Hawthorn's decision to resign it's older players

[SBD Gonzalez]

It's hard hearing ourselves - we 're too busy reading your long-winded description of your emotional roller coaster ride as a Swans supporter in grand finals in a thread about Hawthorn.

So don't go baiting Swans supporters with irrelevant crap about this year's GF. I'm always happy to engage in respectful discussion.

But the guy makes a provocative post about Hawthorn's list management, which, after all, is what this thread is about, and instead of addressing him with facts and logic, all you can come up with is a pathetic "How was grand final day? Still crying?"

 

[Wesley2]

 

[threesixpio]

So don't go baiting Swans supporters with irrelevant crap about this year's GF. I'm always happy to engage in respectful discussion.

But the guy makes a provocative post about Hawthorn's list management, which, after all, is what this thread is about, and instead of addressing him with facts and logic, all you can come up with is a pathetic "How was grand final day? Still crying?"

I was provoked?

 

[Gibbke]

These list management threads are f###ing stupid...

It's a fine line between keeping a side on field because you're taking the chance to win a flag with it, or to keep fine tuning to create that possibility. What is known is that big and sudden turnover of players is always disruptive in the short term. So it's a no brainer that a side with an extended period of success is looking to avoid a repeat of the countless instances in the past of teams being gutted and unable to maintain the winning culture - our last was the mid-2000's, and the one before that was the aftermath of the 1991 GF. The first was a brilliantly managed rebuild, the second was a disastrous result which nearly saw the entire franchise dissolved...

There's a bit more to it than the layman's view of Thursday night's announced teams (that's all of us here). It's also stupidly naive to be looking at players and team admin and expecting both sides to be totally upfront, "respectful", and all the other shock horror terms people feel uncomfortable with and try to reconcile any time anything happens. It's a business, and everyone's being paid well enough for egos to stay permanently in the back seat. Noone here can predict what will happen to any side, and that should be part of the journey, otherwise we might as well be soccer. I'd back Al Clarkson to have a plan that will work, because he keeps coming up with plans that will work, but if it doesn't, it's because other teams have plans that beat ours...

And enough of the Swans Hawks shit. They made us look stupid, we made them look stupid right back. We're all stupid, and deep down we all still like Buddy. Let's move on - the Swans aren't Essendon...

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I was provoked?

Been great chattin' with you mate. All the best.

 

[Damon_3388]

I was provoked?

The correct term in 2016 is "triggered".

 

[skipper kelly]

It's a golden handshake really. Mitchell and Lewis had been taking unders and now we are not going for a flag in the short term they are get their deserved coins elsewhere. Worked out great for Mark Williams too.

With all due disrespect to the way the game is marketed to the supporters of football clubs by the football clubs, why would Hawthorn not be going for a flag next year? It's a side issue to this thread and not a Hawthorn thing but I just don't get it and never will.

 

[DrEvil_]

With all due disrespect to the way the game is marketed to the supporters of football clubs by the football clubs, why would Hawthorn not be going for a flag next year? It's a side issue to this thread and not a Hawthorn thing but I just don't get it and never will.

Because realistically the list isn't in flag contention. It's not hard to understand. You don't always go for flag every year. Do you think Carlton will be "going for a flag" next year?

 

[threesixpio]

T Let's move on - the Swans aren't Essendon...

And Pol Pot ain't Hitler either