Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Competitions SBFFL Draft Discussion Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Armoooo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

If every AFL club has 4 rookies there should be more than enough from a quantity perspective. If it is a quality thing we could look at extending it to rookie listed and seniors with 10 or less games.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Yeah it's a quality issue, the quantity is there. If everyone thinks there'll be enough quality, I'm easy. But a 5 or 10 game maximum is a solid idea (y)

I guess I gotta think of it as a rookie list, and if one makes it off there it's a bonus (y)
 
We've taken a lot of prime rookie projects in the main draft which is why the quality is down. Maybe for this initial draft only we should pick 48 players and be allowed to just select our 4 rookies (would need to be valid) at the end of the draft?

Also PetWussy Ryan lester is mid only.
 
majortinkle said:
We've taken a lot of prime rookie projects in the main draft which is why the quality is down. Maybe for this initial draft only we should pick 48 players and be allowed to just select our 4 rookies (would need to be valid) at the end of the draft?

Also PetWussy Ryan lester is mid only.
Click to expand...
Im not adverse to this.
 
majortinkle said:
We've taken a lot of prime rookie projects in the main draft which is why the quality is down. Maybe for this initial draft only we should pick 48 players and be allowed to just select our 4 rookies (would need to be valid) at the end of the draft?

Also PetWussy Ryan lester is mid only.
Click to expand...

44 players?

And I've drafted on the theory that there is a separate rookie draft.
 
saintbatty said:
44 players?

And I've drafted on the theory that there is a separate rookie draft.
Click to expand...
Yeah same, that's why I've been leaving some zero gamers that I probably could have taken...

But I'm happy if we change it, cos if we stick to real life rookies and zero gamers, it's gonna be tough. And a rookie list is for depth, so you should be able to recruit GOP's that could play a role in case of injury.
 
saintbatty said:
44 players?

And I've drafted on the theory that there is a separate rookie draft.
Click to expand...
Sorry yes I meant 44 and I think we've drafted on various different wrinkles through this but if you think it would reduce the integrity of it you're right to flag it and keep to the original plan on this front.

You could say the same for the players moving from zero to 10 games max.

I think the rookie restrictions has increased them being taken in the main draft but I could be wrong.
 
Maybe best we leave if. Everyone knew the rules to begin with and it does seem a bit farcical to change them now. I just hope people can get some genuinely good rookie options with all 4 of their picks.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I'm happy either way, if we were to vote what are our options, maybe:

a) leave as is, rookies and zero gamers.

b) change to rookies and 10 games or less.

c) change to anyone goes.

d) anyone goes but you need to have 4 eligible rookies (so you can move zero gamers (and possibly <10 gamers) to your rookie list)
 
A or D for me - being flexible on draft position rather than nature of player seems more palatable to me if we're worried about quality. The flip side is if we all have a couple of dodgy rookies then we're the same as most afl teams and it's no big deal. They're 43 and 44 on the list after all.
 
I'm definitely not keen on being able to decide any player can go on your rookie list after the draft, even if they do meet the criteria. It just wouldn't sit right with me that I could have blokes like Weitering and Weideman on the rookie list when I snapped them pretty early in the draft.

At this stage we will keep things as they are until the end of the national draft and pre-season drafts. Once we know what the pool looks like we will have a better idea of whether we should broaden the rookie eligibility.

The rookie draft isn't really meant to be used for depth unless you want a Jed Adcock type over a long-shot prospect. I just like the idea of a Jack Sinclair type joining a senior list because somebody backed him when he was a nobody rather than someone signing him as a free agent when he put a few good games together.

Free agency is there for depth, rookie list is there for prospects that would have otherwise been fantasy insignificant.
 
Armoooo said:
I'm definitely not keen on being able to decide any player can go on your rookie list after the draft, even if they do meet the criteria. It just wouldn't sit right with me that I could have blokes like Weitering and Weideman on the rookie list when I snapped them pretty early in the draft.

At this stage we will keep things as they are until the end of the national draft and pre-season drafts. Once we know what the pool looks like we will have a better idea of whether we should broaden the rookie eligibility.

The rookie draft isn't really meant to be used for depth unless you want a Jed Adcock type over a long-shot prospect. I just like the idea of a Jack Sinclair type joining a senior list because somebody backed him when he was a nobody rather than someone signing him as a free agent when he put a few good games together.

Free agency is there for depth, rookie list is there for prospects that would have otherwise been fantasy insignificant.
Click to expand...

Very comfortable with this. I likewise grabbed 4 top 20 draftees so could easily abuse a change to the rookie draft rules at this stage.

Let's proceed with the rookie draft as planned, with the only decision to be made prior to the draft is between the alternatives for eligibility:

a) Current rule of actual rookie or zero games senior player; or
b) Actual rookies or senior player with <= 10 total games.
 
Sweep on when our holidaying compadre puts his selections in?

I'm going for 8.42am aedt

No prize, just for fun.....
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I think that St Kilda Death found a gem in Phillips, I wouldn't be surprised to see him be Carlton's number 1 ruckman when Kreuzer gets put on the long-term injury list.

I'm pretty happy with Wright also, he can be a pretty handy scorer and should have fairly good job security. Hopefully Carlton play him in the guts.
 
Armoooo said:
I think that St Kilda Death found a gem in Phillips, I wouldn't be surprised to see him be Carlton's number 1 ruckman when Kreuzer gets put on the long-term injury list.

I'm pretty happy with Wright also, he can be a pretty handy scorer and should have fairly good job security. Hopefully Carlton play him in the guts.
Click to expand...
I agree. I hope.
Think he will play from rd1 as a fwd/ruck until kruz breaks.
And i would be very happy with wright... could have sworn he was gone already.
 
St Kilda Death said:
I agree. I hope.
Think he will play from rd1 as a fwd/ruck until kruz breaks.
Click to expand...
It was between Campbell, Nyuon and him for my last two picks. I just saw the others route to the 1st 22 as easier. Phillips started pre season as 4th ruck on the list and I know the Carlton bf board say he is absolutely killing it But I just figured it was more to ask.

Could easily be wrong though.........unfortunately!
 
majortinkle said:
It was between Campbell, Nyuon and him for my last two picks. I just saw the others route to the 1st 22 as easier. Phillips started pre season as 4th ruck on the list and I know the Carlton bf board say he is absolutely killing it But I just figured it was more to ask.

Could easily be wrong though.........unfortunately!
Click to expand...
I see him as clearly the 2nd ruck after kruz.
And a solid fwd too.
Campell seemed out of favour.
And think Nyuon will struggle for a game behind luenberger, bellchambers and McKernan.
But i could easily be wrong too!
 
St Kilda Death said:
I see him as clearly the 2nd ruck after kruz.
And a solid fwd too.
Campell seemed out of favour.
And think Nyuon will struggle for a game behind luenberger, bellchambers and McKernan.
But i could easily be wrong too!
Click to expand...
I see him as Carltons No 1 tbh. Kruzer is too agile not to be utilised in the fwd line!
 
felsty said:
I see him as Carltons No 1 tbh. Kruzer is too agile not to be utilised in the fwd line!
Click to expand...
I only see him as the ruck because thats where they seem to keep playing him.
If i was the coach id rather have him at chf.
Safer for him to stay out of the ruck too being so breakable.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom