News Changes to Next Generation Academies

[Lore]

Statement: Update on NGA Concessions, Pre-Season Supplementary Selection Period, NAB AFL Mid-Season Rookie Draft

The AFL has provided an update on Next Generation Academy Concessions, the Pre-Season Supplementary Selection Period and the NAB AFL Mid-Season Rookie Draft.

www.afl.com.au

Next Generation Academy Concessions

From 2021, Next Generation Academies (NGAs) - targeting Indigenous and multicultural players - will be overseen by the AFL Talent Pathway program with support from AFL Clubs. As part of this change, the AFL Commission determined that the concession model for NGAs be revised to reflect this.

The following changes to the NGA concession model ahead of the 2021 and 2022 NAB AFL Drafts will be as follows:

• From 2021, nominated NGA prospects will only be eligible to be matched from Pick 21 in the NAB AFL Draft. All other players selected from Pick 41 onwards can be matched by their Club using their next available selection, while undrafted players are still eligible to pre-selected on the rookie list.
• From 2022, nominated NGA prospects will only be eligible to be matched from Pick 41 onwards by their Club using their next available selection, while undrafted players are still eligible to pre-selected on the rookie list.

This model allows for elite talent to be available to all AFL Clubs while still ensuring late prospects can find their way onto an AFL list and continue their relationship with the respective Club that has been supporting them.

A summary of changes can be found in the table below:

Round	Current	2021	2022
1st Round (Pick 1 – 20)	20% discount	No access	No access
2nd Round (Pick 21 – 40)	197 points	197 points	No access
3rd Round (Pick 41 - 60)	197 points	Use next available selection	Use next available selection
4th Round (Pick 61 +)	197 points	Use next available selection	Use next available selection
Rookie List	Any undrafted player	Any undrafted player	Any undrafted player

Statement: Update on NGA Concessions, Pre-Season Supplementary Selection Period, NAB AFL Mid-Season Rookie Draft

The AFL has provided an update on Next Generation Academy Concessions, the Pre-Season Supplementary Selection Period and the NAB AFL Mid-Season Rookie Draft.

www.afl.com.au

 

[Suma Magic]

So if there is a bid at pick 41, then a club just trades all its remaining picks for future picks? Then uses pick 100 on the player?

Or if that is banned, then clubs would go in with no picks after 40, and live trade future picks for current picks as needed to make draft selections, to ensure that no picks of value after pick 40 are used on NGA players.

 

[Suma Magic]

Should definitely be for the northern academies too. Or at least get rid of the discount for these and also for father son.

 

[Jozzy]

Am I correct in saying these changes don’t affect the academies for the Queensland and NSW clubs?

That’s absolutely outrageous if so.

 

[Virgin Dog]

The development of Aussie Rules is coming a long way in Queensland (and New South Wales) with these academies, with a lot more success than the previous development programs. These clubs are incentivised by having access to these players, to reduce the "go home" factor by increasing the proportion of home grown players on their list. If you're going to take away that incentive, then the AFL can take over the funding and running of these academies (as they are with the NGAs).

Just taking an example from the Brisbane academy, Jack Payne represented Australia in discus throwing and also played rugby union growing up. He was scouted at age 13 and was invited to come and join the Lions academy, and about eight years later he was running out in a preliminary final.

Brisbane came very close to poaching Kalyn Ponga from the grasps of the NRL. He was involved with the Lions academy from age 15, and was about to sign a four year contract with Brisbane before Newcastle came along with a big bag of money. 10 years ago, I suspect playing in the AFL wouldn't have even registered on his radar.

And I'm happy to see all that. But just like the NGAs (and rightfully FS), I don't believe kids at the very top end should be automatically tied to the clubs. Elite talent should be in the open draft pool, while guys like Payne, and even Andrews before him, can stay tied to their respective academy's club

 

[Virgin Dog]

Well there's a long story about that but once SANFL agreed to the formula and then VFL found out that SANFL includes pre-season games in game total they reneged wouldn't include those games. Port only got one player from father/son and he wasn't eligible but nobody checked. Brett Ebert's dad played 391 games for Port including 4 Magarey medals, coached the club and has his statue out the front of Adelaide Oval but wasn't eligible for father/son.

The pain continues this year James Borlace son of Darryl 246 games for Port 3 time premiership player and former captain - James is a NGA for Adelaide Crows because he was born in Egypt and lives in the wrong area ie Adelaide Crows area.

Borlase is one of the most ridiculous cases the system has ever seen. Should be father/son, not NGA. Probably second behind Blakey being in an academy despite his father being top 10 for most games played.

 

[Kwality]

Just need to find a way to keep incentivising them to develop that talent. Or at least stop the gaming of the system with points (can only match with a pick in the same round or something).

Like Sydney has done without any AFL help in the early days as well you know.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Why not allow matching - but just disallow the points discount - or indeed - put a point loading on it.

Also - Pick 41 seems random - IMO should be from the third round - so starting from pick 37 - not much of a difference.

