http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-04-11/rival-clubs-opposed-to-possible-demon-priority-pick

It seems other clubs wont be very happy. It would be a joke for us to get a priority pick after this whole tanking saga.

i dont care what other clubs think

all i care about is the MFC

if not a pick then a 17 year old to on traded for a player why not both GC and GWS got this

but make it that it has to be traded for a player not a pick

If we don't win a game for the year as alot of people seem to be suggesting, we absolutely deserve a priority pick. hopefully not a tanking saga attached to this one though

A priority pick!what makes you think another one will help?MFC should be banned from wasting any more talent for the good of the comp.A crippled organization.Ashamed to be associated.

Survival is far more appealing than idealism.

How exactly has socialism helped the club thus far?

It hurts competitiveness. It's very clear. Clear as day.

Stuff the pick, I don't want the rst of the people honking we always need bailing out, stand on our own feet!

We need to from this day on, start compiling who are the best assistant coaches and more importantly the best developers for our draft picks and hunt the bloody lot of them.

it's not bailing out. Brisbane won 3 in a row because of all the concessions they got when fit dou joined bears.

in for next year picks 1 and 2 kevin sheedy as coach i'd be pretty happy with that

A priority pick does not necessarily mean a pick following our first draft pick - right?

Say we finish 2nd or 3rd last we could receive a priority pick after round 1 (#19). - anyone know the rules?

Anyway the AFL will deal with this in good time, all the MFC needs to think about is winning games of footy.

I think both the club and supporters need to move away from the past, this is a different coaching group (new drafting manager) give them a chance to select/develop players instead of predicting that they are useless like the last drafting group. look at last years draftees - you have Viney and Kent already showing more than some previous high draft picks (they have also all added size quickly - Morton, Watts, Gysberts etc.)

We will get what we 'deserve' - arguments of the merits of Socialism not-with-standing...

We are a socialised sport - as we should be - we don't want to go the way of the EPL.

You can blame the mindset that the PP engendered, and the way we 'built' through youth without investing in the recruitment department but don't blame the fact that the game is socialised for our plight.

The draft, and the vagauries of the salary cap will help us get to where we want to be and I have no problem taking any extra help that might come our way.

Collingwood embraced their PP, as did the Hawks, and Carlton.

We will get what we 'deserve' - arguments of the merits of Socialism not-with-standing...

We are a socialised sport - as we should be - we don't want to go the way of the EPL.

You can blame the mindset that the PP engendered, and the way we 'built' through youth without investing in the recruitment department but don't blame the fact that the game is socialised for our plight.

The draft, and the vagauries of the salary cap will help us get to where we want to be and I have no problem taking any extra help that might come our way.

Collingwood embraced their PP, as did the Hawks, and Carlton.

Why don't we want to go the way of the EPL? The EPL encourages teams to strive to be the absolute best they can be: the PP has led to teams losing on PURPOSE to reap the benefits of a "socialised sport".

I think you're mixing up "deserving of" and "entitled to".

A premiership-winning side is "deserving" of financial growth, prime-time games and television spots: they earn what they deserve, based on their performance.

A losing team is "entitled" to help only if it is incapable of building a team on its own ... as it stands in the AFL's current system.

I am "deserving" of wealth. I am not "entitled" to it (I am sure some here will disagree with that...)

We do not "deserve" an extra pick. No one "deserves" socialism, because you're not technically "earning" what you're given.

The club "deserves" to suffer financially through its own failures. That's not an opinion. It's earned a bad reputation.

Why don't we want to go the way of the EPL? The EPL encourages teams to strive to be the absolute best they can be: the PP has led to teams losing on PURPOSE to reap the benefits of a "socialised sport".

I think you're mixing up "deserving of" and "entitled to".

A premiership-winning side is "deserving" of financial growth, prime-time games and television spots: they earn what they deserve, based on their performance.

