Jump to content

Featured Replies

Posted

MFCSS says to me the moment we even look like challenging for the pointy end of the ladder they look at changing the rules:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-floats-radical-draft-changes-20180823-p4zzf7.html

"Under the first model - which is unlikely to be in place even for 2019, though it has not been ruled out - the top 10 picks would remain in the current format of reverse ladder order, with selections 1-10 going to non-finalists. The eighth-placed team would receive pick 11, then the bottom side would receive pick 12, the seventh team would receive pick 13 and the 17th side pick 14.

Under this "alternating" model, the order of selections (after No.11) would continue to alternate - pick 15 to the sixth side, pick 16 to the 16th club - until pick 23, when the 12th placed side would have the choice, rather than the losing grand finalist. Teams that finished 11th, 10th and 9th would follow (picks 24, 25 and 26). The top two sides would end up with picks 27 and 28."

 
3 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

MFCSS says to me the moment we even look like challenging for the pointy end of the ladder they look at changing the rules:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-floats-radical-draft-changes-20180823-p4zzf7.html

"Under the first model - which is unlikely to be in place even for 2019, though it has not been ruled out - the top 10 picks would remain in the current format of reverse ladder order, with selections 1-10 going to non-finalists. The eighth-placed team would receive pick 11, then the bottom side would receive pick 12, the seventh team would receive pick 13 and the 17th side pick 14.

Under this "alternating" model, the order of selections (after No.11) would continue to alternate - pick 15 to the sixth side, pick 16 to the 16th club - until pick 23, when the 12th placed side would have the choice, rather than the losing grand finalist. Teams that finished 11th, 10th and 9th would follow (picks 24, 25 and 26). The top two sides would end up with picks 27 and 28."

That would be an absolute disaster! I hope the AFL are not serious about this?!?!

Say What??

 

 

  • Author

The conspiracy theorist in me suggests that it is a way to soften up the objectors to the priority picks.

In other words accept our discretion or we'll adopt the nuclear option.

Marvellous how one can change the "norm".

The AFL is a dead set disgrace, what all of a sudden they care about clubs being down the bottom for too long. Carlton played finals in 2013, how about waiting another seven years before they get some help. 

 
  • Author
53 minutes ago, trout said:

The AFL is a dead set disgrace, what all of a sudden they care about clubs being down the bottom for too long. Carlton played finals in 2013, how about waiting another seven years before they get some help. 

But according to Gil it's good for the competition...........

"AFL boss Gillon McLachlan has been concerned about the time it takes clubs to rebuild from the bottom and of the impact of free agency and trading on lower teams. He mentioned that the English Premier League had lost television rights revenue in the last deal, in making the argument to CEOs that the poor teams could drag down the financial health of the competition."

And there it is. All Gil cares about is $$$. He couldn’t give a stuff about the sanctity of the game. Hell he’d sell the AFL’s soul if it meant making an extra buck.

The worst ever CEO and by the length of the Flemington straight.


if the system aint broke just leave it Gil!

Unfortunately and sad to say it but I do think it’s a good thing. Free agency is skewing things waaay in favour of top teams. I say unfortunately as we have finally emerged from the swamp and for the first time since FA started are in a position to benefit from it. We did it the hardest way with no frikn help and a fair share of shaming for even asking for it. And now we aren’t going to reap the same benefits of as those that went before us. Ie Geelong, whorethorn... both of who just kept using FA to stay at the top. Effectively getting an a grader every year as well as their draft pick. 

When it was us at the bottom “ Melb are a basket case...let them stay there” when it’s carlton different story. But mainly this is about rehabbing their problem child in GC isn’t it? At least the changes are a couple of drafts away so we get a small break. 

And yet still nothing about pushing resources into the second tier and early development to increase depth of talent in the draft, from both young and mature sources.

Sure, it would be fairer, improve the quality of the spectacle, nurture grass-roots support for the game and...

Yeah, not this AFL HQ. A decisive reinvestment would cost almost as much as one NRL player making a fool of themselves.

2 hours ago, trout said:

The AFL is a dead set disgrace, what all of a sudden they care about clubs being down the bottom for too long. Carlton played finals in 2013, how about waiting another seven years before they get some help. 

Gifting CFC (and Saints) all those prime time games this year, whilst giving very few to one of the most watchable attacking teams (us) just shows where the priorities of Gillon and his henchmen lie.

Then, after setting up all those unwatchable games through their own ineptitude, they want to change the rules to bring back audiences!  Do they even watch those terrible games themselves, or just look at the TV ratings?

1 hour ago, Demon Disciple said:

And there it is. All Gil cares about is $$$. He couldn’t give a stuff about the sanctity of the game. Hell he’d sell the AFL’s soul if it meant making an extra buck.

The worst ever CEO and by the length of the Flemington straight.

Pity he just doesn’t ride off into the sunset on his polo pony never to be seen again in AFL circles.

We have just been rid of the worst and most waffling PM* in history; now let’s do the same for the worst and most waffling CEO in AFL history.

*PS ... yes, I do remember Billy McMahon.  

Edited by monoccular


They want to change the draft to better the bottom 10 teams. Funny it coincides with the Dees finishing top 8 and making finals.

The Dees copped the raw end of the stick when GC and GWS entered the competition when we were a basket case also... With them receiving all the priority picks and concessions.

 

Free agency is a curse.

Top 4 side when recruiting a free agent to pay the same compensation (picks-points) as the AFL pay to the side losing the player. There must be a cost to recruiting a free agent. 

Bottom 4 sides should not lose a player to a top 4 side (in last 2 years) - Bottom 4 sides can take a free agent with no cost, compensation from the AFL

4 hours ago, ManDee said:

Free agency is a curse.

Top 4 side when recruiting a free agent to pay the same compensation (picks-points) as the AFL pay to the side losing the player. There must be a cost to recruiting a free agent. 

Bottom 4 sides should not lose a player to a top 4 side (in last 2 years) - Bottom 4 sides can take a free agent with no cost, compensation from the AFL

That’s too logical for the AFL honchos to follow

4 hours ago, deebug said:

Peter Jackson should be the new AFL boss.

Brilliant idea. Succession plan should be in place. Maybe he can cull the hundreds of "jobs for the boys AND girls" in the AFL (300+ I think) and sack immediately the "interpretation of rules" department. Well I can dream.

As if the on field changes coming weren't enough we now have off field changes also. The entire AFL is looking more and more like Frankenstein's monster...


So the top team get 27 and 28 instead of 18 and 38ish?

The draft is meant to help the teams down below.

I don't immediately hate it. Willing to listen to arguments though.

FMD! Could they make it any more complex? Next they'll incorporate the Fibbonacci sequence into it!

13 hours ago, rpfc said:

So the top team get 27 and 28 instead of 18 and 38ish?

The draft is meant to help the teams down below.

I don't immediately hate it. Willing to listen to arguments though.

No,  the top 2 sides recieve 27 and 28.

 
  • Author

The way Peter Gordon explained it is that it is designed to give the lower clubs a better chance of getting a good player.

He likened it to basketball where with one draft pick you can get a star player and because there are only five players on court you can dramatically change your success rate.

Out of interest are there father/son and academy picks etc in the US sporting system?

1 hour ago, deanox said:

No,  the top 2 sides recieve 27 and 28.

Ah.

if it is a ‘snake’ system. It won’t be terrible. If it is not that and the top teams get 27 and 45 then it won’t go anywhere.


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 528 replies