On 14/07/2019 at 01:08, Lucifer's Hero said:

Agreed. 

GCS have had plenty of top picks in the last few years:  In 2016: picks 4, 7, 9, 10.  In 2018: picks 2, 3, 6.  ie 7 top 10 picks in a 24 month period.  Those players are still developing and some will be elite, if they keep them.

So while more draft picks are better than not, it hasn't helped them so far.

They really need help.  They ciuld start with a new Chairman.  Cochrane has been there for 6 years and overseen the appointment of Eade and Dew.  He grandstands, breathes fire and brimstone and cries poor but not much apparent positive impact.

The AFL put in Mark Evans as CEO but he isn't having much impact either but needs time.  They also need to put people and resources into development, medical, rehab etc.  It is the only feasible option.

To be honest I couldn't care less about the GCS but was more arguing that the more top end picks,  the better,  when it comes to drafting.

The next no.1 could be a Nick Rewoldt or a Jack Watts or a Tom Scully.  It's a numbers game. 

The GC list is already stacked with young talent. More will not help straight away. Its a joke.

Paul Roos had the great idea of priority players from State and other leagues. The AFL just big time stuffed up the execution of it. They told GC and the Blues not long before the draft it was going to happen.

What they should do for example is tell GC and the comp after the end of the 2019 season that GC will be getting priority access to these players prior to the 2020 draft. GC can put on say 5 full time equivalent staff to scout these competitions during the 2020 season.  Then just as the old VFL had an 8 week playing permit arrangement with the Amateurs GC during 2020  could bring over a few players to play NEAFL and train with them so they can have a close look at the potential picks. Gives them the best chance of snaring a Kelly, Fritsch, etc,etc.

Maybe the AFL could also assist a couple of good free agents to go to GC. Ie, subsidise pay or moving costs.

The AFL just keep throwing a few cheap doggy biscuits at GC to shut them up for 5 minutes,. Its time to give them a bone with a bit of meat on it. Its going to take a few years or more to get them really going well.

But no more of this priority pick before first pick. We have been there before and it does not work.

  On 14/07/2019 at 01:38, manny100 said:

The GC list is already stacked with young talent. More will not help straight away. Its a joke.

Paul Roos had the great idea of priority players from State and other leagues. The AFL just big time stuffed up the execution of it. They told GC and the Blues not long before the draft it was going to happen.

What they should do for example is tell GC and the comp after the end of the 2019 season that GC will be getting priority access to these players prior to the 2020 draft. GC can put on say 5 full time equivalent staff to scout these competitions during the 2020 season.  Then just as the old VFL had an 8 week playing permit arrangement with the Amateurs GC during 2020  could bring over a few players to play NEAFL and train with them so they can have a close look at the potential picks. Gives them the best chance of snaring a Kelly, Fritsch, etc,etc.

Maybe the AFL could also assist a couple of good free agents to go to GC. Ie, subsidise pay or moving costs.

The AFL just keep throwing a few cheap doggy biscuits at GC to shut them up for 5 minutes,. Its time to give them a bone with a bit of meat on it. Its going to take a few years or more to get them really going well.

But no more of this priority pick before first pick. We have been there before and it does not work.

What Sporting Franchise has survived on the Gold Coast in the last 50 years?

  On 12/07/2019 at 12:13, Moonshadow said:

TGR is not good with facts or perspective

You guys are absolutely blinkered.  Even with their father-sons, to even compare Geelong’s past draft selections/position with our welfare/charity gifts defies logic.

 

Even the simpleton wearing rose-coloured glasses can see that.

 

Love to see your facts that prove otherwise.

None have survived because like the AFL they stuff the execution of the plan.

  On 14/07/2019 at 01:08, Lucifer's Hero said:

 

GCS have had plenty of top picks in the last few years:  In 2016: picks 4, 7, 9, 10.  In 2018: picks 2, 3, 6.  ie 7 top 10 picks in a 24 month period.  Those players are still developing and some will be elite, if they keep them.

And a couple/few of those 7 top-end picks will almost certainly be below par.  That's how drafting works.  There are no absolutes despite what we're told. 

