Draft - SANFL winners and losers.

[redandblack]

Big winner: Eagles 4 drafted, but 3 to Port Adelaide! Loss of Hall will hurt, but Broadbent and the other 2 staying is a big bonus.

Winner: West - 3 drafted (not counting Mitch Robinson of Tassie, which makes 4 ). Big bonus with Hartlett staying depends on when he makes his AFL debut. Huge, huge bonus in the mini-draft.

Loser: North. Davis stays, but Johnstone and O'Keeffe go.

Minor losses: Norwood, as expected, lose Schoenmakers. Perhaps more pain in the rookie draft to come.

Glenelg lose Redden.

Sturt lose Cahill.

Yawn: Port, South, Central.

[Bluedemon]

12 players from SA would have to be good, much better than last year.

[whufc]

It's not all over yet though is it. I remember this time last year as a Central fan thinking we had got through really well, with a couple of our drafted players staying local and it all went pear-shaped in the pre season draft.

Like it was said before Norwood could be the ones to be hit hardest by the pre-season draft.

[Wedgie]

Having one of our youngsters stay is a huge win for North, we're used to most of them going interstate plus some league players going interstate so one of our best results draft day for a long time.
Stoked that young Motlop ended up at Geelong!

[bayman]

good luck to all the guys drafted

[spell_check]

That's only half down, still more to go. It's great that three of the Eagles drafted players will be staying in SA, but I know there will be some unhappy supporters of the team that gains them.

[poohbear]

surely matt martin was unlucky to, i really rate the kid a certainty for the rookie draft?

[am Bays]

A 225% increase on SANFL draftees in 2008, surely that is a reflection of our current outstanding development and player pathways (17s, 19s, ressies and 1s) seems a shame we are going to lose that....

Yes I know the current pathway isn't the sole reason why we got 13 drafted this year but when it put forward as the reason why we only got 4 drafted last year in the November draft, well it has to be highlighted when we we get a good draft result.

Thwe change to an under 18s comp wont see more drafted or less drafted (as I said before there are many ways to skin a cat - develop footballers) seems a shame the SANFl league R&D competitions (17s & 19s) are being sacrificed when they obviously work in developing AFl footballers....

[spell_check]

A 225% increase on SANFL draftees in 2008, surely that is a reflection of our current outstanding development and player pathways (17s, 19s, ressies and 1s) seems a shame we are going to lose that....

Yes I know the current pathway isn't the sole reason why we got 13 drafted this year but when it put forward as the reason why we only got 4 drafted last year in the November draft, well it has to be highlighted when we we get a good draft result.

Thwe change to an under 18s comp wont see more drafted or less drafted (as I said before there are many ways to skin a cat - develop footballers) seems a shame the SANFl league R&D competitions (17s & 19s) are being sacrificed when they obviously work in developing AFl footballers....

Exactly like judging the house from the front - may look run down, but inside and out the back is nicely done. The auctioneers hammer went down after valuing one year of draftees as a renovators delight, this year the interior is being viewed to the public - the system what was in place was what really gave the house its value.

Now the SANFL are fixing the front entrance to our system.

[redandblack]

TM, it's interesting that more than half the SA draftees came from only 2 clubs.

Three clubs contributed none.

You can use statistics to back up any argument

[redandblack]

Taking that further, 10 of the 13 were from only 3 clubs.

That means two-thirds of the U17/U19 comps produced only 3 drafted players.

Renovator's delight, with a classy kitchen

[am Bays]

TM, it's interesting that more than half the SA draftees came from only 2 clubs.

Three clubs contributed none.

You can use statistics to back up any argument :D

Agreed R&B but given that the current structure was used as a reason for why there was such a poor draft result I thought it had to be said...

Look we've been over this argument before so no point wasting bytes again...

I stand by the fact that the new structure and limitations plaeced on players and clubs is a backward step based on my experiences.

[spell_check]

Renovator's delight, with a classy kitchen

That the AFL has a trademark on.

[redandblack]

spelly, you're right, we could argue about it for ages.

But...

It's a fact of life, so...

embrace it and enjoy it

[sjt]

Central, lose at the moment. Not enough players drafted for a mini-draft selection.

[JK]

TM, it's interesting that more than half the SA draftees came from only 2 clubs.

Three clubs contributed none.

You can use statistics to back up any argument :D

Agreed R&B but given that the current structure was used as a reason for why there was such a poor draft result I thought it had to be said...

Look we've been over this argument before so no point wasting bytes again...

I stand by the fact that the new structure and limitations plaeced on players and clubs is a backward step based on my experiences.

Shouldnt take one year in isolation when assessing the outgoing structure mate

[am Bays]

Shouldnt take one year in isolation when assessing the outgoing structure mate

Agreed mate, but when last years abnormal result is used as a reason to justify the change.....

[wycbloods]

Central, lose at the moment. Not enough players drafted for a mini-draft selection.

Still the rookie draft so you guys will get a selection.

[JK]

Shouldnt take one year in isolation when assessing the outgoing structure mate

Agreed mate, but when last years abnormal result is used as a reason to justify the change.....

Yeah fair call

[redandblack]

Tassie, I'd just like your take on the following observation.

Four SANFL clubs opposed the change to the underage competition. They were Port, Centrals, Sturt and Glenelg.

Those four clubs contributed the grand total of 2 players between them to the drafted players total this year.

The Clubs who supported the change contributed 11 of the 13.

Perhaps there's a lesson there for those clubs, or perhaps readers can draw their own conclusions about those clubs.