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

[HBFlanker]

Bring that in and it will kill the academies entirely. In the 12 years the academy has been in operation I think we (the Swans) only have Gulden who has played a lot of games in the main team who was drafted outside the first round. 1 player in 12 years is simply not worth the effort of running the academy.

I look at this the other way. The academy has given the Swans guaranteed access to multiple first round picks they otherwise wouldn't have got.

The academy is literally the backbone to the current Swans team. Heeney, Blakey, Gulden, Campbell.

 

[HBFlanker]

All this does is open up for more draft tampering.

I.E - Gold Coast suns have pick 12 in the 2030 draft. They have a player who is projected top 10. All that player needs to do is explain he will ask for a trade at the earliest possible opportunity to get back to the Gold coast, if any club with a pick in the first 11 picks takes him. We have seen this before multiple times (Wingard, Bailey Smith

3

Bailey Smith

Age

25

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

3.8

5star

CL

2.7

4star

D

19.8

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

4star

CL

3.2

4star

D

14.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

7.2

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

1.6

4star

etc).

Clubs won't take the risk on a player who isn't committed.

The system is beyond broken.

 

[Lore]

They do what they do every year.

Let's use Essendon last year, as that's pretty straightforward.

Melbourne Essendon	to Melbourne (from Essendon) pick #9 2025 third round pick (Essendon)	to Essendon (from Melbourne) Pick #28 Pick #40 Pick #46 Pick #54 Pick #65 2025 first round pick (Melbourne)

13	Isaac Kako	Essendon	Calder Cannons	Talent League	Next Generation Academy selection (Iraqi descent), matched bid by Richmond​

PICK 13 - (Richmond bid matched using 33 and 34, gaining 60)

Surely it's not hard to see

Sold out of 1 draft, into the following (in this case, get a better pick (got lucky there), plus extra picks.

You get the player, still get a 1st round pick ( although pushed back a year ) and were able to use those extra picks to do further trades/draft players

Yeah so we gave up pick 9 to match a bid at pick 13…

Melbourne could easily have produced a pick in the later part of the first round. 9 for 13 and 15 is a trade clubs have done in the past (see also; Melbourne trading up to get Clayton Oliver in 2016). That they managed to implode almost as hard as Essendon did was lucky but at the time everyone thought we were completely nuts to do that trade.

Also, in case you didn’t know, future picks have the assigned value of the last pick in the given round for the purpose of a trade being approved. Perhaps that’s the rule you should be arguing about — future picks should be valued as if they were mid round picks instead? Or perhaps we trade points instead of picks?

Isn't the access enough of a reward?

Well given they’re now talking about taking access away in the first round…?
What is your argument here? No discount or no access?

It does, there's only 18 picks in the 1st round, how do we keep seeing close to 30 the last few years?, I'll use the same analogy, you can't hand over 3 picks in the 30's and take a kid at pick 5 if it's purely a draft based on picks. The points system undercuts the pick-based system.

it does if anyone has actually done that, but who has? not the Pies, Dogs, Brisbane, GCS, Ess or any other club using the points-based system because the cost isn't high enough for them to need to.

Brisbane has taken 2x Ashcroft's, Fletcher, Marshall and is about to get Anabell(sp), All top-end picks in the last 4 years. Who have they had to sell?

Literally none of your examples use the new DVI. You’re fighting a fight you already won and complaining that you haven’t seen your prize yet…

 

[Coach_Required]

That probably opens it up even more for manipulation

No it doesnt, top 10 makes sense. All teams are striving to play finals, teams making finals shouldn't get a chance to then get a player in the top 10 in the draft on the cheap. Also those teams outside the 8 should be able to pick a player without it being compromised.

 

[mpal6]

Bring that in and it will kill the academies entirely. In the 12 years the academy has been in operation I think we (the Swans) only have Gulden who has played a lot of games in the main team who was drafted outside the first round. 1 player in 12 years is simply not worth the effort of running the academy.

you guys are too good in identifying talent. Be mediocre like us

Payne (pick 54), Coleman (pick 37), Coleman 2(24ish), Bruce Reville (Cat B), Shadeau Brain (Cat B), Gallop (pick 42)

Also us sharing our academy love to the rest of the AFL clubs - Aliir Aliir (Port), Samson Ryan (Richmond), Patrick Snell (Sydney), Mabior Chol (Hawks), Corey Wagner (Fremantle), Ben Keays (Adelaide), Tom Fullarton (Demons)

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

No it doesnt, top 10 makes sense. All teams are striving to play finals, teams making finals shouldn't get a chance to then get a player in the top 10 in the draft on the cheap. Also those teams outside the 8 should be able to pick a player without it being compromised.

