List Mgmt. Geelong's Next Generation Academy

[CatToTheFuture]

Do we devote any resources to our NGA?
We seem to have a lot less return on what we're doing with it than other sides

As Jhye Clark 13 said there's not much to devote to. There's a small patch of east Arnhem land which just doesn't have a big enough population to really fluke out a decent player and a large section of mostly farmland with few immigrants or indigenous people to select from.

I think after Hawkins they're pretty keen to keep us locked out.

 

[gogeelongcats]

Geelong should complain. Why not if we are disadvantaged?

We should get the Western district which is the area we represent.
Long term I think there will be reduced number of sides and the WB will merge with us. We should get access to our Western region.

 

[cats_09]

Geelong should complain. Why not if we are disadvantaged?

We should get the Western district which is the area we represent.
Long term I think there will be reduced number of sides and the WB will merge with us. We should get access to our Western region.

Western Bulldogs won't be needing merging with Geelong

 

[gogeelongcats]

Western Bulldogs won't be needing merging with Geelong

It depends on how the AFL intends to move forward and how many teams and where they want in the competition. Long term as the interstate market grows there will simply be too many teams in Victoria. This will lead to a restructure in Victoria. The teams are trading well however change will come.
WB and Geelong would represent Western Victoria.
Similarly, i can see North merging with Essendon (representing Northern Victoria).
I am crystal balling into a long way in the future.

 

[cats_09]

It depends on how the AFL intends to move forward and how many teams and where they want in the competition. Long term as the interstate market grows there will simply be too many teams in Victoria. This will lead to a restructure in Victoria. The teams are trading well however change will come.
WB and Geelong would represent Western Victoria.
Similarly, i can see North merging with Essendon (representing Northern Victoria).
I am crystal balling into a long way in the future.

Yeah, I doubt we actually see any clubs merge let alone the idea that it would be clubs like Geelong or Essendon involved with merges - clubs with 150+ years of history aren’t going to merge under the false notion of ”too many teams in Victoria”, regardless of how far into the future the crystal ball is having a laugh at predicting

Besides, a merge of Geelong & Western Bulldogs wouldn’t represent ’Western Victoria‘, nor would a merge of North & Essendon represent ‘Northern Vic’ - people already have their loyalty to their clubs, and merging clubs in that fashion would be an excellent way of killing off over 260k members of those 4 clubs, as a lot of those would drop off as those merged clubs isn’t the club they actually support. And someone living in those regions who has loyalties to another club isn’t going to suddenly change because this newly formed club has been designed to apparently represent them

IF the AFL wants to move forward with a strong competition, the first step isn’t to kill off clubs with 100+ or 150+ years of history, and with a loyal following of supporters. It really sounds like all that would be achieved is something more likely to hurt the league rather than make it stronger

 

[gogeelongcats]

Yeah, I doubt we actually see any clubs merge let alone the idea that it would be clubs like Geelong or Essendon involved with merges - clubs with 150+ years of history aren’t going to merge under the false notion of ”too many teams in Victoria”, regardless of how far into the future the crystal ball is having a laugh at predicting

Besides, a merge of Geelong & Western Bulldogs wouldn’t represent ’Western Victoria‘, nor would a merge of North & Essendon represent ‘Northern Vic’ - people already have their loyalty to their clubs, and merging clubs in that fashion would be an excellent way of killing off over 260k members of those 4 clubs, as a lot of those would drop off as those merged clubs isn’t the club they actually support. And someone living in those regions who has loyalties to another club isn’t going to suddenly change because this newly formed club has been designed to apparently represent them

IF the AFL wants to move forward with a strong competition, the first step isn’t to kill off clubs with 100+ or 150+ years of history, and with a loyal following of supporters. It really sounds like all that would be achieved is something more likely to hurt the league rather than make it stronger

i understand your view which would be supported by most.

 

[SkittleCats]

IF the AFL wants to move forward with a strong competition, the first step isn’t to kill off clubs with 100+ or 150+ years of history, and with a loyal following of supporters. It really sounds like all that would be achieved is something more likely to hurt the league rather than make it stronger

It's coming, for a number of reasons the league will be forced to look at the size of the comp. Adding Tassy expands the comp to 19, which means an ugly fixture, so 20 teams becomes almost necessary at that point. Can the AFL talent pool support 20 teams? I dont think so, not without an even further drop in the overall standard of the game itself.

The league has shown that it wont hesitate to move Vic clubs with a long history if they need to: South Melbourne and Fitzroy obviously. The benefit here this time for the clubs affected is that they wont be leaving the state, infact they may not even need to leave Melbourne. Ross Oakley argued for a 3 way merger in the 80's and it should still be considered now. Merging North Melbourne and the Saints with a stronger club like the Dogs or Melbourne makes the most sense here.

Hopefully they pull the pin on Gold Coast to, so we can get the comp back down to a more sustainable number of teams that the talent pool can easily support.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

It's coming, for a number of reasons the league will be forced to look at the size of the comp. Adding Tassy expands the comp to 19, which means an ugly fixture, so 20 teams becomes almost necessary at that point. Can the AFL talent pool support 20 teams? I dont think so, not without an even further drop in the overall standard of the game itself.

The league has shown that it wont hesitate to move Vic clubs with a long history if they need to: South Melbourne and Fitzroy obviously. The benefit here this time for the clubs affected is that they wont be leaving the state, infact they may not even need to leave Melbourne. Ross Oakley argued for a 3 way merger in the 80's and it should still be considered now. Merging North Melbourne and the Saints with a stronger club like the Dogs or Melbourne makes the most sense here.

