PRIORITY MICK

[Tony Tea 2,800]

In today's Australian, Mick Malthouse on tanking:

Stamp out priority draft picks

IT's time for the ugliest word in football to rear its head again.

The top sides have September on their minds; the middling outfits are focused on that, too, but down at the bottom of the ladder, it's priority draft picks and next year that are starting to becomes the issues.

Allegations of tanking - the word the AFL doesn't want you to hear - are about to be in the news again.

It must have slipped Mick's mind that in 2005 Collingwood was a beneficiary of the priority pick system. (2005 draft) I mean, he wouldn't leave that fact out intentionally, would he?

Collingwood picked Dale Thomas with pick two and Scott Pendlebury with pick five.

Mick must have also been unaware that during the Friday night match of round 21 in 2005 (the "whispers in the sky" match when Freo played St Kilda) Eddie McGuire, who was at Subi for Nine commentary duties, was in the press-box boasting "If we lose tomorrow, we'll be singing the song - don't you worry about that."

Collingwood duly lost the next day (to Adelaide in Melbourne, and by a whopping 110 points) to secure a priority pick by making sure that they couldn't win more than the five matches that were the cut-off point at the time.

Edited July 11, 2009 by Godemons

[rusty_kingswood 0]

Mick is a Moron.

However, I do agree in part. The system needs to change.

As long as the AFL continues to burry its head int he sand about this issue, 'tanking' is never going to go away.

I think the priority pick needs to go......so long as it isnt effective immediatly.

[biggestred 4,769]

the system needs to change, and i think everyone knows it. but the question is, what system do you put in?

i wouldnt mind if they went, ok you guys finished bottom 8, lets work out your average ladder positions over the last 5 years, oh yeah melbourne, 6, 6, 14, 16, 16 (or whatever), you guys have been [censored], you can have pick 1, west coast you have been top 4, 2, 1, 15, 13 (or whatever), you can have pick 2, kangas your average position is better again, so you can have pick 3. etc. just an idea.

i certainly think it needs to be over a longer period than just 1 or two years. its pretty clear that the race is on between richmond, us, wce and the roos to get shitty results and therefore draft picks this year.

Edited July 11, 2009 by Benno

[e25 5]

Mick is a Moron.

Mick is one of the best coaches in the AFL, although it'd be interesting to see what any other coach would do with all of Collingwood's resources.

What Mick says is self-serving and club-serving and so it should be.

If Bailey says anything that is only in the interests of both himself and MFC then I'd certainly support him.

He's just stirring the pot.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Mick is a Moron.

However, I do agree in part. The system needs to change.

As long as the AFL continues to burry its head int he sand about this issue, 'tanking' is never going to go away.

I think the priority pick needs to go......so long as it isnt effective immediatly.

I don't think the priority pick is the problem, but the fact that it's too easy to achieve, & by multiple teams.

The priority pick is there as a tonic for down & almost out clubs that have found themselves in quicksand. This is an important aid that should be kept but yet modified.

As they say, don't throw the baby out with the dirty bathwater.

I think it needs to be changed to make it less appertizing to those who would abuse the system.

Maybe there should only be 2 priority picks available, or/& harsher restrictions on them. 4 wins is too easy, to avail a pick before the draft.

If there were only 2 picks available @ the end of the first Round for 2 teams who failed to win more than 4 games.

A priority pick should not be available @ the beginning of the draft unless a side won less than 3 games two years in a row.

Also there has been ideas suggested about a lottery for say the bottom 5 teams draft order. I think this could help as well. When an outright superstar kid is on the horizon the clubs know all about it. The lottery stops the certainty of this stuff.

Edited July 11, 2009 by dee-luded

[BAMF 4,080]

Mick is completley right.

I want the best for the club. I want those picks. But realisticly I havent been able to truly enjoy a win for 2 seasons now.

The system needs to change.

Just make it next year!

[Dannyz 2,546]

Mick is completley right.

I want the best for the club. I want those picks. But realisticly I havent been able to truly enjoy a win for 2 seasons now.

The system needs to change.

Just make it next year!

At this stage, I think getting a winning culture into our young boys is the most beneficial thing for them. After all, we all love winning and its many benefits.

but in our position I agree. The picks are just so vital, most importantly tieing up Scully. Who'd of thought 10 years ago, we'd be supporting the Melbourne Football Club to an honourable loss?

Edited July 11, 2009 by Dannyz

[e25 5]

At this stage, I think getting a winning culture into our young boys is the most beneficial thing for them. After all, we all love winning and its many benefits.

but in our position I agree. The picks are just so vital, most importantly tieing up Scully. Who'd of thought 10 years ago, we'd be supporting the Melbourne Football Club to an honourable loss?

Once again, with feeling -- the need to develop a winning culture is a fallacy.

The team will win when it is good enough to win, its that simple.

[Pepe Dee Pew 0]

This is our 3rd crap season in a row and no flag since 64.