The 'hope' attached to drafting leads many to ignore the bad news that inevitably surrounds drafting. 

So an extra pick increases the percentage play rather than guaranteeing another good player.

As a coach,  Dew should know this so why he doesn't want what is best for his own club is quite baffling.  You take what you can get and if you don't ask,  you don't get.

I understand all the rest of it with regards to building a great list and a great club but again,  you scramble for all that you can get in this league. 

We'd be a bit alarmed if Goodwin was in conflict with Bartlett over a priority pick.  I guess the GCS are a bit out of sight,  out of mind so that might explain the difference of opinion between the Pres & Coach.

Edited July 14, 20195 yr by Macca

  On 14/07/2019 at 03:16, manny100 said:

None have survived because like the AFL they stuff the execution of the plan.

It is a transient town, most occupants already have their Teams embedded

if i moved up there in the next 10 years as a retiree would i give a dam about the $un$....

Can we ask for a couple of pp’s?

Its GODS 'waiting room' up there. Why not spend those last precious moments following footy. After all its treated very reverently.!!

I think GC need a priority pick. Most other clubs wouldnt qualify but the AFL needs to build up Queensland. I hope GC end up with picks 1 and 2, mainly just because I hate Adelaide.

If CGS get a priority pick I hope it follows the same guidelines we got in 2008 when our priority pick came at the end of the first round (which we used on Sam Blease).

As bad as the Suns are, the blues, Saints (and now apparently us) are also in need of top end young talent.

Shame Carlton swapped draft picks, they need another top end kid.

  On 11/07/2019 at 13:10, Gunna’s said:

Good in theory, but relies on players wanting to go to GC.

Melksham and Hibberd both wanted out of essendon after the drugs saga which gave essendon less bargaining power. 

Rather than using the reference 'drug saga' can you refer to it correctly as 'The EFC performance enhancing drug program' 

  On 14/07/2019 at 01:08, Lucifer's Hero said:

Agreed. 

GCS have had plenty of top picks in the last few years:  In 2016: picks 4, 7, 9, 10.  In 2018: picks 2, 3, 6.  ie 7 top 10 picks in a 24 month period.  Those players are still developing and some will be elite, if they keep them. 

Cochrane goes on about the mistakes in the early years.  But he has nothing to Crow about.  He has been there for 6 years and overseen the appointment of Eade and Dew.  He grandstands, breathes fire and brimstone and cries poor but not much apparent positive impact.

They really need help and a new Chairman might be a good start. The AFL put in Mark Evans as CEO but he isn't having much impact either but needs time.  They also need to put people and resources into development, medical, rehab etc.  It is the only feasible option.

I wouldn't know Tony Cochrane from a bar of soap, but having listened to him being interviewed quite a few times now I'm absolutely certain he's part of the problem. I'm not sure of the governance arrangements of the Suns (is it owned by the AFL?) but if I were the AFL I would want to provide the Suns with help, but on condition that Cochrane was replaced. Otherwise, the AFL will find that additional picks or any other form of on-field assistance will just be wasted. That club's problems are not just on-field and what we know from experience of just about every other club in history is that you can't fix the on-field without getting the off-field right first.

  On 14/07/2019 at 13:12, chookrat said:

Rather than using the reference 'drug saga' can you refer to it correctly as 'The EFC performance enhancing drug program' 

Noted 

assume they are essendrug too?

GC can just fold and we can have a mini-draft of their players. 

  On 14/07/2019 at 05:18, Redleg said:

Can we ask for a couple of pp’s?

We should. We’ve played one finals series in 13 seasons and finished bottom 4 god knows how many times.

  On 15/07/2019 at 06:38, sisso said:

We should. We’ve played one finals series in 13 seasons and finished bottom 4 god knows how many times.

If we didn’t beat west coast over there in the h&a last season......the media would be asking for another coach, another rebuild and probably for Melbourne to move to Tassie. 

I don’t think we are a basket case, but we need to build some mental toughness and with it a win at all cost attitude. If a PP gets someone in with those attributes....I’ll take it.

Suns are clearly tanking. Weller playing back pocket is as bad as Frawley on a wing.  

