What a muppet.

Anyone who says Melbourne doesn't deserve a priority pick because its terrible recent history is its own fault, just shows themself to be an absolute fool.

For what other reason, other then your own mistakes, would you be consistently down the bottom of the ladder?

I can't comprehend how these journos just can't grasp the concept that the priority pick is not about fairness or justice or what's deserved.

How do these guys get jobs?

how do these guys get jobs? The guys on about 75,000 a year, pay peanuts get monkeys.

Agree with his article. I don't want or need the PP.

We don't deserve a priority pick.

If I barracked for an opposition side I'd feel the same as Barrett.

But if we don't receive a priority pick, we won't improve and the AFL need us to improve.

We are a blight on the competition and the AFL knows that it owes it to Demons supporters to give them hope.

If we can trade our PP for an elite midfielder, that creates some hope - more than we currently have anyway.

If we can get an established midfielder or two, we'll improve a lot next year.

Ps. He is a Norf supporter, so every step MFC takes closer to death, theoretically in turn brings them closer to a safe future.

It's a hopeful article.

Its up to us to turn up to games, I took my kid on the weekend knowing they couldn't win, the AFL WANT every side in the competition to survive, Norfs attendances aren't much better than ours and the Dogs have won 7 games, we need to recruit properly develop players and win [censored] games then everything will fall into place, our club is the Carlton and Tigers of the last decade they dealt with it now its our turn, if they wanted us to die they wouldn't have appointed PJ and Bartlett and give 2.7 million, if you people want to turn this around quicker you have to attend the [censored] games no matter the outcome.

Guys like Barrett exist because people click on their articles. It's irrelevant to modern Journalists whether the article is accurate or fair. It comes down to how many people view the article. If you read his crud your only empowering him. If he offends you refuse to read his articles irrespective if it relates to us or not. It always amuses me that people our outraged when he pens his dribble about us but lap up similar rubbish about other clubs.

http://afl.com.au/news/2013-08-20/no-more-handouts

This guy is getting worse.

In this article, he mentions our use of a priority pick on Blease, without acknowledging the fact he badly broke his leg before he even played a game. What's worse is that he blames us for $cully leaving. Tell me Damian, did he leave to go to a successful side? No. He left because him and his stupid father care about money, nothing else.

If Barrett actually had a clue, he would acknowledge that an improved Melbourne outfit would be beneficial to every club and media outlet in the league - ticket sales would improve, TV viewing would improve etc.

This article is not Journalism, it's a blatant attack written by a wannabe intellectual looking for an easy kill.

[censored]

A piece of crap written by one.

He's not even worth hatred, that would require relevance.

Win games and they all shut up.

Simple remedy but a wee bit harder to achieve.

We will probably have to grit our teeth till 2015

My issue with the whole argument on whether we deserve a PP or not, is that it is being debated a lot about stuff that isn't happening on the footy field.

I don't believe that matters off field should really come into account when deciding if a club gets one.

I would like to know, if don't qualify for a PP, purely on our football performances on field, then how bad would a team have to be to get one?

The AFL might as well scrap it completely, because if a team was to ever have a sustained period of pathetic performances like we have over the last 2 years(2 wins against non-expansion sides, multiple 80 point+ floggings, etc), then using our club as an example, they would not be eligible either.

Edited August 20, 201311 yr by Jerry Lundergard

I am not fully for a PP, but FCS Barrett must have been snubbed last night and made to sleep on the couch with the dog.

That is not journalism it is merely what he wants.

What an obnoxious snob you are Barrett.

His argument is filled with so much bias and is one-eyed. The father-son rule is used by all clubs, Essendon were able to pick up Daniher last year at pick 10 when he was touted as possibly going number one, doesn't mention that. Also as stated in another post Geelong have been blessed with father-son recruits who helped them win a flag, and they were able to take them with some late picks before the new rules were brought in, he doesn't mention this. Then he forgets to mention that Carlton, who actually cheated, were given multiple priority picks after they were punished for their crimes. And he also forgets that other clubs like Richmond also had multiple priority and number one picks just like us. He's a cokchead.

I actually don't care if we get one or not as I don't believe it's going to make or break our club. The only thing that will get us back is bloody hard work and bringing in players who want to give their all, not just the most talented (I hope we've worked that one out). But this guy needs to be told what for. Anyone know how to bring these points up with him?

Don't waste your time Cunnerz. Logic goes over his head.

And then he has a go at us for getting Viney under the 'convenient' father-son rule. Yep. It's 'convenient' when you're Melbourne, but it's par for the course when you're Geelong and you get Scarlett and Ablett. Father-son is a part of the competition, not sure how that is relevant at all to Barrett's insipid attempt at an argument.

And Hawkins and Blake etc.

