News AFL to overhaul the draft, discuss changes to Academy and FS bid matching

[giantroo]

 

[1990crow]

NGA zoning is apparently based on residence not SANFL club.

Don’t quote me on it as I haven’t researched it, but it’s what I’ve been told.

It seems incredibly sus.

 

[SC_Power]

I cannot find anything that this has changed and it has been a point of discussion for years for SA prospects. If you can find somewhere that confirms access to metropolitan areas, please share as I cannot find anywhere the AFL have confirmed this.

It was discussed when NGA access was changed to 40+ however there was never confirmation that metropolitan access was implemented as we then entered the Covid years and the discussion seemed to disappear.

This is from last year and it appears the remain.

“In a further twist to Cochrane's appeal, he would need the AFL to go through and make a change to the zoning around encompassing the metropolitan areas of Adelaide for the Next Generation academy.”

This is from 2019

“Clubs were told it is likely Adelaide, Port Adelaide, West Coast and Fremantle will gain priority access to indigenous prospects in metropolitan regions after pick No.40 of the NAB AFL Draft.”

Then we never heard anything again on this…. It was discussed but never actually implemented the change. Very convenient.

AFL website, link… The Jamarra Rule

 

[SC_Power]

It seems incredibly sus.

I heard this because the Crows had access to an NGA prospect a number of years ago who was playing for a Power-aligned club. Was for the same reasons.
Again, heard not proven, so I might be muddying the waters….

 

[sr36]

I heard this because the Crows had access to an NGA prospect a number of years ago who was playing for a Power-aligned club. Was for the same reasons.
Again, heard not proven, so I might be muddying the waters….

The zones match up. It's why heaps of the desert isn't NGA zoned. They've just gone with SANFL zones and thus the desert areas that weren't zoned for the SANFL aren't NGA zones. Will probably change this year.

But they're both on residence which can change.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

even if they completely fix the draft you still have 10-15 years of some teams built on defunct rules, you'll be hearing complaining until the daicos/ashcrofts retire.

Yes but I that's also true with how Geelong got Tom Hawkins a top 3 prospect with a 3rd round draft pick before the improved the system, before Sydney had Heeney with pick 18 as a top 3 prospect, before they improved the system, etc. etc.??

 

[DarthMader]

Well lucky for you, I’ve spent plenty of time looking for you and it hasn’t changed. There isn’t a single quote or reference that the change was actually implemented. My theory is that was due to Covid and it was placed on the back burner and not a priority for the AFL.

As the rules currently are, we don’t get access to Metropolitan NGA players.

Borlase was drafted as a Cat B rookie. Players can still participate in our NGAs however we don’t get draft rights (discounts, ability to match) for Metropolitan kids. If Borlase was a first round talent, he wouldn’t be at the Crows.

Slight correction is SA didnt (and not 100% they do have now) access to indigenous kids from metro in their NGA but did for international and any other way kids get eligibility for NGA, Borlase qualified as he was born overseas in Egypt

 

[Enviable Tradition]

NGA zoning is apparently based on residence not SANFL club.

Don’t quote me on it as I haven’t researched it, but it’s what I’ve been told.

The most recent Advertiser article has confirmed that it is based in residence and that he lives in the Port zone despite playing SANFL for Centrals due to their lenient father son rules.

 

[Young Gun #6]

He's at Central Districts which is a crows aligned NGA club.
Would love to know the gymnastics that somehow makes him Port eligible.

It seems incredibly sus.

 

[My_Username]

How does it reduce salary cap integrity

Same was draft integrity is reduced.

Making more and more exceptions and special cases.

 

[boncer34]

Same was draft integrity is reduced.

Making more and more exceptions and special cases.

How though?

The OP doesn't mention the salary cap at all.

 

[My_Username]

How though?

The OP doesn't mention the salary cap at all.

What would you consider to be 'a payment to their salary' would be for 'those running each academy'?

My idea for competitive balance, would be all the academy and NGA’s drafts are taken from clubs however keep these academy’s to be run by AFL but have a financial bonus system for those running each academy that they get a payment to there salary if player gets drafted from there academy.

