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

[Duckimus Prime]

In what world does Zak Butters not give you the currency to match a potential bid on Dougie?

Anyone in reality.

Butters will want to go to a contending side, so any picks received in trade will be late first rounders. With the limits being suggested on picks for matching, multiple late first round picks can't even be combined to match a bid. So they have to be traded for another very limited earlier first round pick.

Now if there's another top rated kid in the same draft for another club, they're going to be seeking the exact same limited number of picks. Pushing up the costs for trading even more.

 

[stavro#4]

Anyone in reality.

Butters will want to go to a contending side, so any picks received in trade will be late first rounders. With the limits being suggested on picks for matching, multiple late first round picks can't even be combined to match a bid. So they have to be traded for another very limited earlier first round pick.

Now if there's another top rated kid in the same draft for another club, they're going to be seeking the exact same limited number of picks. Pushing up the costs for trading even more.

Butters is an RFA next year.

Either way Butters won’t get to a contending club without them meeting your trade price. You might not get dollar for dollar value but you’ll get a bloody good trade haul.

Same situation with Nas this year that other fanbases couldn’t grasp.

Which was the point effectively made by Ross. Clubs still need to meet trade values as they are not UFA

 

[mpal6]

Anyone in reality.

Butters will want to go to a contending side, so any picks received in trade will be late first rounders. With the limits being suggested on picks for matching, multiple late first round picks can't even be combined to match a bid. So they have to be traded for another very limited earlier first round pick.

Now if there's another top rated kid in the same draft for another club, they're going to be seeking the exact same limited number of picks. Pushing up the costs for trading even more.

I believe the benchmark highlighted was how Carlton got the Jagga Smith pick 3 trade. I had a look for it.

Carlton acquired pick 14 by giving up future first (8) and future second (26).
Carlton then acquired pick 3 by giving up pick 12, 14, Matt Owies

So in order to get a top 5 pick - you need to be prepared to give up 3 firsts, 1 second and potentially a player. Apparently that's fair price and anything less to bid match will be deemed as robbing the system.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

So the bottom four clubs aren’t allowed to trade those picks?

Yes if they get a good enough offer and want to trade them they can but they should have access to any player in the draft no matching of bids in or compensation picks in the first 4 picks , if the afl were actually serious about equalisation the would do this immediately

 

[Stamos]

I believe the benchmark highlighted was how Carlton got the Jagga Smith pick 3 trade. I had a look for it.

Carlton acquired pick 14 by giving up future first (8) and future second (26).
Carlton then acquired pick 3 by giving up pick 12, 14, Matt Owies

So in order to get a top 5 pick - you need to be prepared to give up 3 firsts, 1 second and potentially a player. Apparently that's fair price and anything less to bid match will be deemed as robbing the system.

We didn't give up 3 1sts

 

[LukeParkerno1]

So the league needs to scrap all academies then as there's no benefit to clubs putting a cent towards then to develop elite talent.

Where have I said that? You recon I want academies to go we benefit from it jeez. All I've said is pay market value and that's fair, it's fair for every one of these whether it be academy, NGA or father son. If he's worth pick 5, you get the adequate selections in 2 picks to equal that selection.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I believe the benchmark highlighted was how Carlton got the Jagga Smith pick 3 trade. I had a look for it.

Carlton acquired pick 14 by giving up future first (8) and future second (26).
Carlton then acquired pick 3 by giving up pick 12, 14, Matt Owies

So in order to get a top 5 pick - you need to be prepared to give up 3 firsts, 1 second and potentially a player. Apparently that's fair price and anything less to bid match will be deemed as robbing the system.

The pick 3 deal only involves the last stage which was 10 and 14, that's market value, whatever Carlton did before that to get there is on then, but West Coast determined they would accept pick 10 and 14 for selection 3.

