List Mgmt. 2022 Draft Thread - Part I

[George]

Sticking this at the top of each page. If it gets annoying, let me know and I can just put it in the original post of the thread. Credit to Lore

 

[Klaatu]

Then how do you expect them to populate their lists? Do you remember the Brisbane Bears? Not so good at all.

How's North going just as good as BB are they going to get conseesions i doubt so you draft and trade like everyone else.

 

[Klaatu]

Yeah, I've thought about it.
Get over it.

At a guess and i might be wrong your in your early 20's & thinking you know what iv'e got a lifetime to get a flag i'll be right just what i thought in the 80's it doesn't work that way all clubs should be on an even footing otherwise it becomes a 5 team comp just like EPL.

 

[ScrappyDo]

How's North going just as good as BB are they going to get conseesions i doubt so you draft and trade like everyone else.

North are going much much much better than the Bears.

 

[ScrappyDo]

At a guess and i might be wrong your in your early 20's & thinking you know what iv'e got a lifetime to get a flag i'll be right just what i thought in the 80's it doesn't work that way all clubs should be on an even footing otherwise it becomes a 5 team comp just like EPL.

If I'm making reference to the Bears then it would first require me to be old yes?

That team was populated by the transference of the bottom 3 players from each of the existing teams. And they were utterly terrible. The AFL learnt there lessons on that one and went for massive draft concessions more recently because it's a better outcome.

 

[gringo2011]

If I'm making reference to the Bears then it would first require me to be old yes?

That team was populated by the transference of the bottom 3 players from each of the existing teams. And they were utterly terrible. The AFL learnt there lessons on that one and went for massive draft concessions more recently because it's a better outcome.

Port Adelaide had a bulk SANFL list and were competitive from early on. Same with WC. Perhaps give them free rein on set up and access not outright free access. Sydney's got an obscene list of academy players.

 

[ScrappyDo]

Port Adelaide had a bulk SANFL list and were competitive from early on. Same with WC. Perhaps give them free rein on set up and access not outright free access. Sydney's got an obscene list of academy players.

I'm just kicking against the whingers. None of it is fair but who said it's supposed to be?
To me it's obvious that culture is the most important thing for start up clubs. For Tassie the AFL should have Clarko stitched up and developing a a list plan already.

 

[gringo2011]

I'm just kicking against the whingers. None of it is fair but who said it's supposed to be?
To me it's obvious that culture is the most important thing for start up clubs. For Tassie the AFL should have Clarko stitched up and developing a a list plan already.

100%, if you are starting ground up you want to build it the right way with as much local input as possible. WC and Port really hit the ground running because of the strong local quality talent with local pride on the line. The ones that didn't work were when the AFL sent in the wage earners who were there for cash.

 

[Yawkey way]

Then how do you expect them to populate their lists? Do you remember the Brisbane Bears? Not so good at all.

They weren’t given the necessary concessions to establish the club. That’s completely different to the soul destroying concessions granted to gws and the gold coast. You can’t just say to the life blood of the competition well screw you, you may have waited decades for success but a club that will never be anything but an ego trip for administrators and a bonus on tv rights is more important.

Bribane argued long and hard that they could fill the demand on the Gold Coast by playing three games a year there and that the state couldn’t support two teams but the afl couldn’t care less. Sydney when they hit a rough patch wanted to play some home games every year in Canberra but again no and now we have gws who can’t draw a crowd even giving away handfuls of tickets to whoever wants them.

At what point does the afl just recognise that league and union are the games of choice in qld and nsw. They have four clubs operating with varying degrees of success, Auskick is a hit and at least adds interest and eyes to ratings. You have ridiculous concessions still applying to teams like Sydney who have been there how long, have won a flag and so on. St Kilda and the other victorian teams deserve a level playing field and an opportunity to survive and prosper. The NT has a flourishing football culture and has for many decades independent from anything the Gold coast have done, so just another inexplicable gift.

This is the old affirmative action gag dressed up in different clothes, it’s just discrimination plain and simple. The afl should be aiming for an uncompromised draft free from any concessions including the ridiculous father son rule. In regards to Tasmania obviously they will require initial concessions but they should be targeted to establish a competitive list and to have as little impact on existing clubs as possible. They love there football down in Tassie and need nothing more than a fair start Imo.

I think somewhere along the way someone at the afl allowed expectations and goals for expansion clubs to run amok. No one should be set up to win flags as a right anymore than a guaranteed decade of being a flag chance. We’re just lucky that GWS stuffed things up and continue to because the could have dominated with what they were given. Even this year after screwing the cap yet again and a poor year on the field they’re stacked with talent and will have god knows how many early draft picks yet again.

