Can Swans still win GF?

Remove this Banner Ad

Of course. But when Geelong beat Collingwood in 2011 no one was expecting Hawthorn to emerge like they did.

Huh? Didn't Hawthorn just lose a thrilling PF to Collingwood that year? And didn't they already have the nucleus of star power in a team that had won a premiership a few years earlier?

Maybe no-one was predicting a three-peat - they're pretty hard to do and take more than just playing talent - but Hawthorn's "emergence" in 2012 was hardly a surprise.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Huh? Didn't Hawthorn just lose a thrilling PF to Collingwood that year? And didn't they already have the nucleus of star power in a team that had won a premiership a few years earlier?

Maybe no-one was predicting a three-peat - they're pretty hard to do and take more than just playing talent - but Hawthorn's "emergence" in 2012 was hardly a surprise.

It would be interesting to know was favourite at the start of 2012? I'd guess Collingwood?
 
No doubt! The rate at which Hawk fans still sulk about Buddy leaving does tend to suggest a need for anusol though...

No problem with the Swans taking Buddy over GWS. Whilst it wasn't fair process due to the Swan's salary cap advantage, it did begin the process for the end of COLA and will handicap the Swans salary cap for another 5 years or so.

I was more annoyed that apparently compensation for Buddy under the longest and most lucrative contract of all time was only pick #19. That was more the AFL's issue under Vlad.
 
No problem with the Swans taking Buddy over GWS. Whilst it wasn't fair process due to the Swan's salary cap advantage, it did begin the process for the end of COLA and will handicap the Swans salary cap for another 5 years or so.
.

The Giants had a far bigger salary cap advantage at the time than the Swans. They had COLA AND their initial list concessions (which included extra in the cap). So COLA had nothing to do with the Swans' ability to beat out GWS.

There's no evidence yet of the Swans' salary cap being handicapped by Buddy's salary. He's not the only player in the league on that kind of money and he's performing to the level you'd want from someone being paid that amount (which is more than you can say for some other $1m+ players). It will only become an issue if he fails to see out his contract by more than a season. We'll have to wait and see.
 
The Giants had a far bigger salary cap advantage at the time than the Swans. They had COLA AND their initial list concessions (which included extra in the cap). So COLA had nothing to do with the Swans' ability to beat out GWS.

There's no evidence yet of the Swans' salary cap being handicapped by Buddy's salary. He's not the only player in the league on that kind of money and he's performing to the level you'd want from someone being paid that amount (which is more than you can say for some other $1m+ players). It will only become an issue if he fails to see out his contract by more than a season. We'll have to wait and see.

I was referring to the Swans ability to outbid the Hawks (using COLA) ;)

Agree Buddy is earning his keep at the moment. But only Jarrad Waite hits peak career form at 34.

Edit: 35 actually. Never change Brad Scott.
 
I was referring to the Swans ability to outbid the Hawks (using COLA) ;)

Well it does cost a lot more to live in Bondi than Box Hill. ;);)

I wondered at the time about the magnitude of the offer Sydney made to Buddy because I figured (and still think) it was a long way north of what Hawthorn might have offered him. I suspect they could have offered a shorter contract and still not risked Hawthorn matching. Maybe he was genuinely considering the Giants (though I got the impression he wasn't keen on becoming a marquee player at a new club, plus it's a long drive from Bondi to Homebush). Had he been seriously tossing up the two Sydney clubs, I reckon the GWS offer would have been closer to Sydney's than the Hawks' would have been.

Or maybe the offer just reflected what they thought he was worth (intrinsically, rather than from a market point of view).
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Of course. But when Geelong beat Collingwood in 2011 no one was expecting Hawthorn to emerge like they did.

Richmond are there. The question is who is going to join them? Port? Melbourne? Someone else?
OK, so you’re confident the Swans have been eclipsed but apart from the Tigers you’re unable to enlighten us as to who’s eclipsed them.
 
No problem with the Swans taking Buddy over GWS. Whilst it wasn't fair process due to the Swan's salary cap advantage, it did begin the process for the end of COLA and will handicap the Swans salary cap for another 5 years or so.

I was more annoyed that apparently compensation for Buddy under the longest and most lucrative contract of all time was only pick #19. That was more the AFL's issue under Vlad.
Pick 19 was fair.
 

So the Swans lose a ruckman close to the season starting and the AFL is now pushing a Mid Season trade period to start ASAP this year??

Hmmmm how convenient and it took the Swans to suffer the fate many other teams have had in the Pre Season before but the AFL are quickly trying to rush in a new system all of a sudden to benefit their love child team base.......:rolleyes:

I like the idea but gee the timing stinks to high heaven and good one Gill i suppose as there is no way the AFL will let NSW not be competitive.

Where do you stand on the moon landing being faked and 9/11 being an inside job? :rolleyes:
 
I think they can win it. Still have a quality side. The importance of a ruckman can be overrated. Good midfield, strong finish to last season, they have a habit of good players just coming out of nowhere so you always have to be optimistic about their list. For what it's worth I never rated Tippett.

As for midseason draft, sure why not but If your list isn't structured to cover the loss of one or two players then come on! You deserve to be a bottom side.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top