Can Sydney rebound after their GF debacle?

[MinerBoy]

Christianson had a gambling problem .

Is that what it's called? I guess it was a bit dicey.

 

[ScrewInStuds]

Is that what it's called? I guess it was a bit dicey.

That's what I heard, happy to be corrected if I'm wrong and will update my original post.

 

[MinerBoy]

That's what I heard, happy to be corrected if I'm wrong and will update my original post.

I heard the first part of your username is closer to the mark.

 

[MickyG]

What are your genuine thoughts on this ?

My thoughts:
On the one hand, Sydney have put a lot of effort and money into the academies, it seems only right they should benefit from it.
But it is potentially a big advantage, being able to grab the best young NSW talent at potentially bargain picks.

On the other hand, every club would pour money into their own version if they had the opportunity, the AFL should have run and funded it, and made all players available to all clubs, like a draft, that could work.

The problem is that most Vic, SA and WA based people don't understand that junior ALF in NSW and Qld is way behind that in the AFL states. Therefore the quality and quantity of players available in the draft from NSW and Qld is poor. I apologise if this is insulting to your intelligence but some of the posters on here are insulting ours by their ignorance or choosing to ignore that simple fact.

This year the Swans have benefited from getting one player 'cheap' but then paying overs for another. Overall the Swans have been winners from that but this is not going to happen every year.

In my opinion when 4 of the first 18 players drafted are coming from NSW and Qld for a few years then you get rid of the Academy bidding system. In the meantime I think they will introduce some other system where players are graded and other picks or next years picks get combined or moved later to balance any perceived unfairness.

Here's a few points:

• It's probably too late now (and unfair) for the AFL to change the Academies.
• It is better for the Academies to have a state based brand rather than a national one so Swans or Suns Academy is more meaningful than AFL Academy.
• The Academies draw on the resources of the clubs including players, coaching staff, management, contacts and sponsors. It is therefore cheaper and easier than if the AFL were to try and recreate that. Consider the money QBE had pumped in over the last five years and how would they feel about it suddenly being the Toyota AFL Academy. How much can the AFL get out of Toyota to replace the money being put in by QBE and the other clubs' sponsors?

You can argue over all of those but in total I think it means what has been created will not get changed too much.

 

[ScrewInStuds]

I heard the first part of your username is closer to the mark.

Edited my post to include all the bawdy details

 

[Gold Member]

Must be tough for the Melbourne Storm to stop 100% of their list from wanting to go home.

 

[RUNVS]

Must be tough for the Melbourne Storm to stop 100% of their list from wanting to go home.

I am pretty sure the Storm have a retention allowance.

 

[Leg End]

You still haven't addressed the Adam Goodes issue though, thats why Sydney are so hated. Without him , people might stop being so down on your side.

The issue is clear. Goodes has been bigger, faster, stronger and more talented than 98% of his opponents for many many years. If you can't match him as an opponent, then you have to scrag him, infringe against him - which has been happening for years. And largely ignored by the umpires.

However, the standard whineyVictorian approach is "he stages" - the fact is that he should have got many more frees.

 

[JackFlash]

No, the Swans are stuffed...

 

[Tedeski]

What are your genuine thoughts on this ?

My thoughts:
On the one hand, Sydney have put a lot of effort and money into the academies, it seems only right they should benefit from it.
But it is potentially a big advantage, being able to grab the best young NSW talent at potentially bargain picks.

On the other hand, every club would pour money into their own version if they had the opportunity, the AFL should have run and funded it, and made all players available to all clubs, like a draft, that could work.

I'm not sure what the right way to go about it is.
As long as we are just existing in the competition without any success, I believe the other clubs are quite happy to see us with an academy. Should those players become good players then we are seen to have an advantage, even though we are picking up local talent & leaving others on the table.
Heeney is the only player potentially with some class about him with Mills next year being spoken about.

If the Vic clubs are willing to fund their own academies & the Swans can take one of their players as well, then I have no problem with that.

Personally I think the AFL can fund our academy from now on.
Realistically? They can't afford to because they would then have to fund all of them.

All I know is that with Gillon being pushed around by the Victorian boys club, the Swans will never have anything that is seen to be an 'advantage' anytime soon.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

So a Victorian game with mainly Victorian players has no Victorian go home factor? The home ground for finals and GF, the travel factor etc - we just conveniently ignore this. But. A Cola agreed by every club and implemented by the AFL is so grossly unfair that the AFL has to cut a NSW club out of trading for two years - but not the other Sydney club.

And let's ignore the millions the Swans have poured into building grassroots footy in NSW. And the extra money the AFL now has due to much expanded TV rights - much of which goes to incompetently managed Melbourne clubs.

