List Mgmt. 2025 Trade/FA Thread

[Ctracks]

Imagine a Bigfooty Pies supporter blog in the Herald Sun every week.

For now, Ralphys articles should be used by puppies.

 

[unplugged]

Setting aside this peanuts view I’m fully supportive of St Kilda’s stance even if it hurts our academy in the long term. Wilson on the agenda setters suggested St Kilda’s lobbying is on the verge of paying off with a limit of one academy player per draft which I’d be much more comfortable with on an ongoing basis. What doesn’t feel right to me is that the northern clubs are able to take a triple pronged approach to list management (trade/ FA, academy or live draft) if they sell their club correctly.

Back to Ralph and what’s most hypocritical to me given the sheer number of recycled “Collingwood has a list crunch” articles he’s released is he completely ignores that in order to make those moves we currently have zero trade currency.

I'm not 100% sure on what the answer is with academies, but I reckon the AFL should continually tinker until it just "feels" right as far as all clubs are concerned. There's no need for sudden, drastic change although it is the AFL we're dealing with here.

They could get rid of or lessen the discounts, make the bids cost more to match, make it so you have to match a bid with a pick from the same round, make it so you can only match a bid with 2 or 3 selections, limit intake, etc. etc.

There's probably a lot left that they can change which I didn't think of in the 5 minutes it took me to think up this post.

The perfect system would have players having access into their sons of guns or academy players they've invested in, provided they foresee the bid and have the means to match. If they can't match or decide the player isn't worth it, and they go elsewhere, then that's the system working.

The likes of Cochran coming to the Pies rather than Sydney is the academy system working perfectly IMO. They pass him up because they didn't have a need for him, but along the journey they've helped attract him to the sport, have a say in his development and so on.

 

[Jen2310]

And they chose the wrong King brother

Numerous players on other clubs lists they could have selected over the years, but didn't.

They also drafted Paddy McCartin over Petracca.

 

[BillyElliott]

They also drafted Paddy McCartin over Petracca.

So many we could name. But it's everyone else's fault

 

[jmac70]

They also drafted Paddy McCartin over Petracca.

Imagine how much Petracca would cry at St Kilda.

 

[Scodog10]

I'm not 100% sure on what the answer is with academies, but I reckon the AFL should continually tinker until it just "feels" right as far as all clubs are concerned. There's no need for sudden, drastic change although it is the AFL we're dealing with here.

They could get rid of or lessen the discounts, make the bids cost more to match, make it so you have to match a bid with a pick from the same round, make it so you can only match a bid with 2 or 3 selections, limit intake, etc. etc.

There's probably a lot left that they can change which I didn't think of in the 5 minutes it took me to think up this post.

The perfect system would have players having access into their sons of guns or academy players they've invested in, provided they foresee the bid and have the means to match. If they can't match or decide the player isn't worth it, and they go elsewhere, then that's the system working.

The likes of Cochran coming to the Pies rather than Sydney is the academy system working perfectly IMO. They pass him up because they didn't have a need for him, but along the journey they've helped attract him to the sport, have a say in his development and so on.

I can see the argument both ways. The tinkering around the edges until you get a goldilocks scenario might work for some, but not all. Say your St Kilda or Fremantle who are potentially going to lose significant talent this off-season (NWM and Jackson). How do you feel about being effectively sidelined because this draft is so compromised? They’ll become bystanders with no pre-aligned talent. This draft is going to be jarring with how clunky it is and will necessitate serious change to academies (both Northern and NGA), IMO.

My goldilocks scenario is that every club gets to pre-list one NGA, FS or northern academy player every year and the rest go into the draft pool. They’re still available, but you need the picks to bring them in. Simple, clean and it limits the ongoing damage that drafts like GC had in 2023 and 2025 can do long term. The only concern I have is that well run clubs will do the Ollie Henry one two step, but they’ve still got to cough up at the trade table in that scenario. You could even protect clubs that draft out of academies from poaching with FA type compensation(only spitballing there).

 

[Pragmatic Shill]

"Vic clubs like you-know-who"

 

[DopeMaster]

I’m less worried about the GC academy and moreso about clubs like Brisbane and Sydney who have access to both academies and father sons. They’re tremendously advantaged by having both.

 

[unplugged]

"Vic clubs like you-know-who"

What the **** is this guys problem?

I'm assuming he's talking about the Bulldogs... right? lol...

 

[stormskye]

What the **** is this guys problem?

I'm assuming he's talking about the Bulldogs... right? lol...

Richmond would be my guess. Them adding lynch after falling short in 2018 was disgusting..

 

[Exambolor]

"Vic clubs like you-know-who"

Ralphy…..

 

[nahnah]

Basically our advantage is we are a better club, cheers Ralphy we already knew that

 

[thommo_legend]

Was nice to see Kane clip Jon Ralph on Agenda Setters. Can't stand him

 

[Bianconeri]

I'm not 100% sure on what the answer is with academies, but I reckon the AFL should continually tinker until it just "feels" right as far as all clubs are concerned. There's no need for sudden, drastic change although it is the AFL we're dealing with here.

They could get rid of or lessen the discounts, make the bids cost more to match, make it so you have to match a bid with a pick from the same round, make it so you can only match a bid with 2 or 3 selections, limit intake, etc. etc.

There's probably a lot left that they can change which I didn't think of in the 5 minutes it took me to think up this post.

The perfect system would have players having access into their sons of guns or academy players they've invested in, provided they foresee the bid and have the means to match. If they can't match or decide the player isn't worth it, and they go elsewhere, then that's the system working.

The likes of Cochran coming to the Pies rather than Sydney is the academy system working perfectly IMO. They pass him up because they didn't have a need for him, but along the journey they've helped attract him to the sport, have a say in his development and so on.

I get get the tinkering is the way it should go realistically but I think the AFL should just go all out on academies and let every club have their own with minimal restrictions.

Let’s clubs live and die by their talent development rather than the current lottery situation.

Still have a sought of draft to keep too equalise slightly but it will be more an exercise of obtaining enough points to just getting points for your own academy players rather than a true draft.

I’d also give father sons a huge discount based off games played.

 

[Anzacday]

The bastard knows how to get under Collingwood supporters skin

Spot on.
The troll has done it again.
He sits backs and laugh$ every time.

 

[Pistol Night]

I love how Ralphy and co refer to Josh as a “father/son” selection, like we snapped him up after a bid rather than taking him with our final selection after nobody bid on him.

Wow it’s so unfair that we got a player that nobody else wanted who turned out to be good! Boo hoo!

Imagine a Daicos coming into the system now and the frenzy it would cause

 

[Pistol Night]

They chose Jack Billings over the Bont and Tom McCartin over Petracca.

Father/sons and academies are the least of their problems.

Petracca was a no brainer in that draft. Bit like Melbourne back in 09 having picks 1 and 2 and somehow letting Dusty slip to 3. These clubs don’t help themselves with stupidity even nuffies can see then cry poor about their “disadvantages”

 

[Anzacday]

Spot on.
The troll has done it again.
He sits backs and laugh$ every time.

Well I’m shocked to be sitting here, he admits it…

 

[Pistol Night]

Well I’m shocked to be sitting here, he admits it…

No Ralphy, with your standard of journalism you'd be lucky to get a weekend in Moe you flog

 

[cakewalk06]

Imagine a Daicos coming into the system now and the frenzy it would cause

Unfortunately my idea about a Peter Daicos … Snitzel/I Am Invicible type siring program from a few years back never got off the ground

 

[MoreMoore]

It makes me laugh when clubs like St Kilda, one of the oldest clubs in the comp complain about f/s. Whose fault is it if they have haven't been able to produce any f/s prospects?

Result of getting kicked in the nuts every week

 

[sr36]

The Saints are in big trouble. No leaders, no stars and no soul.

NWM is a star. But they're likely to lose him.

 

[sr36]

I’m less worried about the GC academy and moreso about clubs like Brisbane and Sydney who have access to both academies and father sons. They’re tremendously advantaged by having both.

GC academy is the glittering one though, as there are so many Southern state footy fans who have moved there.

 

[Bussie]

The Brown brothers are still young enough to play AFL again, draft away Sainters!

 

[gouki88]

NWM is a star. But they're likely to lose him.

Jack Sinclair is also a gun. Having guys like King sidelined and not coming on as was forecast after his best seasons, most veterans declining (Steele) or injured (Macrae) and relying on youngsters is a bad recipe.