A losing team is "entitled" to help only if it is incapable of building a team on its own ... as it stands in the AFL's current system.

I am "deserving" of wealth. I am not "entitled" to it (I am sure some here will disagree with that...)

We do not "deserve" an extra pick. No one "deserves" socialism, because you're not technically "earning" what you're given.

The club "deserves" to suffer financially through its own failures. That's not an opinion. It's earned a bad reputation.

I also put 'deserves' in inverted commas so you can keep your grandstanding to yourself.

You don't want to see teams benefit from being poor? Then go and enjoy your unregulated nonsense that is European soccer.

Where fans dream of being bought by Russian or Middle Eastern billionaires and for their teams to be used as personal toys so that they can win silverware.

We have a draft and slary cap regulated sport and hallejulah for that.

We will fight to win every game and take whatever picks a team in a position should get at the end of the season.

Funny how you equate no priority pick and league handouts to being "unregulated".

Teams lost on purpose to benefit from a welfare system. Shockingly, people still struggle to recognise the issue with that and the system.

EPL is the way it is because there is no salary cap, and all the leagues abide by the same wide reaching set of regulations (or lack thereof). I was referring more to the competitiveness of the league, where it's every club for itself.

The AFL still has a salary cap, and has no demotion system. It's like the NBA...only with extra rewards of ineptness...and even in the NBA you're not assured a top pick if you have the worst record.

Melbourne hasn't struggled for decades because of a lack of resources, or because financially it's worse off than other clubs: it's struggled because it's been run so ineptly as to not have those benefits in the first place. There were no external forces compromises the club's ability to be at the top with the likes of Collingwood. The club has only itself to blame.

The way I see it, and I understand that you disagree, is that Melbourne has constantly, consistently been lacking the ruthless competitiveness that is needed to win in this league, both on and off the field.

You can have the most amazing vision in the world, the most spectacular understanding of the game, but if you lack the drive and capacity to thrive in a competitive environment, you won't ever fulfil the prophecy.

I am still reeling from the fact that even jokingly there were people of authority at the club considering putting the club in a position to benefit from league welfare, to lose on purpose.

Another priority pick is not a good thing. It's an act of pity. Many of you embrace as "yay another top pick", but it's not going to change a damn thing: it won't change our prospects, the culture, the earning capacity of the club. Nothing.

I listened to the game on 3AW as I had to work, they discussed that we may see a rise in legal challenges by players being drafted for issues such as club mismanagement towards draftees! Hope we don't become a leader in this area.

Funny how you equate no priority pick and league handouts to being "unregulated".

Teams lost on purpose to benefit from a welfare system. Shockingly, people still struggle to recognise the issue with that and the system.

EPL is the way it is because there is no salary cap, and all the leagues abide by the same wide reaching set of regulations (or lack thereof). I was referring more to the competitiveness of the league, where it's every club for itself.

The AFL still has a salary cap, and has no demotion system. It's like the NBA...only with extra rewards of ineptness...and even in the NBA you're not assured a top pick if you have the worst record.

League handouts? Draft picks are handed out worst to best. You are argtuing against the system now, not just PPs.

It's every club for itself here too - handn't you noticed?

We decided to do what teams - ruthless, well run, or otherwise - do when they are having a losing season in a draft regulated sport.

I don't think you know whether you are arguing against tanking, or arguing against the fact that we didn't profit immensely from tanking: we didn't get Thomas and Pendlebury, we didn't get Franklin and Roughhead.

Melbourne hasn't struggled for decades because of a lack of resources, or because financially it's worse off than other clubs: it's struggled because it's been run so ineptly as to not have those benefits in the first place. There were no external forces compromises the club's ability to be at the top with the likes of Collingwood. The club has only itself to blame.

The way I see it, and I understand that you disagree, is that Melbourne has constantly, consistently been lacking the ruthless competitiveness that is needed to win in this league, both on and off the field.