Many going on in a way that suggests PP's deliver results guaranteed - even Barrett thinks as much.

As we've seen, it can be fools gold. Let's not get so cut about it.

Agree with his article. I don't want or need the PP.

The MFC does and I want it.

I am actually stunned at people who say they don't want an advantage or assistance.

Clubs will do anything to win and be successful, even taking drugs, yet some on here say they don't want something that will help. Yes a PP or mini draft pick doesn't guarantee success, but it will help. It could be traded for 2 reasonable mids, for example.

Has anyone heard the Pies refusing to play 18 games at the G and instead requesting to play some games in Canberra and Darwin.

Unbelievable.

Ever notice how little respect he gets from his peers?

Laugh every time Garry Lyon addresses him as 'Purple' i.e. Purple Headed Warrior.

It's a pretty lightweight effort. Must have taken him all of 15 minutes to bash that out.

Father son? Geelong? Not just Ablett and Scarlett. Hawkins too. And they were getting them when they were cheap - around a fourth round pick.

But I don't give a rat's either way - for Barrett's opinion or a compensatory pick.

Compensatory picks we have shown to be fool's gold.

They alone are not the answer so if we don't get one, I won't be especially fussed.

We wasted four years with "just getting games into the kids" and another two years with an arrogrant 'do-what-I-say-not-what-I-did' martinet.

With or without compensation we'll do better with either of Roos or Eade (supposed to be especially good with kids), or Craig for that matter.

In any case, if we did get a compensatory pick my guess is it would come before the second round.

Edited August 20, 201311 yr by pitmaster

I am actually stunned at people who say they don't want an advantage or assistance.

Clubs will do anything to win and be successful, even taking drugs, yet some on here say they don't want something that will help. Yes a PP or mini draft pick doesn't guarantee success, but it will help. It could be traded for 2 reasonable mids, for example.

Has anyone heard the Pies refusing to play 18 games at the G and instead requesting to play some games in Canberra and Darwin.

Unbelievable.

Trading for established midfielders is the only way to go if it is granted.

Trading for established midfielders is the only way to go if it is granted.

With what? What assets do we have?

Should the AFL give us one to get a good player?

Like, I don't know, a Priority Pick?

We would be weak and 'woe-is-us' if we didn't ask for draft assistance.

Do you think Collingwood, just 20 months out of it's second GF appearance in two years, didn't know what they were doing when they got Pendlebury and Thomas in the 2005 National Draft?

They went 13 and 31 over two years after finishing 2nd twice and got two stars that won them a flag 5 years later.

We have gone 23 and 63 since our last Priority Pick.

!

Do people know that?

Forget the shizen years since 2007. Since 2010, we have battled on our own and have continued to fail to the detriment of the league.

Give us some assets.

Solution: Give us a mini draft type pick for the best 17 year old that we are required to trade.

Doesn't effect the draft.

Another team benefits.

We get an experienced player.

I don't care if it affects the draft; other clubs should STFU.

Having their pick pushed down one position isn't going to be the end of the world:

It's not like 1 spot means a massive drop off in talent.

Besides, there have been plenty of times when we've picked someone like Morton and effectively bumped up every other team's draft pick by 1 spot - they owe us.

Does he have a twitter account that i can absolutely [censored] him in?

With what? What assets do we have?

Should the AFL give us one to get a good player?

Like, I don't know, a Priority Pick?

We would be weak and 'woe-is-us' if we didn't ask for draft assistance.

Do you think Collingwood, just 20 months out of it's second GF appearance in two years, didn't know what they were doing when they got Pendlebury and Thomas in the 2005 National Draft?

They went 13 and 31 over two years after finishing 2nd twice and got two stars that won them a flag 5 years later.

We have gone 23 and 63 since our last Priority Pick.

!

Do people know that?

Forget the shizen years since 2007. Since 2010, we have battled on our own and have continued to fail to the detriment of the league.

Give us some assets.

It's been debated in other threads whether we should draft the best available youngster or use the PP to trade establised mids.

I'm for doing the latter because of our glaring inadequacy in the midfield that needs immediate help - help that a first year player would not be able to provide in terms of leadership and playing capability.

It's been debated in other threads whether we should draft the best available youngster or use the PP to trade establised mids.

I'm for doing the latter because of our glaring inadequacy in the midfield that needs immediate help - help that a first year player would not be able to provide in terms of leadership and playing capability.

if we traded pick 17 and 19 in 2008 and pick 11 and 18 in 2009 we wouldnt be sitting on the bottom, trade for established players.

Solution: Give us a mini draft type pick for the best 17 year old that we are required to trade.

Doesn't effect the draft.

Another team benefits.

We get an experienced player.

Happy to get that. Unbelievably some on here aren't.