They didn't even give up 3 firsts in the first place, it's two and a player basically and Owies was basically worthless they just got him to where he wanted to go

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yes if they get a good enough offer and want to trade them they can but they should have access to any player in the draft no matching of bids in or compensation picks in the first 4 picks , if the afl were actually serious about equalisation the would do this immediately

Academies would die tomorrow if this was implemented. You lot got a solution that is fair for everyone and are still complaining? I'm all for paying closer to market value, but there's no need to close off the top picks if you luck out once a blue moon. Compensation picks should not occur in the first round.

 

[Bostonian]

Where have I said that? You recon I want academies to go we benefit from it jeez. All I've said is pay market value and that's fair, it's fair for every one of these whether it be academy, NGA or father son. If he's worth pick 5, you get the adequate selections in 2 picks to equal that selection.

I'm saying there's no point if there is no guarantee of getting that player that you've put years into.

Imagine putting 5+ years into a young player and then because you can't secure the now overpriced value of them you lose them.

Zero point of academies for non-Northern Clubs to bother putting a single cent into it.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'm saying there's no point if there is no guarantee of getting that player that you've put years into.

Imagine putting 5+ years into a young player and then because you can't secure the now overpriced value of them you lose them.

Zero point of academies for non-Northern Clubs to bother putting a single cent into it.

It’s not overpriced it will be “priced” at market value. There is a guarantee you will get the player if you have the selections that’s all this will do that’s it.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Academies would die tomorrow if this was implemented. You lot got a solution that is fair for everyone and are still complaining? I'm all for paying closer to market value, but there's no need to close off the top picks if you luck out once a blue moon. Compensation picks should not occur in the first round.

Your looking at things from an extremely biased point of view How exactly would blacking out the first 4 picks cause academies to die ? As you say if it only happens once in a blue moon . we missed out on cam McKenzie a top 10 pick when they changed the nga bidding for a short time it sucked but it was not the end of the world. The new system is a little bit better but not even close to being fair, the bottom 4 clubs should absolutely have priority access to talent before anyone else like I said if the club wants a top 4 rated academy player bad enough then they can come up with a fair and reasonable trade to get one off the picks

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Your looking at things from an extremely biased point of view How exactly would blacking out the first 4 picks cause academies to die ? As you say if it only happens once in a blue moon . we missed out on cam McKenzie a top 10 pick when they changed the nga bidding for a short time it sucked but it was not the end of the world. The new system is a little bit better but not even close to being fair, the bottom 4 clubs should absolutely have priority access to talent before anyone else like I said if the club wants a top 4 rated academy player bad enough then they can come up with a fair and reasonable trade to get one off the picks

You should be thankful McKensie is rubbish. You do realise how much the new system will cost, it will be fair. To match a top 5 pick you are going to have to get a similar output to what Carlton gave WCE and that was picks 10 and 14. That is more than fair. No need to stop the access

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Your looking at things from an extremely biased point of view How exactly would blacking out the first 4 picks cause academies to die ? As you say if it only happens once in a blue moon . we missed out on cam McKenzie a top 10 pick when they changed the nga bidding for a short time it sucked but it was not the end of the world. The new system is a little bit better but not even close to being fair, the bottom 4 clubs should absolutely have priority access to talent before anyone else like I said if the club wants a top 4 rated academy player bad enough then they can come up with a fair and reasonable trade to get one off the picks

We missed out on Cam McKenzie because of NGA drafting limits... meanwhile Lance Collard and Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera are on St Kilda's list.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

We missed out on Cam McKenzie because of NGA drafting limits... meanwhile Lance Collard and Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera are on St Kilda's list.

Yeah and we used first round picks to draft both which is how it should be

 

[Senor M]

lol, we get two MCG games a year if we're lucky. None of the non Vic clubs get any type blockbuster fixture. It's a national competition, share them around nationally. Why should Port argue for the Bulldogs, when they get nothing out of it.

The Lions had 3 H&A games at the MCG in 2025 (Richmond, Hawthorn, Collingwood).

