C'mon Ed...

[MF]

- "Time in the wilderness"
- One game and percentage out of finals last year
- 2nd on the ladder ATM with the best percentage in the league

Ok.

You'd finished 11th and lost one of your best players when McGuire started going to town on the academies.

Wilderness like when we finished second in 2002 & 2003 or every year since?

I think McGuire put in his submission to the AFL regarding Brisbanes concessions at the end of 2004 when Collingwood had finished bottom 4 and then bottom 2 the year after.

 

[Kummerspeck]

And we can go Visa Vera on that as well. If Hawthorn had an academy in say Eastern corridor (example only peoples) and had first digs at drafting them then that would leave the likes of Bruest, Langford & Hale (as an example as he is Qld IIRC) for NSW & QLD teams.

No, you can't go vice versa. Those are three players (one of which was a father son taken under the NSW scholarship program) taken with late and rookie picks across a decade. When the Swans take an academy player there are still multiple players from Victoria, SA and WA who are first rounders.

 

[Spook]

No, you can't go vice versa. Those are three players (one of which was a father son taken under the NSW scholarship program) taken with late and rookie picks across a decade. When the Swans take an academy player there are still multiple players from Victoria, SA and WA who are first rounders.

Its not taking the players everyone had a problem with FFS, cant you read. Its the order and rights to then players, Sydney finished second but has first rights to a player.... That is not how the draft is meant to work. You also have father son. You want it both ways. As I have said many time the academy is great but why do Sydney get first right if they are the second top team. It doesn't effect me at all because Hawthorn finished above you but what about the Likes of Saints, Melbourne Bullies etc.

 

[Pendles!]

You want fairness give up the Father/Son rule.

Brisbane and Sydney have access to both....

 

[Lockyer24]

Eddie 100% correct. Next.

 

[PTizzle]

Really wish people wouldn't comment on stuff they obviously have little idea about.

Eddie's obviously done very well though, has created a perception about the academies that has most people in strong footballing states frothing in agreement every time he speaks.

For every Heeney there's going to be a heap of other blokes who either don't make it or aren't drafted by the clubs who worked with them. I'm a big fan of having more QLD/NSW players on the lists of Brisbane/GC/GWS/Sydney and taking away programs like that is just going to mean that the growth of the game is far slower. Like it or not, these clubs exist and will continue to do so.

I don't have an issue with balancing the academies so that other clubs can benefit more from their existence but they're not the superstar production lines some people seem to think they are.

 

[Kummerspeck]

Its not taking the players everyone had a problem with FFS, cant you read.

I can. I directly responded to a statement you posted.

 

[TW Sherrin]

give every club a zone and everyone is happy.

 

[MarkT2]

You'd finished 11th and lost one of your best players when McGuire started going to town on the academies.



I think McGuire put in his submission to the AFL regarding Brisbanes concessions at the end of 2004 when Collingwood had finished bottom 4 and then bottom 2 the year after.

I think you made all that up.

Just the first google result in my search to back my memory up re Brisbane - back in 2002:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/30/1033283436570.html
As for the Sydney one, Collingwood were actually around top 4 half way though the year when the earlier rumblings became a mainstream issue - Andrew Ireland responding in July:
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...own-their-nsw-development-20140721-zvgg0.html

 

[MarkT2]

Really wish people wouldn't comment on stuff they obviously have little idea about.

Eddie's obviously done very well though, has created a perception about the academies that has most people in strong footballing states frothing in agreement every time he speaks.

For every Heeney there's going to be a heap of other blokes who either don't make it or aren't drafted by the clubs who worked with them. I'm a big fan of having more QLD/NSW players on the lists of Brisbane/GC/GWS/Sydney and taking away programs like that is just going to mean that the growth of the game is far slower. Like it or not, these clubs exist and will continue to do so.

I don't have an issue with balancing the academies so that other clubs can benefit more from their existence but they're not the superstar production lines some people seem to think they are.

Yes and Sydney want the Heeneys and to leave the rest to the rest. That is entirely the point.
I think there should be a Sydney and Qld academy and for that matter an NT one and probably Tassie. They should be AFL funded and the players should be subject to the draft either separately or in the national draft pool. If it is about talent development then giving anyone a priority does not achieve that aim. If it is about better talent access to target clubs than non target clubs then it does achieve that aim.

 

[MarkT2]

give every club a zone and everyone is happy.

On the contrary, all the teams who don't get a player as talented as the few in year 1 will be unhappy with their zone allocation.

 

[TW Sherrin]

maybe its time to acknowledge some teams aren't sustainable. brisbane won 3 flags last decade and are a basket case. do they have a future?

dogs, demons, saints, tigers haven't won a flag for decades. they have sorted their off field issues and are building towards finals.

Brisbane's biggest recruit won't be a player it will be their own version of Eddie.

 

[Kummerspeck]

If it is about talent development then giving anyone a priority does not achieve that aim. If it is about better talent access to target clubs than non target clubs then it does achieve that aim.

The point is to increase the number of players coming into the AFL from NSW and Queensland to address the disadvantage faced by clubs in those states who've had to build the overwhelming majority of their lists from interstate players and have had much less access to elite talent from within their state that teams in heartland states have.

 

[TheTrademark]

The AFL want money. You can't make any more money out of the saturated markets of traditional AFL markets like Victoria, SA and WA. So you look elsewhere.

The reason the AFL is not a saturated market in NSW and QLD is because they have competition in the form mainly of Rugby League and Union (Soccer is pretty equally popular everywhere). Traditional followers of Rugby League and Union typically watch and have watched it through the generations - father takes son, who grows up and takes son of own (though this is not always the case). Thus the AFL has to do as much as they can to beat the competition for the viewing dollar and create a cultural generational legacy to reduce following of other sports and switch to AFL.