You can have the most amazing vision in the world, the most spectacular understanding of the game, but if you lack the drive and capacity to thrive in a competitive environment, you won't ever fulfil the prophecy.

I am still reeling from the fact that even jokingly there were people of authority at the club considering putting the club in a position to benefit from league welfare, to lose on purpose.

Another priority pick is not a good thing. It's an act of pity. Many of you embrace as "yay another top pick", but it's not going to change a damn thing: it won't change our prospects, the culture, the earning capacity of the club. Nothing.

I am defending the institution of the draft - you have changed the subject to the ineptitude of MFC administrations - and then attached my belief that we haven't been inept.

Of course we have - we decided at the conclusion of 2007 to begin a rebuild of the list through the draft with an enormous number of U/20s coming into the club over the following 2 years. While we were doing this, we ddin't deem it necessary to boost the recruiting department. We went on a strategy and didn't invest in it's success.

Before that were the malaise of the 70s and 80s that I can only retell stories of delapidation and politics.

The PP is an extension of the ethos of the draft and it is has been abused over its short existence.

Should we be eligible for one, we will take it, and try to work harder to not get it again.

It is not something that will save us, and it is not something we want, but it is certainly not something we would turn down.

I listened to the game on 3AW as I had to work, they discussed that we may see a rise in legal challenges by players being drafted for issues such as club mismanagement towards draftees! Hope we don't become a leader in this area.

I heard that on the way in to the game. Basically was instigated by a "frequent caller" who has nothing better to do than stir up trouble. SEN listeners would hear of him often.

Take no notice of him.

Rather than a PP, it may be more useful for us if the AFL found a way for us to 'pay' for a top-grade established mid-fielder.

I think in light of yesterday's loss we need to consider the very real possibility that we will finish last on the ladder this year.

Surely the AFL would deem this a situation warranting a priority pick? I think they said they would now address it on a needs basis - well I think this demonstrates that we need it.

Personally I think that the AFL is partially culpable for our current situation here. The bottom few teams were always going to be the worst effected by the compromised drafts by not being able to draft the best talent available - the franchise teams got dibs. Then free agency comes along. It's now apparent that that system also does not assist with poorer (financially and performing) clubs as free agents of high quality wouldn't want to come here. We've been hit very very hard with these AFL dictated changes at a time when we were already struggling.

I doubt the AFL envisaged the franchise clubs using their mini-draft picks in the manner they did. They thought they would use them to trade in some experience, instead they used them the further compromise the draft by trading for picks instead.

I think we need the pick and we need to trade it for a real A-grade midfielder. If we can convince one to come.

This is not an 'entitlement' argument, nor is it an excuse for our poor performances and development. I simply think that all things considered and if we finish last on the ladder, we should get that priority pick.

I think we are likely to end up with picks #1 and #3 and we should use our picks to draft kids.

I think we are likely to end up with picks #1 and #3 and we should use our picks to draft kids.

depending on GWS it could potentially be #2 and #3 or something like that, either way Couch and Billings, pencil them in!

Couch is a clearance machine and ball magnet, billings personifies elite disposal and hard running, both ready to go at AFL level already.

depending on GWS it could potentially be #2 and #3 or something like that, either way Couch and Billings, pencil them in!

Couch is a clearance machine and ball magnet, billings personifies elite disposal and hard running, both ready to go at AFL level already.

I see it being #1 (Priority) - MFC, #2 - GWS, #3 - MFC

The Dogs might also get a Priority Pick, however.

Whats the use MFC will always pick the wrong guy

Wasted opportunities abound

And even if we pick well We will so embue him with the Melbourne culture He will whither away or if he is smart hit the road after 2 years

Whats the use MFC will always pick the wrong guy

Wasted opportunities abound

And even if we pick well We will so embue him with the Melbourne culture He will whither away or if he is smart hit the road after 2 years

That's why we need to trade it for an a-grade midfielder. Even if we 'picked right', I have no faith in our ability to develop that pick.