Calm ya tit.s mate. The season hasnt even finished yet
Saad would be a fantastic acquisition. McKenna, Saad, Baguley and an improved Gleeson is starting to look like a nice backline. All we need is an intercept king KPP to push out Hartley/Ambrose.
The season finished some time around 5:15pm last Saturday.
Half time last Saturday.
If we’d kicked a bit straighter, we’d be in front! We’re a real chance!
2nd Quarter 05:38
2nd Quarter 16:22
Bravo Wimm… that would’ve have pretty much been my loungeroom… except with less people in it.
The club strategy is to ensure we are in the position to contend (amongst other things). As Simon Madden always says “You can’t plan to win a premiership but you can ensure you put yourself in a position to contend”.
The board is about governance and consultancy at a high level. We do not get involved in the day to day operations of the club - most especially the football department - unless it is a governance or club values issue.
The FD presented a list management strategy to the board 2 years or so ago. It talked about recruiting ‘Essendon type’ players. I will not go into details, for obvious reasons, but this has, I believe, been adhered to since.
Reviews are done of all departments. Reviews often show areas of improvements and gaps. The executive then act on these recommendations accordingly.
… well the Stringer thing was fun while it lasted.
Essendon type players are people on the ■■■■ and googs. At least that’s the players that won premierships
So then they obviously aren’t Essendon type people if they’ve won premierships
I’m sorry but this sort of thing just sounds like nonsense.
We draft based on available talent and need, like all clubs. We may value certain qualities over others at times but there is no such thing as an ‘Essendon type’ there are just footballers of all different shape size and attribute and this is reflected by our past and present lists which have been filled with players of vastly different qualities. I consider that you’d be hard pressed to identify a single outstanding quality with which you could label the entire list.
You also can’t draft based purely on a specific personality type because team sports require an array of personality types and a psychologically uniform list would not be a strong one imo.
Further If you look at our trading over the last two years i sincerely doubt there is a single unifying quality to all the players we’ve drafted other than drafting the best available to fill a specific list need.
You may set some drafting parameters for your list strategy and prioritise certain attributes over others (football ability over athleticism for example). But to describe that as an ‘Essendon type’ is just a fancy way of making ourselves feel special and superior, sentiments that frankly have held us back for a very long time.
Now if you want to prescribe a set of values by which we want our players to train, develop and play that is something I can get behind.
Essendon type is pr jargon that I’m sick of from the club.
Same with saying someone’s part of our fabric all the ■■■■■■■ time.
Sorry for being a pedant, but you mean “prescribe”. “Proscribe” would be the opposite. Not that sorry, obviously, or I wouldn’t have written the post.
Lets just keep drafting NICE Essendon type players…that rules out all the elite talent then …spare me!!!
On the development v success argument earlier in the thread I think it is a real chicken and egg thing.
I’m almost certain Sydney’s development is strong because they are successful and young players come in land earn what it takes to win from guys who have a lived experience of being winners and who set appropriate onfield and off field examples.
It’s the same reason clubs value getting experienced players from successful programs. But individual players alone can’t compensate for 15 years of losing culture.
As you lot don’t know what Catherine means by that (and neither do I), why go all silly over it.
(not you Ivan, your response was more reasoned and I tend to agree).
Does anyone here know the 10 swans players who are playing tonight that came off the rookie list?
Yeah I acknowledge that and I initially hesitated to respond for that reason but frankly, and with all due respecect to Catherine, to suggest we draft ‘Essendon types’ is the height of arrogance, particular considering our recent lack of success.
I also think such branding leads to a shallowness of thought and consideration. If we are having a discussion around draft strategy then I think using generic labels doesn’t serve the debate very well.
That said I accept that within the club ‘Essendon type’ may have a very clear and well understood meaning which can be applied flexibly to various roles. However, that meaning is not apparent from our recent drafting imo.
I really wish she hadn’t have said “Essendon type”.
That’s what has got us to this point at the moment and quite frankly we are sick of it.