That nobody rated until they were drafted in the ND. expecting clubs to pick diamonds isn’t particularly sustainable as an approach.
North Melbourne Priority Pick 2021
- Thread starter Mofra
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
- Aug 17, 2009
- 6,343
- 7,464
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Oh yeah, I'm not angling for a PP. I just think this argument that North played finals more recently than lots of clubs is a furphy. Meanwhile others saying if anyone deserved one it was Adelaide last year, when they played in the GF in 2017!
Personally I think they need to remove all the shit that distorts the draft and it will work much more effectively as an equalisation measure. No more academies, no more father-son, no priority picks, no free agency compensation. (The last obviously requires some other changes to free agency).
If the AFL had the balls to do that within a few years the draft would work as intended and it would be a better competition overall.
Devington
Brownlow Medallist
- Jun 4, 2013
- 18,529
- 49,113
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
I agree that these things, and more, make the game less equal but by the same token I think some of them also have value. The father-son rule in particular is a really unique cultural aspect of the sport that I think the league is better off for having it. That doesn't mean the implementation shouldn't or can't be changed, but I would be sad to see it go away completely.
BringOn2017
Cancelled
- Apr 27, 2016
- 415
- 764
- AFL Club
- Richmond
I would love to be a fly in the room when you have to explain to Eddie that Josh Daicos will be going to North because of a new rule.
- Aug 17, 2009
- 6,343
- 7,464
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Unfortunately I think it belongs to another era. Clubs aren't interested in father-son unless they can see an advantage to exploit in it. The points system was supposed to make it fairer but just leads to further draft distortions with clubs trading junk picks to get ahead of the pick, or out of the draft for that year.
And patently unfair to GC/GWS and even Port and Freo (haven't looked too closely but I assume WC and Adelaide have been in long enough now to be on an equal footing).
Belongs to a bygone era I'm afraid, with flogger and suburban grounds and 6 games at 2pm Saturday.
When you totally gut a list with so many delistings and end up uncompetitive and finish last you dont get a PP
Freo / Hawks / bombers could all have taken that route but have chosen to try to rebuild with smart trading and drafting
Freo / Hawks / bombers could all have taken that route but have chosen to try to rebuild with smart trading and drafting
- Feb 23, 2010
- 2,267
- 3,081
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- C's
I don't think we deserve one. If we're still dead last in 2 years time and shown no signs of improvement, then yes, maybe I'd change my tune. Fact is we've created this situation and I'm hoping we can turn it around and lose by 69pts when we get some guys back.
- Nov 14, 2013
- 1,552
- 5,919
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Colts, Raptors, Milan, FU Crabs
I don't think we should get a priority pick this season, this is essentially ground zero and I would hope the team should improve from here, without AFL mandated support.
This thread is a bit weird though, the delistings have been way overstated, literally only Majak was picked up from our delistees. We'd still be this bad if we kept them around, just much older. I'd rather losing by 50 and blooding the youngsters than losing by 30 and not developing anyone.
The injuries have also been understated. A majority of our senior players have had extended stints out already this season. Tarrant, McDonald, Anderson, Cunnington, Corr, Dumont etc. Not to say we would've won any games with them all in, but the side would no doubt be a lot more competitive with these guys playing.
Needless to say, if we go winless this season it'll probably end up with us receiving a PP, having an uncompetitive team hits the AFL right in the bank account where it hurts. Even though North are small, they still want people to watch and attend our games.
This thread is a bit weird though, the delistings have been way overstated, literally only Majak was picked up from our delistees. We'd still be this bad if we kept them around, just much older. I'd rather losing by 50 and blooding the youngsters than losing by 30 and not developing anyone.
The injuries have also been understated. A majority of our senior players have had extended stints out already this season. Tarrant, McDonald, Anderson, Cunnington, Corr, Dumont etc. Not to say we would've won any games with them all in, but the side would no doubt be a lot more competitive with these guys playing.
Needless to say, if we go winless this season it'll probably end up with us receiving a PP, having an uncompetitive team hits the AFL right in the bank account where it hurts. Even though North are small, they still want people to watch and attend our games.
They all are but you cannot make those poor decisions and then less than 12 months later put your hand out for a priority pick. Now if as a result of cutting too deep and mismanaging their list they are in the same position in another year or two then you can ask for assistance.
