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

[tombomb]

But here's the kicker. If you match the bid the player still has the option of delisting themselves and going in one of the drafts and the losing club gets nothing. With Houston the situation was different because we had said its fine to leave just as though we got 2 firsts but the Melbourne thing fell apart and we got screwed. Assumingly by player managers.

Players going into the draft is going to happen about once every 25 years. It is not a good enough reason to have these compensation picks diluting the first round.

And there was nothing stopping Port saying no to Houston. They screwed themselves.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

But here's the kicker. If you match the bid the player still has the option of delisting themselves and going in one of the drafts and the losing club gets nothing. With Houston the situation was different because we had said its fine to leave just as though we got 2 firsts but the Melbourne thing fell apart and we got screwed. Assumingly by player managers.

Houston was contracted for the millionth time nothing was stopping you accepting rubbish and Rory Atkins for the bloke! That’s on Port how is that remotely relevant to this? That was a trade that happens every year

 

[longdonkey]

Houston was contracted for the millionth time nothing was stopping you accepting rubbish and Rory Atkins for the bloke! That’s on Port how is that remotely relevant to this? That was a trade that happens every year

The implications of removing academy access for first rounders, no compo for free Agency and no father sons is that more and more players will leave clubs after their first contract. I reference Houston as a trade that was forced on us in exactly the same way that trades that are forced that lead to unfair outcomes. The perfect examples can be seen over the past 10 years at Gold Coast. Dawson being another example. Would love to go back and see how much you would have whined about that one.
But these types of trades will happen more and more. Thinking having a unrestricted first round will lead to equalisation of the comp while free agency and trading exist is dumb.
This is about one thing - clubs that think that they are disadvantaged want it gone, clubs who think they will get an advantage don't. It's got nothing to do with fairness.

 

[Purple Suit]

The only player of note we have gotten post pick 20 in the 15 years of the academey is Gulden and he would have been a first round pick if not for COVID.

Clubs aren't going to invest the enormous resources it takes to run an academy like we do because once every 5 years you get access to a Sam Wicks.

If a team like Freo legitimately identified someone who wouldn't be playing australian rules if not for the NGAs, then they should get priority access to them. I dunno how that can possibly work though.

But he wasn't a first round pick though so by not investing the resources that the AFL gives you could miss out on the next Gulden. Seems like a dumb move, I'd happily pick up a Gulden every 5 years.

You mean like Sydney did for the Lizard otherwise he would be lost to footy forever. The point is not about the individual, it's giving about communities, indigenous, other nationalities and other states more chance to play AFL and provide inspiration to the next lot of kids and background types to have someone to follow. The AFL identified it was an issue and went down this path to the determent of traditional AFL football states and populations. Cutting back the access for everyone for the first round is necessary to protect the draft, the benefits for the back 2/3rds of the draft is still a big enough carrot despite your complaining about having your huge advantage watered down.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

But he wasn't a first round pick though so by not investing the resources that the AFL gives you could miss out on the next Gulden. Seems like a dumb move, I'd happily pick up a Gulden every 5 years.

You mean like Sydney did for the Lizard otherwise he would be lost to footy forever. The point is not about the individual, it's giving about communities, indigenous, other nationalities and other states more chance to play AFL and provide inspiration to the next lot of kids and background types to have someone to follow. The AFL identified it was an issue and went down this path to the determent of traditional AFL football states and populations. Cutting back the access for everyone for the first round is necessary to protect the draft, the benefits for the back 2/3rds of the draft is still a big enough carrot despite your complaining about having your huge advantage watered down.

You can’t cut back all the benefits whilst keeping every other advantage still in play. You planning on taking out some advantage’s Melbourne clubs get? Or how about the utter you know what that SA clubs get a free home game every year…oh don’t forget Melbourne clubs getting gifted a home state GF with the umpiring that comes that way

 

[Purple Suit]

You can’t cut back all the benefits whilst keeping every other advantage still in play. You planning on taking out some advantage’s Melbourne clubs get? Or how about the utter you know what that SA clubs get a free home game every year…oh don’t forget Melbourne clubs getting gifted a home state GF with the umpiring that comes that way

It’s not all the benefits. You get access to all kids over a huge area. I don’t know the numbers but I assume the growth in junior participation is huge and the kids that are good at it probably keep playing. You still get access past the 1st round, bigger advantage than 1 extra home game a year.

You also get opening round which gives you an advantage with an extra bye & sometimes a free hit against a side who hasn’t played due to the AFL’s terrible scheduling.

Sydney has been up for a very long time and has had 7 GF’s for 2 flags in 20 years. Not sure you’re disadvantaged at all.

