Unofficial Preview SEASON 2025 - Best 22, Game Plan, Personnel

[caesar88]

How is Papley not at the top of that list!? Rampe? He's too pretty.

Papley, McCartin, Ladhams, Wicks, Sheldrick would give your top five an almightily epic flogging.

Because Papley is the very definition of all bark no bite.

 

[ShireSwan]

Because Papley is the very definition of all bark no bite.

Haha, no chance he's not first one in for a mate at the local B & S.

He knows the limits on the footy field though, and plays them magnificently, hilariously.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

I wouldn’t mind McLean in a bar fight. Looks like the kind of bloke who would be calm as as tensions first started rising, but then turn it on when he needed to.

Grundy? Haha - no thanks!

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

As I understand it there were vice-captains and a leadership group this year. It wasn't formally announced because the voting was so vast and widespread that it was counter-productive to publicly acknowledge the leadership of some but not others, just over a few votes difference.

Mills (C), Rampe (VC), Parker (VC), Heeney, Papley, Adams & Gulden received the most votes, and Cunningham, Lloyd, Hayward, Grundy, Blakey & McCartin were the next-best of the rest.

To that end, I wonder if perhaps it wasn't a lack of leadership that was a problem this year, but a lack of clear leadership. The above results would suggest that there's no shortage of players considered worthy of a 'leadership' role at the club, in fact it's the opposite, we have plenty. But we lacked that one clear voice and character that could change the DNA of the team when needed. Maybe there were so many voices providing leadership that complacency crept in; the players felt so comfortable that there was always enough leadership on offer that no one was quite prepared to be THE leader.

Assuming this is all true, I have some many questions…

Do we let players vote the captains and vice captains, or just the leadership group?

Do the coaches have votes too?

If only the players, then when did leadership become a popularity contest?

What’s the purpose of a leadership group without an arbitrary divide between leadership and rest of team? That is, why not announce the group even if the voting was close?

Who voted for Mills after the mad Monday incident???


Call me old fashioned, but I reckon the coaches should choose the captains with an informed understanding of who the players respect (but not a vote). Pretty simple to have convos with each player to gauge how they see things and who they rate, then come together as a coaching group to respect those views but also select who they think the team needs to set standards and lead the way. Sport is not a democracy.

I am on the record as saying leadership was probably the team’s biggest weakness last season. It showed on GF day, especially with Mills leading a team talk as they walked in at half time I think it was. But also all through the year with the team regularly struggling to put down runs from the opposition.

I am really struggling to understand how a leadership group was not announced because the voting was tight… so because they didn’t want to hurt feelings / explain why someone was left out, they just don’t announce the leaders? Some faith in the leadership group then! And again, if you don’t have voting, you don’t have this problem. And if you do have voting, why not make it about who each player thinks best exemplifies the values the team aspires to, rather than players in general? You could then make sure the leadership group has good coverage of the various values.

Not sure how gulden can stay in the leadership group next year, and foolish of the club to let him in so early. Another reason not to vote on it - sometimes old stays know more!

Rant over

 

[caesar88]

Assuming this is all true, I have some many questions…

Do we let players vote the captains and vice captains, or just the leadership group?

Do the coaches have votes too?

If only the players, then when did leadership become a popularity contest?

What’s the purpose of a leadership group without an arbitrary divide between leadership and rest of team? That is, why not announce the group even if the voting was close?

Who voted for Mills after the mad Monday incident???


Call me old fashioned, but I reckon the coaches should choose the captains with an informed understanding of who the players respect (but not a vote). Pretty simple to have convos with each player to gauge how they see things and who they rate, then come together as a coaching group to respect those views but also select who they think the team needs to set standards and lead the way. Sport is not a democracy.

I am on the record as saying leadership was probably the team’s biggest weakness last season. It showed on GF day, especially with Mills leading a team talk as they walked in at half time I think it was. But also all through the year with the team regularly struggling to put down runs from the opposition.

