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

[longdonkey]

even more bizarre is they still have a knack of ending up with multiple first rounders in the next draft... they had 3 first rounders in 24, gave up Pick 6 for Rioli, traded out 2 other first rounders in the Noble/Houston/Lukosius trade and yet end up with 3 first rounders this coming draft, their own plus Port's and Pies. I wish WC had their LM Team.

Yeah I guess they are just rolling over all the picks they've got in the past for Rankine, Lukocious and many others so much so that they were able to ship one out with Bowes and it really hasn't adversely affected them. Ideally they'd probably prefer to keep the players.

 

[briztoon]

And we run our own academy for father son/daughter players.

Walker has been down at Carlton training far longer than any Brisbane academy kids has been at Brisbane.

Yet we are to get zero benefit from that?

I'm not sure what your angle is here, with me.

We're not trying to bin the academies or father sons.

 

[briztoon]

The extra game provided extra revenue, this is still part of all clubs revenue as they are 1/18th of the product. That bucket could still be shared equally but it is not, sometime up to 3 times the smallest amount.

Half the revenue for the clubs is from game day revenue, half from tv money. Those that struggle get a lot more TV money, they don’t earn more. They then complain about paying for academies which give them a massive advantage, it’s a bit rich.

The problem are different rules for different clubs. In a comp that restricts things for equalisation, it has completely blown out the advantages North of the border. We get NGA scraps and have missed out on more than we have taken due to the rules.

We have had a bigger talent drain than any other club in the past 10 years yet we don’t get assistance like the reigning premiers do. About time they fixed it properly and no first round academies, nga’s or f/s would be a great result.

I haven't seen a single fan of a Northern club complain about funding our own academies.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

It’s an extra bye and sometimes a free hit at a team who hasn’t played yet. Still an advantage.

We have 13 games at Optus but only 11 home games. Melbourne teams get around 15-16 games in their own State. We travel more than anyone so that doesn’t even go close to evening up especially when you consider what shit timeslots do to prolong turn arounds.

You do realise that interstate teams have a far greater home ground advantage when measured by the usual reasons for home ground advantage, fan influence and ground familiarity?

Vic teams have to accept opposition Vic fans in their home stadium (except Geelong). This can be quite extreme e.g. a Dogs home game against Essendon even has a greater number of away supporters than home supporters, with a negative home ground advantage.

Interstate teams are far more familiar with Melbourne stadiums (playing there more often) than vice versa.

Take Bulldogs' "home" final at the MCG vs Adelaide. Adelaide had actually played at the MCG more often in the preceding seasons than the Dogs. Bulldogs couldn't restrict the free access for Adelaide fans to cheaply buy a ticket. Barely a home ground advantage there.

 

[briztoon]

Does the humidity affect your cognitive function up there or something?

Find me one post where I have advocated for getting rid of academies. The claim that the clubs "fund the academies" is bullshit. Trying to justify how hard done by you are and therefore that warrants an extra $5-10m of central funding and then claiming you fund something is peak hypocrisy. Arguing that distorting the draft is good for the game is opinion but pretty disingenuous. I follow the NBA and a top player not being from the US used to be a rarity. The last 5 seasons have been 3, 3, 4, 4, 3 players in the starting 5 of the All NBA first team that are from outside the US. There hasn't been an American MVP since 2018. Two of the last 3 #1 picks in the draft have been from France. In 2024 picks 1, 2 and 6 were from France, pick 9 from Canada, 11 from Lithuania, 12 from Serbia... Imagine sitting there with a straight face arguing that Ant Edwards and Cooper Flagg are available to whoever finishes last but Wemby and Risacher can only go to New Orleans because they are French - that's what you lot do.

The entitlement of Brisbane fans since they've started winning is something I certainly didn't see coming.

Mate, no one has claimed we're hard done by. That some narrative you've invented to go off on.


QBE has directly funded Sydney's academy for over a decade, to the tune of $1m per year in sponsorship. This has been mentioned by the Swans multiple times in draft articles and interviews.

Since 2023 the Lions academy has been funded solely through commercial sponsors, when Ausenco came on board, along with Youi and several other commercial sponsors.