We deserve a priority pick.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Mick is one of the best coaches in the AFL, although it'd be interesting to see what any other coach would do with all of Collingwood's resources.

What Mick says is self-serving and club-serving and so it should be.

If Bailey says anything that is only in the interests of both himself and MFC then I'd certainly support him.

He's just stirring the pot.

Once again, with feeling -- the need to develop a winning culture is a fallacy.

The team will win when it is good enough to win, its that simple.

Agree with both of those.

The best way to develop a winning culture is to develop a team that is good enough to win.

[Dannyz 2,546]

Agree with both of those.

The best way to develop a winning culture is to develop a team that is good enough to win.

What result are you hoping for tomorrow and will you be at the game Rhino?

[praha 11,100]

The entire AFL is in the stone ages. No free agency is the biggest joke imo. If you have a decent salary cap and enforce strict minimum percentage salary cap restrictions, no one team would be out of favour (pending teams like Melbourne fix up their training venue debacles to attract free agents and re-sign players).

It should be a lottery system. The bottom 8 teams are all entered into a lottery, with the lower based teams having a higher chance of winning. So if you finish 16th, you get 3000 balls in the lottery. 15th get 1000 balls, 14th get 900 balls, 13th get 800 balls and so on, so at least then 16th still has the best chance (by far) to get the No. 1 pick, but any other of the bottom 8 teams also have a chance. If you win less than 5 games over 2 years, you get two positions in the lottery, and the 9th placed team gets the 9th pick as opposed to the 8th.

[45HG 1,539]

That system would give them the best chance out of any individual team to get the 1st pick, but less than a 50% chance overall.

[Sir Why You Little 36,585]

Mick is a Moron.

Mick is not a moron at all, infact he is highly astute & just talking about what WE HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL YEAR!!

The system is wrong but while it exists we should take advantage of it as ALL clubs have done in the past.

I want DEEP september action from next year onwards...

[biggestred 4,769]

perhaps they should total the amount of wins over 5 years, then give number 1 to the worst team over 5 years.

and if you total below 20 over 5 years you get a priority for example

[BAMF 4,080]

perhaps they should total the amount of wins over 5 years, then give number 1 to the worst team over 5 years.

and if you total below 20 over 5 years you get a priority for example

Over 5 years might be a bit long. I think they should scrap the 2nd round priority pick.

Calabreseboy lottery system also makes a lot of sense to me. Is that the NBA draft system?

[biggestred 4,769]

perhaps 3 years then.

and im not talking about priority picks here, im talking about the whole order of the draft.

say you finish 16th, 16h and 14th, youve still been the worst team over 3 years, so you deserve pick 1. perhaps youve finished 1st then 16th and 16th, well you havent been the worst team over 3 years, but youve been 2nd worst, then you get the 2nd best pick. and so on.

challenge for top 4 four years in a row and you get the worst pick. play in 3 grand finals in a row and you clearly dont need a bloody decent draft pick anyway.

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

A coach with an agenda. Who would have thunk it.

[Demondeb 8]

It has been suggested by my good mate Tarax, that to stop the tanking argument, the first pick should go to the team with the highest percentage at the end of round 22 ( from the teams in the bottom four, six or eight). This way each team will be busting a gut to score well and win and still have a chance at #1.

Fortunately for us, this will not happen this year but its not a bad idea.

What do you guys think?

[george_on_the_outer 7,418]

The lottery ball system suggested by Calabrese Boy works and works well in the NBA,NFL.

Vlad and the AFL won't introduce it because it wasn't their idea and no-one tanks in any case do they?

[praha 11,100]

Yaha, lottery system used in the US.

[e25 5]

What result are you hoping for tomorrow and will you be at the game Rhino?

Not sure about Rhino, but I was at the game and I hated it.

The priority pick rule needs to be abolished.

I spent the whole second half of the game feeling sick and disinterested as we were keeping the power at arms length, only really taking notice with excitement when Port threatened to close the gap.

I'm disgusted with myself and couldn't even bring myself to sing the team song.

This is not football as I know it or want it.

Having said that, I did notice that when a clear option was not provided we made much better decisions with the football, kicking it to the right spots or to advantage.

This team is getting closer to being good enough to win games, but PA were insipid today and a good team should have buried them.

This only reinforced for me the need to get a priority pick so that our list has the tools to become an elite performer.

[e25 5]

And I don't think we need the lottery system; we just need to abolish the priority pick.

One pick alone is not enough reason to tank.

Edited July 12, 2009 by Enforcer25

[45HG 1,539]

The priority pick rule needs to be abolished.

I spent the whole second half of the game feeling sick and disinterested as we were keeping the power at arms length, only really taking notice with excitement when Port threatened to close the gap.

I'm disgusted with myself and couldn't even bring myself to sing the team song.

This is not football as I know it or want it.

Spot on (in a "ditto" type fashion)

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,748]

Not sure about Rhino, but I was at the game and I hated it.

Exactly my sentiments, "Enforcer".