Whilst I totally agree with the crux of your argument about the 'welfare mentality', I really don't think that posters who want JV in the second round or don't think we should pick him at 3 unless we actually value him third best (or better) in the draft are necessarily exhibiting this mentality.

If he is not rated top 3, and we are forced to pick him there because another team is able to use of the vagaries of the father-son system against us, then what some have said here is true; we are going to be the first team ever to be disadvantaged by our own father-son pick in the draft! Fact! (and I'm not talking about what JV might end up being. Nobody knows that for sure. I'm saying, if he is rated 5 - 8 now (hypothetical, I know, but a reasonably accurate interpretation of everything that's been written about him by those who should know) and we pick him at 3, we are paying slightly overs). The fact that we would be paying slightly overs for a player that, historically speaking and by the nature and intention of the rule under which we are getting him, we should be getting at unders, is just further salt in the wound. No welfare mentality there. Just a legitimate gripe!

Even in this very same draft, another team is paying well-unders for a future father-son gun (Daniher). Imagine if the Bombers finished last and were forced to take him at pick 1, when he is generally rated around pick 2-5. They would be having the same conversation on BomberBlitz. They'd be livid that they aren't getting him in the second round. And I don't think anyone is suggesting that the have a welfare mentality over there.

I can see where you're coming from and respect your opinion but your central argument, I feel, further illustrates my point. The concern that "we are going to be the first team ever to be disadvantaged by our own father-son pick in the draft! Fact!" is indicative of our "poor bugger us" mindset. (What's your opinion on Ace Cordy?) The father son rule is relatively new to a very old game and the way I look at it a situation like this way always going to happen, of course it was, I just struggle to tolerate the some posters devastation that it has happened to us. The fact that some are unwilling to take him because we 'have to pay a little bit overs' is pathetic. This is a game and in games you play by the rules. I think it's great that we have access to JV and that we can trump other clubs if we want to.

We lost Scully and we got pick 4 and pick 13.

If we're forced to draft Viney at 3, we will still have pick 4 and pick 13.

How does logic seem to fail some people?

We got pick #4 and #13.

Then we get forced to use pick #3 on Viney (When he is not worth a top #3 pick by most accounts)

Therefore our pick #4 will be used on the #3 best kid. Resulting in only compensation pick #13 being left for Scully.

Therefore

A. No Scully ordeal and no F/S rule changes = Pick #3 + Scully + Viney

B. Scully ordeal and F/S rule changes = Pick #3 + Pick 13 + Viney + 3rd Round pick

A. Definitely looks better to me hence we got screwed again if Viney dosn't go as a 2nd rounder.

Edited September 13, 201212 yr by olisik

Couldn't be more spot on. If we are forced to take Viney at 3 so be it, this is the type of heart that the team needs & more importantly us supporters need. I can't imagine what would hurt more than seeing Viney in a Suns jumper driving a Melbourne player into the turf.

I know its draft tampering but if we really wanted to see Viney slip to 2nd round we should tell GC we will trade P3 or P4 for Caddy if they don't bid on Viney in the F/S noms. We then have P3 or P4 to on trade for a mini draft pick or just use in the ND.

But Caddy isn't worth P3 or P4.

So pay overs for Caddy so you can pay unders for Viney ?

We got pick #4 and #13.

Then we get forced to use pick #3 on Viney (When he is not worth a top #3 pick by most accounts)

Therefore our pick #4 will be used on the #3 best kid. Resulting in only compensation pick #13 being left for Scully.

Therefore

A. No Scully ordeal and no F/S rule changes = Pick #3 + Scully + Viney

B. Scully ordeal and F/S rule changes = Pick #3 + Pick 13 + Viney

A. Definitely looks better to me hence we got screwed again if Viney dosn't go as a 2nd rounder.

FUBAR

FUBAR

Naive

If Gold Coast nominate him at 2 he wont be coming to Melbourne, I can't see Melbourne giving up pick 3 for him

If Gold Coast nominate him at 2 he wont be coming to Melbourne, I can't see Melbourne giving up pick 3 for him

about as illogical a suggestion as Ive seen

We got pick #4 and #13.

Then we get forced to use pick #3 on Viney (When he is not worth a top #3 pick by most accounts)

Therefore our pick #4 will be used on the #3 best kid. Resulting in only compensation pick #13 being left for Scully.

Therefore

A. No Scully ordeal and no F/S rule changes = Pick #3 + Scully + Viney

B. Scully ordeal and F/S rule changes = Pick #3 + Pick 13 + Viney + 3rd Round pick

A. Definitely looks better to me hence we got screwed again if Viney dosn't go as a 2nd rounder.

FFS watch him play and I mean watch his attack at the ball, he is everything our previous draft c%#k ups aren't, and I think the key indicators for new targets via the draft will be

Hunger

Hardness

Desire

Work Ethic

Tick all these boxes and you are coming to us

FFS watch him play and I mean watch his attack at the ball, he is everything our previous draft c%#k ups aren't, and I think the key indicators for new targets via the draft will be

Hunger

Hardness

Desire

Work Ethic

Tick all these boxes and you are coming to us

Settle down, I wasn't giving an opinion whether we should take him at #3 or not. I was just doing a bit of Mathes to highlight how crap our Scully compo could end up being.

We should just thank god that BP is no longer around as he would definitely pass on Viney for a skinny classy mid instead.

