News Adelaide Academy?

[Vader]

The AFL website is reporting that the AFL is considering introducing zones/academies for ALL of the AFL clubs, not just the NSW & QLD clubs. Clubs would then have the ability to take these players at a discount, the same as the new F/S system. This could potentially give us an opportunity to access the best South Australians in the draft pool for a change (given that the club has only ever had 1x single-digit draft selection).

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-05-...introducing-recruiting-zones-for-all-18-clubs

This could radically change the AFC's recruitment policies. Currently the AFC seems to focus their attention on SA, Vic Country, Tasmania and the NT. Very few players are drafted from Vic Metro or WA. Ex-SANFL players are now in the minority on our team list, with the best of the SA talent consistently going interstate. This move could significantly increase the number of SA-based players drafted by the AFC, becoming once again an SA-dominated club.

Thoughts?

 

[spenze]

Collingwood to get all the juvenile detention centres in their zone?

 

[Pdub]

I think every club should have 2 zones, one in a predominantly indigenous area and one not. The size of each zone should be worked out by how many kids play aus kick, each zone should have an equal number of aus kick kids, the zone boundaries should be redrawn every 5 years and only roughly follow state boundaries.

I think each club should only be able to take one player per round from their zones and if another club is willing to take one of your players in an earlier round than you are willing then you can't stop them.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Hope this happens. I'm sick of seeing all the best South Australian talent playing interstate especially given we rarely if ever get any of these guys back.

 

[knobby]

Has merit I think and would be easy to implement in SA & WA, just follow the father son guidelines and their recruiting zones
i.e Adelaide develop Norwood, South Adelaide, Glenelg, Sturt zones Port Adelaide develop Central, WWT, North Adelaide, West city & country
AFL sides can then work with the SANFL clubs as well financially and resource wise

Not sure if the Vics will go for it, but they have a bigger population

 

[knobby]

and hopefully its in place for Jonty Scharenburg !

 

[Elder van Berlo]

I've long thought each club should be able to take one player per year from their zone outside the draft. Ensures a real link between the elite talent and their local club. Also encourages the AFL club to invest in and develop their own zone and takes some of the burden of that off the AFL.

 

[radiojake]

the s**t fight would be breaking up the Victorian zones - But I guess if it's limited to one player per draft it wouldn't be so bad

 

[JP Sauce]

the s**t fight would be breaking up the Victorian zones - But I guess if it's limited to one player per draft it wouldn't be so bad

There'd be s**t fights in SA and WA too.

 

[radiojake]

Dividing the states into 2 zones compared to dividing a state into 10?

 

[JP Sauce]

Dividing the states into 2 zones compared to dividing a state into 10?

It'll be simpler, yes, but I can still see there being plenty of fighting over certain areas.

 

[Vooligan]

This would be a brilliant idea. Would love to see Adelaide filled with the best Adelaide talent. This would also help our go home problem immensely. Considering how much brilliant SA Talent is consistently going to opposition/interstate lists, surely this could only be good for the future of our list.


Also, dividing up SA is easy. Port Power represent a suburb in SA, give them that. We represent the entire Adelaide as the "team for all South Australians" give us the whole state.

 

[Vader]

I think every club should have 2 zones, one in a predominantly indigenous area and one not. The size of each zone should be worked out by how many kids play aus kick, each zone should have an equal number of aus kick kids, the zone boundaries should be redrawn every 5 years and only roughly follow state boundaries.

I think each club should only be able to take one player per round from their zones and if another club is willing to take one of your players in an earlier round than you are willing then you can't stop them.

It's relatively easy to identify "predominantly indigenous areas" in SA & WA, possibly NT, Qld and NSW as well. There really aren't any "predominantly indigenous areas" in Victoria. It's a good idea though - and dividing up the Kimberley is apparently one of the stumbling blocks they're going to have to sort out for the WA clubs.

Dividing the states into 2 zones compared to dividing a state into 10?

The article indicates that they're looking at establishing a national U18s competition, with each U18 club aligned with an AFL club. The example given is Calder Cannons aligning with Essendon, which would be a problem for us given the number of Cannons players we've drafted over the years.

 

[Miss Vanessa]

It's funny but I was arguing for something similar a couple of years ago on BF. Was mostly howled down by people claiming it would be unfair but I went back to the 2005-2012 drafts and had a look at what clubs would have got what via a slap dash allocation system. Sorry, it's kinda long but other than an anomaly in favour of Freo, the data shows that this type of thing could really work with no one getting screwed.

