What would you like the AFL to do..........

JohnM · **Posted:** Sun Sep 04, 2005 6:58 pm

Whoah, let's not get carried away.

The PP is designed to prevent teams from wallowing on the bottom of the ladder for a decade, like they did in the old days.

A free 9th selection after THREE years of being crap isn't going to help any team get anywhere.

It's either a longer qualification period OR a downgrading of the pick. To do both is to render it useless.

From Caro's article today, it seems that the problem the AFL have with the system as it currently stands is the Melbourne/Brisbane scenario of one bad season from a not-bad list netting them a PP.

Look for a tougher qual period, but not a downgrading of the pick itself, I'd suggest.

Kaptain Kouta · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:41 pm **Posts:** 63509

camelboy wrote:

Jarusa wrote:

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.

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

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.

He musta only beatenme by a couple of minutes....Jars must type faster than me.

Great minds think alike, eh? :wink:

Kouta · **Posted:** Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:03 pm

I'd like the AFL to @#$%&! OFF! and sack Demetriou! :twisted:

camel · **Posted:** Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:04 pm

JohnM wrote:

Whoah, let's not get carried away.

The PP is designed to prevent teams from wallowing on the bottom of the ladder for a decade, like they did in the old days.

A free 9th selection after THREE years of being crap isn't going to help any team get anywhere.

One extra kid taken early in the draft won't be the answer either.

AGRO · **Posted:** Sun Sep 04, 2005 10:17 pm

JuzzCarlton wrote:

I'd like the AFL to F@%&#! OFF! and sack Demetriou! :twisted:

Thats the spirit - but you need to spell D - E - M - E - T - R - I - S - P - E - W correctly. :wink:

Synbad · **Posted:** Sun Sep 04, 2005 10:26 pm

camelboy wrote:

JohnM wrote:

Whoah, let's not get carried away.

The PP is designed to prevent teams from wallowing on the bottom of the ladder for a decade, like they did in the old days.

A free 9th selection after THREE years of being crap isn't going to help any team get anywhere.

One extra kid taken early in the draft won't be the answer either.

Ok 3 extra kids taken early in the draft whilst were down there//

camel · **Posted:** Sun Sep 04, 2005 10:30 pm

Three kids is not one though is it.

BlueMark · **Posted:** Mon Sep 05, 2005 11:17 am

Scrap it completly.

Just go with the simple draft. At some point clubs have to be responsible for thier own poor performance and recruiting.

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10636

Get rid of priority picks. Simple gone for ever.
Bring in zones where each club is allowed to pick one or two players every year from their zone and then the rest go into a draft. Draft to be run from last to first as current.
Salary Cap to be kept but no llimit on cap, ie. 95% should not be the minimum paid, idiotic rule.
Father Son rule to be kept and reduced to 50 games.

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10636

Also should add, force clubs like Kangaroos to merge before it's toooo late.

George Harris · **Posted:** Mon Sep 05, 2005 11:54 am

SurreyBlue wrote:

Get rid of priority picks. Simple gone for ever.
Bring in zones where each club is allowed to pick one or two players every year from their zone and then the rest go into a draft. Draft to be run from last to first as current.
Salary Cap to be kept but no llimit on cap, ie. 95% should not be the minimum paid, idiotic rule.
Father Son rule to be kept and reduced to 50 games.

Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.

Spot on.

bennyvtown · **Joined:** Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:01 pm **Posts:** 203

SurreyBlue wrote:

Also should add, force clubs like Kangaroos to merge before it's toooo late.

We'll probably be the ones that have to merge with them... :shock:

Everything else, as George said.. Spot on.

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10636

bennyvtown wrote:

SurreyBlue wrote:

Also should add, force clubs like Kangaroos to merge before it's toooo late.

We'll probably be the ones that have to merge with them... :shock:

Everything else, as George said.. Spot on.

Benny this might sound strange, but I think it would be a good merger.
Carlton Kangaroos.

