The calumny of the AFL's priority pick policy

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

37 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

I think to best sum it up for me it's,

Gold Coast were rewarded for poor management. I get they need help, but the help should be even across the competition for the same circumstances.

What they've received is a competitive advantage. But we all know the draft isn't an automatic path to success.

People have been following this club for years, and we have been a basket case for decades. I don't blame people for getting upset and asking when is it our turn?

Why should the "new" club get a competitive advantage over a club that has existed from the start? What other competition allows for such variations in rules?

Don't get me wrong, I really do agree with your points, but people have a right to be [censored] off with AFL house

Why is it so hard to decipher between a well established club like us vs an eight year old club plonked in the middle of a rugby infested state?

I don't care how poor we are. We have supporters. We have 50,000 + members. We're 150 +  years old.

Gold Coast are a new team trying to establish itself in a new area. 

Nobody has a right to be [censored] off.

If things went to plan this year, the draft compromises wouldn't have troubled us and nobody would be saying boo.

Do you think Richmond GAF about what's just transpired?

Let's worry about our own backyard. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by stevethemanjordan

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

12 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Why is so hard to decipher between a well established club like us vs an eight year old club plonked in the middle of a rugby infested state?

I don't care how poor we are. We have supporters. We have 50,000 + members. We're 150 +  years old.

Gold Coast are a new team trying to establish itself in a new area. 

Nobody has a right to be [censored] off.

If things went to plan this year, the draft compromises wouldn't have troubled us and nobody would be saying boo.

Do you think Richmond GAF about what's just transpired?

Let's worry about our own backyard. 

You're completely missing my point.

The point isn't about what the MFC should or shouldn't have done, it's about AFL house applying the rules unevenly.

In an even league with set rules why should GC get draft assistance?

As per above you've answered my question (per the highlighted section) - My point is, the competition should be even and not comprised to meet AFL objectives.

 

it has nothing to do with MFC, it is a statement about AFL house 

I'll leave it at that.... like you've said it is more important that the MFC get and keep their house in order - Draft assistance is not the answer to our woes

Edited September 30, 2019 by Unleash Hell

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Here's something that should be on the minds of Melbourne supporters instead of this Gold Coast package fluff.

How about some energy and attention goes toward the pending decisions that will be made around trade period time?

I'm far more concerned to hear that both Papley and Martin have nominated Carlton as their club of choice whilst also potentially getting Betts back.

Now without wanting to jump the worry gun just yet, I find it alarming and fascinating that our name wasn't linked to either player. Whilst the Elliott offer is promising, I'm praying that we haven't gone all eggs in one basket with him and there's some transparency around us and Tom Papley. For instance, if he didn't want to come then what was the reason? Again, it will reflect extremely poorly on us if it's because of the season we had and it should be a reminder to those who continually excuse this as "just a blip year". 

The talk of our lack of outside speed is nothing but a big furphy in my opinion. We had the same list last year and at times we looked absolutely ballistic with our forward movement. It'll come down to having a fit and firing midfield with some players who need to lift their decision making game.

In case people haven't noticed, we averaged a huge number of inside 50's this year which means we need to start converting those into shots at goal.

Papley would have been absolutely perfect as that high pressure half-forward and Jack Martin turns opportunities to score into scores.

If Elliot signs, I'll be over the moon. If he doesn't, I'll be wanting answers in regards to game changing players like Martin and Papley and why we didn't pursue them.

At the moment, Carlton are going to leapfrog us and they won't be turning back once they get on a role. 

Let that sink in for a minute.

[Lord Nev 13,511]

5 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Here's something that should be on the minds of Melbourne supporters instead of this Gold Coast package fluff.

How about some energy and attention goes toward the pending decisions that will be made around trade period time?

https://demonland.com/forums/forum/38-tradedraft-what-to-do-with-pick-3/

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

17 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

You're completely missing my point.

The point isn't about what the MFC should or shouldn't have done, it's about AFL house applying the rules unevenly.

In an even league with set rules why should GC get draft assistance?

As per above you've answered my question (per the highlighted section) - My point is, the competition should be even and not comprised to meet AFL objectives.