Multiple posters have tried to explain to you why the northern clubs receive a higher distribution than the other clubs, but you completely ignore these.

A big part of it is the stadium lease agreements in place. Not every state/team has the same stadium costs. Before we moved in to our own training base, the Lions rented their offices and gym at the Gabba from Stadiums QLD to the tune of $1m per year. That was on top of the $1m per game it cost us to use the Gabba.

I don't know about the other northern clubs, but last financial year we turned our first profit as a club, and announced we had finally paid off our debt to the AFL.

Maybe the AFL were handing us a bigger distribution so we could payoff our debt to them.

West Coast don't get the same handout from the AFL, because they're the richest club in the land, as they like telling everyone. Same goes for Collingwood, Richmond etc.


And last I looked, this was a thread on academies and father sons, nothing to do with us winning anything, and I haven't mentioned anything about winning anything in these discussions. I struggle to recall any other Lions fan mentioning that either.

I think your now inventing slights and/or grudges to tee off on, as well inventing that someone has claimed to be hard done by.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Mate, no one has claimed we're hard done by. That some narrative you've invented to go off on.


QBE has directly funded Sydney's academy for over a decade, to the tune of $1m per year in sponsorship. This has been mentioned by the Swans multiple times in draft articles and interviews.

Since 2023 the Lions academy has been funded solely through commercial sponsors, when Ausenco came on board, along with Youi and several other commercial sponsors.

Multiple posters have tried to explain to you why the northern clubs receive a higher distribution than the other clubs, but you completely ignore these.

A big part of it is the stadium lease agreements in place. Not every state/team has the same stadium costs. Before we moved in to our own training base, the Lions rented their offices and gym at the Gabba from Stadiums QLD to the tune of $1m per year. That was on top of the $1m per game it cost us to use the Gabba.

I don't know about the other northern clubs, but last financial year we turned our first profit as a club, and announced we had finally paid off our debt to the AFL.

Maybe the AFL were handing us a bigger distribution so we could payoff our debt to them.

West Coast don't get the same handout from the AFL, because they're the richest club in the land, as they like telling everyone. Same goes for Collingwood, Richmond etc.


And last I looked, this was a thread on academies and father sons, nothing to do with us winning anything, and I haven't mentioned anything about winning anything in these discussions. I struggle to recall any other Lions fan mentioning that either.

I think your now inventing slights and/or grudges to tee off on, as well inventing that someone has claimed to be hard done by.

It's strange that you're arguing about the circular nature of the money.

If you do indeed run the academy, do you think that the AFL would let you stop running the academy if you sponsors wanted to sponsor something different in the club?

Is it just coincidence that the four clubs started the academy at identical times?

Also, keep in mind that three of the four clubs who run northern academies are not actually independent from the AFL, as the AFL appoints the board members of those three clubs.

 

[briztoon]

The premise is right but the execution really needs to be thought out for the long game here.

You almost need to make these clubs with multiple opportunities pay overs as a way to sway them to not match bids. Make Gold Coast want to match a bid on either Uwland or Patterson but try and get Addinsal later.

I dunno but the theatrics of the whole thing is starting to become farcical. The article today I saw sees Gold Coast have another 8 possible academy kids over the nest 3 drafts (3 in 2025 obviously). When does it stop?

What article?

It's pretty common knowledge up here that Gold Coasts academy is pretty weak for the 2026 and 2027 drafts. Love to know who some one is trying to talk up.

 

[briztoon]

Funnily enough, I don't have an issue with that. What I do have an issue with is that they are able to trade players in while doing that.

Why do you have an issue with trading players in?

Gold Coast have extra first round picks, partly because both Rankine and Lukosius requested trades home to SA, so Gold Coast lost a couple of good players, and received draft picks back.

Are they not allowed to use those picks in trades if they so choose?

Gold Coast has been active in trading picks forward in to future years, to make sure they have the picks/points for their academy kids.

This has meant other clubs have traded future picks to get current picks from Gold Coast.