 

[Lore]

Like Sydney has done without any AFL help in the early days as well you know.

Yeah Sydney probably didn't need the benefit. Brisbane were in the doldrums and GC and GWS were new clubs, while Sydney got the benefit of being located down the highway without any real need for a helping hand.

Although I guess it might be in lieu of some of the smacks they got over poaching Buddy.

 

[Kwality]

Borlase is one of the most ridiculous cases the system has ever seen. Should be father/son, not NGA. Probably second behind Blakey being in an academy despite his father being top 10 for most games played.

Johnnos boy is the one to beat - son of a fair dinkum star of our game is NGA, its a joke.

 

[JasRulz63]

And I'm happy to see all that. But just like the NGAs (and rightfully FS), I don't believe kids at the very top end should be automatically tied to the clubs. Elite talent should be in the open draft pool, while guys like Payne, and even Andrews before him, can stay tied to their respective academy's club

So you want the clubs to fund and run these academies, but not given them to the first round picks they develop? What's the incentive to develop elite talent then?

Should the Dogs spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on continuing to run their NGA if they don't get access to players in the top 40? I don't see that making much sense for the Dogs tbh, I'm sure the money would be better spent elsewhere.

 

[Kwality]

Yeah Sydney probably didn't need the benefit. Brisbane were in the doldrums and GC and GWS were new clubs, while Sydney got the benefit of being located down the highway without any real need for a helping hand.

Although I guess it might be in lieu of some of the smacks they got over poaching Buddy.

They developed the Academy with QBE money & as it developed the AFL came along for the applause. It was pre Buddy.

 

[Kwality]

So you want the clubs to fund and run these academies, but not given them to the first round picks they develop? What's the incentive to develop elite talent then?

Should the Dogs spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on continuing to run their NGA if they don't get access to players in the top 40? I don't see that making much sense for the Dogs tbh, I'm sure the money would be better spent elsewhere.

That is exactly what free loaders want.
All the heartland players should go into the draft.

 

[Virgin Dog]

So you want the clubs to fund and run these academies, but not given them to the first round picks they develop? What's the incentive to develop elite talent then?

Should the Dogs spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on continuing to run their NGA if they don't get access to players in the top 40? I don't see that making much sense for the Dogs tbh, I'm sure the money would be better spent elsewhere.

I'm more a believer in AFL-funded academies. There's already enough benefit in giving clubs the opportunity to claim players outside the 1st round (top 40 is maybe a bit much, but I won't argue), as well as giving them a closer look at some kids.

It's hard to pinpoint the "perfect" system, but what I can say with confidence is that the current system is clearly broken and unfair. As much as you can argue that clubs should be rewarded for their investment, it also needs to be considered that, if given the chance, all 18 clubs would be happy to invest the money in having JUH, Heeney, Thomas, etc. in their academy if it meant giving them dibs on the player.

 

[Tas]

They need to scrap F/S and Academies, we have benefited from them but they are shambolic, this "competition" is a joke. You can't have the draft as the talent distribution mechanism and just have the best talent going to whichever clubs, it is just Russian Roulette if you get lucky or not and we realised from the 70s that luck based zoning was bad for the competition.

AFL is the most amateur professional football code on the planet.

 

[longdonkey]

That is exactly what free loaders want.
All the heartland players should go into the draft.

It's funny I think exactly the opposite - the only way I think the points system for drafting on another thread could work is if you could draft players from your state or NGA into your club.
What I don't like is how players who get drafted into non-VIC clubs lose the player after 3 years and their needs to be mechanisms for the best players to remain in their home states.

 

[Lore]

It's funny I think exactly the opposite - the only way I think the points system for drafting on another thread could work is if you could draft players from your state or NGA into your club.
What I don't like is how players who get drafted into non-VIC clubs lose the player after 3 years and their needs to be mechanisms for the best players to remain in their home states.

I would be curious to see what teams might look like if we had state-based drafts. Would they be balanced, competitive teams? What would the NSW/Qld clubs look like (made up of Irish/Tas/NT/local players and whatever doesn't get drafted to WA/SA/Vic?)

Even with state-based drafts they could still nominate for a draft other than the state they were born in or reside in, of course. You see it a bit in AFLW where a player thinks they'll have a better chance of being drafted interstate and don't mind going there so they nominate for that draft instead.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

Good decision, now they need to abolish F/S and all Academies

 

[longdonkey]

I would be curious to see what teams might look like if we had state-based drafts. Would they be balanced, competitive teams? What would the NSW/Qld clubs look like (made up of Irish/Tas/NT/local players and whatever doesn't get drafted to WA/SA/Vic?)

Even with state-based drafts they could still nominate for a draft other than the state they were born in or reside in, of course. You see it a bit in AFLW where a player thinks they'll have a better chance of being drafted interstate and don't mind going there so they nominate for that draft instead.

Queensland and NSW is the difficult bit of this concept.

