GC17 names top pick ahead of time

[The O 39]

Well may you laugh but you're contradicting yourself. No club has been able to announce the #1 pick in the past but that's changed now. Not only that but GC17 have the the opportunity to train up their player while we can't do the same with Scully. Tell me we wouldn't gain from giving him training and guidance over those five weeks.

In any event, it's clearly discriminatory  to give GC17 the right to do this while other clubs can't!

Alpha, you just don't get it, do you? Comparing the GC17 and MFC is completely pointless.

You say that announcing the No 1 pick has changed. Really?? Maybe you should tell the AFL, the MFC and our other members. The fact is it hasn't changed. The AFL regards the draft as the centrepiece of their off-season, with enormous media exposure being drawn to who is the No 1 pick, so why would they allow the draft to be spoilt. The announcement of a GC17 player in the 2010 draft is a seperate issue with seperate rules. As both the GC17 and GWS deservedly so require concessions.

You're assuming Scully is taken as the No 1 pick (and that's debateable) as I wouldn't be surprised if the MFC picked Trengove @ No 1. So assuming we can announce whomever as our No 1 pick, why stop there? Why not announce the No 2 pick, and then Richmond can announce their No 3 and so.... eventually they'll be no need for a draft, rather clubs simply announce who they'll all take prior to the draft via the media.

You suggest we would gain something from having him train and receive guidance by the club over these 5 weeks. How delusional are you. In a hypothetical world assuming we could announce and take Scully and that he could attend training, how much time is the No 1 draftee going to be able to attend training now that he is in the midst of VCE exams/study. Absolutely none is my answer. Let these draftees finish of their schooling without additional unwanted distractions. On the alternative if we draft Trengove at No 1, do we take him out of school and let him complete his exams in melb? I think not.

Edited October 22, 2009 by The O

[beelzebub 23,382]

Im with Alpha here.. As we DO have both 1 and 2..and the club KNOWS who its picking.. then how is it that radically different from the GC KNOWING who it is taking at 3..?? It clearly gets to double dip its advantaged concession here. A bit much for mine unless whats good for the goose is good for us too !!

You suggest we would gain something from having him train and receive guidance by the club over these 5 weeks. How delusional are you

of course there would be gains.. its ridiculous to suggest otherwise. or why else are we as a team starting early?? Its the same reasoning. The earlier and better you train the better the outcome. A real problem in many respects is that draftees come into the program much later than the rest of the team. This could be avoided. easily The club just announces its picks ( 1 and 2 ) and gets on with it.. They will in reality start a little later in many instances because of exams etc but some modified programs ought to be introduced as early as possible.

No one in there right mind spends every hour on swat-vac studying.. some balance and exercise is actually beneficial..so why not in accordance with a team's program?

The AFL is full of sh!t when it comes to its own rules about what is right and wrong. It makes most up along the way to suit itself. The game has and will evolve off field. The draft..and its public face will change also in line with expectations of all parties and the simple requirements of participants to be involved without delay.

The draft could in fact be brought forward 5-6 weeks, maybe that would resolve things

[tess 19]

He's certainly in the "Scully" bracket. He's a proven performer as a 16yr old in the WAFL against grown men. I'd content that he would have been a certainty to be a top 5 pick in this year draft if eligible.

Agreed.

Not only was he playing against men but he was averaging 20 + possessions and looked very comfortable.

[The O 39]

Im with Alpha here.. As we DO have both 1 and 2..and the club KNOWS who its picking.. then how is it that radically different from the GC KNOWING who it is taking at 3..??

Belzebub, how is it different? It's a completely different draft. We're talking this years draft in 2009 for MFC picks and next years in 2010 for GC's. Swallow is 16yrs old and not eligible for this year draft. Nor will he be able to play in the AFL next year, Scully and Trengove are able to. The new GC17 club hasn't got the infrastructure, nor the development and structure in place to compare with the MFC. We're comparing a club that has a history of over 150 years with one which has around for 150 days. The GC need all the help they can in developing and promoting the game in Qld, and if picking a 16yr old kid to spend 12mths ahead is going to be seen as favoritism, them get used to seeing a lot more for the GC and GWS.

No one in there right mind spends every hour on swat-vac studying.. some balance and exercise is actually beneficial..so why not in accordance with a team's program?