For the purposes of this exercise, I’ve assigned each of the ten Victorian clubs and Sydney and Brisbane directly with a team from the TAC Cup. Sydney and Brisbane would have also had a priority pick directly from NSW and Qld.

For the teams from SA and the WA, they have been allocated teams from the SANFL and WAFL respectively.

As for the Gold Coast and GWS, well they throw a spanner in the works and as such, perhaps priority picks from NT (for GC) and Tasmania (for GWS) would even things up slightly.

Who finishes higher on the ladder between the two NSW clubs and the two Qld clubs would determine the order for their priority picks from the two states in question (NSW and Qld)

Perhaps also, a pick from the best of the rest might even things up too, at least until these regions have developed sufficiently to provide adequate “local” picks.

Wasn’t entirely sure how the club allocations would work. Victorians and West Australians let me know if these club assignments are kind of on the money

Anyhow, other than the Fremantle anomaly, this actually seems to me to be pretty even across the board... Also, the talent that would slip through to the draft proper is still pretty darn good and I can’t see how the integrity of the draft itself would really be upset.

Adelaide - South Adelaide, Glenelg, Sturt, Norwood
Port Adelaide - Port Adelaide, Centrals, West Adelaide, North Adelaide, Woodville/West Torrens

Fremantle - Swan Districts, East Fremantle, South Fremantle, Peel Thunder and Claremont
West Coast - East Perth, West Perth, Perth, Subiaco

North Ballarat - Saint Kilda
Gippsland - Bulldogs
Dandenong - Hawthorn
Sandringham - Melbourne
Oakleigh - Carlton
Calder Cannons - North Melbourne
Geelong Falcons - Geelong
Western Jets - Collingwood
Northern Knights - Essendon
Eastern Ranges - Richmond

Bendigo - Brisbane
Murray Bushrangers - Sydney

These are the players each team would have received since 2005.

Adelaide (aligned with South Adelaide, Glenelg, Sturt and Norwood)

In - Darren Pfieffer (17), Bryce Gibbs (1), Tom McNamara (66), Ryan Schoenmaker (16), Jack Trengove (2), Sam Day (3), Chad Winguard (6)

Average Pick No: 16

Top Ten Picks: 4

Brisbane (aligned with Bendigo and first choice of best of Queensland)

In - N/A, Joel Selwood (7), Robbie Tarrant (15), N/A, Dustin Martin (3), Ariel Steinberg (31), Sam Kerridge (27

Average Pick No: 17

In via Queensland pick (up to 2009): Courtney Dempsey (19), David Armitage (9), Brendan Whitecross (29), Dayne Beams (29), Jason Tutt (31)

Average Pick No: 23

Total Top Ten Picks: 3

Carlton (aligned with Oakleigh)

In - Marc Murphy (1), Todd Goldstein (37), N/A, Luke Shuey (18), Jamie MacMillan (37) Andrew Gaff (4), Dom Tyson (3)

Average Pick No: 17

Top Ten Picks: 3

Collingwood (aligned with Western Jets)

In - Jake Edwards (36), Bachar Houli (42), Callan Ward (19), Jayden Post (26), Jack Fitzpatrick (50), N/A, Will Hoskin-Elliot (4)

Average Pick No: 30

Top Ten Picks: 1

Essendon (aligned with Northern Knights)

In - Ben McKinley (29), Daniel Currie (49), Matthew Kreuzer (1), Michael Hurley (5), Sam Grimley (39), Josh Caddy (7), Billy Longer (8)

Average Pick No: 20

Top Ten Picks: 4

Fremantle (aligned with Swan Districts, East Fremantle, South Fremantle, Peel Thunder and Claremont)

In - Jack Kennedy (3), Scott Gumbleton (2), Chris Masten (3), Nic Naitanui (2), Anthony Morabito (4), David Swallow (1), Stephen Coniglio (2)

Average Pick No: 2

Top Ten Picks: 7

Geelong (aligned with Geelong Falcons)

In - Shaun Higgins (11), Travis Boak (5), Lachlan Henderson (8), Luke Rounds (46), Ben Cunnington (5), Billy Smedts (15), Taylor Adams (13)

Average Pick No: 15

Top Ten Picks: 2

Hawthorn (aligned with Dandenong)

