Roast Corrupt AFL Looking To Change F/S Bidding Rules

[DJ75]

THE AFC HAS TO FIGHT THIS ALL THE WAY… PARTICULARLY GIVEN THERE WAS NO THOUGHT OF THESE CHANGES FOR ASHCROFT OR DAICOS, BUT NOW WELSH IS ON THE HORIZON…

Reid 'open-minded', change flagged for bidding system, Hawk to re-sign

Check out all the latest trade news from around the League

www.afl.com.au

LEAGUE FLAGS CHANGES TO BIDDING SYSTEM​

THE AFL has flagged a series of potential changes to its draft bidding system, but has warned that an overarching umbrella structure for bids on both father-son and academy players remains unlikely.

Speaking on Gettable this week, the AFL's CEO elect Andrew Dillon revealed that the League continues to examine ways in which it can refine the draft's bidding process.

Currently there are three different sets of bidding rules depending on whether clubs elect to place them on father-son prospects, Northern Academy graduates or Next Generation Academy (NGA) players.

Clubs can currently match father-son bids anywhere in the draft, but can only match NGA bids outside the top 40 selections. There are also a host of intricacies for Northern Academy players, such as clubs only being able to match two top-20 bids if they play finals that season.


But the League is set to continue tying up any loose ends within its bidding process, including whether clubs can match first-round bids on father-son prospects with a host of later selections.

"They are really different, a father-son versus a Northern Academy versus a Next Generation Academy. They're all in for different reasons. Having specifics around each of those three is really important for us," Dillon told Gettable.

"What I'd like to look at is that our clubs are really good at, 'You write a rule, we're going to work out what's the best way we can – not exploit the rule – but do what we're doing within the rules?'

"When we first brought in the bidding system, we had the hidden picks where clubs were aggregating heaps of picks. We moved to change that. Sometimes, people look at it and say, 'How can you pick up a player in the early part of the draft by matching (a bid) with picks in the 40s?' Again, as we evolve, that's something to look at. We're taking feedback from clubs all the time on it." – Riley Beveridge

Bahahahahahahahah
Of course they are. I called it. As soon as we start getting good players, it will be time to change the rules. It was all good as long as Geelong and Collingwood reaped the benefits, but those pesky non-Vic club? Never!
What a bunch of absolute flogs the VFL are.

They can get stuffed. I'm pretty much done with this farce of a competition.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

Proposal, a F/S, Academ player bid matched in the first round can only be matched with first round pts.

If this year first round pick is not available next years pick is used. if that is not enough then the years afters 1st round picks is used for pts, and then the year afters first round pick. If you have traded out next years first round and you don't have enough pts with this years frst round you cannot bid match. (or that year pick is already pts for previous selection)

This will stop clubs trading out first round when they have a selection coming, up. sya you have a guy you pick match who goes number 2 and you have pick 10. Picks is 2517 pts, minus pick 10 pts 1385, that's defect of 1,132 pts or pick 11 in teh following draft whihc wil lbe deduced from their pick next year. Pick for 2 picks 10 and 11.

If the bid comes at say pick 6 and the club has already used r traed their pick 1 then full 1751 pts are deductedform ext year roudn 1 *and they cannot bid match if they have traded next years) and the year after that etc if pts still remain. Night see a trade in late round picks to help bid match but ony round 1 picks which should be a premium.

Rational - if you pick up high end rated talent, you must put up high end talent pts to match it

Fine. Let’s back date it and put the Daicos brothers back into the draft.

Why are the league suddenly looking to bring theses changes in now? Why not pre Darcy and Daicos? Why did the academy changes come through the year after JUH went to the Dogs?

Heck of a lot of AFL rulings working out in favour of Victorian teams, must just be a coincidence I guess.

 

[Scorpus]

If West Coast ever got a pick 1 type father son the AFL might fine and ban them for bringing the game into disrepute

 

[rabidcrow]

This is the point.

It feels very convenient that Brisbane, Collingwood, WB walked away with top 5 F/S picks in Ashcroft, Daicos and Darcy in the past 2 years! No mention of rule changes prior to those drafts.

