Shoot me down in flames if I am wrong R22 (like you need an invitation to do that!), but I get the feeling you are advocating "tanking" in your initial post. I find the whole idea of tanking reprehensible as well as plain stupid.

Drafting (in the case of the AFL) and the reverse draft (in WAFL) is a very inexact science and to tank with the idea of getting hold of a supposedly better player makes no sense. There is absolutely no way of assuring that the player drafted as number 1 or 2 in the AFL draft will end up a better player than the player drafted at 5 or 6. If over the last 10 years only number 1 picks ever won a Brownlow there might be some grounds for promoting the idea but football is littered with top draft picks who have not gone on with it. Next year will be no different. Whoever gets drafted at 1 comes with no guarantees of being a better player than the player at 10 (or 20 for that matter!).

The same applies in the WAFL reverse draft. Say, for example, a team a few years ago tanked to get number 1 pick so they could get Chris Judd. Would they consider 1 game to be a good return for tanking? I think not. There are no guarantees in the draft or reverse draft so to have that as your method of building a team is fraught with danger.

I think most team administrations are smart enough to realize that so always scoff at those who suggest teams tank. Why bother? Who says Rich or Natanui are going to go on with it? Who says that some kid who was the last picked in the State under 18's doesn't grab the opportunity with both hands and go on to carve a great career in the AFL?

As I said, there are too many variables to rely on one or two higher a pick to make a difference.

Last Edited By: Dean Schulze Jun 24 08 3:04 PM. Edited 1 times.