Melbourne asks for draft assistance

[Vipercrunch 2,820]

I put very little value in what a single PP can do for us. Upgrading 1/44th (or however many is on a list these days) of our list from a pick very late in the draft to an early pick is not going to swing our rise or fall one way or the other. I think we all know by now our problems run far deeper than that.

HOWEVER, given that a PP rule does exist, how on earth can we not qualify? Any club that slips into the depths we have is going to be greatly responsible themselves for getting there. Of course we stuffed lots and lots of things up. If we are refused, then it can only mean the reasons for such long term failure have to be largely external. Perhaps if half a list is wiped out by the Ebola virus, maybe then the AFL would grant a PP?

If we are refused, then I hope the AFL also scraps the rule altogether. They have the powers to assist in times of tragedy (like when Troy Broadbridge passed away).

[Salems Lot 2,493]

How sad that we cling to the idea that a priority pick will help us. The only way to drag ourselves out of this is by serious gut running from all involved. Reflect on when we were any good (2006) and we were made up largely of good to reasonable players who were all heading in the same direction. A leader like Neitz helped them to walk tall proving the old adage of a team of champions being inferior to a champion team etc etc. We have chewed up enough young men hoping that they will provide the answer but sadly our results over the last 8 years has disproved that misconception.

Leadership, passion and experience is needed not more cannon fodder.

[TheoX 1,222]

the PP is for special assistance

Mark Evans can [censored] if he thinks giving us pick 20 will be enough

Pick 1 should be given to us without question

It's a bit wrong that he has decided we're not going to get a R1 pick before he;s even looked at our submission. Isn't he a Carltank supporter?

[Bingo 297]

I think we should show Barrett that we are fighters and get on the front foot against his BS.

Jackson should know that the Commission only cares about public opinion. Explain to the Footy World their own hypocrisy and false equivocations and convince some loudmouths that the rules should be applied as they are intended and that they are there for a reason.

And, again, he talks about how failed picks like that is a reason not to help us.

It's specious and false reasoning and Jackson should point it out.

It would be somewhat pleasurable to witness someone of the ilk of Jackson put that muppet of a human being Barrett back in his place.

Alas, people like Jackson are on a whole different level to Barrett and would probably say "Damian Who???..." if someone even asked Jackson about him.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Bingo

[Bingo 297]

How sad that we cling to the idea that a priority pick will help us. The only way to drag ourselves out of this is by serious gut running from all involved. Reflect on when we were any good (2006) and we were made up largely of good to reasonable players who were all heading in the same direction. A leader like Neitz helped them to walk tall proving the old adage of a team of champions being inferior to a champion team etc etc. We have chewed up enough young men hoping that they will provide the answer but sadly our results over the last 8 years has disproved that misconception.

Leadership, passion and experience is needed not more cannon fodder.

You're right!!!! Don't lobby the AFL for a PP......We want our zone back!!!

Neitz was a great Melbourne player....straight from a zone selection.

[jnrmac 20,053]

HOWEVER, given that a PP rule does exist, how on earth can we not qualify? Any club that slips into the depths we have is going to be greatly responsible themselves for getting there. Of course we stuffed lots and lots of things up. If we are refused, then it can only mean the reasons for such long term failure have to be largely external. Perhaps if half a list is wiped out by the Ebola virus, maybe then the AFL would grant a PP?

Exactly

[Redleg 40,817]

Barrett says "Forget Handouts Try Fighting".

I have changed my mind on PP's, I agree.

We should start fighting. Below is what I would start fighting for.

An equal draw so everyone shares equally friday nights and the better days and times and the worst days and times.

An end to club's Academies. This year and next the Swans will get 2 boys rated top 5 for a pick 20 in each year.

A direction from the AFL that quality FA's must come to us and other lowly clubs if we offer similar money to the top clubs.

An end to Salary cap benefits of some clubs like the Swans COLA and Carlton's Judd Visy deal.

An end to the avoidance by some clubs of playing at Skilled Stadium.

An end to AFL arrangements that deny clubs like Melbourne, access to players like the American, recently allowed to go only to Collingwood, because we didn't have the money to go to the USA to interview him.

A reduction in the salaries of the executives of the AFL which can lead to more money for the clubs. There will be no problem in replacing them if they decide to leave.

An end to the list benefits of club's like GC and GWS of more players on their list.

An end to working parties of the AFL dominated by Eddie and his selected mates.

