Opinion AFL Academy rules need to be refined

[RedmanWasHere]

Has our collective heightened awareness of the academies and the tracking of junior prospects somewhat obscured any views on the perceived lack of open season year after year?

Or did the collective whingefest only rear its head when bidding for players was enacted?

 

[botts]

NGA academies are. The northern academies genuinely make sense.

I barrack for the Saints, so I know I'm a little out of whack with my fellow sainters - but I live in Brisbane and been part of the footy community up here on the GC mostly and more recently in Brisbane for the past 10 years and the academies are absolutely neccessary for expanding the game in QLD.

End of the day, once the Lions/Suns start having more than 50% of their lists as home grown (same for Swans/GWS) then it would be time to start pegging them back then - as it means the job is almost done.

They will only make sense when fair price is being paid. The fact that Gold Coast are already shopping their pick four this year because they can match the bids with junk Is the issue.

 

[Keystone agony]

Can we not also have these northern academies where they arent necessarily aligned to any club

 

[Keystone agony]

NGA academies are. The northern academies genuinely make sense.

I barrack for the Saints, so I know I'm a little out of whack with my fellow sainters - but I live in Brisbane and been part of the footy community up here on the GC mostly and more recently in Brisbane for the past 10 years and the academies are absolutely neccessary for expanding the game in QLD.

End of the day, once the Lions/Suns start having more than 50% of their lists as home grown (same for Swans/GWS) then it would be time to start pegging them back then - as it means the job is almost done.

Why 50% ?

 

[bulldogs201616]

They need to pay fair price. That’s what’s wrong with the system. Gold Coast have another three first rounders this year because they can keep moving the pick into next year and match the bids with junk.

You should have to match a bid with a pick in the round the bid came.

 

[VinnieB]

They will only make sense when fair price is being paid. The fact that Gold Coast are already shopping their pick four this year because they can match the bids with junk Is the issue.

There's your chance to nab pick 4

 

[Dogflogger]

NGA academies are. The northern academies genuinely make sense.

I barrack for the Saints, so I know I'm a little out of whack with my fellow sainters - but I live in Brisbane and been part of the footy community up here on the GC mostly and more recently in Brisbane for the past 10 years and the academies are absolutely neccessary for expanding the game in QLD.

End of the day, once the Lions/Suns start having more than 50% of their lists as home grown (same for Swans/GWS) then it would be time to start pegging them back then - as it means the job is almost done.

Wny should a tortured fan of a small club like say St Kilda or North Melbourne care about growing the game in QLD over the fairness of the draft?

 

[botts]

Wny should a tortured fan of a small club like say St Kilda or North Melbourne care about growing the game in QLD over the fairness of the draft?

we are asked to grow the game at our expense. As a business though you can never truely grow if it’s at the expense of your product. This dilutes the over all product. It will end up Like the epl, teams with unfair advantage will just stay at the top for decades. You could argue it’s already happened

 

[Chip Scab1]

Wny should a tortured fan of a small club like say St Kilda or North Melbourne care about growing the game in QLD over the fairness of the draft?

As dog shit as we have been, we're still 4-4 in GFs since St.Kilda last saluted (robbed of 4-5 by umps in '94 too). They'd kill for that record if we're being honest. I'm not sure you can put North and StKilda in the same category.

we are asked to grow the game at our expense. As a business though you can never truely grow if it’s at the expense of your product. This dilutes the over all product. It will end up Like the epl, teams with unfair advantage will just stay at the top for decades. You could argue it’s already happened

Agree with this wholeheartedly, it has already begun.

Geelong, Collingwood, Richmond, Carlton, WCE, Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane (+Essington really).

They are the clubs to have made 'bank'.

 

[botts]

As dog shit as we have been, we're still 4-4 in GFs since St.Kilda last saluted (robbed of 4-5 by umps in '94 too). They'd kill for that record if we're being honest. I'm not sure you can put North and StKilda in the same category.



Agree with this wholeheartedly, it has already begun.

