As long as it doesn't happen in 2008, 2009!

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tab...px?newsId=67128

Currently the priority pick system sees teams that win less than five games receive an extra selection before the second round, and teams that win less than eight matches over two years receive a pick before round one of the draft.

For those of you working it out. In order for Melbourne or West Coast to receive a priority pick before Round 1, Melbourne would have to win 4 or less games next year, West Coast 3 or less games next year.

Fremantle and Port Adelaide can only afford to win 1 game next year in order to receive a Priority Pick. That won't happen.

Oh..isnt that crafty of Vlad's littel puppy !! They'll linitially 'suspend" the P-Picks.. but with no intention of returning them I sense. This solves the 'tanking" dilemma fo them..whilst also crippling teams into submission with respect to "have we got a deal for you " !!.. a little thing called relocation etc.

All part of Vlad's great plan no doubt !!

We should tell Jack Watts to chill out for another year - finish his studies then TANK OUR [censored] OFF next year, win under four games and take him with our priority pick. Taking Rich or NikNat this year. One more year of pain and we should be ok for the 4-5 years of GC welfare. Our timing is perfect.

We should tell Jack Watts to chill out for another year - finish his studies then TANK OUR [censored] OFF next year, win under four games and take him with our priority pick. Taking Rich or NikNat this year. One more year of pain and we should be ok for the 4-5 years of GC welfare. Our timing is perfect.

This suggestion you put forward has merit - if a club insists on fast tracking rebuilding by the addition of quality players through the draft.

We should tell Jack Watts to chill out for another year - finish his studies then TANK OUR [censored] OFF next year, win under four games and take him with our priority pick. Taking Rich or NikNat this year. One more year of pain and we should be ok for the 4-5 years of GC welfare. Our timing is perfect.

As long as you're prepared to chip in the $2m which will be required to keep us afloat after another year of onfield pain!!! :angry:

As long as you're prepared to chip in the $2m which will be required to keep us afloat after another year of onfield pain!!! :angry:

Reducing the TPP to 92.5%, and retirements, and cost cutting around the club in Administration and watching what we are spending, with the exclusion of the football department and memberships around the 29-30,000 mark again should ensure we stay afloat.

This suggestion you put forward has merit - if a club insists on fast tracking rebuilding by the addition of quality players through the draft.

This suggestion has absolutely no merit!!! Carlton have received 3 consecutive no. 1 draftees plus Stevens & Judd, and still can't make the finals. They've fast-tracked to where?

As Paul Roos stated in a Caroline Wilson article on Wednesday, "there is no blueprint for winning a grand final". And he scoffs at teams that bottom out.

Reducing the TPP to 92.5%, and retirements, and cost cutting around the club in Administration and watching what we are spending, with the exclusion of the football department and memberships around the 29-30,000 mark again should ensure we stay afloat.

No major sponsor and a reduction of corporate sales will far outweigh any penny-pinching that we might do within administration and the football dept.

This suggestion has absolutely no merit!!! Carlton have received 3 consecutive no. 1 draftees plus Stevens & Judd, and still can't make the finals. They've fast-tracked to where?

As Paul Roos stated in a Caroline Wilson article on Wednesday, "there is no blueprint for winning a grand final". And he scoffs at teams that bottom out.

They've fast tracked from Wooden Spoon to finishing one maybe 2 games from the eight, and on the rise with development. That's where.

On the back of three key players in Murphy, Gibbs and Judd. Well four, Fevola.

Our list requires plenty of replenishment and plenty of development. If you think otherwise you are a fool!

To be honest...if we cant haul our arses off the bottom next year.. we really ought to give it all away. Many of the list cloggers will be gone. Younger legs will be biggerand fitter. Some genuine talent wil be more experienced and a bit of excitement with some decent picks comig up.

We are in the box seat in a fashion to lift off. If we cant do it next year with the picks at hand. then we wont certainly after. All teams face the 'drought'..we have a head start on rebuilding.

We needed to bottom this year..no question about it.. but any talk of continuing this trend in order to furnish some ridiclous idea that finishing last all the time is a "good' thing needs to finish.

We wont be world beaters next year..but we wont be floor mops either.

its NOW time to stop talking about LOSING..and start thingking about WINNING

We will probably be one of the last teams ( outside of the favouritsm of the AFL ) to get a decent crack at players. lets just choose well and get on with it

No major sponsor and a reduction of corporate sales will far outweigh any penny-pinching that we might do within administration and the football dept.

It's been reported that they will not cost cut in the football department for next year.

They've fast tracked from Wooden Spoon to finishing one maybe 2 games from the eight, and on the rise with development. That's where.

Our list requires plenty of replenishment and plenty of development. If you think otherwise you are a fool!

Thats right, the Carlton and Hawthorn model works, its just the Carlton are [censored] at it. Lets watch them improve to around 9th next year then start to plateau out.

we need pick 1 this year plus another couple of very high picks next year to add to Morton, Grimes, Mclean.

