-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Priority Picks fair?
- Thread starter Third Ring
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
kahuna71
Club Legend
and how many minutes do you think it will take before your description here and the team with the most resources becomes one and the same. I'd give it about 7 minutes.
i suppose then the issue is not if we give assistance to the lower teams but how much assistance we give.
The burning question.
At the risk of being boring. i think you still have to pick the right cattle with your priority picks and StKilda and Freo may have done this. But as yet, Freo - only one finals series, StKilda none.
When either of these teams truely become powers and win premierships ( Stkilda - one hit wonders in 1997) then i will say - hey too much assistance for the teams finishing bottom.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
My issue is that the rewards for failure are far to great and in fact the worse you are the more you are rewarded. This is what I find totally ridiculous. To continue the analaogy about welfare, if my taxes pay for the unemployed to eat and put a roof over their head then that's fine but if they get more for being unemployed than I get for working 60+ hours a week then that is far from fine.
no you havent...thats my argument in one.
You got first choice on WHO YOU THINK is the best player.
Goddard and wells before Judd ?
Hodge before Ball ?
No guarantees. When you receive welfare you are not given success - you may be given first choice of cars but what you think is a rolls royce may turn out to be a P76
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
That's fine in theory, but the reality was that the best talent went to the clubs with the most money. It happens in every league that doesn't have a draft.
Its the choice we've made. It's a choice that all clubs made when forming the commision. I can appreciate that you don't like, or don't agree with it, but I'd prefer a system that discourages the likes of an Eddlestone. Fly by night millionaries almost destroyed the entire competition. One did their best in destorying your club.
but rewards for underacheiving arent too greatand thats my point.
What is the ultimate litmus test of whether they have received too much. It can only be premierships or to a lesser extent final series.
Freo has one series. Saints nil.
i will say - too much assistance - only after both teams become powerhouses...hasnt happened yet.
This is a rubbish argument. So maybe Hawthorn should have taken Judd but instead they ended up with Hodge. Meanwhile a club that has performed well on and off the field and made it to the preliminary finals can't get either. There are no certainties in the draft except that the earlier the pick the bigger your chance of getting a gun. That much must be clear. What makes it worse is that iof you are really bad you get an extra reward in the form of a priority pick so you could get picks 1 and 2 simply for being crap or for having a lot of injuries or for playing kids in order to get the picks. I don't know if the latter has happened yet but I am damn sure it is an acqusation that will be leveled some day.
kahuna71
Club Legend
every tool with half a brain already levels it at st.kilda then we have to patiently explain the reality of our list. it's more boring than anything else!
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
Didn't Tony Shaw do just that?
PPs are fair, look where the stars of today have come from. go fish
- Banned
- #265
Arsenal's budget is almost half of what ManUtd's is, yet they've managed to put together the best squad in Brittain. Porto and Monaco are in the Champion's league final, absolute minnows of world football those two. Real Madrid spend more on one transfer than Valencia do on their whole squad yet Valencia have stiched up La Liga this year. Werder Breman have about 1/10th the resources of Bayern Munich yet have pounded them in germany this year. Leeds have spent ****loads more than most clubs and will fall to div1 this year.
There's a few examples to blow your theories out of the water.
look at the bottom of the PL table and the teams down there (apart from Leeds) have less money. Man U has been one of the most sucessful because of its salaries
Ummm - hawthorn did finish up the ladder - they traded croad for the pick that gave them hodge....so far no winners as yet THATS MY POINT. No guarantees - mid league Hawthorn traded for number one pick and so far have come up empty handed. They were sold a pup ( except they sold Freo the pup in croad)
Understand - i think most people ( except you) would accept that a even competition is not a bad thing...and would accept (except you) that some assistance has to be given to lower the clubs...
some people here are saying that the priority picks give too much advantage. I dont agree with that because as yet the recipients of the priority have yet to prove themselves and establish themselves as powerhouses of the AFL.
Not entirely. For one thing we were always going to come last no matter who we picked. For another thing he played the likes of Buckley, Monkhurst etc all year when fit. he spoke about it in concept though. The reality is the best side was picked every week.
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
Results mean squat. We're talking about attracting the best talent.
Clubs can win with less talent. Getting the best talent is no guarentee of success. Just as getting first pick in the draft is no guarantee off success.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Chelsea is by far the best run club in the PL
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
And that is the reality when debating clubs throwing games for draft picks.
Shaw had nothing to gain, he was on the way out. If he'd been instructed to lose it would have been a huge risk for the admin. I can only imagine the penalties the commision would hand out if a club was shown to intentially throw games. I think they call this match fixing.