Swans 2013 Draft Strategy

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ugg
    Can you feel it?
    Site Admin
    • Jan 2003
    • 15967

    Great in the sense they are all still AFL players but not great in that they will be regular for other AFL teams. Most of them in their mid to late 20s so in their sporting prime. A for the recruiting team, D for the retention team.
    Reserves live updates (Twitter)
    Reserves WIKI -
    Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

    Comment

    • stevoswan
      Veterans List
      • Sep 2014
      • 8548

      Originally posted by Ruck'n'Roll
      Useless?
      At the very least, it provided you with an opportunity to make your negative and strangley quixotic contribution. If the revival is a useless exercise then so to is responding to it.
      Actually, if you realy wanted to take a jaundiced view - then contributing to an online forum which has zero effect on the club could be construed as useless, yet you've managed that 62 times already.
      Bit harsh R'n'R.....it could be said you've managed it 2964 times.....so why are we here? For an exchange of ideas, which is exactly what WF did.....and he made a fair point. Every post offered may garner a response....so be prepared for opposing opinions.

      Comment

      • Maltopia
        Senior Player
        • Apr 2016
        • 1556

        Originally posted by WomblingFree
        Viewing everything with hindsight about who we could have or should have drafted with the evidence of 8 years subsequent data is a rather useless exercise.

        All I’ll say is the recruitment that year was very good in that all 4 will play well over 100 senior games.
        Well I for one found the topic interesting.

        No one made you click on the clearly labelled 2013 Draft Strategy thread.

        Comment

        • Ruck'n'Roll
          Ego alta, ergo ictus
          • Nov 2003
          • 3990

          Originally posted by stevoswan
          Bit harsh R'n'R.....it could be said you've managed it 2964 times.....so why are we here? For an exchange of ideas, which is exactly what WF did.....and he made a fair point. Every post offered may garner a response....so be prepared for opposing opinions.
          Nice drive-by stevoswan, a bit wasted though - I wasn’t actually having a go at WomblingFree's 62 posts, I never made any suggestion whatsoever that any or all of them were useless. I think you may have misread/misunderstood my post.

          What I did point out was that Womblingfree had added his/her post to a thread whose revival (with updated information) he/she said was a useless exercise. If you can't see the irony in that, you simply aren't paying attention.

          Comment

          • stevoswan
            Veterans List
            • Sep 2014
            • 8548

            Originally posted by Ruck'n'Roll
            Nice drive-by stevoswan, a bit wasted though - I wasn’t actually having a go at WomblingFree's 62 posts, I never made any suggestion whatsoever that any or all of them were useless. I think you may have misread/misunderstood my post.

            What I did point out was that Womblingfree had added his/her post to a thread whose revival (with updated information) he/she said was a useless exercise. If you can't see the irony in that, you simply aren't paying attention.
            So I'm the 'drive byer'? Sorry, I saw no irony in a post that described the recipient as 'negative', 'strangely quixotic' and 'jaundiced'.....which I felt were a bit harsh.

            Comment

            • Maltopia
              Senior Player
              • Apr 2016
              • 1556

              Originally posted by stevoswan
              So I'm the 'drive byer'? Sorry, I saw no irony in a post that described the recipient as 'negative', 'strangely quixotic' and 'jaundiced'.....which I felt were a bit harsh.
              The response, and not the poster was described as negative and quixotic.

              The jaundiced was a hypothetical comment about the meaningfulness of all posts, and the poster could have said “if one” instead of “if you”.

              If you take the time to read the response properly, you may find that your criticism was partly off the mark (at least re the use of “jaundiced”).

              Comment

              • stevoswan
                Veterans List
                • Sep 2014
                • 8548

                We move on.....

                Comment

                • barry
                  Veterans List
                  • Jan 2003
                  • 8499

                  Originally posted by stevoswan
                  I'd give those picks an A.....but subsequent player retention a C.....but of course, the A(V)FL didn't help with that.
                  Picks an A, sure. But player retention is a serious F. None of them are on the list still. That can only be a fail. There is no upside. Its not as if we got significantly better deals that we paid for them, when we lost them.

                  Comment

                  Working...