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

[Duckimus Prime]

Honestly it's not hard you have 3 inequalities in the NGA, academy and father son. All you need to do is FIX the index and make clubs pay what is 'market value'. That is it, none of this 4 picks equal 1 top 5 rubbish. The idea of the maximum 2 picks for a first round talent is good. It means on basic terms you need a similar deal to what Carlton gave WCE for a top 3 pick last season.

Its actually the worst idea they've had. Its ok if there is just one NGA/Academy/F&S kid in the draft. But it becomes extremely expensive if there are more Academy kids in the draft. Why should matching a pick 5 bid be more expensive in one year than another just because multiple teams have a player?

When you can use 3 or 4 second and third round picks, it keeps the price fairer because a club has more options to trade. And the matching resources aren't so restricted because there are also two other clubs trying to gather them.

 

[Stamos]

You can because that's what the market sets as fair, and frankly it was unders from WCE so we are giving the matching clubs a benefit there.

This is not hard

1. DVI to increase 50% for top 10 picks
2. You can only use list positions for matching, that's it none of this rorting of opening 10 list spots when you have 3 spare spots. You want 5 picks, you get rid of two more players.

By doing no1 you force clubs to pay close to market value anyway. It's fair

It was 1 specific trade, not a market set for every year.

You're not opening more list spots.
The number of open list spots (League wide) is set before the draft. But after that, draft picks are tradable assets. Why would anyone want a limit on that?

I think if the 2025 DVI and rules had been in place for the last decade, nobody would be complaining now, even if it's not perfect.

 

[Stamos]

No one is putting restrictions on future picks, but in the current draft you can ONLY play with the list positions you have free. That is it. So if you have 5, you can play with 5 picks, the other picks become void

Why?

Why should there be restrictions on trading current year picks once they have been set, but not futures?
It should be liquid, to allow trades for clubs to be able to get what they want.
Nobody is being forced to do an unfair trade.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Its actually the worst idea they've had. Its ok if there is just one NGA/Academy/F&S kid in the draft. But it becomes extremely expensive if there are more Academy kids in the draft. Why should matching a pick 5 bid be more expensive in one year than another just because multiple teams have a player?

When you can use 3 or 4 second and third round picks, it keeps the price fairer because a club has more options to trade. And the matching resources aren't so restricted because there are also two other clubs trying to gather them.

That was a rort, you are asking to use MORE list spots than you have. Sorry but no. You have 3 empy spots or whatever it is, that's what you have to play with, you can trade futures to get higher but you can't use more list spots than you have open. That's the biggest rort out of everything, and it's very easy to close. At 7pm on draft night every club locks in the exactly amount of list spots you have, simple and easy.

Instead we have Brisbane (and other clubs yes mine do it and I hate it) matching with 5 list spots when 3 are open, and I know we do it, it's a complte and utter rort.

Just increase the top 10's by 50% on the DVI and clubs will be paying what is market value anyway.

 

[go_the_dockers]

They’ve made such a hash of it with exceptions everywhere, WA clubs paying the WAFC to support and developers players in WA and getting no benefit.

I actually wonder whether an actual zone for each club based on participation and population that can then be developed by each club would be better.

The AFL can adjust it as population etc changes

1 pre-listed pick per year coming from academy and father sons, and it can be rolled over if you don’t have anyone suitable.

I think if we moved to the NRL model, no draft, full free agency I think everything would be a more even comp.

NSW and QLD have enough local players, I don't think it would hurt them. The only clubs that would hurt are the small vic clubs.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Why?

Why should there be restrictions on trading current year picks once they have been set, but not futures?
It should be liquid, to allow trades for clubs to be able to get what they want.
Nobody is being forced to do an unfair trade.

And no one should be getting a top 5 player for 5c in the dollar which is what clubs are right now, so the current situation does not work.

Just increase the DVI, and limit the list spots to exact list spots you can trade futures and what not but when you get to draft day you have to have the list positions to match with those picks.

 

[Stamos]

And no one should be getting a top 5 player for 5c in the dollar which is what clubs are right now, so the current situation does not work.

Previously sure, but not with the changes for 2025.
Right now clubs have to pay a much fairer price.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

That was a rort, you are asking to use MORE list spots than you have. Sorry but no. You have 3 empy spots or whatever it is, that's what you have to play with, you can trade futures to get higher but you can't use more list spots than you have open. That's the biggest rort out of everything, and it's very easy to close. At 7pm on draft night every club locks in the exactly amount of list spots you have, simple and easy.

Instead we have Brisbane (and other clubs yes mine do it and I hate it) matching with 5 list spots when 3 are open, and I know we do it, it's a complte and utter rort.

Just increase the top 10's by 50% on the DVI and clubs will be paying what is market value anyway.

Because matching is based on point value, and you can't actually trade around point values separately from picks themselves.

Clubs are never matching with list spots. You're making up your own shitty little addition here.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Previously sure, but not with the changes for 2025.
Right now clubs have to pay a much fairer price.

