News Changes to Father Son/Academy Bidding

[swansfan51]

Do people think the 15% / 25% discount is too much, not enough, or about right?

Doesn't this violate the rule that a club has to take 3 new draftees a year?

It is 2 draftees, and no it doesn't. You can take 2 draftees at picks 100 and 101 if need be.

 

[Millky95]

Do people think the 15% / 25% discount is too much, not enough, or about right?

Should be 50% or not at all IMO. 50% gives clubs more of an incentive to pick up these guys. 0% actually gives value to the system though of needing to "buy" picks

 

[RUNVS]

Do people think the 15% / 25% discount is too much, not enough, or about right?

Well for the really high draft pick players it is almost worthless as it means if someone bid pick 1 to get him outright we would need pick 3. In the later rounds so rounds 2 and 3 the 25% discount is worth more.

 

[RUNVS]

Got it

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/biddingsystemfeedback.pdf

Page 2 gives a full list of the points for every pick.

 

[Membling]

Can't see the academy clubs being too happy. Bidding rorts could be a problem

 

[Kummerspeck]

Can't see the academy clubs being too happy. Bidding rorts could be a problem

Yeah, it's an open secret that clubs bid just to force the hand of the club with the F/S academy pick. This will make it worse.

 

[RUNVS]

Can't see the academy clubs being too happy. Bidding rorts could be a problem

Basically makes things extremely unaffordable if an academy team has a top 5 player. Even by pick 4 it is down almost 1000 points (or 33%) on the points of pick 1.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Can't see the academy clubs being too happy. Bidding rorts could be a problem

Doubt QBE will be happy they mentioned last year any sort of draconic changes will see them pull the plug.

Not that i agree with their method but its what they said.

 

[Membling]

Going to be an interesting few weeks. Formula sound, may find discounts will change. Which way, bugger knows.

 

[Ticky009]

No doubt the new formula will be another complete disaster that will be 'amended' as soon as Magpies & Hawks are impacted.

In the meantime, for giggles, I hereby nominate our SCG game against Collingwood for Heeney's debut game. Make a statement Swans & make it happen Horse!

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Forget about Dunkely... we may even need to trade players just for Mills if its based on those points.

Seriously i think this could be worth going to court over this is a rort.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

I just dont see how the academy can continue? we will be short on points that second year to pick anyone up due to the points still overdue from the previous year?

Am i reading this correctly??

 

[Ticky009]

Forgot about Dunkely... we may even need to trade players just for Mills if its based on those points.

Seriously i think this could be worth going to court over this is a rort.

If we didn't go to court over the trade ban then we definitely won't go to court over this.

 

[Membling]

I just dont see how the academy can continue? we will be short on points that second year to pick anyone up due to the points still overdue from the previous year?

Am i reading this correctly??

Look at it like this: who do you want to pick Sydney because Eddie and Newbold only want you to have one.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Feel so sad for the parents and kids.

 

[DavyRed]

1. Can definitely see even greater chance of teams putting in dummy bids to force Academy clubs to pay more.
2. Can definitely see Academy clubs questioning whether to commit so many dollars to their programs if the discounts aren't of sufficient value - otherwise why would they bother?
3. Perhaps Academy clubs may now try to 'hide' players so they attract less attention and, therefore, less points?
4. Perhaps Academy clubs may have to do some internal trading - perhaps give up on one excellent propect in the hope of securing two good prospects?

 

[TheMase]

Could put 5-6 years into a player only to have to sacrifice a whole draft, possibly two to get them.

Imagine doing that for a Jack Watts type?

These are kids FFS, there are no guarantees. I agree this is the type of system they should go to, hell I even suggested it, but pretty much if we develop truly elite players we will have to destroy the rest of our draft to get them.

Either the huge drop off from the top needs to be rationalised or the discount needs to go up, otherwise I am not convinced, from the Swans and sponsors point of view, that it is worth continuing with the academy (as much as personally I know it needs to continue).

 

[RW]

Haven't had a chance to look at the new system in detail yet but yeah, this sounds like a rort. A manufactured rule change where none was needed, adding unnecessary complexity, because certain clubs kicked up a big enough fuss. The club has got to get in the AFL's ear and drive them mad otherwise Eddie will just keep getting his way.

 

[swansfan51]

Feel so sad for the parents and kids.

Agreed, would be a crushing feeling if the club didn't feel you were worth taking at a 25% discount to what another club offered

 

[RUNVS]

Agreed, would be a crushing feeling if the club didn't feel you were worth taking at a 25% discount to what another club offered

I don't think it is down to being willing it is done to what we could afford. For instance the last draft we got Heeney, Hiscox, Rose and Davis but if the new rules we would have been able to get Heeney, Davis and pick 74. We would not have been able to afford Hiscox so he would have gone to whatever team bid for him and we would never have had the live pick we had for Rose.

So we got

Heeney, Hiscox, Rose, Davis

under new system we would have gotten

Heeney, Davis, pick 74

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Agreed, would be a crushing feeling if the club didn't feel you were worth taking at a 25% discount to what another club offered

I don't know why you always post with a sarcastic tone but RUNVS expanded my post we will not be able to pick everyone so likely we will pick the best and the rest go elsewhere.

 

[Dan87]

Can't see us going for Mills.

The 2,000 point discrepancy across round 1 compounds the Mills situation. And makes it difficult to secure a talent rated top 3 talent after live day bidding. "Oh s**t St Kilda bid pick 1 for Mills". The rating for first round drops non linearly. Over valuing those first round picks. Encouraging high end to be increasingly inaccessible after 25% off. Make no doubt this rule is to take a Mills type out of our equation.

"Do we go for mills and compromise the evaluation of our 30-40 range and 40-50 range to picks 73 and 74?"

Not bloody likely

Of course our team will have a hunch.

Should get dunkley however....

 

[McRobie]

Can't see us going for Mills.

The 2,000 point discrepancy across round 1 compounds the Mills situation. And makes it difficult to secure a talent rated top 3 talent after live day bidding. "Oh s**t St Kilda bid pick 1 for Mills". The rating for first round is stuffed and drops non linearly. Encouraging high end to be increasingly inaccessible. Make no doubt this rule is to take a Mills type out of our equation.

"Do we go for mills and compromise the evaluation of our 30-40 range and 40-50 range to picks 73 and 74?"

Not bloody likely

Of course our team will have a hunch.

Should get dunkley however....

I disagree, we will forfeit mid range picks for a potential no 1 pick for sure, I would imagine there will be trading to ensure we get both Mills and Dunkley. I really can see Mills or Dunkley stinking it up/"injured" at the carnival, if not one of these blokes the other academy players will def tank with the promise of being drafted by a particular club.
Having said that the whole thing seems a farce.

 

[Millky95]

I would imagine there will be trading to ensure we get both Mills and Dunkley

If trading is done before bidding. If it's just bidding, we get 1. Not both

 

[Dan87]

I disagree, we will forfeit mid range picks for a potential no 1 pick for sure, I would imagine there will be trading to ensure we get both Mills and Dunkley. I really can see Mills or Dunkley stinking it up/"injured" at the carnival, if not one of these blokes the other academy players will def tank with the promise of being drafted by a particular club.
Having said that the whole thing seems a farce.

Mills is nearly inaccessible seeing we would have 1200 points to make up.

That's about the whole cart. Mills + 73+ 74 + pocket change points. That's before dunkley has a bid in the top 10 placed on him. That difference in bid for say bid 1 to bid 7 is over 1300 points. Our draft worth of draft points.

In comparison Dunkley will actually provide us with value.( assuming 5-15 bid range) as our first after discount is about right.

No Mills is my hunch