Rewarding Failure - has it gone too far?

Remove this Banner Ad

The father / son rule is far more unfair then the current draft system IMO. I mean Geelong gets an certain top 5 pick this year in Hawkins, and the crows miss out on Gibbs cause of an technicality, that is clearly unfair.
It's not just the draft though that is unfair about the AFL.
 
bzparkes said:
You could say our recruiters actually are really very good because he came third actually. Both Hawthorn and St Kilda had the previous pick I believe and ended up With Luke Hodge and Jason Ball respectively. .
you are an idiot.

Do you read what you type before hitting the submit button?

You say the eagles recruiters were better because they had pick 3 and picked Judd over Hodge and Ball.

Well, let me tell you a secret, Hodge and Ball were already picked before pick 3!!!
This has nothing to do with who is better, because the eagles had no choice in the matter.
 
celtic_pride said:
The father / son rule is far more unfair then the current draft system IMO. I mean Geelong gets an certain top 5 pick this year in Hawkins, and the crows miss out on Gibbs cause of an technicality, that is clearly unfair.
It's not just the draft though that is unfair about the AFL.


How many games did Ross Gibbs play for Adelaide? I seem to remember he played backpocket for Glenelg. Did he actually play a game for Adelaide?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

JLC said:
It should be a lottery for the number 1 pick between the bottom 8 teams. There should be NO INCENTIVE to finish last.

jlc
What moronic comment, and I'm not just saying that because we happened to finish on the bottom of the ladder this year. Whatb would happen if a team repeatedly finishd last and never got anything more than pick 5. And if a team that had an off year with injuries, but a very talented list finished down the bottom of the ladder and got the umber 1 pick the one year they were there? I does NOTHING for equality whatsoever, only makes club dependant on luck, which is silly and unprofessional- thats why the Americans do it. If a team wanst to tank, then it really isnt any of your business, is it?
 
Tas said:
As for a free market system, Carlton would be dead, you guys couldn't afford to run a lemonade stand let alone the ability to keep your better players from the wealthy clubs.
And if it wasnt for us in the '90's and the AFL now, you wouldnt even exist, you little hypocrite. Why dont you take that lemonade stand and operate it up on the Gold Coast you ungrateful swine.
 
Tas said:
As for a free market system, Carlton would be dead, you guys couldn't afford to run a lemonade stand let alone the ability to keep your better players from the wealthy clubs.

Not very bright are you. Under a free market system Carlton would never have been down in the first place. The draft and salary came in to stop teams like Carlton from continuing their domination.
 
SA Blue said:
Not very bright are you. Under a free market system Carlton would never have been down in the first place. The draft and salary came in to stop teams like Carlton from continuing their domination.


Exactly! There is more money floating around Carlton than most of the ignorant ones would want to know about. Some of the richest people in Australia support Carlton. Who supports North Melbourne? Not their supporters - they haven't got enough. That's why their future is not in Melbourne. The AFL (ie the other 15 clubs) prop up North.
 
Borgsta said:
Dont agree with bottom 8 but bottom 4 sounds good to me.

Yep, it's a good idea, the lottery could be set up like say......the NHL draft where bottom team still has a greater chance of picking first through the lottery but give the other bottom teams the chance to get top pick too, about the best thing to try and stop tanking.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Rewarding Failure - has it gone too far?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top