Opinion Should the team ask for a Priority Pick 2025 edition.

[Choogler]

We won't get one this year as Kane has already boxed herself into a corner over it and it would be humiliating for her to backtrack. But we should ask anyway and kick up a real stink when they say No. Try and get the WA media behind it. Have a public argument with the AFL over it and force the AFL to justify it.

Because if we do that if might put a bit of doubt in their mind next year about saying No again (assuming we are still in the bottom 4 next year). We need to try and make it harder for them to say No next year. Make sure they know they will have to have a fight with us and the WA media over it.

If we just meekly accept No and don't have a fight with them over it then we make it a very easy decision for them to keep saying No. The squeeky wheel gets the grease. I think that that is the whole reason why Kane made those clearly pre - planned and scripted public comments was to disarm the issue for this year by dissuading us from even asking. She knows if we win zero games and ask it will be hard to justify a No. So she is trying to stop us from even asking.

I understand your argument but despite my disgust at Laura Kane's level of hypocrisy, I agree with what she said that no club should be bailed out for poor list management decisions.

I hope we don't BEG for assistance draft picks, but have no problem with requesting additional rookie spots because they don't compromise the draft more than it already is and actually provide an additional spot/s for guys that would otherwise remain unlisted and who knows, we may unearth a late developing gem.

 

[BSD]

I actually agree with Kane, but despise her double standards and hypocrisy.

In case people aren't aware, this is some of here history that is particularly relevant to her latest statement:

Until September 2021, she was General Manager Strategy and Football Operations and Head of Football Operations at the North Melbourne Football Club and was a part of their list management stuff up.

In September 2023, in her current position at the AFL, she was a part of the decision made to give her old club NM, 3 end of first round assistance picks across the 23/24 drafts.

After jumping off the sinking ship at NM, then handing them what they needed to fix the leaks that she helped to create she now says fix your own stuff-ups

AFL and Kane are such a mob of two-faced f*****g HYPOCRITES.

Despite my whinge, I'd rather we didn't resort to going cap in hand to the AFL like the NM Beggaroos, and took responsibility for our own mismanagement.

The West should jump on the band wagon and publicize Kanes history and connection with North Melb and her involvement with the priority picks they were given.
How stupid were the people at the AFL who appointed her after her failed history at Norf.
Come on Woodcock use your pen and expose her for the failure she is.

 

[Choogler]

It's even worse than that. Notice she is not saying that the AFL is getting rid of the PP facility/option altogether despite the arguments she lays out about how it incentivizes bad decisions from clubs. She wants to hang on to it as an option but just not exercise it when we qualify. They clearly think they may want to use it for the benefit of other clubs in the future or they would just get rid of it altogether. Their argument would look more coherent if they did get rid of it. But they aren't. They are keeping it with the intention of using it in the future but just don't want to use it with us.

She also doesn't address the weakest part of her argument which is justifying why North got one despite the fact we will have a worse recent record than them shortly. And GC got one. And whoever interviewed her didn't put it to her. She needs to be asked to explain how North and GC's troubles didn't involve any bad trades or decisions but ours did.

You underestimate the number that have been handed out.
GC, which the AFL owns, got 4 picks across the 2019-2021 drafts, plus 2 pre-draft Academy listings in 2020.

BL (which the AFL owns) got 1 draft pick (16) in 2016.

NM, which may as well be AFL owned due to surviving only because of prop-up funding, got 5 draft picks across the 2022-2024 drafts, plus 2 extra rookie spots from 2022 - 2024. That is a total of 11 players they wouldn't have had access to without the assistance. That is a massive number.

 

[Choogler]

They SHOULD ask for the pick, but what'll probably save the AFL from that would be Oscar getting a Band 1 compo kinda deal so the league can go 'there you go'

Compensation picks have no impact on assistance picks. In 2023 NM got pick 3 as compensation for Ben McKay and still got an end of first round assistance pick in the 2023 draft.

