Draft whispers, rumours & scuttlebut

[LukeHodge15]

I was thinking about this and there's a few things I wanted to point out. For one, these clubs finance their academies themselves so if you remove the drafting privileges, there's no incentives to actually run these academies because why funnel money into a player's development if another team reaps the rewards. So unless the AFL offers to fund these themselves and keep them viable, it wouldn't make sense to remove the privileges unless you want to massively hinder the growth of the sport in NSW and QLD.

A solution could be perhaps join the academies in QLD as well as NSW so Sydney and the Giants have to bid for NSW kids as a collective and Brisbane/GCS bid for theirs which might drive the paying price up.

Also, if you consider Sydney's situation, the idea that they've had to sacrifice ALL their draft picks really compromises the position of their list - instead of bringing in several youngsters to develop, they're only able to bring in one (albeit a gun) and that's just not sustainable with an ageing list unless they're going to rely on trading or FA for list regeneration. Additionally, they've stockpiled picks which 'shows their hand' so clubs know that they're only interested in Mills and could bid earlier to make them pay overs. I'll also add that Lloyd Perris and Jack Hiscox were also very highly rated talents picked up by Sydney through the academy but at the moment, are looking like busts.

So while it seems like a huge advantage, the points system has done really well to try minimise this. It could be tweaked better though.

Stop it..... Lol. I'm sorry but the AFL pay for these academy's already. The AFL virtually run and operate and fund all 4 clubs we talking about here.

 

[Sellout Scully]

Seems to be a common consensus that Mills will attract a bid between 2-3, Hopper will attract one between 2-4 while Matthew Kennedy will go somewhere in the top 10 but I haven't heard much about where the Brisbane prospects are likely to end up in the draft order.

Where do people see Hipwood and Keays ending up? Top 10, or a bit lower?

 

[WA Lion]

Seems to be a common consensus that Mills will attract a bid between 2-3, Hopper will attract one between 2-4 while Matthew Kennedy will go somewhere in the top 10 but I haven't heard much about where the Brisbane prospects are likely to end up in the draft order.

Where do people see Hipwood and Keays ending up? Top 10, or a bit lower?

General consensus for them appears to be Hipwood anywhere 10-15 range and Keays 12-20

 

[Keystone agony]

Well you shouldn't be confident enough. He was out for over half the season so of course he's aerobic levels at the combine would suffer.

Did you ever seen the kid play when he was 15-17? Played through the midfield with great ability and used to break through tackles. Played just fwd this year as was returning from a long stint on the bench.

The kid ain't no Judd and definitely not worth a #3 pick in comparison to others but very doubtful he will be around at the Blues 2nd or 3rd pick.

I think theres a strong chance hes around at pick 8 for Carlton.

But no i havnt seen him at thate age was he the same size and weight as he is now though?

Jack darling at 15 use to be one of the best midfielders in the country for his age then he grew and became a forward. Now hes shown very little as a midfielder since 17-18

 

[doona]

I'm sorry but the AFL pay for these academy's already.

The Swans get pretty much the same cash from the AFL as a majority of the clubs. Not any more. The Swans put well over 1 million dollars per year into our academy and still have the expenses other clubs have.

 

[Funk]

Tend to agree, but I reckon we will take a mid at 8 and Mckay or similar at 11.
If, and it's a big if, curnow or Weideman last to 8 we will snap them up before Mckay and take the mid at 11.

FWIW - Having looked at a few phantom drafts (and seeing how many talls have come in through trades) I'm thinking CFC will take gun mids/utilities at 8 and 11 and if no slider falls to 19 then we'll take B McKay.

 

[LukeHodge15]

The Swans get pretty much the same cash from the AFL as a majority of the clubs. Not any more. The Swans put well over 1 million dollars per year into our academy and still have the expenses other clubs have.

I'm derailing this thread. If u believe that then good luck to u. I'll leave at.

 

[Footypie32]

In for the scuttlebut.

 

[Super Hans]

Oh ffs would somebody change the name of this thread, there's about 2 posts related to draft rumours and the rest belongs elsewhere

I heard that Carlton are gonna somehow get Rance in the PSD. Should be good for them, he could be their new SOS.

 

[hepd]

Stop it..... Lol. I'm sorry but the AFL pay for these academy's already. The AFL virtually run and operate and fund all 4 clubs we talking about here.