 

it has nothing to do with MFC, it is a statement about AFL house 

I'll leave it at that.... like you've said it is more important that the MFC get and keep their house in order - Draft assistance is not the answer to our woes

 

Clubs and therefore the competition will never be 'even'. But hopefully one day they'll be more 'even' and certain clubs will need less 'assistance'.

Gold Coast and GWS are at a huge disadvantage compared to established teams who have a secure supporter base and foundation. If they fail early on, they'll get assistance. They can't and shouldn't be treated the same way as established clubs because the whole experiment would fail.

Edited September 30, 2019 by stevethemanjordan

[Carn dees 108]

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Get angry at your own club.

Write a letter to them.

Ask them to nail their picks at the draft this year and make some killer trades. 

Exactly!!!

this club has stuffed up so many draft picks and ruined careers through terrible development and managemet. 

Stop blaming the AFL, of course there priority is in expanding the afl and supporting their investment. 

Having a stable club in the Gold Coast and two Queensland teams will be great for the competition and obviously that'  their  priority. 

 

 

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 5,923]

I agree with a few of the posters on this forum, while some of us are not happy the club can't be excused for its past decisions re drafting, home base etc.

But what other competition in the world are handing out multiple handouts/free kicks to one organisation.

This wouldn't happen in the states in any of their major sporting codes if it did it would be full blown anarchy.

[Ethan Tremblay 28,469]

I don’t care that our picks have been bumped to the right, we only have ourselves to blame that we’re once again relying on early draft picks. I take issue with the AFL and their decision making, you can give GCS all the picks in the world, it won’t stop the decent players from leaving. 

[Bitter but optimistic 21,389]

What pisses me is that whoever GC takes with P2 will end up at Hawthorn or Richmond etc in a couple of years time

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

16 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

 

Clubs and therefore the competition will never be 'even'. But hopefully one day they'll be more 'even' and certain clubs will need less 'assistance'.

Gold Coast and GWS are at a huge disadvantage compared to established teams who have a secure supporter base and foundation. If they fail early on, they'll get assistance. They can't and shouldn't be treated the same way as established clubs because the whole experiment would fail.

Yes. I agree and understand all of that.

But that's my point. You're happy for the Afl to help their experiments to make sure they're successful so they dont fail.

Yet its at a cost to clubs like ours. You dont have to be upset about it. And i agree with your main point that its up to the mfc to get it right.

But i still.maintain that people have a right to be [censored] off about it.

 

[Go the Biff 3,177]

1 hour ago, Whispering_Jack said:

The problem I have with the AFL is that is makes up its policy on the run. There is no consistency in its decision-making and no accountability. This effectively diminishes the competition and turns it into another form of entertainment much like professional wrestling. How long before we just don’t regard it as a sport any more?

It's a sport second Jack. But it - at AFL level - is a product first and is being administered as such

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

16 minutes ago, Win4theAges said:

I agree with a few of the posters on this forum, while some of us are not happy the club can't be excused for its past decisions re drafting, home base etc.

But what other competition in the world are handing out multiple handouts/free kicks to one organisation.

This wouldn't happen in the states in any of their major sporting codes if it did it would be full blown anarchy.

It makes complete sense for the long-term success and future of these types of sides. 

The AFL is an extremely unique sport and we're still trying to grow the game nationally. Major sporting codes in the states are universally loved sports.

We've still got areas in our own country where the interest in AFL is about as much as it is in a foreign country. 

No other competition would need to hand out as much because the foundation would be there. Port Adelaide are a great example. A club with a rich history who became a new AFL team. Gold Coast and GWS are being built from scratch.

Edited September 30, 2019 by stevethemanjordan

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

7 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

Yes. I agree and understand all of that.

But that's my point. You're happy for the Afl to help their experiments to make sure they're successful so they dont fail.

Yet its at a cost to clubs like ours. You dont have to be upset about it. And i agree with your main point that its up to the mfc to get it right.

But i still.maintain that people have a right to be [censored] off about it.

 

Man.

All of those lines I've bolded just contradict one another. 

You say "it's at a cost to clubs like ours" and follow it up with "I agree that it's up to the MFC to get it right" and finish with "I still maintain that people have a right to be [censored] off about it".

The AFL are doing what they were always going to do if this happened to one of the expansion teams this early in the piece. 

It has zero effect on us. You know why?

We don't need the AFL to screw us, we consistently do it to ourselves.

