News AFL reviewing northern and multicultural academies

[philthy05]

Google it. It’s divided up between all the Vic clubs, except for North, who have Tassie.

I know Essendon have the Tiwi Islands.

Yeah see that is absurd to me.

 

[Lore]

They enjoy all the benefits of having a Vic-Centric competition like playing home 80% of the year.

That's a double-edged sword though.

When a Melbourne-based club plays another Melbourne-based club, the home ground advantage is negligible – they have similar experience on the ground, similar sort of crowds, and no real travel time. On a scale of 1-10 the home ground advantage is like a 2 (since home memberships are more likely to draw a crowd than away memberships and GA ticket sales). Much like playing a local derby, WCE vs Freo, Adelaide vs Port, etc. especially if you share your ground with your cross-town rival.

I won't even begin to comment on MelbourneFC hosting games in Darwin or Alice Springs, Port getting others to host games in China, or Hawthorn/North hosting games in Tasmania.

When a Melbourne-based club hosts an interstate team, they'll have played almost as many games on the same ground, are experienced travellers and have a contingent of travelling or Melbourne-based fans anyway. It's basically a home away from home for the interstaters. In this case maybe the home ground advantage is like a 6ish out of 10.

When Geelong hosts a Melbourne-based club in Geelong, there's a definitive home ground advantage as far as ground familiarity and parochial crowd attendance, though the travel experience is probably less bothersome than flying interstate (though a more unique experience). That's probably an 8 out of 10.

Geelong hosting an interstate team in Geelong is probably the most similar home-ground advantage to a Melbourne-based club playing away interstate. Then you have a 2-8 hour flight/airport time, a bit of time on a bus, a parochial crowd and an unfamiliar ground to contend with. That's probably a 10 out of 10 home ground advantage.


So yes, Melbourne clubs don't travel as often. We also don't necessarily travel *well* when we do travel, and don't have the advantage of playing 11 games against teams that don't know our home ground at all. I'm not saying it's equal, but ignoring it is disingenuous too.

You could argue the rating out of 10 if you want. I'm not going to bother though, you get the gist.

 

[philthy05]

That's a double-edged sword though.

When a Melbourne-based club plays another Melbourne-based club, the home ground advantage is negligible – they have similar experience on the ground, similar sort of crowds, and no real travel time. On a scale of 1-10 the home ground advantage is like a 2 (since home memberships are more likely to draw a crowd than away memberships and GA ticket sales). Much like playing a local derby, WCE vs Freo, Adelaide vs Port, etc. especially if you share your ground with your cross-town rival.

I won't even begin to comment on MelbourneFC hosting games in Darwin or Alice Springs, Port getting others to host games in China, or Hawthorn/North hosting games in Tasmania.

When a Melbourne-based club hosts an interstate team, they'll have played almost as many games on the same ground, are experienced travellers and have a contingent of travelling or Melbourne-based fans anyway. It's basically a home away from home for the interstaters. In this case maybe the home ground advantage is like a 6ish out of 10.

When Geelong hosts a Melbourne-based club in Geelong, there's a definitive home ground advantage as far as ground familiarity and parochial crowd attendance, though the travel experience is probably less bothersome than flying interstate (though a more unique experience). That's probably an 8 out of 10.

Geelong hosting an interstate team in Geelong is probably the most similar home-ground advantage to a Melbourne-based club playing away interstate. Then you have a 2-8 hour flight/airport time, a bit of time on a bus, a parochial crowd and an unfamiliar ground to contend with. That's probably a 10 out of 10 home ground advantage.


So yes, Melbourne clubs don't travel as often. We also don't necessarily travel *well* when we do travel, and don't have the advantage of playing 11 games against teams that don't know our home ground at all. I'm not saying it's equal, but ignoring it is disingenuous too.

You could argue the rating out of 10 if you want. I'm not going to bother though, you get the gist.

I’ve got a simple way to prove it’s an advantage


If port could play 80% of games at home , and Essendon could play 50% games at home ....

Do port and dons make that deal?

Port jump at it, and dons laugh at it. 100%.

As I’ve said having a afl stuffed with Vic teams has its advantages for the Vic teams so I’m not sure why we have to give them a leg up when having so many Vic teams doesn’t work for them in another area ie academy zones.

 

[Lore]

I’ve got a simple way to prove it’s an advantage


If port could play 80% of games at home , and Essendon could play 50% games at home ....

Do port and dons make that deal?

