Remove this Banner Ad

Academy Watch

  • Thread starter Thread starter irel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The scores were relatively close but realistically there was not much positive spin you could take out of the Jets game - draft wise.

The two rucks they played had some nice size, particularly Jensen, and I wouldn't mind seeing more of them. They got some nice clean taps but too often did not direct them well and they were outbodied quite a lot. You can't teach size though and they certainly had that.

The backs I thought were terrible all day and were beaten so easily when the ball went in there. The other lines were not much better although it was hard on the forwards given they had virtually no quality ball all day. There were periods of time when the ball bounced virtually every time and there were a lot of handballs to guys with his opponent sweating on him. Hude was okay up forward and is a bigger bodied medium forward type much like McFadyn. I would suggest he is some chance of being drafted but he looked like the only one for the Lions apart from Fletcher.

On Fletcher I will give a bit more of my extended thoughts. I watched him pretty closely in this game and there were a few good things but also plenty to work on as well. He played as an inside mid mostly and when he was there the midfield tended to work better than when he wasn't. When he was not in the midfield he was rested up forward but the ball rarely got forward of centre when he was there. The couple of goals he got were on the run from just inside the 50 rather than from forward craft.

Fletcher does his best work in space but he did not have much of that. The opposition did key to him and shut him down pretty quickly. He got a three 1 - 2 handball and receive back plays which padded his stats but a couple of them he got the ball back in not a particularly good position. His kicking was not as good as I have seen it previously but I have no concerns on that front. It was still pretty decent and I think with more time and targets who are in space it will be significantly better than that. He covers a fair bit of ground at a reasonable pace but he does need to improve his burst running. There is too much one paced cruising around. He needs to work on giving that burst to get to space to receive or to impact a contest. At the moment he runs in traffic too much and hangs back from the contest when he has an opportunity to impact it.

He is not a player that cracks into contests and he does not have a particularly physical style about the way he plays. He tends to hang around as a hand ball receiver in contests mostly and not attack the ball and try and win it. He is too often behind his opponent when he is playing onball and is very often flat footed when he should be moving. He did not position himself as one of the primary tap receivers but given where he was positioned it was probably intended that he would receive that quick handball to allow the ball to be cleared. He does not hunt the ball on the inside. When he does get it his hands are only average as far as quickness goes. Despite not being particularly physical with the ball in dispute he is a willing tackler and he wraps up well. He is not a hard hitter but he is strong enough to stick his tackles and hold the ball up.

I like that he is getting plenty of time on ball at this level although at the next level I think he plays much more on the outside where he can use his skills more effectively. He is a balanced runner with the ball in hand and his decision making is good. He moves through traffic nicely and, as he showed yesterday, he can finish nicely from 50 if he gets the chance. In tighter I think he will look much better with the likes of Neale and Lyons shoveling the ball out to him and him then kicking it quickly forward.

So don't expect him to be an inside mid at the next level but he does have some promise as an outside in type.
 
Last edited:
Quigley said:
The scores were relatively close but realistically there was not much positive spin you could take out of the Jets game - draft wise.

The two rucks they played had some nice size, particularly Jensen, and I wouldn't mind seeing more of them. They got some nice clean taps but too often did not direct them well and they were outbodied quite a lot. You can't teach size though and they certainly had that.

The backs I thought were terrible all day and were beaten so easily when the ball went in there. The other lines were not much better although it was hard on the forwards given they had virtually no quality ball all day. There were periods of time when the ball bounced virtually every time and there were a lot of handballs to guys with his opponent sweating on him. Hude was okay up forward and is a bigger bodied medium forward type much like McFadyn. I would suggest he is some chance of being drafted but he looked like the only one for the Lions apart from Fletcher.

On Fletcher I will give a bit more of my extended thoughts. I watched him pretty closely in this game and there were a few good things but also plenty to work on as well. He played as an inside mid mostly and when he was there the midfield tended to work better than when he wasn't. When he was not in the midfield he was rested up forward but the ball rarely got forward of centre when he was there. The couple of goals he got were on the run from just inside the 50 rather than from forward craft.