I only think that it should be done with the First Round and all other players go into the open draft pool and each club can only pre-draft one player and there is no trading of first round picks.

 

[Lore]

Queensland and NSW is the difficult bit of this concept.

I only think that it should be done with the First Round and all other players go into the open draft pool and each club can only pre-draft one player and there is no trading of first round picks.

Maybe they just get their academies for 100% free and whatever else from the sources I mentioned. No need for a bidding system in a state-based draft where only one other club can bid.


You'd need to study it properly to know whether it has merit, which I'm not particularly equipped to do.

 

[JasRulz63]

I'm more a believer in AFL-funded academies. There's already enough benefit in giving clubs the opportunity to claim players outside the 1st round (top 40 is maybe a bit much, but I won't argue), as well as giving them a closer look at some kids.

It's hard to pinpoint the "perfect" system, but what I can say with confidence is that the current system is clearly broken and unfair. As much as you can argue that clubs should be rewarded for their investment, it also needs to be considered that, if given the chance, all 18 clubs would be happy to invest the money in having JUH, Heeney, Thomas, etc. in their academy if it meant giving them dibs on the player.

You know what's also broken and unfair? The statistics that Lore posted earlier in this thread where despite making up 22.2% of the teams in the competition, the NSW and Queensland teams only have 9.6% of the players from those states.

The Dogs list has 33 of 46 (72%) players that are playing in their home state. Conversely the Brisbane list has 11 of 47 (23%) players from their home state. What ramifications do you think that has in terms of the "go home" factor, as well as needing to pay these players more because for the sought after players from Victoria, you have 10 clubs that can potentially throw money at them.

The academies are a solution for this inequality. They develop players from these states, and allow the teams to keep them to increase the proportion of players from their home states, as well as increasing the overall pool of players. Despite that, Brisbane still have less than a quarter of players from their home state, whereas the dogs have three times that many.

If we don't have these academies, what is your solution to this inequality? Or is this an inequality you're happy to live with because it doesn't directly disadvantage your team?

 

[Jozzy]

I’m honestly shocked at all of the comments against the father/son selections.

As a Tiger supporter we’ve benefited very little from the system throughout my life time (the last twenty years). However I’ve always liked the romance and uniqueness around it. I personally wouldn’t have any problems with them scrapping the discount but I think it’s nice to see the same families and surnames throughout this histories of clubs.

 

[Lore]

You know what's also broken and unfair? The statistics that Lore posted earlier in this thread where despite making up 22.2% of the teams in the competition, the NSW and Queensland teams only have 9.6% of the players from those states.

The Dogs list has 33 of 46 (72%) players that are playing in their home state. Conversely the Brisbane list has 11 of 47 (23%) players from their home state. What ramifications do you think that has in terms of the "go home" factor, as well as needing to pay these players more because for the sought after players from Victoria, you have 10 clubs that can potentially throw money at them.

The academies are a solution for this inequality. They develop players from these states, and allow the teams to keep them to increase the proportion of players from their home states, as well as increasing the overall pool of players. Despite that, Brisbane still have less than a quarter of players from their home state, whereas the dogs have three times that many.

If we don't have these academies, what is your solution to this inequality? Or is this an inequality you're happy to live with because it doesn't directly disadvantage your team?

I have club by club breakdowns too, but they're all based on 2019 lists coz I posted it last year and cbf updating it right now.




It's in the resources thread:

Resource - FAQs: Rules, Regulations and Resources for Player Movements in the AFL

List sizes Club age and height profiles Salary cap information Trading rules including salary dumps Father/son & academy draft bids Free agency compensation formula & more

www.bigfooty.com

 

[longdonkey]

Maybe they just get their academies for 100% free and whatever else from the sources I mentioned. No need for a bidding system in a state-based draft where only one other club can bid.


You'd need to study it properly to know whether it has merit, which I'm not particularly equipped to do.

I'm pretty sure I can do this. I can run some simulations of other drafts to see what would have happened and whether there is close to an equitable situation.

I'll have a think about how to run it.

 

[Lore]

I’m honestly shocked at all of the comments against the father/son selections.

As a Tiger supporter we’ve benefited very little from the system throughout my life time (the last twenty years). However I’ve always liked the romance and uniqueness around it. I personally wouldn’t have any problems with them scrapping the discount but I think it’s nice to see the same families and surnames throughout this histories of clubs.

I agree but I'm an Essendon supporter so I chose not to comment

Happy if they want to make it no discounts and have to match with a pick in the same round (plus lose points off the next pick to make up the difference), or something along that line. I don't want them free but I still want them because it's warm fuzzies.

 

[Lore]

I'm pretty sure I can do this. I can run some simulations of other drafts to see what would have happened and whether there is close to an equitable situation.

I'll have a think about how to run it.

By the bye, it would also mean that all NGAs in WA would be rolled into WA state drafts and the NT zones would probably be rolled into Queensland. So it would have flow on effects for that too.