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

[Elixuh]

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.

In the grand final we had 3 players from our academy play, in a squad that had players drafted from 2011 onwards. I think you’re giving the academies a bit too much credit old boy.

Academies aren’t just an equalisation mechanism. It is principally a strategy to grow the game and increase talent for the league, which is especially important if you want to continue adding teams.

 

[Seadog]

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?


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.

Yeah na, our list management didn't gift NM 4 extra picks or allow GC to match 4 players in the first rnd of the draft.

 

[ohmygewd]

Yeah na, our list management didn't gift NM 4 extra picks or allow GC to match 4 players in the first rnd of the draft.

Again you are blaming things that your list management team were fully aware about before the draft started and were prepared to go into the draft with only 1 x first rounder and 2 x second rounders but wanted to keep pick 1 at all cost. The fact that no-one wanted to do a trade for your FP1 might have suggested that O'Brien and his crew wanted more for the trade FP1 than a club was willing to give up on the night in the 5 min window. Then throw in the NGA complaint...it's a classic case of misdirection by your list management group to your supporters by blaming the current NGA rules as to the reason you couldn't get 1st rounder & WA product Collard.

 

[adammania9]

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.

Josh Daicos was not a F/S selection. No club rated him highly enough to select so he fell to Collingwood's last pick anyway

 

[Lore]

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.

I’m not suggesting a thirty percent discount, I didn’t talk about a discount at all. I’m saying that the suggestion that they match with any old pick in the same round or within 5-10 picks doesn’t go far enough, and that the proximity of the pick used to match should be based on the DVI instead. The remaining value can be paid from a pick in the same round the following year using a points deficit system.

 

[Membling]

Josh Daicos was not a F/S selection. No club rated him highly enough to select so he fell to Collingwood's last pick anyway

Naicos would be the Nick variety....

 

[sr36]

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?

It's not about making it more difficult. It's about a more equal price. In a comp that has successfully used the draft as part of equalisation, we're at a situation where some top teams have built in draft concessions that makes them very likely to jump the draft order and get access to top end talent for a very cheap draft price.

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

It's not about making it more difficult. It's about a more equal price. In a comp that has successfully used the draft as part of equalisation, we're at a situation where some top teams have built in draft concessions that makes them very likely to jump the draft order and get access to top end talent for a very cheap draft price.

What is "a more equal price"?

IMO people are panicking because the Suns had one good draft. They had just one top 10 academy player before this (Bowes) and he's not even very good.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

What is "a more equal price"?

IMO people are panicking because the Suns had one good draft. They had just one top 10 academy player before this (Bowes) and he's not even very good.

Personally don't care about the Suns, they've had practically nothing from a decade of running it. But now they've had a good haul to catch up, they timing is right to fix the system. GWS have been taking the piss for a decade essentially having a constant supply of top end draft picks regardless of finishing position and Collingwood, Brisbane and Western Bulldogs getting near guaranteed superstars for cents on the dollar all while having very good quality lists.

The draft is supposed to be about equalization, and it hasn't been close to that since the expansion.

 

[Wild Bill]

If the bid for academy or f&s comes in the 1st round you need a 1st round to match.

If you have 3 - then you need to find 3 or miss out.

 

[bzparkes]

Again you are blaming things that your list management team were fully aware about before the draft started and were prepared to go into the draft with only 1 x first rounder and 2 x second rounders but wanted to keep pick 1 at all cost. The fact that no-one wanted to do a trade for your FP1 might have suggested that O'Brien and his crew wanted more for the trade FP1 than a club was willing to give up on the night in the 5 min window. Then throw in the NGA complaint...it's a classic case of misdirection by your list management group to your supporters by blaming the current NGA rules as to the reason you couldn't get 1st rounder & WA product Collard.

Ah no, the point is that pick '19' got pushed out to pick 30.

If you can't see how ****ing stupid that is then you're focusing on the wrong thing.

 

[Wild Bill]

Ah no, the point is that pick '19' got pushed out to pick 30.

If you can't see how ******* stupid that is then you're focusing on the wrong thing.

It’s so stupid.

Early round 2nd picks should be in the early 20s. Trading 2nd rounders now = trading for 3rd rounders.

 

[TheBoss]

Josh Daicos was not a F/S selection. No club rated him highly enough to select so he fell to Collingwood's last pick anyway

He is still regarded as a F/S selection under the draft rules given that he nominated Collingwood prior to the draft.

This does not magically change because no club bid for him.

 

[adammania9]

Naicos would be the Nick variety....

Post said all three Collingwood AAs were F/S selections…

 

[adammania9]

He is still regarded as a F/S selection under the draft rules given that he nominated Collingwood prior to the draft.

This does not magically change because no club bid for him.

Sure. Technically because he was nominated. But the fact that no club wanted him enough to bid means the Pies didn’t benefit in any way.

 

[TheBoss]

Sure. Technically because he was nominated. But the fact that no club wanted him enough to bid means the Pies didn’t benefit in any way.

Collingwood did benefit - they got first dibs. If a bid came in earlier than expected then they could have let him walk.

