Get tanking for the draft out of AFL
Roar Pro By Luke D'Anello, 16 Jul 2009 Luke D'Anello is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- AFL, Melbourne Demons, Tom Scully, West Coast Eagles
Tanking is an ugly word in the AFL. No one likes to hear it, but it is reality. And the time has come for the league to make some adjustments to its draft system.
Simply, it is not right for such heavy attention to be focused towards the fight at the bottom of the table.
Melbourne (currently three wins) and West Coast (four wins) are two teams that could benefit greatly this season if they each win four games or less.
The Eagles have no room to move, but if each team satisfy the requirement, they will gain a prized priority draft pick before the first-round.
Teams who win four games or less in two consecutive seasons are eligible for a priority draft selection.
Adding to the intrigue is the fact that, in 2010, the Gold Coast team will enter the draft. The new side will be given a number of concessions that will affect other clubs.
The Gold Coast will receive nine of the first 15 picks in 2010, making this year’s draft crucial for the competition’s bottom teams as they seek to bolster their lists.
What, then, is the motivation for Melbourne and West Coast to win?
They both can’t make finals and winning, apart from the two hours of joy after the final season, is insignificant given the positions of the two clubs.
Tom Scully is touted as this season’s No.1 draft choice. The best young kid in the country could further enhance the Demons’ chances of climbing further up the ladder. Ditto West Coast.
So, firstly, the priority pick must be banished. There is little doubt that it encourages teams to play for picks. And why wouldn’t they when the rules allow it to happen?
Whether teams say they are putting players in for surgery early or playing kids for their future, it all, sadly, relates back to the same thing.
The AFL must, as a result, remove the carrot. And not just the priority draft pick.
Currently the team that finishes in last position after the home-and-away season receives the first pick in the first-round of the draft (after the priority selections).
The team that finishes second-last receives pick two, and so on.
To put a stop to the tanking discussion at this time of the season, there needs to be no guarantees. As a result, the bottom-four teams should be placed in a hat and the first removed gets the No.1 selection.
It may be a team which finished in 14th position, but at least all debates and talk of tanking will be removed.
In essence, under this system, the team that finishes 12th will always receive pick five (as is the case now). But it is the early draft selections which cause the most controversy.
Regardless, the side lucky enough to receive the top-pick will need it.
The wooden-spoon team, at worst, receives pick four. But, in the second-round, the order will return to normal, according to ladder positions (as is the case now).
This minor change will ensure that winning becomes a priority for clubs.
Remember the farcical situation in 2007 when Melbourne and Carlton played a Round 22 encounter, dubbed the “Kreuzer Cup”, that no team wanted to win?
We can only hope there are no repeats of that day, because the game, and its fans, deserve better
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- AFL, Melbourne Demons, Tom Scully, West Coast Eagles
July 16th 2009 @ 1:57pm
Searly said | July 16th 2009 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
I reckon Lazza makes a good point about the cyclical nature of success for each club. Rather than having a comp where, within reason, you have pretty much every team with a chance to win or do well each year, instead AFL clubs are at any given time in one of only three possible situations:
1) You’re experiencing a purple patch of success and you have to make the most of your ‘Premiership Window’ because due to a lack of high draft picks during this time, you’re going to end up with a pretty ordinary squad in a few years’ time when all your current stars are retiring.
2) You’re completely crap but you’re reaping the rewards of being so crap via the draft system. If you play your cards right you are looking at a sustained period of success in a couple of seasons’ time, at which point you’ll enter into the cycle all over again as per point 1 above. (This should realistically be Carlton at the moment).
3) You’ve got a fairly strong squad that allows you to consistently play finals footy but you can’t quite match it with the guys going through their ‘Premiership Window’ (whoever they happen to be at the time), so you’re in a kind of limbo land where as a club you need to decide whether you currently have the cattle to challenge for the flag or whether you need to bottom out and rebuild with high draft picks.
Ultimately, this is pretty frustrating and means that sometimes it can be hard to be enthused about a particular club’s fortunes, as they are largely dependent on the whim of the cycle. It can also be frustrating for supporters of clubs which (quite rightly in my opinion) refuse to bottom out for the sake of it, but as a result are never quite good enough to crack it for a Premiership (Collingwood in recent times is a good example), while clubs that were completely crap a year or so ago, shoot past you due to nothing other than the rewards of the draft system.
Don’t know precisely how to fix it, but getting rid of the priority picks is a good first step.
July 16th 2009 @ 2:08pm
Lazza said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:08pm | Report comment
Searly,
You are right – that’s where the Adelaide Crows are right now. We are ‘honourably competitive’ every season but we’ll probably never be quite good enough to win the flag without decent draft picks?
