List Mgmt. Should The Eagles Request A Priority Assistance Package at The End of This Year?

[WCErevival]

I wonder if the AFL will wait to see if we trade some players out like Barrass. If we end up getting some decent picks through trades then the AFL might not bother giving us any priority picks. If we just go in with what we have now I think we will get assistance.

 

[Tugga27]

Gotta ask for something, realistically 1 end of first round PP this year [which we then use in the draft] and 2 extra rookie list spots would be a win. With what North have been given, and what Richmond are about to be given, it's going to be insane for us to have suffered through the last 3 years and walk away with no extra picks.

After 3 flags, can't see Richmond getting any help in the short term.

They will also probably end up with the best hand in the draft after 3 or 4 of their players are traded.

 

[eaglevision]

I wonder if the AFL will wait to see if we trade some players out like Barrass. If we end up getting some decent picks through trades then the AFL might not bother giving us any priority picks. If we just go in with what we have now I think we will get assistance.

PP decision is made before trade week (usually before GF) so Barrass shouldn’t affect it unless the AFL demand assurances we don’t trade him which is really draft and trade tampering.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

I've always been opposed but the draft is just too stupidly compromised to be against anymore.

May as well compromise it in our favour for once.

 

[stallon]

A compo pick isnt even really a compo pick anymore, its just draft equalisation

 

[Obeanie1]

No priority picks, clubs should grow a spine and sort it out themselves.

And yet teams playing finals get other forms of assistance to build their lists.

How does that work with your theory?

 

[Stinky Breeches]

And yet teams playing finals get other forms of assistance to build their lists.

How does that work with your theory?

Very true.
NGA and academy players everywhere before they changed the rules.
Kangas have received;
Start of 2nd and start of 3rd in 2022
Plus 2 extra rookie spots
1 end of first round 2023
2 end of first round 2024 that needed to be on traded.
I was against it, but the more I think about inequity of the system the more I say just give us an assistance package.

• 2023 we were the worst team in history and and our second legitimate pick was 30.
• the amount of flying Perth teams do
• 2 gun players retired from concussion in shepherd and venables.
• the academy’s giving teams like Sydney a core of Heeney, Mills, Gulden and the lizard.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

And yet teams playing finals get other forms of assistance to build their lists.

How does that work with your theory?

The system is broken, absolutely.

I’d gladly be the first team to cop the rough end of the pineapple if it signalled the whole system being fixed.

I know that’s a fallacy, it won’t ever get fixed properly despite the noises they’re making about tidying things up, so in reality sure give us everything you’ve got. But I’d rather the system get fixed and we eat some shit to facilitate that. Nice in theory, I guess.

 

[timeforanother22]

You just know the AFL will say, you won a flag six years ago, you have 45k turning up to every game, you have millions in the bank. Go away.

 

[Spooky17]

Even the first batch of assistance Norf received would be beneficial for us.

Start of 2nd for Baker, Start of 3rd for Peatling.

Two extra rookie spots to boost our depth plus improve the Beagles.

With 10 wins over the last 3 years, plus the implosion that was the end of 2021, plus all the inequalities of the system, we need assistance. Screw pride, no one will care in 5 years when we may be contending again.

 

[Obeanie1]

Very true.
NGA and academy players everywhere before they changed the rules.
Kangas have received;
Start of 2nd and start of 3rd in 2022
Plus 2 extra rookie spots
1 end of first round 2023
2 end of first round 2024 that needed to be on traded.
I was against it, but the more I think about inequity of the system the more I say just give us an assistance package.

• 2023 we were the worst team in history and and our second legitimate pick was 30.
• the amount of flying Perth teams do
• 2 gun players retired from concussion in shepherd and venables.
• the academy’s giving teams like Sydney a core of Heeney, Mills, Gulden and the lizard.

There was no directive from the AFL that the 2024 pick needed to be traded, the 2022 package had that caveat.

North asked permission if they were allowed to trade the 2024 end of 1st rounders and the AFL gave it the green light.

There was a mention the 2024 picks could be reviewed if North bounced back so North traded them into 2023 to avoid potentially losung them. Funny we inow.

 

[Obeanie1]

You just know the AFL will say, you won a flag six years ago, you have 45k turning up to every game, you have millions in the bank. Go away.

Whilst at the same time handing out assistance to the Swans and Lions who are more successful, play in grand finals, have 35k plus turn up each week and are financially independant.

How many times have the Swans finished minor premeriers?

 

[WCE_18]

Surely yesterday’s game was an insight to the future. Showing the AFL if we trade barrass and if Gov is injured next year this is what we are looking at. 100 point losses. I admit it wasn’t all the back lines fault but it lacked leadership down there.

