I'm betting that you'll continue to draft household names like O'Rourke, Plowman, Sumner, Buntine etc and continue to sell players of that ilk for a bag of chips. lol
The Academies - 2016
- Thread starter Garlic muncher
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I'm betting that you'll continue to draft household names like O'Rourke, Plowman, Sumner, Buntine etc and continue to sell players of that ilk for a bag of chips. lol
dlanod
Moderator
- Sep 14, 2006
- 52,467
- 81,384
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- GWS; CCMariners; NQCowboys; Ravens
- Moderator
- #252
Nope. Rules haven't changed - Weller was never eligible for nominating by GC, but in their academy anyway. Brisbane has Himmelberg (brother to the GWS player) and a Lambert son in their academy this year. Neither are eligible for academy nominations due to the residency requirements. These generally get glossed over in the academy hatred.
It's their registered address, so generally where their parents are given we're talking about kids here. I doubt many kids in boarding school consider it home.
This is not right and can understand other clubs sentiments. I personally would allow just three academy kids to be picked no matter where they fall with others having to understand that if they all fall in the first round that club would have had to trade players out to have enough points to get them. Five years is what is required and should be in the academy for this duration of time to be eligible. I don't think that academy players should be made to choose between education and football and this should not come into it.
dlanod
Moderator
- Sep 14, 2006
- 52,467
- 81,384
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- GWS; CCMariners; NQCowboys; Ravens
- Moderator
- #254
Adelaide had a real struggle, where they won a premiership in six years after entry. Nine 100+ game players in their inaugural team. Bears had one player that went on to play 100+ games. Fremantle had five (not counting Bell, who left after the first year). Port had 12. The SA teams seem really hard-done by with rules on introduction.
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,399
- 42,325
- AFL Club
- GWS
If the blues wanna keep on paying, who are we to say no.
Last edited:
isamedthegiants
Club Legend
- May 3, 2016
- 1,528
- 1,720
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Banned
- #257
Well we did last year.
And will again this year.
We have no scouts in the Western states, so we're not interested in WA or SA talent...
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,399
- 42,325
- AFL Club
- GWS
You really should research.
I like the academies as it is keeping young kids from NSW and QLD in the AFL system, there is a few concerns though as the amount of quality players that are being produced at the moment is astounding. I think that the teams who run the academies should be restricted to having rights to one player a year in the main draft and then if they aren't picked in the main draft they have rights to them for the rookie draft.
coniglio_number1
Norm Smith Medallist
i prefer the choice of open draft or academy. if you draft academy players then you cant take any players from outside the academy.
So your saying that if you have your academies you can only draft from them? and not from any other state?
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,447
- 28,126
- AFL Club
- West Coast
If an Academy is so fruitful that it's clearly preferential to participating in the draft then it's no wonder that clubs are concerned.
The advantages should only be marginal over those clubs not afforded academies.
The advantages should only be marginal over those clubs not afforded academies.
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,399
- 42,325
- AFL Club
- GWS
They are beneficial because they are players from our own state. We still have to pay for them
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,447
- 28,126
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I was referring to the Academy or open draft choice comment.
But in regards to your comment, I agree but would add that they are beneficial as you can access players at a discount.
CallumMills2020
Rookie
I think Eddie and his mates want to have a bit of a think about this latest knee jerk reaction to the Riverina.
As it stands GWS has 3 1st round selections in the 2016 Draft which for all intents and purposes will be used on Academy kids. For this they will pay a heavy price particularly if all 3 kids are bid on in the first round which appears likely.
If the Riverina zone is removed the Giants will have no choice but to use these 3 picks on the best available talent aka Bowes, McCluggage, Petrevski-Seton etc and not have to pay a cent!!
They can then parlay this into the 2017 superdraft by trading McCarthy, Tomlinson, Patton, Stewart, Marchbank, Steele and again get a bunch of 1st and 2nd rounders which will be used without paying a cent.
If the Riverina Zone remains in place yes GWS will secure Macreadie, Setterfield and perhaps Mutch and maybe Brander and Spargo in 17'. For that they will forego higher rated talent and will pay through the nose.
I think the Riverina whilst providing closer to home grown talent could potentially be a negative for the Giants as they ignore better players and pay heavily for the privilege. As the team continues to get stronger and win more the lure of home will dissipate for those getting a game and the others would be encouraged to move on whilst they have currency.
The more I think of it ole Ed and co may be doing the expansion clubs a favour!!
