Who are the 4? I can only find 2.
Riewodlt in 2000
Ball in 2001
-
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.
Who are the 4? I can only find 2.
Riewodlt in 2000
Ball in 2001
...
...
....
.....
....................................
Where's a wall to bang my head against?!
Did you actually stop and think why teams which have gotten 5 or 7 top 5 draft picks in the space of 6 years, might not, funnily enough, have played in a lot of finals?
Just a hint, those two things are rather linked.
So how long would you say your average draftee takes to reach his prime.. 4 or 5 years? Which would mean that teams which got a large number of quality picks from around 1999-2002 would start to come good... well, actually, about now. Gee, there's another one of those big coincidences.
Its yet to be seen whether the serial recievers of priority pick charity can go all the way, but at the moment you'd have to say that Freo, Melbourne and St Kilda look like pretty sure things to play finals and finish up in the 4-5 spots on the ladder.
The thing which I can never quite understand in this situation is why st kilda fans get so defensive about it. So you got a big lift from the AFL system? Good for you, you used the system and the fact that your fans accepted appalling performances to help you build a good team. So they screwed the system and it has worked spectacularly for them? Great, its hardly the Saints fault if they take advantage of what is on offer, but obviously it highlights the deficiencies with the system..
Yes, without a doubt, that success was aided by the fact that they've generally drafted well and developed strongly from within, but anyone who thinks that being given the picks to get 5 potential superstars in the space of the last 3 years hasn't been the fundamental reason for your success is seriously kidding themselves. Just think for a moment what that implies- 5 guys who, assuming your recruiters know what they're doing, should have a good chance of being the under 18 equivalents of Voss, Buckley, Carey, Silvagni and whoever else you care to name. Now take Reiwoldt, Koschitzke, Goddard, Ball, and Clarke and slot them into a team like the Roos- and tell me that you honestly don't think that would reverse the ladder position of those two teams?
- Banned
- #78
Only in australia would a statement like this be considered at all credible.
Collingwood had money for years, didn't win a flag in 60s 70s or 80s. It was always about being well run, not about money. Nowadays though you get StKilda giving Essendon a footballing lesson. Could you get a club being better run than Essendon is? Yet the saints trounce em and have a brighter future ahead of them. It is a disgrace in my opinion.
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
You obviously don't read much.
Like I've said before, if you wish your team to finish bottom and take this "huge" advantage - go ahead. I'd be more than happy not to get a top 10 pick for the next 5 years.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
Has it ever occured to you that maybe the people running StKilda the past three years have actually done a good job?
- Banned
- #81
hmm some intresting stuff, i actually like the pp myself, i mean heaven forbid a club that can't compete actually being able to put out players that can, heaven forbid them to actually making the finals for once or dare i say it win one once, the draft system is there to bring the top sides down, and give the bad ones a chance to get up, the only thing that a pp may do is speed up the devopement up the ladder thats it, they may get their say 1 year before they should ... you still need to recruit well and have players go out there and want to win, oh can anyone tell me why players would give up a game? wouldn't you think these players would be fighting for there futures rather then worring about a pick that may take thier spot in the side?
It isn't about playing dead. It about how you run the club in a down year and what you play for that is at issue.
Even if the only problem is one of perception from the punters that is a huge problem. Imagine a last Q fadeout like Collingwood v Carlton in round 22 with Buckley on the bench and as a result Collingwood get a PP. Imagine the negative media frenzy.
Unless you are being "rested".
I am not saying it has happened and if Collingwood do it there will be hell to pay as I have said time and again. That isn’t Collingwood and I'll be f'd if I will stand by and let it become Collingwood. That isn’t the point. If the system encourages it, it is a huge problem IMO. Even if it is only a perception it is still dangerous enough. The first time a club is suspected of tanking the whole competition is in massive crisis and then people get on the bet rigging bandwagon and on it goes. I am positive we have a time bomb ticking away for a host of reasons.
As I have said repeatedly I don't at all. I can guarantee a lot of people do though. And I did not enjoy Collingwood being down and I want it to bloody well hurt every Collingwood person like hell being last right now. Unfortunately it doesn't hurt enough people bad enough because of talk about draft picks. That is absolutely unacceptable in a competition as far as I'm concerned.
Joffa this is not just hypothetical. In 1999 Collingwood supporters were debating the merits of winning late in the year against Carlton and the in the last ever Vic Park game against Brisbane. It bloody well made me sick to hear that crap. Not only did I not want a priority pick, I didn't want to finish last.
Joffa if it was 2 picks in bare squad and with no other trades or pick you may well be right but add say Judd and a ruckman to Collingwood and we wouldn't talking about who chokes worse out of Collingwood and Port.
