A potentially stupid draft idea to prevent the go home factor

[briztoon]

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

The counterpoint to that argument is that AFL isn't the number 1, 2, or 3, rated football code up here in terms of talent. The vast majority of the tented kids are still funnelled in to Rugby League and Soccer in the public school system and Rugby Union and Soccer in the private school system.

I've been out of school for nigh on 30 years, but I'd be genuinely surprised if there's more than a token school based AFL comp anywhere in QLD. Probably more chance of a girls comp developing.

Up here, many kids play the sports their parents follow or push them towards. You look at the majority of kids to successfully make it through the Gold Coast and Brisbane academies and make it to the AFL, they come from Victorian families who support an AFL team, who moved up to QLD for job opportunities when the kids were young.
Brisbane:
Jacob Allison (Vic)
Eric Hipwood (Vic)
Ben Keays (Vic)
Harris Andrews (Vic)

Gold Coast:
Brad Scheer (WA)
Jack Bowed (Vic)

QLD and NSW might have more people playing AFL (which I genuinely query as I reckon most sports fudge the numbers when they talk about how many kids/adults play the sport) than SA, but that will purely be a result of our significantly larger populations, not because AFL is the number 1 football code in the state.

What will be interesting, will be to watch female participation rates with the NRL introducing a womens comp next year.

 

[briztoon]

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.

Our current list doesn't have enough mature talent to make it out of the bottom 5.

We have a lot young talent, but the kids are not even close to realising their full potential, and we will need to have drafted many, many more such kids before the team is developed enough to talk about September. And that's if all the current kids stay.

 

[spotthedog1]

Our current list doesn't have enough mature talent to make it out of the bottom 5.

We have a lot young talent, but the kids are not even close to realising their full potential, and we will need to have drafted many, many more such kids before the team is developed enough to talk about September. And that's if all the current kids stay.

I wasn't referring to mature talent - I was referring to talent. I think given the state of our list at present, we'll progress well, and in about 3 years, we'll make it up to 7th or 8th before we head back down the bottom for a rebuild. Right around the time Zorko and Beams retire and we have B graders to replace them. We lack top quality talent on our list. Top 10 picks of Rayner, McCluggage, Rich, Mayes. Two of them B graders, two of them too young to tell. We've managed to pick a couple of good players up from outside the top 10 (Hipwood's plenty exciting), but so has every club. I think that even at our current list's peak, we can't expect a particularly high ceiling.

 

[1970crow]

Why should clubs be punished for simply being in the preferred state of a potential draftee?

It's worse the other way around. How heavily does an interstate club have to overpay to get their hands on a player who is prepared to go or stay there.

 

[Turbocat]

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?

Credit for trying to think out of the box and although its seems complex ..its probably convoluted in a way they afl like.. difficult to understand so difficult to really criticise .

Personally .. no matter the system the draft is a denial of players rights to choose .. and while in days past players were less fussed about it ... these days they are more attuned to getting what they want , when they want it. .. so the draft probably works best for the players just a bit off the best.. the players who have less choice are more likely to take a chance anywhere. Really who cares if a 2nd tier players wish to move home..few supporters care if it happens.

I think if you really want to irradiate go home , then give players their choice back. Imagine if every club one player to be signed pre draft. Depending on the year SA and WA clubs could have a big advantage ..and in Melb most kids would probably choose who they really would want to play for if given a chance. It would probably develop some clubs more than others but it would show a clubs true appeal. The afl would hate what it would do to their draft as well.

 

[briztoon]

Credit for trying to think out of the box and although its seems complex ..its probably convoluted in a way they afl like.. difficult to understand so difficult to really criticise .

Personally .. no matter the system the draft is a denial of players rights to choose .. and while in days past players were less fussed about it ... these days they are more attuned to getting what they want , when they want it. .. so the draft probably works best for the players just a bit off the best.. the players who have less choice are more likely to take a chance anywhere. Really who cares if a 2nd tier players wish to move home..few supporters care if it happens.

I think if you really want to irradiate go home , then give players their choice back. Imagine if every club one player to be signed pre draft. Depending on the year SA and WA clubs could have a big advantage ..and in Melb most kids would probably choose who they really would want to play for if given a chance. It would probably develop some clubs more than others but it would show a clubs true appeal. The afl would hate what it would do to their draft as well.

Great idea for Vic, WA and SA clubs. ****ing s#!t idea for the NSW and QLD clubs.

 

[Turbocat]

Great idea for Vic, WA and SA clubs. ****ing s#!t idea for the NSW and QLD clubs.

It would favor some clubs over others for sure, bigger clubs over smaller clubs, clubs with great amenities and histories , great blockbusters etc. .. but it would reflect the real truth of where players want be ..so less go home. And while the developing states may not get the "best" southern coast kid , you would get kids not far off best and who would be happy to stay.. and one would hope that academies etc would develop players from the Northern states as well. And in this model I was only talking one player per club.. its not like all the best players would just stay south .

Its really just an theoretical debate as an alternative to the draft... and it will be some time before the draft becomes such an issue that its needs a radical change like this... although if we reduce FA to 6 and 8 ... it will increase the amount of FA's available and erode the worth of the draft further

 

[Taylor]

It would be awesome for WA and SA since our four clubs pay to support the league developing the young players that get drafted anywhere.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Any team with less than 30 percent locals get priority access to all locals.

At less than 45 percent it is all players after the 1sr round.

At less than 60 percent then after the 3rd round.

Something like this for all clubs and get rid of academies.