If you're going to derail the thread, at least do it without talking out of your ass.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...own-their-nsw-development-20140721-zvgg0.html

 

[apuchar]

If you're going to derail the thread, at least do it without talking out of your ass.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...own-their-nsw-development-20140721-zvgg0.html

The club’s academy investment is largely funded by major sponsor QBE in an agreement which runs until the end of 2016.

 

[doona]

The club’s academy investment is largely funded by major sponsor QBE in an agreement which runs until the end of 2016.

Which is the Swans paying for the academy through the money we get from our major sponsors.

What we do with sponsorship money/agreements is our choice. Weather we invest it in the academy or football department etc.. Is irrelevant.

For example is the money the Hawks get through the Tasmanian government deal the Hawks money?

 

[apuchar]

Which is the Swans paying for the academy through the money we get from our major sponsors.

What we do with sponsorship money/agreements is our choice. Weather we invest it in the academy or football department etc.. Is irrelevant.

For example is the money the Hawks get through the Tasmanian government deal the Hawks money?

A sponsor should never be allowed to dictate to the AFL where the players they are supporting can go.


The financial health of the 18 AFL clubs has been laid bare, with only six making profits without substantial help from the league's governing body, an analysis of the competition's finances shows.

The Sydney Swans announced a profit of about $846,000 but received about $12 million in AFL funding, higher than many clubs including the likes of Collingwood, Essendon and Hawthorn.

Collingwood, Essendon, Hawthorn and Richmond were the only ones of 10 Victorian clubs to achieve profits in their own right, as did the West Coast Eagles and Fremantle. Essendon's $720,000 profit, however, was boosted by about $700,000 worth of donations.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...d-from-afl-20150228-13rqwm.html#ixzz3rXVa7sN0
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook

 

[doona]

A sponsor should never be allowed to dictate to the AFL where the players they are supporting can go.

They are not.

We, the swans are investing 1 million dollars through sponsorship (every club is allowed to get sponsors and make money from sponsors. Does your club have a sponsor on your Jersey? Training gear? Etc... ) into our academy.

If the AFL decided to put in 1 million dollars into the academy and we loose the academy draft concessions, we would agree.

We would invest that million dollars into our football depart.

Essentially, the AFL don't want to put the money into football in NSW or QLD. They want the clubs to do it themselves.

 

[Crazy Tails]

Brett Anderson tweet from about 45 minutes ago pretty much saying Charlie Curnow to Dees at 3 should be a no-brainer.

Hard to place him. Earlier in the week he is a possibility to miss top 10 now he's going at three. The talent is obviously there but maybe query is that is he an undersized KPF or could he be a tall mid?

I'm sure the Bombers would love Parish to fall into their laps. Add Francis or Weidemann along with Parish and that would be a fantastic result for Essendon.

 

[hendo8888]

Is there likely to be a 'tipping point' for these Academy picks? The highest pick that a club would match a bid on for their player?
Seems like Mills or Hopper likely would be picked, even if they are bid with pick 1, GWS likely would grab Kennedy too, unless he gets a top 3 bid, but the 2 Brisbane guys especially, they don't seem to warrant much more than a mid to late first round pick, and Brisbane don't have the points to pay more than that. So if a team were to bid earlier, to try pull a shonky (make Brisbane overpay), could it come back to bite them? And then what happens with Brisbane? They have stockpiled 5 picks to use as points, but if they don't use them on a pick (because they can't afford it), they'd end up with 2 or 3 unused picks, that combined would be enough points for a mid first rounder, but they would have to wait til 38 to spend it.

 

[coryne]

The Swans get pretty much the same cash from the AFL as a majority of the clubs. Not any more. The Swans put well over 1 million dollars per year into our academy and still have the expenses other clubs have.

And if you gave the same opportunity to the other clubs they would jump at it without a second thought .....

 

[doona]

Is there likely to be a 'tipping point' for these Academy picks? The highest pick that a club would match a bid on for their player?
Seems like Mills or Hopper likely would be picked, even if they are bid with pick 1, GWS likely would grab Kennedy too, unless he gets a top 3 bid, but the 2 Brisbane guys especially, they don't seem to warrant much more than a mid to late first round pick, and Brisbane don't have the points to pay more than that. So if a team were to bid earlier, to try pull a shonky (make Brisbane overpay), could it come back to bite them? And then what happens with Brisbane? They have stockpiled 5 picks to use as points, but if they don't use them on a pick (because they can't afford it), they'd end up with 2 or 3 unused picks, that combined would be enough points for a mid first rounder, but they would have to wait til 38 to spend it.