In - Nathan Jones (12), Andrejs Everitt (11), Jarrad Grant (5), Thomas Gillies (33), Tom Scully (1), Tomas Lynch (11), Matt Buntine (5)

Average Pick No: 11

Top Ten Picks: 3

Melbourne (aligned with Sandrignham)

In - Robert Warnock (42), Chris Dawes (28), N/A, Jack Watts (1), Jack Gunston (29), Ben Jacobs (16), Liam Sumner (10)

Average Pick No: 21

Top Ten Picks: 2

North Melbourne (aligned with Calder Cannons)

In - Richard Douglas (16), Jarryd Allen (59), Addam Maric (21), Nackson Trengove (22), Jake Melksham (10), Dion Prestia (9), Barandon Ellis (15)

Average Pick No: 22

Port Power (aligned with Port Adelaide, Central Districts, West Adelaide, North Adelaide and Woodville/West Torrens)

In - Shannon Hurn (13), Paul Stewart (23), Brad Ebert (13), Hamish Hartlett (4), Daniel Menzell (17), Jared Polec (5), Cameron Ellis-Yolmen (64)

Average Pick No: 20

Top Ten Picks: 2

Richmond (aligned with Eastern Ranges)

In - Matthew Spangher (34), N/A, Matthew Lobbe (16), Sam Blease (17), Andrew Moore (9), Kieran Harper (27), Jonathan Patton (1)

Average Pick No: 17

Top Ten Picks: 2

Saint Kilda (aligned with North Ballarat)

In - Stephen Owen (35), Nathan Brown (10), Clayton Hinkley (24), Nic Suabn (24), David Astbury (35), Lucas Cook (12), Sebastian Rowe (25)

Average Pick No: 24

Top Ten Picks: 1

Swans (aligned with Murray Bushrangers and first choice of best of NSW)

In - Marcus Drum (10), Ben Reid (8), Ben McEvoy (9), Jack Ziebell (9), Sam Reid (38), Shaun Ately (17), Patrick Wearden (47)

Average Pick No: 20

In via NSW pick (up to 2009) - Dylan Addison (27), N/A, Taylor Walker (*75 SP), N/A, N/A, Trent Stubbs (77), Jarrod Witts (67)

Average Pick No: 62 (though skewed via scholarship picks)

Top Ten Picks: 4

West Coast (aligned with East Perth, West Perth, Perth, Subiaco)

In - Jarrad Oakley Nicholls (8), Matthew Leunberger (4), David Myers (6), Stephen Hill (3), Mitch Duncan (28), Reece Conca (6), Fraser McInnes (28)

Average Pick No: 12

Top Ten Picks: 5

Western Bulldogs (aligned with Gippsland)

In - Dale Thomas (2), Lachlan Hansen (3), Myke Cook (38), Nicholas Heyne (48), John Butcher (8), Dyson Heppell (8), Sam Docherty (12)

Average Pick No: 17

Top Ten Picks: 4

Top 2 Picks from Tasmania (from 2005) - Grant Birchall (14), Mitchell Thorp (6), Tom Collier (25), Liam Jones (32), Mitch Robinson (40), Marcus Davies (43), Ryan Harwood (47), Josh Green (32), Jeremy Howe (33), Henry Schade (24), Jimmy Webster (42)

Average Pick No: 31

Top 2 Picks from NT (from 2005) - Nathan Djerrkura (25), Cyril Rioli (12), Marlon Motlop (28), Stephen Motlop (39), Troy Taylor (51), Zephaniah Skinner (88)

Average Pick No: 41

Best of the Rest:

2005 - Xavier Ellis (3), Scott Pendlebury (5), Beau Dowler (6), Patrick Ryder (7)

2006 - James Frwaley (12), Jack Riewoldt (13 - Tassie Mariners), James Sellar (14), Daniel O’keefe (15)

2007 - Trent Cotchin (2), Cale Morton (4), Rhys Palmer (7), Patrick Dangerfield (10)

2008 - Chris Yarran (6), Daniel Rich (7), Tyron Vickery (8), Phil Davis (10)

2009 - Gary Rohan (6), Brad Shephard (7), Jordan Gysberts (11), Kane Lucas (12)

2010 - Harley Bennell (2), Daniel Gorringe (10), Seb Tape (13), Brodie Smith (14)

2011 - Nick Haynes (7), Adam Tomlinson (9), Toby Greene (11), Devon Smith (14)

 

[Pdub]

It's relatively easy to identify "predominantly indigenous areas" in SA & WA, possibly NT, Qld and NSW as well. There really aren't any "predominantly indigenous areas" in Victoria. It's a good idea though - and dividing up the Kimberley is apparently one of the stumbling blocks they're going to have to sort out for the WA clubs.