The fact the no club bothered bidding is more of a reflection of him being projected a >30 pick, and bidding at that range is a pointless exercise especially when clubs receive a 20% discount on the draft index.

 

[sr36]

What is "a more equal price"?

IMO people are panicking because the Suns had one good draft. They had just one top 10 academy player before this (Bowes) and he's not even very good.

Sydney, who have missed finals 3 times in 20 years have gotten a bonus top 10 pick every couple of years - a rate that's likely to accelerate. We're looking at a likely situation where 4 clubs have it built in where they're not subject to the downward slump that usually occurs after a good stint at the top due to not having had access to top kids. And yes the same can happen with FS, but that's much more down to luck.

 

[adammania9]

Collingwood did benefit - they got first dibs. If a bid came in earlier than expected then they could have let him walk.

The fact the no club bothered bidding is more of a reflection of him being projected a >30 pick, and bidding at that range is a pointless exercise especially when clubs receive a 20% discount on the draft index.

Collingwood were the first team to want him at pick 57 or whatever pick he went at. Exact same as Bob Sacamano or any other draft prospect that is available in the draft.

Are people going to have a sook if Calsher Dear becomes an AA-winning premiership player after nobody bid on him?

 

[Elixuh]

Sydney, who have missed finals 3 times in 20 years have gotten a bonus top 10 pick every couple of years - a rate that's likely to accelerate. We're looking at a likely situation where 4 clubs have it built in where they're not subject to the downward slump that usually occurs after a good stint at the top due to not having had access to top kids. And yes the same can happen with FS, but that's much more down to luck.

I see your Sydney argument and raise you a GCS who has never played in finals; Lions who were horrendous from 2010-2018; GWS has made finals 6 times in 12 seasons. It is almost like you're overstating the scary northern academies!

I think the real strength in your argument is raising the last 20 years, which was long before Sydney had an academy

The problem is, even though your argument is incoherent and wrong, people like you are who the AFL seems to be listening to lol.

 

[Membling]

Sydney, who have missed finals 3 times in 20 years have gotten a bonus top 10 pick every couple of years - a rate that's likely to accelerate. We're looking at a likely situation where 4 clubs have it built in where they're not subject to the downward slump that usually occurs after a good stint at the top due to not having had access to top kids. And yes the same can happen with FS, but that's much more down to luck.

Bonus?

As in extra?

Only player who we have managed to get a pick ahead of an Academy selection has been McDonald in 2020.

Outside of that Mills and Blakey are the only top 10 academy selections we have had and they have eaten up the rest of our picks

 

[TheBoss]

Collingwood were the first team to want him at pick 57 or whatever pick he went at. Exact same as Bob Sacamano or any other draft prospect that is available in the draft.

Are people going to have a sook if Calsher Dear becomes an AA-winning premiership player after nobody bid on him?

I am not having a sook. I like the F/S system. I like Josh Daicos too, think he is a terrific player.

But saying he is not a F/S pick is absolutely braindead, you are the only person that seems to hold this position. Even the Collingwood website lists him a F/S pick:



Just take the L already.

 

[sr36]

I see your Sydney argument and raise you a GCS who has never played in finals; Lions who were horrendous from 2010-2018; GWS has made finals 6 times in 12 seasons. It is almost like you're overstating the scary northern academies!

I think the real strength in your argument is raising the last 20 years, long before Sydney's academy began

GWS didn't try to make finals for their first few years.

There are 3 teams who recently had a stint at the top, fell and then had a really quick bounce. Collingwood, Sydney and GWS - draft concession players have played a big role in all 3. Draft concessions can break the boom bust cycle that is the likely impact of the draft for most clubs.

 

[Jirik13]

Just a bit surprised that most people here ignore (and most media too) the rule which limit how many bids can be matched in round 1 by Northern academy teams depending on ladder position.

Suns are expansion team in NRL domain. Suns just finished bottom 4, never played finals. No F/S. They need any help they can get. It's a long list of things going against Suns compared to power houses like Magpies and so on.

When they play finals, there will be max 2 matches and if they finish top 4 only 1 match allowed. That will solve the worries of other teams and academy kids will be available for other teams.

 

[GC2015]

It’s not an anomaly. It’s happening every year now for a while.
You guys getting four first rounders for a bunch of junk picks is absolutely farcical. Something has to be done about the system.

Anomaly - something that deviates from what is standard, normal or expected.

In the 10 years that the Suns academy has existed prior to this year we saw just one first round pick selected (Jack Bowes, Pick 10 2016). This year we saw four first round picks selected from the Suns academy. I would suggest that is a deviation from what is "standard, normal or expected".

 

[sr36]

Bonus?

As in extra?

Only player who we have managed to get a pick ahead of an Academy selection has been McDonald in 2020.

Outside of that Mills and Blakey are the only top 10 academy selections we have had and they have eaten up the rest of our picks

Heeney - pick 17 became pick 2.
Mills - what pick(s) became pick 3?
Break it down and what did Blakey cost you?