Edited September 30, 2019 by stevethemanjordan

[sue 8,463]

50 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

 

Well I'm not entirely sure who you're alluding to. I know over the journey I have been extremely critical of list management and recruitment decisions. 

Maybe supporters can vote me in to a recruiting role or something, I don't know? 

I'm not alluding to you.  As a critic you are sensible.  Some others, not so much.     

I've been supporting this club since the late 1950's so I've seen a lot of pain as well as success (the latter sadly only dimly remembered) but I've never seen so many supporters who are so relentlessly negative as some on here.   Sure we have a lot to be negative about, but I wish some would give it a rest. They are not doing us or the club any favours. Maybe it is therapy for them, who knows.  It's almost as boring as me saying it is boring.

[Demon Dynasty 15,737]

6 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

What pisses me is that whoever GC takes with P2 will end up at Hawthorn or Richmond etc in a couple of years time

All the better players will not be coming to us unless we win a premiership Uncle.  Catch 22.  We are the proverbial pig on a spit.

We should rename ourselves the Melbourne Gyros...taking it from both ends!

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

2 minutes ago, sue said:

I'm not alluding to you.  As a critic you are sensible.  Some others, not so much.     

I've been supporting this club since the late 1950's so I've seen a lot of pain as well as success (the latter sadly only dimly remembered) but I've never seen so many supporters who are so relentlessly negative as some on here.   Sure we have a lot to be negative about, but I wish some would give it a rest. They are not doing us or the club any favours. Maybe it is therapy for them, who knows.  It's almost as boring as me saying it is boring.

Fair enough.

I certainly find it difficult to remain patient with the club. 

[deebug 1,754]

What i would like to know, is why out of all their, 8 years gc have ask this year for a pp, why not last year?

[ding 5,126]

18 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

What pisses me is that whoever GC takes with P2 will end up at Hawthorn or Richmond etc in a couple of years time

For pick 16

[AshleyH30 566]

While everyone is worried about their Priority Picks, here I am more worried about the Academy Concessions and what Ramifications they may have. What would happen if another Team's F/S were to go through their Academy Program?

[Scipio 5,868]

17 minutes ago, deebug said:

What i would like to know, is why out of all their, 8 years gc have ask this year for a pp, why not last year?

To cause the MFC maximum inconvenience.

[DeeSpencer 23,292]

3 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

All AFL clubs had the chance to ready themselves for the draft concessions that both the Gold Coast and GWS were given in their first few seasons in the AFL.

Our club didn't ready itself. 

It is completely and utterly nonsensical for a Melbourne supporter to think it's 'unfair' that Gold Coast have been given more handouts.

We had more top draft picks in 2007, 08, 09 than any other club I'd imagine - Richmond were the only one who would be close. Unfortunately we were operating with a football department and club without anything close to the resources.

We were left behind when the rich clubs started spending money and the AFL had so much cash that they didn't know what to do with that they invented 2 whole new clubs. Our supporters rallied for the debt demolition campaign but that was only to get us back in the game.

The likes of Morton, Grimes, Maric, Trengove, Gysberts, Tapscott, Watts, Strauss and Blease should be [censored] as hell they were drafted to Melbourne and weren't given proper facilities, proper coaching or proper fitness/medical staff. The same issues that hindered Gold Coast's start up hurt that generation of our players. The only ones who made it through - Gawn and Jetta - spent most of the time injured.

Oh and what was our reward for taking all those draft picks so we were prepared for the new clubs - we were slandered in the media for tanking years after the event, furthering a rift between the coaches and administration. Our club name was turned to mud for doing the same thing several clubs had and have done since.

Where were our handouts in 2012-2014? We were as bad if not worse than the Suns are now and instead were given a small amount of extra funding for Roos and told to trade, draft and develop our way back. We had to give up prime draft picks and list spots for Tyson, Vince, Hibberd, Melksham, Frost, Garlett, Cross etc to get back to being a competitive side. Now the Suns can have their cake and eat it too? They can trade draft picks for experienced players whilst still getting access at the top of the draft. Damn right I'll say it's unfair.

[Wiseblood 24,636]

52 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Here's something that should be on the minds of Melbourne supporters instead of this Gold Coast package fluff.

