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

[boncer34]

If it gets done it’ll be via rorting FA compo and giving the bombers band 1 compo for Draper where they otherwise were going to get band 2.

The million bucks you're dropping off to big Sammy's house is already band 1.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

If it gets done it’ll be via rorting FA compo and giving the bombers band 1 compo for Draper where they otherwise were going to get band 2.

Haha not sure that helps though I suppose it's a different convo...

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

They are losing a couple in all likelihood and Annable will wipe out this year and next years firsts they will have to be creative.

It shouldnt matter how creative they are, it should be impossible for them to do both. If there is any loophole that allows it (such as the one Elixuh alluded to) it should be closed. The names they are losing will be for minimal compensation in a forced trade at best (to avoid it being nothing because they are getting Allen and Draper)

 

[WeeBlake]

In order of priority:
1. Fairness, equalisation
2. Many, many other things
3. ‘Romance of father/sons’
4. Growing nsw and qld
5. Juniors being ‘lost’ to AFL

You can fix #4 easily. The AFL ultimately pays for the academies through payments to clubs. Just make it official. They are AFL academies, not club academies. The clubs have no rights to the players.

#5 is such a nothing burger. If no one had ever of Isaac Heeney

5

Isaac Heeney

Age

29

Ht

185cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.2

5star

K

10.4

4star

HB

7.7

5star

M

4.9

5star

T

4.1

5star

CL

2.2

4star

D

14.3

3star

K

8.8

4star

HB

5.5

3star

M

4.8

4star

T

2.5

3star

CL

0.8

3star

D

10.4

3star

K

7.2

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

2.8

3star

T

2.4

4star

CL

0.8

3star

and he was playing NRL or whatever our lives would be just as happy. Anyway he could still get the benefit of an AFL academy, just not a Sydney academy proving unfair, anti-equalisation benefits to Sydney.

#3 is also easily fixed. You can have the romance, you just have to trade up to the pick you need. Why should a club get both their romance and an unfair competitive advantage.

 

[Jirik13]

Picks 1,4 and 5 heading to two finalists in this years draft for basically nothing is just farcical.

Nothing? Point system changed. E.g., bid on Annabel in top 5 will probably wipe out all Lions picks and they will still be in deficit.

Suns had to bring in 2 extra 1st round picks to match Uwland and Patterson.

After points change this year my other suggestions would be:
1) remove 10% discount
2) top 4 no match allowed 1st round
3) top 5-8 max 1 bid match allowed 1st round
4) no finals match as many bid as you want

The same rule for Northern academy, NGA and F/S.

 

[Hasselhough]

Maybe a different sort of advantage would be better than a draft discount, like perhaps some extra money for their footy department or the academy itself.

The advantage you get is access to top end talent without having high picks .

Freo after having top end picks for years are finding out finishing high up the ladder leaves their draft hand looking awful . Their GM even spat the dummy with that rant yesterday.

The exclusive access i the pay off .

Would GC or Brisbane pay more overall into pathway development including academys than WC or freo ?

Is that money also a handout from the afl ?

 

[Scotland]

Why cant they just have the picks used go to the club bidding on the player instead? While it might encourage unfair bidding if the club think the bid is too high then they'll just let bidding club have the player. Having the picks being swallowed means bottom teams bidding on high prospect kids get jipped too. If Tigers bid on Uwland they get extra draft picks to do as they wish.

Gold Coast have pick 6 and two firsts from finalists that are TBC.

Brisbane IIRC have their own first and second and a bunch of thirds.

Under this system if WC bid on Uwland, Patterson, Annable in that order then we would end up with Gold Coast's 3 firsts, Brisbane's first and a bunch of late picks. So if you remove those 3 from the order we'd effectively have 1, 2, 6 and then 4 picks from 11-18 on all remaining non academy/NGA/FS players. That's 7 first rounders, and 6 if you remove our FA pick from the conversation. I'm OK with just this one year only.... but it sounds like a complete rort. Taking out trades from last year and any FA compo Richmond would have pick 2, WC would have pick 1, 6 and 3 more firsts.

 

[Hasselhough]

If it gets done it’ll be via rorting FA compo and giving the bombers band 1 compo for Draper where they otherwise were going to get band 2.

That would be win win for both lions and bombers

Shit for the rest of the clubs

 

[Elixuh]

In order of priority:
1. Fairness, equalisation
2. Many, many other things
3. ‘Romance of father/sons’
4. Growing nsw and qld
5. Juniors being ‘lost’ to AFL

You can fix #4 easily. The AFL ultimately pays for the academies through payments to clubs. Just make it official. They are AFL academies, not club academies. The clubs have no rights to the players.

#5 is such a nothing burger. If no one had ever of Isaac Heeney and he was playing NRL or whatever our lives would be just as happy. Anyway he could still get the benefit of an AFL academy, just not a Sydney academy proving unfair, anti-equalisation benefits to Sydney.

#3 is also easily fixed. You can have the romance, you just have to trade up to the pick you need. Why should a club get both their romance and an unfair competitive advantage.

