Swans want priority selection in darft

[footyhead]

A NSW/Sydney regional priority selection is a good idea for the AFL to take up for the Swans and the Lions in my opinion.

1. It grows the game in those non traditional footballing regions by giving young outsatanding local fotballers the added icentive of dreaming of playing for their "nome team.

2. It gives those teams from non traditional footballing cities and advantage that is not purley based on the need to help them to succeed.

3. It gives more incentive to those teams to invest in local footy and the city in gerneral by keeping in touch with every body and anybody involved in footy at the local level.
IE it makes those teams less nationaly minded and more localy minded!!

http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1264&storyid=3218614

[liz]

We used to have one - LRT was the only player picked by the Swans though I have a feeling it was available the year before and they chose not to use it. The Lions drafted Charman one year under this system too.

I'm in favour but I think it should be made compulsory for each club to use it each year. It is unlikely to ever be an issue for the Lions because there are always quality Queenslanders drafted (and most of them are from the Brisbane area).

The rationale for this is that it balances out getting a gun for free one year with having to allocate one spot on the list to a local player each year and thus supporting the basis that it is about giving local players opportunities, not just cherry picking.

It would mean that if the rule had been in operation for the 2004 draft, say, the Swans would have had to have put Shaw (or Clarke) on the senior list rather than the rookie list. Maybe to mitigate the potential disadvantage of this, the AFL could allow these players to be given just one year contracts rather than the current two year minimum for new senior list draftees.

[satchmopugdog]

The Lions will always be at an advantage as there has been a bigger population relocation from the tradional AFL states to Queensland than to NSW. Whenever a kid leaves one of my classes to move to another state they never say they are going to NSW, they are always going to Qland or SA. I mean thats what happened with the Riewoldts and the Lawrences!!! O f course they will carry those Afl/Vfl alligences with them. Who in their right mind would give up the positives of living in Tassie or Vic to live in NSW. Qld is Understandable!!!

[silent lurker]

I remember that the Lions wanted to get Riewoldt with the priority selection but Southport wasn't in the area covered (I think it was a 50km radius from the Gabba) and they picked up Charman instead.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by liz
We used to have one - LRT was the only player picked by the Swans though I have a feeling it was available the year before and they chose not to use it.

Didn't we pick up Barry under the Zone selection as well?

[liz]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Didn't we pick up Barry under the Zone selection as well?

Barry, Mathews and maybe others (Seymour?)

But they were under a slightly different system that existed in the early / mid nineties and extended across NSW. I suspect what they are proposing here is a return to the Greater Sydney priority pick that existed until Ed'n'Mick got on their battle-horses.

[Mike_B]

Originally posted by liz
Barry, Mathews and maybe others (Seymour?)

But they were under a slightly different system that existed in the early / mid nineties and extended across NSW. I suspect what they are proposing here is a return to the Greater Sydney priority pick that existed until Ed'n'Mick got on their battle-horses.

Maybe if the AFL mandated that clubs had to pick up one player from the Sydney region to be placed on a rookie list, that would shut Eddie up nice and quick?

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by liz
I suspect what they are proposing here is a return to the Greater Sydney priority pick that existed until Ed'n'Mick got on their battle-horses.

I suggest we get to use our second round pick for it. So we jump to the head of the queue for the second round pick as long as its the next NSW player in line.

Then we go back to the normal order in round three. And if we trade our second round pick the concession is void.

[Legs Akimbo]

How about we get a priority selection of a Victorian to encourage migration of some talent to a non-football state.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by Legs Akimbo
How about we get a priority selection of a Victorian to encourage migration of some talent to a non-football state.

Shannon Grant
Darren Gaspar
Anthony Rocca

[Legs Akimbo]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Shannon Grant
Darren Gaspar
Anthony Rocca

oops, forgot to mention, the contract includes that they can't leave.

[footyhead]

Originally posted by liz
We used to have one - LRT was the only player picked by the Swans though I have a feeling it was available the year before and they chose not to use it. The Lions drafted Charman one year under this system too.

I'm in favour but I think it should be made compulsory for each club to use it each year. It is unlikely to ever be an issue for the Lions because there are always quality Queenslanders drafted (and most of them are from the Brisbane area).

The rationale for this is that it balances out getting a gun for free one year with having to allocate one spot on the list to a local player each year and thus supporting the basis that it is about giving local players opportunities, not just cherry picking.

It would mean that if the rule had been in operation for the 2004 draft, say, the Swans would have had to have put Shaw (or Clarke) on the senior list rather than the rookie list. Maybe to mitigate the potential disadvantage of this, the AFL could allow these players to be given just one year contracts rather than the current two year minimum for new senior list draftees.

I like this idea,
It stopps the Swans from further develping their walfare mentality. IE living of AFL concessions.

If they had to do something for the draft choice, they may work a lot harder to a) unearth the right one each year, b) work a lot harder to hope he "makes" it once drafted.
I don't think there should be any consolation for the Swans, in terms of a one year contract for the kid. This would only encourage them to wait for the walk up star to appear on their lap. They need to work hard to develop their talent. Along with the AFL continuing to help and encourage the Swans, the Swans must continue to examine themselves. I think player development has been getting a very average score at this club for almost 10 years.

[sharp9]

I think that the idea which would work is a variation on the one being bandied about for father-son...ie that if a player is eligible a panel assesses him and the club still gets the chance to take the player, but must pay with a selection that is equal to what the player is worth....ie top five, five to 16, 16 to 30 etc, etc, etc...

F/S is obviously in need of overhaul. From memory pick 46...Swans - David Spriggs, pick 47 Geelong - Nathan Ablett.

There is no way known that anyone could possibly justify this as being good for football.

Travis Cloke, 196 cm, 100 Kg ready to play Key Position marking, goal kicking forward who can pick the ball up from the ground on the run without breaking stride, Brownlow votes and Rising Star nomination in first couple of games...pick 39.

This is a joke

[Thunder Shaker]

Originally posted by sharp9
[Father/son] is a joke

Agreed. The only reason we still have father/son is because it's traditional. Guess what, zone selections were traditional too, but the zone selections that the Swans had got axed when some complained about them.

Perhaps it's time father/son got overhauled. I'm not having clubs like Collingwood drafting four or five good father/son recruits just because some former Collingwood player claims he's the father. Two words: paternity test. I want PROOF he's the father, dammit!

[anne]

If they did paternity tests I am sure there would be a whole heap of other eligible players out there in the community.