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

[Caligo]

There were 10 players picked in the 1st round after McCabe. It's a bit of a stretch to suggest that he was taken at the end of the round.

As for a probable top 5 pick, have you just made that up, or can you point to where that's been mentioned as a possibility?

You're right. Comparing a club that has benefited from F/S recently with another that has not isn't a great way to go about this...

Being the 18th guy picked is historically the end of the first round. The fact that this has been the most adulterated draft in history is only more of a reason to start making clubs actually pay properly.

If you don't think campo will be a top 5 player then increasing the price for top 5 players like I am arguing for won't effect you, and will only hit Brisbane.

 

[Jeremias]

Being the 18th guy picked is historically the end of the first round.

You weren't talking historically though, you were talking specifically about Will McCabe. He wasn't taken end of first round as you claimed.

If you don't think campo will be a top 5 player

It's got nothing to do with where I think he'll be picked. I asked and will ask again, what makes you think he's a probable top 5 selection?

 

[Caligo]

It's got nothing to do with where I think he'll be picked. I asked and will ask again, what makes you think he's a probable top 5 selection?

By looking at him? Want some youtube links?

 

[Jeremias]

By looking at him? Want some youtube links?

I've seen him play. It just seems odd that you'd use 'probable' top 5 pick when I don't think there's anyone with any draft-watching credibility - either here or in the media - who has suggested it.

At this stage he's a possible top 5 pick but most would say that's a massive stretch. A probable top 5 pick has no basis in reality.

 

[go_the_dockers]

I wonder how a 15% decrease in points value if the clubs next pick is not with in 10 picks, and a 30% decrease in points value if the clubs next pick is not with in 20 picks would work.


We badly need incentives to stop clubs trading a first round for 10 3rd picks.

 

[Jirik13]

Just keep it simple. Remove 20% discount. Modify picks points table values - increase values significantly for top picks and decrease significantly value for late picks. That would solve most issues.

NGA (IMO, mostly crap system brought in due to whinging from Vic clubs, not really needed, exploited early) remove limit from what pick teams can match. So teams can match like Northern academy and F/S. Just put in some safeguards.

And then the rule which is already in place for Northern academy (only 1 1st round bid match allowed when finish top 4, only 2 matches for 1st round bids when finish 5-8, possibly even change that to only 1 bid match for 1-8 ladder position) expand to NGA and F/S. This limits significantly assistance to teams already playing finals. If teams are at the bottom, they can get help as much as possible.

On a separate note, I agree with Swans boss Pridham. I would do a swap every time too.

“The reality is the biggest advantage of all is being in Victoria and playing 18 of your games, home and away season games, on the MCG,” Pridham said.

“That’s a massive advantage. I’d take that over an Academy any day.”

Sydney played 11 matches interstate this year, while there were five Victorian clubs who were on the road just six times throughout the regular season.

 

[Tandy]

I like NGA as a way to develop talent but I think the clubs shouldnt be involved. NGA should be for the top players from diverse backgrounds that don't happen to make the national academy if that's still a thing. Any club at any pick Can have access

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

I like NGA as a way to develop talent but I think the clubs shouldnt be involved. NGA should be for the top players from diverse backgrounds that don't happen to make the national academy if that's still a thing. Any club at any pick Can have access

That's an interesting point, however one could argue a gun like Mitchito Owens wouldn't have been drafted if he wasn't actively tied to St Kilda and their own academy (or the Saints did a very good job hiding him, getting for pick 33 was a bloody bargain )

 

[Dogflogger]

Just keep it simple count. Modify picks points table values - increase values significantly for top picks and decrease significantly value for late picks. That would solve most issues.

NGA (IMO, mostly crap system brought in due to whinging from Vic clubs, not really needed, exploited early) remove limit from what pick teams can match. So teams can match like Northern academy and F/S. Just put in some safeguards.

And then the rule which is already in place for Northern academy (only 1 1st round bid match allowed when finish top 4, only 2 matches for 1st round bids when finish 5-8, possibly even change that to only 1 bid match for 1-8 ladder position) expand to NGA and F/S. This limits significantly assistance to teams already playing finals. If teams are at the bottom, they can get help as much as possible.

On a separate note, I agree with Swans boss Pridham. I would do a swap every time too.

only took us 5 years to get a better return from NGA than from 50 years of father sons. also we only get to play at the MCG if we make the finals. I'd prefer being able to bid on our NGA players like the northern clubs over having access to father sons or the MCG.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Assuming the article in the stickied Age column/tweet posted by Lore is correct and changes won't likely happen until the 2025 National Draft, I wonder what will happen to the trading of future picks when the 2024 draft comes around ?

Will that be put on the backburner for one year until the changes come into effect in 2025 ???

 

[Caligo]

Assuming the article in the stickied Age column/tweet posted by Lore is correct and changes won't likely happen until the 2025 National Draft, I wonder what will happen to the trading of future picks when the 2024 draft comes around ?

Will that be put on the backburner for one year until the changes come into effect in 2025 ???

If by backburner you mean future trades either won't happen or will be banned then no, no chance of that. What will happen I imagine is that the clubs will get a sense of what is coming and will act accordingly. But they already knew what the afl was doing. No need to wait till 2025.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

If by backburner you mean future trades either won't happen or will be banned then no, no chance of that. What will happen I imagine is that the clubs will get a sense of what is coming and will act accordingly. But they already knew what the afl was doing. No need to wait till 2025.