That's meaningless. We traded for other players and drafted kids instead as well. Apart from that what would we use for currency to get these players? In any case we could add Stevens, Black and Colbert and we wouldn't be much better off anyway. Gehrig only recently came good and Brown I rate very hightly but what would we have given the Dog's for him? Everitt I wish we took but a call was made on his character and you can hardly blame us for that given that's why you got rid of him.
Possibly. It depends on who was pased up in drafts and who was taken. It has been debated on Collingwood sites from time to time. By and large I don't have much problem with our drafting from what we've had to deal with. What does that have to do with the issues though? It has zero to do with a PP system or even a reverse ladder order draft. Unless you also think clubs should be rewarded for being crap recruiters as well?
"Everyone" knew the Earth was flat once. Perhaps a better one would be the "everyone" knew Iraq was full of WMD. Everyone except a few ignored people who actually thought about it.
- May 1, 2002
- 13,987
- 26,266
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, SF 49ers
Well Said Deej.
Absolute rubbish. Hawthorn and North were hardly rich. Hawthorn had a great run in spite of being a so called small club and guess what now they have a very viable club off field because of it. The rich clubs didn't dominate the clubs that dominated got rich. As Deej said, Collingwood disprove this theary at every single turn. They were a poor club that lifted itself and became a huge rich club at which time they stopped winning premierships because they stopped doing what they did so well when they were not rich.
- May 1, 2002
- 13,987
- 26,266
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, SF 49ers
Mr Dunne. Our previous Administration (J Elliott & co,) & coaching department (W Brittain & co.) "played" for priority picks and in true CARLTON fashion WE REMOVED them with a blink of an eye.
The fact that it took us one more year (2003) to get off the bottom rug had more to do with individual players within our list than anything else.
I repeat we will NOT lie down and OPEN our legs to receive what is only taken BY lower people of society.
How I read it is.
The AFLs policy in simplistic terms is.
1. Even Competition.
2. Maximum revenue.
The even competition is created by the draft system, salary cap and the draw, which all have to be looked at combined over X amount of years.
St. Kilda, Freemantle, Melbourne etc have been down and have been rewarded by the draft system. How they used the rewards is a completely different story. To put these teams current success down solely to the draft system, IMO is incorrect. They have shown good management in how they used the rewards. But as at this stage, no ultimate success has been achieved.
Brisbane and Sydney have used the salary cap concessions for player retention, thus getting these non football states and perenial cellar dwellers off the bottom. Brisbane have had the ultimate success, whereas Sydney havent. To put Brisbanes success totally down to concessions is IMO incorrect. It has helped but plenty of other factors have occured, which have brought (not bought) Brisbane success.
Most notably Collingwood and Essendon have favourable draws, in relation to when, where and who they play. This is of benefit to the financial aspects of the clubs and also to player experience, with many of the blockbusters, being finals type atmosphere. The same can be said for the SA and WA sides with 2 derbys, showdowns each year. To put their financial success solely down to these blockbuster games is incorrect. They obviously help but plenty of other factors have and are taking place to keep these clubs successful.
All very simplistic and all quite obvious, but if the AFL want an even competition, where the bottom of the ladder teams are rewarded, non football states helped, and the big clubs helped then what other ways are there?
All these systems are AFL controlled and benefit different clubs in different ways. But the AFL cannot control the X factors of how each club uses these systems. Some clubs have used them successfully, some havent.
I personally dont agree with the Salary Cap, the Draft or the uneven draw, but while the AFL wants 16 clubs and strives for an even competition and maximum revenue, I dont see any other way.
The AFLs policy in simplistic terms is.
1. Even Competition.
2. Maximum revenue.
The even competition is created by the draft system, salary cap and the draw, which all have to be looked at combined over X amount of years.
St. Kilda, Freemantle, Melbourne etc have been down and have been rewarded by the draft system. How they used the rewards is a completely different story. To put these teams current success down solely to the draft system, IMO is incorrect. They have shown good management in how they used the rewards. But as at this stage, no ultimate success has been achieved.
Brisbane and Sydney have used the salary cap concessions for player retention, thus getting these non football states and perenial cellar dwellers off the bottom. Brisbane have had the ultimate success, whereas Sydney havent. To put Brisbanes success totally down to concessions is IMO incorrect. It has helped but plenty of other factors have occured, which have brought (not bought) Brisbane success.
Most notably Collingwood and Essendon have favourable draws, in relation to when, where and who they play. This is of benefit to the financial aspects of the clubs and also to player experience, with many of the blockbusters, being finals type atmosphere. The same can be said for the SA and WA sides with 2 derbys, showdowns each year. To put their financial success solely down to these blockbuster games is incorrect. They obviously help but plenty of other factors have and are taking place to keep these clubs successful.