I am really struggling to understand how a leadership group was not announced because the voting was tight… so because they didn’t want to hurt feelings / explain why someone was left out, they just don’t announce the leaders? Some faith in the leadership group then! And again, if you don’t have voting, you don’t have this problem. And if you do have voting, why not make it about who each player thinks best exemplifies the values the team aspires to, rather than players in general? You could then make sure the leadership group has good coverage of the various values.

Not sure how gulden can stay in the leadership group next year, and foolish of the club to let him in so early. Another reason not to vote on it - sometimes old stays know more!

Rant over

I personally don't have a problem with the way we handled the leadership group this year. As I said, there WAS a leadership group. It just wasn't known to the public, but that wouldn't have made any difference to the way the leadership group operated within the four walls, or to how the team performed. Us fans knowing who the leadership group was wouldn't have made them play any better or lead any better.

But like I mentioned earlier, I think that it shows we have plenty of candidates that are seen as leaders to the players - the seven who made the leadership group and the six who almost made it makes a whopping 13 candidates, more than most clubs I'd imagine. I think this even spread of leaders is overall a very positive and healthy thing for a club, but it's probably reliant on the main leader, the captain, being a strong enough leader and voice to rise above them all and be THE leader.

I don't know if Mills this year - injured for most of it, sidelined for most of it, well down on form, and only in his first year of solo captaincy - could be that strong voice. So I think the 'even spread' of leaders maybe turned into a bit of a jumbled mess of leaders instead.

 

[tombomb]

They aren't going to remove Mills but if there was a clean slate for 2025, I'd be making Heeney captain.

 

[Kiama Chris]

How is Papley not at the top of that list!? Rampe? He's too pretty.

Papley, McCartin, Ladhams, Wicks, Sheldrick would give your top five an almightily epic flogging.

They weren't in order

 

[Kiama Chris]

I wouldn’t mind McLean in a bar fight. Looks like the kind of bloke who would be calm as as tensions first started rising, but then turn it on when he needed to.

Grundy? Haha - no thanks!

McLean is often the second man in. Grundy would wave his arms around a lot. Hence ?

 

[Kiama Chris]

As threatened, here are my thoughts on team make-up. I doubt there will be big changes to start off in 2025. Assuming all fit:

FB: Cunningham McCartin Rampe
HB: Roberts Melican Blakey
C: Gulden Mills McInerney
HF: Jordon McDonald Warner
FF: Papley Amartey Hayward
R: Grundy Heeney Rowbottom
I/C McLean Fox Lloyd Sheldrick Wicks

Notes
Assuming 5 man interchange no sub.
Rampe final year
Fox possibly final year
Defence 2 talls, still not tall enough IMO
Wing rotation Gulden McInerney Lloyd. No room for Campbell in the 23.
Forwards 90+% 2 talls 1+ med 2+ smalls
Mids more focused on clearance and contested possession (worthy of PhD thesis)
Wicks and Sheldrick replacing Campbell and Parker is not a big change but a step in the right direction.
We've talked a lot about emphasis on intensity and accountability.

Perhaps almost as important is what happens from there. To illustrate, here is my team for the start of 2026:

FB: Cunningham McCartin Edwards*
HB: Roberts Melican Blakey
C: Gulden Mills McInerney
HF: Jordon McDonald Hayward
FF: Papley Buller* Hanily*
I/C McLean Snell* Lloyd Sheldrick Wicks

Notes
Cunningham and Lloyd possibly final year
Warner leaves (safest assumption for planning purposes)
Edwards coming in to replace Rampe numerically to give us three genuine talls in defence. If he isn't ready perhaps Snell.
Buller replacing Amartey (who knows but no-one else will be ready)
Hanily (or a 2024 draftee) replaces Warner in the forward line. I hope we will have drafted a ready to go forward/mid.
Snell replacing Fox as the 7th defender.
Mills stays in the midfield
If we need more midfield power we have a few choices:
Change Jordon's role
Bring in Cleary to replace Wicks or Hanily*
Some will say that I must find a spot for Campbell. I don't think so. Time to harden up.