Edited September 13, 201212 yr by olisik

I can understand what Olisik is saying, ideally the club wants it to be 3,4,13, Viney, this is a great result for the club basically giving us 4 top 13 picks. However the MFC will use Pick 3 on Viney if they have to, there is no question about that. It isn't worth worrying about, we will use the pick we have to to get Jack Viney and come round 1 we will all be extremely glad he is playing for us.

We got pick #4 and #13.

Then we get forced to use pick #3 on Viney (When he is not worth a top #3 pick by most accounts)

Therefore our pick #4 will be used on the #3 best kid. Resulting in only compensation pick #13 being left for Scully.

Therefore

A. No Scully ordeal and no F/S rule changes = Pick #3 + Scully + Viney

B. Scully ordeal and F/S rule changes = Pick #3 + Pick 13 + Viney + 3rd Round pick

A. Definitely looks better to me hence we got screwed again if Viney dosn't go as a 2nd rounder.

You do realise that the rules have been changed for about 5 years?

Here is some more pointless logic hypotheticals:

With HWFUA -

A: HWFUA, Viney, Pick 30.

B: HWFUA, Pick 3, Viney

Without HWFUA -

C: Viney, Pick 4, Pick 13, Pick 30

D: Pick 3, Pick 4, Pick 13, Viney.

So the difference between the 'terrible scenarios of taking Viney at 3' of A and C is:

Lose: HWFUA

Gain: Pick 4 and 13

Huh.

That's our compensation for losing HWFUA...

Odd that.

The F/S rule changes have basically diminished our Scully compo drastically imo.

Settle down, I wasn't giving an opinion whether we should take him at #3 or not. I was just doing a bit of Mathes to highlight how crap our Scully compo could end up being.

We should just thank god that BP is no longer around as he would definitely pass on Viney for a skinny classy mid instead.

You're as good at maths as you are at spelling it!

If GC think Viney is worth pick 2, why wouldn't we take him with pick 3?

Think we need to forget he's a father/son and remember he looks like being a bloody good player.

Or....aren't we better off trading pick 4 for Caddy on the proviso they don't nominate Viney.

That way we get Toumpas ,Caddy and Viney

Or....aren't we better off trading pick 4 for Caddy on the proviso they don't nominate Viney.

That way we get Toumpas ,Caddy and Viney

Caddy is no where near worth pick 4. I'd take hogan at 4 and viney where ever we have to. Caddy at 13 I don't mind

Or....aren't we better off trading pick 4 for Caddy on the proviso they don't nominate Viney.

That way we get Toumpas ,Caddy and Viney

GC would need to throw in some sweeteners. Id be happy with Caddy and their 2nd rounder for pick #4

Honestly I am against using 'Do not bid for Viney' clause.

Or....aren't we better off trading pick 4 for Caddy on the proviso they don't nominate Viney.

That way we get Toumpas ,Caddy and Viney

Why the eff would we give GC pick 4 for caddy!? He was pick 7 and he has hardly played any games. Id give them pick 13 and Petterd and say eat my left one moochacho

The F/S rule changes have basically diminished our Scully compo drastically imo.

This does not compute. It's completely flawed logic. Olie, you need to take some ammonia smelling salts in a hurry. They'll jerk your head back in no time.

And as Stuie correctly pointed out, even if the Suns are wanting to keep us honest they wouldn't be bidding for Viney unless they consider him a clear top 5 pick and a player they'd like to get their hands on. It would be a definitive statement as to his worth, as opposed to the guess work of many on here.

This does not compute. It's completely flawed logic. Olie, you need to take some ammonia smelling salts in a hurry. They'll jerk your head back in no time.

And as Stuie correctly pointed out, even if the Suns are wanting to keep us honest they wouldn't be bidding for Viney unless they consider him a clear top 5 pick and a player they'd like to get their hands on. It would be a definitive statement as to his worth, as opposed to the guess work of many on here.

Look at the overall picture.

1. We get compo picks

2. Rule diminishes original early pick

3. Compo picks need to cover for the loss of original early pick therefore diminishing its value as it is no longer an extra. It is just basically replacing a pick that we have lost due to the F/S rule.

Its not that hard to understand. This is all in response to someone earlier saying we were over compensated. In my eyes I don't think we were. I think we were under compensated due to it being diminished.

Edited September 13, 201212 yr by olisik

Caddy is third behind Ablett and Bennell for possessions at the Suns.

Experts think he will become a top liner .

He will also be more mature and ready made next year...ready to go the next step.

Totally agree! All these other clubs dont want us to be in this golden position we are in..too bad so sad...theres always ways around these situations...we will see wont we..

I really want Viney but MFC know best,end of story.

in which case crows bid pick 2 for viney? (or does the timetable not suit?)

Go Demons - Sounds like we re into Caddy in a major way. Gold Coast not happy and trying to exert some pre-draft leverage - hence the leak to Emma. Here we come.

Go Dees!!!!!!

Edited September 13, 201212 yr by Rassilon

If GC think Viney is worth pick 2, why wouldn't we take him with pick 3?

Think we need to forget he's a father/son and remember he looks like being a bloody good player.

yep..hence my comment a bit further up...made no sense . if worth 2 then surely 3 !!

Id like to sell bridges to some folks here

I'll be a member of the club that Jack Viney is playing at next year, there's only 2 possible outcomes:

1. We take JV at 3 because GWS or GC forced us to

2. We take JV in the 2nd round because we've done a deal with GWS and/or GC