 

[tombomb]

But he wasn't a first round pick though so by not investing the resources that the AFL gives you could miss out on the next Gulden. Seems like a dumb move, I'd happily pick up a Gulden every 5 years.

You mean like Sydney did for the Lizard otherwise he would be lost to footy forever. The point is not about the individual, it's giving about communities, indigenous, other nationalities and other states more chance to play AFL and provide inspiration to the next lot of kids and background types to have someone to follow. The AFL identified it was an issue and went down this path to the determent of traditional AFL football states and populations. Cutting back the access for everyone for the first round is necessary to protect the draft, the benefits for the back 2/3rds of the draft is still a big enough carrot despite your complaining about having your huge advantage watered down.

It's not a Gulden every 5 years. It's one Gulden in 15 years and he would have been taken inside 20 if COVID hadn't disrupted all the junior football. A Sam Wicks every 5 years is a better comparison.

As for Blakey, I think changing it to say F/S overrules Academies is fair enough. I'd even say a rule that if your mother or father played state league Australian Rules you can't be matched in the first round as a Northern Academy player would be fair enough.

The NGAs are just a rort to placate non NSW/QLD clubs. Don't bother pretending that this is about under privileged or remote kids or families that can't speak english. Nearly all of them would still be playing AFL at a high level without the NGAs.

The changes I outlined earlier would massively reduce the compromising of the draft without ruining the good things that f/s and northern academies provide. Locking up the first round would ruin both.

Yes, there would still be a small advantage to northern clubs. But there are lot of advantages and disadvantages in the competition. We can't go through every teams' list like Freo does and try to pick off their WA players.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

It’s not all the benefits. You get access to all kids over a huge area. I don’t know the numbers but I assume the growth in junior participation is huge and the kids that are good at it probably keep playing. You still get access past the 1st round, bigger advantage than 1 extra home game a year.

You also get opening round which gives you an advantage with an extra bye & sometimes a free hit against a side who hasn’t played due to the AFL’s terrible scheduling.

Sydney has been up for a very long time and has had 7 GF’s for 2 flags in 20 years. Not sure you’re disadvantaged at all.

The academy wouldn’t exist if it’s only the scraps we’d get access to. Why are we putting in money for a bunch of average. That makes no sense whatsoever. I’m all for paying more all for a top 5 lockout but not more than a top 10 lockout.

Get rid of the other advantages for other clubs.

 

[Purple Suit]

It's not a Gulden every 5 years. It's one Gulden in 15 years and he would have been taken inside 20 if COVID hadn't disrupted all the junior football. A Sam Wicks every 5 years is a better comparison.

As for Blakey, I think changing it to say F/S overrules Academies is fair enough. I'd even say a rule that if your mother or father played state league Australian Rules you can't be matched in the first round as a Northern Academy player would be fair enough.

The NGAs are just a rort to placate non NSW/QLD clubs. Don't bother pretending that this is about under privileged or remote kids or families that can't speak english. Nearly all of them would still be playing AFL at a high level without the NGAs.

The changes I outlined earlier would massively reduce the compromising of the draft without ruining the good things that f/s and northern academies provide. Locking up the first round would ruin both.

Yes, there would still be a small advantage to northern clubs. But there are lot of advantages and disadvantages in the competition. We can't go through every teams' list like Freo does and try to pick off their WA players.

You’re just saying the same stuff.

NGA’s - Not a rort in WA

Gulden - wasn’t first round, you can’t change the past. Anyway, I’m sure the other three northern clubs have done handy 2nd rounder plus recruits.

Biggest Rort - Brisbanes and Sydney’s access to talent that has kept them up for a very long time. GWS & GC soon to follow unless there are changes and they need to be big ones.

The academy wouldn’t exist if it’s only the scraps we’d get access to. Why are we putting in money for a bunch of average. That makes no sense whatsoever. I’m all for paying more all for a top 5 lockout but not more than a top 10 lockout.

Get rid of the other advantages for other clubs.

AFL pays for it with huge distributions to the Northern clubs. Watch access change and the academies continue.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You’re just saying the same stuff.

NGA’s - Not a rort in WA

Gulden - wasn’t first round, you can’t change the past. Anyway, I’m sure the other three northern clubs have done handy 2nd rounder plus recruits.

Biggest Rort - Brisbanes and Sydney’s access to talent that has kept them up for a very long time. GWS & GC soon to follow unless there are changes and they need to be big ones.


AFL pays for it with huge distributions to the Northern clubs. Watch access change and the academies continue.