July 16th 2009 @ 2:13pm
Redb said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
Searly,
YeH maybe the priority pick system has to go. Getting rid of the draft is too extreme and the A League is a poor example as they can recruit players from overseas as well as domesticially to fill lists. The draft provides a structured pathway and is based on a ‘closed’ recruiting zone like the NFL has in the US.
Every comp has to contend with teams at the top, middle and bottom. Priority picks don’t guarantee premierships, look at Geelong, most of their success has come from astute recruiting and coaching.
It is healthier for clubs to take a turn than have 3-4 teams that constantly dominate.
Redb
July 16th 2009 @ 2:26pm
Pippinu said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
There is something to the cyclical nature of AFL brought about by the draft.
But there are just as many stories that dispel that notion.
Redb has already mentioned Geelong – Thompson has been there for something like 7 years, and it was about a 3rd of the way through their premiership year when they all of a sudden hit their straps – but it wasn’t off the back of priority draft picks.
St Kilda was meant to have reaped the rewards from successive good draft years a while ago, just when their window appeared to be closing, along comes this season.
Look at Essendon from 1990 to very recently (but as redb has said, they have never hit rock bottom).
Look at Carlton from 1987 to 2001 (before they were hit hard by being closed out of the draft altogether).
My team, the bullies, had a couple of good years at the draft table – but are really not any closer to a premiership than when they were in 1985, 1992, 1997-99 or last year.
Richmond have come nowhere near to winning a premiership since 1982.
Freo hit rock bottom, and have gone back there almost as quickly as their “recovery”.
Any team could succomb to that malaise at any time, drafts or no drafts.
July 16th 2009 @ 2:29pm
Pippinu said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
How many high draft picks featured in the Swans’ premiership of 2005? It was a team of work horses.
Port’s premiership from the previous year featured quite a few rejects from other clubs.
Anyone who thinks geting the number one draft pick in a particular year guarantees you a premiership is kidding themselves.
July 16th 2009 @ 2:31pm
Redb said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:31pm | Report comment
Some of the best players were never ranked in the top 10 – James Hird I think was pick 34!
Hawthorn got the benefit of draft picks but they also had the right attitude, good coaching and really stole the 08 flag. Look a them this year they should actaully be better in 09.
Redb
July 16th 2009 @ 2:31pm
Dave said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:31pm | Report comment
Lazza
i was thinking Saturday how good some of the young crows players played Saturday night. Considering that the crows don’t get good draft picks.
July 16th 2009 @ 2:37pm
Michael C said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
Searly et al-
gotta remember, Geelong haven’t gained via priority or high draft picks.
They’ve had some inspired father son picks, but, apart from T.Hawkins (perhaps G.Ablett jnr???) – probably none would’ve been dead certainty top 5s – and what’s T.Hawkins given them so far.
StKilda on the other hand bottomed out – got Goddard (courtesy of Carl sanctions), Kosi, Riewoldt…..and 6-7 years on, we’ve seen proof that one or two top draft picks still requires a heck of a lot of work, good coaching and a decent squad with a decent game plan.
Lazza –
The Crows – minor premiers in 2005 and finalists in 7 of last 8 years – 3 top 4 finishes – and yet 4 wins and 9 losses in finals – - so, Crows = chokers => no one to blame but themselves for having not taken out the ‘big one’ – - and perhaps we blame their coaching?? or their recruiting – picking up W.Carey? or injuries to their ruckmen??
Exciting though now – that Tippett is coming good, perhaps one last bash at the top prize for Edwards/Goodwin/MacLeod. Although injuries to Moran and McKernan hurts. Bird man is coming back though. Walker, Petrnecko, Dangerfield etc have been exciting.
July 16th 2009 @ 2:37pm
Pippinu said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
redb
Hirdy was much, much higher than that, around the 70s or 80s.
I knew a Footscray talent scout based in Canberra at the time. Hirdy was helping Ainslie to a premiership as a 17-18 year old the year he nominated, dominating the last quarter.
He had told them about Hirdy, and they replied that Essendon had him under the father-son rule.
But that was bull shit. His old man only played 4 games for Essendon, it was Alan Hird Snr that played 150 odd games, including premierships.
It’s hard to believe, but anyway, either way you look at it, at the time there wasn’t a lot of interest in him.
July 16th 2009 @ 2:39pm
Lazza said | July 16th 2009 @ 2:39pm | Report comment
Redb,
The A-League model proves that you can have a ‘FAIR and EVEN’ competition without having a draft system?
The draft system and the socialist model were introduced in the USA for the benefit of owners. The owners of those franchises are guaranteed profits every season and their team will have a turn at the top when the cycle comes round.
European Football and American Baseball by contrast is completely free market and the owners do it for love or ego only?