Need I go on?

Yes lets start fighting for our fair chance to improve on a level playing field and we can forget the PP.

[Scoop Junior 3,435]

I cannot stand two of his simpleton arguments, arguments that are regulalry trotted out as to why we should not get a PP, even here on on DL.

One. We don't deserve it. Please spare me such young liberal rubbish. Using that logic you could argue that no bottom clubs should receive equalization payments.

Two. We will get compo for Frawley. Leaving aside the fact that he may not go (though it seems accepted by all that he will) this is compo for losing one of our best players and one of the precious few senior players with more than 100 games. It has nothing to to do at all with the PP. Nothing. And even if you argued it did, if anything it should increase our chance of getting a PP rather than diminish it as it hurts our chances of improving.

Not giving us a PP because of compo for Frawley would in fact be penalizing us rather than the purpose of the (weighted) compo which is to ensure the bootom clubs are not unduly hurt by FA . And if it really was a factor in the decision to give us a PP we would be better getting in a highly ranked FA, which would water down our compo and by Barret's (and other's logic) mean we might then be eligible for a PP. Madness.

What about just applying the AFL formula. If we get it based on that, great. If we don't then so be it but as i said earlier surely the PP system must then be axed completely.

I assume the formula does not include a moral weighting for deserving or undeserving candidates. Nor would include compo received for FA or any other equalization measures (such as payments).

So mind boggingly moronic.

Exactly right. Barrett calls Melbourne embarrassing, yet I reckon his failure to understand the situation is embarrassing.

As soon as someone says 'doesn't deserve a priority pick' I instantly think they have completely failed to grasp what is a relatively easy concept.

It's not about 'deserving' at all. It's not a prize given out to a good performer. It's simply about 'need' - the question is simply whether the club needs assistance.

It gets even more embrrassing when these journos state the reasons why we have been on the bottom for 8 years. Do they seriously fail to comprehend that THE reason why we have been on the bottom for 8 years is because we have stuffed up? Based on their reasoning, the corollary is that clubs should only get a priority pick when they draft well, develop well and make other good decisions (in which case you'd be sitting pretty in the finals). So on Barrett and others' logic we should give priority picks to successful teams.

The other inherent failure in the argument that Melbourne has wasted draft picks before so a PP won't help is that why are you then so concerned about giving Melbourne a PP? If it hasn't helped before and won't help now, why bleat about it and get so uptight about it?

That they bring up tanking is also a joke - firstly we have already been punished for that and secondly the conduct only occurred in one season, we have still been rubbish for the other 7 years.

Then Barrett really raises his lack of intelligence to unprecedented heights by saying that we will already be getting a first round pick for Frawley. That has about as much relevance to the PP issue as the current fuel price. What Barrett is telling us is that because we are losing our fourth player to free agency and are getting compensated for that under a completely separate regime, we should not get a PP based on 8 years of poor performance. Again, the corollary is that if Frawley stays, we are more deserving of a PP.

It is genuinely baffling how these people can just completely fail to grasp the concept. If they had half a brain what they would do is state the criteria for a PP and apply the criteria - because that's simply all that matters.

Patrick Smith has done this and on SEN this morning he was of the view that we should get a PP. Even Caro on Footy Classified said there is a good case for one.

Also good to see Evans has pre-judged the situation by commenting on it generally without assessing the merits of a particular case.

[beelzebub 23,313]

anyone know what Gil's views might be ?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,162]

If it's the case that the argument against wins then I think we need to manage a campaign with the other smaller clubs to start attacking the money. Hit Eddie and his mates where it hurts in the pocket.

Lets get true equalisation.

This was one of my main themes in the recent members survey - the MFC admin should be in dialogue with North, Dogs, Saints and Cats (who seem to have a very fair view on equalisation, fixtures etc) to form a bloc and draft a case for the AFL for true equalisation to be implemented particularly with regards to the fixture.

[leucopogon 1,519]

Agreed Redleg, can I add one?

Lets have a rule that if a Free Agent goes to a club higher on the ladder than his current one, the player must take a significant paycut (obviously the band compensation rules would need to be tweaked but something to incentivize free agents from good clubs to go to strugglers rathern than the other way round would be an equalisation measure surely)

[Redleg 40,817]

Agreed Redleg, can I add one?

