News Coronavirus and the draft

[GUMBLETRON]

First step

Community football gets green light, training rules revealed

AFL Victoria is permitting community footballers to train in groups of 10 from Monday

www.afl.com.au

 

[Puregold]

There’s like a 100 reasons why that doesn’t work. Everyone that just traded into next years draft is f’ed over. Now they have to wait an extra year to get the injection of players they were after.

Teams that traded out are also f’ed over. Melbourne go 2 years without a first round pick instead of 1.

Then all the problems with players that may have wanted to move teams this off-season becomes super messy.

All the problems that arise from kids leaving school and not have a professional league to go into until a year later.

As for the 80% of kids not being ready for AFL yet, which is a figure you’ve plucked but it may not be wrong but I’m not sure it’s accurate either

You do realise that those drafted kids aren’t made to play afl if they aren’t ready yeah? That every team in the league has seconds they can play the kids in to develop. Which 19yr old is better prepared to play afl? The guy who has been on an AFL list, working in a professional environment with access to professional health and fitness staff with elite equipment and set up or whatever place you’re proposing 19yr olds play while going to uni / entering the workforce?


The choice between that absolute clusterfu** and playing a few games late in the year or early next year before a draft and recruiters adjust is obvious to me.

Also, who in your hawthorn team is there on “potential” and not performance? 50% according to your statement.

Why shouldn’t they be there?

Who should be playing instead of them?

Where should they be?

Are they all 18year olds that you propose shouldn’t be in the league?

If they came in a year later are they fully developed?

Just ignore 2020 draft when it comes to pick swaps. Go 19+ to replace retirees. Start again at 19+ for the 2021 draft.

 

[Puregold]

I would love for all players to get a rookies wage+ match fees for 2020
All contracts pushed back 1 year (ignore 2020) and players wanting to retire getting payed out their 2020 contract outside of the cap.
Draft to only replace retirees and consisting of 19+ players. draft to be based on 2019 ladder.
2021 draft 19+ and based on 2021 ladder but including 2019 trades of picks.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

There’s like a 100 reasons why that doesn’t work. Everyone that just traded into next years draft is f’ed over. Now they have to wait an extra year to get the injection of players they were after.

Teams that traded out are also f’ed over. Melbourne go 2 years without a first round pick instead of 1.

Tough. We're in a global pandemic here with the great possibility of an economic depression. Millions of people are losing their jobs and can't afford to feed and shelter their children. In that context, if a team wants to complain about such a small inconvenience, I'll play the world's smallest violin for them.

Then all the problems with players that may have wanted to move teams this off-season becomes super messy.

Nothing stops them moving, the pick compensation is just delayed by a year.

I've addressed all the other points in my post above.

 

[philthy05]

I would love for all players to get a rookies wage+ match fees for 2020
All contracts pushed back 1 year (ignore 2020) and players wanting to retire getting payed out their 2020 contract outside of the cap.
Draft to only replace retirees and consisting of 19+ players. draft to be based on 2019 ladder.
2021 draft 19+ and based on 2021 ladder but including 2019 trades of picks.

I think you’re underestimating how incredibly messy that would be

What if you want to be traded at the end of this year? Become a free agent? Is the extra year negotiable? Or do you have to pay a bloke that’s a year older or performance has dropped off the same as you paid him last contract? What if the player was expecting their new contract to be a pay rise. What if a player doesn’t want another year added to their contract?

You’re proposing a cluster****.

 

[andleanback]

I would love for all players to get a rookies wage+ match fees for 2020
All contracts pushed back 1 year (ignore 2020) and players wanting to retire getting payed out their 2020 contract outside of the cap.
Draft to only replace retirees and consisting of 19+ players. draft to be based on 2019 ladder.
2021 draft 19+ and based on 2021 ladder but including 2019 trades of picks.

Players have already been getting their contract monthly instalments for the whole of preseason, its just for the next 5-6 months they wont get much with the money drying up, and players on rookie/ draft wagers wont get a chance to earn match payments which significantly helps their total salary.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

What if you want to be traded at the end of this year?

