Academy Watch

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Old Den said:
I would like to be as optimistic as you are about the discount remaining untouched TBD but I will believe it when I see it.
Click to expand...

It will affect Collingwood too, so I can't see it happening.

In general though I think we need to keep our powder dry and save it for when it really counts. The proposed change (not the discount) seems reasonably defensible to me.
 
I actually agree with the proposed changes. If you finish top 4 you can only gain priority access to 1 player bid on in the top 20. GWS making a prelim and then adding 2 academy prospects in the top 15 of last years draft is a little unfair to me. They could stay on top forever if they finish top 4 and then add 2-3 academy players in the top 20 each year. If they only have access to 1 it evens the playing field a little bit.

At the end of the day the academies are there to expand the talent pool in rugby league dominated states and equalise the number of home grown talent on each clubs list. I think it is important for the AFL to make sure they don't become an unfair advantage and if GWS continue to finish top 4 and proceed to then add 3-4 academy guns that in my opinion is quite the advantage.

Edit: Just to expand on this though it is also important the AFL doesn't neutralise the access the northern state clubs have to their academy players to the point where it doesn't become worthwhile for the clubs to run the academies at the cost of doing so with little in return. The academies truly do expand the talent pool of the whole competition even if the majority of the Vic centric folks down South don't realise it.
 
Last edited:
Yep this seems OK. Clubs will still need to develop their academy kids because they'll never be sure where they'll finish. If they finish high, other clubs can scavenge.
 
Agree with the amount of academy players to where you finish just not the reduction in percentage deduction.
 
lionshine said:
I actually agree with the proposed changes. If you finish top 4 you can only gain priority access to 1 player bid on in the top 20. GWS making a prelim and then adding 2 academy prospects in the top 15 of last years draft is a little unfair to me. They could stay on top forever if they finish top 4 and then add 2-3 academy players in the top 20 each year. If they only have access to 1 it evens the playing field a little bit.

At the end of the day the academies are there to expand the talent pool in rugby league dominated states and equalise the number of home grown talent on each clubs list. I think it is important for the AFL to make sure they don't become an unfair advantage and if GWS continue to finish top 4 and proceed to then add 3-4 academy guns that in my opinion is quite the advantage.

Edit: Just to expand on this though it is also important the AFL doesn't neutralise the access the northern state clubs have to their academy players to the point where it doesn't become worthwhile for the clubs to run the academies at the cost of doing so with little in return. The academies truly do expand the talent pool of the whole competition even if the majority of the Vic centric folks down South don't realise it.
Click to expand...

I think that they need to change the wording around a bit regarding the top 4 part in that you can take as many players bid on in the top 20, but they can only be matched with first round picks. That way if you've lost a gun or two and have first round draft picks to use you're not stopped from taking highly rated home based talent. It would seam a bit silly if a team like GWS had lost players and had 3-4 picks in the first round that they could only use one of them on matching a bid and then having to take miss out on others when they had first round picks to use anyway.
 
Fatcat08 said:
I think that they need to change the wording around a bit regarding the top 4 part in that you can take as many players bid on in the top 20, but they can only be matched with first round picks. That way if you've lost a gun or two and have first round draft picks to use you're not stopped from taking highly rated home based talent. It would seam a bit silly if a team like GWS had lost players and had 3-4 picks in the first round that they could only use one of them on matching a bid and then having to take miss out on others when they had first round picks to use anyway.
Click to expand...

Agreed but I think this leaking is a bit of a PR exercise. They usually leak the worst case scenario to the media and then ease up a bit when they announce the actual changes as a compromise.
 
