2008 Adelaide Board_Big Footy Progressive Votes

[Damp Squarie]

Its not far away from the first bounce; are there any volunteers for tallying the votes after each week? Ive decided to step aside.
How about ya AdelUniCrowFan

Player Of The Year (POTY)
Votes: 5,4,3,2,1.

Best Team Man (BTM)
Votes: 3,2,1

Rookie Of The Year (ROTY)
Votes: Best rookie of the week or
Votes: 2,1 or we could go with
Votes: 3,2,1 given that we have a few that could play together more often this year.

As per last year, votes don’t necessarily have to be given if they are not deserved.Choose your poison.

We need to agree on ROTY Eligibility…

Option 1
23 years of age (or under)and no more than either 15 AFL games at the beginning of the season.

Option 2
21 years of age (or under) and no more than either 15 AFL games at the beginning of the season.

 

[macca23]

I'm happy with the under 23 game definition as it gives a wider range of players for us to vote on during the year.

 

[Damp Squarie]

I'll second that thought Macca

 

[Mismatched]

I'm happy with the under 23 game definition as it gives a wider range of players for us to vote on during the year.

I'm with macca 23 here, I'd even go so far and not make it age restrictive, just games restrictive, although there arn't many who fit that list any way.

 

[sirdaan]

Oi Drummond, which group would your love starlett come under? He'd have to be a certainty for ROTY from all reports! (except he barely fits into either category).
Seriously, he will be delisted along with Jericho at seasons end.

 

[Vader]

I'm happy with the under 23 game definition as it gives a wider range of players for us to vote on during the year.

Doesn't add that many extra players. The only additions are Maric (22yo, 14 games), Vince (23yo, 10 games) and Campbell (23yo, 1 game).

With Maric & Vince have played for 2 seasons already, albeit less than 10 games in either season. Hardly seems fair to be giving them votes in a rookie of the year contest.

I'd be tempted to go for the 21yo and under option.

BTW, what is the cut-off date for the age limit? 1st of Jan? 20th March (1st game of the season)?

 

[macca23]

Doesn't add that many extra players. The only additions are Maric (22yo, 14 games), Vince (23yo, 10 games) and Campbell (23yo, 1 game).
With Maric & Vince have played for 2 seasons already, albeit less than 10 games in either season. Hardly seems fair to be giving them votes in a rookie of the year contest.

I'd be tempted to go for the 21yo and under option.

BTW, what is the cut-off date for the age limit? 1st of Jan? 20th March (1st game of the season)?

I think it's actually 4. Campbell is too old to qualify even under the U/23 criterion but Moran and Symes would both qualify in addition to Maric and Vince.

Last year the options were very limited and it was a Knights procession. Also, none of the 4 mentioned above have consolidated a spot in the 22. In that respect they are dead-set rookies still.

For me definitely the U/23 option - which applies as usual from the 1st January. In this case the player has to be born on or after 1/1/1985 and played no more than 15 games to qualify.

 

[Vader]

I think it's actually 4. Campbell is too old to qualify even under the U/23 criterion but Moran and Symes would both qualify in addition to Maric and Vince.

Last year the options were very limited and it was a Knights procession. Also, none of the 4 mentioned above have consolidated a spot in the 22. In that respect they are dead-set rookies still.

For me definitely the U/23 option - which applies as usual from the 1st January. In this case the player has to be born on or after 1/1/1985 and played no more than 15 games to qualify.

Much depends upon how you define the cut-off dates for their Date of Birth.

Campbell is currently 23 years 194 days old (DOB 7/9/84). To me that's 23 & under as he has not yet celebrated his 24th birthday.

Similarly, Moran (29/9/86) qualifies for the 21 & under group (currently 21 years 172 days). So he's not an extra.

Symes is ineligible either way, having played 20 games with The Evil Empire. Both age qualifications also come with the 15 game criteria.

To me, a rookie is a first or second year player. By that I mean it is the year of their AFL debut or the year after. For example if (when) Tippett debuts in R1, this will be his first rookie year as far as I'm concerned.

By your definition - DOB on or before 1/1/85 (presumably 1/1/86 for the U21 criteria), Campbell would be out, but Moran would be in. Either way, you still only add 3 extra rookies to the list of eligible players. For what it's worth, I would definitely consider Campbell & Gill to be a rookies - it's their second year on the list and neither have played more than 10 games (Campbell 1, Gill 7).

Maybe we should look at it in terms of years on the list & games played, rather than age based? The age criteria clearly discriminates against players drafted at a mature age - eg Gill & Campbell.

 

[macca23]

Much depends upon how you define the cut-off dates for their Date of Birth.

Campbell is currently 23 years 194 days old (DOB 7/9/84). To me that's 23 & under as he has not yet celebrated his 24th birthday.

Similarly, Moran (29/9/86) qualifies for the 21 & under group (currently 21 years 172 days). So he's not an extra.

Symes is ineligible either way, having played 20 games with The Evil Empire. Both age qualifications also come with the 15 game criteria.

To me, a rookie is a first or second year player. By that I mean it is the year of their AFL debut or the year after. For example if (when) Tippett debuts in R1, this will be his first rookie year as far as I'm concerned.