Sydney pays millions for our one for starters. Again I do like how we give up the academies but you have no issue with other things that screw us. I assume you are fine for the top seed getting the grand final? I assume you are fine for all clubs getting the same home games period not SA clubs getting an extra one every year. I assume you are putting in steps so that all clubs have similar travel? The talent is needed as it stops every decent player wanting to go home we get rorted every time at the trade table when the mummies boys want to go home. All the academies do is to stop what would be half the northern sides lists going home. For the record WA clubs should have allowances for travel too I’ve been big on this.

 

[The Tilt]

Changes announced at the end of 2024 to come into effect in 2025 are based around a new draft value index (how many points each pick is worth), a reduced discount for clubs matching bids (10%, down from 20%), and as of the 2024 Draft, bids on NGA players can be matched in the first round, rather than being locked out until pick 40.

Below are the two Draft Value Indexes (DVIs), the first was in use up until 2024, and the second is from this year (2025) onwards. I've added an extra column to indicate what pick you would need to match a bid if the bid was matched with only one pick. In 2024 you could match pick 1 with pick 2, but in 2025 you would need pick 1 to match a bid at 1... etc.

Spoiler: 2024 DVI

Round	Pick	Pick value	Bid match requirement	Equivalent pick
Round 1	1	3000	2400	2
Round 1	2	2517	2014	4
Round 1	3	2234	1787	5
Round 1	4	2034	1627	7
Round 1	5	1878	1502	8
Round 1	6	1751	1401	9
Round 1	7	1644	1315	11
Round 1	8	1551	1241	12
Round 1	9	1469	1175	13
Round 1	10	1395	1116	14
Round 1	11	1329	1063	16
Round 1	12	1268	1014	17
Round 1	13	1212	970	18
Round 1	14	1161	929	19
Round 1	15	1112	890	20
Round 1	16	1067	854	21
Round 1	17	1025	820	22
Round 1	18	985	788	23
Round 2	19	948	751	25
Round 2	20	912	715	26
Round 2	21	878	681	27
Round 2	22	845	648	28
Round 2	23	815	618	30
Round 2	24	785	588	31
Round 2	25	756	559	32
Round 2	26	729	532	34
Round 2	27	703	506	36
Round 2	28	677	480	37
Round 2	29	653	456	38
Round 2	30	629	432	39
Round 2	31	606	409	41
Round 2	32	584	387	42
Round 2	33	563	366	43
Round 2	34	542	345	45
Round 2	35	522	325	46
Round 2	36	502	305	47
Round 3	37	483	286	49
Round 3	38	465	268	50
Round 3	39	446	249	51
Round 3	40	429	232	53
Round 3	41	412	215	54
Round 3	42	395	198	55
Round 3	43	378	181	57
Round 3	44	362	165	58
Round 3	45	347	150	59
Round 3	46	331	134	61
Round 3	47	316	119	62
Round 3	48	302	105	63
Round 3	49	287	90	65
Round 3	50	273	76	66
Round 3	51	259	62	67
Round 3	52	246	49	69
Round 3	53	233	36	70
Round 3	54	220	23	71
Round 3	55	207	10	72
Round 3	56	194	nil	any
Round 4	57	182
Round 4	58	170
Round 4	59	158
Round 4	60	146
Round 4	61	135
Round 4	62	123
Round 4	63	112
Round 4	64	101
Round 4	65	90
Round 4	66	80
Round 4	67	69
Round 4	68	59
Round 4	69	49
Round 4	70	39
Round 4	71	29
Round 4	72	19
Round 4	73	9

Spoiler: 2025 and beyond DVI

Round	Pick	Pick value	Bid match requirement	Equivalent pick
Round 1	1	3000	2700	1
Round 1	2	2481	2233	2
Round 1	3	2178	1960	4
Round 1	4	1962	1766	5
Round 1	5	1795	1616	6
Round 1	6	1659	1493	7
Round 1	7	1543	1389	8
Round 1	8	1443	1299	9
Round 1	9	1355	1220	10
Round 1	10	1276	1148	11
Round 1	11	1205	1085	12
Round 1	12	1140	1026	13
Round 1	13	1080	972	15
Round 1	14	1024	922	16
Round 1	15	973	876	17
Round 1	16	924	832	18
Round 1	17	879	791	19
Round 1	18	836	752	20
Round 2	19	796	712	21
Round 2	20	757	673	22
Round 2	21	721	637	23
Round 2	22	686	602	24
Round 2	23	653	569	25
Round 2	24	621	537	26
Round 2	25	590	506	27
Round 2	26	561	477	28
Round 2	27	533	449	30
Round 2	28	505	421	31
Round 2	29	479	395	32
Round 2	30	454	370	33
Round 2	31	429	345	34
Round 2	32	405	321	35
Round 2	33	382	298	36
Round 2	34	360	276	38
Round 2	35	338	254	39
Round 2	36	317	233	40
Round 3	37	297	nil	any
Round 3	38	277
Round 3	39	257
Round 3	40	238
Round 3	41	220
Round 3	42	202
Round 3	43	184
Round 3	44	167
Round 3	45	150
Round 3	46	134
Round 3	47	118
Round 3	48	102
Round 3	49	86
Round 3	50	71
Round 3	51	57
Round 3	52	42
Round 3	53	28
Round 3	54	14
Round 3	55	0
Round 3	56	0