We on the other hand will sit back in our role as perennial losers and watch brisbane claim Ashcroft with a bag of lower picks. While our academy kid will probably be picked up by someone else or if we’re very lucky we can use our 1 first round pick to claim him. You know for many people there’s a limit to this rubbish and I’m personally approaching mine.

 

[Sun Ra]

All good and well, but to see sides get concessions to start a club and then win a flag while we haven't for 56 years is a hard pill to swollow and then allow Tas in that will put us further back because the talent pool will go to them for maybe 3-5 years.

Think about it no access for top end tallent from when Tas comes in maybe 2025 so from 2024 until 2027 or 2028 nothing so unless your side is in the toop bracket at that time it's a long climb up.

We should start only drafting Tasmanians from this draft onwards - regardless of talent - to get even in advance.

 

[Klaatu]

We should start only drafting Tasmanians from this draft onwards - regardless of talent - to get even in advance.

That's the problem theres not enough of them to draft, how many Tas based players have been drafted in the last 10 years.

 

[Yawkey way]

That's the problem theres not enough of them to draft, how many Tas based players have been drafted in the last 10 years.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi47cfEwbj5AhVb8DgGHXbnCPEQFnoECAYQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.afltas.com.au%2Ftasmanians-in-afl%2F&usg=AOvVaw0EDzb3v7nUroBcRKSyc1_A

 

[gringo2011]

That's the problem theres not enough of them to draft, how many Tas based players have been drafted in the last 10 years.

Port stacked their initial side with the best SANFL talent and it was competitive early. You could scout the best Tassie guys you could get already in the AFL and stack local league bests with a free hit at any state league talent already playing seniors in the country. Collins at GC did more for them than a priority pick which takes years and bringing more inexperienced youth in really just adds to a pile of guys getting slaughtered until their confidence is destroyed.

 

[ScrappyDo]

They weren’t given the necessary concessions to establish the club. That’s completely different to the soul destroying concessions granted to gws and the gold coast. You can’t just say to the life blood of the competition well screw you, you may have waited decades for success but a club that will never be anything but an ego trip for administrators and a bonus on tv rights is more important.

Bribane argued long and hard that they could fill the demand on the Gold Coast by playing three games a year there and that the state couldn’t support two teams but the afl couldn’t care less. Sydney when they hit a rough patch wanted to play some home games every year in Canberra but again no and now we have gws who can’t draw a crowd even giving away handfuls of tickets to whoever wants them.

At what point does the afl just recognise that league and union are the games of choice in qld and nsw. They have four clubs operating with varying degrees of success, Auskick is a hit and at least adds interest and eyes to ratings. You have ridiculous concessions still applying to teams like Sydney who have been there how long, have won a flag and so on. St Kilda and the other victorian teams deserve a level playing field and an opportunity to survive and prosper. The NT has a flourishing football culture and has for many decades independent from anything the Gold coast have done, so just another inexplicable gift.

This is the old affirmative action gag dressed up in different clothes, it’s just discrimination plain and simple. The afl should be aiming for an uncompromised draft free from any concessions including the ridiculous father son rule. In regards to Tasmania obviously they will require initial concessions but they should be targeted to establish a competitive list and to have as little impact on existing clubs as possible. They love there football down in Tassie and need nothing more than a fair start Imo.

I think somewhere along the way someone at the afl allowed expectations and goals for expansion clubs to run amok. No one should be set up to win flags as a right anymore than a guaranteed decade of being a flag chance. We’re just lucky that GWS stuffed things up and continue to because the could have dominated with what they were given. Even this year after screwing the cap yet again and a poor year on the field they’re stacked with talent and will have god knows how many early draft picks yet again.

We on the other hand will sit back in our role as perennial losers and watch brisbane claim Ashcroft with a bag of lower picks. While our academy kid will probably be picked up by someone else or if we’re very lucky we can use our 1 first round pick to claim him. You know for many people there’s a limit to this rubbish and I’m personally approaching mine.