Have at it and tell me why I'm wrong.

Unsurprisingly, this got me thinking a bit more and further down the track. I believe this year and next we have the opportunity to draft some cattle that are as good, and possibly better, than what we have now.
2024
Matt Whitlock a very tall KPD or KPF
Dattoli an agile small forward/half forward/midfielder who is likely to be able to play early
Cochran 195cm fast, jumpy, agile who might be a third back or forward (or nothing but let's be positive).
2025
King KPF
Chamberlain a classy third tall forward
Carmichael a very classy medium defender.
Plus we need a replacement for Ladhams.
In each year someone else, hopefully a small forward and a solid midfielder (please!).

So here's a shot at 2029 when our stalwarts are gone or getting old. Obviously, just about everything is very arguable so far into the future but my intention is to give a flavour of whether we are in reasonable shape (I think we are) or deep doodoo. Players ages attached:

2029 First Round
Carmichael22 Edwards26 WhitlockM23
Roberts26 Snell24 Blakey29
Gulden27 Mills32 McInerney29
Florent31 McDonald27 Jordon27
Papley33 Buller28 Hayward30
Green24 Sheldrick25 Rowbottom29
Cochran23 Mitchell25 Wicks30 Cleary24 Dattoli23

Extras Campbell27 Kirk25

I'm assuming Heeney's body has given up but Papley is still going. Mills turns 32 that year so is 50:50. Melican would be 33 and I'm assuming the worst that McCartin has had to retire. So a big turnover in defence.
King and Chamberlain are knocking on the door in attack. Cochran is playing forward and Mitchell as a medium defender. Hopefully we will have recruited a small forward better than Wicks by then.

There are two excellent potential draftees in 2026 in McCartney and McGroder but we are likely to miss out on both.

So while this is not strictly on-topic I think there is some cause for optimism in terms of the cattle who should be available to us over the next few years and how they would fit together.

 

[caesar88]

The midfield is gonna be suuuper interesting (and/or potentially mind-numbing) to see unfold next year in regards to how Horse views our problem in there. This year, as with most years, he ran with a solid trio - Heeney, Rowbottom & Warner - and, to a lesser extent, a quartet, with Gulden being the fourth.

I think the general consensus I've seen from Swans fans is that we need more contested strength and clearance power in the midfield. And the consensus solutions seem to be any, or in some cases all, of Adams, Mills & Sheldrick, having more midfield time.

But as I often say, rotations have consequences. You can't increase someone's share of the midfield pie without taking a little from someone else's. Who Horse & co choose to take from I think will be fascinating, and potentially telling as to what will be prioritised in the mids next year. Equally as illuminating will be if he doesn't taketh from anyone, and instead runs with the same crew, and backs them in again.

 

[Punts]

The midfield is gonna be suuuper interesting (and/or potentially mind-numbing) to see unfold next year in regards to how Horse views our problem in there. This year, as with most years, he ran with a solid trio - Heeney, Rowbottom & Warner - and, to a lesser extent, a quartet, with Gulden being the fourth.

I think the general consensus I've seen from Swans fans is that we need more contested strength and clearance power in the midfield. And the consensus solutions seem to be any, or in some cases all, of Adams, Mills & Sheldrick, having more midfield time.

But as I often say, rotations have consequences. You can't increase someone's share of the midfield pie without taking a little from someone else's. Who Horse & co choose to take from I think will be fascinating, and potentially telling as to what will be prioritised in the mids next year. Equally as illuminating will be if he doesn't taketh from anyone, and instead runs with the same crew, and backs them in again.

How do you know horse has a problem with the mid group.

Thibk he will look at it like , well they got us to top and the GF.

By the sounds of it , mills comes in like Harley said and it might change.