I know we would want it to be SA clubs get SA zones, WA clubs get WA zones, victorian clubs get victorian zones and so on, but that wouldn't work or be fare. 50% of SA will give more talent than 10% of victoria so if zones were brought in a few of the clubs would have zones in other states. Some Vic clubs may have zones in SA or WA if there are too many people there for the local clubs. NT and Tas would also be split up amongst the clubs.

 

[Bob Neil]

I reckon it's a bad idea and will undermine equality in the competition not enhance.

Keep the elite teams separate from the grassroots/pathways is a cleaner and better model IMO.

 

[rocket18]

Dividing the states into 2 zones compared to dividing a state into 10?

As if we didn't need another reason but this again highlights the farce of having so many AFL teams in Victoria.

Hard yards should have been done years ago to drop a couple of teams back to the VFL to keep it at 16 or even better 14 sides.

 

[Miss Vanessa]

I reckon it's a bad idea and will undermine equality in the competition not enhance.

Keep the elite teams separate from the grassroots/pathways is a cleaner and better model IMO.

While the notion that keeping elite teams separate from the grassroots is interesting, the idea that it would lead to inequality doesn't quite hold.

Just compare who Adelaide would have got from 2005-2012, to the Queensland picks and the lowest ranked (in terms of average pick number) Victorian U/18 club.

Adelaide: Darren Pfieffer, Bryce Gibbs, Tom McNamara, Ryan Schoenmaker, Jack Trengove, Sam Day, Chad Winguard.

Brisbane (first choice of best of Queensland): Courtney Dempsey, David Armitage, Brendan Whitecross, Dayne Beams, Jason Tutt

Western Jets: Jake Edwards, Bachar Houli, Callan Ward, Jayden Post, Jack Fitzpatrick, Will Hoskin-Elliot

And almost all clubs have a similar list of players - some guns, some unknowns...

I don't see how this is particularly inequitable and there could of course be safeguards in place to ensure fairness. I just love the idea that a club would actually have real connections to its local area. I can't see how this is a bad thing.

 

[skoobydoo]

Has merit I think and would be easy to implement in SA & WA, just follow the father son guidelines and their recruiting zones
i.e Adelaide develop Norwood, South Adelaide, Glenelg, Sturt zones Port Adelaide develop Central, WWT, North Adelaide, West city & country
AFL sides can then work with the SANFL clubs as well financially and resource wise

Not sure if the Vics will go for it, but they have a bigger population

Why would you give the country SA to Power?

 

[knobby]

Why would you give the country SA to Power?

sorry poor sentence structure, city & country zones for each SANFL club to respective AFL clubs, so Norwood's city & country zones for Adelaide etc Central's city & country for PAPs etc

 

[mattymac]

Would be great for us

 

[Mismatched]

For the SA and WA clubs, zoning would be a massive bonus, Vic teams it would be middle if the road, then for QLD and NSW it would be less great.

Personally I would love to see some level of zoning return, it's a shame to an extent that I think we've now got more Victorians in our side than South Aussies, we're "the team for all South aussies!"

Certainly the introduction of this new FS bidding system looks like it could be a precursor to a certain level of zoning.

I gather it would have to work something along the lines where clubs could nominate 8-10x 15 year olds each year from their zone who would enter a clubs academy. The clubs would then have priority access to these players by bidding for them through the same system as FS.

Making clubs commit to Academy players at say 15 or 16, with a limit to the size of academies, would mean that there would still be a number of late bloomers for those who would be effectively zone free, which would be important for those clubs wig smaller zones.

It would probably end up being a reasonably complex system, but could work well, especially as it would encourage clubs to invest a lot more in junior footy/grass roots.

As if we didn't need another reason but this again highlights the farce of having so many AFL teams in Victoria.

Hard yards should have been done years ago to drop a couple of teams back to the VFL to keep it at 16 or even better 14 sides.

