Official Club Stuff Carlton Academy - Next Gen & Father/Son/Daughter Discussion II

[The Bighouse]

Not sure it is just about the academy selections they are bringing in another two free agents on top of a top three rated draft pick,unfortunately the systems are not working at all .

On the flip side, they could be losing 2 important role players to FA in Ah Chee & Starcevich.
Zac Bailey is getting offers to leave either pre-agent or FA.
If Allen is in, approach Morris & Gallop (Smith) to tempt them out.

If we can develop/luck out on our F/S & NGA’s the same way, pick from them for the foreseeable future would be great (if the AFL rulings allow).

 

[gbatman]

How can the AFL target the father son rule and completely ignore the elephant in the room which is free agency?

Free agency is the thing which is keeping the better teams up the top and the lesser teams down the bottom.

The AFL's equalisation system is completely broken, we know that. I don't think father son rule has much to do with it.

If the AFL want to make changes they should raise the draft age by a year and get rid of free agency. That is your elephant in the room, that is your starting point. That should come well before messing with the father son rule.

Raising the draft age means players get to spend a year in the real world, which puts things in perspective for them and would help them grow up, a lot. For this generation this is important. It also makes the drafting of players more accurate as you get a better take of what they will turn out as. It also takes a lot of players off lists who are not AFL ready which strengthens the competition as a whole and allows clubs to manage injuries etc a lot better.

Free agency is something top sides have completely hijacked. Geelong, Collingwood, Hawthorn and others, the better operators, the destination clubs gain a huge advantage of it. It completely goes against what the draft is supposed to stand for.

 

[ferrisb]

How can the AFL target the father son rule and completely ignore the elephant in the room which is free agency?

Free agency is the thing which is keeping the better teams up the top and the lesser teams down the bottom.

The AFL's equalisation system is completely broken, we know that. I don't think father son rule has much to do with it.

If the AFL want to make changes they should raise the draft age by a year and get rid of free agency. That is your elephant in the room, that is your starting point. That should come well before messing with the father son rule.

Raising the draft age means players get to spend a year in the real world, which puts things in perspective for them and would help them grow up, a lot. For this generation this is important. It also makes the drafting of players more accurate as you get a better take of what they will turn out as. It also takes a lot of players off lists who are not AFL ready which strengthens the competition as a whole and allows clubs to manage injuries etc a lot better.

Free agency is something top sides have completely hijacked. Geelong, Collingwood, Hawthorn and others, the better operators, the destination clubs gain a huge advantage of it. It completely goes against what the draft is supposed to stand for.

The AFL won't water down player movement mechanisms.

 

[gbatman]

The AFL won't water down player movement mechanisms.

And this is the elephant in the room. This is why equalisation is totally broken in the AFL.

It's the same 5 or 6 teams winning the premiership and playing in the grand final every year and that's not father sons doing that.

Going after the father son rule is just a smokescreen to hide said elephant. It's a distraction.

 

[teknodeejay]

if we weren’t such a basket case we could have been one of those 5 or 6 teams

 

[Dramoth]

if we weren’t such a basket case we could have been one of those 5 or 6 teams

Yes, and no.

Free agency was introduced in 2012. It broke the equalisation model for the league. It allowed top 8 clubs to to raid other clubs for their better players while still be able to be in the first round as well as picking up F/S selections every so often.

Now, one of the clubs is the AFL's darlings. It seems that they have no salary cap and can trade, pick up on free agency, and draft whoever they like and they have appeared in the top 8 for 19 of the last 21 years. They've been minor premiers 3 times and premiers 4 times. You cannot tell me that Geelong hasn't been helped by the AFL over those years by ignoring the "cotton on" contracts and the properties purchased for certain players.

Then you have Hawthorn and Richmond with 4 and 3 premierships respectively. Then with 2 premierships, you have the Swans, the Eagles, and the filth. 17 of 20 premierships divided by 6 teams.

The AFL commission doesn't give a **** about equalisation so long as they get their bonus cheques at the end of the season.

 

[gbatman]

Yes, and no.

Free agency was introduced in 2012. It broke the equalisation model for the league. It allowed top 8 clubs to to raid other clubs for their better players while still be able to be in the first round as well as picking up F/S selections every so often.

Now, one of the clubs is the AFL's darlings. It seems that they have no salary cap and can trade, pick up on free agency, and draft whoever they like and they have appeared in the top 8 for 19 of the last 21 years. They've been minor premiers 3 times and premiers 4 times. You cannot tell me that Geelong hasn't been helped by the AFL over those years by ignoring the "cotton on" contracts and the properties purchased for certain players.

Then you have Hawthorn and Richmond with 4 and 3 premierships respectively. Then with 2 premierships, you have the Swans, the Eagles, and the filth. 17 of 20 premierships divided by 6 teams.

The AFL commission doesn't give a **** about equalisation so long as they get their bonus cheques at the end of the season.

yep, once you are up, you're up. If you manage it well. Free agency and a few other things have thrown it out the window.

 

[teagueyubeauty]

How can the AFL target the father son rule and completely ignore the elephant in the room which is free agency?

Free agency is the thing which is keeping the better teams up the top and the lesser teams down the bottom.

The AFL's equalisation system is completely broken, we know that. I don't think father son rule has much to do with it.

If the AFL want to make changes they should raise the draft age by a year and get rid of free agency. That is your elephant in the room, that is your starting point. That should come well before messing with the father son rule.

Raising the draft age means players get to spend a year in the real world, which puts things in perspective for them and would help them grow up, a lot. For this generation this is important. It also makes the drafting of players more accurate as you get a better take of what they will turn out as. It also takes a lot of players off lists who are not AFL ready which strengthens the competition as a whole and allows clubs to manage injuries etc a lot better.

