News AFL overhauls Academy and FS bid matching, discussing draft lockout

[Lore]

Changes announced at the end of 2024 to come into effect in 2025 are based around a new draft value index (how many points each pick is worth), a reduced discount for clubs matching bids (10%, down from 20%), and as of the 2024 Draft, bids on NGA players can be matched in the first round, rather than being locked out until pick 40.

Below are the two Draft Value Indexes (DVIs), the first was in use up until 2024, and the second is from this year (2025) onwards. I've added an extra column to indicate what pick you would need to match a bid if the bid was matched with only one pick. In 2024 you could match pick 1 with pick 2, but in 2025 you would need pick 1 to match a bid at 1... etc.

Spoiler: 2024 DVI

Round	Pick	Pick value	Bid match requirement	Equivalent pick
Round 1	1	3000	2400	2
Round 1	2	2517	2014	4
Round 1	3	2234	1787	5
Round 1	4	2034	1627	7
Round 1	5	1878	1502	8
Round 1	6	1751	1401	9
Round 1	7	1644	1315	11
Round 1	8	1551	1241	12
Round 1	9	1469	1175	13
Round 1	10	1395	1116	14
Round 1	11	1329	1063	16
Round 1	12	1268	1014	17
Round 1	13	1212	970	18
Round 1	14	1161	929	19
Round 1	15	1112	890	20
Round 1	16	1067	854	21
Round 1	17	1025	820	22
Round 1	18	985	788	23
Round 2	19	948	751	25
Round 2	20	912	715	26
Round 2	21	878	681	27
Round 2	22	845	648	28
Round 2	23	815	618	30
Round 2	24	785	588	31
Round 2	25	756	559	32
Round 2	26	729	532	34
Round 2	27	703	506	36
Round 2	28	677	480	37
Round 2	29	653	456	38
Round 2	30	629	432	39
Round 2	31	606	409	41
Round 2	32	584	387	42
Round 2	33	563	366	43
Round 2	34	542	345	45
Round 2	35	522	325	46
Round 2	36	502	305	47
Round 3	37	483	286	49
Round 3	38	465	268	50
Round 3	39	446	249	51
Round 3	40	429	232	53
Round 3	41	412	215	54
Round 3	42	395	198	55
Round 3	43	378	181	57
Round 3	44	362	165	58
Round 3	45	347	150	59
Round 3	46	331	134	61
Round 3	47	316	119	62
Round 3	48	302	105	63
Round 3	49	287	90	65
Round 3	50	273	76	66
Round 3	51	259	62	67
Round 3	52	246	49	69
Round 3	53	233	36	70
Round 3	54	220	23	71
Round 3	55	207	10	72
Round 3	56	194	nil	any
Round 4	57	182
Round 4	58	170
Round 4	59	158
Round 4	60	146
Round 4	61	135
Round 4	62	123
Round 4	63	112
Round 4	64	101
Round 4	65	90
Round 4	66	80
Round 4	67	69
Round 4	68	59
Round 4	69	49
Round 4	70	39
Round 4	71	29
Round 4	72	19
Round 4	73	9

Spoiler: 2025 and beyond DVI

Round	Pick	Pick value	Bid match requirement	Equivalent pick
Round 1	1	3000	2700	1
Round 1	2	2481	2233	2
Round 1	3	2178	1960	4
Round 1	4	1962	1766	5
Round 1	5	1795	1616	6
Round 1	6	1659	1493	7
Round 1	7	1543	1389	8
Round 1	8	1443	1299	9
Round 1	9	1355	1220	10
Round 1	10	1276	1148	11
Round 1	11	1205	1085	12
Round 1	12	1140	1026	13
Round 1	13	1080	972	15
Round 1	14	1024	922	16
Round 1	15	973	876	17
Round 1	16	924	832	18
Round 1	17	879	791	19
Round 1	18	836	752	20
Round 2	19	796	712	21
Round 2	20	757	673	22
Round 2	21	721	637	23
Round 2	22	686	602	24
Round 2	23	653	569	25
Round 2	24	621	537	26
Round 2	25	590	506	27
Round 2	26	561	477	28
Round 2	27	533	449	30
Round 2	28	505	421	31
Round 2	29	479	395	32
Round 2	30	454	370	33
Round 2	31	429	345	34
Round 2	32	405	321	35
Round 2	33	382	298	36
Round 2	34	360	276	38
Round 2	35	338	254	39
Round 2	36	317	233	40
Round 3	37	297	nil	any
Round 3	38	277
Round 3	39	257
Round 3	40	238
Round 3	41	220
Round 3	42	202
Round 3	43	184
Round 3	44	167
Round 3	45	150
Round 3	46	134
Round 3	47	118
Round 3	48	102
Round 3	49	86
Round 3	50	71
Round 3	51	57
Round 3	52	42
Round 3	53	28
Round 3	54	14
Round 3	55	0
Round 3	56	0