Fletcher does his best work in space but he did not have much of that. The opposition did key to him and shut him down pretty quickly. He got a three 1 - 2 handball and receive back plays which padded his stats but a couple of them he got the ball back in not a particularly good position. His kicking was not as good as I have seen it previously but I have no concerns on that front. It was still pretty decent and I think with more time and targets who are in space it will be significantly better than that. He covers a fair bit of ground at a reasonable pace but he does need to improve his burst running. There is too much one paced cruising around. He needs to work on giving that burst to get to space to receive or to impact a contest. At the moment he runs in traffic too much and hangs back from the contest when he has an opportunity to impact it.

He is not a player that cracks into contests and he does not have a particularly physical style about the way he plays. He tends to hang around as a hand ball receiver in contests mostly and not attack the ball and try and win it. He is too often behind his opponent when he is playing onball and is very often flat footed when he should be moving. He did not position himself as one of the primary tap receivers but given where he was positioned it was probably intended that he would receive that quick handball to allow the ball to be cleared. He does not hunt the ball on the inside. When he does get it his hands are only average as far as quickness goes. Despite not being particularly physical with the ball in dispute he is a willing tackler and he wraps up well. He is not a hard hitter but he is strong enough to stick his tackles and hold the ball up.

I like that he is getting plenty of time on ball at this level although at the next I think he plays much more on the outside where he can use his skills more effectively. He is a balanced runner with the ball in hand and his decision making is good. He moves through traffic nicely and, as he showed yesterday, he can finish nicely from 50 if he gets the chance. In tighter I think he will look much better with the likes of Neale and Lyons shoveling the ball out to him and him then him kicking it quickly forward.

So don't expect him to be an inside mid at the next level but he does have some promise as an outside in type.
Click to expand...
Outstanding. Most observant footy/player review ive ever read. Just, wow!
 
Quigley said:
The scores were relatively close but realistically there was not much positive spin you could take out of the Jets game - draft wise.

The two rucks they played had some nice size, particularly Jensen, and I wouldn't mind seeing more of them. They got some nice clean taps but too often did not direct them well and they were outbodied quite a lot. You can't teach size though and they certainly had that.

The backs I thought were terrible all day and were beaten so easily when the ball went in there. The other lines were not much better although it was hard on the forwards given they had virtually no quality ball all day. There were periods of time when the ball bounced virtually every time and there were a lot of handballs to guys with his opponent sweating on him. Hude was okay up forward and is a bigger bodied medium forward type much like McFadyn. I would suggest he is some chance of being drafted but he looked like the only one for the Lions apart from Fletcher.

On Fletcher I will give a bit more of my extended thoughts. I watched him pretty closely in this game and there were a few good things but also plenty to work on as well. He played as an inside mid mostly and when he was there the midfield tended to work better than when he wasn't. When he was not in the midfield he was rested up forward but the ball rarely got forward of centre when he was there. The couple of goals he got were on the run from just inside the 50 rather than from forward craft.

Fletcher does his best work in space but he did not have much of that. The opposition did key to him and shut him down pretty quickly. He got a three 1 - 2 handball and receive back plays which padded his stats but a couple of them he got the ball back in not a particularly good position. His kicking was not as good as I have seen it previously but I have no concerns on that front. It was still pretty decent and I think with more time and targets who are in space it will be significantly better than that. He covers a fair bit of ground at a reasonable pace but he does need to improve his burst running. There is too much one paced cruising around. He needs to work on giving that burst to get to space to receive or to impact a contest. At the moment he runs in traffic too much and hangs back from the contest when he has an opportunity to impact it.