Carlton get a mascot.
Carlton get away jumper. Would change the colors to NavyBlue ofcourse. :-D

Carlton get additional supporter base to work with.
Kangaroos get future and don't lose their identity with jumper/mascot.
AFL get one less team draining it's resources and inparticular one less Victorian team.

I don't know about others but have always been warm to this idea. Hopefully won't be shot down now.

Wild Blue Yonder · **Posted:** Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:55 pm

And what benefit is the merger bringing to Carlton.

12 fans?

MarkNo3 · **Posted:** Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:56 pm

SurreyBlue wrote:

bennyvtown wrote:

SurreyBlue wrote:

Also should add, force clubs like Kangaroos to merge before it's toooo late.

We'll probably be the ones that have to merge with them... :shock:

Everything else, as George said.. Spot on.

Benny this might sound strange, but I think it would be a good merger.
Carlton Kangaroos.

Carlton get a mascot.
Carlton get away jumper. Would change the colors to NavyBlue ofcourse. :-D

Carlton get additional supporter base to work with.
Kangaroos get future and don't lose their identity with jumper/mascot.
AFL get one less team draining it's resources and inparticular one less Victorian team.

I don't know about others but have always been warm to this idea. Hopefully won't be shot down now.

Hope you enjoy supporting this new side on your own.

TruBlueBrad · **Posted:** Tue Sep 06, 2005 1:14 pm

SurreyBlue wrote:

bennyvtown wrote:

SurreyBlue wrote:

Also should add, force clubs like Kangaroos to merge before it's toooo late.

We'll probably be the ones that have to merge with them... :shock:

Everything else, as George said.. Spot on.

Benny this might sound strange, but I think it would be a good merger.
Carlton Kangaroos.

Carlton get a mascot.
Carlton get away jumper. Would change the colors to NavyBlue ofcourse. :-D

Carlton get additional supporter base to work with.
Kangaroos get future and don't lose their identity with jumper/mascot.
AFL get one less team draining it's resources and inparticular one less Victorian team.

I don't know about others but have always been warm to this idea. Hopefully won't be shot down now.

John Elliott discussed the proposed merger with North Melbourne in his book (Yes I was the guy who bought a copy). Both in the late 80's when we bought share's and then again in the late 90's. The flag in 99 probably prevented it going even further.

The other thing he did was anticipate the problems we're having now with senior players after the new board were forced to ask them to alter their contracts.

Whether you like him or not its an interesting read.

GWS · **Posted:** Tue Sep 06, 2005 2:24 pm

TruBlueBrad wrote:

The other thing he did was anticipate the problems we're having now with senior players after the new board were forced to ask them to alter their contracts.

Whether you like him or not its an interesting read.

You would hope he would have anticipated some of the problems that he helped to create.

An interesting read if you like self-aggrandising fiction.

phoenix johnson · **Posted:** Tue Sep 06, 2005 2:25 pm

Actually I believe had Ron Casey not passed away, the Blues and Roos may have merged.
Apparently he was a big fan of both teams merging.

buzzaaaah · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:31 am **Posts:** 17893

Jarusa and KKs plans are not the same.

The problem I see with Jarusa plan is it obly penalises the teams that didnt tank. ie Carlton, Hawks and Pies still get the PPs but Essendon* which tried to win as many games as possible gets a shitty pick. Real incentive to win there
I think leave the order alone or adopt the Synbad//KK option 1 model but with a 2 year shitness rule. ie win less than 12 games over 2 years

killpies · **Posted:** Tue Sep 06, 2005 4:34 pm

For me:

Lottery for the bottom 8 teams(8 tickets for last, 7 for 15th, 6 for 14th etc) and the top 8 teams(same process for the top, more chance for the lower teams to get drawn first). No priority picks, or if they remain at all later in the round or 2nd round like KK's (tm :wink:

)suggestion.
No more tanking for anyone, only incentive is to tank to miss the finals and I don't think any club, coach, match commitee is evere going to go for that.

What would you like the AFL to do..........

Who is online