Past players - what are they up to?

[caj23]

Whether it's the players or the system or his role or that they are just coaching him better it's working out better for him on field at Geelong. l.

Newman has also been utilised more effectively at Carlton than he was with the Swans.

Interested to see how Hanners fares when he gets on the park now

[Markwebbos]

The current "success" of Gaz, Nankervis and to a lesser extent Newman outside of the Swans and the excessive time it has taken to get players like Mitchell, Nankervis, Dawson, COR, Newman and others into the side on a regular basis does raise a few questions about the basis on which our team selection, coaching, player development etc works.

[MattW]

I miss Gazza (now known as Chuckie at Geelong). I only wish him well and have been cheering his goals. I am delighted to see him blooming at Geelong. I wish he was still with us in that sort of form. Clearly, at this stage, Geelong are winning the (effective) Rohan-Menzel trade.

That said, and sad as I am that we pushed Gaz out (I think he made it clear that he didn't really want to leave), it doesn't mean we made the wrong decision. He wasn't going so well playing for us. And I think the point that he may not have been getting the same service from our midfield is a point well made. Whether it's the players or the system or his role or that they are just coaching him better it's working out better for him on field at Geelong. Anyway, it can be a win-win-win trade although one that at this stage Gaz is winning the most and us the least. It's up to us to make of it now. Hopefully Menzel will come good for us.

And in the meantime, I continue to wish Gaz every success at Geelong, including that he plays well.

Good post. Interesting to see whether Menzel plays reserves this weekend.

[MattW]

The current "success" of Gaz, Nankervis and to a lesser extent Newman outside of the Swans and the excessive time it has taken to get players like Mitchell, Nankervis, Dawson, COR, Newman and others into the side on a regular basis does raise a few questions about the basis on which our team selection, coaching, player development etc works.

I've generally been supportive of the coaching and player development, but agree there is now reason for some doubt. The development of Florent, Hayward, Ling, Stoddart, Blakey and Rowbottom will be telling. All of our line coaches are inexperienced and have little to no demonstrated success. Might be time to at least bring in proven assistant coaches.

[Markwebbos]

I've generally been supportive of the coaching and player development, but agree there is now reason for some doubt. The development of Florent, Hayward, Ling, Stoddart, Blakey and Rowbottom will be telling. All of our line coaches are inexperienced and have little to no demonstrated success. Might be time to at least bring in proven assistant coaches.

To my eyes there does appear to be an overly cautious selection policy, which I suspect correlates with too much focus on what players can't do and not enough on what they can do. And the need for every player to be a two way runner etc. The whole Dusty doesn't tackle discussion (and response, that's not his role) was interesting. I wonder if he'd get a game at the Swans if he wasn't prepared to defend?

There also appears to be inflexibility in how we play the game. I think Nankervis was a success at Richmond yet barely played at Sydney because they were prepared to build a gameplan that didn't require a dominant tap ruckman, whereas ours is so stoppage focused we wouldn't/couldn't. Ludwig would be all over this. They played to his strengths and compensated for his weaknesses, above all, not winning the hitouts.

And yes I'm very concerned about (1) the mass exodus of line coaches and (2) their replacement with Swans insiders. I'm not qualified to know where its going wrong with the coaching, but I look at the Hardwick-Buckley-Richardson (so far) model, where clubs have retained the senior coaches but brought in stronger/different line coaches to challenge and support them better. I particularly look at what Collingwood did almost overnight, with the same set of players and a long injury list and think that something similar could be possible at the Swans.

I also don't know how it works with Blakey and Longmire and who calls the shots. What I'd give to spend a week inside the Swans as a fly-on-the-wall!

[MattW]

To my eyes there does appear to be an overly cautious selection policy, which I suspect correlates with too much focus on what players can't do and not enough on what they can do. And the need for every player to be a two way runner etc. The whole Dusty doesn't tackle discussion (and response, that's not his role) was interesting. I wonder if he'd get a game at the Swans if he wasn't prepared to defend?

There also appears to be inflexibility in how we play the game. I think Nankervis was a success at Richmond yet barely played at Sydney because they were prepared to build a gameplan that didn't require a dominant tap ruckman, whereas ours is so stoppage focused we wouldn't/couldn't. Ludwig would be all over this. They played to his strengths and compensated for his weaknesses, above all, not winning the hitouts.

And yes I'm very concerned about (1) the mass exodus of line coaches and (2) their replacement with Swans insiders. I'm not qualified to know where its going wrong with the coaching, but I look at the Hardwick-Buckley-Richardson (so far) model, where clubs have retained the senior coaches but brought in stronger/different line coaches to challenge and support them better. I particularly look at what Collingwood did almost overnight, with the same set of players and a long injury list and think that something similar could be possible at the Swans.

I also don't know how it works with Blakey and Longmire and who calls the shots. What I'd give to spend a week inside the Swans as a fly-on-the-wall!

They did bring in Johnson and Cox, but they are effectively doing an apprenticeship at the moment. A Ratten-type would be helpful.

[KSAS]

I see on Seven's 'Gameday' that Hanners was at the Swans/Tigers game last night sitting with Will Hayward and other Swans players. They didn't make anything of it as there wasn't anything in it but they had a Saint player there in the studio (not sure who it was) and he was just talking about how good Hanners is with his support of his team mates etc. Hanners did seem very comfortable sitting where he was, animatedly chatting with his old team mates.....

