Media Swans Talk in the Media 2024

[Ticky009]

This content is brought to you by Chief and the Mods of Big Footy.
PLEASE READ:

A reminder to all on the rules of copywritten content.

You will be held responsible for the articles you post that infringe copyright.

Mods will issue warnings when posters reproduce full articles on Big Footy.

You will receive something like this and an initial 1-point infraction. Contued posting of articles will incur a Serious Infraction of 5 points.

So please remember, when using material that may be the copyright of another party, you must:

• Use only that portion you are directly commenting on. A reasonable guide might be a paragraph or two.
• Always link to the source.

Terms and rules

You must agree to these terms and rules before using the site.

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Kiama Chris]

Sorry KC but I didn't really find it helpful, nor particularly insightful. Their mob usually provide better meat. The analysis seemed to be "if we kick 25 fewer goals we won't win as many games!" The author talks about his own knowledge without revealing what that knowledge is. It's a social media dislike of mine, "based on what I know". Of course there's no space to write what that knowledge is, what it's based upon or how anyone arrived at such knowledge.

At this time of year journos are furiously stacking new content onto back pages, flapping out pages of promises based purely on opinions. I miss the days of data, analysis and facts.

More analysis of the roles of our big three, the use of mids/forwards, who is likely to progress their scoring, who is likely to scorse less. What factors led to Amartey being our highest scorer? At the beginning of the season there were many doubting he was worth persisting with. I argued my reasons why I thought he would do well, including statistical reasons, like the fact that he had so little experience. He was a very junior forward (if not in age terms).

The writer might have talked about his potential future progress, such as the multiple drops and small mistakes that should be further remedied with practice and games. He may have discussed the other roles McLean has taken on which have added other value, the reasons McDonald was not our biggest goal kicker and/or how that may change in the future.

OK, it's a rat-bait article on the one-size-fits-all frame designed to reach all 18 clubs' fans with a single sheet, but most fans could write a more insightful piece on their own club's forwards, with a lot more to back up their opinions.

Ouch! Did you read the article on Grundy? It was more in line with what you were hoping for, though still not quite to that standard.
Sadly his acolytes aren't to HB's level.

 

[The Mares Leg]

Talking Footy - Selwood, Watson and Cotchin all went for the Giants - made me feel more confident.

 

[GoTheSwannies]

Talking Footy - Selwood, Watson and Cotchin all went for the Giants - made me feel more confident.

I haven't heard Cotchin in the media but geez Selwood and Watson (the Jab version) are absolutely painful to listen to.

Obviously decisions made by the boys club. Yes Selwood was a champion on field, but keep him away from the media, his voice is nails on chalkboard. And Watson is seriously a buffoon in a mansuit. Surely nepotism has its boundaries...

 

[The Mares Leg]

I haven't heard Cotchin in the media but geez Selwood and Watson (the Jab version) are absolutely painful to listen to.

Obviously decisions made by the boys club. Yes Selwood was a champion on field, but keep him away from the media, his voice is nails on chalkboard. And Watson is seriously a buffoon in a mansuit. Surely nepotism has its boundaries...

I think they’re still seeing the 2022 version of the Swans.

 

[Ticky009]

 

[GoTheSwannies]

I think they’re still seeing the 2022 version of the Swans.

Probably the last time they've watched a swans game

 

[GoTheSwannies]

Funny how in that middle segment he picks two teams that started the season hot (Swans / Essendon) and finished poorer, and two teams that started the season shockingly, and then improved at the end (Brisbane / Hawks) as evidence that the rule change had an impact. Complete rubbish if you ask me...

 

[caesar88]

Funny how in that middle segment he picks two teams that started the season hot (Swans / Essendon) and finished poorer, and two teams that started the season shockingly, and then improved at the end (Brisbane / Hawks) as evidence that the rule change had an impact. Complete rubbish if you ask me...

The only mid-year rule change that hurt us was teams not allowing us to use the corridor. Pretty unfair if you ask me.

 

[SM]

Going to be funny when the Hawks win.

 

[Millky95]

I haven't heard Cotchin in the media but geez Selwood and Watson (the Jab version) are absolutely painful to listen to.