Port jump at it, and dons laugh at it. 100%.

As I’ve said having a afl stuffed with Vic teams has its advantages for the Vic teams so I’m not sure why we have to give them a leg up when having so many Vic teams doesn’t work for them in another area ie academy zones.

No doubting there's something in it, but that's a little simplistic. It's worth less than a win each year on average if you compare Port's and Essendon's averages at the stadiums we played at last year.

Spoiler: Port Adelaide

Port Adelaide played:
12 games at Adelaide Oval in 2018. You have a 58.73% win rate there. 58.73% of 12 is 7.0476
2 games at Docklands in 2018. You have a 39.22% win rate there. That's 0.7844
2 games at the MCG in 2018. You have a 43.33% win rate there. 0.86
2 games at Perth Stadium in 2018. You have a 0% win rate there. 0
1 game at SCG in 2018. You have a 29.41% win rate there. .2941
1 game at York Park in 2018. You have a 55.56% win rate there. .5556
1 game at Eureka Stadium in 2018. You have a 100% win rate there. 1
1 game at Jiangwan Stadium in 2018. You have a 100% win rate there. 1
7.0476+.7844+.86+.2941+.5556+1+1
Altogether with that breakdown of stadiums you should average 11.5417 wins per season.

Spoiler: Essendon

Essendon played:
8 games at Docklands in 2018. We have a 53.95% win rate there. 4.316
8 games at the MCG in 2018. We have a 57.71% win rate there. 4.61
2 games at Perth Stadium in 2018. We have a 50% win rate there. 1
1 game at Adelaide Oval in 2018. We have a 40% win rate there. 0.4
1 game at Carrara in 2018. We have an 80% win rate there. 0.8
1 game at the Gabba in 2018. We have a 44.44% win rate there. .4444
1 game at Sydney Showground in 2018. We have a 66.67% win rate there. .6667
4.316+4.61+1+.4+.8+.4444+.6667
Altogether with this breakdown of stadiums we should average 12.2371 wins per season.

No doubting there's something in it, about 0.6954 wins per season on average between our two clubs. Would be more accurate if there was a larger sample size of games at Perth, Carrara, Gabba etc.

Now lets try West Coast and Richmond:

Spoiler: West Coast

West Coast played:
12 Perth Stadium. 78.57% win rate. 9.4284
2 Adelaide Oval. 77.78% win rate. 1.5556
2 Docklands. 42.74% win rate. 0.8548
2 MCG. 40.24% win rate. 0.8048
1 Bellerive Oval. 33.33% win rate. 0.3333
1 Gabba. 61.90% win rate. 0.6190
1 SCG. 16.67% win rate. 0.1667
1 Showgrounds. 60% win rate. 0.60
9.4284+1.5556+0.8548+0.8048+0.3333+0.6190+0.1667+0.60
14.3626 average per season.

Since Perth Stadium has a small sample size (only 2018 games) I can substitute Subiaco for those 12 games instead.

Their win rate at Subiaco is 68.25%, which is 8.19. That would give them an average season win rate of 13.1242 games per season.

Spoiler: Richmond

14 MCG @ 55.17%. 7.7238
3 Docklands @ 43.68% 1.31
2 Adelaide Oval @ 33.33% 0.6666
1 Carrara @ 37.5% 0.375
1 Perth Stadium @ 0% 0
1 Showground @ 60% .60
So they'd average 10.6754 with this breakdown of stadiums.

So with a typical fixture of H&A games, and average scores at each venue, for the four clubs we're looking at now;
Essendon averages 12.2371 wins per season
Port Adelaide averages 11.5417 wins per season
West Coast (Perth Stadium) averages 14.3626 wins per season
West Coast (Subiaco) averages 13.1242 wins per season
Richmond averages 10.6754 wins per season

I mean I'd swap home ground advantages and fixtures with West Coast but not Richmond or Port based on that.

Honestly I think there's a bunch of other factors that seem to make more difference than an alleged home ground 'vicco bias' advantage though.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

That's a double-edged sword though.

When a Melbourne-based club plays another Melbourne-based club, the home ground advantage is negligible – they have similar experience on the ground, similar sort of crowds, and no real travel time. On a scale of 1-10 the home ground advantage is like a 2 (since home memberships are more likely to draw a crowd than away memberships and GA ticket sales). Much like playing a local derby, WCE vs Freo, Adelaide vs Port, etc. especially if you share your ground with your cross-town rival.

