A few thoughts about playing kids and our selection

Remove this Banner Ad

lacrow

lacrow

Team Captain
Feb 7, 2003
389
122
Los Angeles
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Dodgers, Lakers
OK, before I start this, here's my disclaimer: I firmly believe that young kids should not be playing with grown 30 year olds in a physically challenging sport like Aussie Rules until they are about 21. Their bodies are simply not up to that, physically. I would say that what the AFL should have is a development league (not SANFL, etc.) where kids from 18 to 21 - drafted and undrafted - would play against physically similar competition in order to mature. This is essentially what College Football is vs. the NFL. And having this would solve a lot of selection issues for all the clubs/fans and would put them all on a level playing field.

Now, considering this is not the present reality, I would just like to say that I honestly don't understand why top draft picks aren't played immediately with the idea of developing them within the context of the level that we actually want them to be at. Nobody in the NBA or the NFL is going to have a top pick sit on the sidelines for 2-3 years without playing them. It just seems like a complete waste of time. In the NFL you start, you play, and you usually get a significant period of time to show whether you belong or not. With AFL it's like 3 years pass and you still don't really know who's going to be a player or not. That seems ridiculous, just like this notion of giving them 1 or 2 games at AFL level and then dropping them down to SANFL seems ridiculous. If they are struggling with confidence, then let them fight through that. It builds character and strength of mind.

Also this idea of constantly moving players in and out of the side doesn't make sense to me as an American. Surely even if a guy is having a down year, the coaches should know who is in their best 22 and keep those players in so they can work themselves into form. If nothing else, I feel like the continuity would be an asset, regardless of a few slumps in a player's output. This idea that "Player X is really playing well in the SANFL and even though we KNOW he's not a better player than Player Y, we are going to swap them out because Player Y is having a bad patch of games"..... I just don't agree with that at all.

When Kobe started in the NBA he had a bunch of bad games and Phil Jackson sat him down a lot, but the point is that he never went back to the D-league (which actually didn't exist, but please ignore that for argument's sake). He developed IN the NBA, the environment where he was really going to play.

Thoughts.......
 
Vhaluus said:
Plenty of examples of first year draft picks coming immediately into AFL sides and having a positive impact.

So the idea their bodies aren't up to it is just wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes there are, but unfortunately from a health perspective we really don't have the data that shows whether those kids eventually become more injury-prone than they otherwise would have. And that, my friend, is the point I was thinking about when formulating my statement. It just seems wrong and dangerous for a skinny 18-year-old to be getting crushed week after week by mature-bodied 27 year olds.

Again, I don't have the data, but that is at least part of the reason the NFL has their age rules (although there are other factors too).
 

Log in to remove this ad.

lacrow said:
Yes there are, but unfortunately from a health perspective we really don't have the data that shows whether those kids eventually become more injury-prone than they otherwise would have. And that, my friend, is the point I was thinking about when formulating my statement. It just seems wrong and dangerous for a skinny 18-year-old to be getting crushed week after week by mature-bodied 27 year olds.

Again, I don't have the data, but that is at least part of the reason the NFL has their age rules (although there are other factors too).
Click to expand...

"we don't have the data so I'm just going to assume that it does because it helps my viewpoint"

******* spot on logic there mate.
 
marty36 said:
As a percentage of the amount drafted each year how many have an impact in their first year at the elite level

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

You tell me, it's not my job to fetch up data to contradict your argument.

I have stated that they do play top level and have a positive impact, that is provable.

You want to prove your own point, go and prove it.
 
lacrow said:
OK, before I start this, here's my disclaimer: I firmly believe that young kids should not be playing with grown 30 year olds in a physically challenging sport like Aussie Rules until they are about 21. Their bodies are simply not up to that, physically. I would say that what the AFL should have is a development league (not SANFL, etc.) where kids from 18 to 21 - drafted and undrafted - would play against physically similar competition in order to mature. This is essentially what College Football is vs. the NFL. And having this would solve a lot of selection issues for all the clubs/fans and would put them all on a level playing field.