I can’t see horse changing much across the board to be honest

3 talls etc etc

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

I was surprised to hear Horse say during the final series that our midfield was a real strength. It might sound counterintuitive, but I think our midfield was a weakness while our midfielders were a strength.

Warner, Heeney, Gulden and even increasingly Rowbottom would all do game breaking things in open play. But they didn’t do their first job well enough, which is winning the ball at the contest and moving forward with clean possession.

More than looking for a change of personnel (although I will be disappointed if Warner is in the centre square opening bounce next year), I want to see a mindset shift. I want to see the boys prioritising making hits and embracing impacts to win the contests and dominate with tackles - with the flash to follow when opportunity allows.

I would love it if the team mantra next year was to be the hardest team to play against. If we get that right, the team’s talent will sit very nicely on top of a well formed cake.

I also don’t know how you can choke and go soft in a GF if your DNA has been built up through the H&A season is to go hard at everything.

 

[Punts]

horse almost needs to revert back to the defensive mindset he had once. Very hard to score against and team defence he so often talked about.

Mids running defensively

Get kj , Kennedy and hanners back for the pre season to show them what team defence is

Get Roos back and rok lol

 

[S120]

The midfield is gonna be suuuper interesting (and/or potentially mind-numbing) to see unfold next year in regards to how Horse views our problem in there. This year, as with most years, he ran with a solid trio - Heeney, Rowbottom & Warner - and, to a lesser extent, a quartet, with Gulden being the fourth.

I think the general consensus I've seen from Swans fans is that we need more contested strength and clearance power in the midfield. And the consensus solutions seem to be any, or in some cases all, of Adams, Mills & Sheldrick, having more midfield time.

But as I often say, rotations have consequences. You can't increase someone's share of the midfield pie without taking a little from someone else's. Who Horse & co choose to take from I think will be fascinating, and potentially telling as to what will be prioritised in the mids next year. Equally as illuminating will be if he doesn't taketh from anyone, and instead runs with the same crew, and backs them in again.

Seems to me that we have options here to put Errol back to largely being a wingman where he’s most effective. I don’t think he’s a particularly effective centre bounce or stoppage player whereas he’s the best wingman in the league.

Chad playing more at HF seems to be something to explore too although you also want his pace around stoppages to break away from.

A primary four of Heeney, Mills, Rowbottom, and Warner seems the way to go for me with Sheldrick to put on as much pressure as possible to fight his way in. Heeney being such a good forward and Warner at HF (maybe) suggests there is space available for Sheldrick too.

2025 is going to be fascinating in so many ways. How do we bounce back - I expect pretty well although I can’t possibly tip us to win a flag on the back of that thrashing. And how do we build to our next flag opportunity. We need ruthlessness and I hope Mills is the one who pulls himself up to bring a sense of ruthless expectation to the group by demanding more of himself and the other stars like Chad, Errol, and Blakey and the other senior stalwarts like McCartin, McInerney, Papley, Grundy, and the young guys who we need to start putting pressure on the old guys (Rampe, Lloyd, Cunningham) like Snell, Will Edwards, Corey Warner, Sheldrick

 

[Jeffers]

If they don’t sort out their slow starts then it really will be a long season. If we can tighten that up then maybe we can close the gap between how good our best is compared to how utterly shit our worst is.

Until then I’m not convinced we’ll be able to get anywhere near the top 6

 

[caesar88]

How do you know horse has a problem with the mid group.

Thibk he will look at it like , well they got us to top and the GF.

By the sounds of it , mills comes in like Harley said and it might change.

I can’t see horse changing much across the board to be honest

3 talls etc etc

I don't know that he has a problem with the midfield, that's why I said it will also be telling if he doesn't change anything about it

 

[tombomb]

If they don’t sort out their slow starts then it really will be a long season. If we can tighten that up then maybe we can close the gap between how good our best is compared to how utterly shit our worst is.

Until then I’m not convinced we’ll be able to get anywhere near the top 6

Our slow starts were almost entirely due to us not having ball winners in the middle of the ground.

