Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
True but theoretically any club can do this. Let's say Will Ashcroft didn't nominate Brisbane and for some reason Nick Daicos suddenly decides he wants to join West Coast this off season, the Eagles would trade their first pick for Daicos and Collingwood may very well have just won the premiership...West Coast did in 1992. Admittedly they traded for it, but they did it.
i think a more fruitful discussion could be had if you framed the father son rule in general terms rather than focusing on brisbane. its not really in the clubs power to control when an ex-players kid will be a gun, what year they will be available and what position the club is in at the time which seems to be the gripe raised in this thread. brisbane has not historically been a significant winner from the rules existence - only notable player being Brown, who would not even be available under the rules current iteration.True but theoretically any club can do this. Let's say Will Ashcroft didn't nominate Brisbane and for some reason Nick Daicos suddenly decides he wants to join West Coast this off season, the Eagles would trade their first pick for Daicos and Collingwood may very well have just won the premiership...
The point in the OP was more so that Brisbane, who may be the premiers in two months from now, haven't given up anything and will still get the number 1 pick this year if Ashcroft gets bid on by the Eagles/Roos.
I understood your point.True but theoretically any club can do this. Let's say Will Ashcroft didn't nominate Brisbane and for some reason Nick Daicos suddenly decides he wants to join West Coast this off season, the Eagles would trade their first pick for Daicos and Collingwood may very well have just won the premiership...
The point in the OP was more so that Brisbane, who may be the premiers in two months from now, haven't given up anything and will still get the number 1 pick this year if Ashcroft gets bid on by the Eagles/Roos.
That's essentially what the post was, hence the reason the Sam Darcy example was brought up. We've never seen a team win a premiership AND have the best junior in the land come through as a father-son pick at the same time and this year may very well be the first time. We know the main reason the national draft exists is that it serves as an equalisation tool but that system completely falls apart when a highly rated father-son prospect comes through.i think a more fruitful discussion could be had if you framed the father son rule in general terms rather than focusing on brisbane. its not really in the clubs power to control when an ex-players kid will be a gun, what year they will be available and what position the club is in at the time which seems to be the gripe raised in this thread. brisbane has not historically been a significant winner from the rules existence - only notable player being Brown, who would not even be available under the rules current iteration.
the way this is framed it just seems like an undertone of sour grapes which i know some gc fans have because ashcroft spent time in their academy and feel like they were a bit robbed
True, he was no N DaicosYou do realise that Ablett when he was drafted was thought as only getting a gig due to his last name right, was a speculative pick. Turned out to be one the greatest that’s played the game but at the time many thought the Cats overpaid.
I think Gold Coast of all clubs should not throw stones when it comes to things that compromise the draft....Not every club. We (Gold Coast) and GWS still have to wait at least another 10 years before it'll be available for us.
Implying we're even gonna make top 4.Straight sets.
I don't understand this logic. Either we should have it or we shouldn't. This sort of halfway house is essentially saying "you can play for your dad's team if you're not that good".The draft is meant to even up the competition. While the rule is a feel good story having a son follow in his dads foot steps fairness of the competition is more important. Imo top draft picks (top 10 maybe) shouldn't be allowed to be f/s selections
True, he was no N Daicos
Only 17 though, have to be 18 these days, another year at the Falcons might have theoretically lifted his stocks
Well I was mostly referring to potential Number 1s, as Hawkins could have been. Ablett wasn't even going to be top 10.
But unlike the previous method, the clubs now pay market price in points minus 20%. It’s not Perfect but it’s pretty fair. North can pick him and if so it will cost Brisbane basically most of their picks In points.The draft is meant to even up the competition. While the rule is a feel good story having a son follow in his dads foot steps fairness of the competition is more important. Imo top draft picks (top 10 maybe) shouldn't be allowed to be f/s selections
If you had that rule kids would start under performing to ensure they slipped out of the top 10 meaning gun kids wouldn't be fully paid for.The draft is meant to even up the competition. While the rule is a feel good story having a son follow in his dads foot steps fairness of the competition is more important. Imo top draft picks (top 10 maybe) shouldn't be allowed to be f/s selections
Sydney gave up their other priority pick to Essendon for Ed Consindine and Michael Werner as well.Traded Tony Begovich and Scott Watters to Sydney for it.
Also did something similar in 1996, traded Ian Downsborough to Port Adelaide for the first pick.
Good times.
Yep, that would be a terrible outcome and lead to famous kids taking the foot off the pedal so they can get drafted to their Dad's team. It's all or nothing with F/S and I think they need to keep it.I don't understand this logic. Either we should have it or we shouldn't. This sort of halfway house is essentially saying "you can play for your dad's team if you're not that good".
If Brisbane win the premiership they have to give up all their draft picks and still trade for a pick in the 20's. its not nothing.True but theoretically any club can do this. Let's say Will Ashcroft didn't nominate Brisbane and for some reason Nick Daicos suddenly decides he wants to join West Coast this off season, the Eagles would trade their first pick for Daicos and Collingwood may very well have just won the premiership...
The point in the OP was more so that Brisbane, who may be the premiers in two months from now, haven't given up anything and will still get the number 1 pick this year if Ashcroft gets bid on by the Eagles/Roos.
IMO All academies and father sons should be abolished.
The sentimental stuff is nice and all but it’s completely screwed the fairness of the draft. If a father son gets drafted elsewhere and wants to play for his fathers club, he can do so in a trade.
The free agency and trade mechanism already benefits the big and successful clubs, now they are consistently acquiring the top of the table young talent. It’s stacking the weight against teams at the bottom of the ladder.
To be fair i bet Jobe Watson was wishing that the f/s had been abolished and he never ended up in Essendon. Surprised to see an Essnedon fan advocating for never having the ability to draft Dustin Fletcher, Jobe, and Joe Daniher amongst others.IMO All academies and father sons should be abolished.
The sentimental stuff is nice and all but it’s completely screwed the fairness of the draft. If a father son gets drafted elsewhere and wants to play for his fathers club, he can do so in a trade.
The free agency and trade mechanism already benefits the big and successful clubs, now they are consistently acquiring the top of the table young talent. It’s stacking the weight against teams at the bottom of the ladder.