You're like rusted on dinosaur Liberal party supporters - arrogant and ignorant.

I'm not being arrogant or ignorant. I just disagree with you.

What is the ratio of players brought in to players leaving due to homesickness in the past 10 years? Where is the concessions for Adelaide and Perth teams, they suffer from this 'go home' factor more that eastern states...

Look, for years we've had this 'bloods culture' rammed down our throats, how it was so strong and was the sole reason sydney hadn't bottomed out. It was to be the envy of the league according to many.

Yet at the same time, some swans fans (and some in actual positions of power at Sydney aswell) have continually defended all of their handouts and actually seem to enjoy playing the victim.

Which is it? Do you need help or is this 'superior culture' strong enough to overcome the big bad vics?

And now to top it off, some of you are coming out and attacking the AFL and it's 'vic-centric' attitude because these handouts are being phased out? Give me a break, talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

 

[Big Hotdog]

I'm not sure what the right way to go about it is.
As long as we are just existing in the competition without any success, I believe the other clubs are quite happy to see us with an academy. Should those players become good players then we are seen to have an advantage, even though we are picking up local talent & leaving others on the table.
Heeney is the only player potentially with some class about him with Mills next year being spoken about.

If the Vic clubs are willing to fund their own academies & the Swans can take one of their players as well, then I have no problem with that.

Personally I think the AFL can fund our academy from now on.
Realistically? They can't afford to because they would then have to fund all of them.

All I know is that with Gillon being pushed around by the Victorian boys club, the Swans will never have anything that is seen to be an 'advantage' anytime soon.

I guess that is the other side of the coin. You have already had significant advantages. The pendulum is swinging and I agree that whilst Sydney needs to be assisted in ways promote the game in NSW it shouldn't be given advantages far and above what is reasonable.

The Buddy deal is and will have ramifications into the future.

And on the op I think Sydney will be top four in 2015.

 

[Lethality]

So a Victorian game with mainly Victorian players has no Victorian go home factor? The home ground for finals and GF, the travel factor etc - we just conveniently ignore this.

Most interstate sides recruit players from their home state probably for a number of reasons, Sydney are no different.

If you're talking go home factor then every team has players from another state, it's just something that has to be managed.

 

[syl97]

I guess that is the other side of the coin. You have already had significant advantages. The pendulum is swinging and I agree that whilst Sydney needs to be assisted in ways promote the game in NSW it shouldn't be given advantages far and above what is reasonable.

The Buddy deal is and will have ramifications into the future.

And on the op I think Sydney will be top four in 2015.

I don't have a big issue with the Sydney academies. They still had to give up their first round draft pick and for the work they are putting in they should get some reward. If he turns out as a star everyone will complain but who can say that Sydney wouldn't have picked up an equivalent star with that pick anyway. They are amazing at picking up young talent.

Ultimately the AFL just needs to monitor it from season to season to make sure that it is not creating a large inequity and then act to correct it if necessary. As they did with the COLA.

 

[Leg End]

I'm not being arrogant or ignorant. I just disagree with you.

What is the ratio of players brought in to players leaving due to homesickness in the past 10 years? Where is the concessions for Adelaide and Perth teams, they suffer from this 'go home' factor more that eastern states...

Look, for years we've had this 'bloods culture' rammed down our throats, how it was so strong and was the sole reason sydney hadn't bottomed out. It was to be the envy of the league according to many.

Yet at the same time, some swans fans (and some in actual positions of power at Sydney aswell) have continually defended all of their handouts and actually seem to enjoy playing the victim.

Which is it? Do you need help or is this 'superior culture' strong enough to overcome the big bad vics?

And now to top it off, some of you are coming out and attacking the AFL and it's 'vic-centric' attitude because these handouts are being phased out? Give me a break, talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

What rubbish.
You promote the whole swans history as being the product of charity. Insulting and pure lies.
You must be proud - bunch of Victorian losers hanging on Fat Eddie's every word.

 

[dickballsack]

The problem is that most Vic, SA and WA based people don't understand that junior ALF in NSW and Qld is way behind that in the AFL states. Therefore the quality and quantity of players available in the draft from NSW and Qld is poor. I apologise if this is insulting to your intelligence but some of the posters on here are insulting ours by their ignorance or choosing to ignore that simple fact.

This year the Swans have benefited from getting one player 'cheap' but then paying overs for another. Overall the Swans have been winners from that but this is not going to happen every year.

In my opinion when 4 of the first 18 players drafted are coming from NSW and Qld for a few years then you get rid of the Academy bidding system. In the meantime I think they will introduce some other system where players are graded and other picks or next years picks get combined or moved later to balance any perceived unfairness.