I won't even begin to comment on MelbourneFC hosting games in Darwin or Alice Springs, Port getting others to host games in China, or Hawthorn/North hosting games in Tasmania.

When a Melbourne-based club hosts an interstate team, they'll have played almost as many games on the same ground, are experienced travellers and have a contingent of travelling or Melbourne-based fans anyway. It's basically a home away from home for the interstaters. In this case maybe the home ground advantage is like a 6ish out of 10.

When Geelong hosts a Melbourne-based club in Geelong, there's a definitive home ground advantage as far as ground familiarity and parochial crowd attendance, though the travel experience is probably less bothersome than flying interstate (though a more unique experience). That's probably an 8 out of 10.

Geelong hosting an interstate team in Geelong is probably the most similar home-ground advantage to a Melbourne-based club playing away interstate. Then you have a 2-8 hour flight/airport time, a bit of time on a bus, a parochial crowd and an unfamiliar ground to contend with. That's probably a 10 out of 10 home ground advantage.


So yes, Melbourne clubs don't travel as often. We also don't necessarily travel *well* when we do travel, and don't have the advantage of playing 11 games against teams that don't know our home ground at all. I'm not saying it's equal, but ignoring it is disingenuous too.

You could argue the rating out of 10 if you want. I'm not going to bother though, you get the gist.

Having just travelled to our game today I have to say I'm not so sure. The train was full of Bombers fans. Lots adults in red and black with the kids in orange and grey though. Project cuckoo seems to be working.

 

[Lore]

Having just travelled to our game today I have to say I'm not so sure. The train was full of Bombers fans. Lots adults in red and black with the kids in orange and grey though. Project cuckoo seems to be working.

Lol. Essendon has one of the largest followings in the league, and GWS as an expansion club has one of the smallest. They're not an example of anything at all at this stage, there isn't a large enough sample size to support an argument either way.

Not that it's stopped you from winning games or making finals, of course.

 

[Colonial]

https://m.afl.com.au/news/2019-04-03/a-tale-of-two-isaacs-giants-boss-academy-optimism

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Magpies27]

I haven't seen anyone talk about the governments plan to spread immigration to more regional areas, alot of these immigrants would be eligible for the NGA I'm unsure how this would affect the other states but In Victoria the Bulldogs tigers and hawks share the majority of the regional areas, so the question is will the academy review take this into account?

 

[briztoon]

I haven't seen anyone talk about the governments plan to spread immigration to more regional areas, alot of these immigrants would be eligible for the NGA I'm unsure how this would affect the other states but In Victoria the Bulldogs tigers and hawks share the majority of the regional areas, so the question is will the academy review take this into account?

Has anyone actually looked how the Vic clubs are running their NGA academies in terms of how they are getting kids from Immigrant communities playing footy?

From a Jake Niall article last year, most Vic clubs have spent more time investigating the backgrounds of kids in the TAC cup system, rather than trying to identify young talent and nurturing it through an Academy.

I wonder how much contact and training good quality kids in Vic spend with their AFL club academy as opposed to training with their TAC cup team?

Up north in our club academies, our kids are playing in our teams against the other northern academies, and now against the TAC cup teams, then they play in the new Div 2 academy series which includes TAS and NT. The best kids make the combined Allies team for the National Champs. After the National Champs, the better kids from each academy play in their NEAFL team.


What's the point of the NGA academies if the TAC cup system is already doing the same job? Other than to give the Vic clubs a free hit at a quality kids already in the system.

 

[Zurgblade]

From a Jake Niall article last year, most Vic clubs have spent more time investigating the backgrounds of kids in the TAC cup system, rather than trying to identify young talent and nurturing it through an Academy.

It would be a lot more efficient to browse through the heritage of top existing athletes behind the comfort of a desk then it would be to train someone with little experience from scratch.

 

[Zurgblade]

I wonder how much contact and training good quality kids in Vic spend with their AFL club academy as opposed to training with their TAC cup team?

From my own experience with the WA NGA's, the training volumes between NGA and WAFL clubs are chalk and cheese. Most eligible players aren't even able to attend NGA trainings as it usually conflicts in time. That and the intensity and workload is far greater from the WAFL. WAFL clubs train at least 3 times a week in a very intensive environment, where the NGA's might only organise 10 - 15 sessions a year and train at a modest pace.

 

[Magpies27]

Has anyone actually looked how the Vic clubs are running their NGA academies in terms of how they are getting kids from Immigrant communities playing footy?