Yes it does because it’s easier to get a kid to slide ~5 spots than it is ~12. If a kid is ranked 5 you could come up with ways (or atleast try to) to get them to 11. It’s highly unlikely they slide past the top 4 sides picking in the late teens so clubs and kids aren’t likely to try it.

 

[Bostonian]

No it doesnt, top 10 makes sense. All teams are striving to play finals, teams making finals shouldn't get a chance to then get a player in the top 10 in the draft on the cheap. Also those teams outside the 8 should be able to pick a player without it being compromised.

So clubs should just fund the development of father sons and if they do a good enough job of developing them into top 10 calculations they should be happy and excited another team gets to draft that player?

 

[Purple Suit]

Bring that in and it will kill the academies entirely. In the 12 years the academy has been in operation I think we (the Swans) only have Gulden who has played a lot of games in the main team who was drafted outside the first round. 1 player in 12 years is simply not worth the effort of running the academy.

Isn’t your other best player from your academy in Heeney? Nevermind, I re-read what you wrote.

Access at pick 20 won’t kill them otherwise they wouldn’t exist outside of the Northern clubs.

We have had Walker & Draper do ok from those positions but neither are currently in the team.

 

[mpal6]

We have enough information before hand to not need to do it live, cochrane and walker are projected to go 1 and 2 in next yrs draft, there's time to that make trade, we have live trades in general now so of course you can get it done. What's the point of having live trades then?

Not a reliable system to be honest.

Even as far back as 2015 there was a tendency to inflate academy players and 12 months is a long time in footy. Jacob Allison the 60m long kicking super boot no.1 player from brisbane lions academy rah-rah was raging. In the end on draft year he went pick 60.

 

[Coach_Required]

Richmond because we'll take Walker next year off Carlton.

Not true, for starters we have to have another shit year. Yes, that is likely to happen but still doesn't mean it will.

Also we have Armstrong in our NGA, our first real prospect so he might not be Walker calibre but these changes could still impact us.

 

[Vankri]

Really starting to look like the romance attached to the father-son rule could on its last legs. Out of curiosity, I went back five years to see what the league would look like if first round F/S bids weren't matched and it looked like this:

Sam Darcy - GWS
Nick Daicos - Gold Coast
Will Ashcroft - North Melbourne
Jaspa Fletcher - Bulldogs
Max Michalanney - Sydney
Jordan Croft - Sydney
Will McCabe - North Melbourne
Levi Ashcroft - Melbourne

It would certainly be a very different league if the those players ended up at the clubs that bid on them. Presumably, predicted 2026 number 1 pick Cody Walker will become the first F/S prospect that won't end up at his father's club, despite already making it clear that he wants to go there. Unless Carlton completely tank 2026 and go for the wooden spoon just to secure Walker. Otherwise, he probably ends up at Richmond (he is also NGA eligible for the Tigers), North or West Coast.

This is the best argument for the proposed lockdown (first round or top 10). But you now have to do the same job for the academies especially after this year’s draft and especially as all four northern clubs are doing well and not rebuilding. They are essentially getting the same distorted free hit you describe above and stifling other rebuilding clubs and this time it’s a regular intake vs the randomness of which team will get good father sons which years. It’s very obvious the draft needs a change and completely understand why St Kilda or North would be heavily advocating for it.

On Cody Walker, since it sounds like he’s in the mix for pick 1 it’s a pretty extreme case but if he and Carlton want each other strongly enough, they can trade up to pick 1 if they have the capital or just get him by regular trade two or three years later. It’s what likely would have happened with Nick Daicos, we would have traded for him because of the family connection and playing with his brother in 2023 (or 2021 for picks), paying through the nose of course but that’s fair and certainly much fairer than the current system. Not as big of a deal as people think.

 

[Coach_Required]

So clubs should just fund the development of father sons and if they do a good enough job of developing them into top 10 calculations they should be happy and excited another team gets to draft that player?

Bottom teams should be entitled to the best quality prospects, so yes. There's nothing stopping clubs from planning 12 months ahead and getting better picks to trade for said player.

