"pulling names out of a hat system" could work with a bit of tweaking...maybe for each concurrent season your team doesn't win 5 games you get an extra "ticket"

so when GWS don't win a game for the season they would have 2picks before finalists, then in 2013 when the get a doughnut again they would have 3 etc etc.

whereas a team like the suns because they already sucked last year would have the extra pick already for next year but after the 2013 season when they have 6-8 wins they would drop back to only having the 1first round pick

EDIT- "When the league last looked at the issue, in 2009, consideration was given to lengthening out the qualifying period for priority picks or giving the AFL discretion to hand out picks."

PLEASE GOD NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LIKE THE ADMIN NEED TO STICK THEIR NOSES IN ANY FURTHER!!!!!!

The priority pick has been used and abused by a number of AFL clubs since inception and should be scrapped. At best, give those that qualify a selection at the beginning of the second round but nothing more. That way the tanking debate is eliminated and Demetriou stops looking like an imbecile when he announces in mid-August that clubs don't tank.

Recent experience shows that getting priority picks doesn't necessarily mean securing long term elite players.

If it is the case that Bailey essentially tanked in order to secure higher draft picks, I hope history shows that we used those draft picks as effectively as possible.

Because losing so many games over such a long period of time has to have a very negative impact on the culture of a club.

I don't think this would work, even for a pick 11 let alone a 19. Picks 10 - 20 are littered with failures and average AFL players whereas you're close to guaranteed a gun with pick 1 - 4.

I don't think the mini-lottery would work either as clubs on the fringe of the bottom group would still tank for it.

If the priority pick stays, I think the only viable solution is for the AFL to form a sub-committee which reviews struggling clubs each season and awards the pick at its discretion. I don't see another way.

Not quite.

Depends on your definition of gun, of course, but only going back as far as 1998...

Koschitzke, Luke Livingston, Justin Longmuir, Nic Fosdike, Ryan Fitzgerald, Wells, Brennan, Tim Walsh, Tambling, Fiora, Ellis, Andrew Walker, Farren Ray, Hansen, Gumbleton, Masten (early), Morton (early)...

The draft is littered with top 4 players that promised much and largely failed to deliver.

Some seem to have of late, but took 8 years to do so.

Even in the 2001 superdraft of 2001, Graham Polak went at number 4.

He was ok pre-tram incident, but I'd never have called him a gun.

Not a player to re-build a list around.

You may think recruiting has improved, and it has, but the only drafts without top 4 "failures" (not "guns") are far too early to judge.

Recent experience shows that getting priority picks doesn't necessarily mean securing long term elite players.

There's not many misses in this list going back 10 years ...

Scully, Kruezer, Murphy, Thomas, Ellis, Deledio, Roughead, Griffen, Cooney, Walker, Sylvia, Hodge, Ball, Judd

No Dean coached within the rules of HQ. That's what makes it interesting.

And under instruction of Stynes, McLardy and the Board.

I don't think teams would tank a finals appearance to retain a late first round pick.....or would they?

thoughts

Like the PP, there is an incentive if they do. And that is wrong

If you had a chance of limping into 8th position with an injury riddled team or got pick 9 in an uber draft what would you do? If you did not tank you might be tempted. And if you were honestly flogged in R22 and fell out of the 8, would there be a smear on you?

The priority pick has been used and abused by a number of AFL clubs since inception and should be scrapped. At best, give those that qualify a selection at the beginning of the second round but nothing more. That way the tanking debate is eliminated and Demetriou stops looking like an imbecile when he announces in mid-August that clubs don't tank.

The AFL should announce the scrapping of the PP before a ball is bounced.

Recent experience shows that getting priority picks doesn't necessarily mean securing long term elite players.

If it is the case that Bailey essentially tanked in order to secure higher draft picks, I hope history shows that we used those draft picks as effectively as possible.

Because losing so many games over such a long period of time has to have a very negative impact on the culture of a club.

The PP allowed Carlton to get Judd and take Kruezer. Why else would have Bailey tanked?? And getting the PP is one thing. Using it effectively is another. I share your hope.