I agree that there is time for balance and exercise in a kids life, although I think the AFL have set a good precendent (rightly or wrongly) by ensuring that draftees complete their schooling before being drafted. Whilst any potential draftee could get some training and development mapped out for the future development, the AFL makes the rules and everyone is expected to adhere to them. Why should the MFC be the only club to benefit? Because of our position in the draft? You're delusional if you think we should be the only club to get the benefit.

The AFL is full of sh!t when it comes to its own rules about what is right and wrong. It makes most up along the way to suit itself. The game has and will evolve off field. The draft..and its public face will change also in line with expectations of all parties and the simple requirements of participants to be involved without delay.

The draft could in fact be brought forward 5-6 weeks, maybe that would resolve things

Maybe bringing the draft forward would resolve the anxiety, but I think it's the last thing these draftees need to be thinking about. Although feel free to disagree. Whilst many pundits seem to know who will be picked at 1 or 2, this isn't the case normally with the draft and the uncertainty as to who a club is going to pick only adds to many supporters excitement.

[Tatu 416]

Belzebub, how is it different? It's a completely different draft. We're talking this years draft in 2009 for MFC picks and next years in 2010 for GC's. Swallow is 16yrs old and not eligible for this year draft. Nor will he be able to play in the AFL next year, Scully and Trengove are able to. The new GC17 club hasn't got the infrastructure, nor the development and structure in place to compare with the MFC. We're comparing a club that has a history of over 150 years with one which has around for 150 days. The GC need all the help they can in developing and promoting the game in Qld, and if picking a 16yr old kid to spend 12mths ahead is going to be seen as favoritism, them get used to seeing a lot more for the GC and GWS.

Why don't the AFL, just hand over the 2014 premiership cup to the GCFC now? might speed up development.

Edited October 22, 2009 by tatu

[beelzebub 23,382]

I think the point A33 and i are getting at is .. how is it OK for GC to infer..let alone SAY anything concrete about a draft. ?

Its only a different draft in that GC can make no claims to this years.. but none the less they are announcing exactly who they are taking with a pick..and that is absolutely flying in the face of the instructions to the other clubs regarding this years ( draft ).

So agree or not..there seems to be two sets of standards here.

I would proffer the following regarding bringing forward the draft. Whilst things are 'secret' and unknown for many players awaiting draft selection that I would think would have a much bigger effect on any studying and resulting academic performances than actually already knowing where you are going and able to put that aside for a time. I.e it would put that issue to bed so to speak.

[The O 39]

I agree Bub that it may be a bit inconsistent about saying who a club is going to draft, however I'd personally much rather know in advance who the GC and also GWS are planning to draft as it narrows down our available choices. In the upcoming drafts where both clubs will have a long list of picks, by reducing the available unknown selections gives us a greater idea of who's available to be chosen in draft.

The reason I'm all for the GC and GWS announcing players in advance is that compared with other new clubs coming into the competition (ala Brisbane Bears, West Coast, Fremantle, Adel & Port) both these new clubs have the inherent problem of few if any local talent to nuture and develop to create a team. Having personally played in the NSW league years ago and having most recently spent 2 years in QAFL, their talent and player development falls a long way short of other leagues. Both the GC and GWS are starting from scratch and don't have the luxury of the WAFL or SAFL to create a list and I feel they need as much exposure and development to create interest (especially amongst juniors) otherwise they may be the basket cases of the competition for years to come.

[beelzebub 23,382]

OK..I'm with you in that they are differing circumstances regarding the nature of drafting..( all announcements aside..lol ) They have quite different backyards in which to play compared to ours ( or indeed established footy locales)

I had the pleasure of playing footy in Western Sydney in 1971-2 ( high school ) and I would have been more 'normal' had I been from mars !! so I understand the nature of the beast. It does serve well to know who is going where..and ahead of time. Others can dance around this and make amends etc..

So the crux of the matters tends to promotion, exposure, validity etc. I think the AFL really needs to address this in a much more compensating manner than at present.

[Akum 2,660]

If GC17 & probably GWS are going to be able to announce their high picks well ahead of time in the next few drafts, then that's likely to set a precedent for the years following too.

I thought at the time that televising the draft on a weeknight & counting down the last 10 picks was a bit much. It now seems that this spectacle is going to last exactly one draft. Which is probably a good thing.