Clubs have already been limited to one pick in the national draft for each available spot on the senior list for the last few years. The minimum open list spots prior to the draft is 3, in order to take a minimum of 3 picks in the national draft (including rookie upgrades).

With the new DVI, picks in the second and third round are significantly devalued, and fourth round picks have no value at all. Grand Final teams' third round picks also have no value under the new DVI. This means that trading in enough points to match a high bid is far more difficult from 2025 onwards.

Notably, in 2025 you cannot match Pick 1 with your natural draft hand if you finish outside the bottom 5. The club that starts with picks 5, 23 and 41 will not have enough points to match Pick 1 without trading for more picks, while the premiers' natural draft hand is now insufficient to match a bid above 10th.


As of Monday 18th of August 2025, the AFL is also floating the possibility of a draft lockout affecting the first 5 or 10 picks, or potentially the whole first round.

Spoiler: Twomey on Gettable (transcript is voice recognition software from the Podcasts app)

“Well, I spoke to several clubs who are a part of the AFL's football managers meeting on Monday. And they all left with the view that the league very much has significant change on its mind with regards to the bidding system as part of that, of course, the father-son and academy system. So while clubs in some quarters are pushing for this, we know St Kilda, we know Geelong have raised this.

The majority are fearful that the AFL is going to be bringing in a draft lockout, whether it's the first five picks, first 10 picks or the first round, whether it's a protected zone, the bids can't be matched on those father-sons, academy and NGA players. And the feeling that the clubs took from Monday's meeting as well is that the league is keen to get the ball rolling on this pretty soon, potentially even as soon as next year. So I think there's gonna be some significant backlash to this, this potential draft lockout.

And clubs will rally against that. So let's look at a couple that will. I mean, we just spoke about Cody Walker in recent weeks and how good he's been[…]”

From Gettable: Father-son ‘lockout’ fear, Don to depart, big play for Saint, Harley call close?, 20 Aug 2025

This material may be protected by copyright.

 

[Miller1971]

No club stays top 4 forever.

Geelong have been Top 4 in 15 of the last 19 seasons.

They don't do this via rorts in the draft or Father/sons (anymore)

They do this as the only Victorian club with a genuine home deck advantage against both local oppo and interstate oppo.

they do it via salary cap rorting and probably most importantly, they do it via success breeding interest in being part of more success - which really isn't a rort at all!

 

[HBFlanker]

Clubs like WCE would argue that is unfair to them as Bris is giving them pick 2.

I'd personally get rid of free agency. We can't copy what other sports do because other sports don't have half the competitions teams in one city.

They would get pick 2 compo if he went to any club though?

 

[Elixuh]

They would get pick 2 compo if he went to any club though?

Does any club want him and are willing to pay band 1 compo?

 

[mpal6]

Clubs like WCE would argue that is unfair to them as Bris is giving them pick 2.

I'd personally get rid of free agency. We can't copy what other sports do because other sports don't have half the competitions teams in one city.

I'm happy to keep free agency but will get rid of priority picks. Instead of giving picks and hoping these bottom clubs will get it right during drafting, I'd give them a bigger salary cap boost.

If TDK is going to St.Kilda for 1.7M over 8 years, guess what Carlton - you get $1.7M as a add-on boost in your cap ! If West Coast is losing Oscar Allen for 6 years at say a $1M - West Coast gets that $1M as add-on boost in their cap !

Go for your life and attract premium talent as part of your additional cap boost now - players get bigger salary so they'll be happy. Clubs get top line high profile players due to their cap boost so the rebuild is suddenly fast tracked. Happy days and win win for everyone.

We have levelled the playing field so top clubs are suddenly struggling to compete with these bottom half ladder who all have bigger cap for losing their premium players.

