List Mgmt. 2025 National Draft Thread - Beaten at your own game, Bidney?

[robbieando]

 

[RUNVS]

He was very good as a mid early. Goal kicker as well.

Yes, and I may be in the minority, but I really wish Longmire kept him there instead of moving him into defence.

 

[crankygeese]

Note that the HS has a list of the best 50 under 23 players currently in the AFL. There was not a single Swans player in the list.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afls-top-50-players-under-23-years-old-ranked-ahead-of-the-2026-season/news-story/2f1b0989e5e7f22f330f81cb464548c8

It's a potentially big problem on our list, we need our young blokes to step up next season and make it onto that list. We've got the following players who would qualify for 22Under22 for 2026

CoWarner, Sheldrick, Andrew, Cleary, Hanily, Snell, Green, Dattoli, Bowman, Kyle, Phillipou, King, Chamberlain, Hetherton

We need 2 or 3 of them to at least make that squad.

 

[RUNVS]

It's a potentially big problem on our list, we need our young blokes to step up next season and make it onto that list. We've got the following players who would qualify for 22Under22 for 2026

CoWarner, Sheldrick, Andrew, Cleary, Hanily, Snell, Green, Dattoli, Bowman, Kyle, Phillipou, King, Chamberlain, Hetherton

We need 2 or 3 of them to at least make that squad. Dattolli.

The problem is our drafting over the last 3 or so drafts have been pretty poor. In fact other than our academy kids we have not really had a good draft in years.

 

[crankygeese]

The problem is our drafting over the last 3 or so drafts have been pretty poor. In fact other than our academy kids we have not really had a good draft in years.

Dattolli is the only one I can see with a realistic chance of cracking the 22under22. Sheldrick and Cleary might be outside shots. Snell and Andrew might have a shot at the third KPD role, but Serong seems to have been brought in for that purpose so they first have to crack the Swans lineup before anything else. The others are just too young.

 

[McGowan3]

Yes, and I may be in the minority, but I really wish Longmire kept him there instead of moving him into defence.

See your point.

 

[Bandicoot]

Sadly because of the amount of trades that they made I think you are missing the two first round picks they traded in from Port and Collingwood for this year as part of the Jack Lukosious trade. Also they traded so many picks in and out in the later rounds. That we won’t be able to keep track of.

They gave up 4 first round picks (Collingwood 1st, Port 1st and their 1st this year and their future first next year) to be in a position to match the four bids this season and trade for Trac.

When you include the players they gave up, the mountain of second and later round picks they gave up last year, this year, next year and 2027. Then they paid more than fair value. Only the ill-informed think otherwise.

Don't need to be Einstein to figure out who the uninformed is (are).

 

[Tedeski]

Carmichael will be back at the Swans at some point of his career if he turns out to be a gun.
Payback time!

 

[robbieando]

Don't need to be Einstein to figure out who the uninformed is (are).

Is

 

[anotherletdown]

The issue is the splitting creating more points. The 11 wouldn’t have been traded if the 2 pick rule was in place. Thankfully it will be in 2026. This will mean less of these lopsided deals and yes the pick 11 one was unders Carl played the system it’s a bad system that needs immediate fixing and thankfully it will.

Yes, 'thankfully'... geez, there must still be some Bombers campaigner stuck in you.

It'll highly likely to mean a scaling back of northern academies. BUT the NGA's scale will not change, they are a box ticking, ancestory.com exercise and have nothing to do with expanding the pool, just cordoning it off. Their scale will continue unaffected, because their investment is token only.

It's a shit decision, another AFL special, let's just keep piling up the wrongs and hope we fumble into a right sometime soon. There is no harm in admitting it.

Been saying it for a while now. Scrap the NGA's, scrap the FA compensation, and then limit the northern academy discount to one player per year. That's your fairness, and the sequence it should go in. And, it's far flippin simpler to manage too

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yes, 'thankfully'... geez, there must still be some Bombers campaigner stuck in you.

It'll highly likely to mean a scaling back of northern academies. BUT the NGA's scale will not change, they are a box ticking, ancestory.com exercise and have nothing to do with expanding the pool, just cordoning it off. Their scale will continue unaffected, because their investment is token only.