That has meant Gold Coast hasn't used live picks in drafts to select non academy kids, when they could have. Instead they have prioritised the drafting of their academy kids, because they are less likely to pull a Rankine Lukosius, Steven May, Tom Lynch, etc.


Brisbane traded out a future first round pick to help facilitate the trade for Dunkley. So the following year we didn't draft anyone in the first round, or have any academy kids.

Just because a team is matching a bid for a father son or academy kid, isn't a reason to exclude them form being able to trade for a player, so long as they have the picks for both.

Otherwise you should start excluding every club from the draft, if they have traded in a player that year.

 

[briztoon]

Is this a joke?

The Northern clubs get up to triple the allocation of the richest clubs. Freo get about 1-2m less than WC most of the time, they get an extra 20-25m depending on the year.

You know you answered your own rant right here.

GWS and GC lose money each year. They don't make a profit, so the AFL props them up.

Brisbane just made a $250k profit for the first time in our history, with the assistance of the AFL distribution.

If every team made the same profit, then I'm sure the AFL distribution would be the same for all clubs (maybe).

Saying they fund it is like saying my Dad gives me an allowance but I have to pay my own rent (allowance is 10 times the rent amount).

So your clubs dad still gives you an allowance, but your sooking it up, because dad gives his favourite child from a different mistress more money.

Gotcha now.

The revolving door is an issue over here too and with all clubs in the bottom 4. The AFL doesn’t address this except for North of the border. Its own compo system encourages bad teams to let experience leave.

I believe the root cause of your revolving door is retiring this year, so you might have better luck in the future now.

Freo had no F/S for decades due to the rules and only just starting to come into the window. GC & GWS avoided free agency for 8 years when it came in, we’re not even at par yet in terms of disadvantage with those two things.

 

[briztoon]

You do realise that interstate teams have a far greater home ground advantage when measured by the usual reasons for home ground advantage, fan influence and ground familiarity?

Vic teams have to accept opposition Vic fans in their home stadium (except Geelong). This can be quite extreme e.g. a Dogs home game against Essendon even has a greater number of away supporters than home supporters, with a negative home ground advantage.

This part of the problem we keep trying to bring up. The big Vic teams don't really play away games at their home ground, because more of their own fans turn up than the "home" minnow Vic club.

So Collingwood never plays an away game at the MCG.

And they complain when they get sent to Marvel.

Both Collingwood and Carlton have publicly complained about playing in opening round in the Northern states, because of the extra travel it adds to their season ffs.

Interstate teams are far more familiar with Melbourne stadiums (playing there more often) than vice versa.

No we're not.

We're lucky if we get two games at the MCG each year.

Instead we get sent to play games in Tasmania and Ballarat against Vic teams, and mostly at Marvel.

We want more MCG games.

And we want Hawthorn to come up and play us at home a little more often than twice in fourteen years.

Take Bulldogs' "home" final at the MCG vs Adelaide. Adelaide had actually played at the MCG more often in the preceding seasons than the Dogs. Bulldogs couldn't restrict the free access for Adelaide fans to cheaply buy a ticket. Barely a home ground advantage there.

 

[Purple Suit]

You know you answered your own rant right here.

GWS and GC lose money each year. They don't make a profit, so the AFL props them up.

Brisbane just made a $250k profit for the first time in our history, with the assistance of the AFL distribution.

If every team made the same profit, then I'm sure the AFL distribution would be the same for all clubs (maybe).

So your clubs dad still gives you an allowance, but your sooking it up, because dad gives his favourite child from a different mistress more money.

Gotcha now.

I believe the root cause of your revolving door is retiring this year, so you might have better luck in the future now.

I’m not the one claiming Brisbane funds their academy and that is a reason for it to exist in the future.

 

[briztoon]

It's strange that you're arguing about the circular nature of the money.

If you do indeed run the academy, do you think that the AFL would let you stop running the academy if you sponsors wanted to sponsor something different in the club?

No, we'd possibly go back to funding it from our pokies, or more likely from the profits we're making from our Springfield base.

Is it just coincidence that the four clubs started the academy at identical times?