Geelong, Collingwood, Richmond, Carlton, WCE, Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane (+Essington really).

They are the clubs to have made

Sydney play finals almost every year, as have giants as do Brisbane and now Gold Coast site top 4. All due in part of the advantages they have been give through the academy and fs. Sydney drafted nick Blakey who was a north fs, that’s not growing the game. He was always playing footy. Same with Luke Hodges kid

 

[Anythings_sipposible]

The top 10 of the draft should be untouchable. It is where equalisation actually happens, and if it is compromised by father/sons or academy picks it is inevitably going to negatively effect teams that need to draft to get better.

This is particularly true for smaller clubs, as they do not have the same consistent access to free agents and players wanting to be traded in, especially when they are performing badly.

That being said, father/sons picks are part of AFL history, and they do give the game extra character. Similarly, academies are good for the game, particularly if they are bringing kids into elite systems who would not have entered them otherwise.

My proposal to fix F/S and academies would be thus:

1) The first 10 picks cannot be bid on. If you have a f/s or academy player in this range, trade up, or get them later in their career. Some might say that this will mean top line f/s players won't make it to the clubs their father's played for, amd that this will take the magic out of the game. But inreality, those clubs will always have a pull for those kids. Do you really think if father/son wasn't a thing and Daicos was drafted by North in 2021, he wouldn't have been playing for Collingwood by 2023? Horne-Francis forced a trade, and he had nowhere near the same connection. Clubs drafting a f/s will also know this, and will have to factor this into their initial choice to draft them. The same is true for academy picks.

2) Picks 10-20 do not have a discount, and have to be matched with a pick within 5 picks of where the player is bid on. This will stop the double dipping that is ruining the whole NGA/ Academy debacle, and will also make draft night extra fun, particularly if a club has to scramble for a pick.

3) Picks 20-40 remain the same, with a 20% discount. It's players like Gulden, H Andrew, Windhager etc that the academies are trying to capture, not the JUHs and the Ashcrofts of the world. That is, it is the talented but maybe overlooked kids that we want to be encouraging into the system, not the kids that were going to play and excel regardless. Thus, the 20-40 range gets discounts, to encourage this.

4) Picks 40 plus are free. And I mean really free. No point matching, and they don't take up a list spot. This would encourage clubs to really take a punt on some kids, without having to worry too much about their investment. By giving Clubs and recruiters a bit of a licence to get creative, I believe that this could bring some really interesting talent into the pool.

Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk, I'm usually giving it every Friday at the pub to any poor sod who will listen to me after I've had 4-5 pints.

 

[Jack Richards]

By my reckoning that's close to 40% of the top 40 aligned to clubs through Academy/NGA/F/S unless their aligned club chooses not to match a bid.....what a joke.

Probably make the 1st round go to pick 30

 

[Pure_Ownage]

You just ban clubs from trading their top pick and you put in a clause that if they do they are not allowed to match any bids. It's simple but the afl is useless.

 

[botts]

You just ban clubs from trading their top pick and you put in a clause that if they do they are not allowed to match any bids. It's simple but the afl is useless.

the double dipping is the problem

 

[Dogflogger]

As dog shit as we have been, we're still 4-4 in GFs since St.Kilda last saluted (robbed of 4-5 by umps in '94 too). They'd kill for that record if we're being honest. I'm not sure you can put North and StKilda in the same category.



Agree with this wholeheartedly, it has already begun.

Geelong, Collingwood, Richmond, Carlton, WCE, Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane (+Essington really).

They are the clubs to have made

the torture I'm talking about for north fans is the fact that teams in the top 8 are getting better draft hands than the wooden spooners, not calling them a shit team. calling them a smaller vic club that the AFL dont give to shits about.

