And the 2008 Nick's BB Gavin Brown Medal goes to...

[kambarker]

lets take this further, I will chip in $10 to get a medal struck for the winner and the have it sent to the club....it may get thrown in the bin but hell it might actually become pride of place in someones top drawer at home...what do ya reckon?

Cheers

Happy to add to the coffers if this is the way to go!!

[David]

Same.

[Alec. J. Hidell]

I think the best voting system is
5
4
3
2
1

It clearly recognises the BOG and allows for those who had a 'good game' to get a vote or 2.

[John Wren]

Same.

a fake chinese rubber plant an option? happy to contribute a few $. if, by chance, we get a few $ should we buy medals/awards for the past winners too?

[David]

Not sure about past winners, might be old news. Not too fussed either way though. And I can probably contribute $10-$20, it'd be worth it to see this go ahead. Realistically though, I don't see why we wouldn't need more than about $5 each from 10 posters, this kind of stuff really shouldn't cost too much.

jmcp, I think a few fake plastic trees would go down quite well

[Captain_MyCaptain]

10 bucks, too easy.
20 'paid up' posters x 10 bucks? Should be doable.
Medals no. A prize of some sort yes.
Administration?

[Pied Piper]

I think the best voting system is
5
4
3
2
1

It clearly recognises the BOG and allows for those who had a 'good game' to get a vote or 2.

I tend to agree with this. It allows room for other players while remaining simple for counting purposes. Anyway, I'll do a poll next year when the time comes.

[Kingswood]

yeh i'd donate too, too easy

[Johnson#26]

Well done Dane Swan, and a champion effort by David in compiling and writing up the votes. How did you deal with all those posters who gave their 1 vote to "everyone else", or to multiple players?

I'm happy with the current system, but for what it's worth, when next season comes around we should run a poll on how best to do the medal next year - i.e. offer a choice between the status quo and the five best players rated out of 10, as suggested by some posters after round 21, or any other system anyone else can think of. Ah heck, I'll just try to remember to do it myself before round one 2009!

No, keep it as it is. You just have to trust that people will be sensible. We have had the system for three years now, and it should not be changed.

[Johnson#26]

We DO have rules here, for those who are interested - http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=33720

[Pied Piper]

No disrespect Luke, and I didn't have a problem with the old system myself, but a number of people have said they wished for a different approach. That doesn't mean the present system hasn't worked; just that some are dissatisfied with it. There is no harm in holding a poll to determine what model Nick's netizens want to go with and the current system should and will be one of the options.

[Kingswood]

i'd hate to read a 5-vote system after a bad loss, we usually struggle to name 3 good players.

[Neil Appleby]

Thanks David, a big job well done.

I reckon the players would come to appreciate a medal from Pie supporters, not just Australia wide, but world wide don't you?

I reckon Eddie would appreciate it too. He's filthy enough about the anti Collingwood bias in every other award and he obviously knows about and watches the weekly voting. I actually thought there was a Nick's Medal.

Regarding the voting; just because we have had a 321 system doesn't mean we can't change it. The Copeland Trophy doesn't use 321 and the coaches don't use 321 either. Neither does The Age (not sure about the Sun).
Anyway, a poll sounds in order.

And for those posters alluding to 'stupid voters' who dared to be different, sometimes plenty of us found the 321 just too unfair on some great efforts.

[David]

No worries Neil, and I tend to agree with you and some of the others - even though I find the 3-2-1 system easier and more user friendly than a lot of other suggestions, I'd like to reiterate that I think the 5-4-3-2-1 might be superior. It simply allows for the recognition of more players. Kingswood has a point, but I'm sure people will still make an effort. Either way, it's a good idea to put it to a vote.

BTW I'm pretty sure the Herald Scum does a best of 5.

[Piethagoras' Theorem]

I think the best voting system is
5
4
3
2
1

It clearly recognises the BOG and allows for those who had a 'good game' to get a vote or 2.

I tend to agree with this. It allows room for other players while remaining simple for counting purposes. Anyway, I'll do a poll next year when the time comes.

I don't think that is any more accurate than a 3, 2, 1 system which imo is not an accurate way of differentiating good performances. You may as well leave it at 3

For example, why should player A, who played an average game but was best for his team in a horrible loss in WEEK 1 be credited the same votes as player B, who in WEEK 2 played an outstanding game in a 10 goal win.

If you rated them out of 10, player A would perhaps get a 6 or 7 out of 10 wheras player B would get say a 9 or 10.

The voting woud then look someting like this

WEEK 1 (Bad loss, terrible team effort)

6. Player A
5. Whoever
5. " "
4. " "
4. " "

WEEK 2 (Great 10 goal win)

9. Player B
8. Whoever
8. " "
7. " "
7. " "

I think this system is a lot fairer