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

[mpal6]

What’s the point of being able to trade future picks if you can’t use them on players from your own state?

I believe it's the first round which is the point of contention so far.

Fine with whatever happening later, if they settle the argument on the cream of the crop - across father-son, academy, NGA - all streams - then this problem goes away hopefully

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

We'll never see "Points" replace "Picks", so....just fix the DVA indexation and (almost) all other problems go away. Simple, efficient. Review/Update the DVA indexation every 3 years (with 2 years forward planning) - ie announce change to 2027 draft values before 2025 trade period) to reflect recent changes in trading values.

Open pick matching throughout the draft - no restrictions on F/S, NGA, Northern Academies. I'd even look to a reintroduction of recruitment 'zones' for the Vic/SA/WA clubs. Personally I'd remove the % discount entirely (the benefit is using lower picks), or at least reduce it to the first bid-match per draft.

Remove FA compensation entirely - the benefit is getting the contract off the books to recruit others. (Won't happen as it is against the AFL's "competitive balance" goals).

 

[Lore]

Bombers, Power dads call on AFL to keep sons' dreams alive

Darren Bewick and Steven Salopek hope any changes to the AFL's father-son rule will allow their sons, Koby and Louis, to follow in their footsteps

www.afl.com.au

 

[Count_Zero]

Imagine if St Kilda had Sandy dragons as an academy.

 

[eastfreo75]

Tom Mitchell left his father’s club. Joe Daniher left his father’s club.

There’s also West Australians that left WA to play in the east and vice versa.

There are northern and NGA academy players that ended up elsewhere.

There’s players you drafted that then left.

Why do anything if a player might leave anyway? Let’s just have a free for all and let players sign where they want with whoever will pay them the most. Salary cap acts as equalisation.

My point is get rid of the Father Son.

 

[Lore]

My point is get rid of the Father Son.

I know, I just think your argument needs some work

 

[eastfreo75]

I know, I just think your argument needs some work

I was responding to an argument.

Maybe you should look at the context and previous posts.

 

[Lore]

I was responding to an argument.

Maybe you should look at the context and previous posts.

Which started with your post that they should get rid of father son. I’m comfortable with my statement that your argument needs work, and now reiterate it.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Remove FA compensation entirely - the benefit is getting the contract off the books to recruit others. (Won't happen as it is against the AFL's "competitive balance" goals).

Take the compo pick/points from the acquiring club. Prevents the draft being impacted by additional picks being created and also limits strong clubs getting free players to make themselves stronger.

 

[My_Username]

Not sure how this fell off the first page.

GWS and Carlton have officially had words with the league about it now too.

Blues, Giants in talks with League over impending draft changes

Carlton has had discussions with the League around possible changes to draft bidding

www.afl.com.au

I dare say most, if not all clubs have spoken to the league about it. I'd suggest they were remiss in their duties if they hadn't.

Obviously some clubs will be much more concerned about the short-medium term ramifications than others, but I suspect they've all had a chat, both to gauge the likely happenings and attempt to influence them for their own benefit.

 

[My_Username]

Take the compo pick/points from the acquiring club. Prevents the draft being impacted by additional picks being created and also limits strong clubs getting free players to make themselves stronger.

Ensure that the compo is always lower than the trade value of the player.

Either remove band 1 entirely, or limit it to the half dozen or so highest paid players in the comp.

 

[jdstorm]

Ensure that the compo is always lower than the trade value of the player.

Either remove band 1 entirely, or limit it to the half dozen or so highest paid players in the comp.

I’d just rather no compo and give clubs an option to force a trade.

ie club can ask a player to pick 2
Preferred Teams That they would like to play for and then the club accepts the best offer

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I’d just rather no compo and give clubs an option to force a trade.

ie club can ask a player to pick 2
Preferred Teams That they would like to play for and then the club accepts the best offer

I know it won't happen but players should not be able to nominate teams for trade, rather they can nominate a state, that is until UFA. It would stop the ridiculous notion of players nominating clubs from a state that are contenders. I use last year for example, why shouldn't Port be able to trade Houston to lets say North? Instead they have to accept a packet of used Twisties and Rory Atkins

Bank 1 comp should be after the first round period, that is plenty it's still a top 30 pick use it or trade it. It will stop the Carlton's of the world not even attempting to match Silvagni as they know the bloke under no planet is worth a top 10 pick

 

[jdstorm]

I know it won't happen but players should not be able to nominate teams for trade, rather they can nominate a state, that is until UFA. It would stop the ridiculous notion of players nominating clubs from a state that are contenders. I use last year for example, why shouldn't Port be able to trade Houston to lets say North? Instead they have to accept a packet of used Twisties and Rory Atkins

Bank 1 comp should be after the first round period, that is plenty it's still a top 30 pick use it or trade it. It will stop the Carlton's of the world not even attempting to match Silvagni as they know the bloke under no planet is worth a top 10 pick

I think nominating a state is tricky I think players would avoid Victoria so they don’t end up on one of the terrible teams.

