Tweet
Rampe is a very significant loss. I would have thought that bringing in Melican and Aliir and moving Mills to the midfield would have been a distinct possibility. It would appear that Aliir isn't ready yet so that would mean Melican and Mills in the backline and the introduction of another mid. Could it be Melican and Haywood? I can't see Cameron coming into the side.
-
-
I think the current rookie system is badly outdated as the rookies take on the same full time training load as the maion squad, it's a throwback to when the game was less professional.
I'd like to see the current main squad list expanded from 38-40 to 42-44 and I'd like to see first and second rounders on three year deals, third and fourth on two year deals and fifth rounders onwards on a one year minimum deal.
I do like concept of the rookie list in that it provides an additional pathway for late bloomers to the system and selfishly I think it is good for our academy pathway. I'd like to see it continue but without the ability to be upgraded mid-season and with the clubs being able to match any offer in respect of the draft if other clubs come in for a rookie/development player.Comment
-
Rookies are on one year contracts (as opposed to minimum two year contracts for the ND) which is appealing when you are talking about highly speculative picks that are effectively picks 75-120 in any given draft with a low probability of success compared to the pointy end of the draft.
If rookies are dispensed with and lists are expanded to 44, the ND will have picks out to 110-120 so I would expect that there will the ability to offer picks post say 70, one year contacts. The salary cap will obviously be expanded to include the salaries of the rookies who will now be on the main list.
Cat B rookie category, which you can sign at any time and not just at ND time, will be in addition to the main list of 44 you would think as an encouragement to try players from outside the AFL system.
Getting rid of the rookie list may impact us because we choose to run a main list of 38 not 40 like most teams which spreads the cap over less players.
Anyway, back to discussing the game against the Dogs. If you want to read something clever and funny, check out the game preview on the Swans board on Big Footy (am I allowed to plug that??)Comment
-
Bomber didn't hold back (AFL 360) about the Swans performance in the '16 Grand Final : that they should have done the Bulldogs heads in early in the game both mentally and physically ..
Funny , that's what I paid a lot to go there and expected them to do.
Bomber also reckons he (if he was coach) wouldn't care if a couple of Swans players were reported Friday night, which is one of the strangest things I've heard a commentator utter .
We've got enough problems .Comment
-
I agree with him. We need to get angry. We should have done to the Bulldogs what Hawthorn did to us in 2014. Admittedly, it's harder for us as we don't have the backing of the VFL umpires but still we need to make other teams fear us which has never happened. Even when we were the best tackling side in the game, we were always clean and played by the rules.Comment
-
The rookie list provisions have 2 key parts: The contract and the elevation. The contract related parts can stay the same, while removing the elevation provisions, i.e. anyone on the list, including rookies, can play at AFL level, any time. The LTIL then becomes superfluous. There are some minor issues regarding salary cap adjustments (TPP) when rookies replace injured senior players which can be resolved in a number of ways, including just dropping these rules completely. I hope we go this way. It's easy to do.
Bomber Thompson often says strange things. But I agree with him about not caring if a couple of Swans players get reported, as long as their names are Towers and Cunningham.
Checked out Big Footy preview. That swansfan51 does some funny stuff. I like a long post with lots of photoshopped pics. He must have more free time on his hands than I do.Last edited by Ludwig; 29 March 2017, 09:33 PM.Comment
-
If we are going to pay a debutant against WB would it not have been announced by now? I think it was on about Tuesday that it was announced that Florent would be playing. If no debutants this week that would rule out Hayward, Maibaum, Newman, Cameron, Dawson, Leonardis plus all the rookies who have not been upgraded. That leaves us with just Aliir, Edwards, Sinclair, B Jack, Talia and Rose as possible ins. Sinclair would mean going very tall and I doubt that Rose would be considered ready. B Jack and Talia appear to be on the outer with Longmire which would leave just Aliir and Edwards as the ins. Am I right about debutants being announced early and have I missed anyone who might be considered? It seems we are very close to scraping the bottom of the barrel with regards to depth.Comment
-
I'm guessing the team flies there tomorrow. Keep an eye on which players are at the airport.
Fox and Newman should also be under consideration.Comment
-
Wasn't Edwards on the outer after the JLT series and then miraculously got upgraded? There wasn't a NEAFL game which means players can only have impressed the coaches at training.
I know Horse said he wouldn't play, but would they try and rush Heeney back for this game, on the grounds that partially fit, he's better than any alternative?
I can't see Cameron playing unless they swing Reid back. Surely not!
Can see an outside player coming in to replace Robinson and Melican / Aliir to replace Rampe. Will they want to replace Laidler / Towers too or give them another chance?
Going to be a very interesting team announcement tomorrow night.Comment
-
I'm taking a long view
This game is just a stepping stone
We lost 7 games last year
If we are 0-2 after two games so be it when u are down on key players
We are a resilient team and we are playing the GF winner without a stack of players
I think we can still do they same as last year And be ready for the final series smarter and better"be tough, only when it gets tough"
Comment
Comment