From memory the rules were changed to make it easier for the Dogs to bundle up picks to get JUH? I am sure an adjustment was made to help them due to him going at 1


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

Does any other league in the world tinker with the rules as much as the AFL does in order to get the outcomes they want?

 

[Crow till I die]

Are there any proposed alternatives?

Heard some say you have to use a first round pick in matching if the bid comes in the first round etc.

So say next year we have pick 10, we select a player, then a bid on Welsh comes at pick 15 (we have no more first round picks).

Then what? We lose our future first?

Really interested to see this proposed fairer solution.

I dont mind if they changed the f/s bidding so you had to use a pick either the same round as the bid - ie 1st, or 2 picks in the next round after the bid ie if a bid came in in the 1st round, then it had to be 2 x 2nds. That still gives a good enough discount to make it beneficial.

But before all this, it shits me no end they look at the F/S bidding process just in time to screw us with Welsh - not 3 years earlier or a few years later. From memory, they changed the academy rules the year we had Keeler coming through who at the time looked like he was right in the hitting zone

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

From memory the rules were changed to make it easier for the Dogs to bundle up picks to get JUH? I am sure an adjustment was made to help them due to him going at 1


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I’m sure the rule originally was you could use a bunch of crap picks to match. They then changed it so that you could only take into the draft as many picks as you had free list spots.

AFL then changed it back again because WB we’re gonna be in trouble getting JUH. So they were able to use more picks than list spots again.

Something along those lines

 

[pugsville]

Comes so easily from fan of a club that boast 2 x Daicos and 1 x Moore under the existing system .. ok

Josh Diacos we picked with 57 in 2016. We did not bid match. just an ordinary draft selection,. NO one particularity rated Josh. He wa snot actually taken under Father son rules, so just irrelevant..

Darcy Moore was taken at pick 9 bid matched with pick 10.
Yeah we got him but paid fair value.
(but if had lasted just one more pick collingwood could have got another round 1 selection in the is the typical F/s acamdey rort/)

Yup Nick Discos was a steal.
Though we didnt do that well out of it either, we trading the futiure roudn 1 pick the year before , still thnking that we would not have such really poor down year. SO the pick sthat eventually was pick 2, we trading for some picks, that gave us Laim MacMhon (delisted), Caleb Poulter (delisted), Half of Beau McCreery (that at lesat was good) and about the trhid of the pts used to match the Nick Dacios bid. So while it was a rort typical of low F/S we did miosmage it quite a bit we kept the pick ad drafted Fin Callahan or Josh Rachele AND Nick Daicos it would hae been a much more successful rort. For many Pies supporters that trading of the future pick for handful of magic beans is widely regarded as utter incompetence. SO yeah Nick Diacos WAS a steal but collingwood mostly wasted the chance, though that's on us.

 

[1990crow]

Sign this petition. Share it around.

This campaign needs you now

AFL Father Son Rules - Stop Victorian Bias

chng.it

 

[Kwality]

No the reverse is true. The Expansion clubs have alwayss been favored they get academies and father sons. Loop holes are repeated found for clubs in non traditioal states.

Brisbane and Sydney hmm have little trouble attracting talent and retaining it . But they had an zone academy and full acces to father sons.

When will the trainer wells come off?

Its not that long ago that there was an exodus at Brisbane.

IF you think the benefits of being in a heartland State dont exceed the need to be in the development markets, you are kidding yourself. Thats not to deny there is more footy in Melbourne than there are fans.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

So AFL tinkering that has a direct / immediate negative impact on us:

• Gibbs f/s qualification
• Noah Anderson priority pick
• academy bidding / matching rules (Keeler)
• academy bidding / matching rules and ability to stockpile picks (JUH instead of TT)
• others?

 

[pugsville]

Its not that long ago that there was an exodus at Brisbane.

yeah because the club was badly run. The point every time an expansion club is trouble the wagons are circled and AFL looks to provide assistance. How much assistance did Fitzroy get compared to Brisbane?

Brisbane go through a tough patch it's structural reasons it must be fixed.

