Past players - what are they up to?

[Blood Fever]

There is no debate. And yes, you have made your point - over and over and over again - Everything the club does is wrong, the coaches are hopeless and know so much less than you, and making the finals virtually every year in this century is no measure of competence or success.

The negativity on RWO by some posters wears on a bloke. Hate to see what these people would write about teams they don't support. But maybe I'm being sucked in by trolls.

Nothing personal in all this, I just don't understand.

Also getting sick of the "quick to condemn brigade". Loyalty seems to be an obsolete virtue. Seems instant gratification is compulsory. Form of therapy I guess.

[MattW]

Enough of the Monday Quarterback rubbish please. Gaz was tried as a leading forward and didn't cut the mustard. Most people on here called for his trade.

I respect your opinion TBC, but don't agree we gave Rohan a reasonable run as a leading forward. I feel there were odd games he played that role and performed well, both leading out of the goal square and crashing packs as a contested mark, but my recollection is we didn't stick with it. I recall being a bit miffed by that at the time, as it always seemed his most dangerous position.

I am surprised Scott reckons he was surprised by Rohan's self-assessment as a good mark as that always seemed clear. It speaks to his own attention levels, but also the infrequent occasions he was played as a leading forward.

I know this sounds like expertise after the fact, but it is how I felt at the time.

As for Gleeson's piece, The Age podcast reveals his comparatively shallow analysis of the Swans. It is impressionistic compared with the Melbourne clubs. I regard his piece as a hot take.

[Blood Fever]

I respect your opinion TBC, but don't agree we gave Rohan a reasonable run as a leading forward. I feel there were odd games he played that role and performed well, both leading out of the goal square and crashing packs as a contested mark, but my recollection is we didn't stick with it. I recall being a bit miffed by that at the time, as it always seemed his most dangerous position.

I am surprised Scott reckons he was surprised by Rohan's self-assessment as a good mark as that always seemed clear. It speaks to his own attention levels, but also the infrequent occasions he was played as a leading forward.

I know this sounds like expertise after the fact, but it is how I felt at the time.

As for Gleeson's piece, The Age podcast reveals his comparatively shallow analysis of the Swans. It is impressionistic compared with the Melbourne clubs. I regard his piece as a hot take.

Chris Scott fancies himself as an intellectual and guru. His finals record at Geelong is embarrassing since he inherited Bomber Thompson's team in 2011. Longmire's finals record far superior. Let's see how Cats go in September again.

[Bloods05]

There is no debate. And yes, you have made your point - over and over and over again - Everything the club does is wrong, the coaches are hopeless and know so much less than you, and making the finals virtually every year in this century is no measure of competence or success.

The negativity on RWO by some posters wears on a bloke. Hate to see what these people would write about teams they don't support. But maybe I'm being sucked in by trolls.

Nothing personal in all this, I just don't understand.

Oh yes. Oh yes.

[liz]

We had Papley and Ronke in the forward line and they were also pressure forwards. They were able to find the ball and kick goals.

Over the years there were games where Rohan produced like he has at Geelong, but unfortunately he was never consistent and that's what frustrated us fans because we knew what he was capable of.

I'm glad he's found his confidence at Geelong and I wish him the best.

I'm with you Mel. I don't see a conflict between being a pressure forward and kicking goals. Even Buddy is pretty decent at applying defensive pressure when he sets his mind to it.

And as you point out, it's not a surprise that he can mark the ball strongly and kick truly. He did that plenty of times for us, albeit he never found quite such a rich vein of form as he is currently in.

I hope for his sake it continues (particularly while the Swans aren't really contending) but it's also a very small sample size of games, and in a team playing exceptionally well. His contributions were never really in question when we were winning and winning comfortably.

I am also on record (at last year's trade time) as expressing disappointment and a little confusion over his trading, with the qualification that I had no insight into his frame of mind or need/desire to be with family. My disappointment was largely predicated on the fact it seemed to be the club initiating the trade, rather than him. Still, plenty of players find that a change of scenery rejuvenates them, and that's likely a contributing factor to Gary's form.

[barry]

Rohan is still not racking up big possession numbers and if you factor in the greater number of inside 50's geelong have compared to us, his performance is probably not significantly higher than his best at the swans.

One thing I did note about his time at Sydney was his positioning was 'terrible'. 'Terrible' in the sense that he would go to positions that the ball was very unlikely to end up.
But if he was directed to do that by the coaching staff, then that explains it to some degree.
But even if he was playing the defensive forward role, he must still not meeting the swans objectives because he hardly got a game in 2018.