As it stands GWS has 3 1st round selections in the 2016 Draft which for all intents and purposes will be used on Academy kids. For this they will pay a heavy price particularly if all 3 kids are bid on in the first round which appears likely.
If the Riverina zone is removed the Giants will have no choice but to use these 3 picks on the best available talent aka Bowes, McCluggage, Petrevski-Seton etc and not have to pay a cent!!
They can then parlay this into the 2017 superdraft by trading McCarthy, Tomlinson, Patton, Stewart, Marchbank, Steele and again get a bunch of 1st and 2nd rounders which will be used without paying a cent.
If the Riverina Zone remains in place yes GWS will secure Macreadie, Setterfield and perhaps Mutch and maybe Brander and Spargo in 17'. For that they will forego higher rated talent and will pay through the nose.
I think the Riverina whilst providing closer to home grown talent could potentially be a negative for the Giants as they ignore better players and pay heavily for the privilege. As the team continues to get stronger and win more the lure of home will dissipate for those getting a game and the others would be encouraged to move on whilst they have currency.
The more I think of it ole Ed and co may be doing the expansion clubs a favour!!
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,447
- 28,126
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Can you explain how the Giants could get non-Academy selections without paying a cent?
CallumMills2020
Rookie
What I mean is that they will just take them with their selections, they won't have to worry about securing enough points. They will also make uncompromised selections picking the best available per pick.
The Giants have been stung by losing some top end Victorian talent to poachers so are a bit gun shy but at the end of the day they are becoming a powerhouse so a good percentage of their core will want to hang around and be a part of that. When you have a successful program less players seek trades...look at the Swans.
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,447
- 28,126
- AFL Club
- West Coast
So you are arguing that securing draft picks at the market rate is cheaper than securing them at a discounted rate?
I'm beginning to think that you are an anti-Academy troll.
CallumMills2020
Rookie
No it is cheaper to get the discount but that doesn't mean you are getting the best available player.
The Riverina does not have a mortgage on the best players, they come from everywhere so GWS can source them from outside.
The horse has already bolted, the depth is off the charts and will be used to solidify the position over the next 5-10 years.
Things like future trading which some (Collingwood) were so keen to bring in will only lengthen the strong period for the Giants.
The currency is there no matter what and will either be used on Academy players or the best available.
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,447
- 28,126
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Your claims that they pay more "a heavy price" for academy selections than draft choices "not a cent" are not true. If the non-academy options are preferable at any selection in the draft then they will select them.
They always get the best available player (as they alone make every selection). And often they get them at a discount to what other clubs can pay.
They always get the best available player (as they alone make every selection). And often they get them at a discount to what other clubs can pay.
Last edited:
CallumMills2020
Rookie
Do you think they had Himmelberg rated the 16 best player? Do you think they had Flynn that high??
Absolutely not but they had to match bids. This is not to say they are not nice players but if there was no incentive would they have reached? I'm not sure they would.
With 3 early picks this year will they overlook a jet without an incentive, what if the key is in a needed position.
I just think the real issue was the stuff that happened earlier and this reaction is more sour grapes.
Absolutely not but they had to match bids. This is not to say they are not nice players but if there was no incentive would they have reached? I'm not sure they would.
With 3 early picks this year will they overlook a jet without an incentive, what if the key is in a needed position.
I just think the real issue was the stuff that happened earlier and this reaction is more sour grapes.
That was due to a well ran football club. One that came from the history of the SANFL.
We were not allowed to draft players from outside SA. We were only allowed to get one ex- SA player from each team (couldnt poach players who came from other states). We had no mini drafts to auction off. We had no prelisting of the best u17s in the land.
Seriously, GWS and GC have been given such a leg up it is crazy. And if that wasnt enough giving GWS the first pick at the Riverina kids for a discount is even more crazy.
How did Freo go with their consessions?
coniglio_number1
Norm Smith Medallist
given how painful the entry of brisbane and freo went it makes sense that the league learnt from the past and made changes
I think they have gone too far the other way.
And the GWS academy with 5 top 30 picks is too much. This is more players than WA had last year and probably this year as well.
Picks is based on Young Talent Time draft, which has 6 GWS players before pick 35.
The zone needs to be rained in very quickly.
coniglio_number1
Norm Smith Medallist
That just proves how well the academy is working and what happens when effort is poured into the region. I don't doubt the Riverina will be phased out but will probably not happen for a minimum of 2-3 years I imagine. Helps having a hopper available when player the caliber of treloar walks out of the club