Then you do that, with compensation moved back to 2021.

Become a free agent?

Tough. One year of waiting won't kill them. Coronavirus might have.

What if the player was expecting their new contract to be a pay rise.

Tough. Try again in a year.

What if a player doesn’t want another year added to their contract?

Tough. They can go play in the state leagues or retire if they're that upset.

 

[philthy05]

Then you do that, with compensation moved back to 2021.


Tough. One year of waiting won't kill them. Coronavirus might have.


Tough. Try again in a year.


Tough. They can go play in the state leagues or retire if they're that upset.

What problem are you solving that is worth creating all this mess, and telling players and clubs to suck it up?

 

[briztoon]

I think you’re underestimating how incredibly messy that would be

What if you want to be traded at the end of this year? Become a free agent? Is the extra year negotiable? Or do you have to pay a bloke that’s a year older or performance has dropped off the same as you paid him last contract? What if the player was expecting their new contract to be a pay rise. What if a player doesn’t want another year added to their contract?

You’re proposing a clusterfu**.

Have you been reading anything written by
Caro or Naill?

It’s going to be a different looking league when footy comes back.

There’s going to be a lot team and league sponsors unable to fulfill their obligations because their revenue will have dramatically decreased.

Things are going to be different, and that’s going to flow through to the tpp and player wages and off field soft cap. There’s already been articles about off field staff numbers being reduced.

I’m not sure you’re fully understanding the situation Australia is likely to find itself in, in 6 months time, and the impact that’s going to be felt Australia wide for a long, long time.

 

[briztoon]

What problem are you solving that is worth creating all this mess, and telling players and clubs to suck it up?

Do you not really understand where this mess is coming from?

 

[philthy05]

Have you been reading anything written
Caro or Naill?

It’s going to be a different looking league when footy comes back.

There’s going to be a lot team and league sponsors unable to fulfill their obligations because their revenue will have dramatically decreased.

Things are going to be different, and that’s going to flow through to the tpp and player wages and off field soft cap. There’s already been articles about off field staff numbers being reduced.

I’m not sure you’re fully understanding the situation Australia is likely to find itself in, in 6 months time, and the impact that’s going to be felt Australia wide for a long, long time.

That’s not an argument to further screw things up though? And the proposed cancelling of an off-season and draft and altering draft rules and contracts doesn’t fix any issues caused by this either.

It’s simply people who believe that players should be held back from the draft until a year later jumping on this opportunity to push for that

 

[philthy05]

Do you not really understand where this mess is coming from?

What? Pushing back the draft age solves coronavirus? Or it saves the AFL from losing money?

 

[briztoon]

That’s not an argument to further screw things up though? And the proposed cancelling of an off-season and draft and altering draft rules and contracts doesn’t fix any issues caused by this either.

It’s simply people who believe that players should be held back from the draft until a year later jumping on this opportunity to push for that

There won’t be choices here. The league is being forced in to survival mode.

The league doesn’t have the money to carry on as before.

The draft will have to change. I don’t know what it will look like, that’ll be up to the AFL.

I don’t agree with changing the draft age. But I’m a realist to know things will be different this year, and there isn’t a choice about this.

 

[briztoon]

What? Pushing back the draft age solves coronavirus? Or it saves the AFL from losing money?

The draft is one small part of the AFL.

There’s going to be changes right across the league, and all areas of change will have knock on effects to other parts.

List sizes are going to be reduced. Best case scenario is 38 senior list spots and no rookie lists, either Cat A or Cat B.

So most clubs are going to have to delist 8 players just to get down to 38 players.

There’s going to be little incentive for clubs to keep on project players.

Then if clubs want to draft kids, they’re going to have to delist more than 8 players.

At a guess, we’ll see the abolishment of the rule requiring clubs to take 3 picks to the draft for kids and rookie upgrades.

It might be changed to 1 list spot required for the draft per team. Teams can take more kids at the draft if they want.

The top end kids will still be drafted. But we might see the draft only going 2 rounds deep.