Free agency is something top sides have completely hijacked. Geelong, Collingwood, Hawthorn and others, the better operators, the destination clubs gain a huge advantage of it. It completely goes against what the draft is supposed to stand for.

It’s such an easy fix staring head office in the face, whichever round of the draft a free agent is rated at by the secret herbs and spices formula the receiving club of said player has to pay for with their own draft pick.
I’d even make it top 8 have to pay and bottom 8 don’t. That would equalise this clear advantage.

Then I’d look at removing compensation which dilutes the draft every single year multiple times.
Bottom 8 sides get the pick from the top 8 side they give to get said free agent.
If a bottom 8 side gets a free agent from a top 8 side we’ll bad luck, that’s equalisation

 

[gbatman]

It’s such an easy fix staring head office in the face, whichever round of the draft a free agent is rated at by the secret herbs and spices formula the receiving club of said player has to pay for with their own draft pick.
I’d even make it top 8 have to pay and bottom 8 don’t. That would equalise this clear advantage.

Then I’d look at removing compensation which dilutes the draft every single year multiple times.
Bottom 8 sides get the pick from the top 8 side they give to get said free agent.
If a bottom 8 side gets a free agent from a top 8 side we’ll bad luck, that’s equalisation

There's a lot you could do.

Eliminate free agency altogether.

Exclude top 4 clubs from taking in free agents.

As you said, force receiving clubs to pay from their own draft picks.

The only way to 100% equalise the AFL is to eliminate free agency or exclude the top sides from taking in free agents.

Raise the draft to 19 so that drafting becomes more accurate and teams with high picks get it right more than they get it wrong and teams aren't filled with kids who can not play in the AFL yet.

Give clubs more power of who and where to trade players to. I can see from the players perspective of why this would not be a good thing as it's not fair on players who have families and are established in their area. Perhaps limit this to players under 25 years old.

It's easy, this century has been dominated by 6 clubs with two or three of those clubs being standouts. Geelong, Collingwood, Sydney, Hawthorn, Brisbane and West Coast with Richmond a good possibility to join this group, possibly take West Coast out. The rest of the clubs have their moments or none at all. Because teams develop these reputations, they become destination clubs and if they manage their salary caps well, they just take who they want.

The AFL is run by people who either do not understand the game and are blind to all this or it's run by people who are weak and fold to the demands of the AFLPA.

 

[Jimmae]

This has played out before in other sports and the answer is simple: franchise tag, removing them from free agency calculations for a season until a suitable trade can be done, but also giving them the average salary of the top 5 at their position in the league (or maybe 115-120% of past salary if that's higher). In the NFL they let you do this for 2 years before making it hideously expensive to continue doing so.

Where we can step away from that is the using the points equivalent of roughly two top 5 picks as a valuation unless the club holding the tag wants to negotiate a different trade. Keep the player trade window open all off-season, and 6 weeks into the year, along with free agency at large (the latter effectively DFA/SPSS at that point in time). 3500 points makes sense and clearly establishes it as above band 1 compensation (potentially even allowing for Band 2 compensation to become the new maximum offered by the league).

So increase player mechanisms, but then give the club some power to tell them they can't slink away when they're a valued player. If the player refuses to agree to the contract offered through the tag (or any contract) by the close of trading after round 6, they sit out the season.

And to be 100% clear, the club chasing the player would be providing a suitable trade, it would not be any league compensation to break the tag.

 

[Stamos]

Obviously we're getting screwed again

No father-son draft lockout, but AFL set to tighten bidding rules

Clubs will still be able to match bids on father-son and Academy talent in 2026 and beyond but the League is make them pay up for the privilege

www.afl.com.au

 

[CrippaTheGoat9]

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

Another incentive for clubs to tank. Great work.

 

[Pencil case]

Common sense prevails, would’ve been a travesty implementing a draft lockout.

 

[BlueBalls#17]

Thankgod! The number 1 locker shall remain empty for Cody!

 

[carlton_99]

At least it's not a lockout but now interested to see what these changes are.

 

[Bulldogs85]

Well done Carlton and any other club that was fighting against Swann and that clowns dumb new rule

 

[Stamos]

Common sense prevails, would’ve been a travesty implementing a draft lockout.

It's not really common sense doing a truckload of work to introduce new rules, and them changing them before anyone gets to see how they actually work.

 

[Ninja Worrier]

It's not really common sense doing a truckload of work to introduce new rules, and them changing them before anyone gets to see how they actually work.

Yup, still a fail

 

[swuzzlebubble]

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

I think it will be a sliding scale of discount depending on which "zone" you finish up in.

Bottom 4 - 10% (for example)

16-8- 8%

8-4 - 5%

4-1 - Zero.

 

[Sickblue]

Huge news and gives us a lot more flexibility with this years manoeuvring meaning we don’t need to trade in anything further to match a Cody bid for next year. Great result all round.

 

[Stamos]

Huge news and gives us a lot more flexibility with this years manoeuvring meaning we don’t need to trade in anything further to match a Cody bid for next year. Great result all round.

Not if Ralph is correct 2 posts up

 

[carlton_99]

Not if Ralph is correct 2 posts up

Couldn't we move our 27 1st into 2026 next year. Two first round picks should be enough to match most early bids if they come for Cody

 

[Stamos]

Couldn't we move our 27 1st into 2026 next year. Two first round picks should be enough to match most early bids if they come for Cody

Who is going to trade us a 26 1st round pick for a Tassie year pick (unless Tassie falls though of course)?