Can Sydney keep Warner and avoid more trade bans?

[Eshay187]

Yes... Doesnt matter where a club bidded, they would havd just used a bunch of picks in the 30’s and 40’s for a top ten pick.

Swans had already used their picks on McDonald and Braden Campbell. If someone had bid on him from picks 6-26 swans couldn’t have got him.

I know it is more fun to claim you are the victim of some conspiracy and not that your selectors are incompetent, but here we are, rewriting history.

 

[.Shotties.]

Are you able to just say you completely cooked that or are you going to try to misdirect again?

I’m so sorry that you yourself are so worked up into a tizz that even now, you have NFI how your own academy is funded.

Im guessing you’re still madly googling to find the definition of a coterie group.

Say it with me "Neither the Swans Academy or foundation is funded by other teams."

 

[Eshay187]

I find this argument in particular the most mind numbing stupid one of the lot.

Why? Cause the hawks picked Seamus Mitchell?

The swans had used all their ammunition on Braden Campbell.

 

[Philhawk]

Say it with me "Neither the Swans Academy or foundation is funded by other teams."

To make it easier, maybe trying calling the Swans to ask them yourself. While you’re at it, you can get them to update their website. Sounds like they don’t even know who is funding what

 

[.Shotties.]

To make it easier, maybe trying calling the Swans to ask them yourself. While you’re at it, you can get them to update their website. Sounds like they don’t even know who is funding what

This is a fascinating delve into your psyche. Like, you're demonstrably wrong and you're doing anything to avoid acknowledging it.

 

[Philhawk]

This is a fascinating delve into your psyche. Like, you're demonstrably wrong and you're doing anything to avoid acknowledging it.

At this point, I don’t know what’s more embarrassing.

Your idiotic explanations for why Swans should keep their draft concessions - or your desperation to insist the Academy has a viable source of funding.

 

[.Shotties.]

At this point, I don’t know what’s more embarrassing.

Your idiotic explanations for why Swans should keep their draft concessions - or your desperation to insist the Academy has a viable source of funding.

Phil: Do other teams fund the Swans academy, yes or no?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

What trade ban?? What is op on about

I think it’s referring to the trade ban slapped on the Swans some years back for… um, for picking up Buddy and Tippett totally above board, and um, it seems that, um, that, um we had to pay for making the AFL look silly.

Or something.

Shades of Monty Python’s Piranha Brothers sketch.

We ‘ad transgressed the unwri’en law an’ we ‘ad to be punished innit?

 

[Philhawk]

Phil: Do other teams fund the Swans academy, yes or no?

Indirectly? Yes.

Before you go on your usual diatribe I’ll say it for the last time.

Home

www.sydneyswansfoundation.org.au

By making a donation to the Sydney Swans Foundation you are directly contributing to the QBE Sydney Swans Academy.

You have shown at length in this thread you have NFI the source of funding for the Foundation. You first denied the use of the phrase “coterie groups”, then you claimed it was all “donations”.

In the absence of any kind of annual reports for your “foundation”, it’s not ridiculous to assume the Swans are chipping in extensively. Given the fact the big Melbourne clubs are subsidizing your larger allotment - you’re welcome.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

I think it’s referring to the trade ban slapped on the Swans some years back for… um, for picking up Buddy and Tippett totally above board, and um, it seems that, um, that, um we had to pay for making the AFL look silly.

Or something.

Shades of Monty Python’s Piranha Brothers sketch.

We ‘ad transgressed the unwri’en law an’ we ‘ad to be punished innit?

Ohh you mean the massive COLA allowance that was used to pick up mega stars,, gotcha

 

[.Shotties.]

Indirectly? Yes.

No, Phil. The answer is no. Your theory that the Swans are paying money into the foundation who in turn put that money into the academy is baseless. It's something you invented.

 

[Number37]

Indirectly? Yes.

Before you go on your usual diatribe I’ll say it for the last time.

Home

www.sydneyswansfoundation.org.au

You have shown at length in this thread you have NFI the source of funding for the Foundation. You first denied the use of the phrase “coterie groups”, then you claimed it was all “donations”.

In the absence of any kind of annual reports for your “foundation”, it’s not ridiculous to assume the Swans are chipping in extensively. Given the fact the big Melbourne clubs are subsidizing your larger allotment - you’re welcome.

QBE sponsors the Swans Academy hence the name QBE Swans Academy

https://www.qbe.com/au/media-centre/press-releases/qbe-announces-sydney-swans-sponsorship-renewal


The program is also expensive at more than $1 million a season – more than the Swans have been paying Lance Franklin. Much of the funding comes from corporate support from insurer and club sponsor QBE.

https://www.afr.com/companies/sport...developed-through-its-academy-20220922-p5bkbq

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Ohh you mean the massive COLA allowance that was used to pick up mega stars,, gotcha

Except that it wasn’t. Everything was above board.

The extra 10% applied to all players and the Swans were specifically prohibited from hoarding it to pay overs to megastars.

There has never been any evidence that they rorted COLA payments.

By all means argue the merits of this scheme (which was signed off on by all other club chiefs including yours), but it was not rorted by the Swans, and the AFL has never properly explained why we copped a two year trade ban for doing nothing wrong.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Except that it wasn’t. Everything was above board.

The extra 10% applied to all players and the Swans were specifically prohibited from hoarding it to pay overs to megastars.

There has never been any evidence that they rorted COLA payments.

By all means argue the merits of this scheme (which was signed off on by all other club chiefs including yours), but it was not rorted by the Swans, and the AFL has never properly explained why we copped a two year trade ban for doing nothing wrong.