No doubt he's happy with where his new team is at.....

Alex Johnson & Hanners were in the stands with Will Hayward watching the game. Post match, they were seen in the rooms embracing Kieran Jack on his 250th. Heart warming.

[stevoswan]

Alex Johnson & Hanners were in the stands with Will Hayward watching the game. Post match, they were seen in the rooms embracing Kieran Jack on his 250th. Heart warming.

I missed that.....that's great.

[S.S. Bleeder]

I STILL want to be young enough to dance naked on the table at your wedding.
Yullah. Hurry up.

- - - Updated - - -.

Don't you mean his bucks night, not this wedding?

[S.S. Bleeder]

Chris Judd on Footy Classified tonight has already declared Gary Rohan as the recruit of year after his bag of 4 goals today! Hutchy suggesting he is a trade up for Geelong over Menzel, who hasn't played a game yet this year.

Funny how players seem to thrive away from our club. Rohan, Mitchell, Nankervis, etc. That's pretty damning for our culture or coaching staff.

[S.S. Bleeder]

They did bring in Johnson and Cox, but they are effectively doing an apprenticeship at the moment. A Ratten-type would be helpful.

IMO Ratten is the best non-senior coach in the game. The Carlton management treated him like crap.

[Aprilbr]

Another one who has done pretty well since leaving us is Membrey at St Kilda. We received absolutely nothing in return for him too.

I think that the common thread with Nankervis, Membrey and Newman was lack of senior opportunities at the time at the Swans. I might add that Bruest at Hawthorn was on our rookie list at one point.

I think that Rohan is getting many more opportunities and service at Geong than he received as a forward in recent times at the Swans. It's hard to get a look in as a forward at the Swans when it hardly gets down there and when it does it's just a rushed kick under pressure.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[liz]

Another one who has done pretty well since leaving us is Membrey at St Kilda. We received absolutely nothing in return for him too.
I might add that Bruest at Hawthorn was on our rookie list at one point.

Breust was never on our rookie list. He played as a regular top-up player with our reserves team (then in the Canberra league) and was a stand-out performer. His residence qualified him to be taken as a priority rookie selection and many of us were flabbergasted at the time that he wasn't selected.

It is possible that he declined selection as a priority pick, as players were entitled to do. Matt Suckling was one player who I believe the Swans were keen to pick as a priority rookie but who declined, preferring instead to back his chances of being picked up by a Melbourne based club. I've never heard that Breust declined to be selected by the Swans. I recall the OTC team once quizzing Roos about why the club didn't select him, and him mumbling something about them thinking he was too small, or too slow, and then quickly changing the subject. If so (and Breust didn't decline), he was certainly a bad miss, and a surprising one given how much better he was than other top-ups we did then draft. It wasn't until Lloyd Perris came along that another top-up player looked quite as comfortable, and was such a strong contributor as an underaged top up.

[caj23]

Breust was never on our rookie list. He played as a regular top-up player with our reserves team (then in the Canberra league) and was a stand-out performer. His residence qualified him to be taken as a priority rookie selection and many of us were flabbergasted at the time that he wasn't selected.

It is possible that he declined selection as a priority pick, as players were entitled to do. Matt Suckling was one player who I believe the Swans were keen to pick as a priority rookie but who declined, preferring instead to back his chances of being picked up by a Melbourne based club. I've never heard that Breust declined to be selected by the Swans. I recall the OTC team once quizzing Roos about why the club didn't select him, and him mumbling something about them thinking he was too small, or too slow, and then quickly changing the subject. If so (and Breust didn't decline), he was certainly a bad miss, and a surprising one given how much better he was than other top-ups we did then draft. It wasn't until Lloyd Perris came along that another top-up player looked quite as comfortable, and was such a strong contributor as an underaged top up.

No he didn't decline an invitation, we simply overlooked him for the reasons you indicated

[bloodspirit]

Following all the comment and debate here about Rohan and his "walking on eggshells" remark is an article that provides more illumination about what he meant: https://www.smh.com.au/sport/afl/mr-...27-p51hrp.html.

Among other things Gazza said:

"I feel more free. At Sydney I felt I was more down as a pressure forward so I would put myself in spots where I probably wouldn't get the ball. I would get in a more defensive spot.... Here I want the ball in my hands and I am enjoying it."

To me this implies that his role at Geelong has allowed him more freedom and opens us up to question whether we should have limited his role in the way we seemingly did. On the one hand it's easy to say we got it wrong - because it's working so well for him at Geelong and we all like goals. On the other hand our game style is different and perhaps we/Horse place a greater premium on defensive pressure and not for nothing have we had one of the best defensive records for the past several years. We are a really hard team to score against. It's hard to evaluate what the Cats are sacrificing by giving Rohan more freedom. Anyway, hopefully Horse and the other coaches (especially Stevie J) will see what is happening with Rohan at Geelong and reflect on our approach and whether we think it can be improved (albeit with other players now that Rohan is gone).

I do feel sad that we didn't get to see more of Rohan using his great talent offensively. I tend to feel we did make a mistake by limiting him to a primarily defensive focus.... but what would I know?