The FS policy is fine, but the application of the points system is a joke, agreed. In some way that goes to level the playing field against the academies for the expansion teams.
However whilst your perspective is a valid point of view, it disregards the reality that our club was taken over by charlatans who initiated a rebuild during the compromised drafts, dumping the likes of Dal, BJ, McEvoy etc, then frittering the spoils on complete spuds that were all gone within a few short years. Then blowing our bottom out picks on Paddy, Hugh and Billings.
It's a level of incompetence you couldn't replicate if you tried, and claiming the expansion teams had a hand in it is like blaming the table leg you stubbed your toe on. The club made it's own bed then proceeded to s**t in it for almost an entire decade and it's taking longer than 3 years to clean up the mess.
In the same time the Hawks took Big Boy and we took Savage, Dunstan and Acres, then proceeded to ruin the three of them whilst the Hawks won 3 premierships. Are Hawks to blame for that also? No. StKilda are to blame 110%

 

[gringo2011]

The FS policy is fine, but the application of the points system is a joke, agreed. In some way that goes to level the playing field against the academies for the expansion teams.
However whilst your perspective is a valid point of view, it disregards the reality that our club was taken over by charlatans who initiated a rebuild during the compromised drafts, dumping the likes of Dal, BJ, McEvoy etc, then frittering the spoils on complete spuds that were all gone within a few short years. Then blowing our bottom out picks on Paddy, Hugh and Billings.
It's a level of incompetence you couldn't replicate if you tried, and claiming the expansion teams had a hand in it is like blaming the table leg you stubbed your toe on. The club made it's own bed then proceeded to s**t in it for almost an entire decade and it's taking longer than 3 years to clean up the mess.
In the same time the Hawks took Big Boy and we took Savage, Dunstan and Acres, then proceeded to ruin the three of them whilst the Hawks won 3 premierships. Are Hawks to blame for that also? No. StKilda are to blame 110%

The first thing I'd change is clubs ability to trade away their higher picks and make up the value in points. It should take a first round pick for a first round player. If they don't have I take next years pick off them. Sydney getting two top 5 picks in a year they finished just out of the 8 is just making it harder for teams below to make up ground. It's no different to a priority pick. Clubs are actively getting a double up due to trading out their picks.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The FS policy is fine, but the application of the points system is a joke, agreed. In some way that goes to level the playing field against the academies for the expansion teams.
However whilst your perspective is a valid point of view, it disregards the reality that our club was taken over by charlatans who initiated a rebuild during the compromised drafts, dumping the likes of Dal, BJ, McEvoy etc, then frittering the spoils on complete spuds that were all gone within a few short years. Then blowing our bottom out picks on Paddy, Hugh and Billings.
It's a level of incompetence you couldn't replicate if you tried, and claiming the expansion teams had a hand in it is like blaming the table leg you stubbed your toe on. The club made it's own bed then proceeded to s**t in it for almost an entire decade and it's taking longer than 3 years to clean up the mess.
In the same time the Hawks took Big Boy and we took Savage, Dunstan and Acres, then proceeded to ruin the three of them whilst the Hawks won 3 premierships. Are Hawks to blame for that also? No. StKilda are to blame 110%

It was fine until everyone got too clever.
How can we get in our F/S when we traded out our 1st round pick. OK we'll let you get him for a number of later picks.

So then they all start trading out their early picks so they can have cake and eat it too.

Solution:
You have to give up an equivalent pick.

You have no first round pick. Next year's first rounder.
No next year? The year after.

Or.... No first round pick?....bad luck, you had 18 years to plan it.

 

[ScrappyDo]

The first thing I'd change is clubs ability to trade away their higher picks and make up the value in points. It should take a first round pick for a first round player. If they don't have I take next years pick off them. Sydney getting two top 5 picks in a year they finished just out of the 8 is just making it harder for teams below to make up ground. It's no different to a priority pick. Clubs are actively getting a double up due to trading out their picks.

Something like that.

 

[Yawkey way]

The FS policy is fine, but the application of the points system is a joke, agreed. In some way that goes to level the playing field against the academies for the expansion teams.
However whilst your perspective is a valid point of view, it disregards the reality that our club was taken over by charlatans who initiated a rebuild during the compromised drafts, dumping the likes of Dal, BJ, McEvoy etc, then frittering the spoils on complete spuds that were all gone within a few short years. Then blowing our bottom out picks on Paddy, Hugh and Billings.
It's a level of incompetence you couldn't replicate if you tried, and claiming the expansion teams had a hand in it is like blaming the table leg you stubbed your toe on. The club made it's own bed then proceeded to s**t in it for almost an entire decade and it's taking longer than 3 years to clean up the mess.
In the same time the Hawks took Big Boy and we took Savage, Dunstan and Acres, then proceeded to ruin the three of them whilst the Hawks won 3 premierships. Are Hawks to blame for that also? No. StKilda are to blame 110%

Our incompetence has nothing to do with a level playing field, process this in my lifetime collingwood have won 1 more flag than us. No one has a right to success but we do have a right to expect a level playing field in the afl.