Agreed, at a bare minimum I think the AFL needs to look to shift 2 Melbourne based teams interstate within the next 10 years. One to Tasmania, then one to potentially NZ, FNQ or perhaps another in Sydney/Canberra. At present you'd probably be looking at St Kilda, Bulldogs, Melbourne and the Roos.

 

[LC40]

Port Power (aligned with Port Adelaide, Central Districts, West Adelaide, North Adelaide and Woodville/West Torrens)

In - Shannon Hurn (13), Paul Stewart (23), Brad Ebert (13), Hamish Hartlett (4), Daniel Menzell (17), Jared Polec (5), Cameron Ellis-Yolmen (64)

Average Pick No: 20

I'm not quite sure what your criteria was for this exercise?
Players to qualify for your team still needed to be in the AFL system now?
The players chosen for Port in this example are your best rated top 22 therefore discarding blokes like Varcoe ,Greenwood, Edwards.???
I wasn't sure; Tom McNamara and Darren Pfieffer named in Adelaide threw me as they currently aren't playing.

I do know if you're quoting since 2005-2012 you missed a hell of a lot of players who would have qualified for Port that came from Central, West, North, Port and Woodville-West Torrens.

Rhys Stanley(WA),Travis Varcoe(CD),Alan Obst(CD),Brent Montgomery(PA),Matthew Stokes(WWT),Jonathan Giles(CD),Shane Edwards(NA),Chris Schmidt(WA)Lindsay Thomas(PA),Nick Gill(NA),Levi Greenwood(PA)Matthew Westhoff(CD),Lewis Johnston(NA),Matthew Broadbent (WWT),Jarred Redden (WWT),Rhys O'Kefffe (NA),Glenn Dawson(WWT),Tyson Slattery(WA),Chris Hall (WWT),Luke Tapscott(NA),Nick Joyce (WWT),Cameron Ellis -Yeoman (WWT).

I have never been a fan of allocating teams to either side but I understood it under the father/son rules.
I believe an exercise was done by the AFL working out the proportions of father/sons for South Australians that would qualify under the old system. When they looked at it the number of likely candidates was almost even if you divided the teams up as they did.

A team academy is a vastly different exercise!
I haven't done the calculations but I'm guessing the same can't be said over the history of the draft for allocations along these team lines.
Discounting Port as potentially their whole team moved into the AFL.
South Fremantle ,Woodville-West Torrens and West Adelaide are the three clubs I'm lead to believe have produced more AFL draft picks than any other clubs, although lately Norwood would be pressing.

If we look at the named Under 18 SA team playing WA today 13 would be tied to Port under the present scheme and 9 tied to Adelaide.
North 4,Centrals,4, West Adel 6
Norwood 5, Glenelg 2, Sturt 2
There is potential for an imbalance to occur under the existing system.
The other anomaly now concerns Port Adelaide, as they've lost their actual metropolitan and country recruiting zone with which to draw players from (although they still have an academy). There is also talk of them losing their under age teams in the SANFL.

This really needs to be thought through as IMO there are too many variables in the current carve up.

 

[Miss Vanessa]

I'm not quite sure what your criteria was for this exercise?

I simply worked under the assumption that each team would get one pick from their designated teams prior to the draft proper. The players I named were those who were chosen first from those teams in that given year - not the best player who a team could have picked up in retrospect.

And I think you're overthinking the rest of it - though I'm sure you could smooth out any glaring inequalities. All I was trying to show that with a simple allocation system, it all seems to come out in the wash. All teams would have had a reasonable bunch of players on their list, all "homegrown" and all with a connection to the club and the region they represent. That's surely a good thing?

 

[LC40]

I simply worked under the assumption that each team would get one pick from their designated teams prior to the draft proper. The players I named were those who were chosen first from those teams in that given year - not the best player who a team could have picked up in retrospect.

And I think you're overthinking the rest of it - though I'm sure you could smooth out any glaring inequalities. All I was trying to show that with a simple allocation system, it all seems to come out in the wash. All teams would have had a reasonable bunch of players on their list, all "homegrown" and all with a connection to the club and the region they represent. That's surely a good thing?

I don't believe you can't 'over think' something like this. We got screwed over with the father and son rules and although the theory of an academy is fine I'm hoping our teams don't rely on it coming out in the wash.
I'm fine with the present set up, if they got the father son rule more equitable then we can draft players from anywhere.
If your worried about home grown and players from your region go watch the SANFL that's is far more aligned to regions and a good standard.