IF you think the benefits of being in a heartland State dont exceed the need to be in the development markets, you are kidding yourself. Thats not to deny there is more footy in Melbourne than there are fans.

Any danger of Brisbane standing on it;s own when will be special assistance and favoritism end?

 

[Kwality]

yeah because the club was badly run. The point every time an expansion club is trouble the wagons are circled and AFL looks to provide assistance. How much assistance did Fitzroy get compared to Brisbane?

Brisbane go through a tough patch it's structural reasons it must be fixed.



Any danger of Brisbane standing on it;s own when will be special assistance and favoritism end?

When they've been in the comp 50 years? Favouritism, are you dinkum?

 

[Punchy Bassett]

Any danger of Brisbane standing on it;s own when will be special assistance and favoritism end?

How many Vic clubs would be bankrupt by now if this didn't happen to all in the competition?

 

[pugsville]

How many Vic clubs would be bankrupt by now if this didn't happen to all in the competition?

Number of Victorian clubs wound up 1. Number of expansion clubs - 0.

 

[Brasher]

How many Vic clubs would be bankrupt by now if this didn't happen to all in the competition?

Clubs who sell games to regional venues present a strong correlation.

 

[MrBarry]

Still waiting for the crows to come out on the good side of any AFL policy or ruling. It’s been 32 years now.

Walker

 

[pugsville]

Walker

So Aside some Max Michalanney, Tex Walker and allowngthe crow throw which goes without saying what have the AFL ever done for the crows.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

So Aside some Max Michalanney, Tex Walker and allowngthe crow throw which goes without saying what have the AFL ever done for the crows.

I think we got the same draft sanctions as Essendon for our promise to trade Tippett for a 2nd round pick as Essendon did for doping their whole list!

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

So Aside some Max Michalanney, Tex Walker and allowngthe crow throw which goes without saying what have the AFL ever done for the crows.

Oh, and as far as those you name, we just benefited from the same rule that others benefited from at the same time. So not actually special treatment in our favour

 

[1990crow]

I think we got the same draft sanctions as Essendon for our promise to trade Tippett for a 2nd round pick as Essendon did for doping their whole list!

Nope. We got double.

 

[1990crow]

Oh, and as far as those you name, we just benefited from the same rule that others benefited from at the same time. So not actually special treatment in our favour

Correct. Everyone had access.

 

[RePete]

So AFL tinkering that has a direct / immediate negative impact on us:

• Gibbs f/s qualification
• Noah Anderson priority pick
• academy bidding / matching rules (Keeler)
• academy bidding / matching rules and ability to stockpile picks (JUH instead of TT)
• others?

Didn't they reject us trading in some senior St Kilda player a few years ago? Wasn't it that we were going to alleviate some of their salary cap by taking a player so they could offer Brouch more? And then they shot it down.... Then when the FA offer went through, they didn't count performance clauses in it as well. We ended losing one of our best mids for a pick in the 20's....Then they hand Ess a top-10 pick for Danniher who's deal shortly got re-negotiated after joining Bris? Nothing to see here.

Didn't we have a trade on draft night with Melbourne rejected as well?

 

[zhoung]

Comes so easily from fan of a club that boast 2 x Daicos and 1 x Moore under the existing system .. ok

Let’s not let facts get in the way
1x Daicos
Josh Daicos was picked up with Pies last pick, 57. Don’t think he received a bid

 

[1990crow]

Didn't they reject us trading in some senior St Kilda player a few years ago? Wasn't it that we were going to alleviate some of their salary cap by taking a player so they could offer Brouch more? And then they shot it down.... Then when the FA offer went through, they didn't count performance clauses in it as well. We ended losing one of our best mids for a pick in the 20's....Then they hand Ess a top-10 pick for Danniher who's deal shortly got re-negotiated after joining Bris? Nothing to see here.

Didn't we have a trade on draft night with Melbourne rejected as well?

Yes and 2 years later they waved through Geelong getting Jack Bowes AND receiving a top ten pick for salary relief.

The league is a joke and corrupt.