The father son should be drastically altered or better still abolished. It‘s so arbitrary why 100 games, why not a suitable pick instead of a bag of rubbish. I believe 1 game should qualify you based on several factors. Firstly most would be as proud as punch if your dad had played even 1 game and there are many reasons why some will never make 100 games. Secondly the player still needs to nominate your club so given you can’t offer better terms or more cash there’s no incentive to nominate a club you have no attachment to. Thirdly if you make the club pay a fair price there’s no incentive to take a father son over any other player.

Dean Anderson played 83 with the hawks and 67 with us and is a club director but under this ridiculous rule his son found himself ineligible for either and drafted to the Gold Coast, absurd imo.

 

[Veer Right]

The FS policy is fine, but the application of the points system is a joke, agreed. In some way that goes to level the playing field against the academies for the expansion teams.
However whilst your perspective is a valid point of view, it disregards the reality that our club was taken over by charlatans who initiated a rebuild during the compromised drafts, dumping the likes of Dal, BJ, McEvoy etc, then frittering the spoils on complete spuds that were all gone within a few short years. Then blowing our bottom out picks on Paddy, Hugh and Billings.
It's a level of incompetence you couldn't replicate if you tried, and claiming the expansion teams had a hand in it is like blaming the table leg you stubbed your toe on. The club made it's own bed then proceeded to s**t in it for almost an entire decade and it's taking longer than 3 years to clean up the mess.
In the same time the Hawks took Big Boy and we took Savage, Dunstan and Acres, then proceeded to ruin the three of them whilst the Hawks won 3 premierships. Are Hawks to blame for that also? No. StKilda are to blame 110%

Best post I have read on here for a while.

 

[gringo2011]

Our incompetence has nothing to do with a level playing field, process this in my lifetime collingwood have won 1 more flag than us. No one has a right to success but we do have a right to expect a level playing field in the afl.

The father son should be drastically altered or better still abolished. It‘s so arbitrary why 100 games, why not a suitable pick instead of a bag of rubbish. I believe 1 game should qualify you based on several factors. Firstly most would be as proud as punch if your dad had played even 1 game and there are many reasons why some will never make 100 games. Secondly the player still needs to nominate your club so given you can’t offer better terms or more cash there’s no incentive to nominate a club you have no attachment to. Thirdly if you make the club pay a fair price there’s no incentive to take a father son over any other player.

Dean Anderson played 83 with the hawks and 67 with us and is a club director but under this ridiculous rule his son found himself ineligible for either and drafted to the Gold Coast, absurd imo.

That's why I've suggested that the AFL should increase soft cap space instead of a priority pick to clubs like North when sides have been serial badly administered. Those clubs have to pay overs to attract the best people. Otherwise you are burning kids futures sending them out on the Titanic with very little chance that they'll make it. Getting in a proven recruiter is the best way to make your rebuild short.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Port stacked their initial side with the best SANFL talent and it was competitive early. You could scout the best Tassie guys you could get already in the AFL and stack local league bests with a free hit at any state league talent already playing seniors in the country. Collins at GC did more for them than a priority pick which takes years and bringing more inexperienced youth in really just adds to a pile of guys getting slaughtered until their confidence is destroyed.

In 2017 Victoria had 316174 participating in footy contests. - Nearly 32 000 per AFL team. 52 per 1000 population.
WA had 112116, 55 000 per AFL team. 43 per 1000.
NSW/ACT had 98344. 49 000 per AFL team. 12 per 1000.
QLD had 75 000 , 37500 per AFL team. 15 per 1000.
S.A. had 61306, 30500 per AFL team. 35 per 1000.
Tasmania had 21838. 40 per 1000.
NT had 12292. 52 per 1000.

Tasmanian's are as keen as anyone in the country on AFL, but the simple fact is there are not many of them.
It will affect the number of players they can get locally and it will affect the size of the crowds.

The Cats seem to have no problem getting 20-30000 spectators each game in Geelong ( Population 253 000 ) but there is a city of 5 million just an hour away.
Hobart is smaller than Geelong and the next largest city is Launceston ( 72 000) two and a half hours away.
If the AFL would wake up and look at the numbers , they don't need a "Stadium Deal ". It won't be a big crowd deal if it goes ahead.

The current tickets at the gate funding for the club will not work there.
( Hasn't worked great for the Saints either ).

 

[ScrappyDo]

It was fine until everyone got too clever.
How can we get in our F/S when we traded out our 1st round pick. OK we'll let you get him for a number of later picks.

So then they all start trading out their early picks so they can have cake and eat it too.

Solution:
You have to give up an equivalent pick.

You have no first round pick. Next year's first rounder.
No next year? The year after.

