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

[crankygeese]

Nothing? Point system changed. E.g., bid on Annabel in top 5 will probably wipe out all Lions picks and they will still be in deficit.

Suns had to bring in 2 extra 1st round picks to match Uwland and Patterson.

After points change this year my other suggestions would be:
1) remove 10% discount
2) top 4 no match allowed 1st round
3) top 5-8 max 1 bid match allowed 1st round
4) no finals match as many bid as you want

The same rule for Northern academy, NGA and F/S.

It's funny you should mention points 2,3, and 4, because they were actually already in place for Northern Academy players, but were only removed this year. They were removed this year because they were never in place for Father/Son, and that's how Brisbane were able to get Washcroft and Fletcher, then Lashcroft and Marshall.

Here are two articles covering that exact conundrum.

‘It isn’t right’: How AFL’s great draft dilemma was exposed this week — and how to fix it

A draft protest threat means the AFL is nearing a tipping point. Here’s how to fix it

www.foxsports.com.au

"In contrast, Gold Coast, Brisbane, Sydney and GWS can match bids on academy players at any point in the draft, with the only restriction coming from their on-field performance; a team can match one first-round bid if they reach the preliminary finals, two if they reach the finals but are knocked out in the first two weeks, and an unlimited number if they miss the finals. The rule was introduced during the Giants’ period of premiership contention in the late 2010s."

AFL announces changes impacting drafts, trades, Academy bidding, free agency, mid-season trades and more

A total of seven changes have been confirmed, with four coming into effect from this year.

www.zerohanger.com

"Restriction on Northern Academies: There will be no restrictions based on ladder finishing position for Northern Academy clubs."

So if that rule was in place for Father/Sons, or if Father/Sons were lumped in with Academy kids as part of an overall matching process, the Lions wouldn't have Fletcher and Marshall because they made prelim finals both of those seasons. But Father/Sons have been treated differently.

Gold Coast were only able to match on Walter, Read, Rogers, and Graham because they didn't make finals that year. If they had made finals, they would have been able to match on 2 at most.

 

[Stamos]

Any decision on this must be removed from club influence. Can the AFL put on its big boy pants and make a decision for the good of the game?

They just did.
This year will be significantly fairer than the previous decade.

 

[bluebaggerjuls]

Any decision on this must be removed from club influence. Can the AFL put on its big boy pants and make a decision for the good of the game?

the easiest way to do this would be to make a transition period of 3-5 years before making the draft un-compromised as the talent pool is relatively unknown at those age groups right now.

If your making short term decisions that will directly impact specific clubs it’s almost impossible to do

 

[sydney_gws]

I think port would be unlucky, I think if you limit clubs to 2 top 15 matches over a 8 year period, then 2nd of which has a 10% points loading means things are pretty fair. Gold Coast to be allowed 3 maybe for 2026-2033, then review.

 

[kuhni]

Just give clubs a 1 player exemption for top 10 players. This can look retrospectively for say 3-4 years to account for clubs that have already gained an advantage.

 

[mpal6]

Just give clubs a 1 player exemption for top 10 players. This can look retrospectively for say 3-4 years to account for clubs that have already gained an advantage.

Or AFL could do a sliding scale

Premiers - can't bid match anything in first round. Free to take a player at their own pick (including academy, father son if they fall to that pick)
Grand finalist - can't match anything in top 15. 1 bid match allowed outside.
Finalist - can't match anything in top 10. 1 bid match allowed outside
missed finals but not bottom 4 - can't match anything in top 5. 1 bid match allowed outside
bottom 4: 1 bid match allowed anywhere in first round. i.e they can take their own top 5 pick as well as take another one.

 

[Stamos]

Or AFL could do a sliding scale

Premiers - can't bid match anything in first round. Free to take a player at their own pick (including academy, father son if they fall to that pick)
Grand finalist - can't match anything in top 15. 1 bid match allowed outside.
Finalist - can't match anything in top 10. 1 bid match allowed outside
missed finals but not bottom 4 - can't match anything in top 5. 1 bid match allowed outside
bottom 4: 1 bid match allowed anywhere in first round. i.e they can take their own top 5 pick as well as take another one.

Restrictions like this are completely unnecessary if the DVI is set correctly.

Imagine a club who hadn’t made finals in a decade finally gets there in the same year that their first Father Son player in 15 years is rated in the top 10.

Just make clubs pay a fair price, and the changes this year make it much fairer than before.

 

[eastfreo75]

But what about the romance ??!!

If a club wants the romance let them trade up or take a player early.

 

[hammer180]

If a club wants the romance let them trade up or take a player early.

It's like supporters only look at it from the perspective of them missing out on their fatherson as oppose to them being terrible and missing out on picking their player.

 

[eastfreo75]

It's like supporters only look at it from the perspective of them missing out on their fatherson as oppose to them being terrible and missing out on picking their player.

I really respect how Richmond and Hawthorn won multiple flags on the bases of doing well in the draft and trading.

Alot of flags have had a leg up with Father Sons and the clubs have paid massive unders to get them. Lions getting Fletcher, and the Ashcroft boys for massive unders isn't great drafting.

 

[NeutralFan]

While we're changing stuff can we get rid of 'out of contract' rubbish and have restricted free agent status on draftees? Give everyone unrestricted free agency status after 6 or 7 years in the league.

 

[Sarcoidevo]

AFL needs to pull the trigger ... now!!

No more procrastinating

No more "grandfather periods"

A few clubs might miss out on a few good players but there will be other good players to draft

Due to a snap rule change in 2021 the Saints missed out on Mackenzie ..... but we ended up with Phillipou

Just pull the trigger and move on

 

[briztoon]

One of the big issues with the northern academy defenders is you guys just don’t see the importance of bottom clubs getting the top end talent.
It’s like - “oh isn’t it great we are getting all these extra players from Queensland” great for the game, etc etc.