He is not a player that cracks into contests and he does not have a particularly physical style about the way he plays. He tends to hang around as a hand ball receiver in contests mostly and not attack the ball and try and win it. He is too often behind his opponent when he is playing onball and is very often flat footed when he should be moving. He did not position himself as one of the primary tap receivers but given where he was positioned it was probably intended that he would receive that quick handball to allow the ball to be cleared. He does not hunt the ball on the inside. When he does get it his hands are only average as far as quickness goes. Despite not being particularly physical with the ball in dispute he is a willing tackler and he wraps up well. He is not a hard hitter but he is strong enough to stick his tackles and hold the ball up.

I like that he is getting plenty of time on ball at this level although at the next level I think he plays much more on the outside where he can use his skills more effectively. He is a balanced runner with the ball in hand and his decision making is good. He moves through traffic nicely and, as he showed yesterday, he can finish nicely from 50 if he gets the chance. In tighter I think he will look much better with the likes of Neale and Lyons shoveling the ball out to him and him then kicking it quickly forward.

So don't expect him to be an inside mid at the next level but he does have some promise as an outside in type.
Click to expand...
Hi Quigs, are you doing a mock draft this year?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Required said:
Lions vs Stingrays.

Domestic competition fixtures | PlayHQ


NAB League Boys Saturday Boys U19


Dandenong Stingrays Boys v Brisbane Lions (NAB League) Boys, 2022, R2 - Game Centre | PlayHQ

Game Centre for Dandenong Stingrays Boys v Brisbane Lions (NAB League) Boys in Coates Talent League 2022 season, Round 2.
www.playhq.com www.playhq.com

.
Click to expand...
The new platform is awful to read, can’t even see the side in its entirety (unless I’m doing it wrong).

The old sporting pulse was far superior.
 
Required said:
Selected from outside the squad.. which i actually have no problem with as these boys should have had a chance to show their wares in intra-academy games. Though, boys actually selected in the squad whom have yet to get a game, must be a little bemused?

I wouldn't be surprised if the academy coaches are getting so sensitive and desperate from the wide, constant criticism, they are taking advice from anonymous internet posters (though they may have a heads up who you are.. and I) on footy forums just to hold back a little of that criticism? I don't know how this could deflect for their own ineptitude? This would be reactionary to failure, and should be noted, and seen as such.

How can the head of the academy and head coaches be retained by the Lions after this debacle?;

*Boys doing an entire preseason, then getting cut from the final squad without even playing a single intra-academy game to show what they got?
*Persisting with boys who are failing on field and not giving others an opportunity. (one boy has been played in 4 different positions in 4 games despite failing each time but the last, and how he performed in the last is debatable.)
*Perhaps only 1 boy gets drafted, (and they cant even take credit for that) and so who plays every week would be academic. (teachers should understand this) Why not more rotation?
*The coaches seem to be focusing on winning not talent identification, and therefore failing at both.
*If their interest was to identify talent, why no intra-academy games before cutting the squad?
*18yo Kids already being told they wont be in the academy next year despite the NAB League being u19s!
* Which means what they do in QAFL seniors as an u18 has no consequence!
*Squad members not selected each week are not told they aren't in the team and can go back to club. Only those selected are told! QAFL coaches have had to ring the academy on a Friday to see if a boy is available for club on Saturday!
*Jersey presentation only for the 1st team that was chosen. Other boys left out. Suns did their presentation with entire squad.. on youtube.
*In 2 years, most likely not 1 boy gets drafted by these new academy staff and their academy boss!! (they cant take credit for Jaspa)
*Boys dropping out of the academy totally confused and angry. Their experience being a stressful, disappointing and confusing one, instead of challenging and instructive.
*How many dreams must his group of coaches squash, before the Lions clean house again for the good of the entire AFL? Lions have an obligation to provide draftees from their academy. This group of coaches has failed every year they have been at the academy. Time the Lions employ an academy boss who is young, driven, wants to make something of the academy to further his ambitions in coaching or Administration.