 

[Deplorable trumpster]

I understand your argument but despite my disgust at Laura Kane's level of hypocrisy, I agree with what she said that no club should be bailed out for poor list management decisions.

I hope we don't BEG for assistance draft picks, but have no problem with requesting additional rookie spots because they don't compromise the draft more than it already is and actually provide an additional spot/s for guys that would otherwise remain unlisted and who knows, we may unearth a late developing gem.

My rebuttal would be that any club that ends up in the situation we are in where have been in worst 2 or 3 teams in the comp for 5 years with maybe another 3 or 4 to come has made bad list management decisions. You don't get to where we are or where North has been without having made mistakes and contributed to your own demise. In her scripted and staged remarks (that had no follow up questions asked) she never explains why North Melbourne's bad management and bad decisions were OK and didn't disqualify them but ours did. What's the difference?

It also comes down to the question of what is the actual purpose of PP's or assistance packages. I think the purpose is supposed to be to prevent any clubs from getting to a point where they are no longer AFL standard and they are an embarassment to the competition and a drag on ratings and attendances. So the issue of how long ago your last flag was and value judgements on how much of your demise was self inflicted via bad management vrs bad luck are irrelevent.

And the level of assistance is not going to be such that it helps you to win another flag, just to be able to get out of the bottom 4 at some point. Her suggestion that clubs will game the system, deliberately run their lists into the ground and plan to spend 5 years plus in the bottom 3 to get a couple of draft picks in the late teens from the AFL is ridiculous.

If the AFL doesn't believe in equalisation anymore then thats great. Lets get rid of the soft cap.

 

[WCErevival]

Its pretty simple really

Reasons for a priority pick

Since 2021

• Lost 3 players to concussion
• Lost one player who walked away from the game.
• Early retirements to senior players not helped by our travel loads.
• Hampered by compromised drafts

You can argue all you want about us mismanaging our squad but we have been restricted by the above and our isolation as a WA team trying to recruit players from outside WA.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

Hey ROYAL EAGLE - can you give some insights as to the 2026 cohort as to what NGA prospects we have and where you think they might land (albeit we have nearly 2 full seasons of football development to go).

Kehn - NGA and I think he is a possible top 10
McGlade - NGA and I think a possible R2 (maybe higher)

Harper Banfield - F/S looks draftable and possibly the best of the Banfield sons and I have him as a late R2 pick

I cannot comment on the remaining NGA prospects as it feels too early.

If we can get 2 things from the AFL by way of support, it would help a lot.

1. An additional 4 rookie spots to be used for NGA.
2. Pre-listing of NGA talent that means we use our picks on non NGA talent.

These 2 are pretty close to what the Suns got - note they also got additional picks which is what pissed off many clubs. They got pick 1, pick 11 and some picks that they had to use on VFL/WAFL players and that from memory was how they got Collins (after Freo had de-listed him). Likewise Norf got 3 end of R1, after R2 and after R3 picks over a couple of years.

I would say additional rookie spots and auto access to 3 or 4 NGA prospects as acceptable from the clubs

 

[Rowan18]

Its pretty simple really

Reasons for a priority pick

Since 2021

• Lost 3 players to concussion
• Lost one player who walked away from the game.
• Early retirements to senior players not helped by our travel loads.
• Hampered by compromised drafts

You can argue all you want about us mismanaging our squad but we have been restricted by the above and our isolation as a WA team trying to recruit players from outside WA.

Yep - that's it in a nutshell. We were going to be dropping down the ladder one way or another, no matter how good our drafting was. I'd argue it wasn't even that bad when you consider the alternatives around our draft selections (not just cherry picking the Chad Warner types that every club passed over twice). Yes, there were some howlers, but it's not like we blew up year after year of selections (we got best 22 players out of every year in the last decade except for maybe 2015, or 2020 when we traded Kelly in).

The other big factor was the AFL significantly changing the rules to speed up to game and reduce stoppages. This blew up our control-orientated game-plan and made a good section of our list (the slow, uncontested players) redundant. The rebuild has had to be much deeper as a result.

All of this are reasons why we dropped. The reason we need assistance is because the draft is stuffed and we are excluded from many of the recruitment avenues other clubs have:

-FA: why would a Vic FA move over here if they could just change clubs in Melbourne? We can only get the fringe ones trying to extend their career or by paying overs (with diminishing returns due to salary cap).
-Academies: sorry WA, you don't get these. You can have some token NGA selections but until recently we couldn't match them if they were any good (top 40).

 

[Woutizmoo]

The West should jump on the band wagon and publicize Kanes history and connection with North Melb and her involvement with the priority picks they were given.
How stupid were the people at the AFL who appointed her after her failed history at Norf.
Come on Woodcock use your pen and expose her for the failure she is.

lets go one step further and put Laura Kane on the back page of the paper 57 days in a row

 

[Scotland]

Pyke should be clarifying with the AFL what the current "formula" is. If anything we should be campaigning (and making sure "sources" know all about it) that the rules are changed so that the next shit team doesn't get the Gold Coast treatment after we get SFA.

From the Wiki page:

Under current AFL rules, enacted from the 2012 season onwards, a club can receive a priority draft pick at the discretion of the AFL Commission.

A formula which will assist with determining whether or not a team receives a priority draft pick, and at which round in the draft that pick will be taken, has been developed that takes into account such factors as:

• premiership points that a club has received over a period of years (with greater weight to recent seasons),
• a club's percentage (points for/points against x 100) over a period of years (another indication of on-field competitiveness, with greater weight to recent seasons),
• any finals appearances that a club has made in recent seasons,
• any premierships that a club has won in recent seasons, and
• a club's injury rates in each relevant season.

WC's current run:

2022: 2-20 60%
2023: 3-20 53%
2024: 5-18 68%
2025: 0-8 58%

So that's 10 wins in 3 and a half seasons. I'm not counting 2021 because we did still win 10 games even though we lost 7 of the last 9. Our record is worse than Gold Coast when they were given a bunch of picks.
We have a percentage of 59.7 since the start of 2022.
We last played finals in 2020. So that's 5 seasons at the end of this one.
We last won a flag in 2018. So that's 7 seasons at the end of this one.
Our injury list (including Covid outs) was historically bad the last few years.

The two bolded are for optics. North are into their 6th season of not being competitive. They made a prelim in 2015 and finals in 2016 then were 9th in 2018. If the AFL don't care about North why would they care about us? We played finals more recently and won a flag. But list turnover is rapid. Collingwood made the GF in 2018 and 2023. By my count 13 players in 2023 didn't feature in 2018 and most weren't on the list. From our 2018 side only Cripps (33), McGovern (33), Yeo (32), Sheed (30), Ryan (29), Duggan (29) Cole (28) are still on the list. Naitanui, Sheppard, Gaff who were the 3 big outs are all gone. If the AFL's position is "You won a flag 7 years ago so we're not helping you" then fine, but the strength of that team has no actual bearing on our current fortunes. Someone has to play us twice so I don't want to hear about how unfair that is.

As far as injuries go we have been crucified. But we're now at the point we're missing Yeo (again), Sheed is basically done and Reid/Allen are underdone but we're no longer holding out for Shuey, Naitanui etc. to come back. As fans we just want to see Reid, Hewett, Bazzo, Chesser etc. get a decent run at it. I maintain that with a decent run from 2022 the drop off would not have been as severe, but it was still a transition period. 2021 we had Naitanui, Sheed, Gaff, Kelly, Redden in the middle with part seasons from Shuey and Yeo. There is a reason that team was 8-5. WC never had a great midfield anyway so I am not sure what people expected to happen. Our major advantages were the forward line and defence. We mostly maintained the defence but Sheppard retired early, Hurn retired and now TB is gone. McGovern will be gone in a year or two. The efficient forward line is mostly gone too. Kennedy, Darling, Rioli, LeCras all retired/traded and Ryan injured often.

 

[Choogler]

My rebuttal would be that any club that ends up in the situation we are in where have been in worst 2 or 3 teams in the comp for 5 years with maybe another 3 or 4 to come has made bad list management decisions. You don't get to where we are or where North has been without having made mistakes and contributed to your own demise. In her scripted and staged remarks (that had no follow up questions asked) she never explains why North Melbourne's bad management and bad decisions were OK and didn't disqualify them but ours did. What's the difference?

That is the Hypocrisy of which I spoke, and I'd dearly love a reporter with a bit of gumption to point out her role in the NM fiasco, her role in the decision to award compo picks to HER old club, and ask her what has changed.

It also comes down to the question of what is the actual purpose of PP's or assistance packages. I think the purpose is supposed to be to prevent any clubs from getting to a point where they are no longer AFL standard and they are an embarassment to the competition and a drag on ratings and attendances. So the issue of how long ago your last flag was and value judgements on how much of your demise was self inflicted via bad management vrs bad luck are irrelevant.

Bad luck has little to do with it. If anything, WC had more bad luck losing Venables and Shepherd to concussion. I can't think of a NM player since 2015 that has had to retire due to concussion. I would be open to a system whereby some sort of compensation is given in those circumstances but how would you evaluate what it would be because some (eg: McCartin) hardly make it onto a footy field and others like Brayshaw had a 10 year career. Apart from those exceptional circumstances I can't think of how "bad luck" impacts a clubs list management, poor or otherwise. It is almost always the people employed to make the right decisions, making the wrong ones. That is what happened at NM and WCE.

And the level of assistance is not going to be such that it helps you to win another flag, just to be able to get out of the bottom 4 at some point. Her suggestion that clubs will game the system, deliberately run their lists into the ground and plan to spend 5 years plus in the bottom 3 to get a couple of draft picks in the late teens from the AFL is ridiculous.

Agreed, but it can give you a real big shove along the path. As for Kane, she, like a lot of AFL officials, is prone to making ridiculous statements.

If the AFL doesn't believe in equalisation anymore then thats great. Lets get rid of the soft cap.

Agree there too, if a club doesn't have the resources to compete and they fall by the wayside and become irrelevant, then so be it. It is a business, run it like one instead of this Centrelink like mentality and "they shall survive" philosophy they have particularly toward the non-viable "pauper" clubs in Melbourne. Happy to prop-up the northern clubs for awhile longer because they are actually contributing to growing the game and will eventually become profitable especially with some premiership success.

To finish on topic, I still don't believe any club should be handed assistance picks that affect the draft or disadvantage other clubs. The only thing I would concede are extra rookie spots to be used after all clubs have selected their rookies.

 

[Broken_Chairs]

I asked ChatGPT to figure out if WC deserve a priority pick

---

West Coast at the End of 2025 (So Far)

Key Facts

Year Ladder Position Wins Percentage

2022 17th 2 ~59%
2023 18th 3 ~54%
2024 16th 5 68.1%
2025 18th (current) 0-8 57.7%


Over the last 3.5 seasons, they’ve managed only 10 wins and consistently held one of the worst percentages in the AFL, indicating deep structural issues, not just bad luck.

Their current 2025 form suggests no significant recovery despite high draft picks and a multi-year rebuild.



---

What This Signals

1. Sustained On-Field Failure

Four consecutive years in the bottom 3 (including likely a third wooden spoon).

Averaging 2–3 wins per season, and consistently non-competitive in games.

Their percentage (especially in 2025) shows they are not just losing, but getting heavily outplayed week after week.


2. Stalled Rebuild

The addition of elite talent like Harley Reid, Reuben Ginbey, Elijah Hewett, etc., has not translated into competitiveness.

There’s growing evidence that the club’s list, development pathways, or gameplan aren’t progressing, even with elite draftees.


3. Comparative Precedent Strengthens

West Coast’s current situation is now arguably worse than what triggered assistance for:

Melbourne (2009–2013) – bottom 3 for multiple years with poor % and blowout losses.

North Melbourne (2021–2023) – granted priority picks after sustained failure and poor youth development.

Gold Coast (multiple) – received both pre-draft and post-season help during repeated cellar-dwelling.


4. No Justifiable AFL Excuse to Delay

By end of 2025, if the Eagles remain winless or finish last with under 3 wins and a sub-60% percentage, the AFL would have little room to argue that they are "rebounding."

Their off-field wealth is now irrelevant if it’s not translating to on-field improvement, which is what priority assistance is about.



---

Reassessed Conclusion (2025 Context)

Yes, based on four consecutive bottom-tier finishes, deteriorating form in 2025, and an unproductive rebuild, West Coast should qualify for an AFL priority pick at the end of the 2025 season.

What Assistance is Justifiable?

End-of-first-round priority pick (before trades, but after finals teams)

Or mid-first-round pick between natural first-round and pick 11, similar to concessions granted to North Melbourne.

Possibly conditions attached, like youth development plans, coaching transition, or football department reviews.



---

Final Verdict

If West Coast ends 2025 with 0–3 wins and another bottom-two finish, the AFL would have a clear obligation to intervene. The situation fits both the letter and spirit of priority pick criteria: chronic non-competitiveness, stalled rebuild, and no recovery trajectory.

Lock the thread

 

[Choogler]

Yep - that's it in a nutshell. We were going to be dropping down the ladder one way or another, no matter how good our drafting was. I'd argue it wasn't even that bad when you consider the alternatives around our draft selections (not just cherry picking the Chad Warner types that every club passed over twice). Yes, there were some howlers, but it's not like we blew up year after year of selections (we got best 22 players out of every year in the last decade except for maybe 2015, or 2020 when we traded Kelly in).

From 2015 - 2020 via the national and Rookie drafts we drafted 36 players. 8 are still on our list and only 3 are automatic selections. Jake, Allen and Ryan. Cole, Petch, Harry, Bailey and Jamo are the others. We lost Venables thru concussion. Those 36 discount any we traded for where only Kelly remains on our list.

If we move on to 2021 when we took Chesser at 14 and take a look at the next 7 picks which were Leek Aleer, Willmott, Tom Brown, Sheldrick, Van Rooyen, Lohmann, Matt Johnson, all would have been better picks than Chesser who was always a risk having hardly played during his draft season. We next took Hough at 31 which was a good pick but Curtis (a gun)and Soligo went after him and before our next pick Bazzo who may yet be a good pick, at 37. We missed a gun in Nic Martin in the PSS draft despite him having trained with us.

In 2022 we did OK with Ginbey, Hewett & Long and 23 was a no brainer with Harley, and I think A Reid and Hall will be good. We did miss out on Humphries who had previously been in our NGA academy.

I also think we did OK in 2024 but the jury is out on that.

All in all, the period between 2015 - 2021 was pretty sub-par IMO, since then we've done better but we won't know for a year or 2.

If we Oscar goes and we go to the draft with 3 first rounders we just absolutely have to nail our picks.

The other big factor was the AFL significantly changing the rules to speed up to game and reduce stoppages. This blew up our control-orientated game-plan and made a good section of our list (the slow, uncontested players) redundant. The rebuild has had to be much deeper as a result.

All of this are reasons why we dropped. The reason we need assistance is because the draft is stuffed and we are excluded from many of the recruitment avenues other clubs have


-FA: why would a Vic FA move over here if they could just change clubs in Melbourne? We can only get the fringe ones trying to extend their career or by paying overs (with diminishing returns due to salary cap).

Agree with your FA viewpoint

-Academies: sorry WA, you don't get these. You can have some token NGA selections but until recently we couldn't match them if they were any good (top 40).

Something is better than nothing, besides, the NGA players we missed out on, I don't see any setting the world on fire ATM.

 

[Choogler]

I asked ChatGPT to figure out if WC deserve a priority pick

---

West Coast at the End of 2025 (So Far)

Key Facts

Year Ladder Position Wins Percentage

2022 17th 2 ~59%
2023 18th 3 ~54%
2024 16th 5 68.1%
2025 18th (current) 0-8 57.7%


Over the last 3.5 seasons, they’ve managed only 10 wins and consistently held one of the worst percentages in the AFL, indicating deep structural issues, not just bad luck.

Their current 2025 form suggests no significant recovery despite high draft picks and a multi-year rebuild.



---

What This Signals

1. Sustained On-Field Failure

Four consecutive years in the bottom 3 (including likely a third wooden spoon).

Averaging 2–3 wins per season, and consistently non-competitive in games.

Their percentage (especially in 2025) shows they are not just losing, but getting heavily outplayed week after week.


2. Stalled Rebuild

The addition of elite talent like Harley Reid, Reuben Ginbey, Elijah Hewett, etc., has not translated into competitiveness.

There’s growing evidence that the club’s list, development pathways, or gameplan aren’t progressing, even with elite draftees.


3. Comparative Precedent Strengthens

West Coast’s current situation is now arguably worse than what triggered assistance for:

Melbourne (2009–2013) – bottom 3 for multiple years with poor % and blowout losses.

North Melbourne (2021–2023) – granted priority picks after sustained failure and poor youth development.

Gold Coast (multiple) – received both pre-draft and post-season help during repeated cellar-dwelling.


4. No Justifiable AFL Excuse to Delay

By end of 2025, if the Eagles remain winless or finish last with under 3 wins and a sub-60% percentage, the AFL would have little room to argue that they are "rebounding."

Their off-field wealth is now irrelevant if it’s not translating to on-field improvement, which is what priority assistance is about.



---

Reassessed Conclusion (2025 Context)

Yes, based on four consecutive bottom-tier finishes, deteriorating form in 2025, and an unproductive rebuild, West Coast should qualify for an AFL priority pick at the end of the 2025 season.

What Assistance is Justifiable?

End-of-first-round priority pick (before trades, but after finals teams)

Or mid-first-round pick between natural first-round and pick 11, similar to concessions granted to North Melbourne.

Possibly conditions attached, like youth development plans, coaching transition, or football department reviews.



---

Final Verdict

If West Coast ends 2025 with 0–3 wins and another bottom-two finish, the AFL would have a clear obligation to intervene. The situation fits both the letter and spirit of priority pick criteria: chronic non-competitiveness, stalled rebuild, and no recovery trajectory.

Lock the thread

North Melbourne did not receive a mid-first round pick. In 2022 they had an end of 2nd and an end of 3rd that had to be traded for at least one player. In 2023 they were given an end of first in the 23 draft, and 2 end of 1st rounders in the 2024 draft. They were to be reviewed after the 2024 season but could be traded in 2023 which was what NM did. They also received 2 additional rookie spots in each of those years.

 

[Choogler]

Its pretty simple really

Reasons for a priority pick

Since 2021

• Lost 3 players to concussion
• Lost one player who walked away from the game.
• Early retirements to senior players not helped by our travel loads.
• Hampered by compromised drafts

You can argue all you want about us mismanaging our squad but we have been restricted by the above and our isolation as a WA team trying to recruit players from outside WA.

Many clubs, StK, Melb, WB, Pies and others have all lost players to concussion. Even without concussion, Shepherd would now be 34 and probably retired anyway.

Players from other clubs have also walked away from the game

Who were the early retirements, maybe Redden is all I can think of.

Definitely agree. Twice we've had a our pick 19 and 21 blow out to 30's, BUT if it has affected us, it has also affected others

I still say our predicament is largely of our own making and assistance picks should not be handed to any club... if you hand them to us, or any club, guess what? It unfairly compromises the draft further and disadvantages other clubs, exactly as the NM picks disadvantaged us.

 

[amazingjoshy]

Many clubs, StK, Melb, WB, Pies and others have all lost players to concussion. Even without concussion, Shepherd would now be 34 and probably retired anyway.

Players from other clubs have also walked away from the game

Who were the early retirements, maybe Redden is all I can think of.

Definitely agree. Twice we've had a our pick 19 and 21 blow out to 30's, BUT if it has affected us, it has also affected others

I still say our predicament is largely of our own making and assistance picks should not be handed to any club... if you hand them to us, or any club, guess what? It unfairly compromises the draft further and disadvantages other clubs, exactly as the NM picks disadvantaged us.

This is an argument as to why PPs/assistance shouldn't exist at all (which i agree with)

But they do exist

 

[Broken_Chairs]

North Melbourne did not receive a mid-first round pick. In 2022 they had an end of 2nd and an end of 3rd that had to be traded for at least one player. In 2023 they were given an end of first in the 23 draft, and 2 end of 1st rounders in the 2024 draft. They were to be reviewed after the 2024 season but could be traded in 2023 which was what NM did. They also received 2 additional rookie spots in each of those years.

Yeah chatGPT gets some details wrong, but the VIBE is strong

 

[Deplorable trumpster]

They have a segment on Fox Sports with Jon Ralph and a couple of nobodies talking about it. They are trying to frame it as the critical question being how long since your last flag instead of how bad is your current squad as the excuse.

Their suggested remedy is why don't we spend $3 million on our academy instead of the $1 million we are currently spending. Why would we want to spend money on something we have gotten very little benefit out of? If we end up with nothing for any player coming out of academy that is good enough to go in the top 40 then how would spending three times as much money on it improve things for us? If the academy was included as part of the soft cap i would say we should shut the thing down and spend the money on some better quality assistant and development coaches instead. Whats the point of developing players for other clubs to take off us?

Good on Pyke for standing up for us. He has clearly spoken off the record to the media and told them we will be asking. I honestly think that the purpose of Kane's comments on the subject were intended to intimidate Pyke out of asking. She is very media shy to start with and it is very weird for the AFL to comment on a PP request 4 months before it can even be asked for. Why did she decide to go and give unasked for commentary on it? She is looking over the horizon to the end of the year and imaging us winning zero games and how hard it will be to justify not giving us anything. So she wants Pyke to not even ask. That would give her a get out of jail card. Thats what she was trying to do.

They also mention that the club was very unhappy with Matthew Lloyd's segment about Harley Reid. So i am guessing that the club did say something to the AFL about it.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

They also mention that the club was very unhappy with Matthew Lloyd's segment about Harley Reid. So i am guessing that the club did say something to the AFL about it.

And to make matters worse, Lloyd's article was on the AFL's own media platform*

* Gamble responsibly

 

[BSD]

They have a segment on Fox Sports with Jon Ralph and a couple of nobodies talking about it. They are trying to frame it as the critical question being how long since your last flag instead of how bad is your current squad as the excuse.

Their suggested remedy is why don't we spend $3 million on our academy instead of the $1 million we are currently spending. Why would we want to spend money on something we have gotten very little benefit out of? If we end up with nothing for any player coming out of academy that is good enough to go in the top 40 then how would spending three times as much money on it improve things for us? If the academy was included as part of the soft cap i would say we should shut the thing down and spend the money on some better quality assistant and development coaches instead. Whats the point of developing players for other clubs to take off us?

Good on Pyke for standing up for us. He has clearly spoken off the record to the media and told them we will be asking. I honestly think that the purpose of Kane's comments on the subject were intended to intimidate Pyke out of asking. She is very media shy to start with and it is very weird for the AFL to comment on a PP request 4 months before it can even be asked for. Why did she decide to go and give unasked for commentary on it? She is looking over the horizon to the end of the year and imaging us winning zero games and how hard it will be to justify not giving us anything. So she wants Pyke to not even ask. That would give her a get out of jail card. Thats what she was trying to do.

They also mention that the club was very unhappy with Matthew Lloyd's segment about Harley Reid. So i am guessing that the club did say something to the AFL about it.

I think it's time all the clubs (except norf) got together and passed a motion of no confidence in Kane.
She has to go as she's G.N.F.I. Keep up the pressure on her

 

[Andyy]

(I come in peace)

Of course they should ask for a PP. Every club that struggles this much should. The board has a duty to the members to deliver performance no matter what and it costs virtually nothing to ask.

Otherwise I've always thought the PP idea isn't very effective on its own to be honest. I think the lower clubs should have slightly larger TPP's (similar to Sydney's COLA rort) and non-player soft caps that taper off the higher they finish up the ladder as well.

For example, if WCE finish 18th they might get:
R1 Pick 1
PP end 1st round (P19)
R2 Pick 20
etc...
Additional $1,000,000 TPP for 2026 season
Additional $250,000 soft-cap for 2026 season.

And perhaps the team in 17th might get $700,000 TPP and additional $175,000 soft cap etc. Then a lower benefit for 16th until the bottom 4-6 clubs are sorted and the rest get nothing.

This way the weaker clubs would be better placed not just to draft talent, but to be able to afford to retain it, attract it, bring in free agents, support players with ancillary staff etc.

 

[tigger_ferret]

(I come in peace)

Of course they should ask for a PP. Every club that struggles this much should. The board has a duty to the members to deliver performance no matter what and it costs virtually nothing to ask.

Otherwise I've always thought the PP idea isn't very effective on its own to be honest. I think the lower clubs should have slightly larger TPP's (similar to Sydney's COLA rort) and non-player soft caps that taper off the higher they finish up the ladder as well.

For example, if WCE finish 18th they might get:
R1 Pick 1
PP end 1st round (P19)
R2 Pick 20
etc...
Additional $1,000,000 TPP for 2026 season
Additional $250,000 soft-cap for 2026 season.

And perhaps the team in 17th might get $700,000 TPP and additional $175,000 soft cap etc. Then a lower benefit for 16th until the bottom 4-6 clubs are sorted and the rest get nothing.

This way the weaker clubs would be better placed not just to draft talent, but to be able to afford to retain it, attract it, bring in free agents, support players with ancillary staff etc.

Additional cap space with a shit team is pretty pointless though, as more money goes to shit players. It would require additional list spots to have any actual benefit.

Increased soft cap for footy departments would also be more beneficial.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

I realise it is NFL but I loosely follow the podcasts "Move the Sticks" with Daniel Jeremiah and Bucky Brooks. I wish we had a pair like these 2 for AFL.

Anyway, they stressed the importance of development for clubs going hard at the draft. This resonated to me and what we need to be doing.

I feel this has been a weakness over the last decade for us.

I love that Hurn has been brought into the club to help develop the defenders. Shuey has probably missed a step going in as the stoppage. Yes he did a bit a development role last year but he has not got the coaching experience experience and spent most of his life roving to NicNat and Cox. Maybe I am frustrated is seeing our AFL team setting up at stoppages as if we are about to win the hit out!!!!

Anyway, glad to see we are starting to emphasise the development roles and hope we do more (especially if the soft cap is given more $$)

 

[Cuzz09]

PP talk will increase tomorrow if we get flogged.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

As the season drags on and the WAFL side continues to just be unacceptable and we also have salary cap room coming out of the wazoo, we could have a easier time of it if we just simply ask for 4 extra list spots for the rookie list . Gives us the chance to get the best of the best reserve players by being able to offer them AFL spots.

If we could do this in the off season and pick up say Brew, Sellwood, Deven Robertson

40

Deven Robertson

Age

24

Ht

185cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

7.0

2star

K

3.0

1star

HB

4.0

3star

M

0.0

1star

T

3.0

5star

CL

0.0

1star

D

7.0

1star

K

3.0

1star

HB

4.0

3star

M

0.0

1star

T

3.0

4star

CL

0.0

1star

D

7.0

2star

K

3.0

1star

HB

4.0

3star

M

0.0

1star

T

3.0

5star

CL

0.0

1star

and then say a speculative youngster it will be more palatable for the AFL to just accept and move on, gives us a actual fairly big win in making up for moving on the elderly we have and giving the WAFL youngsters a copout whereby we can give players different roles and opportunities during the season as opposed to stunting development by having to stick them into pigeon holed roles due to the lack of numbers