Fatcat08 said:
I think that they need to change the wording around a bit regarding the top 4 part in that you can take as many players bid on in the top 20, but they can only be matched with first round picks. That way if you've lost a gun or two and have first round draft picks to use you're not stopped from taking highly rated home based talent. It would seam a bit silly if a team like GWS had lost players and had 3-4 picks in the first round that they could only use one of them on matching a bid and then having to take miss out on others when they had first round picks to use anyway.
Click to expand...
There shouldn't be anything stopping them from selecting them with live picks. Imo, however, if you finish top 4 you should only have priority access to 1 player in the top 20. So let's say GWS finished top 4 and due to some trades they had picks 5, 10, 15 and 18 and 4 highly rated academy prospects. They had an academy player bid on with pick 4 which they then matched with pick 5. One of their academy players was selected by another team with say pick 8 which they can't match but they then select the other two academy players with their live picks at picks 10 and 15 and an interstater at pick 18.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The new academy series starts this weekend

AFL.com.au identified some of our players to watch

Connor Ballenden
29/3/99
199cm/95kg
University of Queensland

Key forward

"He will play as a key forward and he has really good launching power into the air; he can hit a pack and split it open. The good thing is you can play him up the ground because he's so good at turning and getting the ball in, and he's a nice kick. We all know he's going to be a nice player, he just has to learn a little bit more about using his body strength and getting the defender in front of him to lean on them and get the ball at the back."

Jack Clayton
25/2/99
184cm/77kg
University of Queensland
Defender

"Jack's a left footer with a low centre of gravity and good speed. He has good ground level coverage. He will have to go through the midfield at some stage of his career, but he can play really well off half-back, which he will for the Lions academy. His ball use is good, and he can use his right foot pretty well. He can hone in on improving that run-and-carry and be a bit more damaging. Jack chose being in the national academy over a cricket scholarship, which is a big thing for the AFL."

Reid Gordon
27/6/99
186cm/76kg
Noosa
Midfielder

"Reid plays out on a wing and offers great speed, and is a good mark over his head when the chance comes for him to take a few grabs. He's a good user of the ball and just needs to get a little bit better at the contested side of his game. He's a good run-and-carry player, who kicks the ball nicely."

Jack Payne
15/10/99
195cm/93kg
Noosa
Key defender

"He has really good speed and has that body shape that allows him to match up on the strong bodies. He's clean at ground level and kicks the ball pretty well out of defence. Jack's a discus thrower from Noosa, and is a really good size coming through."

Ben Sloan
27/8/99
189cm/80kg
Mt Gravatt/Redland
Defender


"Ben's a good mark and good kick, and at his size can be used in a few different spots. He'll play half-back for the Brisbane Lions academy, but he can also play on the wing or across half-forward, so he really has that versatility to move around wherever he's needed."
Click to expand...
 
Lions get up 38-31 over the Suns.

From the AFLQ website it appears like it was a pretty scrappy game and hard to work out who played well. Stackleberg and Haines got a few mentions. Ballenden only a couple. Clayton did not play - not sure why not.
 
Young GC defender got the better of Ballenden yesterday. He needs to get in an afl environment asap IMO, seems content with one effort leads, no follow up efforts and not crashing through packs. I'm not sure playing against kids his own age is a of benefit right now.

Not many other standouts from this group other than Clayton imo. The full back Payne looks good, Fletcher has singled him out a few times.

Interestingly most of the best performed mids yesterday were under-agers.
 
thoselionslads said:
Young GC defender got the better of Ballenden yesterday. He needs to get in an afl environment asap IMO, seems content with one effort leads, no follow up efforts and not crashing through packs. I'm not sure playing against kids his own age is a of benefit right now.
Click to expand...
I would assume that it was a bit of a slog yesterday but you would think that in these types of games you would see more from him. I have always thought to reserve judgement until the end of the National champs but the things you have identified others in here have stated very similar things.
 
briztoon said:
Weeeee Ballenden slides down the draft, where we can pick him up with a third round pick.
Click to expand...
i know in jest but if Ballenden slides to only being worth of a third round pick i would pass on him and look at some more midfielders. statistically KPFs who go below the first round very rarely become A grade to elite, more chance of grabbing a mid who makes it in the later rounds than a KPF.
 
briztoon said:
The further the better.
Click to expand...

I'm not really concerned where we draft anyone - I care about the talent they bring to the team. I feel like we're investing a lot into development across the board and back our coaches to get the most of every draftee.
 
If Ballenden wasn't the size he is, he would be a late second round pick. He is no good whatsoever. I certainly wouldn't be ok giving up a top 5 pick for him. No workrate, no second effort post-contest, thinks too highly of himself imo as well. It's not just one off game with him, it's five OFF games then one ON game, which isn't good enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top