Make no doubt about it, we follow this model and we will build a top 4 side.

They've fast tracked from Wooden Spoon to finishing one maybe 2 games from the eight, and on the rise with development. That's where.

Our list requires plenty of replenishment and plenty of development. If you think otherwise you are a fool!

So Carlton spending 4 out of 5 years in the bottom 2 is fast tracking?

After 2006, I would have preferred us to have taken the course that clubs like Geelong, Sydney, Adelaide and North Melbourne did, which was replenish via astute drafting/trading, rather than bottom out.

So Carlton spending 4 out of 5 years in the bottom 2 is fast tracking?

After 2006, I would have preferred us to have taken the course that clubs like Geelong, Sydney, Adelaide and North Melbourne did, which was replenish via astute drafting/trading, rather than bottom out.

Carlton were an absolute basket case for a number of years based on draft penalties from salary cap breaches. Pagan brought in very average used players such as Daniel Harford, Digby Morrell, & Co. They began two years ago really with the addition of Murphy. It's taken two and a half years to get where they are now.

I would have preferred the same course too you mention but our recruiting and development is streets behind those clubs you mention unfortunately.

whilst also crippling teams into submission with respect to "have we got a deal for you " !!.. a little thing called relocation etc.

If teams are 'crippled into submission' because of a lack of PP pick, I'd suggest that it's merely the straw that breaks the camel's back.

If teams are 'crippled into submission' because of a lack of PP pick, I'd suggest that it's merely the straw that breaks the camel's back.

very probably...but it does become a very handy tool of leverage for the AFL...no ?

very probably...but it does become a very handy tool of leverage for the AFL...no ?

Let's hope A.Anderson and Vlad never use that tool.

After 2006, I would have preferred us to have taken the course that clubs like Geelong, Sydney, Adelaide and North Melbourne did, which was replenish via astute drafting/trading, rather than bottom out.

Which trades and drafts would have prevented us from 1) injuries we faced in 2007 2) the collapse of the form of core champions Neitz, White 3) a Coach is his last year and chance at a flag and 4) the substantial lack of leadership and culture at the Club?

The seeds to this problem were sown a couple of years before.

By the start of 2007 bottoming out was not a choice, it was an outcome and result of the decision made earlier.

A lot of talk seems centred around the notion that we have no real talent what so ever !! I find this amazing really. Success and talent though bedfellows arent necessarily related ( that all sounds so wrong..and isnt a cue for discussion about a Tassie team.. )

As RR alludes..the seeds of our demise were not particulalry about our slections at the draft and trade table but more about the storms and unsettling climate of indifference that beleagured our club.

The old guard is all but gone now...some wil see this as lamentable..personally Im excited as a result. These kids really have to step up..and there will always be those that seize such an opportunity.

Does expansion threaten picks?? Probably does...this is the case for everyone surely. Is this a set back for us in particular ? I dont see why..not unless all we ever aim to achieve is teh first pick each year..that and bonus lolllies for being totally inept.

I'm fairly certtain the Football dept arent focussing on the "rewards" of failure..more the path to success.

very probably...but it does become a very handy tool of leverage for the AFL...no ?

I don't think so.

Currently the priority pick system sees teams that win less than five games receive an extra selection before the second round, and teams that win less than eight matches over two years receive a pick before round one of the draft.

For those of you working it out. In order for Melbourne or West Coast to receive a priority pick before Round 1, Melbourne would have to win 4 or less games next year, West Coast 3 or less games next year.

Fremantle and Port Adelaide can only afford to win 1 game next year in order to receive a Priority Pick. That won't happen.

Wrong! West coast are not eligable, you must win 4 games or less in both years, thus the reason why we dont get pick 1 and 2 this year even though we only won 8 games over two years

Wrong! West coast are not eligable, you must win 4 games or less in both years, thus the reason why we dont get pick 1 and 2 this year even though we only won 8 games over two years

I didn't say West Coast are eligible this year, twit! It's dependant what happens with them next year, read the post AGAIN.

So Tara Murray exclusively reporting for the AFL for afl.com.au is wrong, is she? Read the article attched at the top of the thread and get back to me. If you have any trouble, it's the last paragraph.

I didn't say West Coast are eligible this year, twit! It's depenant what happens with them next year, read the post AGAIN.

I think Bruce Almighty understands your assertion - he simply stated that WCE will not be eligible for a #1 PP if they win eight or less games over the two years, as they've won more than four this year.

My understanding is that you need to have won four or less games in two successive years, as Bruce Almight indicates.

I think the Dees have won just eight games over two years, but don't receive a #1 PP as we haven't won four or less in both years (we won five last year).

I think Bruce Almighty understands your assertion - he simply stated that WCE will not be eligible for a #1 PP if they win eight or less games over the two years, as they've won more than four this year.

West Coast had 4 wins this year.