Enough with the free ride.

 

[Elixuh]

This’ll just lead to even worse rorting and draft tampering. Northern clubs may even get some absolute bargains out of it.

Then you’ll have vfl clubs drafting academy players who will request a trade back after 2-3 years and you’ll be having to deal with 1 club and getting cents on the dollar.

 

[hammer180]

Who gets to project where a player goes?

Sounds like a system that could be exploited by other teams knowing how it could benefit them.

In your scenario who gets to determine who is 1 and 2 out of the two players you named if they are evenly matched?

That's how the draft works though, if you think walker is the best player in the draft trade up with the team who has pick 1 , to ensure he is on your team and the name stays with the club.

 

[Bostonian]

Bottom teams should be entitled to the best quality prospects, so yes. There's nothing stopping clubs from planning 12 months ahead and getting better picks to trade for said player.

Enough with the free ride.

There's plenty stopping clubs actually.

Before this season Harry Dean wasn't in top 30 calculations.

So if using your theory of planning ahead 12 months" we did that we'd have planned for a 3rd round pick.

12 months on he's potentially a top 10 pick. So explain to us all how a club can plan ahead for that?

 

[Bostonian]

That's how the draft works though, if you think walker is the best player in the draft trade up with the team who has pick 1 , to ensure he is on your team and the name stays with the club.

What if the other clubs don't want to trade?

 

[FreeAgent1]

Academy players will draft tamper like Wingard and Perkins saying they only want to play in state XX etc and then a team are highly unlikely to take them unless it’s H Reid level of talent.

Could result in even more distorted outcomes…. As player that should have gone at 9 gets to 25.

I mean they literally just changed the laws on this last year, wtf is the league listening to the second worst run club on what the rules should be, craziness!

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

I can already see it. They will wipe it next year and we will miss the number 1 pick in Walker than they will obviously get rid of FA compo in the first round as that’s an even larger joke just to have Walsh walk out on us and miss the top 5 compo pick

 

[Lore]

Bottom teams should be entitled to the best quality prospects, so yes. There's nothing stopping clubs from planning 12 months ahead and getting better picks to trade for said player.

Enough with the free ride.

Should they also ban trading of top 10 picks, or limit it so that finals sides can’t acquire them?

 

[hammer180]

There's plenty stopping clubs actually.

Before this season Harry Dean wasn't in top 30 calculations.

So if using your theory of planning ahead 12 months" we did that we'd have planned for a 3rd round pick.

12 months on he's potentially a top 10 pick. So explain to us all how a club can plan ahead for that?

They can trade 3 draft hands (2 into the future and the one currently in) if the club can't manage to get the player in the door from that, that's squarely on there mismanagement of their list. In a normal draft players rarely stay ranked 1 all through the yr, and teams still manage.

 

[hammer180]

What if the other clubs don't want to trade?

Then the club will the fatherson should have been offering more to ensure the trade gets done.

 

[Lore]

I can already see it. They will wipe it next year and we will miss the number 1 pick in Walker than they will obviously get rid of FA compo in the first round as that’s an even larger joke just to have Walsh walk out on us and miss the top 5 compo pick

You’ll just have to win the spoon and take him home full price I suppose.

If Essendon wins the spoon they’ll probably trade the pick to you in exchange for a bit of help when Bewick comes through in 2027

 

[Bostonian]

Then the club will the fatherson should have been offering more to ensure the trade gets done.

So you want a system to develop where other clubs can extort another club with ridiculous demands?

 

[Elixuh]

Academy players will draft tamper like Wingard and Perkins saying they only want to play in state XX etc and then a team are highly unlikely to take them unless it’s H Reid level of talent.

Could result in even more distorted outcomes…. As player that should have gone at 9 gets to 25.

I mean they literally just changed the laws on this last year, wtf is the league listening to the second worst run club on what the rules should be, craziness!

Because the brother of Fred Bassett is on the AFL Commission, Paul. It’s the only pull they’ve got.

 

[Bostonian]

They can trade 3 draft hands (2 into the future and the one currently in) if the club can't manage to get the player in the door from that, that's squarely on there mismanagement of their list. In a normal draft players rarely stay ranked 1 all through the yr, and teams still manage.

All your ideas seem to revolve around other clubs being only to happy to accommodate another clubs needs.

Thus the massive flaws that are evident in those theories.