November 2009 - Not a compromised Draft its .........?

[giveusatraveller]

I reckon we need to come up with a better word or phrase than "compromised". It detracts from the skill and talent that the kids coming up this year have. Future references will also underpin anything that is written about now. Come on - there are smart people out there on big footy....... lets think laterally to do these boys justice. When all is said and done we are talking about "babies born within a set time frame" where does this take us? Certainly not to say they are "compromised!"

Tom Scully......compromised skills/talent - nah I don't think so - John Butcher.......Kane Lucas......and the list goes on.......still so much talent so come on - let's get correctly descriptive.

 

[footyman]

Interesting topic.

Perhaps we should just say the draft pool is depleted? Or weakened?

 

[BABYBOMBERS2007]

A tainted draft.

 

[Bails2008]

A restricted draft

 

[giveusatraveller]

Interesting topic.

Perhaps we should just say the draft pool is depleted? Or weakened?

Depleted isn't too creative and I think weakened is in the vein of insulting....sorry if that sounds harsh FM...tainted also the same.

These boys would otherwise get wraps of "strong draft...talented...." you know what I am trying to say perhaps inarticulately.

 

[one 4 the road]

Born '91 draft.
Pretty lame but thats what it is, as you said originally does belittle the boys eligble this year.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Strange thread bursting with political correctness.

'Compromised' doesn't refer to the quality of the individual players, but merely that this is the first draft where the normal procedures of selection are subject to concessions afforded to the Gold Coast team. 2010 is where it really kicks in anyway.

Regardless, lets not be too precious.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

"Compressed" draft?

Refers more to size of draft pool than quality.

 

[giveusatraveller]

Strange thread bursting with political correctness.

'Compromised' doesn't refer to the quality of the individual players, but merely that this is the first draft where the normal procedures of selection are subject to concessions afforded to the Gold Coast team. 2010 is where it really kicks in anyway.

Regardless, lets not be too precious.

Truly not looking to be "precious" just wanting to be fair for future references to this years quality kids, being literal here is what GOOD OLD THEO came up with

compromised noun
1. agreement
a settlement of a dispute in which two or more sides agree to accept less than they originally wanted
2. something accepted rather than wanted
something that somebody accepts because what was wanted is unattainable
3.potential danger or disgrace
exposure to danger or disgrace

compromised verb

1. agree by conceding

intransitive verb to settle a dispute by agreeing to accept less than what was originally wanted
2. lessen value of somebody of something

transitive verb to undermine or devalue somebody or something by making concessions
• Don't compromise your integrity by telling half-truths.

 

[Johnson#26]

Limited, restricted.

 

[forgetaboutit]

Why don't we just call it The 2009 Draft?

Do we have preface it with something do we, seeing that once the GC & the 2nd Sydney side is done and dusted, this will be they way of all future drafts.

If you call 2009 compromised, what do we call 2010, basterdized!!!

 

[BOND 007]

Can somebody advise the exact situation of the 2009 draft now with GC involved.
-- How many underage footballers does GC have first dibs on ?
-- If they select a player who doesnt want to go - can the player refuse and if so what are the repercussions?
-- given GC will be playing TAC cup during 2010 can the underage player not nominate (knowing he is a good chance of GC taking him) on the hope he will be picked the next year (a la Matt DeBoer) and
-- What are the drafting considerations for GC in 2010 for this non nominating underage player. In other words are the concessions so great that he is likely to end up there anyway.
-- Who are some of the names likely to be on GC's radar at the end of this year ?

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[one 4 the road]

In 2009 GC are the only club with the ability to sign 17yo kids - but they must come from QLD or NT and they can only sign 10 (might be 12) of them. If the kids come from SA, VIC, WA, NSW, ACT or TAS then they just have to wait for 2010 for their opportunity.

In 2010 everyone is playing off the same sheet when it comes to age eligibility. Once again there is a full 12 month crop of youngsters to choose from - everyone born in 1992.

However, GC17 have a raft of draft concessions to help them build their initial team list.

Firstly, they have the following first round draft selections: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, plus the first selection in each subsequent round. These selections can be traded away (during trade week) to obtain experienced players from other clubs.

Secondly, they can sign up to 10 uncontracted players from other clubs (limit of 1 per club). The AFL will compensate the unfortunate clubs using a formula which is yet to be announced, but will factor in things like age/experience/quality of player (as measured by their performance in the club champion voting).

