A potentially stupid draft idea to prevent the go home factor

[mightymouse75]

At least 3 year lock in. Sooking after years or even threatening to do a mummys boy needs to stop.

 

[piesaregreat]

At least 3 year lock in. Sooking after years or even threatening to do a mummys boy needs to stop.

How about we introduce slavery

 

[Hawk Dork]

Surely growing the sport in the non Victorian states will allow them to recruit locals

 

[spotthedog1]

Surely growing the sport in the non Victorian states will allow them to recruit locals

Absolutely, but that's not a 2-year fix. Auskick doing a great job here in QLD - doesn't change the fact that with no successful teams up here, kids aren't interested in watching. My nephew is 15, been a Lions supporter for a decade, played Auskick since he was small. He now hates watching AFL because he's never known his team to have success, and for the last two years, has been moving more into basketball. We need to have QLD teams actually in the hunt for a while, with the Auskick setup (more than it was back in 2001-3), and then we need the academies to encourage them in, and enough competition that they actually develop the kids well against other decent kids. The problem is, the way the comp is at the moment, neither Brisbane nor Gold Coast are going to even come close to challenging under the current system. Gold Coast have just started another rebuild, and Brisbane are still recovering from the Go Home 5, let alone more recent losses of Aish and Schache. I'm a big Lions fan, but despite all the talk of the Lions "building something special", I don't think our current list has enough talent on it to play more than the first week of September. To me, all that talk is more the AFL and Victorian media trying to dodge having to deal with the real and serious issues in QLD. I'll admit I'm more pessimistic than most though.

 

[drama5]

How about we introduce slavery

dont see many slaves signing up to be drafted as a slave =p

i would feel alot worse for them if they didnt sign up to move in the first place!

its like signing up for a job in Ameria and then complaining because its so far from Australia lol

 

[drama5]

theres an easy fix. if you dont want to leave your family and move then dont sign up for the draft lol

 

[Racing line]

Is it time to give the queensland teams extra salary cap? They cant compete with vic and to a lesser extent sa and wa clubs because they simply dont develop the talent. What's the point having 2 queensland teams when both suck? Its not growing the sport up there its damaging it.

 

[old55]

Simpler solution to retention.

Draftees are assigned a home state based on published rules including birthplace and years of residency.

Players drafted by clubs outside their home state only have 85% of their salary counted in the cap.

All clubs benefit in proportion to the number of non home state players they have. Every club has at least one star in this category.

 

[DashinD]

I like the idea but think that the player should take a hit as well in his draftee wage.
If they are going to compromise the draft then they have to cop it.
Maybe there is a 20% loading for the team drafting them and the player loses 20% of his draftee wage for the first 2 years which would go into the competitive balance fund.
It might seem drastic but we need to stop them doing this and this at least makes them think twice.

I was thinking this but more like 25% of their wage until they reach free agency. It has to be de-incentivised for the player big time.
I think that would work better than punishing the club that selects them.

 

[drama5]

Simpler solution to retention.

Draftees are assigned a home state based on published rules including birthplace and years of residency.

Players drafted by clubs outside their home state only have 85% of their salary counted in the cap.

All clubs benefit in proportion to the number of non home state players they have. Every club has at least one star in this category.

Could you explain this further? As i dont fullt comprehend what you mean but am interested.

And out of interest if i read it correctly wouldnt that just entice clubs to pick interstate players instead of developing their own? And puts more young draftees ib the position of having to move when it is alreasy an issue as it is

 

[go_the_dockers]

Surely growing the sport in the non Victorian states will allow them to recruit locals

Not with out priority access to those locals.

 

[Hawk Dork]

Not with out priority access to those locals.

If it was implemented 30 years ago it would be reaping massive rewards now.
With its own go home factor
Cola has been a 2 edged sword it made them lazy in local development but still delivered success so there was no reason to change.
30 years was wasted.

 

[old55]

Could you explain this further? As i dont fullt comprehend what you mean but am interested.

And out of interest if i read it correctly wouldnt that just entice clubs to pick interstate players instead of developing their own? And puts more young draftees ib the position of having to move when it is alreasy an issue as it is

There's a genuine retention problem for the Qld clubs and to a lesser extent GWS. But there is a legitimate concern from the other clubs about a blanket extra salary cap allowance for retention specifically to those clubs.

The idea is that players playing for clubs away from their state of origin have less salary counted in the cap, this means they can be paid more at those clubs as a means to counteract the desire to move home. This targets the problem more directly than a blanket extra salary cap to specific clubs. Clubs will benefit directly in proportion to the number of "away" players they have - this will clearly be of more benefit to Qld and NSW clubs who naturally have more of these players, but every club has good players in this category e.g. my own club MFC with Hogan, Adelaide with Sloane, West Coast with Gaff etc. so it has in built fairness.

I think what you say about drafting "away" players preferentially is true to the extent that it will eliminate the bias away from it. Already we have SA and WA clubs preferring to draft from their home state and nervous about drafting players from other states.

 

[spotthedog1]

If it was implemented 30 years ago it would be reaping massive rewards now.
With its own go home factor
Cola has been a 2 edged sword it made them lazy in local development but still delivered success so there was no reason to change.
30 years was wasted.

OR alternatively, COLA compensates for the ASAs not available in QLD/NSW. It's not surprising players leave all the time, when they're told they can, they get to be nearer family and friends, and they get more money due to the availability of ASAs. How on earth are non-AFL clubs supposed to compete with that?

 

[hilly]

Hopefully something to help Sydney out more. Like having the highly-rated son of a player who played 7,000 games for the Lions/Roos in their academy.

 

[spotthedog1]

Hopefully something to help Sydney out more. Like having the highly-rated son of a player who played 7,000 games for the Lions/Roos in their academy.

Changes should be made for the 99% of situations. Not that odd 1% obscurity. Sure, I'd like the kid, but at the same time, I'm not exactly calling shenanigans over it. If he goes to Sydney, he goes to Sydney.

 

[tugga]

Would the northern academy players attract the same 'loading'? Fair's fair.

 

[branedotorg]

wipe the draft clean. have recruiting zones again.

OR

a salary cap and a player pool you make offers to. you must have a certain number of players on your list but it's up to you how it splits.

If you change it, you may as well go full *.

 

[Kwality]

If it was implemented 30 years ago it would be reaping massive rewards now.
With its own go home factor
Cola has been a 2 edged sword it made them lazy in local development but still delivered success so there was no reason to change.
30 years was wasted.

lazy in development, how do you work that out, check out their Academy operational since 2010
http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/academy
Dont fall for folklore that its an AFL initiative, AFL funded.

 

[GC wayno]

Maybe it’s not a player problem, maybe some clubs are such s**t places to be and players want to go somewhere better.

 

[TradeDraft]

A part of this idea was brought up on the Swans board where instead of having 18 year olds lie, saying they are willing to go interstate when in reality they are not, and when they are drafted interstate they do everything in their power to move back within the first 2 years what about if 18 year olds were able to nominate what states they are willing to be drafted?

However, there is a cost to doing that, both for the player, and the team that ends up drafting him, so if he does not nominate every state there is an immediate 20% loading placed on him and his team.

So for example, if lets say for arguments sake that Cam Rayner nominates that he only wants to be drafted to a Victorian club.

Then Brisbane and Fremantle can't take him at picks 1 or 2, so Carlton decide to take him at pick 3.

In the points system, pick 3 is worth 2234 points, but with a 20% loading that is 2681 points.

So in order to get Rayner, Carlton would need to use pick 3, but they would also need to use 481 points from pick 10 as well (as they have pick 10) and suddenly pick 10 would become pick 20

So Carlton lose pick 3 and pick 10 and gain Raynar and pick 20.

This way, interstate clubs know going in the players that are not willing to move to other states, while also making those players more expensive, so a non-interstate club gets priority access to these players, but they also have to pay more for them as well, making it potentially a little harder for these flight risk players to get drafted, or if they are drafted, they are going to cost more than they otherwise would have.

Does that make sense, and what do people think?

So be Simmlar what they do with the AFLW Draft?

 

[Jell]

4 year minimum contract for first round picks.

If you look at the drafts between 2010 and 2015 (best comparable data) there were 139 players taken in the first round. When looking at their first 4 seasons:

-107 of them remained on their originally drafted clubs list for at least the first 4 seasons.
- 21 successfully requested to be traded
- 3 were traded by their club (or at least it appears the club initiated the trade)
- 2 unsuccessfully requested to be traded
- 2 left the AFL for personal or health reasons
AND
- 4 were delisted by their club prior to completing 4 seasons

So all in all, out of 139 players, only 7 were moved on by their clubs choosing and only 4 of those held no tradeable value.

By introducing a 4 year minimum, you're only restricting clubs on the 2.87% of first round picks that would be delisted prior to 4 years. But in turn, you're protecting their investment in the 15.10% that request to be traded, mostly for under value trades.

In 4 years you have a better chance of a player adjusting to life at their new club, or having a greater chance to increase in tradeable value. Conversely, there is also a risk that that player may decrease in value with longer exposure to the AFL system (think Jono O'Rourke, Tom Boyd, James Aish etc). But all in all, it gives clubs more power over their playing list, and may in turn save a few coaches their jobs as they'll have a stable list of players for longer.

 

[The_Reaper]

Simpler solution to retention.

Draftees are assigned a home state based on published rules including birthplace and years of residency.

Players drafted by clubs outside their home state only have 85% of their salary counted in the cap.

All clubs benefit in proportion to the number of non home state players they have. Every club has at least one star in this category.

So Sydney and GWS end up with effectively a bigger salary cap than everyone else. Yeah nah.

 

[footyfan1978]

I think what we will find in time, is if live trading in drafts comes in, quite a bit of trading well happen around a player drafted from a club from one state being traded to a club from his state of origin and the clubs working out the trades themselves that make all parties happy. So more draftees can still stay at home.

Certainly will reduce the go home factor to some extent as more draftees likely to stay in their home state from the start.

 

[Cleric]

Absolutely, but that's not a 2-year fix. Auskick doing a great job here in QLD - doesn't change the fact that with no successful teams up here, kids aren't interested in watching. My nephew is 15, been a Lions supporter for a decade, played Auskick since he was small. He now hates watching AFL because he's never known his team to have success, and for the last two years, has been moving more into basketball. We need to have QLD teams actually in the hunt for a while, with the Auskick setup (more than it was back in 2001-3), and then we need the academies to encourage them in, and enough competition that they actually develop the kids well against other decent kids. The problem is, the way the comp is at the moment, neither Brisbane nor Gold Coast are going to even come close to challenging under the current system. Gold Coast have just started another rebuild, and Brisbane are still recovering from the Go Home 5, let alone more recent losses of Aish and Schache. I'm a big Lions fan, but despite all the talk of the Lions "building something special", I don't think our current list has enough talent on it to play more than the first week of September. To me, all that talk is more the AFL and Victorian media trying to dodge having to deal with the real and serious issues in QLD. I'll admit I'm more pessimistic than most though.

Both Qld and NSW have more people playing AFL than SA does.