Lets have a rule that if a Free Agent goes to a club higher on the ladder than his current one, the player must take a significant paycut (obviously the band compensation rules would need to be tweaked but something to incentivize free agents from good clubs to go to strugglers rathern than the other way round would be an equalisation measure surely)

Well done. I'll bet there is plenty more we could fight for.

[Ted Lasso 19,284]

I reckon all bottom 4 sides should have the right to match any offers made for their free agents as default

[beelzebub 23,313]

A possible snag in our endeavours to get a PP will be how palatable will it be for all others should we finish last and if ( lol ) Frawley goes we get a band 1 compo ?

There is no way in this lifetime we could ever get 1, 2 and 3. Though we need them.

Either a PP or compo will have to be at the round 1 to even get off the floor

not sure who's activating what banked pick but hypothetically if we were to finish last . Wed have Pick 1, possibly pick 2 ( as compo ) pick 19 (or thereabouts ) and maybe a PP at 20...and 38 etc

1, 2, 19, 20, 38, 56

[Deespicable 2,717]

I hate our "Poor me" attitude.

I am happy for AFL commission to independently determine which clubs need a priority pick and give them one accordingly.

But I despise the fact that we have gone begging for one.

What we should be doing is trying to strike a deal to get priority access to NT players, but only after we have shown a commitment to the area with development and a long-term game deal.

[binman 42,629]

Agreed Redleg, can I add one?

Lets have a rule that if a Free Agent goes to a club higher on the ladder than his current one, the player must take a significant paycut (obviously the band compensation rules would need to be tweaked but something to incentivize free agents from good clubs to go to strugglers rathern than the other way round would be an equalisation measure surely)

Ok in theory, however i suspect some FAs might go for a greater chance of finals ans may in fact get more from the club they are leaving ie are taking a pay cut (eg Rivers?).

But what about FA's can't go to top 4 (or 6) sides from previous year

[daisycutter 29,603]

evans should be censured and called out publicly for making pre-emptive comments about a pp before considering the case

this is just more of the afl shooting off at the mouth and playing to the media and the court of popularity

where are the real journos?

[binman 42,629]

I hate our "Poor me" attitude.

I am happy for AFL commission to independently determine which clubs need a priority pick and give them one accordingly.

But I despise the fact that we have gone begging for one.

What we should be doing is trying to strike a deal to get priority access to NT players, but only after we have shown a commitment to the area with development and a long-term game deal.

Begging? A little bit dramatic don't you think. The system that the AFL has set up is that in order to get a PP clubs must apply for one. Following the process proscribed by the AFL is hardly begging.

Edited August 19, 2014 by binman

[beelzebub 23,313]

evans should be censured and called out publicly for making pre-emptive comments about a pp before considering the case

this is just more of the afl shooting off at the mouth and playing to the media and the court of popularity

where are the real journos?

We all know Evan's real views on equalisation..

[Bitter but optimistic 22,218]

evans should be censured and called out publicly for making pre-emptive comments about a pp before considering the case

this is just more of the afl shooting off at the mouth and playing to the media and the court of popularity

where are the real journos?

"real journos" !!!!!!! A bit like the Yeti.

[beelzebub 23,313]

"real journos" !!!!!!! A bit like the Yeti.

NO, that exists !!

[Grimes Times 1,278]

Heres a list of all the PP over the years.

WB - Cooney, Griffen

Melb - Sylvia, Blease, Scully

Carl - Walker, Murphy, Hampson, Kruzer

Coll - Fraser, Thomas

Haw - Ellis, Roughead

Rich - Delido, Rance

Ess - jetta

STK - Ball, Roo

WCE - Judd, Shuey, Darling, McInness

Freo - Hodge*, Haselby, Foster

Adel - Kerridge

* Pick traded to Haw for Croad & Mcpharlin

What also need to be taken into account is the player teams get with there normal pick. Eg. Haw take Roughead as PP and then Buddy with there round 1 pick. Would Haw have won 2 flags with only one of these players. Coll win a flag with only Thomas and not Thomas and Pendles?

Would Carlton who took Kennedy with there round 1 pick after taking Murphy with a PP have enough to get the Judd trade done without Kennedy?

Edited August 19, 2014 by Grimes Times

[Sir Why You Little 36,963]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-19/forget-the-handouts-demons

Barrett having his usual crack...

[beelzebub 23,313]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-19/forget-the-handouts-demons

Barrett having his usual crack...

getting slow in your old age there WYL

[Sir Why You Little 36,963]

Don't have time to read 9 pages....i see i paste.