Yes... The AFL who have given sydney massive concessions to keep you competitive is out to get you.

Answer this: if you didnt have the academy, do you believe you would be as good as you are right now?? Also, how much do you believe it has contributed to the cluba on field success for a sustained period of time??

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Except that it wasn’t. Everything was above board.

The extra 10% applied to all players and the Swans were specifically prohibited from hoarding it to pay overs to megastars.

There has never been any evidence that they rorted COLA payments.

By all means argue the merits of this scheme (which was signed off on by all other club chiefs including yours), but it was not rorted by the Swans, and the AFL has never properly explained why we copped a two year trade ban for doing nothing wrong.

I must say as much as the victim mentality of Swans supporters amuses me/shits me to tears, the trade ban was a bit weird. The AFL at the time basically said they were doing it for their own good; it didn't apply to GWS because their contracts and TPP were structure differently to the Swans.

Was certainly all a bit vague and lacking detail in the explanation. Not great for the supporter group with the biggest persecution complex and quickest to leap to conspiracy theories.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I must say as much as the victim mentality of Swans supporters amuses me/shits me to tears, the trade ban was a bit weird. The AFL at the time basically said they were doing it for their own good; it didn't apply to GWS because their contracts and TPP were structure differently to the Swans.

Was certainly all a bit vague and lacking detail in the explanation. Not great for the supporter group with the biggest persecution complex and quickest to leap to conspiracy theories.

Apart from your mischaracterising of a victim mentality I quite agree.

I don’t have a victim mentality as a Swans supporter. Rather proud of my club’s fine record actually.

I’m the first to admit I’m not across the complexities of how a giant sporting body doles out its concessions.

But I also grasp, having been born in NSW and lived here for my half- century plus, how ignorant many supporters of Victorian clubs are about the realities of footy in a state where it was basically invisible until 1982.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Yes... The AFL who have given sydney massive concessions to keep you competitive is out to get you.

Funny, I didn’t say that and it’s not what I was implying. The usual reductive internet binary that had me sworn off BF for most of a year.

The AFL is an enormously powerful organisation. The AFL is far more powerful than any individual club.

The AFL hands out concessions however it feels, and retracts them just as capriciously.

Answer this: if you didnt have the academy, do you believe you would be as good as you are right now??

Of course not. It’s starting to pay dividends, as intended.

But as others have pointed out, it’s been a massive long-term effort, over many years, with a huge number of kids passing through the academy, to net just Mills, Heeney and a handful of others.

As I said a few pages back, that we are doing well now is no reason to conclude we shouldn’t be allowed concessions that put us on a more equal footing with Victorian clubs and their built-in advantages.

Also, how much do you believe it has contributed to the cluba on field success for a sustained period of time??

No idea, and there are so many variables involved that there is no way any of us could say. How much do you think Geelong’s various off-the-books perks have helped its onfield success?

We do happen to be a really well-run club over many years, like yours, it would seem.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Funny, I didn’t say that and it’s not what I was implying. The usual reductive internet binary that had me sworn off BF for most of a year.

The AFL is an enormously powerful organisation. The AFL is far more powerful than any individual club.

The AFL hands out concessions however it feels, and retracts them just as capriciously.

Of course not. It’s starting to pay dividends, as intended.

But as others have pointed out, it’s been a massive long-term effort, over many years, with a huge number of kids passing through the academy, to net just Mills, Heeney and a handful of others.

As I said a few pages back, that we are doing well now is no reason to conclude we shouldn’t be allowed concessions that put us on a more equal footing with Victorian clubs and their built-in advantages.

No idea, and there are so many variables involved that there is no way any of us could say. How much do you think Geelong’s various off-the-books perks have helped its onfield success?

We do happen to be a really well-run club over many years, like yours, it would seem.

Geelong has achieved its success through all the means available to every club in the AFL. not by being gifted exclusive academy kids to prop us up.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Geelong has achieved its success through all the means available to every club in the AFL. not by being gifted exclusive academy kids to prop us up.

Um, your players get all sorts of very convenient assistance. Surprised you’re not aware of it.

 

[BloodySwan]

Geelong has achieved its success through all the means available to every club in the AFL. not by being gifted exclusive academy kids to prop us up.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

View attachment 2032212

The only problem is the situation we have currently has Grundy standing on two crates, while Sonny Walters and Jack Higgins get nothing.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Geelong has achieved its success through all the means available to every club in the AFL. not by being gifted exclusive academy kids to prop us up.

Not sure what's worse, Swans supporters claiming they need a leg-up, or Cats fans denying their natural advantages.

 

[BloodySwan]

The only problem is the situation we have currently has Grundy standing on two crates, while Sonny Walters and Jack Higgins get nothing.

What? I'm happy to trade Grundy for Jackson and Darcy. Those two are both brilliant with years left in them.

Rowan Marshall is no slouch either. But I don't understand, couldn't St Kilda sign Grundy as well? Are you suggested we should be banned from trades if we have access to academies?

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

What? I'm happy to trade Grundy for Jackson and Darcy. Those two are both brilliant with years left in them.

Rowan Marshall is no slouch either. But I don't understand, couldn't St Kilda sign Grundy as well? Are you suggested we should be banned from trades if we have access to academies?

What? I'm extending the visual metaphor. Grundy plays for Sydney, he's the tall guy standing on two crates. Walters and Higgins play for Freo and St Kilda respectively, and are short. They don't seem to get a crate.

 

[BloodySwan]

What? I'm extending the visual metaphor. Grundy plays for Sydney, he's the tall guy standing on two crates. Walters and Higgins play for Freo and St Kilda respectively, and are short. They don't seem to get a crate.