This will financially incentive people running these academy to produce draft talent and then makes the draft no longer comprised and I would make Father son 200 games for a club

 

[boncer34]

What would you consider to be 'a payment to their salary' would be for 'those running each academy'?

A bonus to the AFL staff running the academies.

Did you read the part where they say take the academies off the clubs?

 

[dynasty_Richmond]

So, increase the integrity of the draft by reducing the integrity of the salary cap?

I am saying the academies should be run independently to AFL clubs and as a lot of people said there will be not as much incentive for academy’s to produce afl talent but the afl should fund these academies and have financial bonuses to the academy if a player gets draft to incentives the person in control of the academy to create more talent

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I am saying the academies should be run independently to AFL clubs and as a lot of people said there will be not as much incentive for academy’s to produce afl talent but the afl should fund these academies and have financial bonuses to the academy if a player gets draft to incentives the person in control of the academy to create more talent

They tried that, it was a complete failure, it currently works now. The new bidding rules have made Northern clubs pay up. The issue is, this should have been in years ago, that's where the angst comes in. There's no need for the afl to run these they have enough on their plate anyway. The new matching rules with the amounts picks are worth teams can't trade down for junk anymore

 

[briztoon]

I am saying the academies should be run independently to AFL clubs and as a lot of people said there will be not as much incentive for academy’s to produce afl talent but the afl should fund these academies and have financial bonuses to the academy if a player gets draft to incentives the person in control of the academy to create more talent

..,,,.

Wouldn’t go astray.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I am saying the academies should be run independently to AFL clubs and as a lot of people said there will be not as much incentive for academy’s to produce afl talent but the afl should fund these academies and have financial bonuses to the academy if a player gets draft to incentives the person in control of the academy to create more talent

I mean they tried that before e.g. NSW/ACT Rams playing in the TAC Cup and it basically didn't work.

You're making suggestions that already have been tried

 

[Purple Suit]

They tried that, it was a complete failure, it currently works now. The new bidding rules have made Northern clubs pay up. The issue is, this should have been in years ago, that's where the angst comes in. There's no need for the afl to run these they have enough on their plate anyway. The new matching rules with the amounts picks are worth teams can't trade down for junk anymore

The issues is that it's not really fair on kids. Come from a footy state and not qualify for an AFL academy, the development pathways are mainly private schools based. It makes it harder for kids going to public schools to get a look in and the programs are terrible compared to what academy kids are getting, so they are developing better.

It's well known that more money = more talent development and better players. Not sure why they shouldn't be doing this across the board, even if the kids are not tied to a specific club.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The issues is that it's not really fair on kids. Come from a footy state and not qualify for an AFL academy, the development pathways are mainly private schools based. It makes it harder for kids going to public schools to get a look in and the programs are terrible compared to what academy kids are getting, so they are developing better.

It's well known that more money = more talent development and better players. Not sure why they shouldn't be doing this across the board, even if the kids are not tied to a specific club.

That’s what the NGA’s are doing- it’s fairer this year how about let’s see how it works. You do realise us and every other club will pay near double this year? It should have been this 5 years ago I’ve been very consistent there. I also have said there’s no need for discounts- the ability to match is the discount with the proviso it’s the same for NGA/FS and whatever. The kids are not being forced to join an academy

 

[sydney_gws]

As said by many, the main problem is clubs trading down multiple times so that can double dip and get an academy player for next to nothing.
I had another idea.
Stop trading down.
Make academies, FS a 10-15% loading.
But allow a 20-25% loading to the points for your natural, ladder position draft picks.
Also only 8 top 30 matches over 10 years, no more than 5 in a 5 year period. No more than 2 I a single year.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Well lucky for you, I’ve spent plenty of time looking for you and it hasn’t changed. There isn’t a single quote or reference that the change was actually implemented. My theory is that was due to Covid and it was placed on the back burner and not a priority for the AFL.

As the rules currently are, we don’t get access to Metropolitan NGA players.