It's a shit decision, another AFL special, let's just keep piling up the wrongs and hope we fumble into a right sometime soon. There is no harm in admitting it.

Been saying it for a while now. Scrap the NGA's, scrap the FA compensation, and then limit the northern academy discount to one player per year. That's your fairness, and the sequence it should go in. And, it's far flippin simpler to manage too

I’d be fine with the 1 first round talent per year idea you have stated. No issue would stop this years of 20% of the first round tied to one club. The DVI has to be better though too easy to match top 5 selections still

 

[liz]

I’d be fine with the 1 first round talent per year idea you have stated. No issue would stop this years of 20% of the first round tied to one club. The DVI has to be better though too easy to match top 5 selections still

You’re conveniently ignoring that none of the Northern Academy products would be close to top five picks were it not for all the time invested in them by the academies. Most would be off playing other sports. Some might scrape onto a list as Cat B rookies.

If you (and the AFL) want to chop off at the knees a programme that has been modestly successful but has taken a decade to develop, go for it.

 

[Jewelsbon]

Been saying it for a while now. Scrap the NGA's, scrap the FA compensation, and then limit the northern academy discount to one player per year. That's your fairness, and the sequence it should go in. And, it's far flippin simpler to manage too

Your user name is very apt in this instance!

There is one glaring issue with your thoughts - it's logical! And this IS the AFL afterall....

 

[dosser]

Here's a thought I just had and haven't had time to think it through yet.

What if the Academy Club (AC) is given the right to offer a contract to 1 x 16yo academy kid each year (if there is one worthy of that) and they are then no longer eligible for the draft. This contract amount is then included in the salary cap. This will eliminate the advantage that NRL clubs have when they see an academy kid who they want for league, and will encourage the kid to continue with the academy.

In addition, for the contracted kid's draft year the AC forfeits their R1 pick and is unable to match any bid for any other academy player occurring in the first round.

The AC was always going to take this kid early in the draft, so it doesn't matter that they took him a year or two earlier, and if the contract wasn't offered then the kid would probably have been off playing for Canterbury or something so wouldn't be in the draft anyway. In addition, sacrificing your pick for a 16yo kid who still has more to develop would be a risk, however this could stay in the cupboard as a nuclear option for when we are about to lose an academy kid.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You’re conveniently ignoring that none of the Northern Academy products would be close to top five picks were it not for all the time invested in them by the academies. Most would be off playing other sports. Some might scrape onto a list as Cat B rookies.

If you (and the AFL) want to chop off at the knees a programme that has been modestly successful but has taken a decade to develop, go for it.

Maybe in some cases not in all cases. Paying fair value for all of these whether it be father son, NGA or academy should be what happens. It’s why the 2 pick match will come in and it’s quite fair. Removes matching top picks with junk. I’d still like a 25% increase on the DVI for top 5 selections though. It’s meant to be a premium to match at that point we saw how compromised it was this year.

 

[bedford]

A lot of this driven by St Scum

 

[Bandicoot]

Maybe in some cases not in all cases. Paying fair value for all of these whether it be father son, NGA or academy should be what happens. It’s why the 2 pick match will come in and it’s quite fair. Removes matching top picks with junk. I’d still like a 25% increase on the DVI for top 5 selections though. It’s meant to be a premium to match at that point we saw how compromised it was this year.

You constantly refer to the academy, NGA and f/s picks to be one and the same, as do the AFL at the moment.
This is my greatest grief. They should not be treated anywhere near the same. A f/s selection is purely luck of genetics. The club has done nothing and spent nothing on the development of that player. The same applies to most NGA players. Neither of these actually bring people into the sport rather than playing NRL or soccer or basketball. The Northern academies are the only one of the three that spend significant money on the development of these kids and bring them into the game from a young age.
The AFL should treat the academies on a completely different basis to the others.

 

[bedford]

You constantly refer to the academy, NGA and f/s picks to be one and the same, as do the AFL at the moment.
This is my greatest grief. They should not be treated anywhere near the same. A f/s selection is purely luck of genetics. The club has done nothing and spent nothing on the development of that player. The same applies to most NGA players. Neither of these actually bring people into the sport rather than playing NRL or soccer or basketball. The Northern academies are the only one of the three that spend significant money on the development of these kids and bring them into the game from a young age.
The AFL should treat the academies on a completely different basis to the others.