The article said changes won't happen until 2025 because of picks already traded from the 2024 draft.

Richmond can rightly claim they wouldn't have done any draft night pick swaps if they knew about the proposed draft changes was coming into effect in 2024.

This is exactly why it won't happen next year but 2025.

The AFL themselves are mostly to blame for
This shemozzle

 

[Caligo]

The AFL themselves are mostly to blame for
This shshemozzle.

Truer words were never spoken.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Just keep it simple. Remove 20% discount. Modify picks points table values - increase values significantly for top picks and decrease significantly value for late picks. That would solve most issues.

NGA (IMO, mostly crap system brought in due to whinging from Vic clubs, not really needed, exploited early) remove limit from what pick teams can match. So teams can match like Northern academy and F/S. Just put in some safeguards.

And then the rule which is already in place for Northern academy (only 1 1st round bid match allowed when finish top 4, only 2 matches for 1st round bids when finish 5-8, possibly even change that to only 1 bid match for 1-8 ladder position) expand to NGA and F/S. This limits significantly assistance to teams already playing finals. If teams are at the bottom, they can get help as much as possible.

On a separate note, I agree with Swans boss Pridham. I would do a swap every time too.

I would like to point out it wasn't Vic clubs just whining about NGA inequities, both WA clubs are (imo probably correctly) seething they keep missing out on kids they developed in their own regions under current rules

 

[marcmurphy3]

Assuming the article in the stickied Age column/tweet posted by Lore is correct and changes won't likely happen until the 2025 National Draft, I wonder what will happen to the trading of future picks when the 2024 draft comes around ?

Will that be put on the backburner for one year until the changes come into effect in 2025 ???

Why would they need to put future pick trading on the backburner?

Clubs will trade future picks as per normal, but might do so differently given knowledge of what the future bidding system will be.

The issue with bringing in changes for 2024 is that they werent known during this year's trade period when future picks were being traded. Not an issue for 2025 as I imagine any changes will be known well before the 2024 trade period.

 

[Jirik13]

I would like to point out it wasn't Vic clubs just whining about NGA inequities, both WA clubs are (imo probably correctly) seething they keep missing out on kids they developed in their own regions under current rules

As far as I remember, it was Eddie leading whining

 

[Caligo]

As far as I remember, it was Eddie leading whining

That's what I said!

 

[GC2015]

Good read. Gives some perspective on the selective nature of Victorian outrage. No one was calling for an overhaul when Collingwood secured the clear number 1 prospect Nick Daicos by using several third round picks.

‘Victorian whingers’ strangely silent on Nick Daicos’ flag-Pies

There is one rule the AFL won’t change and it’s totally useless to some clubs, but huge for others.

7news.com.au

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Good read. Gives some perspective on the selective nature of Victorian outrage. No one was calling for an overhaul when Collingwood secured the clear number 1 prospect Nick Daicos by using several third round picks.

‘Victorian whingers’ strangely silent on Nick Daicos’ flag-Pies

There is one rule the AFL won’t change and it’s totally useless to some clubs, but huge for others.

7news.com.au

Well the article is not wrong really, but it's a bit disingenuous to suggest it's only Vic clubs as whiners, both WA clubs have also expressed their displeasure about the leg up Gold Coast have gotten via NGAs.

In principle, clubs just want the Suns (and Lions etc) to keep their academy and their NGA picks but pay a more equitable price.

Same argument for Father Son too.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Good read. Gives some perspective on the selective nature of Victorian outrage. No one was calling for an overhaul when Collingwood secured the clear number 1 prospect Nick Daicos by using several third round picks.

‘Victorian whingers’ strangely silent on Nick Daicos’ flag-Pies

There is one rule the AFL won’t change and it’s totally useless to some clubs, but huge for others.

7news.com.au

Lots of people were they just werent getting columns in the papers. And it shows why the system must be changed. No club (doesnt matter which of the 18 clubs it is) should ever be allowed to trade out of the r1 and match a top 10 pick with later picks. Its an easy fix to that problem and why the rules must change now.

 

[Jirik13]

about the leg up Gold Coast have gotten via NGAs

Suns don't have NGA. It's a big difference.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Suns don't have NGA. It's a big difference.

See this is part of the problem/the mess the AFL has created.

And Gold Coast are not to blame at all imo.

I do understand why The Suns are defending their academy, they have been treated like a feeder club by the Vic/traditional football state clubs since you entered the comp.

 

[Caligo]

Good read. Gives some perspective on the selective nature of Victorian outrage. No one was calling for an overhaul when Collingwood secured the clear number 1 prospect Nick Daicos by using several third round picks.

‘Victorian whingers’ strangely silent on Nick Daicos’ flag-Pies

There is one rule the AFL won’t change and it’s totally useless to some clubs, but huge for others.

7news.com.au

Many, many many people were calling for an overhaul when WB got pick 1 as a finalist team. And then just as many complained when Collingwood got an arguable pick 1 for pick 4, both questioning the system and the possibility there was something dodgy going on with the bidding.

This isn't a Vic vs non-vic thing. The largest recent change to drafting was in direct response to a vic team getting an advantage (nga).

 

[Dogflogger]

so with the bidding changes the GF winners get a generational talent at pick 18 and the wooden spooners get him at pick 1?

 

[Caligo]

so with the bidding changes the GF winners get a generational talent at pick 18 and the wooden spooners get him at pick 1?

Surely the afl couldn't be that stupid. Then again, they are the afl.