It really concerns me that we were deep into the season and the coaches were still saying they didn't understand why we kept starting so slow. I'll give them some free advice and say it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they play music in the change rooms before games.

 

[caesar88]

This video came up on my Youtube recommendations so I watched it and it reminded me what a great win it was. Not necessarily most remarkable or memorable but right up there as one of the best I have seen from us. We led all day and when Collingwood kept coming we just kept them at arm's length while playing amazing footy ourselves.



What really stands out to me though is what so many of these highlights are built on. There's a few bits of individual brilliance for sure - Buddy's crumbing goal and Rowbottom's roving roost are just ridiculous. But most we could actually replicate again and again, if we do things right.

The first one, our boys going sideways, taking their time, using each other as options until we get it to Buddy in the clear, and then Buddy selflessly taking the best option which is Heeney in the goal square.

A defender in Sir Dane getting the ball about 60m out and our boys just clearing a path for him and all telling him to go long for goal himself.

Papley's goal where we're surging forward in numbers, Florent keeping the ball moving forward and Papley running onto it, but we also had McInerney out wide if we needed him.

Warner getting the ball 50 out running into an open forward line and selflessly passing off to Hayward on his own rather than going for goal himself.

Sir Dane's gut-busting desperation to bump Mihocek off his feet and saving a certain goal in the process.

The unbelievable gut-running to get forward ahead of the ball by Heeney so he could be in position to cleverly tap the ball to Buddy in the goal square.

It's all such exciting stuff but it all only happens because we're doing the hard things and thinking as a team, not a team of individuals. Selfless plays, being numbers for each other, working tirelessly, running both ways. We also laid 72 tackles in this game.

We've gotta get "uglier", and I put that word in quotation marks because we need to stop thinking of such efforts as "ugly". They are the most important part of footy so therefore they should be considered the sexiest parts that every member of the team strives to lift their weight in.

 

[tombomb]

This video came up on my Youtube recommendations so I watched it and it reminded me what a great win it was. Not necessarily most remarkable or memorable but right up there as one of the best I have seen from us. We led all day and when Collingwood kept coming we just kept them at arm's length while playing amazing footy ourselves.



What really stands out to me though is what so many of these highlights are built on. There's a few bits of individual brilliance for sure - Buddy's crumbing goal and Rowbottom's roving roost are just ridiculous. But most we could actually replicate again and again, if we do things right.

The first one, our boys going sideways, taking their time, using each other as options until we get it to Buddy in the clear, and then Buddy selflessly taking the best option which is Heeney in the goal square.

A defender in Sir Dane getting the ball about 60m out and our boys just clearing a path for him and all telling him to go long for goal himself.

Papley's goal where we're surging forward in numbers, Florent keeping the ball moving forward and Papley running onto it, but we also had McInerney out wide if we needed him.

Warner getting the ball 50 out running into an open forward line and selflessly passing off to Hayward on his own rather than going for goal himself.

Sir Dane's gut-busting desperation to bump Mihocek off his feet and saving a certain goal in the process.

The unbelievable gut-running to get forward ahead of the ball by Heeney so he could be in position to cleverly tap the ball to Buddy in the goal square.

It's all such exciting stuff but it all only happens because we're doing the hard things and thinking as a team, not a team of individuals. Selfless plays, being numbers for each other, working tirelessly, running both ways. We also laid 72 tackles in this game.

We've gotta get "uglier", and I put that word in quotation marks because we need to stop thinking of such efforts as "ugly". They are the most important part of footy so therefore they should be considered the sexiest parts that every member of the team strives to lift their weight in.

I think this is over complicating things.

We need players with clean hands that can win their own ball in the middle of the ground and make smart decisions. It was Heeney or bust this season.

Effort isn't the issue. It's class.

 

[caesar88]

I think this is over complicating things.