Obviously decisions made by the boys club. Yes Selwood was a champion on field, but keep him away from the media, his voice is nails on chalkboard. And Watson is seriously a buffoon in a mansuit. Surely nepotism has its boundaries...

Selwood is the 2nd biggest blight on Australia Rules Football. The first being anyone involved with the Essendon drugs

The fact that Selwood is celebrated makes me ill

 

[giantsully]

2024 Finals Dossier: Sydney Swans - The Shinboner

Welcome to the fifth edition of the Shinboner Finals Dossiers, starting with a look at the minor premiers.

t.co

Thought this Shinboners analysis was excellent.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Didnt watch the video but the Bont?? for Norm Smith i mean i guess its possible but the probability will be so low.

Its wild i think media has lost their mind over the form of the Dogs and Hawthorn and got completely carried away.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Or maybe im wrong? im hearing reports you would rather be in Hawthorn or Bulldogs shoes than a top 4 finish and im just so confused.

 

[MF]

Didnt watch the video but the Bont?? for Norm Smith i mean i guess its possible but the probability will be so low.

Its wild i think media has lost their mind over the form of the Dogs and Hawthorn and got completely carried away.

I think in the case of the dogs it's somewhat justified in an even season. Their form in the back half of the year, albeit after a really poor first half, was as good as anyone's and they have a team strong enough to knock over any of the other finalists home or away IMO. The hawks though I think are more just a fairytale.

Would be funny if the Hawks beat them.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

I think in the case of the dogs it's somewhat justified in an even season. Their form in the back half of the year, albeit after a really poor first half, was as good as anyone's and they have a team strong enough to knock over any of the other finalists home or away IMO. The hawks though I think are more just a fairytale.

Would be funny if the Hawks beat them.

Yer of course im just hearing like you dont wanna be in Sydney or Port shoes but rather the Dogs and Hawthorn guess we will find out this week.

 

[bloodsbigot]

Would be funny if the Hawks beat them.

It would be glorious.

 

[Big Blood]

The teams are statistically so close that this methodology is useless. Swans rank 7th for points against with 1769, Bulldogs are first with 1736. The difference between the Swans' total and the supposed flag window in 4th place is just 17 points - a meaningless gap in a 23-game season.

 

[caesar88]

The teams are statistically so close that this methodology is useless. Swans rank 7th for points against with 1769, Bulldogs are first with 1736. The difference between the Swans' total and the supposed flag window in 4th place is just 17 points - a meaningless gap in a 23-game season.

Bulldogs also got to play the bottom three teams four times while we only played them three times and lost one of them.

Bulldogs had 45 less points against than we did from our respective games against bottom four teams, and 241 more points for from those same games than we did.

 

[Ticky009]

I think in the case of the dogs it's somewhat justified in an even season. Their form in the back half of the year, albeit after a really poor first half, was as good as anyone's and they have a team strong enough to knock over any of the other finalists home or away IMO. The hawks though I think are more just a fairytale.

Would be funny if the Hawks beat them.

Dogs vs Hawks - the very definition of conflict of who to support if you're a Swans fan

 

[bedford]

Bulldogs also got to play the bottom three teams four times while we only played them three times and lost one of them.

GD lol

 

[caesar88]

GD lol

Well unfortunately I don't have my bedford acronym translator with me, so you're gonna have to help me out with this one

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Or maybe im wrong? im hearing reports you would rather be in Hawthorn or Bulldogs shoes than a top 4 finish and im just so confused.

Because .... Stevic .... #freekickbulldogs

 

[Millky95]

Well unfortunately I don't have my bedford acronym translator with me, so you're gonna have to help me out with this one

Go Dogs, I think? bedford becoming a traitor?!?!

 

[giantsully]

Dogs vs Hawks - the very definition of conflict of who to support if you're a Swans fan

Not so much, I'll be cheering loudly for the Hawks - I just suspect they're gonna get flogged.

 

[MF]

Well unfortunately I don't have my bedford acronym translator with me, so you're gonna have to help me out with this one

I had chatGPT open for work and thought I'd see if it could help out...

The response "GD lol" likely means "Good day, laugh out loud." In this context, it suggests that the person is either dismissing the argument or finding it amusing. They might be responding to the claim about the number of times teams played each other and the outcomes, possibly indicating they don’t take the argument seriously or find the discrepancy trivial.