Player Watch #8 James Rowbottom

[Kennedy Parker]

James Rowbottom

The Sydney Swans recruited James Rowbottom

8

James Rowbottom

Age

24

Ht

186cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.0

4star

K

8.1

3star

HB

5.9

4star

M

2.2

2star

T

4.3

5star

CL

2.0

4star

D

14.6

4star

K

9.0

4star

HB

5.6

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

3.4

4star

CL

2.5

4star

D

14.4

4star

K

7.8

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.0

3star

T

3.6

5star

CL

1.2

4star

with their second selection at the 2018 AFL Draft and the midfield bull impacted from the get-go. The Oakleigh Chargers product made his AFL debut against Richmond at Marvel Stadium in Round 5, 2019 and finished the season with 12 senior games beside his name. Rowbottom also led the NEAFL MVP voting when it was hidden from the public after Round 12. The young Swan is a ball magnet, explosive at the stoppages, an outstanding tackler and a clean user of the footy.

James Rowbottom

8

James Rowbottom

Age

24

Ht

186cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.0

4star

K

8.1

3star

HB

5.9

4star

M

2.2

2star

T

4.3

5star

CL

2.0

4star

D

14.6

4star

K

9.0

4star

HB

5.6

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

3.4

4star

CL

2.5

4star

D

14.4

4star

K

7.8

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.0

3star

T

3.6

5star

CL

1.2

4star

DOB: 19 September 2000
DEBUT: 2019
DRAFT: #25, 2018 National Draft
RECRUITED FROM: Camberwell (Vic)/St Kevin's College (Vic)/Oakleigh U18

James Rowbottom | AFL

Follow James Rowbottom's progress through AFL

www.sydneyswans.com.au

 

[rustycrate]

I wasn't wrong though. If anything his last few months have completely validated every thing I said about him. While everyone else was content with him being a role player, I was copping it for thinking he could be more than that and expressing it.

He's just playing his role, he's suited to being a defensive mid, Horse knows what he's doing, etc etc. was all I heard.

Very few people bit when I'd suggest using Rowbottom differently to improve our clearances, or to improve our contested ball work.

So he stayed in that role, and he was a bottom 4-6 player. People were saying he should be dropped. This was not a player who is going to be considered a valuable asset in a few years time when we're shuffling the salary cap around and he's attracting offers from other clubs who are always on the hunt for inside mids. It's also not a player who is going to last in the midfield.

The most obvious example was the exact player whose trajectory Rowbottom's was following: Hewett, who was first squeezed out of the midfield, then squeezed out of the salary cap.

I maintain that we can not - with any player, whether it's Rowbottom, Adam or Eve - squander a player's potential all the way to their mid-20s and then let them walk out in their primes and fulfil their potential at other clubs like we did with Hewett. If we're gonna do that with a player, I'd rather just trade them while they're young and have some worth on the market.

Maybe it was harsh and an unpopular opinion and it's jarring to hear "insert 21 year old" and "trade bait" in the same sentence, but I completely stand by it.

He is now a top 4-6 player in a grand final side, and has become so key that I suspect he'll be one of the select group we'll be moving heaven and Earth to ensure he's a Swan for life. He's helped us secure a grand final berth, and he's helped secure a future standing in the team and at the club.

Won't apologise for A) wanting us to get the best out of a player, B) wanting what's best for that player, and C) wanting the team to improve through that player.

Hewett was traded out because his contract was highly backended. They tried to do it the previous year. Swans had backended so many contracts through our grandfinal years from Tppett to Buddy including our highest paid players like Heeney and Mills. Its what you do when you are in contention. And we were in contention for a lot of years. Hewett was a casualty along with Hannebery, Jones etc. This has nothing to do with being a defensive mid.

 

[caesar88]

Rowbottom
first game of the season;
18 disp ( 13 contested), 7 clearances, 10 tackles.
PF;
18 disp ( 13 contested), 6 clearances, 10 tackles

You were seeing something that didn't exist.
Of course at times he played a more defensive role, just as Mills & Parker have done in recent games.

You were so obsessed by the loss of Hewett that you were projecting Rowbottom onto him

Rowbottom has got more of the ball as the season has progressed because he was still learning at 21 yo.

To suggest that we should look to trade him because he might go the way of Hewett was nonsense.

Nonsense?

Just a few weeks ago in the trade thread, the consensus was that there's always gonna be players from the 22 we have to lose and be willing to sacrifice, and you're saying it's nonsense to think Rowbottom would be exempt from that when the player he was most comparable to was the one we last lost and sacrificed?

As for needing to "man up" (absolutely hate that term), I don't need to. That was my opinion and I'm entitled to it. At no point during any of the debates back then did I have anything negative to say about Rowbottom at all. Was purely about how we were using him. I have said from very early on that I think he will be the best of our young players and I stand by that. Maybe focus on that instead of turning what was intended to be a positive post into a negative?