We need players with clean hands that can win their own ball in the middle of the ground and make smart decisions. It was Heeney or bust this season.

Effort isn't the issue. It's class.

I actually think this is over simplifying things.

I don't disagree that winning the ball in the middle is an issue (I think you are underselling Rowbottom's value here, I actually rate him maybe even better than Heeney in this regard), but effort is clearly an issue. Worth remembering that we won many games throughout the year without winning the midfield battle. So it's important to look at why we couldn't win the grand final, where we lost the midfield battle. Having one issue doesn't mean others don't exist as well.

Our tackling in and around the contest was sub-par in too many games, our defensive running, or lack thereof, exposed too many times, our pressure at ground level inside 50 non-existent for too much of the season, and the "class" of players like Gulden, Warner & Blakey too often superseded taking the best options and making the right, team-first decisions.

All of these things too often made us a combination of wasteful in possession and easy to score against without possession.

 

[Kiama Chris]

I actually think this is over simplifying things.

I don't disagree that winning the ball in the middle is an issue (I think you are underselling Rowbottom's value here, I actually rate him maybe even better than Heeney in this regard), but effort is clearly an issue. Worth remembering that we won many games throughout the year without winning the midfield battle. So it's important to look at why we couldn't win the grand final, where we lost the midfield battle. Having one issue doesn't mean others don't exist as well.

Our tackling in and around the contest was sub-par in too many games, our defensive running, or lack thereof, exposed too many times, our pressure at ground level inside 50 non-existent for too much of the season, and the "class" of players like Gulden, Warner & Blakey too often superseded taking the best options and making the right, team-first decisions.

All of these things too often made us a combination of wasteful in possession and easy to score against without possession.

Yep. The first half of the season was IMO built on three things: effort, teamwork and precision. About Rd 9 the first two started to drop away, particularly along with Grundy's impact. Then we hit our slump in all three. We picked up enough to fall over the line in first place but only got past GWS on the back of some super efforts. Port were more shit than we were. By the time of the GF we were back to where Saints beat us plus a few crucial injuries. No gas in the tank. No determination. No pressure to generate turnovers. No composure to create precision.

 

[Punts]

Grundy will keep falling of the cliff imo

Been worked out again

Always was overrated

 

[Callipygian]

Could Fox join the leadership group? He has the maturity. The onfield performances. He has teaching qualifications.

Could the issue be that is he is not assured of selection and perhaps is seen by teammates (and, even worse, himself) as not of the highest quality and therefore undeserving? Even if you score him down as a footballer that doesn't mean he can't be a good leader - look at Tom Harley. And there are plenty of other examples from footy and from other sports. I think it deserves serious consideration.

 

[Bloods86]

Could Fox join the leadership group? He has the maturity. The onfield performances. He has teaching qualifications.

Could the issue be that is he is not assured of selection and perhaps is seen by teammates (and, even worse, himself) as not of the highest quality and therefore undeserving? Even if you score him down as a footballer that doesn't mean he can't be a good leader - look at Tom Harley. And there are plenty of other examples from footy and from other sports. I think it deserves serious consideration.

He should. If we're serious about winning a flag, we need players who stand up on grand final day to be in our 22. If Mills is going to move into midfield, which I think he needs to, then Fox back, with Florent and Lloyd further up the ground.

He may not be the most vocal, may not have an arrogant edge, but if these are required, then where has it been from our leaders in recent grand finals.

 

[Kiama Chris]

Could Fox join the leadership group? He has the maturity. The onfield performances. He has teaching qualifications.

Could the issue be that is he is not assured of selection and perhaps is seen by teammates (and, even worse, himself) as not of the highest quality and therefore undeserving? Even if you score him down as a footballer that doesn't mean he can't be a good leader - look at Tom Harley. And there are plenty of other examples from footy and from other sports. I think it deserves serious consideration.

As much as I agree (I'm a huge Fox fan and own his jersey) I can't see it happening, at least formally. He doesn't push himself forward.