Now, considering this is not the present reality, I would just like to say that I honestly don't understand why top draft picks aren't played immediately with the idea of developing them within the context of the level that we actually want them to be at. Nobody in the NBA or the NFL is going to have a top pick sit on the sidelines for 2-3 years without playing them. It just seems like a complete waste of time. In the NFL you start, you play, and you usually get a significant period of time to show whether you belong or not. With AFL it's like 3 years pass and you still don't really know who's going to be a player or not. That seems ridiculous, just like this notion of giving them 1 or 2 games at AFL level and then dropping them down to SANFL seems ridiculous. If they are struggling with confidence, then let them fight through that. It builds character and strength of mind.

Also this idea of constantly moving players in and out of the side doesn't make sense to me as an American. Surely even if a guy is having a down year, the coaches should know who is in their best 22 and keep those players in so they can work themselves into form. If nothing else, I feel like the continuity would be an asset, regardless of a few slumps in a player's output. This idea that "Player X is really playing well in the SANFL and even though we KNOW he's not a better player than Player Y, we are going to swap them out because Player Y is having a bad patch of games"..... I just don't agree with that at all.

When Kobe started in the NBA he had a bunch of bad games and Phil Jackson sat him down a lot, but the point is that he never went back to the D-league (which actually didn't exist, but please ignore that for argument's sake). He developed IN the NBA, the environment where he was really going to play.

Thoughts.......
Click to expand...

Roo was 17-18 in his maiden year, played 19 games and went on to play 300+. I don’t think there’s a golden rule on the age a player can start mixing it with the mature players. Everyone develops at different rates and some can come in at 17 and others will need to develop and wait until their 20s. I do agree that studies into the impact of playing early and career longevity would be useful, also the impact of head knocks on young guys versus older guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
lacrow said:
OK, before I start this, here's my disclaimer: I firmly believe that young kids should not be playing with grown 30 year olds in a physically challenging sport like Aussie Rules until they are about 21. Their bodies are simply not up to that, physically. I would say that what the AFL should have is a development league (not SANFL, etc.) where kids from 18 to 21 - drafted and undrafted - would play against physically similar competition in order to mature. This is essentially what College Football is vs. the NFL. And having this would solve a lot of selection issues for all the clubs/fans and would put them all on a level playing field.

Now, considering this is not the present reality, I would just like to say that I honestly don't understand why top draft picks aren't played immediately with the idea of developing them within the context of the level that we actually want them to be at. Nobody in the NBA or the NFL is going to have a top pick sit on the sidelines for 2-3 years without playing them. It just seems like a complete waste of time. In the NFL you start, you play, and you usually get a significant period of time to show whether you belong or not. With AFL it's like 3 years pass and you still don't really know who's going to be a player or not. That seems ridiculous, just like this notion of giving them 1 or 2 games at AFL level and then dropping them down to SANFL seems ridiculous. If they are struggling with confidence, then let them fight through that. It builds character and strength of mind.

Also this idea of constantly moving players in and out of the side doesn't make sense to me as an American. Surely even if a guy is having a down year, the coaches should know who is in their best 22 and keep those players in so they can work themselves into form. If nothing else, I feel like the continuity would be an asset, regardless of a few slumps in a player's output. This idea that "Player X is really playing well in the SANFL and even though we KNOW he's not a better player than Player Y, we are going to swap them out because Player Y is having a bad patch of games"..... I just don't agree with that at all.

When Kobe started in the NBA he had a bunch of bad games and Phil Jackson sat him down a lot, but the point is that he never went back to the D-league (which actually didn't exist, but please ignore that for argument's sake). He developed IN the NBA, the environment where he was really going to play.

Thoughts.......
Click to expand...

Really interesting perspective.

I enjoyed it. 👍
 
Simmo28 said:
Roo was 17-18 in his maiden year, played 19 games and went on to play 300+. I don’t think there’s a golden rule on the age a player can start mixing it with the mature players. Everyone develops at different rates and some can come in at 17 and others will need to develop and wait until their 20s. I do agree that studies into the impact of playing early and career longevity would be useful, also the impact of head knocks on young guys versus older guys.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Judd, Selwood - plenty of examples that not only deserved to play year 1 but were borderline dominant. Absolutely is case-by-case and shouldnt be preventing those who are ready from getting games. Situation that needs to be avoided is teams having to play kids who arent ready because they've manged their list poorly, or had a ton of injuries.
 
lacrow said:
OK, before I start this, here's my disclaimer: I firmly believe that young kids should not be playing with grown 30 year olds in a physically challenging sport like Aussie Rules until they are about 21. Their bodies are simply not up to that, physically. I would say that what the AFL should have is a development league (not SANFL, etc.) where kids from 18 to 21 - drafted and undrafted - would play against physically similar competition in order to mature. This is essentially what College Football is vs. the NFL. And having this would solve a lot of selection issues for all the clubs/fans and would put them all on a level playing field.