Borlase was drafted as a Cat B rookie. Players can still participate in our NGAs however we don’t get draft rights (discounts, ability to match) for Metropolitan kids. If Borlase was a first round talent, he wouldn’t be at the Crows.

We were only blocked from getting draft access to Indigenous players from a metro area. Borlase was a part of the Crows NGA because he was born in Egypt while his father was working overseas. If he was pick 1 quality then he would've still ended up at the Crows.

He's at Central Districts which is a crows aligned NGA club.
Would love to know the gymnastics that somehow makes him Port eligible.

He lives in the zone for WWT which means he's Port-aligned for Next Generation Academies. He only qualifies to play for Centrals because of the SANFL's father-son rules.

He previously played for the Crows in U/16 Academy matches because the Crows were given access to Centrals Juniors to top up their Academy side.

The hold up with Dougie Cochrane is that it needs the AFL to approve him being added into Port's NGA as an Indigenous player, because he is so progressed in his development. The issue being that Stuart Cochrane only found out about his potential Indigenous heritage last year.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

As said by many, the main problem is clubs trading down multiple times so that can double dip and get an academy player for next to nothing.
I had another idea.
Stop trading down.
Make academies, FS a 10-15% loading.
But allow a 20-25% loading to the points for your natural, ladder position draft picks.
Also only 8 top 30 matches over 10 years, no more than 5 in a 5 year period. No more than 2 I a single year.

The trading down is limited now with the new values (no club can match more than 2-3 realistically) there’s no need to limit numbers you have the points or you don’t. The later ones are important for northern clubs to help not have a million mummy’s boys every year

 

[Purple Suit]

That’s what the NGA’s are doing- it’s fairer this year how about let’s see how it works. You do realise us and every other club will pay near double this year? It should have been this 5 years ago I’ve been very consistent there. I also have said there’s no need for discounts- the ability to match is the discount with the proviso it’s the same for NGA/FS and whatever. The kids are not being forced to join an academy

NGA's are doing it in the Northern States and in the footy states for First Nations, 1 parent not born here & Father/son prospects. It doesn't happen for non-indigenous kids who's parents are both born here in SA, Vic, WA. I don't know what happens in Tassie.

 

[sr36]

Slight correction is SA didnt (and not 100% they do have now) access to indigenous kids from metro in their NGA but did for international and any other way kids get eligibility for NGA, Borlase qualified as he was born overseas in Egypt

They originally didn't have metropolitan Adelaide in their zones. So neither international or Aboriginal were available and WA had much smaller zones than they do now. The reason is they wanted the zones to be similar in numbers to the Vic zones for equity. But when they changed to not being able to match until 40, WA and SA successfully lobbied to have their zones expanded. It's been expanded for both international and indigenous. The rules are the same for both. WA is now the whole state split up and SA is the SANFL zones - which is all the significant urban areas and the APY lands, but not the central desert. (They're lobbying to get the desert zoned)

They're good zones. Not as good as WA, but better than the Vic ones. The issue now is that it's adding more of a financial arms race to recruiting. Eg. Collingwood now has a funded academy that helps to develop players, whereas the smaller clubs can't afford that, so they just have names on a list of kids who qualify. Means more of the big clubs players will make under 18 teams and rep teams and they'll benefit more. In the long run WCE should be the big winner - half the Aboriginal kids in WA qualify and they'll have the cash to develop them.

The new matching price helps to equalise it a bit, but the other issue is that clubs will start somewhat hiding their top talent so they slip a bit lower in the draft, because that's just how it goes.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

...

The new matching price helps to equalise it a bit, but the other issue is that clubs will start somewhat hiding their top talent so they slip a bit lower in the draft, because that's just how it goes.

I'll see your Sam Grimley and raise you Trent Stubbs. (Think we both lost out there).

 

[sr36]

I'll see your Sam Grimley and raise you Trent Stubbs. (Think we both lost out there).

That was the double bluff - pretend you're hiding a kid to sucker another club into drafting someone they shouldn't.