Whether that be building grass roots so kids play AFL rather than League/Union at their local park, giving interested youth an option to succeed in their own backyard (Academies) when a school system or club system does not exist and/or also a successful team to aspire to be in (Swans/GWS), the AFL needs to create consistent cultural shift towards AFL. When this happens, kids grow up to AFL and become adults who follow the AFL, who in turn have their kids play AFL.

If all the things that are intrinsic to VIC, WA, SA including AFL at all schools, posts at all grounds, generational culture and many teams who have at one time or the other had success to create a generational culture exists in NSW and QLD then we would have equality and fairness.

Its rich coming from Collingwood as they have the lion share. When a victorian like Cloak can be championed in Melbourne because of the Melbourne-centric media but the likes of Pavlich are ignored, there are disparities between states (even AFL saturated ones). (Also does Cloak have Channel 9 subsidizing his contract in anyway? If so, no QLD or NSW clubs players can break their markets to have this but Melbourne clubs can)

There is inequality in this game. Whether it be the above or the fact only one teams has hand coolers for QLD games. (http://www.afl.com.au/video/2015-04-04/pies-bizarre-hand-device) There is inequalities.

Where's my Hand Cooler Eddie?

 

[MarkT2]

The point is to increase the number of players coming into the AFL from NSW and Queensland to address the disadvantage faced by clubs in those states who've had to build the overwhelming majority of their lists from interstate players and have had much less access to elite talent from within their state that teams in heartland states have.

Agree the point is to increase participation. The rest does not bear any relationship to that. More NSW/Qld is better for the NSW and Qld teams and the code overall. Adding them to Sydney or any specific clubs list is completely separate and unrelated to that juts as growing the code ion Tassie is important notwithstanding the don't have a team.

 

[Damon_3388]

Brisbane's biggest recruit won't be a player it will be their own version of Eddie.

Queenslander Karl Stefanovic, come on down.

 

[MarkT2]

Its rich coming from Collingwood as they have the lion share. When a victorian like Cloak can be championed in Melbourne because of the Melbourne-centric media but the likes of Pavlich are ignored, there are disparities between states (even AFL saturated ones). (Also does Cloak have Channel 9 subsidizing his contract in anyway? If so, no QLD or NSW clubs players can break their markets to have this but Melbourne clubs can)

You can't just make stuff up and call it justification. Pavlich would make more than Cloke on every front. Why would Channel 9, a business owned by a public company that exist solely to make money, subsidise a footballers playing contract?

 

[TheTrademark]

You can't just make stuff up and call it justification. Pavlich would make more than Cloke on every front. Why would Channel 9, a business owned by a public company that exist solely to make money, subsidise a footballers playing contract?

There is some desparate under reporting of interstate clubs. I don't want to derail the topic, but please tell me if Rory Sloane wouldn't be "elite" if he played for a Victorian club like Dyson Heppell who does, or Robbie Gray elite like Bryce Gibbs? Players who play for Victorian sides are always made out to be better than and get more coverage and more opportunities outside of football than players in non-victorian sides as the media is stronger and the demand bigger in Victoria.

When the NSW and QLD demand for AFL are as strong then there will be equality.

RE: Cloke... well Eddie Macguire was the CEO of one and Chairman of the other...(I was asking if the rumour was speculation or accepted fact - question not inference)
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...nt-eddie-mcguire/story-e6frf9jf-1226590320453
Why would he have go $100,000 a year for like 7 presentations?

Where is Nick Smith's Channel 9 contract Eddie?

 

[Colonial]

Maybe, I do like that rule though as it is great for tradition.

Academies offer nothing like that.

Bahahaha

And there its is....

 

[Lionheart182]

I still don't get why they can't be AFL funded/run academies.

If the AFL could be bothered they would be. This has been answered numerous times.

 

[Kummerspeck]

Agree the point is to increase participation.

The point is to get more AFL players into the AFL. The academies have been more successful than any other method of doing that, including the AFL running elite teams through AFLNSWACT. Is there an advantage to the teams who have them? Sure. It's no greater than the disadvantage that arises out of the scarcity of players from those states though.

 

[Tedeski]

Typical Ed. Makes some good points in his latest rant but can't resist a self-interested swipe.



Yep. Sydney developing players for Sydney to draft is brilliant for my club...

You can bid for them after we've spent money developing them for you.

We can only take Mills next year. Your club can bid for him, you can also have your pick from all those other academy players that we can't take but that Eddie believes is full of stars.
Go on Scottiland. Choose one.......choose 5!

 

[Lionheart182]

I'm not happy Melbourne got pick 2 for Frawley either, it was a disgraceful decision ..

Look, I think Brisbane deserve a (pre first round) priority draft pick this season, you've been so bad for so long, but all this talk about setting up academies and other forms of concessions, like the return of Lions COLA.

Don't mind The Lions getting financial and administrative aid from The AFL, that's fair enough, but there has to come a time when Brisbane has to stand and its on two feet.

Lions never had COLA, nor are the academies a concession as such.

 

[MF]

I think you made all that up.

Just the first google result in my search to back my memory up re Brisbane - back in 2002:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/30/1033283436570.html

I was going by an article that stated when Collingwood made an official submission to the AFL on the matter. I wasn't aware Ed started whinging about it a week after losing the Grand Final.

 

[dewah07]

i must be the only one fine with losing kids to other sports, theirs plenty of talent around, don't no why AFL feels it has to have a monolpoy on junior talent.