Academy rule changes

[pulpdriver]

I actually like some of the changes. If you are a top 4 club and getting 2-3 kids in the academy as top 10 picks then I think it needs to be limited. I think the discount should still stay and actually be increased to 25% instead of the 20%. I guess i'm the only one who would think this is a good idea here though.

That's actually reasonable. I just object to yet another change to the system. It seems like we can't go 12 months without one. I can't see this current change being made for any other reason than the anticipation that GWS will finish top 4 and has a couple decent kids in their academy. Whilst it's likely, there's a lot of water to run under the bridge yet.

 

[Slitherin9]

I actually like some of the changes. If you are a top 4 club and getting 2-3 kids in the academy as top 10 picks then I think it needs to be limited. I think the discount should still stay and actually be increased to 25% instead of the 20%. I guess i'm the only one who would think this is a good idea here though.

I agree with you SM. The system isn't designed to give teams multiple first round picks. I'd actually be happy to have a flat rule of one academy/father son bid allowed per team, per round.

 

[braddsey]

I agree with you SM. The system isn't designed to give teams multiple first round picks. I'd actually be happy to have a flat rule of one academy/father son bid allowed per team, per round.

I don't think that's correct. There was nothing "designed" in the system to limit the players picked in any round. The academy system concept was to get provide a pathway into AFL for talented young athletes in non-AFL states to draw them away from other sports (namely rugby). For the clubs the investment in young athletes looked as a way to get more homegrown talent and limit the go-home factor that exists in north of the Murray River (excluding Sydney). If you start to limit the number of players that can be selected in the first round, then immediately you take away part of the true benefits of the academy for local players - the close the guarantee of being able to not move interstate. If a top young athlete thinks there's not a clear pathway into the local AFL club, then they may as well go try out for the Broncos instead.

What has broken the system is the concessions given to GWS when they were introduced into the AFL. This gave them such an amazing pool of talent that they have been and will be able to trade on it for years to come - they can keep trading out first round pick players for first round picks, and then take the best of the academy players (and academy players from Riverina... who haven't necessarily been part of any GWS academy.

The number of picks that can be taken into a draft was certainly a loophole exploited by all clubs involved, but that loophole is now closed.
Brisbane absolutely work on their academy and have had to work hard get the picks required for the players we wanted from the academy, and have passed on some players because we didn't have the draft currency (benefiting the AFL as a whole - more so that any Melbourne based club who pickup the local talent from the TAC competition).

If we're fortunately enough to have 2 players in the first round worthy of picking up, why should we have to chose between them...and the same for father-son selections? We did the work identifying the player, building his skills. if the second round-1 player get's taken at 18 we miss out. if he slides to 19 then we get him.

The errors the AFL made in providing such ludicrous introductory concessions to GWS should not be used as an excuse to limit the academy system for other clubs. I would be looking to put stronger qualification rules around academy players (to make sure the club really has been part of an academy). Beyond that, the AFL has to live with the GWS monster - but this is not the fault of the academy system.