Clubs have already been limited to one pick in the national draft for each available spot on the senior list for the last few years. The minimum open list spots prior to the draft is 3, in order to take a minimum of 3 picks in the national draft (including rookie upgrades).

With the new DVI, picks in the second and third round are significantly devalued, and fourth round picks have no value at all. Grand Final teams' third round picks also have no value under the new DVI. This means that trading in enough points to match a high bid is far more difficult from 2025 onwards.

Notably, in 2025 you cannot match Pick 1 with your natural draft hand if you finish outside the bottom 5. The club that starts with picks 5, 23 and 41 will not have enough points to match Pick 1 without trading for more picks, while the premiers' natural draft hand is now insufficient to match a bid above 10th.


As of Monday 18th of August 2025, the AFL is also floating the possibility of a draft lockout affecting the first 5 or 10 picks, or potentially the whole first round.

Spoiler: Twomey on Gettable (transcript is voice recognition software from the Podcasts app)

“Well, I spoke to several clubs who are a part of the AFL's football managers meeting on Monday. And they all left with the view that the league very much has significant change on its mind with regards to the bidding system as part of that, of course, the father-son and academy system. So while clubs in some quarters are pushing for this, we know St Kilda, we know Geelong have raised this.

The majority are fearful that the AFL is going to be bringing in a draft lockout, whether it's the first five picks, first 10 picks or the first round, whether it's a protected zone, the bids can't be matched on those father-sons, academy and NGA players. And the feeling that the clubs took from Monday's meeting as well is that the league is keen to get the ball rolling on this pretty soon, potentially even as soon as next year. So I think there's gonna be some significant backlash to this, this potential draft lockout.

And clubs will rally against that. So let's look at a couple that will. I mean, we just spoke about Cody Walker in recent weeks and how good he's been[…]”

From Gettable: Father-son ‘lockout’ fear, Don to depart, big play for Saint, Harley call close?, 20 Aug 2025

This material may be protected by copyright.

This is a really good synopsis.

Just looking at the new DVI, I feel like the scale of the changes haven't been fully appreciated. There's more than 70% less points attached to picks below pick 40 this year than last year. In 2024, picks 35-39 would cover you for matching pick 1 (with the discount); this year, those picks would cover matching a bid on pick 7.

Am I right in thinking these changes will more or less eliminate the sort of points-harvesting we've seen, where clubs trade out of the first round to get an increase in points by acquiring a bunch of lower picks? If so, it's going to mean a much less compromised draft, with clubs at least needing to use relatively high picks to match early bids on a F/S or academy players.

It looks like a massive improvement on what we've had.

 

[Elixuh]

Sydney pays millions for our one for starters. Again I do like how we give up the academies but you have no issue with other things that screw us. I assume you are fine for the top seed getting the grand final? I assume you are fine for all clubs getting the same home games period not SA clubs getting an extra one every year. I assume you are putting in steps so that all clubs have similar travel? The talent is needed as it stops every decent player wanting to go home we get rorted every time at the trade table when the mummies boys want to go home. All the academies do is to stop what would be half the northern sides lists going home. For the record WA clubs should have allowances for travel too I’ve been big on this.

They don’t believe this bit. Even though the Swans academy is called the ‘QBE Swans Academy’

 

[Lore]

This is a really good synopsis.

Just looking at the new DVI, I feel like the scale of the changes haven't been fully appreciated. There's more than 70% less points attached to picks below pick 40 this year than last year. In 2024, picks 35-39 would cover you for matching pick 1 (with the discount); this year, those picks would cover matching a bid on pick 7.

Am I right in thinking these changes will more or less eliminate the sort of points-harvesting we've seen, where clubs trade out of the first round to get an increase in points by acquiring a bunch of lower picks? If so, it's going to mean a much less compromised draft, with clubs at least needing to use relatively high picks to match early bids on a F/S or academy players.