How do you propose to achieve goal 1? Or you’re just interested in a really specific reality of what fairness and equalisation looks like.

In a season separated by percentage, pretty big leg up for Adelaide to get an additional home game.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

How do you propose to achieve goal 1? Or you’re just interested in a really specific reality of what fairness and equalisation looks like.

In a season separated by percentage, pretty big leg up for Adelaide to get an additional home game.

Yep that is conveniently forgotten, still can't believe they won't address this.

 

[Scotland]

The advantage you get is access to top end talent without having high picks .

I don't know why so many people have an issue understanding this.

This thread is a collection of arguments about everything under the sun except the actual topic which is the system that is in place that prevents the draft from operating as a draft.

 

[bluebaggerjuls]

be interesting to see if that cal article is a complete opinion piece or the afl’s way of putting out feelers on a slightly different proposal.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Yep that is conveniently forgotten, still can't believe they won't address this.

Fair complaint, I am all for the AFL making Vic teams rotate having a game in Northern states each year. Can probably do it using opening round.

Not a discussion for this thread though

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Fair complaint, I am all for the AFL making Vic teams rotate having a game in Northern states each year. Can probably do it using opening round.

Not a discussion for this thread though

They should schedule a derby 1 year in 2 in that round if they are hellbent in keeping it in Adelaide

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I don't know why so many people have an issue understanding this.

This thread is a collection of arguments about everything under the sun except the actual topic which is the system that is in place that prevents the draft from operating as a draft.

The problem comes back to free agency, FA compo, an "open" draft and concession picks being incompatible together without severe protections for the top of the draft. There is basically no points fixing that will fix it without some kind of protections for rebuilding clubs.

 

[WeeBlake]

How do you propose to achieve goal 1? Or you’re just interested in a really specific reality of what fairness and equalisation looks like.

In a season separated by percentage, pretty big leg up for Adelaide to get an additional home game.

This is about the draft, so you achieve 1 by having an uncompromised draft.

Gather round is an unfair advantage to Adelaide and Port, I agree. Happy for it to be canned.

 

[thistimeforsure]

They are losing a couple in all likelihood and Annable will wipe out this year and next years firsts they will have to be creative.

So what , they’ve rebuilt their entire midfield with top 5 picks in 3 yrs without even using 1 top 10 pick and throw in a couple of useful latish 1st types to top it all off

From the top 4

Complete farce

If they had to trade for those picks from 1st they wouldn’t have a decent player left on their list

 

[LukeParkerno1]

So what , they’ve rebuilt their entire midfield with top 5 picks in 3 yrs without even using 1 top 10 pick and throw in a couple of useful latish 1st types to top it all off

From the top 4

Complete farce

If they had to trade for those picks from 1st they wouldn’t have a decent player left on their list

It's literally changing this year, they got lucky with a couple of father sons. So did Collingwood, Geelong, most sides have really, your side got a top 10 NGA.

 

[Elixuh]

This is about the draft, so you achieve 1 by having an uncompromised draft.

Gather round is an unfair advantage to Adelaide and Port, I agree. Happy for it to be canned.

Advantages and disadvantages in the draft balance out other disadvantages and advantages elsewhere in the competition. Treating each separately is a waste of thought.

As has been covered in this thread having 10 teams in one city means equality can’t exist.

 

[Suma Magic]

Just steepen the curve (again) and remove the discount.

Then teams won’t actually be able to match lots of high bids unless they trade quality players out.

 

[Suma Magic]

This is about the draft, so you achieve 1 by having an uncompromised draft.

Gather round is an unfair advantage to Adelaide and Port, I agree. Happy for it to be canned.

No need to can it. Just get crows and port to rotate having 12 home 11 away one year with 11 home 12 away the next year. Not sure why it doesn’t happen already.

 

[thistimeforsure]

It's literally changing this year, they got lucky with a couple of father sons. So did Collingwood, Geelong, most sides have really, your side got a top 10 NGA.

Is it a completion or a casino

Getting lucky should be picking up a gun @ pick 54 not this BS

Liam Henry ? don’t make me laugh with the way that went down

 

[Stamos]

Just steepen the curve (again) and remove the discount.

Then teams won’t actually be able to match lots of high bids unless they trade quality players out.

They've just dramatically changed the DVI.
Why would they change it again without seeing how it plays out in practice?

And the 'discount' is built into the calculations of the DVI. It's not a real discount on an actual value.
People don't seem to realise that.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Is it a completion or a casino

Getting lucky should be picking up a gun @ pick 54 not this BS

Liam Henry ? don’t make me laugh with the way that went down

Whether he was a nitwit off the field is irrelevant you still got access. Every club has benefited from the past systems, North got Luke McDonald as a top 10 among others. Every single club has received a benefit

 

[thistimeforsure]

Whether he was a nitwit off the field is irrelevant you still got access. Every club has benefited from the past systems, North got Luke McDonald as a top 10 among others. Every single club has received a benefit

It not that , SOS put a bid in to buy time for some other trade he was doing otherwise Henry would of been a bust @ pick 20 something not pick 9