Even if the consequence is that Brisbane play finals for 15 years in a row. Meaning that’s one less place for a bottom club like north or west coast to aspire to dislodge in the 8. You guys just don’t care about that.
It’s soon going to be comp when the top 8 is really a top 6, plus Brisbane and GC who are automatic finalists every year due to the sheer weight of numbers of elite talent they are getting for peanuts from the top of the draft.

It’s urgently needing a drastic overhaul.
Picks 1,4 and 5 heading to two finalists in this years draft for basically nothing is just farcical. How many years in a row now is that?
Couldn’t care less how well it’s growing the game.

I assume you’ve been raging about Geelong for the last 15 years.

 

[Dockeroo]

I assume you’ve been raging about Geelong for the last 15 years.

It’s a joke what they have been able to get away with.

That doesn’t mean Brisbane and the suns should also take permanent finals spots due to a flawed system. Two wrongs don’t make a right

 

[Lore]

I wonder if they used average games played by pick number to index it against DVI points. I think doing this would have been a mistake because if you look at Brownlow votes by pick number the value of higher picks start becoming exponentially higher the higher the pick becomes.

If they did that Pick 6 would be lower than the neighbouring picks iirc (it’s on draftguru somewhere)

 

[Lore]

we are a month away from the trade period, and we still don't know the changes. This is seriously amatuer hour from the afl.

If the AFLW is anything to go by, the clubs would be bleating about it if it was causing a problem for them, and the AFL would give them enough information so they can manage themselves effectively while decisions are properly finalised.

I’m not sure what it means that clubs aren’t whinging about the lack of information… possibly interpreting it a shot over the bow?

 

[longdonkey]

If they did that Pick 6 would be lower than the neighbouring picks iirc (it’s on draftguru somewhere)

Yeah that's true Pick 6 has strong voodoo attached to it.

 

[longdonkey]

If the AFLW is anything to go by, the clubs would be bleating about it if it was causing a problem for them, and the AFL would give them enough information so they can manage themselves effectively while decisions are properly finalised.

I’m not sure what it means that clubs aren’t whinging about the lack of information… possibly interpreting it a shot over the bow?

I think you'll find that Port's submission today was caused by the fact that the lack of clarity has already affected planning and the ability to know whether certain picks can be used to trade. Players are making decisions now and clubs don't know what picks they may need in the future.

 

[Lore]

I think you'll find that Port's submission today was caused by the fact that the lack of clarity has already affected planning and the ability to know whether certain picks can be used to trade. Players are making decisions now and clubs don't know what picks they may need in the future.

Link? I haven’t been online much today so missed that

 

[Stamos]

Link? I haven’t been online much today so missed that

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

Nothing? Point system changed. E.g., bid on Annabel in top 5 will probably wipe out all Lions picks and they will still be in deficit. Suns had to bring in 2 extra 1st round picks to match Uwland and Patterson. After points change this year my other suggestions would be: 1) remove 10% discount...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[longdonkey]

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

Nothing? Point system changed. E.g., bid on Annabel in top 5 will probably wipe out all Lions picks and they will still be in deficit. Suns had to bring in 2 extra 1st round picks to match Uwland and Patterson. After points change this year my other suggestions would be: 1) remove 10% discount...

www.bigfooty.com

thanks

 

[Atomboy]

If a club wants the romance let them trade up or take a player early.

That’s a little inconvenient, you can’t have your cake and eat it as well.

Plus everyone will start playing Rugby League instead.

 

[tiger_tough]

we are a month away from the trade period, and we still don't know the changes. This is seriously amatuer hour from the afl.

Are you surprised?

 

[tiger_tough]

I think itd be a terrible mistake to remove father-son eligibility in the 1st round or similar. Surely they can come up with another system that just makes you pay a fair price rather than scrapping it all together.

If Walker gets pick on at say pick 2 next year and blues have pick 6 for example, just make them have to cough up pick 6 and a future pick. If a bid came in at 10 then make them cough up their 2nd rounder a future pick.

There would obviously have to be some sort of formula to work out which round the future pick comes from but that wouldn't be too hard to concoct. No stockpiling of picks/points, just matching with your first pick this year and a single pick next year. This way future drafts become less cluttered as picks will be 'burnt' before the draft even starts and if clubs have multiple highly rated father-sons it will force them to acquire multiple 1st round picks to match the bids.

 

[SurreyBlue]

I think itd be a terrible mistake to remove father-son eligibility in the 1st round or similar. Surely they can come up with another system that just makes you pay a fair price rather than scrapping it all together.

If Walker gets pick on at say pick 2 next year and blues have pick 6 for example, just make them have to cough up pick 6 and a future pick. If a bid came in at 10 then make them cough up their 2nd rounder a future pick.

There would obviously have to be some sort of formula to work out which round the future pick comes from but that wouldn't be too hard to concoct. No stockpiling of picks/points, just matching with your first pick this year and a single pick next year. This way future drafts become less cluttered as picks will be 'burnt' before the draft even starts and if clubs have multiple highly rated father-sons it will force them to acquire multiple 1st round picks to match the bids.

They changed the rules last year so clubs don’t pay with 5 round 3 picks.
A year later with no real time to evaluate the change, or review there modifications, they want to change them ASAP.
The AFL leadership are proving once again, they are a weak, indecisive and an incompetent team.
I’m sure if the ARL had a system they could copy, then we wouldn’t be having changes!!!