Universal Love The Great Dane - hanging the boots up (officially)

Remove this Banner Ad

... Which is the difference between making finals and not?

Definitely. We had some terrible losses early in the season against beatable teams due in part to some unfortunate injuries after a pretty clean offf season and preseason. Losing Swan 10 minutes into the year was a terrible blow.
 
Quote from Malty at SEN today that might explain him not looking Bucks in the eye..............

“For the first couple of years, (Eddie and I) stayed clear of each other, but I’ve got no issues there. Nathan is a bit different. We probably don’t see eye-to-eye in many instances, so the best thing is you don’t put yourself in a confrontational position.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...r/news-story/b5463f802a76bccc0cd394191439e979
Someone should tell him it's only an expression:rolleyes:
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Malthouse is the most immature mature age man I've ever seen. Not looking Bucks in the eye when they shook hands (that Bucks initiated as Malthouse no doubt wouldn't have) is the perfect representation of what sort of "man" he is.

Agreed. 5 years later and he's still being a tool. Bucks was incredibly professional during the transition, when Malthouse was sniping him.
 
This bloke dumbfounded me he never looked like an athlete and he was the first to admit it,but damn could he play. He looked slow but he would still out run his opponents and burst through packs and kick goals from his left or right. Great mark overhead,he had it all. The last of the real characters of the game. Blokes like this wont be seen again on the footy field.
 
I don't know about anyone else here but this in is probably the saddest retirement at this great football club that I have witnessed. I'm 25 and have seen many greats play for collingwood one being our coach Nathan Buckley. That happened 9 years ago and each year I fall in love with collingwood even more. And these generation of players are the first of many I got witness though out their entire careers, I was a baby when Buckley started out as a junior so didn't get too see him from start to finish.
I understand now all you older people here you talk to your children my age how great Nathan Buckley and Peter Daicos were. Now whenever the day comes I have my own kids I will be telling them and showing videos of Dane Swan on YouTube showing how great he was. He is a warrior and a legend of this club. Being a collingwood supporter watching the replay grand final live in some music festival I didn't give a s**t about, all my mates went and saw their music artists etc and I was down the hill watching us romp st kilda apart with 300 odd random Collingwood fans. We were up about 7 goals in the 3rd qtr and still thought this isn't over and when Dane swan kicked that goal and jumped and put his fists in the air that's when I knew we were going to win the premiership. As I'm a grown man now sitting on the toilet with a little tear in my eye I'm thinking about about the great things this man has done for our club. I'm going to miss you out there Swanny. GO PIES.
 
2 Bulldogs games, 1 Against the Tigers, both lost by the closest of margins. Swan could conceivably have been the difference maker in all 3, which would put us on 12 wins, outside the 8 by percentage, and playing for a spot in the finals this week.

All well and good to say you can't just slot in a player and say x x x games would have been wins, but when you're talking about a player of Swan's caliber, it's an entirely plausible scenario.

It's entirely not plausible to suggest 1 player out of 22 can be realistically be the difference between 9 wins and 12 wins.

Swan wasn't exactly at his best recently either, his performances were on the downward trend.

Also if we get back Swan do our opponents also get back 1 of their injured players? You're creating an entirely different timeline when anything in theory is possible.

Putting Swan in (and bringing someone out) for the Richmond game creates a completely different game and we could of ended up losing by more, who knows.
 
It's entirely not plausible to suggest 1 player out of 22 can be realistically be the difference between 9 wins and 12 wins.
When it's a player of Swans caliber, yes it is.
Swan wasn't exactly at his best recently either, his performances were on the downward trend.
Yeah man, he's not that good anymore.
His 29 disposals, 1 goal, 5 marks and 4 tackles per game clearly wouldn't have had a big impact this year.
Also if we get back Swan do our opponents also get back 1 of their injured players? You're creating an entirely different timeline when anything in theory is possible.
Except Swan having a positive impact on close games apparently...
Putting Swan in (and bringing someone out) for the Richmond game creates a completely different game and we could of ended up losing by more, who knows.
I said it's plausible he could have been able to drag us over the line and you start delving in to multiverse theory. Please just stop.
 
When it's a player of Swans caliber, yes it is.

Yeah man, he's not that good anymore.
His 29 disposals, 1 goal, 5 marks and 4 tackles per game clearly wouldn't have had a big impact this year.

Except Swan having a positive impact on close games apparently...

I said it's plausible he could have been able to drag us over the line and you start delving in to multiverse theory. Please just stop.
Lol!
 
Also if we get back Swan do our opponents also get back 1 of their injured players? You're creating an entirely different timeline when anything in theory is possible.

Putting Swan in (and bringing someone out) for the Richmond game creates a completely different game and we could of ended up losing by more, who knows.

Hey Apex you forgot to reply to this point

....I dont see any other team in the AFL that lost their Brownlow Medallist all time champion ten minutes into the season.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hey Apex you forgot to reply to this point

....I dont see any other team in the AFL that lost their Brownlow Medallist all time champion ten minutes into the season.

Yea I reckon there's some teams who might've missed Ablett... Roughhead... Natanui...Fyfe..Sandilands... Liberatore.... the list goes on.

