Different times

Then...Less than 4 wins= 2 picks .... therefore a serious leg up

Now not so much

7 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Different times

Then...Less than 4 wins= 2 picks .... therefore a serious leg up

Now not so much

I think this is an important distinction between then and now. There is a lot less to gain now than there was.

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I think this is an important distinction between then and now. There is a lot less to gain now than there was.

There’s still the potential to get pick one if a rejuvenated North wins a game and goes past them. That’s an incentive.

Edit: particularly if North get a priority pick and push WC to pick 3.

Edited July 22, 20223 yr by deejammin'

We tanked. Others tanked. It's just that we did it more flagrantly than the others. Same as peptides. Dons drugged. Others drugged. It's just that the Dons did it more flagrantly than others.

1 hour ago, deejammin' said:

There’s still the potential to get pick one if a rejuvenated North wins a game and goes past them. That’s an incentive.

Edit: particularly if North get a priority pick and push WC to pick 3.

Is it? The strike rate for pick #1 being better than picks #2 or #3 is hardly that impressive. Accordingly, it probably doesn't really matter whether a team has picks 1, 2 or 3.

13 hours ago, Turner said:

because then the essendon drug saga kicked off so they had to fine us so they could move their attention to the next and more important scandal

Thats pretty much exactly how it went down really.