No it's not coincidence, because the AFL said, "there, go run the talent pathways up north, because we can't be arsed doing it directly our selves".

Also, keep in mind that three of the four clubs who run northern academies are not actually independent from the AFL, as the AFL appoints the board members of those three clubs.

 

[briztoon]

I’m not the one claiming Brisbane funds their academy and that is a reason for it to exist in the future.

I'm not claiming that either.

Those goal posts of yours keep on moving.

Edit: my bad, two different posters arguing the same thing.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

We're lucky if we get two games at the MCG each year.

But you do realise that your two MCG games per year is still a greater familiarity with the fact that an average team plays at the Gabba less than once per year?

For instance, when you beat us at the Gabba in Round 20, our players had not played there for three years, and many players of ours were playing there for the first or second time in their careers.

On the other hand when we hosted you in Docklands in 2024 it was your seventh game at the venue in the last 3 years. Many of your players would have played 4, 5+ games there over the previous three years and were familiar with the stadium.

This adds up in the micro (understanding how the ball bounces, the psychology of your mind being relaxed and being less stressed in the warm-ups because anthropologically humans fear the unknown, etc.). Obviously it's not going to be a huge difference, maybe fractions of a point home ground advantage, but all home ground advantages are only about 10 points at AFL level anyway, so it adds a few percentage points on top of the existing home ground advantage.

Instead we get sent to play games in Tasmania and Ballarat against Vic teams, and mostly at Marvel.

And it's a rare time that those clubs get a genuine home ground advantage similar to non-Vic teams by playing in a stadium that they're far more familiar than, than the opposition.

 

[briztoon]

But you do realise that your two MCG games per year is still a greater familiarity with the fact that an average team plays at the Gabba less than once per year?

And it's a rare time that those clubs get a genuine home ground advantage similar to non-Vic teams by playing in a stadium that they're far more familiar than, than the opposition.

We'd be happy to play more games at the Gabba. Please AFL, schedule Collingwood and Hawthorn up at the Gabba twice a season.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

We'd be happy to play more games at the Gabba. Please AFL, schedule Collingwood and Hawthorn up at the Gabba twice a season.

Does the fact that you don't play Collingwood or Hawthorn at home often prevent you from enjoying a strong home ground advantage in the 11 games you do play there? Why are you being deliberately obtuse here?

 

[briztoon]

Does the fact that you don't play Collingwood or Hawthorn at home often prevent you from enjoying a strong home ground advantage in the 11 games you do play there? Why are you being deliberately obtuse here?

You haven't really looked at our recent home ground win loss record have you.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

You haven't really looked at our recent home ground win loss record have you.

By yes the only way to statistically measure home ground advantage in the AFL is to take simply the win-loss record and nothing else for one team specifically.

**** me.

Do you honestly think that Brisbane do not have a statistical home ground advantage at the Gabba? Or that it is reduced as an advantage than it otherwise has been? Really?

 

[JTTheKing]

I'd like to think that Carlton will still get him and in fact it is wrong if you don't.

I can't believe the AFL has literally decreased the discount year on year and it will be the smallest discount ever this year, yet the AFL aren't willing to see how it goes for a number of years.

It is absurd knee jerk reactionary BS that the AFL is making another change and seriously, given clubs planning; if they are going down that path, then implement it in say 5 years time to account for club's planning.

It’s typical of the AFL.

You get a whiny St Kilda president with a victim complex who acts like the rule is the reason his club has continually made garbage draft decisions for a decade plus cause them to be in this cycle of mediocrity.

Then all of a sudden father sons are ruining the game because of the sheer luck that in one draft we had two generational father sons (Darcy and Daicos) and then two Ashcroft brothers in quick succession.

There’s never any rational well thought out ideas at AFL HQ. Everything is knee jerk in response to someone moaning.

Maybe twenty years ago it was a silly rule with all the fresh interstate teams. It’s complete luck of the draw. Nearly every side in the comp could end up with a gun father son in the next 10 years minus the Suns and Giants (but they’ve benefitted elsewhere with academies).

