Playing kids is not a blueprint for success. If it were, Richmond and Carlton would have the next few premierships sown up.
Collingwood have stumbled on a group of 3 or 4 very good youngsters who have made an impact quickly. Thomas and Pendlebury look like they've got very good careers ahead of them - but then they were both taken with top 5 draft picks, gained after a season of crapness for Collingwood far worse than anything the Swans have dished up in the past decade. The system is one that rewards crapness if a club is smart enough to make the most of it.
Cloke is very promising and if he learns to kick straight at goal could become a very potent forward. He'd have been a first round draft pick had he not been a FS. His promise was known at junior level.
Shaw also looks to be a fine young player, but he was in his fourth year last year - so he's the equivalent of a Schmidt, not a DOK.
The only other two who made a real impact on Collingwood's success last year were Clarke and Goldsack. And while they were impressive, they were absolute first year players and have to show sustained development before they can be classed as very good prospects. It might happen - not saying it won't - but bear in mind that Bevan finished a very deserved 4th in the RS award in his debut season. When players first burst onto the scene you tend to see their strengths only. In subsequent seasons the opposition tends to identify their flaws and find ways to exploit them. Fans also tend to factor in a continued increase in development at the same pace - it rarely happens.
The rest of the Pies youngsters who played the odd game last year didn't really make that much difference and none looks totally convincing an as AFL prospect yet - the Iles, Cooks, Stanleys, Nichols, Tooveys, even Rusling (for all his undoubted pace on the lead).
If the Swans had a group in the wings with the pedigree of Cloke, Shaw, Thomas and Pendlebury, I'd agree with you that throwing them in the deep end might have a quick rejuvenating effect on the Swans. But I don't think we do have a group ready to make such an "instant" impact. Those who could make a difference in the longer term had - and still have - limitations and major areas of development that will take time before they're ready, if ever, to become good AFL players.
If you're Carlton or Richmond you play young players regardless of whether they really deserve a senior spot. And mostly because you have no good senior players and have been crap beyond crap for a sustained period. Some may become long term players but many others will never become good enough to win a spot in a top flight team. They're just getting games because there is no-one else.
liz, much as i see the sense in most of what you say, sometimes you sound like a mouthpiece for the club, or at least its recruiting team
no one actually knew how good any of those c'wood players were until they were given a run in the seniors
i know they were mostly high draft picks, but pendlebury even the pies concede was a bit of a gamble at No 5, and they copped a lot of criticism in some areas for going with him
but what about the likes of o'brien, clarke, goldsack, dick, rusling, egan, et al (i know i've missed a couple there) that have been played in seniors with great success in the past coupla years and were NOT so highly acclaimed
the point i'm making is we continue to NOT play kids, we hold them back or, in the case of a few, play them once or twice, then drop them again
what does that do to their confidence or development???
yet, as bedford (and myself) continue to point, an ongoing disappointment (dud, if you like) such as mcveigh just keeps on getting a run for no reason we can come up with
his field kicking is ordinary, he's weak under pressure, he's not hard at the ball, and we have several players of similar abilities who DO go hard at it, who are overlooked
it's infuriating to hear you or anyone else keep on peddling the line "why play kids for the sake of it" when the players in the team who are keeping the kids out aren't doing a better job
jesse white (just one example) kicked four goals (from memory) in a pre-season game last year, but was never a hope of a run in seniors during the season
why not? if he had injury problems, that's an answer, but as i said, he's just one example
why was jarred crouch or paul bevan played in the finals when crouch was obviously struggling and bevan consistently error-prone? why not have played a keiran jack, jarrad moore, young simpkin, anyone who'd been going okay in the seconds?
you seem to be blindly defending the senior team selection policy without acknowledging at all that we've now reached a critical point of stagnation, where we're forced to take the punt and play a bunch of kids in one season to see what they can offer us, or push on with the ageing bodies and risk losing these kids, untested, when they get fed up with lack of opportunity
i apologise if this comes across a bit garbled, i'm furiously typing off the top of my head because i'm sick of getting the same obtuse reactions