How about some energy and attention goes toward the pending decisions that will be made around trade period time?

I'm far more concerned to hear that both Papley and Martin have nominated Carlton as their club of choice whilst also potentially getting Betts back.

Now without wanting to jump the worry gun just yet, I find it alarming and fascinating that our name wasn't linked to either player. Whilst the Elliott offer is promising, I'm praying that we haven't gone all eggs in one basket with him and there's some transparency around us and Tom Papley. For instance, if he didn't want to come then what was the reason? Again, it will reflect extremely poorly on us if it's because of the season we had and it should be a reminder to those who continually excuse this as "just a blip year". 

The talk of our lack of outside speed is nothing but a big furphy in my opinion. We had the same list last year and at times we looked absolutely ballistic with our forward movement. It'll come down to having a fit and firing midfield with some players who need to lift their decision making game.

In case people haven't noticed, we averaged a huge number of inside 50's this year which means we need to start converting those into shots at goal.

Papley would have been absolutely perfect as that high pressure half-forward and Jack Martin turns opportunities to score into scores.

If Elliot signs, I'll be over the moon. If he doesn't, I'll be wanting answers in regards to game changing players like Martin and Papley and why we didn't pursue them.

At the moment, Carlton are going to leapfrog us and they won't be turning back once they get on a role. 

Let that sink in for a minute.

Great post, Steve.  

The two bolded parts are what stick out to me the most.  I must admit that I was disappointed to see Papley potentially nominating Carlton as his club of choice today.  A small forward who is smart, quick and can hit the scoreboard is exactly what we need.  It's what the likes of ANB, Lockhart, Wagner etc don't bring to the table.  They might bring plenty of effort for the jumper, but that only gets you so far.  The club would have seen the weaknesses up forward and, why the Elliott offer is interesting, I feel as though we've gone for the hardest bloke to get.  We may have gone for him as we wouldn't have to cough up players or picks for him, which in turn allows us more flexibility at the trade table or when we go to the draft, but Elliott seems like a Collingwood man through and through.  Prying him out of there might be a challenge, and one we need to pay plenty of dollars for.

On the flip side, perhaps we saw the fact that Papley was under contract for a few more years and didn't want to stump up a high pick to get him from the Swans?  Maybe we have offers on the table to 'split that pick' and felt we weren't in the running?  That's a lame excuse, and one I don't agree with, but I guess you would like to think there is a reason why we didn't chase him, or that we were rebuffed when we did.  

The last bolded part is why I'm still confident in what we're doing.  We still have pretty much the same list that got us to a Prelim in 2018, and the potential additions in Langdon, Tomlinson and Elliott will improve us - none of them are stars, although Elliott had the capacity to win games off his own boot, but they improve our best 22 and we only need to cough up a second rounder for Langdon to do it.

These are interesting times for the club, and some are rightly questioning a few of the decisions that are potentially being made.  There is still plenty to play out and I'm hopeful supporters hold their fire until everything unfolds over the next few months.

[deebug 1,754]

4 minutes ago, AshleyH30 said:

While everyone is worried about their Priority Picks, here I am more worried about the Academy Concessions and what Ramifications they may have. What would happen if another Team's F/S were to go through their Academy Program?

It seems like they would have first choise, at that player if he were to go through their academy program.

That is why last week gil said there is going to an overhall of the whole system after 2019 season. So from 2020 gc will become the club with it all.

Even reading the AFL website just now they are saying how can luke Bruset get to the suns, now Huge Greenwood.

This ust keeps on getting better and better.

2 minutes ago, Luther said:

To cause the MFC maximum inconvenience.

Yer, i am soo p*$$#@ off about this.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,499]

It's a bit more generous than I was expecting, but I have no problem with the AFL giving the Gold Coast a hand. What does surprise me is that all of the additional picks appear to be unencumbered. I was expecting the AFL to require at least one of the picks to be traded. That would have given the Gold Coast one or more mature players rather than another 18 year old. Of course, Gold Coast can still trade these additional picks on their own volition.

[Jara 1,149]

Free country People can think whatever they like.

What i  think is that i hate the AFL. Like all carnivorous capitalist beasts, it grows fat by devouring the weak. Doubtless Greasy Gill will get bonuses etc for pushing GC up the ladder.