Or.... No first round pick?....bad luck, you had 18 years to plan it.

1. Drop the discount

2. Consume picks in order of 1st, F1st, 2nd, F2nd etc.

3. Clubs to have to secretly nominate the pick after which they will be allowed to claim the player

4. Run that through a formula that prescribes the necessary minimum draft hand

Case: Ashcroft to Brisbane

Nominated pick: 2 (2517 points)

Draft position 15th (1112 points)

Brisbane must hold 2x FRDPs and 1x SRDP

Or

Nominated pick: 10 (1395 points)

Draft position 15th (1112 points)

Brisbane must hold 1x FRDPs and 1x SRDP

 

[ScrappyDo]

Our incompetence has nothing to do with a level playing field, process this in my lifetime collingwood have won 1 more flag than us. No one has a right to success but we do have a right to expect a level playing field in the afl.

The father son should be drastically altered or better still abolished. It‘s so arbitrary why 100 games, why not a suitable pick instead of a bag of rubbish. I believe 1 game should qualify you based on several factors. Firstly most would be as proud as punch if your dad had played even 1 game and there are many reasons why some will never make 100 games. Secondly the player still needs to nominate your club so given you can’t offer better terms or more cash there’s no incentive to nominate a club you have no attachment to. Thirdly if you make the club pay a fair price there’s no incentive to take a father son over any other player.

Dean Anderson played 83 with the hawks and 67 with us and is a club director but under this ridiculous rule his son found himself ineligible for either and drafted to the Gold Coast, absurd imo.

Yes I get all that and you're not wrong. But your view on it that places StKilda as a victim of the system is off the mark. StKilda is a victim of itself.
Take everything I already mentioned and ads the move to Seaford, Richo's tenure, Trouts tenure and so on. Where was the campaign for priority picks after the losses of Paddy, Hugh, Stuv, Koby and Robbo. Who gave Richo the extra 2 years, was it the AFL?

 

[gringo2011]

Yes I get all that and you're not wrong. But your view on it that places StKilda as a victim of the system is off the mark. StKilda is a victim of itself.
Take everything I already mentioned and ads the move to Seaford, Richo's tenure, Trouts tenure and so on. Where was the campaign for priority picks after the losses of Paddy, Hugh, Stuv, Koby and Robbo. Who gave Richo the extra 2 years, was it the AFL?

The thing is if you're flying yourself you don't worry about what everyone else is doing. It's hard when everything is so labour intensive for us to even get the basics right, to then watch others drowning in riches.

We have done some idiotic things and the AFL see us as the s**t kid who's always ringing up for loan because they went to the pokies with their dole cheque. The good kids get nice presents and formal invitation to every event, we get the abrasive phone call saying that we don't have to come if we're busy.

Sides tend to make their own luck in this industry and sides that do come good get the prime fixtures and the advertising focussed on them etc. We have to do the hard work first because no-one is coming to save us from ourselves at the end of the day.

 

[ScrappyDo]

The thing is if you're flying yourself you don't worry about what everyone else is doing. It's hard when everything is so labour intensive for us to even get the basics right, to then watch others drowning in riches.

We have done some idiotic things and the AFL see us as the s**t kid who's always ringing up for loan because they went to the pokies with their dole cheque. The good kids get nice presents and formal invitation to every event, we get the abrasive phone call saying that we don't have to come if we're busy.

Sides tend to make their own luck in this industry and sides that do come good get the prime fixtures and the advertising focussed on them etc. We have to do the hard work first because no-one is coming to save us from ourselves at the end of the day.

Absolutely. We need to get everything right for an extended period then capitalize to create a self perpetuating cycle. At the end of Richo's tenure or the start of Lethlean's we were at zero with zero momentum. Now one good year, one decimated by injury and one mostly wasted. 2023 better be off the friggn charts or we risk flaming out.

 

[Yawkey way]

Yes I get all that and you're not wrong. But your view on it that places StKilda as a victim of the system is off the mark. StKilda is a victim of itself.
Take everything I already mentioned and ads the move to Seaford, Richo's tenure, Trouts tenure and so on. Where was the campaign for priority picks after the losses of Paddy, Hugh, Stuv, Koby and Robbo. Who gave Richo the extra 2 years, was it the AFL?

You’ve mistaken me for someone else, I think we’re probably the greatest screwups, so many of our problems are self inflicted. However no matter how bad we’ve been the system is still fixed against us, the afl has treated us very shabbily going all the way back to zones. I’ll fight to see us get a fair go and I’ll keep agitating until this club is run in a manner that is sustainable and successful.