I’ve got no idea why people are acting like father sons are selectively bred like a bunch of racehorses and clubs can pump money into a program to make sure of it. There’s been countless rubbish father sons over the years.

 

[hawksrus]

The biggest disgrace in all of this is the AFL actually choosing to listen to the designated losers of the AFL, St Kilda.

Father/Son is one of the last great things about the game and the AFL is now likely to abandon it because one loser club cried for long enough.
Spare me any guff about the rule being "unfair". This is a sport that hosts the Grand Final at the same ground every year, which happens to be the home ground of a select few clubs. If you can rationalize that by saying its good for income, then father/son and academies should stay.

The loser club's failures started in 2012 where they allowed Brendan Goddard to walk, then traded their two first round picks for Tom Hickey

31

Tom Hickey

Age

34

Ht

202cm

Wt

97kg

Pos.

Ruck

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.9

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

6.9

4star

CL

2.8

4star

HO

19.1

5star

D

4.0

1star

K

1.5

1star

HB

2.5

2star

CL

1.0

3star

HO

7.0

5star

D

11.2

3star

K

4.2

2star

HB

7.0

5star

CL

0.4

3star

HO

8.6

5star

and Tom Lee. They have been an endless trainwreck ever since. Nothing to do with father/sons, they're just hopeless.

 

[Coach_Required]

The biggest disgrace in all of this is the AFL actually choosing to listen to the designated losers of the AFL, St Kilda.

Father/Son is one of the last great things about the game and the AFL is now likely to abandon it because one loser club cried for long enough.
Spare me any guff about the rule being "unfair". This is a sport that hosts the Grand Final at the same ground every year, which happens to be the home ground of a select few clubs. If you can rationalize that by saying its good for income, then father/son and academies should stay.

The loser club's failures started in 2012 where they allowed Brendan Goddard to walk, then traded their two first round picks for Tom Hickey and Tom Lee. They have been an endless trainwreck ever since. Nothing to do with father/sons, they're just hopeless.

What utter garbage you just posted. Do some research.

Saints are only one of a few clubs not happy with current rules with F/S and academies. F/S isnt being abandoned either the rules will be tweaked and as it should.

 

[bzparkes]

Spot on.

Add into that they drafted McCartin and Billings when they could have drafted Petracca and Bontempelli or go back further and giving up a first round pick for Andrew Lovett and yet here we are, father / sons is the sole reason as to why they are so shit with a pathetic coach.

I mean how bloody embarrassing are the Saints fans going all simp fan boi with the 'We love you Nas' signs and then doubling down with the most cringeworthy t-shirt after beating Melbourne of all teams on your home deck. Did I mention Ross Lyon dancing around with Nas on his shoulders at the Brighton Hotel celebrating a home and away win like they'd won a flag. Talk about the most irrelevant club in the AFL.

Heaven forbid people try to enjoy themselves

 

[Purple Suit]

The biggest disgrace in all of this is the AFL actually choosing to listen to the designated losers of the AFL, St Kilda.

Father/Son is one of the last great things about the game and the AFL is now likely to abandon it because one loser club cried for long enough.
Spare me any guff about the rule being "unfair". This is a sport that hosts the Grand Final at the same ground every year, which happens to be the home ground of a select few clubs. If you can rationalize that by saying its good for income, then father/son and academies should stay.

The loser club's failures started in 2012 where they allowed Brendan Goddard to walk, then traded their two first round picks for Tom Hickey and Tom Lee. They have been an endless trainwreck ever since. Nothing to do with father/sons, they're just hopeless.

If the Father son rule is so great and important, why did the AFL allow academies to trump it?

Blame the AFL for diluting it & eventually having to cave in to pressure from the teams without.

 

[JTTheKing]

What utter garbage you just posted. Do some research.

Saints are only one of a few clubs not happy with current rules with F/S and academies. F/S isnt being abandoned either the rules will be tweaked and as it should.

If father sons can’t be taken in the first round the rule is basically dead

 

[txbyhull]

If father sons can’t be taken in the first round the rule is basically dead

Big whoop, if you want them so desperately trade to get a pick that’ll actually net the player at market value.