Here's a few points:

• It's probably too late now (and unfair) for the AFL to change the Academies.
• It is better for the Academies to have a state based brand rather than a national one so Swans or Suns Academy is more meaningful than AFL Academy.
• The Academies draw on the resources of the clubs including players, coaching staff, management, contacts and sponsors. It is therefore cheaper and easier than if the AFL were to try and recreate that. Consider the money QBE had pumped in over the last five years and how would they feel about it suddenly being the Toyota AFL Academy. How much can the AFL get out of Toyota to replace the money being put in by QBE and the other clubs' sponsors?

You can argue over all of those but in total I think it means what has been created will not get changed too much.

Your points are spot on, the problem is that punters don't understand what the clubs are arguing against in terms of the academy. There are 2 clubs, hawthorn and Collingwood that want the rules changed on academies, media would like us to believe that it's just Eddie whinging but here are the facts: the hawksNs pies now pay an extra tax on earnings to support the comp, they have signed up and agreed for the equalisation of e comp, what they don't like is that they pump money into Sydney which no one doubts that they need being in the market they're in t they put in a huge expense in an academy that no other club is allowed and they feel that there is a disconnect with what their extra 'tax' is for. Basically they're funding a clubs training facility that they aren't allowed to have themselves. As stated they don't want the academy shut, they want the ability to have their own academy and invite players in these non afl areas to join.

 

[Heaps of fun]

If Kangaroos happen to make Finals, probably a good thing one would think.

You wot m8?

 

[Mitchell Madness]

I am pretty sure the Storm have a retention allowance.

No they don't, nothing of the sorts
They have got to pay the same as everyone else

 

[syl97]

No they don't, nothing of the sorts
They have got to pay the same as everyone else

Yeah Storm thought they had a retention allowance too! Turned out they didn't.

 

[Gold Member]

The shit in this thread posted by Swans fans is gold.

Almost Jamestown gold...

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

What rubbish.
You promote the whole swans history as being the product of charity. Insulting and pure lies.
You must be proud - bunch of Victorian losers hanging on Fat Eddie's every word.

I promote what? You're insulted?! What a precious little thing you are.

Toughen up, I wasn't saying anything like what you seem to think I was.

Also, I'm not Victorian.

 

[Kummerspeck]

Sydney which no one doubts that they need being in the market they're in t they put in a huge expense in an academy that no other club is allowed and they feel that there is a disconnect with what their extra 'tax' is for. Basically they're funding a clubs training facility that they aren't allowed to have themselves.

Hawthorn and Collingwood don't want am academy like Sydney's, they want systems where they can skim off established pathways.

 

[dickballsack]

Hawthorn and Collingwood don't want am academy like Sydney's, they want systems where they can skim off established pathways.

They do want academies and requested them before the Sydney academy was established. As for your second point I'll leave my comment here so you can understand the irony. In 2005 collingwood proposed a system where clubs could nominate players outside of traditional afl areas to draft as a supplement to their list, all clubs agreed and the afl put in place the scholarship program in which clubs signed and them drafted or rookied. In 2010 the afl ceased the program sighting it advantaged particular clubs, now they have the same thing, funded by an equalisation fund, skim off established pathways you say? Who established them.

 

[JackFlash]

I see Sydney following a similar path to Collingwood after 2011, Hawthorn absolutely blew them away in the Grand Final, the game was effectively over for us neutrals midway through the first QTR. The Swans like the Pies will suffer scarring and they will struggle in 2015, they will hang around the top 4, but they won't be as good as they were this year and they were humbled in that GF. I now firmly believe that teams who have the tough prelim appear to benefit more from it. I can't see past a Hawks V Port GF in 2015 with the Swans battling out for the remaining top 8 positions.

 

[Kummerspeck]

They do want academies and requested them before the Sydney academy was established. As for your second point I'll leave my comment here so you can understand the irony. In 2005 collingwood proposed a system where clubs could nominate players outside of traditional afl areas to draft as a supplement to their list, all clubs agreed and the afl put in place the scholarship program in which clubs signed and them drafted or rookied. In 2010 the afl ceased the program sighting it advantaged particular clubs, now they have the same thing, funded by an equalisation fund, skim off established pathways you say? Who established them.

I don't think you understood what I was saying, nor do I think you understand what irony is. Where do Hawthorn and Collingwood want to have their academies?

In 2010 the afl ceased the program sighting it advantaged particular clubs

No, they didn't.

now they have the same thing, funded by an equalisation fund, skim off established pathways you say? Who established them.

The academies are nothing like the scholarship program and any pathways out of NSW will have had absolutely nothing to do with the scholarship program. It's moronic to suggest that.