Now, considering this is not the present reality, I would just like to say that I honestly don't understand why top draft picks aren't played immediately with the idea of developing them within the context of the level that we actually want them to be at. Nobody in the NBA or the NFL is going to have a top pick sit on the sidelines for 2-3 years without playing them. It just seems like a complete waste of time. In the NFL you start, you play, and you usually get a significant period of time to show whether you belong or not. With AFL it's like 3 years pass and you still don't really know who's going to be a player or not. That seems ridiculous, just like this notion of giving them 1 or 2 games at AFL level and then dropping them down to SANFL seems ridiculous. If they are struggling with confidence, then let them fight through that. It builds character and strength of mind.

Also this idea of constantly moving players in and out of the side doesn't make sense to me as an American. Surely even if a guy is having a down year, the coaches should know who is in their best 22 and keep those players in so they can work themselves into form. If nothing else, I feel like the continuity would be an asset, regardless of a few slumps in a player's output. This idea that "Player X is really playing well in the SANFL and even though we KNOW he's not a better player than Player Y, we are going to swap them out because Player Y is having a bad patch of games"..... I just don't agree with that at all.

When Kobe started in the NBA he had a bunch of bad games and Phil Jackson sat him down a lot, but the point is that he never went back to the D-league (which actually didn't exist, but please ignore that for argument's sake). He developed IN the NBA, the environment where he was really going to play.

Thoughts.......
Click to expand...
Great to see Americans following AFL, and more importantly, the Crows!

Regarding your age criteria, it should not matter on age, but more on each individuals past history of injuries. Usually by the age of 18, bones have generally matured, whereas growing bones are more brittle and are more prone for fractures. So 18 is usually a fair age to be able to play regular contact sports against “adults”.

The real concern is the soft tissue injuries, and in particular, the bodies with recurrent injuries. If there is a history of these sort of injuries, then I think you’re on the ballpark and we should not rush them into senior ranks earlier on, and be more careful with their management/selection. I’m talking about bodies like a BCrouch, McPherson etc.

Regarding the “rotating door selections” for players between SANFL and AFL, then this is just necessary practice in any AFL club. Some points to ponder:
- if we keep selecting our best 22, then we might never play the new kids for 4-5 years! (They need time to develop fully)
- you can’t just have a concrete “best 22 each year”; the names will change on a monthly basis and this will depend on who’s in form in the SANFL vs who’s in form in the AFL eg. Jacobs vs ROB, JJ vs Himmelberg.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Vhaluus said:
"we don't have the data so I'm just going to assume that it does because it helps my viewpoint"

******* spot on logic there mate.
Click to expand...
Never said I'm assuming anything bud. Just said I have a hunch or a theory. Big difference.

Also, I disagreed politely.... you could learn to do the same.
 
John Who said:
Great to see Americans following AFL, and more importantly, the Crows!

Regarding your age criteria, it should not matter on age, but more on each individuals past history of injuries. Usually by the age of 18, bones have generally matured, whereas growing bones are more brittle and are more prone for fractures. So 18 is usually a fair age to be able to play regular contact sports against “adults”.

The real concern is the soft tissue injuries, and in particular, the bodies with recurrent injuries. If there is a history of these sort of injuries, then I think you’re on the ballpark and we should not rush them into senior ranks earlier on, and be more careful with their management/selection. I’m talking about bodies like a BCrouch, McPherson etc.

Regarding the “rotating door selections” for players between SANFL and AFL, then this is just necessary practice in any AFL club. Some points to ponder:
- if we keep selecting our best 22, then we might never play the new kids for 4-5 years! (They need time to develop fully)
- you can’t just have a concrete “best 22 each year”; the names will change on a monthly basis and this will depend on who’s in form in the SANFL vs who’s in form in the AFL eg. Jacobs vs ROB, JJ vs Himmelberg.
Click to expand...

Thanks, and YES... I LOVE Aussie Rules. It's an amazing game.

Send some love to the LA Dragons when you get a chance!
www.ladragons.com
 
lacrow said:
OK, before I start this, here's my disclaimer: I firmly believe that young kids should not be playing with grown 30 year olds in a physically challenging sport like Aussie Rules until they are about 21. Their bodies are simply not up to that, physically. I would say that what the AFL should have is a development league (not SANFL, etc.) where kids from 18 to 21 - drafted and undrafted - would play against physically similar competition in order to mature. This is essentially what College Football is vs. the NFL. And having this would solve a lot of selection issues for all the clubs/fans and would put them all on a level playing field.

Now, considering this is not the present reality, I would just like to say that I honestly don't understand why top draft picks aren't played immediately with the idea of developing them within the context of the level that we actually want them to be at. Nobody in the NBA or the NFL is going to have a top pick sit on the sidelines for 2-3 years without playing them. It just seems like a complete waste of time. In the NFL you start, you play, and you usually get a significant period of time to show whether you belong or not. With AFL it's like 3 years pass and you still don't really know who's going to be a player or not. That seems ridiculous, just like this notion of giving them 1 or 2 games at AFL level and then dropping them down to SANFL seems ridiculous. If they are struggling with confidence, then let them fight through that. It builds character and strength of mind.

Also this idea of constantly moving players in and out of the side doesn't make sense to me as an American. Surely even if a guy is having a down year, the coaches should know who is in their best 22 and keep those players in so they can work themselves into form. If nothing else, I feel like the continuity would be an asset, regardless of a few slumps in a player's output. This idea that "Player X is really playing well in the SANFL and even though we KNOW he's not a better player than Player Y, we are going to swap them out because Player Y is having a bad patch of games"..... I just don't agree with that at all.

When Kobe started in the NBA he had a bunch of bad games and Phil Jackson sat him down a lot, but the point is that he never went back to the D-league (which actually didn't exist, but please ignore that for argument's sake). He developed IN the NBA, the environment where he was really going to play.

Thoughts.......
Click to expand...

Some interesting points.

I don't know that a blanket age guideline works. I know a few kids in the TAC Cup system in Victoria, and while some 17-18 year olds have some development to go through, there are some that are physically ready for senior footy. Probably similar to college football where arguably Clowney was physically ready for the NFL at least a year before he was eligible.

I think that most AFL clubs take a fairly similar developmental approach. Of the top 20 picks in last year's draft, 14 have played at least one game. Of those, half have played 10+ games, with 3 having played all 18 and another 5 having played 17. Of the top 20 picks yet to debut, most have struggled with injury to some extent. Outside the top 20, 3 of the 58 have played 10+ games, with 2 of those 3 being mature age picks. It seems like there's some combination of first round picks being more likely to be ready to go and/or clubs being more likely to throw them in the deep end.

This one game in, one game out approach that's hitting Stengle (and Davis and Wilson) seems ridiculous to virtually everyone not in the Crows selection meetings, not just Americans.

Kobe is an interesting mention, as he played 150 games before he became a starter. There's a slightly askew comparison between Aussie Rules and basketball in that a NBA coach can suit up 12 players and play 5 of them at any time, but there's only 4 on the bench compared to 18 on the field in footy. There's not really a footy equivalent of giving a player 15 minutes off the bench.
 
lacrow said:
Yes there are, but unfortunately from a health perspective we really don't have the data that shows whether those kids eventually become more injury-prone than they otherwise would have. And that, my friend, is the point I was thinking about when formulating my statement. It just seems wrong and dangerous for a skinny 18-year-old to be getting crushed week after week by mature-bodied 27 year olds.

Again, I don't have the data, but that is at least part of the reason the NFL has their age rules (although there are other factors too).
Click to expand...


Your not alone why you think that its both physical and mental a few articles backing your thoughts

www.abc.net.au

Should the AFL draft age be lifted to give players real world experience?

Amid the seemingly endless ways a player can find their way onto an AFL list, Port Adelaide co-captain Tom Jonas says increasing the minimum draft age would be a good way to ensure better choices were made by the clubs and players.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

www.foxsports.com.au

AFL 2019: Jesse Hogan’s first coach Paul Roos calls for AFL draft age to be increased

Footy great: The AFL flaw that led to Hogan’s downward spiral
www.foxsports.com.au www.foxsports.com.au

www.perthnow.com.au

Time to raise the draft age

RAISING the AFL draft age it seems has become a longer, deeper, tougher task than raising the Titanic. Like the ill-fated British passenger liner, it’s long overdue.
www.perthnow.com.au www.perthnow.com.au
 
One of my neighbours played VFL for a powerhouse club. We hung out a lot and I got the opportunity to ask him about his playing days which he normally never mentioned.

He was a young forward, skinny and his body wasn't developed, he got beaten up so badly in the games he played, he left football altogether.
The phycological effects it had on him was obvious just speaking to him, he said, "It was irresponcable of the club to send me out there and play against thugs at my age", he just wasn't ready. He said he should have had a long career in footy he could play.

This was a different time I know, but shows the phycological impact sport can have on young people.
 
Bender20 said:
One of my neighbours played VFL for a powerhouse club. We hung out a lot and I got the opportunity to ask him about his playing days which he normally never mentioned.

He was a young forward, skinny and his body wasn't developed, he got beaten up so badly in the games he played, he left football altogether.
The phycological effects it had on him was obvious just speaking to him, he said, "It was irresponcable of the club to send me out there and play against thugs at my age", he just wasn't ready. He said he should have had a long career in footy he could play.

This was a different time I know, but shows the phycological impact sport can have on young people.
Click to expand...

Tim Watson and Ben Hart beg to differ. They were both young and very skinny when they started and both had wonderful playing careers.

There are so many cases that directly argue against your point, it’s not funny.

If you are good enough, the game doesn’t know your age.
 
It’s a very individual thing, some kids are more developed/mature and ready to go early. Others aren’t and require further development. I think most AFL clubs are pretty good with this, a lot of times just giving youngsters a taste of the big time, but not flogging them. We have been notoriously conservative with our development, rarely playing kids much in their first season. I think some kind kids could actually develop quicker in the AFL.

I’d argue Fog is an example of a kid who could be developed more in the AFL, his fitness hasn’t been up it But I’d think playing AFL would be a good way to get AFL fitness, but I’m not a highly qualified development coach, so what would I know?

It can be a difficult balance with fans though, who just want to see the kids play . But I’d say our development has in the past been a strong point Tom doedee or a ROB being good examples. A lot (including myself) will argue they could have been playing AFL a lot earlier, but it’s hard to argue they haven’t been developed well.
 
Morning_Fog said:
Tim Watson and Ben Hart beg to differ. They were both young and very skinny when they started and both had wonderful playing careers.

There are so many cases that directly argue against your point, it’s not funny.

If you are good enough, the game doesn’t know your age.
Click to expand...
Yes as individuals everyone is different aren't they

Some people can drink 5 beers stay under the limit and drive some have one and are pissed

So do you protect everyone with one rule

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Max and Jake are our future. Rebuild 2.0 should begin now.
Replies
4
Views
452
Bob Neil
Bob Neil
feenix67
Roast Sooo... about that review
2 3
Replies
72
Views
3K
Mostyn
Mostyn
weekend at bernies
When do we ask the AFL for our priority pick??
Replies
19
Views
577
FR0GGY
FR0GGY
A
Strategy Who should be our next coach?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
154
Views
5K
Sanders
Sanders
FR0GGY
Opinion Rank our list 1-30
2 3 4
Replies
92
Views
4K
Danger in Texas
Danger in Texas
adelaidecrows
Analysis Rating our offseason!
Replies
23
Views
1K
Kane McGoodwin
Kane McGoodwin
J
Fallacy or Fact - our 2023 ball movement is one of our biggest improvements this year - Discuss ( try and use evidence where possible )
Replies
18
Views
517
FR0GGY
FR0GGY

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top