News AFL overhauls Academy and FS bid matching, discussing draft lockout

[Snuffaluphagus]

I hope if they chnge to say a 5% discount, 2 picks to match they don't just leave it to 2025.
Make 2024 3 picks bring allowed, although the Tigers wouldn't like that.

Nope, do it for this year, the teams will manage and they can avoid the headache of headlines around a couple of big Vic clubs being looked after with any delay of changes.

 

[tombomb]

I'm stunned, that actually sounds like they are going to make good, reasonable changes...

Seems an overly complicated solution.

Increasing the points value of higher picks would pretty much resolve everything fairly.

Everyone knows pick 3 isn't worth three picks in the 30s, but that is the current system.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Seems an overly complicated solution.

Increasing the points value of higher picks would pretty much resolve everything fairly.

Everyone knows pick 3 isn't worth three picks in the 30s, but that is the current system.

Main thing is they "want teams to pay with picks closer to the bid"

Whatever way they do that works for me

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

I'm stunned, that actually sounds like they are going to make good, reasonable changes...

It reads like someone has been collating the idea's on Big Footy. With the below caveat.....

"The AFL does not want to change academy rules, the priority access for the northern academies or father-son rules, but wants to simplify the system and require clubs to use picks closer to the initial bid."

 

[GC2015]

So now we have an idea of what might happen with needing a first round pick should a first round bid come through, let's see if this will actually make a difference. Brisbane have Levi Ashcroft (F/S) and Sam Marshall (Academy) coming through next year and both are seen as good chances to be bid on in the first round. For argument's sake, let's say Brisbane make another prelim and are given pick 15 with their natural first pick. Keeping in mind the Lions have already traded away their 2024 second round pick and I'll work under the proviso that none of Brisbane's players have requested a trade out of the club.

Ashcroft seems to be a consensus top 3 pick at this point so we'll say he's bid on with pick 3. Brisbane do have their natural first round pick to match the bid but they are short by several hundred points because their third and fourth round picks don't add up to enough points. They can only trade future picks at this point so trading out a future second/third rounder should get the job done. Then a bid comes through for Marshall around pick 14 and Brisbane will probably have to trade back into the first round by likely having to trade their future first round pick. Then they match and end up with a later pick from the points left over.

So Brisbane still get Ashcroft and Marshall, the draft order still get pushed back and the system is still compromised in terms of where the players end up. Only difference is Brisbane has to be more active with trades but it's certainly not impossible for them to match the bids. Nothing really changes and a team that made a prelim still gets two first round talents that were bid on before their natural first round pick. Everyone happy with that?

 

[Jirik13]

So now we have an idea of what might happen with needing a first round pick should a first round bid come through, let's see if this will actually make a difference. Brisbane have Levi Ashcroft (F/S) and Sam Marshall (Academy) coming through next year and both are seen as good chances to be bid on in the first round. For argument's sake, let's say Brisbane make another prelim and are given pick 15 with their natural first pick. Keeping in mind the Lions have already traded away their 2024 second round pick and I'll work under the proviso that none of Brisbane's players have requested a trade out of the club.

Ashcroft seems to be a consensus top 3 pick at this point so we'll say he's bid on with pick 3. Brisbane do have their natural first round pick to match the bid but they are short by several hundred points because their third and fourth round picks don't add up to enough points. They can only trade future picks at this point so trading out a future second/third rounder should get the job done. Then a bid comes through for Marshall around pick 14 and Brisbane will probably have to trade back into the first round by likely having to trade their future first round pick. Then they match and end up with a later pick from the points left over.

So Brisbane still get Ashcroft and Marshall, the draft order still get pushed back and the system is still compromised in terms of where the players end up. Only difference is Brisbane has to be more active with trades but it's certainly not impossible for them to match the bids. Nothing really changes and a team that made a prelim still gets two first round talents that were bid on before their natural first round pick. Everyone happy with that?

I would expect that for top 4 team only 1 matching bid in round 1 will cover F/S too

 

[GC2015]

I would expect that for top 4 team only 1 matching bid in round 1 will coveer F/S too

No such restriction on F/S picks at this stage so it'll be one F/S first round pick and one academy first round pick for Brisbane next year. I reckon they'll purposely keep that loophole open for at least one more year.

