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

[Maybe Tomorrow]

They tried that before it was a catastrophic failure. If you remove some of the Vic Biases in the game all for these discounts etc going. Start with the home grand final for starters.

It’s the curve that’s the issue not the discounts.

The discounts make no sense, having access to the player is enough imo.

 

[Sonny Hayes]

They tried that before it was a catastrophic failure. If you remove some of the Vic Biases in the game all for these discounts etc going. Start with the home grand final for starters.

It’s the curve that’s the issue not the discounts.

The grand final should be neutral I agree, but it’s such a silly comparison.

It still doesn’t show why you should be getting discounts on players you have sole access to, that’s is the reward. Choose to pay it or let them go in the open draft.

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

Perhaps. But the AFL has already said it won't be bringing in any changes to the 2024 draft cause of future pick trades already being done. No need for Carlton to worry/fret about the Campo twins.

This is true, they can't change things for 2024 as clubs have traded assuming the current system is in place.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I don't understand where you are coming from...what are the bias and remove everything else you are talking about?

FA's should be a seperate topic altogether!

Discounts and the curve go hand in hand...give me a valid reason why a club should receive a discount for an NGA/Acad/FS pick?

There is no 100% fair to all clubs because the minute a club is slightly impacted, they cry unfair.

What biases how about every player being drawn to Victoria. Northern states deal with vultures from other clubs way more than a Victorian side.

All for a reduction in the discount but gradual and in line with percentages drafted from those states. It’s not at a stage right now to reduce it to 0, somewhere in the 10-12% is about right.

The curve is the issue, top 10 picks should be worth double that’s the issue not the discount applied. The 9 pick idea is fantastic.

Compensation should go for FA none of this farce that North did we all know why you did it don’t pretend it was any other reason

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The grand final should be neutral I agree, but it’s such a silly comparison.

It still doesn’t show why you should be getting discounts on players you have sole access to, that’s is the reward. Choose to pay it or let them go in the open draft.

When the amount drafted from these states is higher all for it. The discount is to bridge the gap between local and Vic/WA/SA players that’s it

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The discounts make no sense, having access to the player is enough imo.

Of course after GC did the system right. There should be a happy middle ground with all this. Go to 10% then let’s re evaluate in 3-4 years. The amount drafted in northern states has to increase

 

[Sonny Hayes]

Of course after GC did the system right. There should be a happy middle ground with all this. Go to 10% then let’s re evaluate in 3-4 years. The amount drafted in northern states has to increase

why does it? What are you even basing that off? Why does the amount have to increase before removing the discount. It’s already a huge leg up allowing clubs priority access.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

why does it? What are you even basing that off?

There’s the Vic Bias right there Northern states lose players a lot- local players help prevent this to a degree. Even Sydney do we lost Dawson to this and we are probably the best one.

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

Of course after GC did the system right. There should be a happy middle ground with all this. Go to 10% then let’s re evaluate in 3-4 years. The amount drafted in northern states has to increase

The Suns have plenty more academy players on the way. Nothing to do with club ties here, if I was trying to be biased towards them I'd say keep the discount.

The fact that GC can take Walter or Collingwood can get Daicos is enough of a benefit without a discount on the points system.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

This is true, they can't change things for 2024 as clubs have traded assuming the current system is in place.

Exactly. Be interesting to see if what happens to future pick trading next trade and draft period, knowing the changes coming in 2025.

 

[Sonny Hayes]

There’s the Vic Bias right there Northern states lose players a lot- local players help prevent this to a degree. Even Sydney do we lost Dawson to this and we are probably the best one.

Sydney don’t lose many, vic clubs lose them at times elsewhere. You can keep the academy and you can keep the players, just pay for them lmfao.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Sydney don’t lose many, vic clubs lose them at times elsewhere. You can keep the academy and you can keep the players, just pay for them lmfao.

Reduce it to half that’s more than fair. Fix the curve that’s where the issue is. If it’s a first round match you have to use a first round pick

 

[sr36]

Reduce it to half that’s more than fair. Fix the curve that’s where the issue is. If it’s a first round match you have to use a first round pick

This is how far out of whack it is:

Gold Coast essentially traded Pick 4 for: Pick 3, Pick 8, Pick 15 and two future firsts.

It's that far out of whack that I'd do both - first round matching with first round picks and no discount.

 

[JasRulz63]

I'm not talking about the years prior, I'm talking about the last few years. You've had 3 elite youngsters for free. You would've known 3 years ago that you had multiple midfielders come in, so that helps your list strategy. Massively kissed and a massive asterisk on future results.

The nature of how imbalanced the AFL is leads to a massive asterisk placed on most results.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

This is how far out of whack it is:

Gold Coast essentially traded Pick 4 for: Pick 3, Pick 8, Pick 15 and two future firsts.

It's that far out of whack that I'd do both.

Yep it’s why the discounts get all the blame and not against a reduction whatever in line with percentages but they could fix 90% of it in one off season without even changing discounts. Top 10 picks should be double and top 5 should be triple what they are worth.

 

[sr36]

The nature of how imbalanced the AFL is leads to a massive asterisk placed on most results.

It's one of the most even sporting comps in the world.