This will have multiple flow on effects. More talented kids in the state leagues.

More 19 year olds drafted the year after they finish school. Which will mean even less 18 year olds drafted in their draft year.

Clubs will probably have 4 or 5 kids training with them over the preseason as potential ssp signees if they suffer a long term injury.

The mid season draft might change somewhat. Instead of a draft, we might have an extended SSP period up until 1/2 way through the season in case clubs suffer a long term injury during the year.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

What problem are you solving that is worth creating all this mess, and telling players and clubs to suck it up?

Two problems.

1. Forcing kids to move into a professional environment, and potentially across the country, at age 18, without having had any real life experience first. Multiple AFL figures have said this is not ideal and 19 is a better age for it, but you've already seen that argument and it hasn't changed your mind, evidently.

2. The thorny issue of draft order if this season is cancelled and yet a draft is still held.

I also disagree that this proposal a mess, it's a temporary measure in the face of a season being cancelled due to outside factors, which is the real mess. And they should suck it up. Being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to play a game is a privilege, not a right. And within that, free agency is a privilege that has been bestowed, not a right.

You're ignoring the club's perspective here also, if they were letting a player go in FA at the end of 2020, then they were expecting another season of production out of them, which they didn't get. As a result I think it's perfectly fine for them to be compensated for that in the form of trading rights.

 

[philthy05]

Two problems.

1. Forcing kids to move into a professional environment, and potentially across the country, at age 18, without having had any real life experience first. Multiple AFL figures have said this is not ideal and 19 is a better age for it, but you've already seen that argument and it hasn't changed your mind, evidently.

This argument is hugely problematic.

1. Where is the evidence that being drafted at 18 is bad for these kids other than outsider opinions?

Unless you’re proposing a league that drafts and retains every single kid drafted whether they are good enough or not then players are not going to make it in the league. You think our turnover rate is higher than a league with older draftees like the nba or nfl? Spoiler, it’s not.

2. If we don’t consider kids being drafted at 18 to be ideal, and that they need to mature beforehand, do we also consider that 18yr olds shouldn’t enter any workforce at 18?

3. Where is the line? If 19 is better than 18 is 20 better than 19?

What happens in between 18-19 that magically prepares these kids better?

4. Define real life experience? What happens to these kids between 18-19 outside of the afl that doesn’t happen if they are drafted?

5. If I could offer an 18yr old minimum pay, in a workforce that doesn’t care about physical or mental health

Or...

Above average pay, in a workforce where there are staff and programmes specifically in place for physical and mental health and support and mentoring programs

Which do you want him to take?

Which 19yr old is likely to be in a better position in a year?

You say I haven’t seen the argument, and you’re correct.

I’ve seen a statement, and I’ve seen nothing but vague suggestions as support.

2. The thorny issue of draft order if this season is cancelled and yet a draft is still held.

The solution to a problem that’s pretty minor (figuring out draft order) somehow being to obliterate this off-season by not allowing any player movement, forcing players to stay at a club they were prepared to leave even if they are ooc, upend past trades involving future picks, force players and clubs into signing on players to another year when One or both parties may not have wanted that

It’s insane. It’s like wanting to trim a fingernail and amputating both legs.

I also disagree that this proposal a mess, it's a temporary measure in the face of a season being cancelled due to outside factors, which is the real mess. And they should suck it up. Being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to play a game is a privilege, not a right. And within that, free agency is a privilege that has been bestowed, not a right.

The suggestion that we void this off-season is both a complete mess and also has permanent ramifications.

Also I’m boggled at a suggestion that feigns player interests at heart by acting concerned that young draftees aren’t prepared for the league, while also telling the entire league to eat a bag of dicks if they don’t like getting ****ed over.

You're ignoring the club's perspective here also, if they were letting a player go in FA at the end of 2020, then they were expecting another season of production out of them, which they didn't get. As a result I think it's perfectly fine for them to be compensated for that in the form of trading rights.

I’m not sure what you mean by this? Trading rights if a player doesn’t leave?

If joe Daniher wants to get to Sydney this off-season he cannot. He gets stuck at Essendon for another year.