The above is a post from Vader on Dec 4 2008 from the thread "Gold Coast plans to start relocating teenagers (not computer smart enough to make a link).
GC is playing TAC Cup this year 2009 and then VFL in 2010 (I think, could be wrong, usually are).
Hope this answers your questions.

Modes we should do a sticky somewhere on these concessions, many people will ask (its only January) and we should be able to direct them somewhere.

 

[BOND 007]

Thanks 'One 4 the road' - it certainly answers some of them. It doesnt seem the '09 draft is as compromised as it is made out to be.
-- So GC get their hands on 17yr old kids from QLD and N.T. - how many good kids can you expect from that - 2 maybe 3 if lucky.
-- Also those kids not already 18 have to wait until next year where presumably many would be traded by GC for experience.
-- Can someone advise who would have been affected in this years draft if the age rule had been in place ?
-- I have heard of names like Butcher, Lucas, Scully who look at being prominent in this years draft. Are any of these going to be underage ?

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Diluted

 

[one 4 the road]

What it means Bond is that bottom age players in this years Nationals will not be eligble. ie guys from U/16's last year.
The guys you mentioned were bottom age last year but were born after April 30 1991.
The draft will have a smaller pool of 4 months this year as the only "new" guys will be the boys born between May 1 1991 and December 31 1991.
And as you say the GC concessions this year are picking up 17 year old guys from Qld and NT, other than that its business as usual.

 

[Forrest Gimp]

A gimped draft.

 

[Hollow Knight]

"The Reject Draft Filled with the Half-chewed Scraps from GC17's Table".

Suddenly 'compromised" doesn't seem so bad does it?

 

[Giggidy Giggidy]

What it means Bond is that bottom age players in this years Nationals will not be eligble. ie guys from U/16's last year.
The guys you mentioned were bottom age last year but were born after April 30 1991.
The draft will have a smaller pool of 4 months this year as the only "new" guys will be the boys born between May 1 1991 and December 31 1991.
And as you say the GC concessions this year are picking up 17 year old guys from Qld and NT, other than that its business as usual.

So am I correct in saying that the previous normal draft pool age bracket was 1 May - 30 April, yet the '09 draft will be only 1 May - 31 December, and future drafts will be 1 Jan - 31 Dec, so all else being even '09 has only 66% of the talent pool normally available?

 

[one 4 the road]

So am I correct in saying that the previous normal draft pool age bracket was 1 May - 30 April, yet the '09 draft will be only 1 May - 31 December, and future drafts will be 1 Jan - 31 Dec, so all else being even '09 has only 66% of the talent pool normally available?

You are spot on.

 

[its game on]

So am I correct in saying that the previous normal draft pool age bracket was 1 May - 30 April, yet the '09 draft will be only 1 May - 31 December, and future drafts will be 1 Jan - 31 Dec, so all else being even '09 has only 66% of the talent pool normally available?

Not quite. Not by a long way! All players born prior to 31/12/91 are eligible for the 2009 draft, this includes say your Nathan Carroll's who will be on the draft list for the next 3 years, all the TAC Cup 19yo's who the AFL Victoria are doing their best to promote their draftability, and any 19yo to say 23yo in the VFL, SANFL and WAFL system. Players like Tom Hill, Taylor Duryea and others who were born between 1/1/91 and 30/4/91 are eligible and very draftable.

IIRC there were only 19 players of the "bottom agers" drafted, so the entire talent pool essentially has been reduced by only 19. Certainly they were regarded by the clubs as the best bottom agers out there, but there is still a lot of talent out there.

Take the ruck situation, only one 17yo ruckman was drafted, hardly an impact on the 2009 ruck talent pool. Anyone who was getting a bit comfortable, think again!

Players are still going to have to earn their drafting.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

A s**thouse draft?

Wait... that's probably worse.

 

[thejester]

- Abused

- r*ped

- Genocided (yes it's not a real word, shut up)

- Flagellated

Frankly I think 'compromised' conveys both the facts of the situation and that slight note of contempt that all pre-existing football fans should have for the AFL's grandiose attempt to replicate 19th century European imperialism.

 

[shewho]

A "concessioned" draft

 

[giveusatraveller]

This year (2009) is a manipulated draft - neither compomised nor lesser talented and that needs to be acknowledged! The kids coming through this year as mentionered earlier are not compromised......there is great talent in this draft as with other years.