Drafting system needs to be looked at?

Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Posts
146
Likes
0
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #1
The National AFL Draft is a great way of introducing youngsters to the AFL and improving AFL club lists for the future. The draft brings many talented footballers every year, some names are Chris Judd, Luke Hodge, Brendan Goddard and the list goes on.

There are two things I’m looking at, do AFL clubs have ties with players from their area/zone? And does the current drafting procedure need to be looked at.

Firstly, we’ll have look at the current draft system. The current drafting rules have been under fire lately by several clubs and media officials. The current system only benefits teams that win 5 games or less in a season.

This takes away plenty of competition between the clubs and if a club’s list isn’t looking too ‘flash’ one year then they would just sit at the bottom of the ladder for the whole year and get ‘rewarded’ for it. Some would argue that the rule is fair as the lesser teams but it’s just an incentive for them for finishing last. Absolutely disgraceful if you ask me!

A newer draft system needs to be put into place immediately. There are several ways that the AFL can change the current system.

1. The AFL can introduce a system where the bottom four to eight teams at the end of the season draw for pick number one and so on to pick 4 to 8. This system will make sure that AFL clubs don’t take advantage of the system and finish last just for the sake of getting pick number one.

2. The priority picks should be replaced with something more reliable/consistent or banished all together.

3. OR give a priority pick to a team that wins 8 games or less in 2 consecutive seasons.

Something on lines of those three things should make the draft more fairer.

Before the National Draft system began players got recruited from the local zone/area of the particular AFL Club and clubs could try and draft players from the WAFL or SANFL.

Here is one new rule that I would like to see in place. As well as the priority picks and round 1, round 2 and etc. picks I think there should be a section for drafting from your zone prior to the priority picks (or maybe instead of them) and etc.

Maybe, just one pick from the club’s zone to start off the idea. Some might argue that the zoning idea or re-introduction of zones would be unfair for some teams, as the zones are different in different. And teams such as Brisbane and Sydney will get a whole state, this can be fixed by using local metropolitan areas for each team.

This way the club has drafted players from within the area, Brisbane and Sydney might get advantages at first but as the competition expands it'll become fairer and the NAME of the club will still have association with their area.

I’ll leave for you to make your own mind and discuss.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Oct 26, 2004
Posts
29
Likes
0
Other Teams
roosters
#2
Changing the Draft system is like introducing the send off rule, too many with their heads in the sand that can't see the wood for the trees!!
 

ThePope

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Posts
3,478
Likes
125
Location
32º 03'S 115º 45'E
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
South Fremantle
#3
The problem with zones is that people move around. When do you decide which zone a player belongs to? at 15? 16? 17? whichever club he belongs to or where he plays? If the next Chris Judd is known to be playing/living in Carlton's zone but Collingwood know's his uncle lives in their zone, how can you stop him "moving there" to qualify?

Too easy to manipulate the draft in that manner. Priority picks are a problem when more than 1 club gets one, otherwise it's fair enough. Randomising the draft is OK, but would it really help?
 

theorangeapple

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 18, 2003
Posts
5,626
Likes
3
AFL Club
West Coast
#4
zoning wont ever return because of sydney and brisbane. they simply dont have the players available.

the only part of the draft system that needs to be changed is the priority picks. made them harder to get, or reduce the reward by making the picks straight after the first round.
 

Weaver

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 26, 2001
Posts
7,943
Likes
56
Location
Deledio Wonderland
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Southampton
#5
1. There used to be country and metro zones. The country zones were meant to be rotated but never were. The zones were meant to be adjusted to take account of population shifts but never were. As the South-East corridor of Melbourne (Brewick-Pakenham etc) grew Hawthorn benefited hugely while falling populations in rural areas such as the Wimmera-Mallee cost other teams.

2. Development programs are better managed when they are independant. Kids can focus on playing and learning. If AFL clubs are expected to develop their zone some will choose to save money by neglecting their zones. In this case it is not only that club that will suffer but the local clubs and the players themselves. Local development should be managed as much as possable by the local clubs and leagues which know theire areas.

3. Zoning is hardly fairer on a player. The assumption is that each kid in WA wants to play for West Coast or Freo. This might be true of the majority but there are kids in WA who want to play for Essendon, kids in Melbourne who want to play for Brisbane etc.

4. The idea is that is better that kids don't have to leave home. Even under a zoning system 50% of players have to leave home anyway. These are the kids that have to move from country towns into the city. Moving from Mildura to Melbourne is not that much different to moving to Brisbane. You still don't get home cooking. It only helps the city kids.

5. Zoneing would be more likely to be challenged as a restraint of trade than the draft. Saying that where you worked was determined by your place of birth is highly restrictive.

6. What about players who move? Nick Riewoldt was born in Tassie raised in QLD, Voss and Akermanis were born in Victoria and raised in QLD. For city zones how do you determine where a player is zoned? Should it be based on his residence, his club or his school team. If he lives in Melbourne's zone and plays for a club in St Kilda's zone would St Kilda be at a disenctive to pick him in development squads? Would they pressure the local representative team to pick someone else instead?