'You pay peanuts you get monkeys'. School teachers thrown into a role that should be occupied by young budding AFL coaches out to prove they can take on a coaching role while receiving guidance on the job by AFL coaching staff, will get one exactly the results we are seeing...Disenchanted talent, cynical observers, no draftees, and failure on field. They are employing staff whose biggest achievement in life will be having coached the Lions academy... instead of a driven young ex AFL player using the academy as a proving ground, a stepping stone to higher coaching achievement.

The academy should not be an end point in someones career, or career highlight. It should be a place for growth, opportunity, be instructive, vibrant, with new ideas, and challenging. The academy right now is stagnant, out of ideas, and reactive to criticism, is failing QLD talent, and the AFL.

Im sure the coaches are literate enough to make excuses for their failures. But the many failures remain, and continue..

.
Click to expand...
Given your mention of school teachers, you're obviously meaning Henriksen. Is a pedigree of coaching Vic Country U16 & U18's not applicable? Or is it Borlace? If you're going to criticise, then perhaps you should spell out exactly your issues as it relates to you and name names. And in what way are you able to criticise i.e. what is your experience in coaching/development?

Given you a fairly recent member here, it begs the question: Are you a parent or family member? There's been plenty of disgruntled parents unhappy with the Academy over the years, sometimes for valid reasons, and sometimes because they just wanted their kid to succeed. We've seen them on this forum over the years.

I would certainly agree that the Academy has underperformed over the years, but how long does the new setup get to prove themselves? Some of the allegations you make above are concerning, particularly those around communication of selection. But I've observed enough of QAFL clubland from the outside to see the amount of chinese whispers, rumour and innuendo that go on, so I'm also interested as to how much of the above you've witnessed.
 
Required said:
Selected from outside the squad.. which i actually have no problem with as these boys should have had a chance to show their wares in intra-academy games. Though, boys actually selected in the squad whom have yet to get a game, must be a little bemused?

I wouldn't be surprised if the academy coaches are getting so sensitive and desperate from the wide, constant criticism, they are taking advice from anonymous internet posters (though they may have a heads up who you are.. and I) on footy forums just to hold back a little of that criticism? I don't know how this could deflect for their own ineptitude? This would be reactionary to failure, and should be noted, and seen as such.

How can the head of the academy and head coaches be retained by the Lions after this debacle?;

*Boys doing an entire preseason, then getting cut from the final squad without even playing a single intra-academy game to show what they got?
*Persisting with boys who are failing on field and not giving others an opportunity. (one boy has been played in 4 different positions in 4 games despite failing each time but the last, and how he performed in the last is debatable.)
*Perhaps only 1 boy gets drafted, (and they cant even take credit for that) and so who plays every week would be academic. (teachers should understand this) Why not more rotation?
*The coaches seem to be focusing on winning not talent identification, and therefore failing at both.
*If their interest was to identify talent, why no intra-academy games before cutting the squad?
*18yo Kids already being told they wont be in the academy next year despite the NAB League being u19s!
* Which means what they do in QAFL seniors as an u18 has no consequence!
*Squad members not selected each week are not told they aren't in the team and can go back to club. Only those selected are told! QAFL coaches have had to ring the academy on a Friday to see if a boy is available for club on Saturday!
*Jersey presentation only for the 1st team that was chosen. Other boys left out. Suns did their presentation with entire squad.. on youtube.
*In 2 years, most likely not 1 boy gets drafted by these new academy staff and their academy boss!! (they cant take credit for Jaspa)
*Boys dropping out of the academy totally confused and angry. Their experience being a stressful, disappointing and confusing one, instead of challenging and instructive.
*How many dreams must his group of coaches squash, before the Lions clean house again for the good of the entire AFL? Lions have an obligation to provide draftees from their academy. This group of coaches has failed every year they have been at the academy. Time the Lions employ an academy boss who is young, driven, wants to make something of the academy to further his ambitions in coaching or Administration.