It looks like a massive improvement on what we've had.

We don't know until we try it, but in theory it should help a lot. There will always be clubs looking for a competitive advantage though so it's something that needs to be tried and then altered as necessary.

 

[longdonkey]

We don't know until we try it, but in theory it should help a lot. There will always be clubs looking for a competitive advantage though so it's something that needs to be tried and then altered as necessary.

I wonder if they used average games played by pick number to index it against DVI points. I think doing this would have been a mistake because if you look at Brownlow votes by pick number the value of higher picks start becoming exponentially higher the higher the pick becomes.

 

[bluebaggerjuls]

we are a month away from the trade period, and we still don't know the changes. This is seriously amatuer hour from the afl.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Suns had to bring in 2 extra 1st round picks to match Uwland and Patterson.

I'm hoping we use pick 1 to bid on Uwland and then Patterson in quick succession.
Would love either and if Gold Coast match I want them paying through the nose for them.
Then throw a bid on Annable for good measure.

 

[Elixuh]

we are a month away from the trade period, and we still don't know the changes. This is seriously amatuer hour from the afl.

This my boy is business as usual

 

[eastfreo75]

Time to get rid of the Father Son. Silvagni is the latest fs to move to another club.

If tradition is such a big thing why are father sons moving? Usually for the best outcome for club or player or both.

 

[beatnik]

we are a month away from the trade period, and we still don't know the changes. This is seriously amatuer hour from the afl.

It seems obvious that any changes will primarily be to stop Brisbane getting Annable and potentially Cooper Hodge next year

 

[beatnik]

Time to get rid of the Father Son. Silvagni is the latest fs to move to another club.

If tradition is such a big thing why are father sons moving? Usually for the best outcome for club or player or both.

Except that’s he’s moving to his father’s new club…which kind of reinforces its relevance in a way

 

[giantsully]

It's not a Gulden every 5 years. It's one Gulden in 15 years and he would have been taken inside 20 if COVID hadn't disrupted all the junior football. A Sam Wicks every 5 years is a better comparison.

As for Blakey, I think changing it to say F/S overrules Academies is fair enough. I'd even say a rule that if your mother or father played state league Australian Rules you can't be matched in the first round as a Northern Academy player would be fair enough.

The NGAs are just a rort to placate non NSW/QLD clubs. Don't bother pretending that this is about under privileged or remote kids or families that can't speak english. Nearly all of them would still be playing AFL at a high level without the NGAs.

The changes I outlined earlier would massively reduce the compromising of the draft without ruining the good things that f/s and northern academies provide. Locking up the first round would ruin both.

Yes, there would still be a small advantage to northern clubs. But there are lot of advantages and disadvantages in the competition. We can't go through every teams' list like Freo does and try to pick off their WA players.

Why? What makes F/S mor precious than the Academy? Surely that's a decision for the player (which is what happened with Lizard, he could have chosen to go to either North or the Lions rather than Swans).

While Blakey is the one Swans example I'm aware of that would likely have ended up in the AFL w/o the Swans Academy, he would have almost certainly been much less developed (unless he went and boarded in a Melbourne private school). So, knowing that he would inevitably end up at another club, why would the Swans choose to include him in their Academy? Heard Luke Hodge discussing this very point regarding his kid recently - worth a listen.

 

[tombomb]

Why? What makes F/S mor precious than the Academy? Surely that's a decision for the player (which is what happened with Lizard, he could have chosen to go to either North or the Lions rather than Swans).

While Blakey is the one Swans example I'm aware of that would likely have ended up in the AFL w/o the Swans Academy, he would have almost certainly been much less developed (unless he went and boarded in a Melbourne private school). So, knowing that he would inevitably end up at another club, why would the Swans choose to include him in their Academy? Heard Luke Hodge discussing this very point regarding his kid recently - worth a listen.

If we chose to exclude a local kid from the academy because we didn't have his draft rights, that would make us complete hypocrites and expose the Northern Academies as no different to the NGA rort.

 

[Stamos]

'Serious concerns' raised over proposed draft changes

Port Adelaide has written to the AFL calling for a grandfather period for new draft bidding rules

www.afl.com.au

 

[Hawker399]

Any decision on this must be removed from club influence. Can the AFL put on its big boy pants and make a decision for the good of the game?

 

[Atomboy]

Time to get rid of the Father Son. Silvagni is the latest fs to move to another club.

If tradition is such a big thing why are father sons moving? Usually for the best outcome for club or player or both.

But what about the romance ??!!