Swans will match Mills. At worst, one of our picks we will just upgrade Newman and only have the one other live pick.

GWS will match hopper & Kennedy but if 2 really high bids come in, they may not be able to afford himmleberg.

I think Brisbane should be right though with the discount for academy players and the amount of late 30's/early 40's Picks they have.

It's GWS with himmelberg that might slip depending on Kennedy and hopper.

I also think, clubs will only bid if they are happy to take the player. A recruiters job is to get the best player for their team, not screw over another club.

 

[Determinant]

Stop it..... Lol. I'm sorry but the AFL pay for these academy's already. The AFL virtually run and operate and fund all 4 clubs we talking about here.

1996 ring any bells?
The league needs all 18 clubs to survive in order to max the rights to broadcast games via any medium.
The club's spend on academies is discretionary, if the access to the players coming through is equal for all why bother?
The fact that more players are coming through these academies should make traditional market clubs happy, it means the players available from the "natural" nurseries is more likely to stay in those states.
The fact that Heeney last year cost pick 18 and Mills this year will likely cost pick 4 or 5 is more than enough equalisation.

 

[LukeHodge15]

They are not.

We, the swans are investing 1 million dollars through sponsorship (every club is allowed to get sponsors and make money from sponsors. Does your club have a sponsor on your Jersey? Training gear? Etc... ) into our academy.

If the AFL decided to put in 1 million dollars into the academy and we loose the academy draft concessions, we would agree.

We would invest that million dollars into our football depart.

Essentially, the AFL don't want to put the money into football in NSW or QLD. They want the clubs to do it themselves.

The AFL own u. Subsidise u. Make allowances for u. Let's keep this a little real here.

Sydney Swans Sucking is bad for the AFL brand and growing football in the Northern states. Aka Media Rights. That's what COLA existed for.

If u can't see the correlation with letting northern states have access to elite talent for discounted price to further strengthen those teams aiding in bigger sponsorship dollars then ur not looking close enough.

The AFL own the Swans. It's that simple

 

[LukeHodge15]

1996 ring any bells?
The league needs all 18 clubs to survive in order to max the rights to broadcast games via any medium.
The club's spend on academies is discretionary, if the access to the players coming through is equal for all why bother?
The fact that more players are coming through these academies should make traditional market clubs happy, it means the players available from the "natural" nurseries is more likely to stay in those states.
The fact that Heeney last year cost pick 18 and Mills this year will likely cost pick 4 or 5 is more than enough equalisation.

Spin it however u want

It's a compromised bullshit rule the AFL has bought in to aid the northern states in winning games and essentially making them more money.

Run academy's. All throughout northern states just don't compromise a draft. Every clubs get access to the elite kids of the North

Amy compromised bullshit rule that screws with the draft is an appalling idea

 

[Funk]

You are clueless. But witnessing that rabble from the western suburbs for the last few years will do that to you I guess.

Why is it that so many Richmond supporters find it necessary to resort to insults when another person holds a contrary view?

Grow up children!!!!

 

[doona]

The AFL own u. Subsidise u. Make allowances for u. Let's keep this a little real here.

Sydney Swans Sucking is bad for the AFL brand and growing football in the Northern states. Aka Media Rights. That's what COLA existed for.

If u can't see the correlation with letting northern states have access to elite talent for discounted price to further strengthen those teams aiding in bigger sponsorship dollars then ur not looking close enough.

The AFL own the Swans. It's that simple

You do realise there use to be a nsw scholarship program which got you Langford, the crows T. Walker but most clubs could not be bothered investing and the clubs didn't want the program.

Then E. Mcguire, yes E. Mcguire and the rest of the AFL clubs decided to can that program and allow the creation of the academies in its place.

The Swans or AFL or northern clubs were not the ones that created the academies, but a vote from all the AFL clubs.

Now northern non afl state clubs are reaping benefits from investing millions, it's now the AFLs fault.

But think what you will.

 

[yyou]

I created this thread with good intentions,
but I now understand he it feels to be disappointed by what you have created.
It must be like your kid choosing to follow the team you hate most.
Let's try to keep it on topic, please

 

[Silvagnis]