In fact outside of the COVID years, Brisbane has been "lucky" and played at least two H&A MCG games in 7 seasons out of a possible 8.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

You should be thankful McKensie is rubbish. You do realise how much the new system will cost, it will be fair. To match a top 5 pick you are going to have to get a similar output to what Carlton gave WCE and that was picks 10 and 14. That is more than fair. No need to stop the access

Your missing the major issue here yes your paying a fairer value but your still getting priority access to the players , it’s in no way a fair system when a club that wins enough games to play finals get access over a club that wins 2-3 games it’s actually laughable

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Yeah and we used first round picks to draft both which is how it should be

And so did Hawthorn...

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Your missing the major issue here yes your paying a fairer value but your still getting priority access to the players , it’s in no way a fair system when a club that wins enough games to play finals get access over a club that wins 2-3 games it’s actually laughable

You need to look at the new system there won’t be much trading out and if the other changes come in with a max of two picks that becomes more than fair. These systems would close if there isn’t access. Do it and then the afl can pump millions into it (which they tried and was an utter failure). We aren’t keeping an academy running to get scraps

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Solution is simple.

If there's a bid, you have to match with a SINGLE pick that is, at worst, ten picks after the bid pick.

No stupid points. No bundling up worthless late picks to score a gun player.

There's still scope for a bit of a bargain, but you have to pay a fairer price.

Fri Oct 3 - Fri Oct 10: Free Agency Period
Mon Oct 6 - Wed Oct 15: Trade Period
Fri Oct 24: Deadline for draft bidding
Sat Oct 25 - Tue Nov 18: Pick trading allowed to obtain matching picks if required
Wed Nov 19 - Thu Nov 20: Draft

If you bid for my player with pick 2, then I need pick 12 or lower to match it. If I haven't got one, I need to go to the market and trade for one. Future pick trading makes this more than possible.

The problem at the moment is the AFL have allowed the market to set a price (the bid), but then don't make the club pay that price (a similar pick). They allow them to pay with a bunch of low picks. It's absurd and needlessly complicated.

Nick Daicos was bid on at pick 4. Pies have to pay with Pick 14 or lower.

Darcy was bid on at pick 2. Dogs have to pay with Pick 12 or lower.

Don't have it? go and pay for it on the market.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

And so did Hawthorn...

Yep and I have no issues with him going in the open draft that’s how it should be if we wanted him enough we could have traded up

 

[briztoon]

The Lions had 3 H&A games at the MCG in 2025 (Richmond, Hawthorn, Collingwood).

In fact outside of the COVID years, Brisbane has been "lucky" and played at least two H&A MCG games in 7 seasons out of a possible 8.

Yet our merger agreement stipulates all our Melbourne games are supposed to be at the MCG.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

You need to look at the new system there won’t be much trading out and if the other changes come in with a max of two picks that becomes more than fair. These systems would close if there isn’t access. Do it and then the afl can pump millions into it (which they tried and was an utter failure). We aren’t keeping an academy running to get scraps

Explain how you would be getting scraps ?you would still have priority access to any player that’s not bid on in the first 4 picks of any draft , I don’t see how anyone one could argue that this is not fair

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Explain how you would be getting scraps ?you would still have priority access to any player that’s not bid on in the first 4 picks of any draft , I don’t see how anyone one could argue that this is not fair

That is scraps why would we do it if we can’t have access to the very off time we have an elite talent it’s the same as F/S or NGA. Just make the system parallel which they have now. There should not be any more whinging it’s beyond fair now

 

[Tasmanian saint]

That is scraps why would we do it if we can’t have access to the very off time we have an elite talent it’s the same as F/S or NGA. Just make the system parallel which they have now. There should not be any more whinging it’s beyond fair now

Beyond fair that’s absolutely laughable it’s not even close to being fair. Drafts are supposed to be the number 1 tool for equalisation yet we clubs that finish at the bottom not having access to the best talent and people wonder why clubs are getting stuck in forever rebuilds . You talk about the limit of only two players that doesn’t mean a Lot if they end up being multiple top ten picks like this year

 

[Tasmanian saint]

It’s a embarrassment the afl have allowed this doesn’t happen in any other major sports on the planet