From a Jake Niall article last year, most Vic clubs have spent more time investigating the backgrounds of kids in the TAC cup system, rather than trying to identify young talent and nurturing it through an Academy.

I wonder how much contact and training good quality kids in Vic spend with their AFL club academy as opposed to training with their TAC cup team?

Up north in our club academies, our kids are playing in our teams against the other northern academies, and now against the TAC cup teams, then they play in the new Div 2 academy series which includes TAS and NT. The best kids make the combined Allies team for the National Champs. After the National Champs, the better kids from each academy play in their NEAFL team.


What's the point of the NGA academies if the TAC cup system is already doing the same job? Other than to give the Vic clubs a free hit at a quality kids already in the system.

Well first of all I didn't state my position on that nor did you reply to what I said, I'm asking does the governments plan for immigration affect the review in anyway? And to follow up not every one in the NGA are an issac quaynor the majority of them do actually benefit from the programs such as Collingwoods other NGA recruit atu bosenavulagi who came from a rugby background right up until 2 years ago believe then joined our academy and got drafted theres no way you can say that's not a good thing, Sydney got issac Heeny at pick 18 the academy's help everyone, the one change I would recommend is that all indigenous kids should be eligible to be in an academy I'd just love to see more aboriginals footy players the interstate teams would split their states and the Victorians would probably have to change up the southern academy's and the northern territory zones so that each academy had a fair amount of indigenous population, other then that I'd keep it the same tbh

 

[briztoon]

Well first of all I didn't state my position on that nor did you reply to what I said, I'm asking does the governments plan for immigration affect the review in anyway? And to follow up not every one in the NGA are an issac quaynor the majority of them do actually benefit from the programs such as Collingwoods other NGA recruit atu bosenavulagi who came from a rugby background right up until 2 years ago believe then joined our academy and got drafted theres no way you can say that's not a good thing, Sydney got issac Heeny at pick 18 the academy's help everyone, the one change I would recommend is that all indigenous kids should be eligible to be in an academy I'd just love to see more aboriginals footy players the interstate teams would split their states and the Victorians would probably have to change up the southern academy's and the northern territory zones so that each academy had a fair amount of indigenous population, other then that I'd keep it the same tbh

Yeah, my response wasn't really a reply to your original post.

It was more another rant that the NGA's are a rort to appease Eddy.

A lot of fans of Northern clubs, especially those of us who live up here and are converts to AFL and were born and bred with League view the NGA's as a rort and another leg up for the old VFL clubs.

In QLD the whole state is already split in to zones for the Suns and Lions, ever kid, whether they're indigenous, from a non english speaking background or immigrant community, or not, falls in to one of two academy zones. It's just that most don't play football.


Just speaking for our (the Lions) academy, we're basically pulling kids away from sports other than league or union. If it wasn't for our academy, Hipwood would be playing cricket. We have another kid on our list, in our reserves who came from an elite athletics back ground. And each year we have kids in our academy who have to choose between our academy and State level cricket. We almost got one elite junior, Kalyn Ponga, to choose AFL over League, but we couldn't offer the 19 year old $600k a year, which is what he got signing for Newcastle.

 

[Magpies27]

Yeah, my response wasn't really a reply to your original post.

It was more another rant that the NGA's are a rort to appease Eddy.

A lot of fans of Northern clubs, especially those of us who live up here and are converts to AFL and were born and bred with League view the NGA's as a rort and another leg up for the old VFL clubs.

In QLD the whole state is already split in to zones for the Suns and Lions, ever kid, whether they're indigenous, from a non english speaking background or immigrant community, or not, falls in to one of two academy zones. It's just that most don't play football.


Just speaking for our (the Lions) academy, we're basically pulling kids away from sports other than league or union. If it wasn't for our academy, Hipwood would be playing cricket. We have another kid on our list, in our reserves who came from an elite athletics back ground. And each year we have kids in our academy who have to choose between our academy and State level cricket. We almost got one elite junior, Kalyn Ponga, to choose AFL over League, but we couldn't offer the 19 year old $600k a year, which is what he got signing for Newcastle.

I did not know that Qld was already completely zoned, if that's true the Qld teams should probably get an academy in the NT like the vic clubs hopefully its discussed in the review.

I can see how you think the NGA are bullshit because clubs like Collingwood get a quaynor but I do believe the program does improve kids, the popularity of afl in Qld is definitely a problem however I do believe a successful team would breed more popularity so hopefully in the next few years the sport will get more popular cause you guys are developing into a powerhouse again if you understand what I mean,

and yeah ponga is a machine and to be fair the location of your academy probably wouldn't have helped on that one the NRL just pays young guys more money and from a kids perspective especially if he was in poverty before they would almost always choose more money sooner, the AFL would have to re structure the rookie contracts and maybe even the salary cap to make us compete with the NRL in that perspective, but I do feel eventually the AFL will over take NRL in salary and i feel the popularity will improve in nsw and qld,

i get your frustration over the academies i really do but i feel like the Victorian clubs having academy's with eligibility restrictions is more fair then not having academy's now I get it's not perfect I'm not saying it is if you have a model that you believe would be more fair tell me if you want I'm open to change my mind, it's just a very complex situation and I believe it's more then just should the Victorian clubs have academy's becauses there are options such as increasing eligibility criteria and re zoning the academies to more fair locations, I do remember Brisbane having an academy in Victoria from their days as fitzroy, I can see the argument where Brisbane and Sydney could choose whether they wanted academy's in their states or in Victoria because that's where their teams came from (I know Brisbane was a merger but still), I know you might comeback with the flight risk problem but at the same time the kid and his family would have few years to accept it I feel like the amount of kids going home from your vic academy would be lower then the over draftee population, also can your club offer a job to a kids parent or family member so they can move aswell? Or is that considered cheating? I think the afl should allow clubs to do such things to improve loyalty in my opinion

 

[GUMBLETRON]

What's the point of the NGA academies if the TAC cup system is already doing the same job? Other than to give the Vic clubs a free hit at a quality kids already in the system.

Their entire purpose is to protect the northern academies.

 

[telsor]

Has anyone actually looked how the Vic clubs are running their NGA academies in terms of how they are getting kids from Immigrant communities playing footy?

From a Jake Niall article last year, most Vic clubs have spent more time investigating the backgrounds of kids in the TAC cup system, rather than trying to identify young talent and nurturing it through an Academy.

I wonder how much contact and training good quality kids in Vic spend with their AFL club academy as opposed to training with their TAC cup team?

Up north in our club academies, our kids are playing in our teams against the other northern academies, and now against the TAC cup teams, then they play in the new Div 2 academy series which includes TAS and NT. The best kids make the combined Allies team for the National Champs. After the National Champs, the better kids from each academy play in their NEAFL team.


What's the point of the NGA academies if the TAC cup system is already doing the same job? Other than to give the Vic clubs a free hit at a quality kids already in the system.

As noted, their main purpose is as cover for the northern academies.

Not least because all the problems you mention are also problems in them too. GWS particularly, with it's zones in southern NSW/ACT pick up a lot of kids who were playing football anyway (including a number who play TAC cup). The Vic clubs academies were put in place so that if those clubs complain, then the AFL (through their media stooges) can point to the kids they get and act like they're hypocrites.

The whole thing should be wound back, and the AFL should manage these academies themselves. GWS/GC should get a few players as compensation for not getting FS, and all NSW/QLD clubs can gain a bit from the AFL giving their players '3rd party deals' for appearances/coaching.

 

[Peel67skin]

The whole thing should be wound back, and the AFL should manage these academies themselves. GWS/GC should get a few players as compensation for not getting FS, and all NSW/QLD clubs can gain a bit from the AFL giving their players '3rd party deals' for appearances/coaching.

100%agree .

 

[Colonial]

The whole thing should be wound back, and the AFL should manage these academies themselves. GWS/GC should get a few players as compensation for not getting FS, and all NSW/QLD clubs can gain a bit from the AFL giving their players '3rd party deals' for appearances/coaching.

100% disagree.

Why change something that's working.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Peel67skin]

100% disagree.

Why change something that's working.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Do you really think AFL will change it.

 

[Colonial]

Do you really think AFL will change it.

If the AFL are running it then they are changing it.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Peel67skin]

If the AFL are running it then they are changing it.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Based on a BF post ?

 

[Colonial]

Based on a BF post ?

Isn't that the whole base of BF.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Peel67skin]

Isn't that the whole base of BF.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

You mean AFL make decision based on reading our post. Are you kidding me ?

 

[Colonial]

Is just a footy forum , you don't need to read every post too seriously .

I don't.
Tense why I happily disagree with some and agree with others.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[telsor]

100% disagree.

Why change something that's working.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

I suppose it depends on how you define 'working'.