By your definition - DOB on or before 1/1/85 (presumably 1/1/86 for the U21 criteria), Campbell would be out, but Moran would be in. Either way, you still only add 3 extra rookies to the list of eligible players. For what it's worth, I would definitely consider Campbell & Gill to be a rookies - it's their second year on the list and neither have played more than 10 games (Campbell 1, Gill 7).

Maybe we should look at it in terms of years on the list & games played, rather than age based? The age criteria clearly discriminates against players drafted at a mature age - eg Gill & Campbell.

You're really complicating a simple issue Vader.

It's not 23 or under, neither is it 21 or under. It's under 23 on the 1st January or Under 21 on the 1st January.

That means we are talking about 3 players, as you are right about Symes.

To me, under 21 on the 1st January is too restrictive as players take different times to make it at AFL level. That is used as the criterion for rising star of the whole competition, and these players in general are well above the average player in terms of ability.

I'm not totally opposed to no age limit for players with no more than 15 games, but still have a preference for U/23 on the 1st January.

 

[Vader]

You're really complicating a simple issue Vader.

Fair call, I love playing devils advocate at times.

It's not 23 or under, neither is it 21 or under. It's under 23 on the 1st January or Under 21 on the 1st January.

That means we are talking about 3 players, as you are right about Symes.

To me, under 21 on the 1st January is too restrictive as players take different times to make it at AFL level. That is used as the criterion for rising star of the whole competition, and these players in general are well above the average player in terms of ability.

I'm not totally opposed to no age limit for players with no more than 15 games, but still have a preference for U/23 on the 1st January.

Agreed. Happy to go with your definition of U/23.

So... The players who are eligible for ROTY are:
Taylor Walker
Patrick Dangerfield
Aaron Kite
Myke Cook
Tony Armstrong
Andrew Otten
Jarrhan Jacky
James Sellar
Greg Gallman
David MacKay
Kurt Tippett
Brad Moran
Ivan Maric
Bernie Vince

The rookies, if any of them get elevated, are also all eligible:
James Moss
Edward Curnow
Jared Patrenko
Brodie Martin

Douglas & Griffin miss out on eligibility by the narrowest of margins - the cut-off is 15 games and they have each played 16.

 

[cammo84]

Being new to bigfooty, how does this thing work?

We just post in the relevant thread our POTY votes after each round?

Vote for rookies every week too? And once a rookie has hit the 15 games, are they still eligible, or is the cutoff just 15 games at the beginning of the season?

Apologies if these are stupid questions...

 

[Vader]

Being new to bigfooty, how does this thing work?

We just post in the relevant thread our POTY votes after each round?

Pretty much, here's a link to one of the threads from last year. Should give you an idea of what to expect:
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=363118

Vote for rookies every week too? And once a rookie has hit the 15 games, are they still eligible, or is the cutoff just 15 games at the beginning of the season?

Rookies are eligible all season. They don't become ineligible once they play the magical 16th game of their career.

Apologies if these are stupid questions...

No problem at all.

 

[cammo84]

Much appreciated Vader

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Agreed. Happy to go with your definition of U/23.

So... The players who are eligible for ROTY are:
Taylor Walker
Patrick Dangerfield
Aaron Kite
Myke Cook
Tony Armstrong
Andrew Otten
Jarrhan Jacky
James Sellar
Greg Gallman
David MacKay
Kurt Tippett
Brad Moran
Ivan Maric
Bernie Vince

The rookies, if any of them get elevated, are also all eligible:
James Moss
Edward Curnow
Jared Patrenko
Brodie Martin

Douglas & Griffin miss out on eligibility by the narrowest of margins - the cut-off is 15 games and they have each played 16.

Do we cut out the 15 games criteria, which would open it up to Grif & Dougy?

If Maric is eligible to should Grif.

Particularly if we are looking at 3,2,1 criteria, rather than a 2,1 votes.

 

[Vader]

Do we cut out the 15 games criteria, which would open it up to Grif & Dougy?

If Maric is eligible to should Grif.

Particularly if we are looking at 3,2,1 criteria, rather than a 2,1 votes.

I'm not inclined to increase the games limit. None of our 1st or 2nd year players have more than 15 games to their credit. Douglas played in both 06 & 07, Griffin played significantly more than 50% of the games in 07, so I'm happy for them to be ineligible for the ROTY award in 08.

I would be more inclined to cut the age criteria completely. This would open it up for Campbell & Gill. Both are second year players with less than 10 games experience, so would qualify under most rookie qualifications except for the fact that they were mature aged draftees.

Another suggestion might be to go with the same rookie definition as used for the Rising Star award? 10 games and 21 or under as at 1/1/08? This would eliminate Moran, Maric & Vince.

This would neatly get around your problem of one ruck being eligible but the other ineligible - albeit by making all 3 of them ineligible!

Lots of options, by my personal preference would be to stick with the U/23 & 15 games or less rules, as per Macca23's definition of U23.

Happy to run with the majority verdict though. I'm only one member of a large board, no reason why my opinion should be the ultimate decider.