 

[Chip Scab1]

Sydney play finals almost every year, as have giants as do Brisbane and now Gold Coast site top 4. All due in part of the advantages they have been give through the academy and fs. Sydney drafted nick Blakey who was a north fs, that’s not growing the game. He was always playing footy. Same with Luke Hodges kid

Neck Blakey is exactly the issue. To be fair they are further away from a Premiership than just about anyone, Neck is a curse for Sydney with which I can deal, currently.

the torture I'm talking about for north fans is the fact that teams in the top 8 are getting better draft hands than the wooden spooners, not calling them a shit team. calling them a smaller vic club that the AFL dont give to shits about.

Not arguing, it's the pits. We just need to keep going and keep cleaning house; we'll get there. We were about as far back as you can be!

 

[M Malice]

The top 10 of the draft should be untouchable. It is where equalisation actually happens, and if it is compromised by father/sons or academy picks it is inevitably going to negatively effect teams that need to draft to get better.

This is particularly true for smaller clubs, as they do not have the same consistent access to free agents and players wanting to be traded in, especially when they are performing badly.

That being said, father/sons picks are part of AFL history, and they do give the game extra character. Similarly, academies are good for the game, particularly if they are bringing kids into elite systems who would not have entered them otherwise.

My proposal to fix F/S and academies would be thus:

1) The first 10 picks cannot be bid on. If you have a f/s or academy player in this range, trade up, or get them later in their career. Some might say that this will mean top line f/s players won't make it to the clubs their father's played for, amd that this will take the magic out of the game. But inreality, those clubs will always have a pull for those kids. Do you really think if father/son wasn't a thing and Daicos was drafted by North in 2021, he wouldn't have been playing for Collingwood by 2023? Horne-Francis forced a trade, and he had nowhere near the same connection. Clubs drafting a f/s will also know this, and will have to factor this into their initial choice to draft them. The same is true for academy picks.

2) Picks 10-20 do not have a discount, and have to be matched with a pick within 5 picks of where the player is bid on. This will stop the double dipping that is ruining the whole NGA/ Academy debacle, and will also make draft night extra fun, particularly if a club has to scramble for a pick.

3) Picks 20-40 remain the same, with a 20% discount. It's players like Gulden, H Andrew, Windhager etc that the academies are trying to capture, not the JUHs and the Ashcrofts of the world. That is, it is the talented but maybe overlooked kids that we want to be encouraging into the system, not the kids that were going to play and excel regardless. Thus, the 20-40 range gets discounts, to encourage this.

4) Picks 40 plus are free. And I mean really free. No point matching, and they don't take up a list spot. This would encourage clubs to really take a punt on some kids, without having to worry too much about their investment. By giving Clubs and recruiters a bit of a licence to get creative, I believe that this could bring some really interesting talent into the pool.

Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk, I'm usually giving it every Friday at the pub to any poor sod who will listen to me after I've had 4-5 pints.

Don't mind that for northern academies and NGAs but not father sons, I like the tradition/romance of F/S.

North and Saints x players have just as much opportunity to have coitus and inseminate women as their Magpies/Blues/Hawks etc cohorts.

 

[Anythings_sipposible]

Don't mind that for northern academies and NGAs but not father sons, I like the tradition/romance of F/S.

North and Saints x players have just as much opportunity to have coitus and inseminate women as their Magpies/Blues/Hawks etc cohorts.

They don't though, or at least clubs that finish lower down the ladder traditionally have fewer players who play 100 games, meaning a smaller pool of talent.

But more than this, equalisation shouldn't involve the luck, tradition and romance be damned. Or at least tradition and romance be damned in the top 10, we can feel warm and fuzzy with the rest of the draft.

I'd actually take it one step further and say the AFL should even be going for equality, they should be going for equity.

 

[briztoon]

We do pay.

We gave up our traditional recruitment zones yes?

WCE took Harley Reid at #1 from Carlton's old recruitment zone.

And who do you think earns the bulk of the money that goes into supporting the Coates League?

Is it the VIC clubs who have large fan bases and big corporate pull?

You think GWS or GC are earning the league money to run it?

They get full access to it but they contribute sweet FA to it.

TV rights.