If port wants to draft their father son or nga players Schofield or Jones they get told no. What about how they drafted into points for them? Bad luck?

If a 32yr old player was on 800k at Collingwood, and there was no way Collingwood would offer him another year the proposal I’m arguing against says Collingwood would have to pay him to play another year.

Keep in mind that none of this cluster**** in any way addresses anything to do with the fallout of coronavirus.

As I said. Some people staunchly want the draft age to be pushed back and think this is an acceptable way to achieve that.

I disagree.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

1. Where is the evidence that being drafted at 18 is bad for these kids other than outsider opinions?

What evidence would you like to see exactly? Do you disagree that younger people are less likely to be able to cope with a media spotlight and are generally less mature?

Unless you’re proposing a league that drafts and retains every single kid drafted whether they are good enough or not then players are not going to make it in the league. You think our turnover rate is higher than a league with older draftees like the nba or nfl? Spoiler, it’s not.

I have no idea why you've decided to make this about the drop-out rate in professional football. Of course players will drop out, that's life. My concern is with easing kids into high profile situations, given they have only just entered adulthood, and younger people are less able to deal with such pressure. That extra year gives them an opportunity to take an interest in something other than playing football full-time and experience what life is like outside the AFL fishbowl, thus setting them up to cope better if they do drop out of professional ranks.

But, if people who have actually played and coached at the highest levels are saying this and it hasn't convinced you, then it's unlikely an average Joe like me will be able to.

2. If we don’t consider kids being drafted at 18 to be ideal, and that they need to mature beforehand, do we also consider that 18yr olds shouldn’t enter any workforce at 18?

No, they're not comparable. If you get a job as a welder at 18, you won't have a media circus scrutinising your every move.

3. Where is the line? If 19 is better than 18 is 20 better than 19?

The line is 19. To my knowledge, none of the AFL coaches or players have suggested it goes beyond 19.

What happens in between 18-19 that magically prepares these kids better?

They get out of high school and get a taste of what real life is like.

4. Define real life experience? What happens to these kids between 18-19 outside of the afl that doesn’t happen if they are drafted?

They're either earning or learning.

5. If I could offer an 18yr old minimum pay, in a workforce that doesn’t care about physical or mental health

Or...

Above average pay, in a workforce where there are staff and programmes specifically in place for physical and mental health and support and mentoring programs

Which do you want him to take?

Both. I'd want him to see what both sets of circumstances are like so he can appreciate what he has in the second environment.

The solution to a problem that’s pretty minor (figuring out draft order) somehow being to obliterate this off-season by not allowing any player movement

Straw man argument, I never suggested there be no player movement.

forcing players to stay at a club they were prepared to leave even if they are ooc

I didn't suggest this either.

upend past trades involving future picks

Nor did I suggest this. The trades would be perfectly valid, it's just that the draft pick compensation is held over until 2021, as that would be when the next draft is held.

force players and clubs into signing on players to another year when One or both parties may not have wanted that

I don't think those players and clubs would have wanted coronavirus to happen either. They're more than welcome to pursue trades if either party can't stand being in the same room as the other for five minutes longer.

It’s insane. It’s like wanting to trim a fingernail and amputating both legs.

It would be, if you read what I proposed rather than making things up.

The suggestion that we void this off-season is both a complete mess and also has permanent ramifications.

I didn't suggest this either.

Also I’m boggled at a suggestion that feigns player interests at heart by acting concerned that young draftees aren’t prepared for the league, while also telling the entire league to eat a bag of dicks if they don’t like getting f’ed over.

It boggles my mind that you don't seem to realise these are two completely different things, happening to two different sets of people. One is a group of 18 year olds who have just left high school and are entering the real world. The other is a group of veterans who chose to sign professional contracts, and whose collective bargaining agreement allows them to demand a trade if they so wish. I see no issue in holding them to a contract for a certain number of seasons if one of those seasons was voided. And in terms of free agency, the CBA also states that it is only reached after a certain number of years of service, and I wouldn't regard a season abandoned after a single game to be a year of service.