 

[caesar88]

Hewett was traded out because his contract was highly backended. They tried to do it the previous year. Swans had backended so many contracts through our grandfinal years from Tppett to Buddy including our highest paid players like Heeney and Mills. Its what you do when you are in contention. And we were in contention for a lot of years. Hewett was a casualty along with Hannebery, Jones etc. This has nothing to do with being a defensive mid.

Not getting into it rusty, sorry.

 

[rustycrate]

Not getting into it rusty, sorry.

i was just putting my point of view across about why Hewett was traded out. Nothing to do with his ability or role. His salary was hurting the Swans because it was highly backended. Swans went youth and had to after putting everything into winning a premiership through the years after 2012. Something had to give. Swans had to cut players and Hewett was just one of them. Nothing to do with role or ability.

 

[caesar88]

i was just putting my point of view across about why Hewett was traded out. Nothing to do with his ability or role. His salary was hurting the Swans because it was highly backended. Swans went youth and had to after putting everything into winning a premiership through the years after 2012. Something had to give. Swans had to cut players and Hewett was just one of them. Nothing to do with role or ability.

I know. I didn't mean to be rude, just can't be bothered going over it and derailing the thread more than it already has been. I'm very happy we've got Rowbottom, love him.

 

[rustycrate]

I know. I didn't mean to be rude, just can't be bothered going over it and derailing the thread more than it already has been. I'm very happy we've got Rowbottom, love him.

I don't know where we would be without him. And he is sooo good lookin'

 

[SwansProudly]

18 disposals and a goal, 10 tackles (team-high), 13 cont. possessions (team-high), 6 clearances (team-high), 6 score inv. (team-high), 27 pressure acts (team-high), 437m gained (2nd most), 16.3 rating points (3rd highest)

 

[Tesla Tenet]

Nonsense?

Just a few weeks ago in the trade thread, the consensus was that there's always gonna be players from the 22 we have to lose and be willing to sacrifice, and you're saying it's nonsense to think Rowbottom would be exempt from that when the player he was most comparable to was the one we last lost and sacrificed?

As for needing to "man up" (absolutely hate that term), I don't need to. That was my opinion and I'm entitled to it. At no point during any of the debates back then did I have anything negative to say about Rowbottom at all. Was purely about how we were using him. I have said from very early on that I think he will be the best of our young players and I stand by that. Maybe focus on that instead of turning what was intended to be a positive post into a negative?

Hmmmm

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk

 

[caesar88]

Hmmmm

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk

Doesn't this just confirm what I've already just said to HB?

"Big fan of his" = I don't have a negative thing to say about the kid as a player.

"I don't see how Rowbottom isn't traded" = I think he would be traded if he stayed in that role.

All of which I'd said over the last page.

 

[Deccas]

I wasn't wrong though. If anything his last few months have completely validated every thing I said about him. While everyone else was content with him being a role player, I was copping it for thinking he could be more than that and expressing it.

He's just playing his role, he's suited to being a defensive mid, Horse knows what he's doing, etc etc. was all I heard.

Very few people bit when I'd suggest using Rowbottom differently to improve our clearances, or to improve our contested ball work.

So he stayed in that role, and he was a bottom 4-6 player. People were saying he should be dropped. This was not a player who is going to be considered a valuable asset in a few years time when we're shuffling the salary cap around and he's attracting offers from other clubs who are always on the hunt for inside mids. It's also not a player who is going to last in the midfield.

The most obvious example was the exact player whose trajectory Rowbottom's was following: Hewett, who was first squeezed out of the midfield, then squeezed out of the salary cap.

I maintain that we can not - with any player, whether it's Rowbottom, Adam or Eve - squander a player's potential all the way to their mid-20s and then let them walk out in their primes and fulfil their potential at other clubs like we did with Hewett. If we're gonna do that with a player, I'd rather just trade them while they're young and have some worth on the market.

Maybe it was harsh and an unpopular opinion and it's jarring to hear "insert 21 year old" and "trade bait" in the same sentence, but I completely stand by it.

He is now a top 4-6 player in a grand final side, and has become so key that I suspect he'll be one of the select group we'll be moving heaven and Earth to ensure he's a Swan for life. He's helped us secure a grand final berth, and he's helped secure a future standing in the team and at the club.

Won't apologise for A) wanting us to get the best out of a player, B) wanting what's best for that player, and C) wanting the team to improve through that player.

This is called revisionism and Stalin would have had you shot for it.

"He was too good and that's why we should have got rid of him and I was right to say that" omg

 

[caesar88]

This is called revisionism and Stalin would have had you shot for it.

"He was too good and that's why we should have got rid of him and I was right to say that" omg

All in the context of if he stayed in that role. There is literally nothing complicated or difficult to understand about it. People are just being ****y

 

[BarneyBent]

All in the context of if he stayed in that role. There is literally nothing complicated or difficult to understand about it. People are just being ****y

I think where people are getting shitty is you are suggesting that he was playing a different role back then, and now his role has qualitatively changed, which is simply not true. You are now justifying your previous stance by saying "well now he's playing the role he always should have, of course he's doing better and he shouldn't be traded, I was right all along."