I think that nominating 2 teams is in practice the same as it creates a competition/market for the player.

I’d rather just wipe out compo. You get a list spot

 

[bluebaggerjuls]

I think nominating a state is tricky I think players would avoid Victoria so they don’t end up on one of the terrible teams.

I think that nominating 2 teams is in practice the same as it creates a competition/market for the player.

I’d rather just wipe out compo. You get a list spot

Wiping out compo forces teams to match which is great. Means extra picks aren’t getting created out of thin air

 

[Scotland]

I think nominating a state is tricky I think players would avoid Victoria so they don’t end up on one of the terrible teams.

I think that nominating 2 teams is in practice the same as it creates a competition/market for the player.

I’d rather just wipe out compo. You get a list spot

In professional sports leagues with equalisation measures in place you don't get to pick and choose where you are traded. Which is why free agency and contract terms are so valuable.

AFL players just want to pick and choose the best aspects of each system and not have any of the negatives. First cab off the rank the AFL needs to get rid of 6, 7, 8, 9+ year contracts and have a real salary cap.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Firstly I'd get rid of FA compo. It ****s around with the draft too much and you know a compo system isn't working when clubs are actively trying to trigger it.

If there must be compo, perhaps it's instead in the form of money. Lose a player and you get some additional cap space next year. Maybe half the value of their contract at their new club (up to a certain amount). Allows you to actively recruit to replace them.

Eg Draper goes to Brisbane on $800k per year average. Essendon as compo get an extra $400k in their salary cap in 2026 (only for one year). They can use that to recruit, or pay their other guys more so they don't lose them.

It's not perfect but I think it's better than ruining the draft with all these picks. The players would love it as there's more total money in the salary pool and it encourages chasing current players rather than getting an extra pick.

Secondly I think FS and academies are okay, they just need to fix the bidding so that a fair price is paid. Eg, you have to pay with a pick that is within 10 picks of the bid. Bids can occur a couple of weeks before the draft. The club then either matches with a pick it has, or has two weeks of pick trading to get one. If they can't then bad luck, you miss out on the player.

So two weeks prior to the draft, Richmond submits a bit for Bunk Moreland Jr with Pick 2. Essendon can only match with pick 12 or below. Either it already has one, or it has two weeks to find one via trade (including trading future picks). It then gets the player if it matches, or doesn't. And no, you can't trade a pick that you've bid with - Richmond have used Pick 2 to bid, so it is locked to them.

Essendon pays something approaching a fair price rather than packaging up a bunch of garbage picks to get the player. 2021 Draft is the prime example - the Bulldogs and Collingwood actively trading out their high picks so they could use multiple shit lower picks to pay for Darcy and Daicos. Nah. Darcy is bid at pick 2, the Dogs have to use a pick inside 12 to get him. Still a discount, but closer to a fairer price.

 

[My_Username]

I’d just rather no compo and give clubs an option to force a trade.

ie club can ask a player to pick 2
Preferred Teams That they would like to play for and then the club accepts the best offer

AFLPA wouldn't accept it.

It's also a plan that would work for Vic clubs, but not so much in others.

 

[GenericUsername202]

Queenslanders and those from NSW don't follow AFL. They follow their AFL teams. The culture is completely different here and it would be a lot harder to convince a Queenslander to play for North than it would be for a Victorian kid to play for the suns. The AFL can do whatever they want, but in the end, all of these players will come home to us.

 

[My_Username]

Queenslanders and those from NSW don't follow AFL. They follow their AFL teams. The culture is completely different here and it would be a lot harder to convince a Queenslander to play for North than it would be for a Victorian kid to play for the suns. The AFL can do whatever they want, but in the end, all of these players will come home to us.

I think you overestimate how much Victorians support the league.

 

[jumperfan]

Queenslanders and those from NSW don't follow AFL. They follow their AFL teams. The culture is completely different here and it would be a lot harder to convince a Queenslander to play for North than it would be for a Victorian kid to play for the suns. The AFL can do whatever they want, but in the end, all of these players will come home to us.

So those academies aren't necessary then?

 

[tigs2010]

Queenslanders and those from NSW don't follow AFL. They follow their AFL teams. The culture is completely different here and it would be a lot harder to convince a Queenslander to play for North than it would be for a Victorian kid to play for the suns. The AFL can do whatever they want, but in the end, all of these players will come home to us.

Sounds like Vic clubs need an academy and Qld teams do not

 

[GenericUsername202]

 

[Dr Tigris]

AFL might accidentally throw eh baby out with the bathwater - I'm shocked.

Keep FS and Academies but do something like no discounts and if you match in picks 11-20 you can't get another first for one year, picks 6-10 can't match for 2 years, and 1-5 can't match for 3 years. Still got the incentives, but limit the ability to just build a squad through a super Academy or FS luck.

 

[Elixuh]

The arguments from clubs like port, Essendon etc are terrible.

Either you want the change now (2026) or you want a different approach (eg go with the points changes and continue to tweak). A reason argument can’t be that we should change it -checks when my club will benefit- in 3 years time.