All very simplistic and all quite obvious, but if the AFL want an even competition, where the bottom of the ladder teams are rewarded, non football states helped, and the big clubs helped then what other ways are there?
All these systems are AFL controlled and benefit different clubs in different ways. But the AFL cannot control the X factors of how each club uses these systems. Some clubs have used them successfully, some havent.
I personally dont agree with the Salary Cap, the Draft or the uneven draw, but while the AFL wants 16 clubs and strives for an even competition and maximum revenue, I dont see any other way.
- Banned
- #87
If they're doing such a great job then they should do very well in an open comp. Or don't you have enough confidence in your mob to be able to compete openly?
Has it ever occurred to all the 'money wins' doomsday prophecists that Carlton in the 60s 70s and 80s never bought a premiership any more or less than any other club tried to?
It's all so convenient to say money wins, truth be known collingwood had plenty for years yet couldn't win a flag in any of the 60s 70s or 80s. Sort of blows that theory right out the window doesn't it.
Pre-PP's
St Kilda's Ladder Position in the Year 2000 week by week.
Rd 1: 12
Rd 2: 14
Rd 3: 14
Rd 4: 15
Rd 5: 15
Rd 6: 16
Rd 7: 16
Rd 8: 16
Rd 9: 16
Rd 10: 16
Rd 11: 15
Rd 12: 15
Rd 13: 16
Rd 14: 16
Rd 15: 16
Rd 16: 16
Rd 17: 16
Rd 18: 16
Rd 19: 16
Rd 20: 16
Rd 21: 16
Rd 22: 16
OVERALL: 16
Post-PP's
St Kilda's Ladder Position in the Year 2004 week by week.
Rd 1: 1
Rd 2: 1
Rd 3: 1
Rd 4: 1
Rd 5: 1
Rd 6: 1
Rd 7: 1
OVERALL: 1
Does that not speak volumes to you?
But we didn't have an open system, we had zoning.
While the population of the Wimmera - Mildura area was plumeting, Richmond were trying to run junior programs many 100s of kms from their base in Melbourne.
In contrast Hawthorn had adjoining Metro and Country zones allowing one admin system and never having to travel more than 100kms. Hawthorn's country zone of Pakenham - Berwick - Frankston was the fastest growing area in Australia and they reaped the rewards. Brereton, Mathews, Mew, Ayres etc all landed in their laps.
Hawthorn benefited far more from the inequities of zoning than St Kilda ever will from priority picks.
- Jun 28, 2000
- 1,776
- 68
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Dallas Cowboys, Tottenham
My sentiments exactly. Well said.
- May 1, 2002
- 13,987
- 26,266
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, SF 49ers
Is that before or after your administration and coaches came out and made statements like "we will stay at the bottom of the ladder to receive top picks" just to ride the wave back up.
Sorry no hard work - NO RESPECT. Win as much as you like, you will still be branded LOSERS.
Fair points one and all. See i knew you would eventually come good
- Banned
- #94
Are you trying to say a bloke from Frankston will always be a better footballer than a bloke from Mildura? What rubbish, it's totally random where good footballers come from. Dunstall came from Qld.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Portia
#DrewBlood
30k Posts
10k Posts
TheBrownDog
Port Adelaide - Jesse Palmer Player Sponsor 2017
Podcaster
Port Adelaide - Riley Bonner Player Sponsor 2016
Port Adelaide - Brendon Ah Chee Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Jarrad Redden Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Matthew Broadbent Player Sponsor 2013
Port Adelaide - Captains Club 2012 Sponsor
Port Adelaide - John Butcher 2012 Player Sponsor
- Oct 7, 2001
- 50,502
- 24,866
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Muckbuckle Dolmens
I think most people would be happy with the salary cap and the draft if they were unaltered by the AFL.
ie. No cap concessions, no priority picks.
This is something we took from the NFL and seriously ****ed up because the administration don't understand the principles involved and why they are supposed to work (or do understand them and are evil).
ie. No cap concessions, no priority picks.
This is something we took from the NFL and seriously ****ed up because the administration don't understand the principles involved and why they are supposed to work (or do understand them and are evil).
Originally posted by Joffaboy
Fair points one and all. See i knew you would eventually come good
I tried not to be too balanced, but I cant help myself.
- Banned
- #97
you would hope they would climb up the ladder after more then 6 (my mistake not 7) years being out of the finals wouldn't you? i fail to see what that proves, why don't you show us what they did between those years.
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
You are a fool. Please show me just one quote from someone at StKilda along these line.
And BTW, you're not out of the woods just yet.
- May 1, 2002
- 13,987
- 26,266
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, SF 49ers
Exactly Porthos.
Similar threads
