Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Sydney got Blakey (a father-son candidate elsewhere), Heeney and Mills through the same system, all top level prospects.
Or make the 20% discount only apply to the first NGA candidate in any given year, meaning the next candidates are taken at full points value.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
From my and a lot of other's point of view it's not that, it's just that I'd be mightily pissed off if other clubs benefited from getting Thomas and Quaynor and then we got the rug pulled out from under us and missed out on a similar level talent that had been in our academy for far longer. Obviously don't think it'd be the AFL being biased against us, it would be more them reacting to a backlash against North and Collingwood if anything.I love how supporters of every club in the competition are utterly adamant that the AFL has it in for them and there's some deep conspiracy at play
And are your thoughts on the academies are the same?
Agree anyone from Victoria should be open draft ( except father sons)
I don't think there should be a mandate on % of revenue spend as a lot of Vic NGA staff are volunteers and would likely be cut from their roles if they arent top of the line coaches. I think a mamdate on programs run, maybe at least 1 talent ID/development session for each club per year or 2, something more like that so that NGA volunteers still get the coaching development without cost and kids in these zones get more attention/ development
Problem then is that we're granting exclusive additional access for the northern states, and denying the same to other clubs.
I disagree. Volunteering can easily be performed through an expanded Auskick open to all. What's the point in an academy without top of the line coaches? That isn't development, that's basically just IDing talent that already existed in the area, and creaming it off without putting in more than a token effort.
That's exactly the point. The northern states have an inherent disadvantage due to being in rugby league territory. They don't produce enough talent like the heartland states, to be able to recruit many players who are unlikely to leave due to no go-home factor. What few prospects they do produce should be prioritised to remain in those states, so that the northern states can reduce their go-home risk and create home-grown superstars to inspire the fanbase and future development of the game.
Now if we go back to the time period before academies or northern state zones, there were relatively few players who came from Queensland, or NSW minus Riverina. I don't know much about NSW, but the few stars that did come out of Queensland, like Dunstall and Crosisca, went to Melbourne, stayed in Melbourne and had no desire to join the Brisbane Bears. Why? Partly because the Bears didn't exist in their formative years and so contributed nothing towards their development in any way. The northern academies now show an actual investment by clubs in the youth, they are integrated into the culture from the junior level, making them more likely to remain with the club and partially address the inherent disadvantage the northern clubs have.
I'm generalizing a bit here but from what I can tell NGA programs are set up with elite head coaches/coordinators who will run sessions and mentor these volunteer coaches, who can take what they've learnt in the program out to their local teams, increasing the quality of coaching in the area. Although a slower process than instantly injecting $$ and putting nothing but ex-AFL players in the programs, it would have more benefit.
Like most things there is no one clear solution, like Priority Picks it needs to be a case by case thing, my main argument is your "may or may not have played AFL anyway". You can say that it's likely he would have without the academy but you can't say the academy didn't help him get to the level he's at, which is still a positive for the league as a whole
That's a fair point. Perhaps clubs could also be required to take a few volunteer coaches for this sort of development, as part of the privilege of having NGA access.
Also a good idea.
Absolutely! They were brought in to keep the "big drawcard" clubs happy. Revenue is all the AFL cares about. They don't care about equality. That's why the grand final is played on Hawthorns, Richmonds, Essendons, Carltons and Collingwoods home ground. The AFL wants those teams to play in grand finals and wants them to win.
Cry me a river mate, the grand final is played on the mcg because it’s the home of football and holds 100k. Get another stadium that holds the same amount, then you can talk about rotating it one day.
That's my point. The AFL want it there because of the money and the advantage to the big clubs. Regardless of the additional income, it's wrong.
We had one, it was called Stadium Australia, but the AFL never considered holding a grand final there. And now we can't since it's being converted to a permanent rectangle.