7. WA and SA supporters like the idea because they think it will make their clubs stronger. If zones are good why not have a raffle where every 5 years a club gets a zone from the hat. That way Brisbane might have half of WA and Fremantle might have Tassie. If zones are inherently good then there would be no objection to that.
 

Crowked

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Posts
6,322
Likes
5,325
Location
The other end of the foot bridge
AFL Club
Adelaide
#6
I think its funny how the ones complaining about it are the top teams from the previous year.

The bottom sides dont complain becuase they benifit from it.

This is what it is supposed to do, just leave it alone and at some stage every team will like it when theyre down and hate it when theyre up.

It is designed to even the comp. isnt it.
 

deck

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Posts
3,041
Likes
992
Location
Melburn
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Liverpool, SF 49ers, FSU
#8
The only thing they have to change is priority draft picks and that is to get rid of them. If you finish last you get 1st pick that is your benefit nothing else.
 

feher

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 29, 2003
Posts
3,509
Likes
5
Location
Adelaide
Other Teams
HFC 9xAFL Pre, Liverpool
#9
Awesome Scotty said:
2. The priority picks should be replaced with something more reliable/consistent or banished all together.
how is pp not consistent? it will be given out just about every year, because as vfl/afl history will show you, it is almost impossible for every team to win 6+ games a season, or did i miss something?
 

Hanis

Club Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Posts
2,737
Likes
16
Location
Yep
AFL Club
St Kilda
#10
Forget about zoning - in the past won't be going back there!!!

With regard to the PP's - maybe a rule stating that you can only have one PP every three years. So starting from this year Richmond, Hawthorn and the Bulldogs are now NOT eligible for a PP until year 2007. :cool:
 

Punt_Road_Roar

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 10, 2004
Posts
8,715
Likes
2,045
Location
Perth WA
AFL Club
Richmond
#11
Hanis said:
Forget about zoning - in the past won't be going back there!!!

With regard to the PP's - maybe a rule stating that you can only have one PP every three years. So starting from this year Richmond, Hawthorn and the Bulldogs are now NOT eligible for a PP until year 2007. :cool:
nah what a crap idea


i say start it from next year

:D
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

scooter600x

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Posts
8,464
Likes
1,149
Location
Behind the goals, Geelong
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#12
The problem with zoning is who decides what are fair zones?

Sydney and Brisbane would suffer big time if they only had NSW & Qld. Do you give Brisbane NT and Sydney the Ovens & Murray league?

The Calder Cannons and Western Jets zones take in roughly the same population base but half of the Jets zone have no interest on football for cultural reasons.
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Posts
146
Likes
0
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #13
scooter600x said:
The problem with zoning is who decides what are fair zones?

Sydney and Brisbane would suffer big time if they only had NSW & Qld. Do you give Brisbane NT and Sydney the Ovens & Murray league?

The Calder Cannons and Western Jets zones take in roughly the same population base but half of the Jets zone have no interest on football for cultural reasons.
I was thinking ..

Control it to leagues in metropolitan area:

Bulldogs: Western Region
Essendon: Essendon District
Kangas: Riddell District
St. Kilda: Mornington Peninsula Nepean
Richmond: Southern
Hawthorn: Eastern
Geelong: All 3 Geelong leagues
Collingwood: Diamond Valley

Its just so clubs do have local ties within their area.
*thanks to paz :p
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Posts
146
Likes
0
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #14
feher said:
how is pp not consistent? it will be given out just about every year, because as vfl/afl history will show you, it is almost impossible for every team to win 6+ games a season, or did i miss something?
I'm not saying what I was suggesting would be consistent but the current PP system isnt to great either. All you have to do is win less than 6 games and then you have a crack at picking up 2 future guns in the first round. Just merely saying it should definately be reviewed...
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Posts
146
Likes
0
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #15
deck said:
The only thing they have to change is priority draft picks and that is to get rid of them. If you finish last you get 1st pick that is your benefit nothing else.
Agree dude.

If it wasn't for the priority pick system in the National Draft then clubs other than the Richomonds, Hawthorns and WBulldogs (of this year) would have a chance of picking up someone like Roughead, Frankinln, Griffen & etc.. I know I'm going on about the would have's, could have's and etc but the system does seriously need to be looked at.

The idea of zoning would be good only if each team has a certain area/district given to them and they were to use their first pick on that or better still instead of the prioirty pick system the teams that finish with less than 20 points at the end of the season should have to zone with their prioity pick so that the picks are evenly or close to evenly distributed.
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Posts
135
Likes
0
Other Teams
HAWTHORN
#16
I will take it this year! but I think the priority pick needs to be looked at.

It should be at the end of the first round, not the start. It rewards mediocrity too much.
 
Top Bottom