  On 15/07/2019 at 22:07, spirit of norm smith said:

Suns are clearly tanking. Weller playing back pocket is as bad as Frawley on a wing.  

Why would they bother? They're 1 game and 19% below the second last team. They don't need to "tank" to show how bad they are. (I should add, that I doubt anyone before the season began gave them any chance of actually winning 3 games, so overall, they've probably done better than expected.) 

  On 14/07/2019 at 03:15, TGR said:

You guys are absolutely blinkered.  Even with their father-sons, to even compare Geelong’s past draft selections/position with our welfare/charity gifts defies logic.

 

Even the simpleton wearing rose-coloured glasses can see that.

 

Love to see your facts that prove otherwise.

Where's your facts? Detail the welfare/charity gifts Melbourne have received. Then do a comparative analysis with what other clubs have received (including Geelong with their father/sons and outside cap payments) and then we can start to talk.

Until then it's just typical pTGRBS.

  On 17/07/2019 at 00:17, Dr. Gonzo said:

Where's your facts? Detail the welfare/charity gifts Melbourne have received. Then do a comparative analysis with what other clubs have received (including Geelong with their father/sons and outside cap payments) and then we can start to talk.

Until then it's just typical pTGRBS.

Apart from all that drafting is flawed anyway so the debate/argument is based on mistruths,  myths,  incorrect projections and crystal ball gazing. 

In a nutshell the draft is a bit of a lottery with lots of hidden nice prizes and any number of busts

But I agree with your reply Gonzo ... up to a dozen clubs 'Qualified' for priority picks which were obviously tanked for.  We just did what the others did but our drafting results were poor (which,  when taking into account how flawed the draft is could have easily been predicted) 

The draft believers will disagree and that's their choice.  I'd rather look at the truths surrounding drafting. 

Putting an absolute value on a draft pick number is flawed too.  The Hogan/May deal with a top-end pick involved as a bartering tool makes more sense. 

In the end we swapped Hogan for May.  A 'virtual' swap per se.

May is older but looks to be a good asset and who knows what Freo will get with Jesse.  I wouldn't call it win/win (yet) but both clubs got what they needed.

  On 17/07/2019 at 00:17, Dr. Gonzo said:

Where's your facts? Detail the welfare/charity gifts Melbourne have received. Then do a comparative analysis with what other clubs have received (including Geelong with their father/sons and outside cap payments) and then we can start to talk.

Until then it's just typical pTGRBS.

A climate change believer trying to persuade a climate change denier is an absolute and utter waste of time and energy, and only puts more CO2 in the atmosphere.

 

pTGR

st-kilda-to-consider-asking-afl-for-priority-draft-pick

A team that has messed up so many draft picks in recent years, had poor development and paid big bucks to injury prone players doesn't deserve a pp.  It is a S-U of their own making. 

Edited July 18, 20195 yr by Lucifer's Hero

  On 18/07/2019 at 00:52, Lucifer's Hero said:

st-kilda-to-consider-asking-afl-for-priority-draft-pick

A team that has messed up so many draft picks in recent years, had poor development and paid big bucks to injury prone players doesn't deserve a pp.  It is a S-U of their own making. 

I'm sorry but that's so hypocritical. our club probably leached for PP's more than any other team off the back of failed picks and poor development. (Morton, watts, maric, Strauss, Blake, Bate, Bennell, Tapscott etc.).

I dont think stkilda will get one but we, as a club, should shut up on this issue.

  On 14/07/2019 at 05:18, Redleg said:

Can we ask for a couple of pp’s?

Not as stupid as it sounded when I posted it. 

The Saints are considering a PP request on the basis of their injuries this season. 

Well guess what, on the published list of injuries to clubs this season we were rated far and away the hardest hit by injuries, both in total games lost and most importantly, games lost by best 22 players on the list. 

There was a large gap to second placed team in both categories.

Well if the Saints are contemplating a request with less injuries and a higher ladder position, ( we could be 2nd last Sunday night ), then so should we. 

Any advantage helps in this competition. Just ask the Cats if they would give up their huge advantage at skilled.

 

Edited July 18, 20195 yr by Redleg