2nds Official Swans Academy Thread (Player News and Discussion)

[Blood red]

Go on Br.

Just an observation.
Seems that several players have been omitted, opted out or flown the coop.
I was hoping someone could enlighten me as to why this would happen.
A few obvious inclusions, but several dark horses.

 

[Ticky009]

Just an observation.
Seems that several players have been omitted, opted out or flown the coop.
I was hoping someone could enlighten me as to why this would happen.
A few obvious inclusions, but several dark horses.

I don’t even know which list you’re referring to. I can’t find anything online

 

[barry fu]

Just an observation.
Seems that several players have been omitted, opted out or flown the coop.
I was hoping someone could enlighten me as to why this would happen.
A few obvious inclusions, but several dark horses.

Right you are Br.

And, as T9 typed above. fu has no clue on who we were missing.
Thought you were filling it in.

 

[RobbieK]

Intentionally vague posting as attention-seeking behaviour...

 

[Ticky009]

Intentionally vague posting as attention-seeking behaviour...

Ive seen worse on here.

 

[Blood red]

I don’t even know which list you’re referring to. I can’t find anything online

FB post of Top End training.
No Rayner as a start.
Not vague for attention, but 'generalised' for discussion, hopefully from those who are a little closer to the scene to enlighten.

 

[Ticky009]

FB post of Top End training.
No Rayner as a start.
Not vague for attention, but 'generalised' for discussion, hopefully from those who are a little closer to the scene to enlighten.

Right. Got it. You’re talking about Josh Rayner. It’s entirely possible hes dropped out and chosen to continue his studies full time. Considering he was like in the top % in HSC etc, its not that much of a stretch

Could he front up for Sydney Uni in the NEAFL instead?

 

[DavyRed]

Hmmm.
19's squad has some big omissions, it would seem.
Wonder why?

Who’s in the squad? I haven’t seen a listing anywhere and I was assuming they’d wait until after the draft to announce it.

Edit: just saw the later comments so now understand this is not based on a specific listing. Can support those comments about Josh Rayner though. My understanding is that he has decided to give the Swans away and concentrate on his studies. May partly explain his form last season.

 

[kelpie_X]

Ive seen worse on here.

\waves

 

[barry fu]

So nothing to see?

 

[Kiama Chris]

NEAFL have announced changes to the list and team structure. In the app or on the website. Picked it up on Twitter. Interesting. 23 men per game for starters!

 

[SwansProudly]

Pleased a 19 YO academy boy gets to play each game.

MEDIA RELEASE: NEAFL announces list rules changes

www.neafl.com.au

Summary of NEAFL rule changes:

• Non-AFL clubs can list up to 40 players, including 35 x primary listed players and 5 x development list players.
• AFL clubs permitted to list seven (7) players, including up to two (2) mature-age players and five (5) 19-year-old academy players.
• A permit system will be in place for non-selected 19-year-old academy players to be eligible for selection by a non-AFL club.
• Non-AFL club listed players can nominate as two-way players, who will available to play for either an AFL club or non-AFL club subject to selection.
• All clubs will be required to play 23 players per match, which will include 1 x 19-year-old academy players for AFL clubs and 1 x development player (i.e traditional 23rd player) for non-AFL clubs.
• Aside from current finals eligibility rules, no other playing restrictions will apply in the finals series.

 

[DavyRed]

Pleased a 19 YO academy boy gets to play each game.

MEDIA RELEASE: NEAFL announces list rules changes

www.neafl.com.au

Summary of NEAFL rule changes:

• Non-AFL clubs can list up to 40 players, including 35 x primary listed players and 5 x development list players.
• AFL clubs permitted to list seven (7) players, including up to two (2) mature-age players and five (5) 19-year-old academy players.
• A permit system will be in place for non-selected 19-year-old academy players to be eligible for selection by a non-AFL club.
• Non-AFL club listed players can nominate as two-way players, who will available to play for either an AFL club or non-AFL club subject to selection.
• All clubs will be required to play 23 players per match, which will include 1 x 19-year-old academy players for AFL clubs and 1 x development player (i.e traditional 23rd player) for non-AFL clubs.
• Aside from current finals eligibility rules, no other playing restrictions will apply in the finals series.

I’m not sure I understand all of that.

• Re second dot point above, are they saying that what has previously been referred to as the NEAFL Development Squad (NDS) is now restricted to 7 players, 2 of which must be mature age - so age 20 or more? If so:
  • What’s the point of the two mature age players? The whole point of the NDS was to develop potential targets post their initial draft year
  • what happens if we need more than 7 top ups one week, which happened many times last season, where do we get them from? Random 19 YOs, in which case what’s the point of the 7 players limit, or only our Academy 17 and 18 YOs?
    • Edit: The third and fourth dot points suggest that not only can an NDS player play for a NEAFL non-AFL club, such as Sydney Uni, if they’re not selected by the Swans but that a player at a non-AFL club can play for the Swans as a ‘two way’ player. Not sure how that would work in practice though
• Re fifth dot point and given above, it seems to say that one 19 YO must play each game. I assume they mean at least one 19 YO?

 

[Blood red]

I’m not sure I understand all of that.

• Re second dot point above, are they saying that what has previously been referred to as the NEAFL Development Squad (NDS) is now restricted to 7 players, 2 of which must be mature age - so age 20 or more? If so:
  • What’s the point of the two mature age players? The whole point of the NDS was to develop potential targets post their initial draft year
  • what happens if we need more than 7 top ups one week, which happened many times last season, where do we get them from? Random 19 YOs, in which case what’s the point of the 7 players limit, or only our Academy 17 and 18 YOs?
• Re fifth dot point and given above, it seems to say that one 19 YO must play each game. I assume they mean at least one 19 YO?