St Scum's NGA is a disgrace the way they treat the kids and parents , they lure then in with the promise of an AFL chance , get the money and then piss them off , trust me it's true

 

[Bandicoot]

Look at what they actually paid on draft night especially for players 2&3 they matched. It’s not fair and it’s not remotely near “market price”. Take Patterson matched with 24,29,31,32….no club would remotely give up pick 5 for that…and the next one is worse…Murray matched for junk. That’s the issue, it’s not near what a club would pay on the open market.

If we had pick 5 what we we want for it? At least a top 10 plus another later first. It’s not even close to what they paid.

Now I don’t blame GC I blame the ridiculous system.

If you want to get some support for your further reductions to academy picks put your posts on the St.Scum board. I'm sure you'll get a few ticks there but we are sick and tired of you constantly telling us that the northern academies need to be tightened further. You're not going to get any agreement here.

 

[robbieando]

Maybe in some cases not in all cases. Paying fair value for all of these whether it be father son, NGA or academy should be what happens. It’s why the 2 pick match will come in and it’s quite fair. Removes matching top picks with junk. I’d still like a 25% increase on the DVI for top 5 selections though. It’s meant to be a premium to match at that point we saw how compromised it was this year.

Please stop ignoring the fact the Gold Coast used 7 first round picks to put themselves in a position to match these bids at more than fair value. If you don't like the academy system, then there is a thread on the draft board to complain about it not on here. This boards position is quite clear, the system is unfair toward us and more discount should be given.

 

[bedford]

Andrew Bassett is doing more damage now that even 5 chins did

 

[liz]

Andrew Bassett is doing more damage now that even 5 chins did

My concern is that the northern plot seemed to be working, by getting Swann and Harley installed in the two top roles at the AFL under Andrew whatsisname, and yet the future of the northern academies seems less secure than ever,

 

[momentbymoment]

Now that the trade year is over, I would like to see some of this thinking move to solving the worlds problems or at the very least, calculate the singularity and it’s after effects.

 

[dosser]

Now that the trade year is over, I would like to see some of this thinking move to solving the worlds problems or at the very least, calculate the singularity and it’s after effects.

Collingwood is the world's problem.

 

[bedford]

Collingwood is the world's problem.

No Bassat

 

[SwansLifer]

You constantly refer to the academy, NGA and f/s picks to be one and the same, as do the AFL at the moment.
This is my greatest grief. They should not be treated anywhere near the same. A f/s selection is purely luck of genetics. The club has done nothing and spent nothing on the development of that player. The same applies to most NGA players. Neither of these actually bring people into the sport rather than playing NRL or soccer or basketball. The Northern academies are the only one of the three that spend significant money on the development of these kids and bring them into the game from a young age.
The AFL should treat the academies on a completely different basis to the others.

100%
I actually think the Academies are ahead of the curve of the impact of potential draftees. You can't take away the clubs doing the hard work there too. Kyle is a good example of a quick turnaround where the academy works on talented kids, but if he was just playing football for a team in an under age competition would anyone have notice? Would his progression been so dramatic if he didn't have exposure?
Then you have the "lifers" like King, or Koby Coulson from the Suns.
They are ahead of the curve, however there is so much more work to be done in this area.

Having said that, I think it takes a collaborative effort from the AFL and clubs to put together a plan that is beneficial for everyone for the northern academies.
I'm still of the belief they have it pretty much right. Although instead of worrying about whether or not GCS, Sydney etc are able to match the kids, why aren't they committed to making it even larger?
The more kids you get ready for the draft the less likelihood the clubs can fit them on their list.
I know that might be a ways off, but IMO the industry discussion should be about how do we get to the stage where we do away with any academy bids. Until then, make it easier for these guys to keep them at the club, because if you (the AFL) want something like F/S to continue you can't hinder a GCS as an example, to have families rooted in the area and not guys "going back home" after a couple of years and missing out on a decent percentage of that system.
Not all of this fits, I understand that. It's messy. At the core though, the system needs to be one where it doesn't favour one club over another, which we do have right now, but that is due to evolution of the sport. Discussion maybe needs to shift to Does the AFL, and by extension it's clubs, actually want an even and equal system?