 

[Jirik13]

No such restriction on F/S picks at this stage so it'll be one F/S first round pick and one academy first round pick for Brisbane next year. I reckon they'll purposely keep that loophole open for at least one more year.

These are just discussions.

 

[FB19]

The more I think about it the more the club allocated points system is far better than the fixed points per pick system. The idea that all drafts are equal is clearly a nonsense so let’s give clubs a swag of points and let them use them as suits their list needs. The interesting point about how it works is the mechanics of the bidding process. Not sure I love the blind bidding approach I favour a traditional auction but the drawback is the amount of time that might take. It’s already way too long. Future trading I guess you offer an amount of future points (probably capped at your current ladder position equivalent total less some % so you don’t trade out fully) for current points so that seems straightforward.
I doubt we will see anything apart from tinkering they love the media surrounding this space they won’t do anything much to make it simpler.

 

[Caligo]

I would expect that for top 4 team only 1 matching bid in round 1 will coveer F/S too

Have there ever been 2 F/S in the first round for any club in history? But yes, I would strongly support that change.

 

[Cameron_Jezza]

Have there ever been 2 F/S in the first round for any club in history? But yes, I would strongly support that change.

Ashcroft and Fletcher last year for Brisbane.

 

[Caligo]

Ashcroft and Fletcher last year for Brisbane.

Indeed. But yep, sounds like a good change.

 

[Jirik13]

Have there ever been 2 F/S in the first round for any club in history? But yes, I would strongly support that change.

Lions last year comes to my mind, Ashcroft and Fletcher (also academy). Carlton could have Camporeales brothers next year?

 

[GC2015]

Carlton could have Camporeales brothers next year?

How will that go down next year if both are bid on in the first round and Carlton lose one? Let's say Collingwood bid on the other Camporeale brother with the last pick in the first round and Carlton are unable to match...

 

[LukeParkerno1]

How will that go down next year if both are bid on in the first round and Carlton lose one? Let's say Collingwood bid on the other Camporeale brother with the last pick in the first round and Carlton are unable to match...

Would have to sell their future first and they can

 

[GC2015]

Would have to sell their future first and they can

This is under the assumption that Carlton finish top 4 and the same restrictions are applied as those to northern academies which means the Blues are only able to match one first round bid on their F/S prospects.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

This is under the assumption that Carlton finish top 4 and the same restrictions are applied as those to northern academies which means the Blues are only able to match one first round bid on their F/S prospects.

Will make the call or can match one and potentially have a “live” pick and draft the second

 

[Sonny Hayes]

So now we have an idea of what might happen with needing a first round pick should a first round bid come through, let's see if this will actually make a difference. Brisbane have Levi Ashcroft (F/S) and Sam Marshall (Academy) coming through next year and both are seen as good chances to be bid on in the first round. For argument's sake, let's say Brisbane make another prelim and are given pick 15 with their natural first pick. Keeping in mind the Lions have already traded away their 2024 second round pick and I'll work under the proviso that none of Brisbane's players have requested a trade out of the club.

Ashcroft seems to be a consensus top 3 pick at this point so we'll say he's bid on with pick 3. Brisbane do have their natural first round pick to match the bid but they are short by several hundred points because their third and fourth round picks don't add up to enough points. They can only trade future picks at this point so trading out a future second/third rounder should get the job done. Then a bid comes through for Marshall around pick 14 and Brisbane will probably have to trade back into the first round by likely having to trade their future first round pick. Then they match and end up with a later pick from the points left over.

So Brisbane still get Ashcroft and Marshall, the draft order still get pushed back and the system is still compromised in terms of where the players end up. Only difference is Brisbane has to be more active with trades but it's certainly not impossible for them to match the bids. Nothing really changes and a team that made a prelim still gets two first round talents that were bid on before their natural first round pick. Everyone happy with that?

Under current rules wouldn't they not be able to trade out a future first if they have already traded out future 2nd's and 3rd's?

But at least in this example they are being forced to trade almost entirely out of the 2024 and the 2025 draft to secure those players. I don't like it but it is a small step in the right direction.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Changes to the system just as the Blues are due to benefit. But only after the Pies, Dogs, Suns, Lions have done their work. Nice.