I’m not sure what you mean by this? Trading rights if a player doesn’t leave?

Simply, since a player is under contract for a season and that season is voided, the contract should continue.

If joe Daniher wants to get to Sydney this off-season he cannot. He gets stuck at Essendon for another year.

He shouldn't have signed a long contract with Essendon then. He didn't leave at the end of last year because he had another season his contract, and if this season is voided he won't be fulfilling the terms.

If port wants to draft their father son or nga players Schofield or Jones they get told no. What about how they drafted into points for them? Bad luck?

Their points carry over to the 2021 draft, in which Schofield and Jones will be eligible.

If a 32yr old player was on 800k at Collingwood, and there was no way Collingwood would offer him another year the proposal I’m arguing against says Collingwood would have to pay him to play another year.

Tough. Collingwood made the choice to keep that player for another season, they have no cause for complaint with him fulfilling that obligation at the very next available opportunity.

Keep in mind that none of this clusterfu** in any way addresses anything to do with the fallout of coronavirus.

Yes it does, it provides certainty about what's happening next year. It essentially just puts the league on ice for a year until normalcy resumes, except a trade period is added.

If you really think any of this is unfair, go take a look outside at the real world, where jobs will be lost, debts will be unpaid, parents won't be able to feed their children, families will split up over financial stress, and people will die as a direct result of coronavirus. Anyone who believes having a guaranteed job next year on a high salary is "getting f****ed" has no sense of perspective.

 

[philthy05]

What evidence would you like to see exactly? Do you disagree that younger people are less likely to be able to cope with a media spotlight and are generally less mature?


I have no idea why you've decided to make this about the drop-out rate in professional football. Of course players will drop out, that's life. My concern is with easing kids into high profile situations, given they have only just entered adulthood, and younger people are less able to deal with such pressure. That extra year gives them an opportunity to take an interest in something other than playing football full-time and experience what life is like outside the AFL fishbowl, thus setting them up to cope better if they do drop out of professional ranks.

But, if people who have actually played and coached at the highest levels are saying this and it hasn't convinced you, then it's unlikely an average Joe like me will be able to.


No, they're not comparable. If you get a job as a welder at 18, you won't have a media circus scrutinising your every move.


The line is 19. To my knowledge, none of the AFL coaches or players have suggested it goes beyond 19.


They get out of high school and get a taste of what real life is like.


They're either earning or learning.


Both. I'd want him to see what both sets of circumstances are like so he can appreciate what he has in the second environment.


Straw man argument, I never suggested there be no player movement.


I didn't suggest this either.


Nor did I suggest this. The trades would be perfectly valid, it's just that the draft pick compensation is held over until 2021, as that would be when the next draft is held.


I don't think those players and clubs would have wanted coronavirus to happen either. They're more than welcome to pursue trades if either party can't stand being in the same room as the other for five minutes longer.


It would be, if you read what I proposed rather than making things up.


I didn't suggest this either.


It boggles my mind that you don't seem to realise these are two completely different things, happening to two different sets of people. One is a group of 18 year olds who have just left high school and are entering the real world. The other is a group of veterans who chose to sign professional contracts, and whose collective bargaining agreement allows them to demand a trade if they so wish. I see no issue in holding them to a contract for a certain number of seasons if one of those seasons was voided. And in terms of free agency, the CBA also states that it is only reached after a certain number of years of service, and I wouldn't regard a season abandoned after a single game to be a year of service.


Simply, since a player is under contract for a season and that season is voided, the contract should continue.


He shouldn't have signed a long contract with Essendon then. He didn't leave at the end of last year because he had another season his contract, and if this season is voided he won't be fulfilling the terms.


Their points carry over to the 2021 draft, in which Schofield and Jones will be eligible.


Tough. Collingwood made the choice to keep that player for another season, they have no cause for complaint with him fulfilling that obligation at the very next available opportunity.


Yes it does, it provides certainty about what's happening next year. It essentially just puts the league on ice for a year until normalcy resumes, except a trade period is added.