For those who want to abolish priority picks, just remember that we would still be on the bottom of the ladder if we didn't get ours.

And if we ever find ourselves on the bottom again (and history suggests that we will), I would very much like to get that sort of assistance.

Us, and many other smaller clubs, would simply fold, if not afforded help in collecting talent. Do we really want Collingwood and West Coast and Adelaide winning every premiership?

Recent experience shows that getting priority picks doesn't necessarily mean securing long term elite players.

If it is the case that Bailey essentially tanked in order to secure higher draft picks, I hope history shows that we used those draft picks as effectively as possible.

Because losing so many games over such a long period of time has to have a very negative impact on the culture of a club.

It's not the draft or the priority pick that has hurt our culture Ron, it's the mismanagement & game themes before we had to have our 'cleanout' & rebuild that hurt us.

We've had a crap culture for most of the past 45 Yrs. It took Barassi his whole 5 Years to almost Eradicate that losing 'Soft' mentality, and it cost him his Role with the team, as he pushed so hard the players were over it. But the younger ones coming through had the 'Harder' Want to Win, - Dare to win' mentality,,,, care of 'Barassi & Jordan'.

We flourished for 10 Years of that good breeding.

Then we let it 'Slip Slide Away'.

So we can't blame the Draft for our woes. The draft, & the Priority Pick, has been our Footy savior.

It's not the draft or the priority pick that has hurt our culture Ron, it's the mismanagement & game themes before we had to have our 'cleanout' & rebuild that hurt us.

We've had a crap culture for most of the past 45 Yrs. It took Barassi his whole 5 Years to almost Eradicate that losing 'Soft' mentality, and it cost him his Role with the team, as he pushed so hard the players were over it. But the younger ones coming through had the 'Harder' Want to Win, - Dare to win' mentality,,,, care of 'Barassi & Jordan'.

We flourished for 10 Years of that good breeding.

Then we let it 'Slip Slide Away'.

So we can't blame the Draft for our woes. The draft, & the Priority Pick, has been our Footy savior.

You seem to have blanked out the Balme and Daniher years, when despite not winning a flag we were one of the most consistently well performing clubs - regularly making finals despite far less resources than other clubs.

You seem to have blanked out the Balme and Daniher years, when despite not winning a flag we were one of the most consistently well performing clubs - regularly making finals despite far less resources than other clubs.

Huh, really.

For those who want to abolish priority picks, just remember that we would still be on the bottom of the ladder if we didn't get ours.

And if we ever find ourselves on the bottom again (and history suggests that we will), I would very much like to get that sort of assistance.

Us, and many other smaller clubs, would simply fold, if not afforded help in collecting talent. Do we really want Collingwood and West Coast and Adelaide winning every premiership?

Does not compute Are you suggesting if we did not get Scully we would still be bottom? For several seasons we kept ourselves there just to get him. P'P's are are an insidious vice that suck the life and competitiveness out of vulnerable clubs

You seem to have blanked out the Balme and Daniher years, when despite not winning a flag we were one of the most consistently well performing clubs - regularly making finals despite far less resources than other clubs.

You seem to think having the Most talented list is being successful.

I happen to think a list like that should have been the dominant club with Flags!

the Daniher Era, Pffftt...

# I think now we can see why the club has been a failure over the Years.

Edited February 6, 201213 yr by dee-luded

Why don't Carlsum ever get mentioned in tanking debate??

3 wooden spoons in a row. Losing the last 11 games to get C Judd (who had todl them he was leaving West Coke) as well as the infamous Kruezer Cup.

Teams for years have sent players off to surgery, tried them in differnt positions etc.

DB did not tell the players to lose.

DB did not tell the players to lose.

But did he play them so that the team had the best chance of winning?

I think a lottery system for the #1 pick should be instituted for all non finals teams.

E.g. 18th place gets 50% of balls in the lottery, 17th gets 25%, 16th gets 12.5 %, etc. Then a PP could be given out to teams that have been consistently poor at the end of the 1st round. This helps to prevent tanking while also not being unfair on bottom clubs.

If need be, PPs should be given at the start of the 2nd round to further prevent tanking.