 

[Sonny Hayes]

It won't be considered though. The Victorian media is not interested in doing a deep dive in how much these players actually cost.

I have pointed out time and time again how much Mills actually cost, and the picks we started with before trading backwards, and how we got those picks but it is all flatly ignored. Easier to point at the picks used in the bid and say "look at all these junk picks that landed you guys Mills, he was practically free"

Except it has nothing to do with the Vic media and is entirely to do with the fact it doesn't change much, look at what they traded out last year to 'prepare'. They moves some later picks in to 2023. So the 'real cost' was just a bunch of later picks in 2 drafts for 4 first round picks, it doesn't change the outcome overly much and is why it is not being reported.

 

[GC2015]

Will make the call or can match one and potentially have a “live” pick and draft the second

That's an option but I'd imagine it could be pretty difficult to re-enter the first round if you've already matched a first round bid and that's also assuming no one picks the player before your pick. So let's say Carlton match a bid for the first Camporeale brother at pick 8 and then trade back into the first round by securing pick 16. Now every club knows exactly what Carlton intends to do with that pick 16 and can use that against them. The club with pick 12 gets on the phone to Carlton and says we're drafting him unless you give us x, y and z for our pick 12. You see how this situation could get really out of hand on draft night and clubs end up overpaying massively?

Changes to the system just as the Blues are due to benefit. But only after the Pies, Dogs, Suns, Lions have done their work. Nice.

Seems unfair huh? This is why it was so absurd that Collingwood and Geelong were two of the three clubs that were most outspoken about changes being needed to a bidding system that they greatly benefitted from. It's a kneejerk reaction to a draft anomaly but because no one was pushing back outside of the northern clubs, the AFL is bowing to the pressure and now there are going to be unintended victims of this new system which could include Carlton next year with the Camporeale brothers.

 

[.Shotties.]

Callum Mills is another example.

The initial concept was great, what we have now is just a blatant rort of the system

That would be Callum Mills who was playing union before he joined the academy? You think because he had a relative who played footy that a kid growing up on the Lower North Shore would play it?

 

[Dockeroo]

That's an option but I'd imagine it could be pretty difficult to re-enter the first round if you've already matched a first round bid and that's also assuming no one picks the player before your pick. So let's say Carlton match a bid for the first Camporeale brother at pick 8 and then trade back into the first round by securing pick 16. Now every club knows exactly what Carlton intends to do with that pick 16 and can use that against them. The club with pick 12 gets on the phone to Carlton and says we're drafting him unless you give us x, y and z for our pick 12. You see how this situation could get really out of hand on draft night and clubs end up overpaying massively?


Seems unfair huh? This is why it was so absurd that Collingwood and Geelong were two of the three clubs that were most outspoken about changes being needed to a bidding system that they greatly benefitted from. It's a kneejerk reaction to a draft anomaly but because no one was pushing back outside of the northern clubs, the AFL is bowing to the pressure and now there are going to be unintended victims of this new system which could include Carlton next year with the Camporeale brothers.

It’s not an anomaly. It’s happening every year now for a while.
You guys getting four first rounders for a bunch of junk picks is absolutely farcical. Something has to be done about the system.

 

[mpal6]

Yeah, but what's the difference? Many clubs don't get anything. The dees could've had Mac Andrew from Gold Coast but of course they changed the rules after the bulldogs got gifted JUH. The reality is, the bulldogs have been so gifted from the system that it's ruined the comp for about 10-15 years. It's not the bulldogs' fault, it's just the system. Changing the rules now, doesn't make it fair as the damage has been done.

Melbourne gets 1 father son that's afl standard every 20 years. Meanwhile teams like Dogs, Coll and Brisbane basically build their lists around them.

Ashcroft brothers and Fletcher are skewing your view on Brisbane's father son strike rate. After Brown we've never gained any father son benefit up until last year.

Brisbane Father son list


Melbourne Father son list

 

[mpal6]

It’s not an anomaly. It’s happening every year now for a while.
You guys getting four first rounders for a bunch of junk picks is absolutely farcical. Something has to be done about the system.

If they finished top 4 or top 8, they would have received only 1 or 2.

Suns will start trending up under Dimma and their academy wealth will start spreading across the league.