If you really think any of this is unfair, go take a look outside at the real world, where jobs will be lost, debts will be unpaid, parents won't be able to feed their children, families will split up over financial stress, and people will die as a direct result of coronavirus. Anyone who believes having a guaranteed job next year on a high salary is "getting f****ed" has no sense of perspective.

But it’s entirely unnecessary to **** players and clubs over by skipping a draft and skipping the off-season so why the hell do it?

The whole, “look at the real world that’s rough” is a useless excuse for doing something unnecessary.

People are always going to be unprepared for anything until they do it.

There’s no magical thing between 18-19 that’s going to make these kids media champions. A year of work? Lol.

Going into a professional environment and acting professional with help and mentor ship is the best thing.

Also, stop with the ‘people that play and coaches say this’ bullshit like it’s consensus. It’s not consensus, it’s an outsider opinion, voiced by a minuscule minority.

Anyway we are going to disagree, but if you’re wanting to enact something that’s going to have such massive ramifications I think you need to have real hard evidence rather than the vagaries put forward.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Also, stop with the ‘people that play and coaches say this’ bullshit like it’s consensus. It’s not consensus, it’s an outsider opinion, voiced by a minuscule minority.

Prove that it isn't. You need to have real hard evidence rather than the vagaries put forward.

 

[philthy05]

Prove that it isn't. You need to have real hard evidence rather than the vagaries put forward.

Prove that it’s not consensus?

If between 5-10 people are arguing for it in media articles, out of I dunno, make a guess? 3000? 5000? current and former players, coaches, staff, football media and other stakeholders then yeah, it’s obviously a minority view.

Sure maybe there are more that agree with it that aren’t voicing their opinion in the media, but you can still see that it is a minority opinion.

It’s not rocket science.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

If between 5-10 people are arguing for it in media articles, out of I dunno, make a guess? 3000? 5000? current and former players, coaches, staff, football media and other stakeholders then yeah, it’s obviously a minority view.

It's a consensus of people who have commented about the matter. If you can prove that a large majority of those people have stated that 18 is a better draft age than 19, then I'll concede the point. Until then, you're just spouting nonsense to feel justified.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Hey guys this got tedious a while ago, just FYI.

 

[Puregold]

Hey philthy05. Where do you stand on lifting the draft age?

 

[Mofra]

I suspect if we get more than a handful of rounds complete, the draft order will stand on its own merit. Perhaps the fixture will be designed to accomodate this, 2-3 games against last years top, middle and bottom six teams in the first 8-10 rounds or something similar. That will amplify the relevance of percentage but at least it's something.

If the mid-year draft last year was able to be based on 10 rounds worth of games then there is precedent to base it on a shortened season.

It may also be that the draft is limited to players who have previously played AFL or nominated for an AFL draft.

Otherwise we most likely revert to 2019's draft order, or forego the draft altogether for 12 months, perhaps with a round of supplemental selections based on prior eligibility to replace any retirees.

U18s currently doing year 12 may need to repeat their year 12 anyway, depending on how this thing works out. Certainly work placements for VCAL kids will be compromised, and I've no idea how they'll do ATAR scores without SACs and exams.

There was a proposal a month ago that the 2019 & 2020 season totals are combined to determine the draft order.
I do see merit in delaying the draft in the event the bulk of kids haven't finished year 12. There is still so much to play out and the better-case scenarios havea full lockdown in Australia lasting 13 weeks so the kids will be one semester behind in their schooling.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

With the ever increasing likelihood of no u18s footy and no school footy for 2020

IMHO the best option will be to run an extended national carnival later in the year, make it only eligible for top age players who qualify for the draft, scrap the u19s playing who have had their turn. Perhaps instead of forcing clubs to pick 4 players in the draft, give them 8 over 2 years, so they could use 2 picks in 2020 then 6 in 2021 if they wish.

 

[briztoon]

Rioli, Silvagni, more: Why your club may still get a draft gun

Draft guru Cal Twomey looks at this year's crop linked to clubs via Academies and the father-son rule

www.afl.com.au