Swan wasn't going to perform like a Brownlow medallist in 2016, it's easy to forgot in recent times his footy hasn't been that flash in patches, and he'd occasionally play a great game like that Anzac game.
 
When it's a player of Swans caliber, yes it is.

Yeah man, he's not that good anymore.
His 29 disposals, 1 goal, 5 marks and 4 tackles per game clearly wouldn't have had a big impact this year.

Except Swan having a positive impact on close games apparently...

I said it's plausible he could have been able to drag us over the line and you start delving in to multiverse theory. Please just stop.


Well he's 32 and his performances before getting injured were nowhere near his best (on average), so I think it's safe to say his best was behind him, despite you wanting to manipulate that into me saying he isn't good anymore.

You don't seem to understand that you can't just "+Swan -unknown player" to a previous result and assume that result will stay the same just with extra goals our way. History doesn't work that way unfortunately Apex.

Having Swan replace someone like a Crisp in the midfield will only slightly increase our chance to win any particular game, certainly not enough to start suggesting an insane amount like a 25% increase on wins.

Well yeah lots of things are "plausible", but trying to act like us missing finals was because of Swans injury is just sticking your head in the sand and not very realistic. It played some sort of role but so did a million other things. Getting back Swan maybe we pinch 1 game we lost, maybe we lose 1 game we otherwise would of won... When you look at the good teams though you see beyond doubt that losing 1 player often has little impact on the grand result. Someone else get's an opportunity and the team moves forward.


And uh no.... that's not multiverse theory :p
 
Well he's 32 and his performances before getting injured were nowhere near his best (on average), so I think it's safe to say his best was behind him, despite you wanting to manipulate that into me saying he isn't good anymore.
I don't see how it's relevant given at his best he was the best player in the competition. The stats I quoted were his averages from last year. Even if he was slightly down on those again this year he still would have been in our top 5, probably top 3 players.
You don't seem to understand that you can't just "+Swan -unknown player" to a previous result and assume that result will stay the same just with extra goals our way. History doesn't work that way unfortunately Apex.
Actually yes I do. Hence why I said 'it's plausible' rather than 'we would have played finals with Swan fit'. Cut the condescending s**t and actually read my posts properly.
Having Swan replace someone like a Crisp in the midfield will only slightly increase our chance to win any particular game, certainly not enough to start suggesting an insane amount like a 25% increase on wins.
You do know that 2 of the 3 games I mentioned were decided by less than a goal, yeah? I don't think a few extra goals our way with the inclusion of Swan is an unreasonable theory.
Well yeah lots of things are "plausible", but trying to act like us missing finals was because of Swans injury is just sticking your head in the sand and not very realistic. It played some sort of role but so did a million other things. Getting back Swan maybe we pinch 1 game we lost, maybe we lose 1 game we otherwise would of won... When you look at the good teams though you see beyond doubt that losing 1 player often has little impact on the grand result. Someone else get's an opportunity and the team moves forward.
When did I say we missed finals because of Swans injury? Stop putting words in my mouth. The closest I said was we could have maybe been playing for a spot in the 8 this week, and specifically used the word plausible because it wasn't a given. It's like you read my posts, then twist the words around in your head to mean something else specifically so you can write a condescending reply and make yourself feel superior.

And uh no.... that's not multiverse theory :p
Also if we get back Swan do our opponents also get back 1 of their injured players? You're creating an entirely different timeline when anything in theory is possible.

Putting Swan in (and bringing someone out) for the Richmond game creates a completely different game and we could of ended up losing by more, who knows.
Creating different and new timelines due to different actions or events is 100% multiverse theory.
 
Whatever impact Swan may or may not have had he was not on the slide. Injury reduced his 2015 output to just being a very good player. In 2015 he has back to being a top end star. He hadn't lost pace. It's a shame he got so badly hurt early in 2016 because he had easily 2 years left of top end footy. Fully fit he'd be starring next year and possibly beyond.
 
What people are forgetting with Swan in 2016 was the stated intention that he would be spending more time forward.
With our clearly dysfunctional forward line he would have dragged us over the line in a few matches, no doubt.
Imagine Dane Swan playing forward/midfield instead of Blair..... Sigh.
 
I have no doubt Swan would have played predominantly as a midfielder simply because he was desperately needed. People on here massively overrate our midfield. We have a mid table midfield. Pendlebury is a gun. Sidebottom is vey good. Adams can get the ball but isn't a great kick. Treloar can run with the ball but can't kick well enough. After that we have a long line of dime a dozen plodders. In any case, putting Swan forward doesn't stop the carnage at the centre clearances which is were we lost most of the games we lost and were Swan was sadly missed. After our number 1 square team we got nothing from the guts. All hypothetical of course but had Elliot and Fasolo been fit Swan probably wouldn't have been needed forward anyway.
 
What people are forgetting with Swan in 2016 was the stated intention that he would be spending more time forward.
With our clearly dysfunctional forward line he would have dragged us over the line in a few matches, no doubt.

+dysfunctional game plan..........no doubt he would of helped.
 
Many people seem concerned only with his possession tallies and output in games, Swan was also a leader in his own very unique way and was able to influence the course of games. The guy made us a better team, 2015 he would have walked into any team in the comp, his experience was invaluable. Who wouldn't walk a little taller running out alongside Dane Swan.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top