'You pay peanuts you get monkeys'. School teachers thrown into a role that should be occupied by young budding AFL coaches out to prove they can take on a coaching role while receiving guidance on the job by AFL coaching staff, will get one exactly the results we are seeing...Disenchanted talent, cynical observers, no draftees, and failure on field. They are employing staff whose biggest achievement in life will be having coached the Lions academy... instead of a driven young ex AFL player using the academy as a proving ground, a stepping stone to higher coaching achievement.

The academy should not be an end point in someones career, or career highlight. It should be a place for growth, opportunity, be instructive, vibrant, with new ideas, and challenging. The academy right now is stagnant, out of ideas, and reactive to criticism, is failing QLD talent, and the AFL.

Im sure the coaches are literate enough to make excuses for their failures. But the many failures remain, and continue..

.
Click to expand...
I’d be genuinely surprised if the academy coaches read this forum, or are aware of the criticism here.

Can’t speak for others, but I’m genuinely a nobody, just a random fan. No connection to any academy member or local club.

Riley McMillan was listed as part of the academy at the beginning of the year, so he hasn’t been parachuted in.

I’m keen to read your response to The Flying Belgian.
 
Required said:
I probably shouldnt have singled out school teachers. I'll retract that.

Ive mentioned no names as i dont know who makes choices that are wrong. So the academy as a whole must own it. Naming names is an endless demand that may also lead to naming individual boys that dont deserve to be in this discussion.

An academy should be able to be criticized by people with the Brisbane Lions best interests or even the AFL as a whole, and as they are to provide draftees, for the AFL. A North Melbourne supporter should have as much interest as a Lions supporter, purely if only it involves the supply of talent to the draft.

Im commenting on the academy as a whole, the process, and problems encountered.

The * are my observations. The comments above and below the * is my opinion.

Parents, QAFL club presidents, etc all cant be wrong. Ask around.

The academy should be criticized in the open, not whispered about in private. How can they address concerns and be made to address them, if there is not open discussion, but just kept 'in house'? Im sure they dont like it. Imagine if a political party could keep everything in house? They would if they could. Both are of public interest and should be held to the light.
Click to expand...
I am going to preface this with, i have questioned what metrics the academy are measured on. It's there in black and white in previous posts and i have asked why it hasn't performed.

I will also say footy is an emotional game and people get emotional.

But this post i am replying to is a considerable softening of the previous... vitriol.

You haven't named names but you have named positions and there are names associated with those positions. So if you are so strong in your convictions follow through and dont capitulate at the first challenge. That's a fair call, given your previous posts.

I will just rebut a couple of points, a north melbourne supporter couldn't give a flying f@#$ about our academy. Nor would any other supporter, it's our problem.

I think when you state every parent and qafl club president is critical, i dont think that is the case. Actually i know it's not the case.

Some kids are going to get cut in squads, ive cut kids in squads. The parents of the kids cut are generally not happy, because little Johnny is the next reincarnation of Voss im just not seeing it. Mmm, no.

There are always going to be questionable selections because it is an art not a science and it is opinion of the people in charge. But they are in charge for a reason and to say this is the pinnacle of their aspirations is bs.

I don't think the Academy should be just criticized, i think some constructive discussion to try and pinpoint the issues is valid and healthy. Rants aren't.

Yes some communication could be improved but generally it's not too bad, in my experience. Jersey presentation gripes... meh, honestly that's piffling. If you aren't in the side you don't get a jersey.

So ive been involved with a lot of kids in the academy over the journey and any i know who have had direct contact contact with Henry have been positive in their feedback. So ??

Mind you im not totally defending the academy as i stated previously the results arent there. But we are better off with it, than without it.
 
Required said:
I probably shouldnt have singled out school teachers. I'll retract that.

Ive mentioned no names as i dont know who makes choices that are wrong. So the academy as a whole must own it. Naming names is an endless demand that may also lead to naming individual boys that dont deserve to be in this discussion.

An academy should be able to be criticized by people with the Brisbane Lions best interests or even the AFL as a whole, and as they are to provide draftees, for the AFL. A North Melbourne supporter should have as much interest as a Lions supporter, purely if only it involves the supply of talent to the draft.