The fact we’ve had 5 wins this year is good but I’d say the we aren’t out of the woods yet. Success isn’t linear and when Gov, Yeo, Cripps, Darling and Kelly retire in the next few years we are probably going to go back down the ladder unless we can inject new young players now, via trade or draft to prepare for those losses. Couple of PP 2nd or 3rd rounders to trade would definitely help especially given Tassie are coming

 

[WCE_phil]

Discussions were had with the AFL 9-10 weeks ago. Back and forth discussions.

There were 2 conditions that were key to the answer.
1. Not with the same coach
2. Not if you win 5 games for the year

Now if someone, hopefully anyone at AFL house watched the first half of our game yesterday the club might get something. I think speculating about it however is unlikely and yes the club does have to formally apply, however most of the discussions are done before any formal application.

 

[sharps24]

After 3 flags, can't see Richmond getting any help in the short term.

They will also probably end up with the best hand in the draft after 3 or 4 of their players are traded.

They'll get a good draft hand this year but that comes at the cost of following the North Melbourne path of having no senior players around to balance the list, so stink it up down the bottom for longer and getting to cry to the AFL about it.

 

[ziad]

You just know the AFL will say, you won a flag six years ago, you have 45k turning up to every game, you have millions in the bank. Go away.

And that's correct, list management/drafting has been a self inflicted wound

 

[Broken_Chairs]

Discussions were had with the AFL 9-10 weeks ago. Back and forth discussions.

There were 2 conditions that were key to the answer.
1. Not with the same coach
2. Not if you win 5 games for the year

I mean classic AFL being arbitrary, but dumb metric when you look at our average over the past 3years... which is as bad as North when they got their FIRST pp's

 

[bzparkes]

Very true.
NGA and academy players everywhere before they changed the rules.
Kangas have received;
Start of 2nd and start of 3rd in 2022
Plus 2 extra rookie spots
1 end of first round 2023
2 end of first round 2024 that needed to be on traded.
I was against it, but the more I think about inequity of the system the more I say just give us an assistance package.

• 2023 we were the worst team in history and and our second legitimate pick was 30.
• the amount of flying Perth teams do
• 2 gun players retired from concussion in shepherd and venables.
• the academy’s giving teams like Sydney a core of Heeney, Mills, Gulden and the lizard.

Those 2 end of firsts this year didn't need to be traded, it was simply up to the AFL as to whether they kept them, based on performance.

After having a worse year than last season, hindsight suggests they should've kept them as this year is a much more even draft.

 

[Broken_Chairs]

If picks are off the table I'd like the AFL to give us a remote location allowance - so we can use our financial position to attract best off field talent

 

[TY24]

If picks are off the table I'd like the AFL to give us a remote location allowance - so we can use our financial position to attract best off field talent

That'll happen after the AFL approves us to start travelling on our flying pig

 

[stallon]

The absolute least the AFL could do is give us 2 extra rookie spots

 

[3agles87]

Discussions were had with the AFL 9-10 weeks ago. Back and forth discussions.

There were 2 conditions that were key to the answer.
1. Not with the same coach
2. Not if you win 5 games for the year

Now if someone, hopefully anyone at AFL house watched the first half of our game yesterday the club might get something. I think speculating about it however is unlikely and yes the club does have to formally apply, however most of the discussions are done before any formal application.

Yep, sounds like something dopey the AFL would do.

Years ago they did away with formulaic approaches for priority picks to minimise the risk of tanking. Solution, have chats 10 weeks before the end of a season to discuss formula for priority picks.

So, instead of tanking West Coast try to maintain competitiveness and the reward is we played ourselves out of eligibility. anyone watching our games, compares our recent record with the Kangas and sees how our draft hand has been consistently diluted over the years would see that the situation is far worse than being about a scrubby win or two.

But, nothing surprises me with how the AFL picks and chooses their approach based on their desired outcome these days. It is just a shame that I can’t remember the last time I thought the AFL gave a shit about West Aust footy.

 

[Jumpoff Joey]

We should have asked last year, keep asking this year too.

If nothing comes back our way. Then start knocking the door over next year.

I would not be asking for Kangaroos treatment in 2025. I'd be asking for a pick straight after our first come 2025. I dont see us getting out of the bottom three to be honest.

2025
Pick 2 (Sharp), (3 and Hawks F1) C Warner

Reid, Draper, Hewitt, Sharp and Warner

 

[kranky al]

You just know the AFL will say, you won a flag six years ago, you have 45k turning up to every game, you have millions in the bank. Go away.

Then flag recency should be written into the rules for applying so there’s a clear understanding.

 

[Keys]

We should ask

With 18 teams, FA compensation picks, NGA and F/S selections it’s harder than ever to rebuild through the draft. The R1 pick helps but when R2 and R3 picks get pushed so far back the second and subsequent bites of the draft cherry aren’t as useful as they once were

So ask for something, even if it becomes as trivial as an extra couple of rookie list spots which would help us have a more competitive WAFL side of nothing else

If we ask and get nothing, then it at least sets a high bar for how shit sides need to be to get assistance in the future