It's nowhere near enough, it's not close to market value, oh great you and we are paying 20c in the dollar now how about we go to at least half price or 3/4, that's not asking a lot

 

[Elixuh]

to be fair, the damage has been done. it's got nothing to do with Brisbane specifically. it's Brisbane, Pies and Dogs. 3 teams that would be just average teams without the f/s rule. Not their fault but the damage has been done, unless other teams are going to be given multiple top 5 picks in the next 10 years of drafts to make up for the inequality then the competition will continue to be unfair until the likes of Ashcroft x 2, Daicos x 2, Sam Darcy and Croft etc. retire.

Don’t forget Geelong. They have benefited from FS the most of any team

 

[danster168]

Don’t forget Geelong. They have benefited from FS the most of any team

yes, Geelong over a long period of time. Asterisks on all of theirs. What was it Hawkins for pick 40+? Throw in your Ablett's, Scarlett's and a whole bunch of others

 

[Elixuh]

yes, Geelong over a long period of time. Asterisks on all of theirs. What was it Hawkins for pick 40+? Throw in your Ablett's, Scarlett's and a whole bunch of others

Sickening isn’t it Danny. We got one back for the competition on Saturday.

 

[Jirik13]

Yeah, past system was a crap and some teams benefited from it.

I suggest to focus on this year. New point system is way fairer. Lions matching Annable bid will wipe out all their picks and still not enough points right now. Suns accumulated 3 first round picks. These will only cover Uwland and Patterson bids.

Next year will be even more fairer if what Twomey says is true (like only 2 picks to use for top picks and more points needed for top bids). It should be very difficult for top teams to match top picks (rightly so).

Only couple more days to know details.

 

[Vindicater]

My question under the new rules starting next year is if they will take out the abity to go into deficit.

So let's say Carlton need picks 6 and 12 to match a bid on Walker next year but they only have pick 6 and 18. Are they able to use those and go into deficit for the following year?

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

My question under the new rules starting next year is if they will take out the abity to go into deficit.

So let's say Carlton need picks 6 and 12 to match a bid on Walker next year but they only have pick 6 and 18. Are they able to use those and go into deficit for the following year?

One would think so, but knowing the AFL they'll have removed that too like absolute clowns.

 

[Sonny Hayes]

Yeah, past system was a crap and some teams benefited from it.

I suggest to focus on this year. New point system is way fairer. Lions matching Annable bid will wipe out all their picks and still not enough points right now. Suns accumulated 3 first round picks. These will only cover Uwland and Patterson bids.

Next year will be even more fairer if what Twomey says is true (like only 2 picks to use for top picks and more points needed for top bids). It should be very difficult for top teams to match top picks (rightly so).

Only couple more days to know details.

I would argue any system that allows that back to back premiers to have exclusive access to one of the best kids in the draft is still just objectively unfair

 

[Elixuh]

I would argue any system that allows that back to back premiers to have exclusive access to one of the best kids in the draft is still just objectively unfair

Is it fair for the 2nd ranked side? 7th? 15th?

 

[Sonny Hayes]

Is it fair for the 2nd ranked side? 7th? 15th?

No, I think it was wrong in general. I do think this is a great way to highlight how wrong the system still would be and simply making clubs ‘pay more’ is not the solution some think it is.

 

[Elixuh]

No, I think it was wrong in general. I do think this is a great way to highlight how wrong the system still would be and simply making clubs ‘pay more’ is not the solution some think it is.

Not really. It’s the same as if a low ranked side is able to double dip at the top end of the draft.

 

[mpal6]

Plus you cannot 'live trade' more list selections, I mean of all the rorts this has been the laughable worst one. So we have 3 list spots but somehow at 7.01pm on draft night we have 8 list spots? How in the blue moon is that allowed. Jus no, you have 3, that's it!

Live trade is what makes it an attractive commodity from media point of view. You remove all these elements and draft will be done in 15 mins like it happened in AFLW.

Fairness advocates would be pleased with that but AFL still needs to run a business and sell this as a commodity. I don't see them getting rid of it anyime soon considering they've opened 2 years worth picks for future trade.

 

[Jirik13]

I would argue any system that allows that back to back premiers to have exclusive access to one of the best kids in the draft is still just objectively unfair

I have always suggested top 4 no bid match allowed in first round.

 

[Bostonian]

I have always suggested top 4 no bid match allowed in first round.

Of course a club with an academy that gets topped up each year with a large influx of new players would say that.

 

[Jirik13]

Of course a club with an academy that gets topped up each year with a large influx of new players would say that.

There was actually limit on academy bid matches in the first round until this year based on ladder position. If I remember correctly, 1-4 were allowed max 1 match, 5-8 max 2 matches, 9-18 no limit.

I suspect AFL removed it because they unified rules for academies, F/S and NGA and F/S clubs did not like it.

Start collecting first round picks for your F/S 2026 onwards

 

[Bostonian]

There was actually limit on academy matches in the first round until this year based on ladder position. If I remember correctly, 1-4 were allowed max 1 match, 5-8 max 2 matches, 9-18 no limit.

I suspect AFL removed it because they unified rules for academies, F/S and NGA and F/S clubs did not like it.

Start collecting first round picks for your F/Sv 2026 onwards

Statistical probabilities obviously too much for you to grasp the concept of.

 

[Jirik13]

Statistical probabilities obviously too much for you to grasp the concept of.

Not sure what you're talking about but that's all good.

But one thing looks to be certain. It will be very difficult for top teams to match academy, F/S, NGA bids on top 5 picks from 2026. Rightly so, IMO.