News Suns to ask for No. 1 pick

Mr Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 1, 2010
16,394
8,223
AFL Club
Richmond
I have had doubts about their chairman Tony Cochrane for a while now.. Seems bit of a loose cannon

I was going to say, they can't be taken seriously until this bling guy gets moved on.

If Gold Coast wants to get real Cochrane has to get shifted!!!

Look what happened when Fagan arrived, you can't have clubs being run on hot air!!!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

briztoon

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 28, 2015
7,705
7,095
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
NUFC, Philadelphia 76'ers
I was going to say, they can't be taken seriously until this bling guy gets moved on.

If Gold Coast wants to get real Cochrane has to get shifted!!!

Look what happened when Fagan arrived, you can't have clubs being run on hot air!!!
Cochrane is a CEO. Fagan is a coach.

Swan is the Lions CEO. While he’s not loud like Cochrane, he often has a similar message.
 

Mr Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 1, 2010
16,394
8,223
AFL Club
Richmond
Cochrane is a CEO. Fagan is a coach.

Swan is the Lions CEO. While he’s not loud like Cochrane, he often has a similar message.
Who is Swan??

Must be someone that lets others do the talking through action!

Cochrane just comes across as a snake oil salesman. Why does he open his mouth at all? Looks like he simply beats his own drum on the back of someone elses delivery.

The trouble is when someone with a free loader background asks for handout the credibility drops off!!

It is interesting because I think Cochrane represents that part of Gold Coast that thwarts the progression of the team and club. Get rid of Cochrane and the Suns might be taken seriously as a footy club and not some tourist event.

Like Mike Willessee and Eccelstone revisited
 
Last edited:

Tayl0r

Moderator
Jul 16, 2009
37,720
38,246
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
I'll put together a spreadsheet on which clubs have the disproportionate spread of talent and how long they have had those picks.

I expect the data will show two things.

1 - the Gold Coast Suns have a lot of talent on their list

2 - teams with talent plus time equal success

So if it come back like that I'd say a priority pick further distorting the system will hurt the rest of the competition more than it helps GC and what they need is to run through their rebuild.

Priority picks can last over a decade, take five years to get good and by that time the reason for them isn't relevant anymore but the player remains with the club making them better.

Players like Darling, Shuey, Rance were all priority picks. Handy players making their teams better for years after their down time.
 

Mr Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 1, 2010
16,394
8,223
AFL Club
Richmond
I'll put together a spreadsheet on which clubs have the disproportionate spread of talent and how long they have had those picks.

I expect the data will show two things.

1 - the Gold Coast Suns have a lot of talent on their list

2 - teams with talent plus time equal success

So if it come back like that I'd say a priority pick further distorting the system will hurt the rest of the competition more than it helps GC and what they need is to run through their rebuild.

Priority picks can last over a decade, take five years to get good and by that time the reason for them isn't relevant anymore but the player remains with the club making them better.

Players like Darling, Shuey, Rance were all priority picks. Handy players making their teams better for years after their down time.
Thats an interesting case for a priority after round one.

Some might say why?

Well if its a top 10 and higher pick they think they have the currency to go dysfunctional and request a trade before or after their initial contract believing the market of prospective will hear and meet their calls given their supposed currency.

With a later pick the currency may not be as obvious and the player may be more likely to stick.

There is another reason, later picks are not as goos meaning Gold Coast can stay low and get more very good picks allowing the development of the draftees to grow into the team.

Arguably Gold Coast went wrong by getting Ablett and others. They should have stayed younger. Likewise GWS failed getting experienced players as well arguably. Gold Coast getting a series of ruck prospects probably did not help either!!

Melbourne have arguably failed getting Lever and May as well as other mature types overestimating the progression of their list. Arguably Roos build was flawed and ignorant of the difficulty of accruing genuine talent without Cola.

So really a stronger case for a later priority pick would be more helpful for Gold Coast
 
Last edited:

Elmer_Judd

#Teague2020
Jul 25, 2019
926
2,265
AFL Club
Carlton
I'll put together a spreadsheet on which clubs have the disproportionate spread of talent and how long they have had those picks.

I expect the data will show two things.

1 - the Gold Coast Suns have a lot of talent on their list

2 - teams with talent plus time equal success

So if it come back like that I'd say a priority pick further distorting the system will hurt the rest of the competition more than it helps GC and what they need is to run through their rebuild.

Priority picks can last over a decade, take five years to get good and by that time the reason for them isn't relevant anymore but the player remains with the club making them better.

Players like Darling, Shuey, Rance were all priority picks. Handy players making their teams better for years after their down time.
Point of order, Alex Rance was Not a priority pick, he was Richmond's first 2nd pick in the 2007 National draft.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joao

Norm Smith Medallist
May 2, 2017
7,489
10,646
QLD
AFL Club
Fremantle
And what specifically tells you the Suns' present culture is poor? Noting that they overhauled their management and coaching, and got rid of any player who didn't want to be there, all within the last two years.

Are you saying that clubs with good culture don't lose players? I suppose West Coast must have poor culture losing Lycett then? And Adelaide must never have had a good culture given how many players they've lost over the years. GWS must have a simply appalling culture also.
I never said they had a poor culture currently (and frankly, I wouldn't know). If they do in fact have a good culture then why do they need a PP? If the club is strong then it is just a matter of time before they turn it around onfield, with or without a PP. History tells us that repeatedly.

The point is teams with good cultures lose less players and I strongly suspect (but obviously can't prove nor you disprove) that the reason good teams lose players is because of the salary cap and occasionally for more opportunity (see Tigers lately).

So again, give me a reason why a PP someone drives a club travelling the wrong way back up or why a PP is required if they are already on the improve? So far the best argument I have seen is "hope", and that frankly is a terrible argument. Hope may effect some crowd numbers and drive some membership (in the short term only) but it has a finite life if improvement doesn't follow. If you are getting the improvement anyway, then why do you need the PP?
 

Johnny Bananas

Club Legend
Sep 10, 2010
1,759
2,005
A sugar refinery
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
I never said they had a poor culture currently (and frankly, I wouldn't know). If they do in fact have a good culture then why do they need a PP?...

So again, give me a reason why a PP someone drives a club travelling the wrong way back up or why a PP is required if they are already on the improve?
See, I get tired of repeating myself. I've outlined the purpose of a priority pick a few times in this thread. I think the most recent one was in reply to Cleric earlier today. I refer you to that post.

What really bemuses me is how 11/16 clubs that existed before the Gold Coast have received priority picks, including within the last three years, and only now is it that people indignantly pound the table over awarding a priority pick!
 

Joao

Norm Smith Medallist
May 2, 2017
7,489
10,646
QLD
AFL Club
Fremantle
See, I get tired of repeating myself. I've outlined the purpose of a priority pick a few times in this thread. I think the most recent one was in reply to Cleric earlier today. I refer you to that post.

What really bemuses me is how 11/16 clubs that existed before the Gold Coast have received priority picks, including within the last three years, and only now is it that people indignantly pound the table over awarding a priority pick!
Just quote your previous post in reply to me so I know which one you are talking about. Will save you typing it again.

Two wrongs don't make a right. It wasn't a good decision then and isn't now. You are supposed to learn from your past mistakes and not use them as a reason to continue making them.

For clarity, talent is not their problem and it never has been. That is what a PP addresses.
 

Tayl0r

Moderator
Jul 16, 2009
37,720
38,246
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
See, I get tired of repeating myself. I've outlined the purpose of a priority pick a few times in this thread. I think the most recent one was in reply to Cleric earlier today. I refer you to that post.

What really bemuses me is how 12/16 clubs that existed before the Gold Coast have received priority picks, including within the last three years, and only now is it that people indignantly pound the table over awarding a priority pick!
The priority picks certainly helped Hawthorn (Roughead - 4 flags), Collingwood (Dale Thomas - one flag), Richmond (Alex Rance - one flag), West Coast (Darling, Shuey - one flag).

The draft was supposed to be a means of equalisation over the 16 years but the AFL can't help themselves. The pick is given, then the player stays on the list for years and years making the competition uneven.
 

Johnny Bananas

Club Legend
Sep 10, 2010
1,759
2,005
A sugar refinery
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Just quote your previous post in reply to me so I know which one you are talking about. Will save you typing it again.
I copied it and pasted below:

Priority picks are not designed for instant results, and they never were. They are designed to help a rebuilding process. They are for 3-4 years down the track when the players properly develop AFL bodies and can contribute in a more significant way. The value for Gold Coast in getting both top two picks this year is not only in helping the rebuilding process, but addresses their key issue of player retention, as its more likely Rowell/Anderson will stay if their best mate is there with them. That factored into Brisbane choosing McCluggage and Berry. That factored into Brisbane recruiting both Neale and McCarthy. And Brisbane did get a priority pick as I've pointed out multiple times. Gold Coast should too. Whether that is at the beginning or end of the first round remains to be seen.

Two wrongs don't make a right. It wasn't a good decision then and isn't now. You are supposed to learn from your past mistakes and not use them as a reason to continue making them.
There's a big difference between then and now: there was a defined criteria for getting a pick and it was set very low. Priority picks have no criteria now, but it can be seen that they are only awarded for a severe situation, such as when a club has been out of the finals for several years, is shedding members, continually has its players picked off by rival clubs and needs a boost to its rebuild. Gold Coast fit this pattern. They were screwed by the AFL upon setup, a priority pick now would be righting a historical wrong, not repeating a mistake.
 
Last edited:

Johnny Bananas

Club Legend
Sep 10, 2010
1,759
2,005
A sugar refinery
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
The priority picks certainly helped Hawthorn (Roughead - 4 flags), Collingwood (Dale Thomas - one flag), Richmond (Alex Rance - one flag), West Coast (Darling, Shuey - one flag).

The draft was supposed to be a means of equalisation over the 16 years but the AFL can't help themselves. The pick is given, then the player stays on the list for years and years making the competition uneven.
You're conveniently leaving off teams like Fremantle, the Western Bulldogs and Melbourne who didn't go on to great success after their priority picks. But I'd argue the early picks for the examples you did give served their purpose - they strengthened the rebuild of those teams and positioned them for greater success in 3-5 years. That's always been the point of priority picks. That's what they're designed to do. The point was never to lift a team out of the doldrums within a year or two, and if the AFL ever justified it like that, they were fooling themselves.

The issue was, the criteria was far too low for priority picks back then, and so you had teams that had only fallen into a year or two of poor results getting very high priority picks. That isn't the case now, they're only given to real hard luck cases who have had long periods of poor results and structural issues that have hindered their ability to overcome the poor results. See my response to Joao above.

And even if West Coast got gifted priority picks based on very generous criteria, those picks were a crapshoot, not premium talent. The four players selected one pick before and after Shuey and Darling were all unsuccessful in the AFL. Really that's just good drafting by West Coast more so than being gifted the best talent.
 
Last edited:

Joao

Norm Smith Medallist
May 2, 2017
7,489
10,646
QLD
AFL Club
Fremantle
I copied it and pasted below:

Priority picks are not designed for instant results, and they never were. They are designed to help a rebuilding process. They are for 3-4 years down the track when the players properly develop AFL bodies and can contribute in a more significant way. The value for Gold Coast in getting both top two picks this year is not only in helping the rebuilding process, but addresses their key issue of player retention, as its more likely Rowell/Anderson will stay if their best mate is there with them. That factored into Brisbane choosing McCluggage and Berry. That factored into Brisbane recruiting both Neale and McCarthy. And Brisbane did get a priority pick as I've pointed out multiple times. Gold Coast should too. Whether that is at the beginning or end of the first round remains to be seen.


There's a big difference between then and now: there was a defined criteria for getting a pick and it was set very low. Priority picks have no criteria now, but it can be seen that they are only awarded for a severe situation, such as when a club has been out of the finals for several years, is shedding members, continually has its players picked off by rival clubs and needs a boost to its rebuild. Gold Coast fit this pattern. They were screwed by the AFL upon setup, a priority pick now would be writing a historical wrong, not repeating a mistake.
First paragraph:

For this to make sense you would have to conclude that without the PP they could not become a finals competitive side. One PP (unless it is a generational talent) is not going to take a poor/ordinary side to finals. That PP players is 1/22, they simply cannot make enough of a difference for that to be justified. Particularly in Gold Coasts case (and Carlton's previously) as talent is not the problem. They have plenty of former high picks. If they develop the existing talent they will be completely capable of being a good team. If they don't, the PP won't make any difference - evidence is they use to have Gaz.

In relation to Rowell and Anderson together I refer to my post earlier - if the culture is ****, then being mates with some of the blokes isn't going to matter. My evidence is half the Gold Coast list that now plays elsewhere. If the culture is good then you don't need mates to want to stay. This is not a good reason. The only way to justify is if you say having the two of them there together might give you more time to convince them to stay. I find this lacking, if they can see a clear positive direction most will accept that it takes time in a rebuild - source is the vast majority of top 10 picks

Second paragraph:

The old system was awful - no arguments from me. The new system is not the old system, but it doesn't make it good by default. You still need to demonstrate that it is necessary and nothing I have seen from anyone has remotely convinced me of that.

You cite Brisbane as evidence - you received 19 but did some trading but lets say 22 is roughly equivalent to what you received. Do you believe that without that pick your situation this year would be drastically different? Is Witherden the difference between you being a top 4 side and not? He is a good player but you are going to have a hard time convincing anyone of that. Even if you took it to the extreme and pretended you were given pick 1 instead of 19 and selected Taranto (I'd rate 1 from that draft), do you think he would make a difference? Your team is good this year because you got your house in order off field and the talent you had already accumulated, plus the talent you accumulated since has matured massively. Then you consider the number of your talented players that have yet to hit their straps (Rayner for example) and tell me how you could possibly justify that you needed that pick 19. Talent isn't your problem either and this is evident by your rapid improvement, improvement that Witherden only contributes his small fraction too.
 

Crow till I die

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 6, 2017
5,650
5,142
AFL Club
Adelaide
I copied it and pasted below:

Priority picks are not designed for instant results, and they never were. They are designed to help a rebuilding process. They are for 3-4 years down the track when the players properly develop AFL bodies and can contribute in a more significant way. The value for Gold Coast in getting both top two picks this year is not only in helping the rebuilding process, but addresses their key issue of player retention, as its more likely Rowell/Anderson will stay if their best mate is there with them. That factored into Brisbane choosing McCluggage and Berry. That factored into Brisbane recruiting both Neale and McCarthy. And Brisbane did get a priority pick as I've pointed out multiple times. Gold Coast should too. Whether that is at the beginning or end of the first round remains to be seen.


There's a big difference between then and now: there was a defined criteria for getting a pick and it was set very low. Priority picks have no criteria now, but it can be seen that they are only awarded for a severe situation, such as when a club has been out of the finals for several years, is shedding members, continually has its players picked off by rival clubs and needs a boost to its rebuild. Gold Coast fit this pattern. They were screwed by the AFL upon setup, a priority pick now would be writing a historical wrong, not repeating a mistake.
You need to look up the stats before you try and make an argument based on them. Gold Coasts average crowds have been INCREASING year on for the last few years (and that also factors their game in China).

Membership numbers have been INCREASING overt the last 3 seasons

They have signed 8 of their recent 11 draftees with the announcement of 4 signing on today - so they are showing they ARE retaining draftees

So in summary, their membership base is GROWING
Their average attendances are GROWING
Most of their recent draftees have EXTENDED their contracts
 

Tayl0r

Moderator
Jul 16, 2009
37,720
38,246
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
You're conveniently leaving off teams like Fremantle, the Western Bulldogs and Melbourne who didn't go on to great success after their priority picks. But I'd argue the early picks for the examples you did give served their purpose - they strengthened the rebuild of those teams and positioned them for greater success in 3-5 years. That's always been the point of priority picks. That's what they're designed to do. The point was never to lift a team out of the doldrums within a year or two, and if the AFL ever justified it like that, they were fooling themselves.

The issue was, the criteria was far too low for priority picks back then, and so you had teams that had only fallen into a year or two of poor results getting very high priority picks. That isn't the case now, they're only given to real hard luck cases who have had long periods of poor results and structural issues that have hindered their ability to overcome the poor results. See my response to Joao above.

And even if West Coast got gifted priority picks based on very generous criteria, those picks were a crapshoot, not premium talent. The four players selected one pick before and after Shuey and Darling were all unsuccessful in the AFL. Really that's just good drafting by West Coast more so than being gifted the best talent.
Fremantle currently average pick #42 for the players on their roster.

I haven't left off Freo, Dogs or Melbourne. Those are coming. But first, let's talk about the father son picks taken in the third round for clubs like Geelong who got to pick Hawkins with pick #41 after he won the U18s MVP and then pick up Selwood with pick seven. I know it's a whole new era now but this example highlights how a draft concession lingers and continues giving advantage long after it happened.

The priority picks do the same. Those same father son picks helped the Dogs in 2016. Richmond had an extra handy player in 2017, West Coast two in 2018.

I think the league is far too close to be giving extra elite players to clubs because they stay on the list, sometimes for a decade and a half as an extra pick before the second round that didn't need a trade to get the pick meanwhile the rest of the clubs had their sole round one pick.

These all matter, especially when injuries hit and you can call on a pick 30 to replace your pick 19 rather than having to reach into your rookie list players.
 

Johnny Bananas

Club Legend
Sep 10, 2010
1,759
2,005
A sugar refinery
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
For this to make sense you would have to conclude that without the PP they could not become a finals competitive side.
No it doesn't. Perhaps you can demonstrate how this is the case rather than making leaps of logic.

One PP (unless it is a generational talent) is not going to take a poor/ordinary side to finals. That PP players is 1/22, they simply cannot make enough of a difference for that to be justified.
You're trying to have your cake and eat it too here, by saying that priority draft picks are simultaneously not going to make a difference while also being an unfair advantage.

Particularly in Gold Coasts case (and Carlton's previously) as talent is not the problem. They have plenty of former high picks.
Many of which have already left for other clubs. One of their top picks from within the last three years has already left. Anything before that period is irrelevant because it is clear that the previous regime at the Suns was poor at developing talent. You can't keep describing players like Jack Watts (for example) as having great footballing talent even now, just because he was a high draft pick, if he never lived up to what he was rated at when he was 18, partly because of poor coaching.

However, the Suns have overhauled their management and coaching staff since then, and the jury is out on whether they can develop them now. Extra talent now gives them a better chance of success in 3-5 years, which I believe should be the AFLs goal.

In relation to Rowell and Anderson together I refer to my post earlier - if the culture is ****, then being mates with some of the blokes isn't going to matter.
Of course it does. You've been given the example already of McCluggage and Berry. They in fact have been instrumental in developing a new and better culture. Having their best mate there helped them settle in. And during the period they were settling in, Schache found he couldn't deal with living in Brisbane as he was homesick and didn't have a support network that suited him. This is the same club in basically the same time period. I'm absolutely certain that having an existing friendship helped both McCluggage and Berry acclimatise to Brisbane, bed in with the culture and improve it.

My evidence is half the Gold Coast list that now plays elsewhere.
Irrelevant. The Gold Coast very pointedly did not recruit the way Brisbane have learned to, by considering existing friendships as well as other strategies targeting country kids. Sometimes when you throw a bunch of strangers together, it doesn't work out for whatever reason. Existing friendships can be a huge boost for building a network and a culture.

I find this lacking, if they can see a clear positive direction most will accept that it takes time in a rebuild
Some do and some don't. Two people can look at something and see entirely different things. Every club that has had an exodus has also had players staying on, and every club that has retained most players has had departures too. I don't think you can draw a conclusion from that.

You still need to demonstrate that it is necessary and nothing I have seen from anyone has remotely convinced me of that.
I have demonstrated it's necessary. Go read my last reply to you. No finals in their existence, structural problems, blah blah blah. The AFL need a success on the Gold Coast and they will plough resources into it for two decades if necessary.

You cite Brisbane as evidence - you received 19 but did some trading but lets say 22 is roughly equivalent to what you received.
No, I refuse to accept your perspective on this. That priority pick and trade gave us the ammunition to get Charlie Cameron, who has been vital in our rise and culture.

Is Witherden the difference between you being a top 4 side and not?
This is a very silly argument. Priority picks, particularly at the end of the first round, aren't designed to be "the difference between being a top 4 side and not". Their purpose is to help in a rebuild and assist in climbing the ladder. This isn't the NBA where one player just takes over a game regularly.

Once again this feels like you're trying to have your cake and eat it too, and act like a priority pick is a great crime against other clubs when one player is not going to lift them into the top 4 either.

He is a good player but you are going to have a hard time convincing anyone of that.
Anyone who rates a player without actually observing them play regularly isn't worth trying to convince. But that's by the by.

Your team is good this year because you got your house in order off field and the talent you had already accumulated, plus the talent you accumulated since has matured massively.
Already accumulated? Prior to 2016? A lot of that talent absconded to other clubs! Should I go into all the details? Our first round picks from 2011 to 2015 were used to draft or trade for players who had demanded trades away prior to this season.

Then you consider the number of your talented players that have yet to hit their straps (Rayner for example) and tell me how you could possibly justify that you needed that pick 19.
I already have. Charlie Cameron and Witherden have both played parts in our rise and the improvement in culture. That pick 19 swelled our rebuild and added to this year's rise. It helped cover for the talent that the club was shedding and continued to shed afterwards. Gold Coast will have lost as much talent as Brisbane has if Jack Martin leaves this summer, and he very likely will.
 

Joao

Norm Smith Medallist
May 2, 2017
7,489
10,646
QLD
AFL Club
Fremantle
No it doesn't. Perhaps you can demonstrate how this is the case rather than making leaps of logic.


You're trying to have your cake and eat it too here, by saying that priority draft picks are simultaneously not going to make a difference while also being an unfair advantage.


Many of which have already left for other clubs. One of their top picks from within the last three years has already left. Anything before that period is irrelevant because it is clear that the previous regime at the Suns was poor at developing talent. You can't keep describing players like Jack Watts (for example) as having great footballing talent even now, just because he was a high draft pick, if he never lived up to what he was rated at when he was 18, partly because of poor coaching.

However, the Suns have overhauled their management and coaching staff since then, and the jury is out on whether they can develop them now. Extra talent now gives them a better chance of success in 3-5 years, which I believe should be the AFLs goal.


Of course it does. You've been given the example already of McCluggage and Berry. They in fact have been instrumental in developing a new and better culture. Having their best mate there helped them settle in. And during the period they were settling in, Schache found he couldn't deal with living in Brisbane as he was homesick and didn't have a support network that suited him. This is the same club in basically the same time period. I'm absolutely certain that having an existing friendship helped both McCluggage and Berry acclimatise to Brisbane, bed in with the culture and improve it.


Irrelevant. The Gold Coast very pointedly did not recruit the way Brisbane have learned to, by considering existing friendships as well as other strategies targeting country kids. Sometimes when you throw a bunch of strangers together, it doesn't work out for whatever reason. Existing friendships can be a huge boost for building a network and a culture.


Some do and some don't. Two people can look at something and see entirely different things. Every club that has had an exodus has also had players staying on, and every club that has retained most players has had departures too. I don't think you can draw a conclusion from that.


I have demonstrated it's necessary. Go read my last reply to you. No finals in their existence, structural problems, blah blah blah. The AFL need a success on the Gold Coast and they will plough resources into it for two decades if necessary.


No, I refuse to accept your perspective on this. That priority pick and trade gave us the ammunition to get Charlie Cameron, who has been vital in our rise and culture.


This is a very silly argument. Priority picks, particularly at the end of the first round, aren't designed to be "the difference between being a top 4 side and not". Their purpose is to help in a rebuild and assist in climbing the ladder. This isn't the NBA where one player just takes over a game regularly.

Once again this feels like you're trying to have your cake and eat it too, and act like a priority pick is a great crime against other clubs when one player is not going to lift them into the top 4 either.


Anyone who rates a player without actually observing them play regularly isn't worth trying to convince. But that's by the by.


Already accumulated? Prior to 2016? A lot of that talent absconded to other clubs! Should I go into all the details? Our first round picks from 2011 to 2015 were used to draft or trade for players who had demanded trades away prior to this season.


I already have. Charlie Cameron and Witherden have both played parts in our rise and the improvement in culture. That pick 19 swelled our rebuild and added to this year's rise. It helped cover for the talent that the club was shedding and continued to shed afterwards. Gold Coast will have lost as much talent as Brisbane has if Jack Martin leaves this summer, and he very likely will.
Agree to disagree.
 

Mr Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 1, 2010
16,394
8,223
AFL Club
Richmond
I copied it and pasted below:

Priority picks are not designed for instant results, and they never were. They are designed to help a rebuilding process. They are for 3-4 years down the track when the players properly develop AFL bodies and can contribute in a more significant way. The value for Gold Coast in getting both top two picks this year is not only in helping the rebuilding process, but addresses their key issue of player retention, as its more likely Rowell/Anderson will stay if their best mate is there with them. That factored into Brisbane choosing McCluggage and Berry. That factored into Brisbane recruiting both Neale and McCarthy. And Brisbane did get a priority pick as I've pointed out multiple times. Gold Coast should too. Whether that is at the beginning or end of the first round remains to be seen.


There's a big difference between then and now: there was a defined criteria for getting a pick and it was set very low. Priority picks have no criteria now, but it can be seen that they are only awarded for a severe situation, such as when a club has been out of the finals for several years, is shedding members, continually has its players picked off by rival clubs and needs a boost to its rebuild. Gold Coast fit this pattern. They were screwed by the AFL upon setup, a priority pick now would be righting a historical wrong, not repeating a mistake.
Well if its that important trade Lukasiois or Rankine for pick 2 of Melbourne!! If they are going to lose the others anyway in time based on that criteria would a trade not make sense end of year??

What happens if Rowell and Anderson decide to go separate ways in a year or two despite being besties??

Actually I think this might happen, since you value retention and getting mates together, Melbourne trades pick 2 to Adelaide for pick 3 plus a kicker. The kicker will have to be significant because I think after pick 2 talent drops off a bit but Gold Coast might be able to help. Gold Coast trades Lukasios for the Adelaides pick 2. Then Gold Coast can get Rowell and Anderson together with the knowledge Lukusis might be going anyway in the not to distant future.

That way Gold Coast get their coveted mates together even though they may separate later and the other clubs are not screwed over by handout Gold Coast!!
 
Last edited:

Stroppy

Club Legend
Apr 14, 2015
1,027
1,931
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Dubs, AZ Cards, SF Giants
I find it passing strange that the Demons and the Crows have both spoken against a pick 1 PP.
One made a grand final 2 years ago and the other a prelim last year.

Just another example of the strong trying to keep down the weak.

Hang on? Don't the Demons have pick 2 and the Crows pick 3?

Apologies, that makes sense now.

Of course, the team I follow is stone motherless last and looking a long long way off atm.
In 5 seasons we have won 4, 6, 6, 4 games and unless there is a miracle we will win 3 games this year.
And where are we expected to finish next year?

Still, it is all incompetence and being based in a non-football state so we can just get stuffed.

No wonder we are asking for a PP.
Which is one of the things we are allowed to do. Just like every other club is allowed to do.
I hope we do get pick 1 and 2 and take Rowell and Anderson and they are great players for us in 6 years time and we are playing finals. That will be good for the Suns and great for the AFL.
 
Top Bottom