 

[Lore]

Imo, match with one pick, which must be at least 70% of the value required.

Any remainder still owing is held as a deficit and the club’s future pick in the same round is devalued accordingly.

If they don’t have it then their next best pick is devalued live during the draft when it is their turn to pick — so can’t devalue it and then trade in ahead of it.

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

Interesting what the goal is with making it tougher to take academy players?

Teams will always be able to match 1 or 2 players each year. If the rules were tougher in 2023 the Suns would miss on Will Graham and maybe Rogers. They would have found a way to get Walter and Read, and possibly Rogers.

The Jed Walter/Nick Daicos types will NEVER make it to the open draft, unless academy/FS matching is scraped completely. Which it won't be, anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.

So is the system being changed to stop a northern club matching a 3rd/4th player in a given year?

 

[danster168]

Imo, match with one pick, which must be at least 70% of the value required.

Any remainder still owing is held as a deficit and the club’s future pick in the same round is devalued accordingly.

If they don’t have it then their next best pick is devalued live during the draft when it is their turn to pick — so can’t devalue it and then trade in ahead of it.

I think everything is the opposite. Why do you get a discount for getting gifted talent? If you want access to elite talent you should have to pay like 20-30% more for the privilege of having access to someone you shouldn't have access to. I've never understood the discount.

 

[Fluro Boots]

There’s lot of ways it could be tweaked. maybe even 20% discount for first player in each round but no discounts for subsequent players in that round

 

[TheBoss]

Just get rid of the discount and leave everything else the same. The discount problem is compounded by other clubs paying overs (in points value) to move up the draft board.

The Suns getting 4 kids in the first round is an anomaly, changing the rules because of it would be an unnecessary over correction. Let's be real, if the other 17 clubs had a genuine issue with the Suns getting these picks then they would not have traded with the Suns to give them the points they required. Talk about being a bunch of sore losers!

It is also laughable that Collingwood seems to be having the loudest whinge. Let's ignore that all three of their current All Australian players were father-son picks. They also did not call for an overhaul of the system when they used picks 38, 40, 42 and 44 to draft Naicos

I think having NGA prospects that are selected with a top 40 pick be in the open draft is a good move. It really had to change after the Bulldogs got access to #1 pick JUH; because an atheletically gifted 6'5 indigineous kid living in Victoria would have never found his way into playing Aussie Rules if it wasn't for the Bulldogs NGA

The Northern Acadamies are good for the league in the long-term and the execs should not be disincentivizing clubs from developing junior players. It helps expand the game in traditionally non-AFL states while providing an elite pathway for juniors which will eventually lead to a deeper talent pool at AFL level.

 

[Obeanie1]

What biases how about every player being drawn to Victoria. Northern states deal with vultures from other clubs way more than a Victorian side.

All for a reduction in the discount but gradual and in line with percentages drafted from those states. It’s not at a stage right now to reduce it to 0, somewhere in the 10-12% is about right.

The curve is the issue, top 10 picks should be worth double that’s the issue not the discount applied. The 9 pick idea is fantastic.

Compensation should go for FA none of this farce that North did we all know why you did it don’t pretend it was any other reason

Why do the Lions and Swans require equalisation benefits when they are:

1. Playing regularly in finals
2. Playing recently in grand finals
3. Attracting quality trades from traditional football states.
4. Have got father sons in the first round (Lions will have a pick 1, Fletcher and another top 3 father son in 2024)
5. Have lists that are miles ahead of clubs in the bottom 4.

Doesn't this just highlight that the equalisation measures have worked a treat already and should be eased off whilst the clubs are contending grand finals?

This is one of the problems right now. These equalisation tools are not needed for the Swans nor Lions as they are peaking and playing in grand finals.

 

[Sonny Hayes]

Reduce it to half that’s more than fair. Fix the curve that’s where the issue is. If it’s a first round match you have to use a first round pick

Why is it more than fair? You still can’t tell me that. I think having priority access to players that no one else can get is a huge leg up, why is the discount needed?

 

[Seadog]

Of course they are going to change the system after West coast, apparently one of the worst teams in history, got one pick in the top 29 players and the two teams directly above them got 5 and 4 respectively.
Wouldn't want anyone else to be shafted like that.

 

[ohmygewd]

What biases how about every player being drawn to Victoria. Northern states deal with vultures from other clubs way more than a Victorian side.

Well unless you have a time machine and redraft the concept of the AFL in 1990, the reality is that there are 10 Victorian based teams that will always target Vic born players in interstate sides that aren't doing well, the same as interstate players are targeted in Vic based sides. However, fair share of the blame needs to be attributed to the player managers whom are the ones looking out for the best deal for their client so if his manager says to Errol Gulden a Vic base side is offering him double than what the two Syd based side's are offering, is that bias or competition?

Of course they are going to change the system after West coast, apparently one of the worst teams in history, got one pick in the top 29 players and the two teams directly above them got 5 and 4 respectively.
Wouldn't want anyone else to be shafted like that.

You can blame your list management team for this and it was O'Brien putting up the smoke screen in not obtaining Collard after the rule of no matching NGA picks til pick 40, had been in place since 2021 or they couldn't sell their FP1 to try and nab Curtin.