Do we have the worst under 25 in the Comp?

Remove this Banner Ad

Yes but you stated like having those talents didn't help GWS, but didn't mention that they failed retention.
And no normal established club will bleed said top line talents like they have.

They also get an A plus for development for most of there talents. That's why clubs want them.

Why does Sydney attract and retain guns when GWS can't?
 
Do we have an Academy of the entire state of NSW do we?

No, but we get to play Grand Finals on our home ground and not travel interstate every other week.

I'm not sure what your point is, all I'm trying to say is that burning your list and culture for early picks is not the panacea alot of posters are suggesting it is.
 
Just wondering what input does the coach have on recruiting. My mate blames our drafting failures during the bux period on him.
My assumption is that the whole footy department would help to come up with recruiting criteria, as player type for future success depends on projections of future game style. I think there's been a pretty clear change in criteria with this new footy department - in the draft, we've shifted to blokes who can seriously run - unfortunately none of them appear to be natural footballers who know what they're doing out there.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

No, but we get to play Grand Finals on our home ground and not travel interstate every other week.

I'm not sure what your point is, all I'm trying to say is that burning your list and culture for early picks is not the panacea alot of posters are suggesting it is.

My point is you stating they weren't gotten through nominal draft measures and acting as if top line talents are superfluous to needs.

But that's because they have a system in place that allows them to get access to said top picks through a state wide athlete Academy.

We do not have such Academy that covers the same area or population.
 
Last edited:
F/Ss aren’t a gift. You still need to acquire them through the draft, and they’re certainly not a guaranteed success as we’ve seen with Kelly, Cal & Tyler Brown, and Jaxson Barham types. Ditto academy picks.

The best ones are.

A FS that is rated top 10 is far cry from a Barham who was lucky to be listed if not for FS.
It's the late end talents that are less likely.

Brayden Shaw is the interesting case going the other way highly touted junior had a great first season, injuries struck and then MM and Tony fell out over demands of AFL midfield minutes.
 
Carlton, Melb, Richmond and Ess were finding talented 18yo’s and did nothing with them for years.
Haw have spent 4 years at the bottom to get talent to hopefully win a flag.
The analysis proves nothing, let alone an indictment of Hine.

We contend and win flags that’s the only metric needed to confirm we have our own formula for success
Flag
 
No, but we get to play Grand Finals on our home ground and not travel interstate every other week.

I'm not sure what your point is, all I'm trying to say is that burning your list and culture for early picks is not the panacea alot of posters are suggesting it is.

I never suggested burning the list.

The reality is we have an ageing list and nature (retirements) will look after the rest.

What I'm against is trading future firsts for role players and the J.Browne avoiding the draft theory.
 
Because Sydney is an established team they have bred a good culture which no new team can create over night.
GWS retention will improve with time.

Did Wayne Carey stay there (Swans gave him up for 10k)? what about Greg Williams?

Greg Williams? Bendigo lad who’d started at Carlton. Why would he have to stay at the Swans?
 
Why does Sydney attract and retain guns when GWS can't?

Hogan goes alright. As does Ward.

Seriously though, I don’t think it’s they they can’t attract or retain guns, it’s that they don’t need to. They’re a team that set themselves up with the best young talent and continue to bolster that list every draft with multiple top 20-30 draft picks. They’ve got too many potential guns and offloading 1-2 every year just continues to provide them with an ongoing stream of top 20-30 draft picks to continually replenish.
 
Hogan goes alright. As does Ward.

Seriously though, I don’t think it’s they they can’t attract or retain guns, it’s that they don’t need to. They’re a team that set themselves up with the best young talent and continue to bolster that list every draft with multiple top 20-30 draft picks. They’ve got too many potential guns and offloading 1-2 every year just continues to provide them with an ongoing stream of top 20-30 draft picks to continually replenish.
They just had a ridiculous number of good AFL mids. They've had to lose them regularly because you can't play them all at once.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The best ones are.

A FS that is rated top 10 is far cry from a Barham who was lucky to be listed if not for FS.
It's the late end talents that are less likely.

Brayden Shaw is the interesting case going the other way highly touted junior had a great first season, injuries struck and then MM and Tony fell out over demands of AFL midfield minutes.

How they’re projecting in their draft doesn’t by default make them a gift. Clubs still need to do the work with them as they progress through the junior ranks. Clubs still have to adjust their draft strategies to accommodate them. Clubs still need to then invest the draft capital to acquire them. And there are still no guarantees, same as any other junior they acquire.
 
I never suggested burning the list.

The reality is we have an ageing list and nature (retirements) will look after the rest.

What I'm against is trading future firsts for role players and the J.Browne avoiding the draft theory.

Noone said you did.
burning your list and culture for early picks is not the panacea alot of posters are suggesting it is.

I'm glad that you have a firm stance on first round picks.
 
Brayden Shaw is the interesting case going the other way highly touted junior had a great first season, injuries struck and then MM and Tony fell out over demands of AFL midfield minutes.

I remember him stuggling at Williamstown.

We really nailed that draft, 1 game out of our top 3 picks.
 
How they’re projecting in their draft doesn’t by default make them a gift. Clubs still need to do the work with them as they progress through the junior ranks. Clubs still have to adjust their draft strategies to accommodate them. Clubs still need to then invest the draft capital to acquire them. And there are still no guarantees, same as any other junior they acquire.

Nick Daicos was a gift, I don't know why you're trying to argue that.

Just because we invited him to our "f/s academy" doesn't mean he wasn't a gift. Just because we had to use a draft pick on him, doesn't mean he wasn't a gift.

We didn't get him due to good management or good recruiting, he fell into our lap due to the father/son rule.
 
I wouldn’t listen to SEN if it were the last radio station on earth.

Thumbs Up Computer Kid Brent Rambo Original Video on Make a GIF
 
Nick Daicos was a gift, I don't know why you're trying to argue that.

Just because we invited him to our "f/s academy" doesn't mean he wasn't a gift. Just because we had to use a draft pick on him, doesn't mean he wasn't a gift.

We didn't get him due to good management or good recruiting, he fell into our lap due to the father/son rule.

The greatest gift, he was destined to come to Collingwood since 13 years old.

I can't believe anyone would think that wasn't a gift.
 
Nick Daicos was a gift, I don't know why you're trying to argue that.

Just because we invited him to our "f/s academy" doesn't mean he wasn't a gift. Just because we had to use a draft pick on him, doesn't mean he wasn't a gift.

We didn't get him due to good management or good recruiting, he fell into our lap due to the father/son rule.

That’s your opinion. Not the first time your incorrect, likely not the last.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Do we have the worst under 25 in the Comp?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top