 

[HBFlanker]

Does any club want him and are willing to pay band 1 compo?

Hawthorn were.

Thats not the point though. Free agents going from the worst team arguably in history to the top team, whilst captain, isnt how this should work.

Make it top 4 cant bring in a free agent for that year, and then make the compo picks start at pick 20, so that the owning club are better off matching the pick and forcing a trade. It also protects the first round which is what we all want in the draft.

 

[Elixuh]

Hawthorn were.

Thats not the point though. Free agents going from the worst team arguably in history to the top team, whilst captain, isnt how this should work.

Make it top 4 cant bring in a free agent for that year, and then make the compo picks start at pick 20, so that the owning club are better off matching the pick and forcing a trade. It also protects the first round which is what we all want in the draft.

I suspect the AFL don't mind the rule as is. They can give the bad teams quasi priority picks with limited accountability and the talent is going to the teams competing for flags which is the primary product.

 

[Tom14]

Simple solution to the Free agency circus at the moment.

If you finish top 4 you can't bring in a free agent that year.

I cannot believe this hasn't been introduced yet.

Why would the players agree to a rule that limits the market for their free agency services by 4 teams, thus potentially depressing contract value?

Free agency is something that the players bargained for and got, it is in the CBA. It's not something the AFL can unilaterally change!

 

[Duckimus Prime]

they do it via salary cap rorting and probably most importantly, they do it via success breeding interest in being part of more success - which really isn't a rort at all!

Geelong's Success was built on Father-Son rorting. Far more aggregious than anything Brisbane is currently doing. Before that, they hadn't won a flag in 44 years.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Why would the players agree to a rule that limits the market for their free agency services by 4 teams, thus potentially depressing contract value?

Free agency is something that the players bargained for and got, it is in the CBA. It's not something the AFL can unilaterally change!

Bargained for with the argument that Free Agency will allow fringe players to move from the top teams to lower ones for more opportunity, thus helping to equalise the competition.

Has this actually happened at all?

Of course its completely busted by the salary cap floor, which prevents teams at the bottom from being able to bank more money to be able to buy players out of the top sides.

 

[HBFlanker]

Why would the players agree to a rule that limits the market for their free agency services by 4 teams, thus potentially depressing contract value?

Free agency is something that the players bargained for and got, it is in the CBA. It's not something the AFL can unilaterally change!

Its about keeping a level playing field.

The players have far too much power at the moment. Clubs are getting stitched up apart from a handful at the top.

There needs to be a middle ground reached.

 

[Tom14]

Bargained for with the argument that Free Agency will allow fringe players to move from the top teams to lower ones for more opportunity, thus helping to equalise the competition.

Has this actually happened at all?

Of course its completely busted by the salary cap floor, which prevents teams at the bottom from being able to bank more money to be able to buy players out of the top sides.

That argument was always stupid though, just something useful for the AFL to say while players got a major win to their freedom of movement and AFL media got more content.

I've always been of the view that free agency is too late in a players career to do anything other than advantage the best teams. You aren't moving to West Coast if you are 26/27 and haven't had any success in your career.

Go to mandatory draft contracts of 3-4 years (Clubs won't want to guarantee 4 years for players outside the first round though) and then have free agency early when a player is 23/24. Will give more of an opportunity to throw money at players and get them to buy into a longer build.

 

[Tom14]

Its about keeping a level playing field.

The players have far too much power at the moment. Clubs are getting stitched up apart from a handful at the top.

There needs to be a middle ground reached.

That's a nice thought.

But why should the players association agree to it though? Free agency is something they were bargaining to get for a really long time.

They don't make decisions with the best interests of competitive balance in mind, they should make decisions based upon what is best for their members.

 

[Choogler]

The pattern longer term doesn’t suggest that at all.

Prior to Daicos and Darcy the father sons weren’t that great in prior years but of course you ignore that

You also seem to be misunderstanding my point regarding Daicos. The Pies finished third last that year. They traded away said pick knowing they had Daicos. But if father son didn’t exist they still would have got Callaghan or JHF, so it’s a rubbish example of the rich getting richer.