If the old VFL didn't expand nationally, you'd be playing in a 6 team competition and barely be a full time, professional sport.

Your clubs pay **** all towards the development pathways. It doesn't come out of your P&L balance sheets.

Of course GWS and GC are earning the league money, through TV rights, that's why the AFL brought them in, in the first place.

 

[briztoon]

Lets go back to zones and abolish the national draft. For example, give St Kilda rightful access to every kid involved in the Sandringham Dragons program, as they train and develop at RSEA Park.

I am sure absolutely no one would have no problems with that?

Seriously though, supporters from the rugby states need to pull their heads in. You are currently abusing this gravy train and disguising it as "we are bringing more Queenslanders and New South Welshman to the game!".

Cool. You can do that but they don't have to play for your club. If you can't see the damage the academies have and will continue to cause to the integrity of the draft, then there is no hope for you.

Yes, the Suns have never played finals, but they will play finals for the remainder of the decade and beyond if they are able to add three top 15 kids to their list for a handshake and warm can of soft drink.

However, the AFL doesn't care about equality in opportunity, so I guess it won't matter. It's a Michael Mouse competition anyway.

How the **** are northern clubs abusing the gravy train?

We're playing within the rules the AFL set up, because they didn't want to do it themselves. "It" being setting up and paying for elite development pathways up here.

My team, Brisbane hasn't had a top 10 academy kid before this year. We've had two first round academy kids in our history. Explain to me how that's abusing anything.

How is Gold Coast abusing the system? They put more money in to their academy than any other club, because they are sick and tired of Southern clubs raiding all their southern born kids. They have 3 first round picks this year because Port Adelaide raided one of their players, and the Bulldogs traded for their first round pick last year with a future pick, and the other pick is their natural pick.

Why would Northern clubs fund academies if they didn't get access to the players. Right now, academies are increasing the player pool. Sure Southern clubs don't have access to these kids, but what you do have access to is the kids that we would have drafted, if the academy kids didn't exist, or rated as high because of inferior development.

 

[briztoon]

They will only make sense when fair price is being paid. The fact that Gold Coast are already shopping their pick four this year because they can match the bids with junk Is the issue.

Why is Gold Coast shopping their highest pick an issue?

Every club has an equal opportunity to trade for it. More than one team benefits from these trades.

Gold Coast can't match with junk picks any more. The draft points index changes introduced for this year fixed this. Yes they can trade their current pick 5, but they basically need picks 13 & 14 back.

I don't believe you've actually looked at the new draft points index and looked at what's required in a trade for a points upgrade.

Right now, before the trade period and picks have changed clubs, the only club with the picks to trade for Gold Coast's pick 5, is West Coast, and they would be trading their pick 13 (from Hawthorn), their second round pick and their third round pick, and would be getting Gold Coasts third round pick back.

 

[briztoon]

Wny should a tortured fan of a small club like say St Kilda or North Melbourne care about growing the game in QLD over the fairness of the draft?

Does it matter for fans of those clubs any way?

The problem for those clubs isn't the fairness, or otherwise, of the draft. Their problems lay in two areas, the people running those clubs, and the fact they are a small club in a state with 9 other clubs.

 

[briztoon]

the double dipping is the problem

Double dipping is a club trading up, ahead of an academy bid, to get both a highly rated open draft kid and their highly rated academy kid.

Trading back to accrue extra points isn't the same thing.

 

[briztoon]

the torture I'm talking about for north fans is the fact that teams in the top 8 are getting better draft hands than the wooden spooners, not calling them a shit team. calling them a smaller vic club that the AFL dont give to shits about.

North can't say anything, because they did the same thing when they drafted Tarryn Thomas.

 

[Dangerousfield]

we are asked to grow the game at our expense. As a business though you can never truely grow if it’s at the expense of your product. This dilutes the over all product. It will end up Like the epl, teams with unfair advantage will just stay at the top for decades. You could argue it’s already happened

Yep, already happened - Collingwood and Geelong