Remove this Banner Ad

Daniel Currie

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bomber Man
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

RUNVS said:
Well we have done it to other clubs so i guess it is only fair that the shoe is on the other foot now in regards to talented ruckmen developed elsewhere.
Click to expand...

I agree and good luck to him, I thought it interesting that everybody had nothing but positive things to say about the kid.

except Malceskifan
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

baja said:
Are we all really that shallow on this board? We ALL love football. Id like to think most on here are better than that.. at least until the season starts and we beat them by a point from a dodgey free kick.
Click to expand...
No we're not. However of all the posters on BF I would have had probably the worst from them (allthough there are some Hawks & Adelaide posters who have tried to match it this pre-season). I'm hoping Currie smashes it and lifts them to finals 2bh. Kinda weird when it happens the other way around though (recyling players) I agree.
 
I hope he does really well too, if only to silence those flogs who keep saying the COLA gives us an unfair advantage in retaining players. Don't listen to them. (The same would apply to the likes of Campbell Heath, TDL and Spangher). We face the same pressures as any other team in trying to fit players into our cap, and it's inevitable that with the team's success, you will see more players who couldn't get a game at the Swans, making it at other clubs.
 
Currie is looking promising for us but then your ruck stocks have always batted deep.

Fwiw not sure about the whole 'norf' thing, was almost as happy when you guys won in 2012 as if we had. Doubt I was the only one.

It may or may not have something to do with despising everything about Hawthorn.

Good luck going back-back.
 
rwfan83 said:
I hope he does really well too, if only to silence those flogs who keep saying the COLA gives us an unfair advantage in retaining players. Don't listen to them. (The same would apply to the likes of Campbell Heath, TDL and Spangher). We face the same pressures as any other team in trying to fit players into our cap, and it's inevitable that with the team's success, you will see more players who couldn't get a game at the Swans, making it at other clubs.
Click to expand...

None of those players leaving had anything to do with the COLA.

In all cases they were simply not up to pressuring for a starting XXII position at the club. The only one we seemed to want to keep for depth was Campbell Heath, but he would still have been behind Richards, Grundy, Roberts-Thompson and Johnson for a number of years and he wanted the opportunity to play AFL football now, which he will in an inferior Port Adelaide side. We will see how he develops, he may well become a very good AFL player, but he isn't there yet. Dennis-Lane will always be able to pop up with a goal or two, but we have better all-round footballers ahead of him. Spangher was only ever a stop-gap for us and he will be the same at the Hawks. If Currie was still on the list he would only be battling Jesse White for a spot on the emergency list.

None of these players were "lost" because we couldn't fit them into the cap. They were allowed or encouraged to leave (if not just delisted) because they weren't up to it and we needed to give others the opportunity to put pressure on our best team.
 
RobbieK said:
None of these players were "lost" because we couldn't fit them into the cap. They were allowed or encouraged to leave (if not just delisted) because they weren't up to it and we needed to give others the opportunity to put pressure on our best team.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. Schneider and Dempster were certainly up to it when they left.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Sanecow said:
Maybe, maybe not. Schneider and Dempster were certainly up to it when they left.
Click to expand...

And neither were mentioned by the poster I was responding to.

Even still, Dempster was moved on as Mattner was brought in - you can argue about who has been the better player since, but at the time Dempster was seen as below Mattner in the pecking order and Roos told him he wasn't going to get too many opportunities at the Swans. Roos had issues with Schneider's application, felt he had stagnated and needed to make way for fresh blood. Again, you can argue that Roos was wrong to do that, but I don't think the salary cap played a role.

Looking at all the players we have traded away or have delisted and been picked up by another club in the last decade, the list of those that went on to do anything much at AFL level is sparse. The only ones I can think of are Scott Stephens, Schneider, Dempster, Hall and Jolly. I really don't think in any of those cases salary cap pressures were the primary factor causing the trade.
 
Sanecow said:
Reports at the time and statements from Lyon contradict your opinion.
Click to expand...

Here is an article from the time:

Schneider:

"That's what I spoke to him about on Wednesday. Probably with us he stagnated a little bit and that was the reason why, in the end, I was prepared to do the deal. We think him going to St Kilda might stimulate his career, so I though it was better for him to go."

Dempster:

Roos admitted that Demspter became part of the Schneider trade as a favour to both him and Lyon.
After picking up Mattner, 25, it became clear Dempster would only have limited opportunities if he stayed at Sydney next season.

"For Sean he felt and we felt that with Marty Mattner coming in opportunities are going to be limited," Roos said. "Rather than hoarding players we want to make sure kids get a chance to play."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/afl/schneider-trade-a-tough-call/story-e6frexwr-1111114624641

That's how I remember it. I don't really see why Roos wouldn't have said that the salary cap played a role if it did.

If it is the case that there were salary cap pressures involved, that still only means we have lost two players in a decade as a result of it. It doesn't seem like it has been a particular problem for the club. Players that haven't made it at the Swans have very rarely made it elsewhere (though the opposite is not the case) - I think we seem to get the best out of players that other clubs fail to develop, mainly because we play a very role-focused game plan that gives what another club might see as a limited player a chance to thrive. It generally looks like we don't discard players too often if they can contribute, which is why so few ex-Swans have had success elsewhere.
 
Sanecow said:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=jUP_4tEb9lMC&pg=PT275&lpg=PT275&dq="adam schneider" "salary cap"&source=bl&ots=GIx96wD7Sg&sig=_RRbA5YOIY0KzEYVVrqS30NbGls&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Yqo_Ue6xMs3fkgXViIGQCw&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

Coaches lie all the time. I don't see why O'Loughlin would feel the need to lie though.
Click to expand...


I don't want to derail the thread any further so I'll make this my last post on the matter. O'Loughlin would have no reason to lie, but that doesn't mean his interpretation is necessarily right. We aren't going to prove this one way or another with a he said/she said unless Roos comes out and changes his record. But again, even if the O'Loughlin verison is right, I can't really see how two players leaving the club because of the cap over a period of a decade in which we won two premierships and played finals more or less every year is evidence that we have any real player retention problems, which was the initial claim that I was addressing.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Talking points for future "Why did the Sydney Swans delist Daniel Currie" thread:

1) We had Mumford, Pyke, Seaby, LRT & White ahead of him for best 22 spot.
2) Currie's bullocking work was below par, which is a highly valued skill at the Swans.
3) He was physically unsuited to AFL football at the time. At the beginning of his second pre-season with the club, he rocked up to the first training session weighing 74 kilos.
4) Because of salary cap pressure brought on by the high cost of living in Sydney, we could not afford to match the lucrative offer made to him by the North Adelaide Roosters.
 
Simple fact is that it was a case of bad timing for Dan. The Swans simply couldn't afford to hold him on the list for what would have been 7 years for him to come good. We've now got Mummy and Pyke in the top 2 spots so even if we had its debatable whether he would be getting a game

I wish him all the best at the Roos, I always liked him
 
Caj said:
Simple fact is that it was a case of bad timing for Dan. The Swans simply couldn't afford to hold him on the list for what would have been 7 years for him to come good. We've now got Mummy and Pyke in the top 2 spots so even if we had its debatable whether he would be getting a game

I wish him all the best at the Roos, I always liked him
Click to expand...

Are there any teams that can allow a guy to have 7 years on the list before being good enough to play AFL football? I don't think so.

Other than the very rare young standout who is ready to play right away (a Zac Smith or a Nic Natanui) I see no reason to ever draft an 18-20 year old ruckman. It just doesn't make sense for clubs to gamble on such a long development period when you can have a much more reliable return on your outlay if you target 22+ year olds through trades or the draft that have got the experience at VFL/WAFL/SANFL level.
 
Caj said:
Simple fact is that it was a case of bad timing for Dan. The Swans simply couldn't afford to hold him on the list for what would have been 7 years for him to come good. We've now got Mummy and Pyke in the top 2 spots so even if we had its debatable whether he would be getting a game

I wish him all the best at the Roos, I always liked him
Click to expand...

Top poinnt caj indeed. For all his pre season form he would still be no 3 ruck on our list.
 
CAS79 said:
Top poinnt caj indeed. For all his pre season form he would still be no 3 ruck on our list.
Click to expand...

I don't think he has actually done much more than Jesse this preseason, and only then because he has played purely in the ruck while White has not been played as an out and out ruckman in any of the games so far. I doubt he would get a game at the Swans this year as Mumford, Pyke and Tippett and clearly ahead of him and even if two of them were to go down LRT would certainly still start ahead of him as a pinch hitter in the ruck... I'd say he would be about equal fifth in our ruck stocks.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom