With Carlton supporters being split into the we should win every game and the tankers (for which I was one) groups this year

I am interested to know what you would like to see the AFL do (if anything) in relation to the priority picks and the draft.

I for one would like to see the AFL change the priority picks till after the first round bey hey thats just me

Please do not turn this into a we need to tank next year thread, as I am just interested to hear peoples opinions as to what they would like to see the AFL do in regards to the priority pick / draft scenario

Enjoy

_________________
A macfart a day helps you work rest and play

Personally, keep the priority pick but change the order of the draft so that

PP round

then

9th 1st pick second round
10th 2nd pick second round
etc.
16th 8th pick second round

So this year the picks would be:

1 Carlton
2 Collingwood
3 Hawthorn
4 Western Bulldogs
5 Fremantle
6 Brisbane Lions
7 Richmond
8 Essendon*
9 Carlton
10 Hawthorn
11 Collingwood
Then 'normal' order for the top 8.
12 Port Adelaide
etc.

Far less incentive to tank. This could also work with the 2 year <11 wins scenario as well. Gives some incentive to fight for a finals spot as well, if there are no PP's then 9th gets pick 1.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|

Jar i think this is wonderful.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

Unfortunately, whichever system is adopted, you can be the teams will try and find a way around the rules.

I think the PP system has to be split slightly away from 1st round picks.

I see it as one of 3 options:

1) The much-discussed "period of crapness" rule, which would require teams to win less than a certain amount of matches over a set number (rolling, possibly) of years. The current cutoff is 5.5 wins, or 1/4 of matches won in the season. maybe that could be extended to 22 matches over 4 years, so a team would have to be really, really, appallingly crap. I mean St Kilda in the 80s crap. That way it's still the required 25%, and you won't get Yo-yo teams getting PPs one year, and playing finals the next and so on.

2) The PPs get awarded after the bottom 8 have their first pick. This way, the bottom 8 get rightful picks, and teams 9-12ish don't get "sloppy seconds", but when you add the priority picks, the finalists, especially the final 4 teams, still get their picks at the same time as they would under the current system.

3) The PPs get given after the first round of picks, which again means that the teams in the top half of the bottom 8 don't spend "years in mediocrity" (The quotes are there to emphasise that that's the way a lot of people think, and it's not my phrase as such) by missing out on higher picks, and it would also mean that the finalists aren't artificially punished for their success.

Any of the above would be acceptable to me.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

Over 2 seasons.

The only real problem I've had with PP is that you can get a team that has a one-off bad year with injuries (Melbourne, Collingwood) or a bad year due to an open revolt against the coaching staff (Brisbane) and they get a PP.

If you're shit over two seasons, you need the PP, and no-one could argue with it. And I doubt whether a club is going to tank 2 years running in order to get 1 kid.

And, by the way, why the hell would Carlton people be agitating for the PP to be removed before possibly the strongest draft ever, in a season where there's every likelihood we won't win too many games?

Personally, I'll shelve my concern for the greater good until 2007.

I understand what you're saying, John, but I don't necessarily agree with your point of view.
I say let's take what we can this year, and let the cards fall where they may next year. Take the money and run, so to speak.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

Lets do it for the mext 4 years and make sure of it...or five...hell ,make it six...seven?




































eight..I'm sure eight will do the trick
















nine just to be sure.



10..yes 10. I'll still be alive to see us win surely.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

Danny, you forgot to add and to your post.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

Agree with John, should be done over 2 years.

_________________
"You are being watched. The government has a secret system. A machine that spies on you every hour of every day. I know because I built it." - Finch

I like Jarusa's idea the best...

It's not a obvious/simple system, which is what I like about it.




Except Richmond would wind up with Pick 4 every year..!

It's the principle, John. It's just not right where supporters of footy clubs agitate for their team to lose games. It just happens that next season's draft is expected to be a strong one.

_________________
Formerly Blues-Back2003.

at least you're realistic about how bad the list actually is.

No more PP.

Scrap 'em, no more compromising the draft.

_________________
Richard Pratt - A Carlton legend.

Let the shit clubs stay there!!!

Idlove to know how many of you would like the club to give the pick up at the draft this year..
(Lets seperate the sheep from the goats shall we?)

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

a system that makes it a little bit fairer would be to stagger/ reverse (i cant think of the right word) the rounds. i.e

Priority:
1.Carlton
2.Collingwood
3.Hawthorn

Round 1:
4.Carlton
5.Collingwood
6.Hawthorn
7.Essendon*
8.Richmond
9.Brisbane
10.Fremantle
11.Western Bulldogs
12.Port Adeliade
13.Melbourne
14.Geelong
15.Kangaroos
16.Stkilda
17.Sydney
18.West Coast
19.Adelaide

Then Round 2 goes:
20. Adelaide
21. West Coast
22. Sydney
23. St Kilda
24.Kangaroos

etc....to make it fairer, you'd do it jarusas way so that the bad teams dont make up most of the top 10 picks....

_________________
R A D I C A L B R O T H E R S

Inspired by the One-Minute Sculptures of Erwin Wurm

"All in all is all we are..."

Should be

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
(pp1)
(pp2)etc

then the teams from the finals...

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

PP's should be picks taken at the start of the second round, given that a team wins less than 5.5 wins in any given year.

and the first eight should be a lottery system, whereby the team who finishes last gets 8 balls in a lottery draw, second last gets 7 etc. Thus if collingwood and carlton are divided by percentage next year and they play in the last round of the season - who could honestly say that they'd prefer carlton to lose just so we could secure an extra ball in the lottery?

and by giving teams that finish in the 9th and 10th positions a small chance to gain a no.1 pick you would address the problem that teams like geelong and Essendon* have whereby they never get a chance to recruit the absolute elite because they always occupy mediocre ladder positions.

i think having pp's in the single digits is still a solid incentive to tank

I reckon if a team gets 2 spoons in 4 years they should get the top 3 picks in the draft.

_________________
"We used to sit around and talk about how bad the game plan was." Anthony Koutoufides

Do I get royalties for your suggestion Synbad?

I think you'll find this is one of my options in my first post in this thread.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

KK, so long as you post your royalties to Jarusa who posted it first.

Agree that moving the PP away from the start is a good way to go. I also think the 2 year (or even 3 year) qualification rule for the PP is good, and I'd even be happy to reduce the maximum number of points down from 40pts (2 years) to 32pts. Eight wins, or less, over two seasons should help to ease the incentive to tank.

Whatever, and regardless of whether Carlton stands to benefit or not, something needs to be done for the greater good of the game. Wanting your team to lose is just stupid and goes against everything that sport should stand for.

_________________
Click here to follow TalkingCarlton on twitter
TalkingCarlton Posting Rules