The issue is that Rowbottom is playing the exact same role, he's just doing it better because he's been allowed to settle into it and find fitness and form, the exact opposite thing to what you were suggesting.

You were saying "if we don't stop playing him defensively we might as well trade him", while others were saying "give him time and he'll get there". He was given time, he's still playing a primarily defensive role, and now he's comfortable enough he's been able to bring his attacking game in to complement it. The exact thing you assured us, many times, wouldn't happen.

It's OK, we all get things wrong. I was sure Ed Barlow just needed a solid run as a key forward and he'd make it, or that Blakey in the ruck was a genius move we should have stuck with. But I'm not gonna try to argue that Blakey actually is now playing ruck so I was right all along, which is essentially what you're doing.

 

[caesar88]

I think where people are getting shitty is you are suggesting that he was playing a different role back then, and now his role has qualitatively changed, which is simply not true. You are now justifying your previous stance by saying "well now he's playing the role he always should have, of course he's doing better and he shouldn't be traded, I was right all along."

The issue is that Rowbottom is playing the exact same role, he's just doing it better because he's been allowed to settle into it and find fitness and form, the exact opposite thing to what you were suggesting.

You were saying "if we don't stop playing him defensively we might as well trade him", while others were saying "give him time and he'll get there". He was given time, he's still playing a primarily defensive role, and now he's comfortable enough he's been able to bring his attacking game in to complement it. The exact thing you assured us, many times, wouldn't happen.

It's OK, we all get things wrong. I was sure Ed Barlow just needed a solid run as a key forward and he'd make it, or that Blakey in the ruck was a genius move we should have stuck with. But I'm not gonna try to argue that Blakey actually is now playing ruck so I was right all along, which is essentially what you're doing.

Well then we must be watching completely different games. Not saying that to be a prick, I just genuinely don't see how people can't see it, so it seems that goes both ways.

I don't know what else to say, other than it's really ******* weird that people have decided to get pressed about a hypothetical from months ago in the week the kid's about to play in a grand final.

 

[Nuggetz]

who cares who is right or wrong. we're in the grand final ffs. get around everyone and enjoy it!

CARN Rowbottom

 

[Kapers]

This is called revisionism and Stalin would have had you shot for it.

Wat

 

[monopoly19]

This man quietly goes about his business every week and somehow generates more discussion than almost any of our players.

 

[BarneyBent]

Well then we must be watching completely different games. Not saying that to be a prick, I just genuinely don't see how people can't see it, so it seems that goes both ways.

I don't know what else to say, other than it's really ******* weird that people have decided to get pressed about a hypothetical from months ago in the week the kid's about to play in a grand final.

Can you articulate what about Rowbottom's role has actually changed?

He's literally doing the same defensive things he was doing at the start of the year, just also finding more ball and using it better. He hasn't stopped doing anything he was doing previously.

 

[Deccas]

Wat

Just a silly joke about reframing history.

 

[caesar88]

Can you articulate what about Rowbottom's role has actually changed?

He's literally doing the same defensive things he was doing at the start of the year, just also finding more ball and using it better. He hasn't stopped doing anything he was doing previously.

I'd be happy to give my take but can we maybe revisit the discussion in a week or two? He is about to play in a grand final, why not just celebrate that?

 

[Millky95]

Smokey for a Norm

 

[wills2g]

Can you articulate what about Rowbottom's role has actually changed?

He's literally doing the same defensive things he was doing at the start of the year, just also finding more ball and using it better. He hasn't stopped doing anything he was doing previously.

It might be a role or mindset or confidence thing, you could argue all of the 3.

Imo mid way through the season he was more concerned about his direct opponent than the ball. He was really focused on his defensive side of the game.

On the flip side, these last 8 weeks he's better balanced his defensive and offensive game, where he still makes sure his direct opponent has lesser impact, but hes got the dare & confidence to pick up and contest loose balls knowing he's going to win it.

 

[Kapers]

Just a silly joke about reframing history.

Just thought it was odd, I thought you would say Stalin was jealous of his revisionism, rather than kill him for it lol

 

[Nuggetz]

Smokey for a Norm

Yep, if he can snag a goal or two. He should have his name in the discussion.

 

[Deccas]

Just thought it was odd, I thought you would say Stalin was jealous of his revisionism, rather than kill him for it

Accusing people of doing revisionist history is a real classic communist thing to do

 

[Kapers]

Accusing people of doing revisionist history is a real classic communist thing to do

Yeah, but I was more talking about Stalin as the person rather than the ideology. His whole leadership was built on revisionist history.

Anyway this is getting pretty off topic now (my fault originally).

Looking forward to Rowbottom's Norm Smith