Means that Swaney, Martin, McGrath, Rayner, Parker and a couple of others will be plying their trade elsewhere.

 

[DavyRed]

Means that Swaney, Martin, McGrath, Rayner, Parker and a couple of others will be plying their trade elsewhere.

Well it still depends on whether anyone gets drafted but, yep, it looks like three or four boys who were in the frame for an NDS spot will now have to look elsewhere (we can argue who should make up the five 19 YO NDS spots later ). Again, what’s the point of the two mature age players? Isn’t that just saying the Swans will be forced to persevere with two guys they‘ve already passed on twice before?

 

[grimlock]

Really don’t think that makes much practical difference. For all our NEAFL games in 2019, there was always at least one NDS player involved

Be interesting to see who the mature agers will be. Dean towers come on down?!

 

[SeanM]

I think the mature player spot gives an older player a chance to shoecase himself as a regularly member of an afl reserve team. So if we liked a player in his mid 20s he could train with the club and play in the reserves every week.

I remember academy watchers complaining about academy 19yo not getting enough opportunities in the reserves. So maybe this addresses that by allowing to play for other neafl teams.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I’m not sure I understand all of that.

• Re second dot point above, are they saying that what has previously been referred to as the NEAFL Development Squad (NDS) is now restricted to 7 players, 2 of which must be mature age - so age 20 or more? If so:
  • What’s the point of the two mature age players? The whole point of the NDS was to develop potential targets post their initial draft year
  • what happens if we need more than 7 top ups one week, which happened many times last season, where do we get them from? Random 19 YOs, in which case what’s the point of the 7 players limit, or only our Academy 17 and 18 YOs?
    • Edit: The third and fourth dot points suggest that not only can an NDS player play for a NEAFL non-AFL club, such as Sydney Uni, if they’re not selected by the Swans but that a player at a non-AFL club can play for the Swans as a ‘two way’ player. Not sure how that would work in practice though
• Re fifth dot point and given above, it seems to say that one 19 YO must play each game. I assume they mean at least one 19 YO?

Use of the words “up to two mature age players and five under 19” means that is the upper limit and there is no minimum limit other than having to satisfy the minimum1 19 year old by the other rule. On my take you could have zero mature age and only 1 19 year old.

 

[Ralphyboy]

I think the mature player spot gives an older player a chance to shoecase himself as a regularly member of an afl reserve team. So if we liked a player in his mid 20s he could train with the club and play in the reserves every week.

I remember academy watchers complaining about academy 19yo not getting enough opportunities in the reserves. So maybe this addresses that by allowing to play for other neafl teams.

So bartholomeuz and baker could play swans reserves next year?

 

[DavyRed]

So bartholomeuz and baker could play swans reserves next year?

There actually seems to be two ways they could play Swans Reserves next year:

- They fill the two mature age spots in the NDS; or

- They continue to play for their current NEAFL teams and nominate as ‘two way’ players, in which case the Swans can play them on an as needs basis

 

[Eggbeater]

Did I miss something no one drafted again.
I thought from hearing and reading that this was the best crop of academy kids the Swans have had.
one has to wonder what’s going on with current structures that are in place.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Did I miss something no one drafted again.
I thought from hearing and reading that this was the best crop of academy kids the Swans have had.
one has to wonder what’s going on with current structures that are in place.

Yes. The pathway is cemented when it is USED. If it becomes apparent it is too difficult then these kids will not be sold on the pathway and therefore not commit.

 

[Blood red]

Did I miss something no one drafted again.
I thought from hearing and reading that this was the best crop of academy kids the Swans have had.
one has to wonder what’s going on with current structures that are in place.

Yes. The pathway is cemented when it is USED. If it becomes apparent it is too difficult then these kids will not be sold on the pathway and therefore not commit.

If they listen to the 'wind blown up their arses' there were 9 draftable prospects with the Swans.
Took zero.. the pathway can get blocked by stupidity.

 

[DavyRed]

Did I miss something no one drafted again.
I thought from hearing and reading that this was the best crop of academy kids the Swans have had.
one has to wonder what’s going on with current structures that are in place.

I might post more about this later if I have time but there are a few factors that may determine the success of the Academy. Two of those would be a) facilitating the progress of more boys from junior football onto AFL clubs’ lists and b) helping to improve the general standard of local Sydney football.

With regards to point a) this year has been a total failure. Some reasons for that failure sit outside of the Academy but some certainly sit with the Academy itself and led to mismanagement of, and ultimately a waste of, the talent they had available to them this year. I still genuinely believe that we had several boys who were talented enough to get a list spot, certainly a rookie spot.

There are a number of issues that need to be urgently addressed otherwise, apart from the hope that another Blakey or Heeney comes along, we’ll continue to see very few boys getting selected in the 30-70 pick + rookie type range.

 

[Blood red]

I might post more about this later if I have time but there are a few factors that may determine the success of the Academy. Two of those would be a) facilitating the progress of more boys from junior football onto AFL clubs’ lists and b) helping to improve the general standard of local Sydney football.

With regards to point a) this year has been a total failure. Some reasons for that failure sit outside of the Academy but some certainly sit with the Academy itself and led to mismanagement of, and ultimately a waste of, the talent they had available to them this year. I still genuinely believe that we had several boys who were talented enough to get a list spot, certainly a rookie spot.

There are a number of issues that need to be urgently addressed otherwise, apart from the hope that another Blakey or Heeney comes along, we’ll continue to see very few boys getting selected in the 30-70 pick + rookie type range.

Like the advancement of a few less capable players who seem to push managements buttons, into NEAFL games and even Allies games.
Bizzar