Hopefully they pull the pin on Gold Coast to, so we can get the comp back down to a more sustainable number of teams that the talent pool can easily support.

I don't think the talent pool can support 18 but here we are

 

[Warhorse]

I don't think the talent pool can support 18 but here we are

The country is growing at 400k a year. Why don't you think the talent pool won't support it?

 

[gogeelongcats]

I don't think the talent pool can support 18 but here we are

First and foremost, the game must attain national representation to earn its status as our national sport.

It's imperative to recognise that each region possesses its distinctive characteristics and idiosyncrasies, which should be considered. However, over time, the population in each region will help determine the equitable distribution of teams. The question is how many teams does the AFL want in the competition; and how do we make the fixture equitable? This will certainly lead to changes in how the players are drafted and changes to this landscape.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

The country is growing at 400k a year. Why don't you think the talent pool won't support it?

I just think we struggle to fill out 18 teams currently with talent available now. There's not enough elite forwards or rucks to go around, have a look at the contracts being thrown around for KPDs.

I'm not saying it couldn't in time but those 400k migrants need to have kids and those kids need time in the juniors etc etc.

 

[MacStradbroke]

The country is growing at 400k a year. Why don't you think the talent pool won't support it?

Anyone watching the VFL GF today can see there’s plenty of AFL standard quality out there.

 

[SkittleCats]

I don't think the talent pool can support 18 but here we are

I agree, the game is worse today than it was before the Suns came in, it has been on a decline ever since. Getting the comp back down to at least 16 teams should be the overriding purpose of the AFL admin over the next 5 years...But who am i kiding? The AFL Admin will instead take us from 19 to 20 to 22 teams in a blink of an eye.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

I agree, the game is worse today than it was before the Suns came in, it has been on a decline ever since. Getting the comp back down to at least 16 teams should be the overriding purpose of the AFL admin over the next 5 years...But who am i kiding? The AFL Admin will instead take us from 19 to 20 to 22 teams in a blink of an eye.

Why sell a suite of 18 products with 5 being good when you can sell 22 bad products and people lap it up

 

[thejester]

I just think we struggle to fill out 18 teams currently with talent available now. There's not enough elite forwards or rucks to go around, have a look at the contracts being thrown around for KPDs.

I'm not saying it couldn't in time but those 400k migrants need to have kids and those kids need time in the juniors etc etc.

Can you point us to the glory days when there were enough elite forwards to go around?

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Can you point us to the glory days when there were enough elite forwards to go around?

I'm not claiming there ever were

 

[thejester]

I'm not claiming there ever were

OK, but then what's the relevance of the point you're making?

 

[CatToTheFuture]

OK, but then what's the relevance of the point you're making?

Just that there isn't enough talent to go around. Consistently we have teams finishing well off the pace but well outside of the top tier picks in the draft. "No man's land" wouldn't exist if the draft rounds were shorter, not that I think we should cull teams.

It's frustrating that with so much investment in junior pathways were looking at shorter drafts that shorter than they were 20 years ago with more teams selecting.

The solution for me is probably just money: expand all rookie lists by 20 and double the soft cap. Field a seconds team with 100% professional athletes. Would cost the dollars but in my view it's the best way to make sure every Stewart or Fritzch gets their shot.

 

[Warhorse]

I agree, the game is worse today than it was before the Suns came in, it has been on a decline ever since. Getting the comp back down to at least 16 teams should be the overriding purpose of the AFL admin over the next 5 years...But who am i kiding? The AFL Admin will instead take us from 19 to 20 to 22 teams in a blink of an eye.

Population is 21.69 million in 2009. It is 26.4 million today. How has the talent pool shrunk?

 

[CharacterFirst]

Can you point us to the glory days when there were enough elite forwards to go around?

1990s?

 

[thejester]

Just that there isn't enough talent to go around. Consistently we have teams finishing well off the pace but well outside of the top tier picks in the draft. "No man's land" wouldn't exist if the draft rounds were shorter, not that I think we should cull teams.

It's frustrating that with so much investment in junior pathways were looking at shorter drafts that shorter than they were 20 years ago with more teams selecting.

The solution for me is probably just money: expand all rookie lists by 20 and double the soft cap. Field a seconds team with 100% professional athletes. Would cost the dollars but in my view it's the best way to make sure every Stewart or Fritzch gets their shot.

Fair enough, but the problem you've just described isn't a lack of talent, it's inefficiency in finding it. If you think that is the problem, and that the solution is increasing the size of lists, then the addition of two additional teams would actually be good?

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Fair enough, but the problem you've just described isn't a lack of talent, it's inefficiency in finding it. If you think that is the problem, and that the solution is increasing the size of lists, then the addition of two additional teams would actually be good?

You would add less talented kids to first rotations so the quality of football would degrade especially early on. If you expanded lists without adding teams then you'd see no change early. But after 5 years or so you'd see a much higher floor for the performance of the bottom teams. The better teams would likely not get much better I think.

 

[SkittleCats]

Population is 21.69 million in 2009. It is 26.4 million today. How has the talent pool shrunk?

I didnt say the talent pool has shrunk, i implied that the talent pool, regardless of what the overall population of the country is, is not large enough to supply enough talent playing at a high enough level for 18 and then 20 and possibly even more teams.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Fair enough, but the problem you've just described isn't a lack of talent, it's inefficiency in finding it. If you think that is the problem, and that the solution is increasing the size of lists, then the addition of two additional teams would actually be good?

In theory yes but only if the resources allocated to teams were big enough to find said diamonds in the rough and most clubs cut their recruiting budgets when the soft cap came in so they are less likely to find diamonds in the rough now as their recruiting staff dont have as much reach.