Otherwise it clubs an incentive to mismanage their lists out their hand out for a priority pick, get the best two kids in the draft all within 12 months.
Was an entirely different system in 2003 and 2004 where teams could basically tank. Not sure the dogs cut their list like north has either.
OK, so because the 'system' was different, it was alright?
You traded your best young player at the end of 2003 after recieving your first PP in Nathan Brown. It was arguably worse what you did.
You still had the likes of Grant, Smith, Johnson, West, Darcy, Garlic, Croft, Gilbee, Gia, Murphy on your list in 2004......
Looks comparable? And your trying to say North doesn't need one now after you got awarded 2 x top 4 picks with the below list? ****ing rofl.
Last edited:
Never said it was alright. The old system was win less than 5 games you got a priority pick, when less than 5 games in consecutive years you got an early priority pick.
The new system is AFL lotto you apply and they weigh up factors that no one really has a clear idea of and make a decision.
The original system was exploitable and was rightfully changed.
My opinion is a priority pick should not be awarded within the 12 months of the mismanagement. Now if north apply at the end of 2022 then fair enough. But if they get one this year it creates another exploitable system.
Why do people keep saying 12 months?
We finished 17th with 3 wins last year.
It's likely we finish with less than 3 wins this year.
That's 2 years. 4 years ago we also finished on equal points for the spoon.
We would have qualified this year for Pick #1 under the old system and we quite clearly aren't tanking like that Dogs side did with that list.
The fact that there is no transparency on a set formula for when a priority pick is granted but instead a murky "discretionary" hotpotch is classic AFL
- Sep 25, 2013
- 16,122
- 31,139
3 wins in a 17 game season played for the most part in QLD. Very disingenuous.
This is the last time I’m engaging with you because so far your argument has been teams did it under the old system so we should be able to under the new system. By that logic certain teams exploited the salary cap and won flags so everyone should be able to.
It’s the everyone else was doing it so why can’t I argument.
North did finish 17th last year but they had injuries and reasons for that. They then decided to cut their list massively and let Higgins go and forced brown out. When making that list management decision they would have been fully aware that it would make them significantly worse.
Now 12 months after that decision they want a priority pick? That makes the system exploitable. Now people say 12 months because it’s when your club made the list management decisions that have put them in their current position.
If they had not made the decision to cut so deeply and remove any depth/extra mature bodies to help your kids develop, I would not have an issue with you getting a priority pick but cutting your list to the point where the club knew you’d be lucky to win a game, the club cannot then ask for help after a single season in my opinion
Lol so many goldfish on this site.
You need to stop listening to Dwayne Russell on SEN.
North had a contract extension on the table for months at $750k+ per year for 3 years which Brown and his management rejected.
Browns management tried to railroad North into a 5 year deal, Browns form dropped dramatically and he had a major knee injury, the $750k contract extension was rescinded and Brown and his management walked to Melbourne for a lot less than what was originally on the table at North.
Ramanauskas was made to look like one of the biggest mugs in trade history last year.
- Sep 25, 2013
- 16,122
- 31,139
And still didn’t win the spoon.
People really don't understand this current system.
It's not there for equalisation, it's there for the AFL to please the broadcaster.
The AFL recieved an ultimatum over the Gold Coast by Lewis Martin and Patrick Delaney 2 years ago regarding the quality of games they were putting out. They were told in no uncertain terms to fix them by whatever means necessary by the next broadcast rights.
North's current losing margins far exceed the GC's 2-3 years ago, I imagine the same phone call will be made to fix the quality of these games as quickly as possible.
Currently 11% of the broadcasters product each week has turned to unwatchable garbage.
So prepare your tears....
Smack on
Lots of Hypocrites in here
"yeah we got a priority pick(or 2) but that was the old system" sort of rubbish
Well who cares what system it was then or now. The fact is the PP is still available and if North qualify we'll grab it with both hands and all those clubs who got COLA or priority picks in the past can go have their tanty's..I don't see why we should care. We are playing by the rules of the day, the exact same as what the other clubs who got handouts did
- May 13, 2007
- 2,706
- 4,071
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Seahawks, Huskies, Newcastle Utd.
Totally agree that they were looked over but halfway through their final years in the WAFL it was obvious to everyone that both players were going to be picked up in the forthcoming draft.
10 - 12 weeks gives recruiters a pretty good look at anyone running around in the 2nd's.
- Status
Similar threads