What you failed to mention was that in addition to getting Daicos, the Pies trading away that Pick gained them an advantage elsewhere either in earlier, current or later drafts. It may have been players, or picks but a club doesn't trade away a first rounder for no benefit,

It is basically double dipping and is why the starting point for any bid matching must be changed to a pick in the round a bid comes. First round bid, first round pick (plus points) required to match

advocating the bottom 4 teams just continually get preference over a team that has a bad year is even more rubbish.

So a team like North gets all pick preference for being shockingly run whilst a team like Richmond has to wait multiple years before getting first access? What kind of BS is that?

I'm an advocate for FS, Northern academies and NGA Academies as long as full price is paid (no discounts), and matching bids starts with a pick in the round in which the bid comes. Having exclusive access is the discount. It seems a very straight forward and easy fix.

 

[HBFlanker]

That's a nice thought.

But why should the players association agree to it though? Free agency is something they were bargaining to get for a really long time.

They don't make decisions with the best interests of competitive balance in mind, they should make decisions based upon what is best for their members.

Im not really concerned with the players association, and neither should the league be.

They have shown significant incompetency when it comes to the massive concussion issues at the moment so until they offer any value they are the least important stakeholder.

They got their free agency. It's just broken and needs to be fixed.

 

[Choogler]

You do realise that West Coast entered into a league that was established by St Kilda and one of the ongoing obligations of the leagues is to protect the interests of its existing clubs?

Be grateful that St Kilda let you into the league and be allowed to dominate a larger population.

"Let us into the league" Oh my, my, my! You really don't have any effin' idea do you. Read this and then tell me again how thankful WC & BB should be that we were "let into the league".

As for "the ongoing obligations of the leagues is to protect the interests of its existing clubs?", tell that to Fitzroy.. they willingly sacrificed Fitzroy by refusing to provide "prop-up" funding and yet here we are almost 3 decades later and the AFL continues to prop-up 4 Melbourne based clubs... WB, StK, NM and Melbourne. Why, what has made them such protected species that the AFL refuses to allow them to die a natural death like Fitzroy? The "ongoing obligations" seem to have been highly selective in their application.

Saving football: New documents reveal how close the VFL came to shutting down

In 1986, the Victorian Football League came perilously close to being shut down. Thirty years on, never before seen documents reveal how close the end nearly came.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Choogler]

Without the expansion of the comp nationally and WCE of the world the VFL would have been bankrupt a long long time ago. You’re welcome. Now you don’t have to tin rattle and bake sale, as much.

The self-entitlement of the Vics is palpable.

 

[banzai]

Simple solution to the Free agency circus at the moment.

If you finish top 4 you can't bring in a free agent that year.

I cannot believe this hasn't been introduced yet.

The games about premierships though, not finishing top 4, why punish teams close to a flag that dont win it?

Just get rid of compo, then the bottom teams should always have enough money to match the bids from the very top teams and force a trade.

 

[banzai]

 

[Supersuns]

Complete overcorrection from the AFL. Just drop the discount and make a pick inside 10 of the bids required. Everyone can agree that's fair.

 

[banzai]

Complete overcorrection from the AFL. Just drop the discount and make a pick inside 10 of the bids required. Everyone can agree that's fair.

So you can match with just one pick inside 10? Thats still a massive discount. Should be 1 inside 10 and another inside 20 of where the bid is placed.

 

[Lach72]

Yeah the AFL can go **** themselves in the arse.

30 years and we’ve never benefited from Father son and nowhere going to **** us and we’ll lose access to Robinson. **** off

 

[Supersuns]

So you can match with just one pick inside 10? Thats still a massive discount. Should be 1 inside 10 and another inside 20 of where the bid is placed.

No you must have at least 1 pick within 10 of the bid, plus the rest of the points. Needs to be a fair price paid.

 

[Elixuh]

Yeah the AFL can go **** themselves in the arse.

30 years and we’ve never benefited from Father son and nowhere going to ** us and we’ll lose access to Robinson. ** off

Wot?

Your club is one of the three who have principally been campaigning for this.

 

[Lach72]

Wot?

Your club is one of the three who have principally been campaigning for this.

Simon Garlick is a moron

 

[banzai]

Yeah the AFL can go **** themselves in the arse.

30 years and we’ve never benefited from Father son and nowhere going to ** us and we’ll lose access to Robinson. ** off

Its said that st Kilda, Freo and Geelong have been the teams pushing hardest for these changes.