Im commenting on the academy as a whole, the process, and problems encountered.

The * are my observations. The comments above and below the * is my opinion.

Parents, QAFL club presidents, etc all cant be wrong. Ask around.

The academy should be criticized in the open, not whispered about in private. How can they address concerns and be made to address them, if there is not open discussion, but just kept 'in house'? Im sure they dont like it. Imagine if a political party could keep everything in house? They would if they could. Both are of public interest and should be held to the light.
Click to expand...

By no means am I defending blindly or suggesting nothing be questioned (and am not sure where I have). But I find a lot of the criticism of the academy comes from disgruntled family members and people involved to some degree with local clubs, so it's hard to pin down where the truth lies. When 95% of the "graduates" of the program don't get drafted there tends to be a bit of negativity, so on that front I think criticism possibly exaggerates any issues. Parents tend to think their child gets overlooked in favour of others and clubs get peeved that the kids that came up as juniors through their system are suddenly taken away for extended periods (and maybe get a bit peeved that any credit for development gets claimed by the Academy (rightly of wrongly)). There also seem to have been a long period of mistrust of the Academy in it's previous configuration (i.e when Luke Curran had the reins) which probably lingers into the current configuration.

But I have no problem discussing any issues. My experience is state your background when discussing. If you're just a regular supporter (like I am), fine. But if your involved with a local club, or your a parent of an Academy kid, then you've got skin in the game and might colour how your feedback is interpreted. That doesn't mean any comments are invalid, but it still informs. Just as my comments are based on observations from the outside and what I hear from parents and club people. But I noticed you kind of dodged that question, but say your criticism are based on observation which leads me to suspect you may be a parent.

Personally, and without a whole heap to base it on other than years of observation from the outside, I think kids in our state are better off (or at least no worse off) playing in the local system against men rather than splitting their time between club and academy.

Again, I'm not trying to willfully dismiss your opinions or observations, just trying to work out where you're coming from.
 
Good post TFB, I have no skin in the academy game apart from being involved at club land. I think it is proven that the academy is not doing anything to improve the chance of qld kids getting drafted. The best kids to come out of our state were never involved in academies eg. Voss, Ackermanis, Reiwoldt, Mal Michael, Ashcroft, Beams and the list goes on. I think let's get these kids back to club land and for a short period of time have them involved in state squads like in the good old days. My personal opinion is that these kids don't need to be involved in footy analytics, over training etc etc so young. It doesn't produce better players. Less is more.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

My grandson plays in a Division 1 Under 14 side and the training that they do is basically the same as the Lions sessions I have seen at Yeronga over multiple seasons.

Of the kids that I have seen over the last few seasons from Under 12 up in the high divisions it is as rare as hens teeth to see a kid that you go wow! there's a future AFL player, some of the kids I have seen who are in the Lions academy you react with an errr what and other's that aren't you shake your head. From my relatively uneducated standpoint there is something wrong with their talent identification process.
 
Academy game live right now. https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...e/news-story/111ab1c646cb98e90f4877f8dff238e8

38 to 4 @end 1st qtr. Dandenong too classy already. Could be closer to 50 as they missed two goals from in front hitting the posts.

No knock on the Lions, they are having a crack. But Dandenong are hot.

46 - 23. Lions getting reward for effort and win 2nd qtr. Dandenong failing often at the final kick before the 50. Lions backs must be working well.

Lions coaches should shout one of the commentators a six-pac for his glowing appraisal of the coaches. And bizzarely, "Many of these (Lions) boys are new to the game".

75 - 54 end 3rd. Lions hit the lead 47 to 46. At one point. Dandenong came back somehow.. looked to have lucked a few goals. Lions again all effort. It looks a lot like a slugger luring a boxer into a brawl. When Dandenong run and gun they look great. But Lions pressure scare them into caution, which suits the Lions fine. When Stingrays pass by hand they do some great work. Seem to get lazy and kick long. Bloody great game though. Lions should be really happy with their efforts.

