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??

 

Trust the AFL to legitimise draft tampering

that's a crazy big change to drafting

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. 

What is definitely needed is more complexity.

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 August 24, 20186 yr by monoccular

Peter Jackson should be the new AFL boss.

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.

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.