It all reeks of a combination of Rohan being a player that suits only a certain type of role (free running forward), and Geelong can offer that type of role, and Sydney couldnt.

[dimelb]

Rohan is still not racking up big possession numbers and if you factor in the greater number of inside 50's geelong have compared to us, his performance is probably not significantly higher than his best at the swans.

One thing I did note about his time at Sydney was his positioning was 'terrible'. 'Terrible' in the sense that he would go to positions that the ball was very unlikely to end up.
But if he was directed to do that by the coaching staff, then that explains it to some degree.
But even if he was playing the defensive forward role, he must still not meeting the swans objectives because he hardly got a game in 2018.

It all reeks of a combination of Rohan being a player that suits only a certain type of role (free running forward), and Geelong can offer that type of role, and Sydney couldnt.

I'm no expert, but I think that's exactly what Gary inferred by using the phrase "pressure forward" in contrast with his current role..

[S.S. Bleeder]

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.

Big mistake by us especially since Bruest is about 6' as far as I know. Maybe he had a late growth spurt. Clubs seem to shy away from the smaller players. I don't see the reason myself. Just look at Caleb Daniels for example. He should have been a first round selection based on ability. Smaller players can compensate for this deficiency other areas.

[barry]

I'm no expert, but I think that's exactly what Gary inferred by using the phrase "pressure forward" in contrast with his current role..

Yeah thats right. A #6 draft pick should be able to play many roles. I think thats where we got bogged down in our expectations.
He's a 1 dimension player, and geelong have the exact role (dimension) for him. We didnt.

[caj23]

Yeah thats right. A #6 draft pick should be able to play many roles. I think thats where we got bogged down in our expectations.
He's a 1 dimension player, and geelong have the exact role (dimension) for him. We didnt.

Someone who can kick goals, why would we need that when we can just kick it to Buddy?

[chalbilto]

Someone who can kick goals, why would we need that when we can just kick it to Buddy?

So that there is another option when Buddy gets double or triple teamed by defenders.

[caj23]

[/I]

So that there is another option when Buddy gets double or triple teamed by defenders.

Forgot the sarcasm font!

[Mr Magoo]

Big mistake by us especially since Bruest is about 6' as far as I know. Maybe he had a late growth spurt. Clubs seem to shy away from the smaller players. I don't see the reason myself. Just look at Caleb Daniels for example. He should have been a first round selection based on ability. Smaller players can compensate for this deficiency other areas.

6' though is a bit in between as forwards go. While I didnt see how talented he was at reserves level , it wouldnt be unusual for clubs to pass over a guy that size if it was seen that he wasnt a viable option as a mid/ forward. Huge mistake of course as the reality is that someone of that size can still compete with most of the big guys as well as the half backs of most teams.

[S.S. Bleeder]

This on Gaz in the Age today. And for the record, I was one of those who called for Rohan to go myself.

The comparison to Menzel stings. Menzel was a 2 goal a game marking forward at Geelong, Gaz is averaging 2.5. The most he ever averaged at the Swans was 1.4 a game.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/4-points-unearthed-treasure-parker-is-key-in-st-kilda-renovation-20190428-p51hyp.html

What the Swans need

Sydney could use a strong-bodied, fast, medium-sized player who is good overhead and can take a mark belying his height. Exceptionally quick and able to get out on a lead, he would be an attacking weapon.

The player that fits Sydney’s needs was there last year. The player they need now is Gary Rohan. OK, they need more than Rohan, and in fact the Rohan we describe now was not the Rohan we could describe at the Swans last year or in previous years.

Yes, he had been wracked by injury through his time at the Swans but he has also said himself recently that he felt he was walking on egg shells in his last days at Sydney. Rohan is a renewed and rediscovered talent. He rounds out the Cats’ attack, being a more athletic version of the role they used Dan Menzel in previously.

Geelong, clear on top of the ladder now, look more potent this year not just for the altering of roles for Selwood and Ablett but the inclusions of Dahlhaus and, in particular Rohan.

That sounds like Membrey (not that's he's exceptionally quick). It's very concerning that; 1) we aren't recognising the abilities of players that we are letting go, and 2) there's a trend for players to flourish in a non-Swans environment.

[111431]

That sounds like Membrey (not that's he's exceptionally quick). It's very concerning that; 1) we aren't recognising the abilities of players that we are letting go, and 2) there's a trend for players to flourish in a non-Swans environment.

I think there have been plenty who have flourished in our environment including the current captain