Final; 92 - 72 Stingrays. Lions coaches no doubt will be happy with that loss. They were competitive right to the end.
 
Last edited:
I will add a couple of things.

I have been critical of the results the academy have generated over the last few years and believe we are wasting our biggest advantage by not investing in it enough and getting it working properly. I do not have any inside information about the academy at all and am judging them purely on a results basis and currently they are failing. Sort out the right structure and get the right people in there. If something is not working change it.

I do think it is probably a bit too early to judge the current group but they have not started well in my eyes. We are very clearly the worst of the academies this year and the players have not shown much in the way of development since I saw them last. Some of the best talent disappearing or not being picked is puzzling and again not a good sign. This group have had to come in and try and turn around a failing system but there is nothing so far to suggest they are doing that. Hopefully we start to see progress as the year goes on and coming into next year we have a academy doing its job.

With that said I do not think we can absolve the QAFL clubs in this mess. They have access to these players much more than the Lions do and the failure to develop quality talent is an indictment on them even more so than the Lions. The Lions program should be polishing and refining but I am not seeing the QAFL getting the guys to that stage. Rather than whinging about the Lions so much they should be having a close look at what they are doing and working out how they can do things better.

On the coaches I really disagree with the idea of throwing in a young ex-player into the head coaching role at the academy. In my opinion that is a recipe for disaster. They are not going to have the planning, coaching or stakeholder management experience the position needs. I think having a couple of keen, high energy ex players in assistant roles would be a great idea for the academy and for them but personally I want a head coach who has been there and done that. On paper the appointments they made last year made a lot of sense.
 
Maybe there should be less focus on producing AFL players and more focus on improving players. How many kids are written off in academies because they don't have perceived AFL qualities? How did the Geelong VFL team filled with non AFL listed players beat our heavily AFL listed team?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

winged1 said:
Well how many did they get drafted last year.
Click to expand...
They got to prelist them. Uwland from memory.

I’m not sure you got the intent of my post.

“They are going better” is an understatement, as I believe they are miles in front at this stage.

Of course I don’t know the inner workings of either academy, but what you can see publicly, and what gets posted on the GC forum, their academy appears to be humming along nicely. Both the Gold Coast section and the Cairns/Nth QLD section.
 
acuguy said:
Maybe there should be less focus on producing AFL players and more focus on improving players. How many kids are written off in academies because they don't have perceived AFL qualities?
Click to expand...

I think this would be an excellent place to start to improve. Grab the best performing kids and try and give them the tools to succeed at the highest level. Not to say that wouldn't apply to some of the academy players, but the Academy (the old version anyway, can't speak for the new) used to say "you don't know what to look for in an AFL player". Meanwhile a bunch of kids got left out. And be on the lookout for the late bloomers.
 
It's been interesting following the discussion re the academy. As mentioned earlier, everyone who posts on this has some sort of skin in the game, but with that in mind I can see some relevant points raised.

There's no doubt the academy can do and needs to do better. We haven't produced any high level draftee out of the academy for a long time now. Looking at the better graduates earlier like Andrews, Hipwood and even Keays, this was early days of the academy and involvement would have been more limited. Not a great endorsement for what's happening at the moment, especially compared to the other 3 northern academies. You can always have a lean year or two without good prospects, but 5 years is a long time.

What puzzles me is that under the broad oversight of David Noble (who repeatedly mentioned the academy as a focus when he first started here) and more recently Danny Daly, as well as people like Henrikson and Littlejohn involved (people who Fagan hand picked for their teaching backgrounds, their own coaching experience and communication skills), how the academy has consistently under-performed. It may be that changes have been made over the past 2 years but there is time lag until results bear fruit. Nevertheless I find it puzzling why the academy stands out like a sore thumb when most other aspects of the football operation do well. Is it funding/resources?
 
Surely the only relevant performance measure for an academy is its success in developing AFL standard players. So is the Suns academy that far ahead of us in that regard, if at all?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom