Opinion Is father-son access going to heavily dictate the next decade of premiers?

[Kane McGoodwin]

Let's be honest here, the clubs (and I would presume my own are probably one of them) complaining about the Gold Coast Academy (specifically) all agreed to sign off on The Suns getting their fruitful academy when their draft/rescue package was put forth to them back in 2019, as a result of said clubs, constantly pillaging and raiding The Suns for all their best and or young talent, giving them no chance whatsoever to actually grow and develop as a football club and make finals.

The more I think about it, the more I agree with one of their club's spokesperson (I can't remember who) defending their club and academy in public and blasting Vic 'Whiners'

The 17 other clubs AGREED to Gold Coast having an expanded and fruitful academy.

That's what is often forgotten in this latest controversy about the Academies.

It's not like the Gold Coast are regularly making finals & are a premiership threat.

Perhaps we can review their concessions if they become a dominant team for a while.

It's healthier for retention if they can draft more local players.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

They are due then... probably plotting someone like JUH.

However, Imo they haven't needed to raid other teams as much since they have had a steady stream of academy players. Better for retention if teams can get access to local talent... just a pity it doesn't apply to all teams.

Happy Crows have finally got their 1st decent F&S with Michaelanny. Hopefully Welsh to follow next year & 2nd Michaelanny after. Young Roo looks like he will be a big unit.

Enjoy them! I love seeing other clubs get a dip at some father sons.

Young roo?? You have a riccuito coming up?

Would be a disgrace to see a ricciuto play for any other club

 

[geelong_crazy26]

U have missed the point.Nobody arguing

The Point I was making is that clubs like swans who are from non traditional afl states can’t have a recruiting strategy to target players who are from nsw who are currently playing interstate.Geelong Adelaide Freo ,West Coast and most Victorian clubs have openly stated they have one.As I said Nick Davis and Tony Armstrong are the only players who have returned to Sydney in the past 40 years.It’s a simple process just go through each list and count how many players have returned to there home state after being drafted interstate

Who cares where they come from.

If you want home grown talent then let’s go back to zoning regions.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Enjoy them! I love seeing other clubs get a dip at some father sons.

Young roo?? You have a riccuito coming up?

Would be a disgrace to see a ricciuto play for any other club

Roo has 4 sons & 2 daughters. Nick is the oldest one who was spotted at the club before Xmas in a Crows jumper.

Nick is the 1st player below.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Roo has 4 sons & 2 daughters. Nick is the oldest one who was spotted at the club before Xmas in a Crows jumper.

Nick is the 1st player below.

Any son of the great ricciuto belongs at Adelaide.

 

[Caligo]

Who cares where they come from.

If you want home grown talent then let’s go back to zoning regions.

Home grown talent matters a whole lot more when you are trying to grow the game in league territory.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Home grown talent matters a whole lot more when you are trying to grow the game in league territory.

Let the AFL take over it again and do a proper job this time.

 

[Caligo]

Let the AFL take over it again and do a proper job this time.

The AFL are in control of GC. Have been for years. It was the AFL that gave you pick 7 and a top 10 draft player for free a few years back. The AFL was also in control when they gave you pick 11 for pick 27.

Must be nice (although not as nice as Fremantle's treatment by the AFL run GC).

 

[geelong_crazy26]

The AFL are in control of GC. Have been for years. It was the AFL that gave you pick 7 and a top 10 draft player for free a few years back. The AFL was also in control when they gave you pick 11 for pick 27.

Must be nice (although not as nice as Fremantle's treatment by the AFL run GC).

You are right. It was very nice losing Garry ablett jnr in his prime for draft pick 7 and 15.

What a ripper deal we got

 

[Caligo]

You are right. It was very nice losing Garry ablett jnr in his prime for draft pick 7 and 15.

What a ripper deal we got

I wasn't talking about that, but that was indeed a ripper deal. We lost Bud for pick 19. (I value them both about even)

The AFL literally came out and said at the time that they didn't feel pick 15 (the pick after your pick) was fair for GAJ and so they would increase the compensation to make it more fair.

Must be nice. (Unless you genuinely think Bud was only worth 19)

 

[Elmer_Judd]

I wasn't talking about that, but that was indeed a ripper deal. We lost Bud for pick 19. (I value them both about even)

The AFL literally came out and said at the time that they didn't feel pick 15 (the pick after your pick) was fair for GAJ and so they would increase the compensation to make it more fair.

Must be nice. (Unless you genuinely think Bud was only worth 19)

Think we can all agree the FA compo was *ed from day one.

We got nothing for Jarrod Waite (apparently due to his age) and he went on to have 4 great seasons at North Melbourne.

Hawks also got zilch for a premiership player in Clinton Young (although he was pretty much washed by the time he joined The Pies)

Wish the AFL was honest and say their pick 3/band 1 compo to North for Ben McKay was to all intents and purposes "a priority pick"

It would still be annoying to most, I just feel like the AFL treats us supporters (of all clubs) like fools as to how they make their Free Agency compensation decisions

The so called formula/criteria is still very vague and confusing, and open to such interpretation and manipulation to suit an agenda (like the McKay compensation)

 

[Caligo]

Think we can all agree the FA compo was *ed from day one.

We got nothing for Jarrod Waite (apparently due to his age) and he went on to have 4 great seasons at North Melbourne.

Hawks also got zilch for a premiership player in Clinton Young (although he was pretty much washed by the time he joined The Pies)

Wish the AFL was honest and say their pick 3/band 1 compo to North for Ben McKay was to all intents and purposes "a priority pick"

It would still be annoying to most, I just feel like the AFL treats us supporters (of all clubs) like fools as to how they make their Free Agency compensation decisions

The so called formula/criteria is still very vague and confusing, and open to such interpretation and manipulation to suit an agenda (like the McKay compensation)

Not wrong. I just thought it was funny having a Geelong supporter complain about 7 and 15.

 

[GC2015]

I agree. The AFL franchises are ultimately just businesses.. GCS is fighting in an incredibly competitive market dominated by another product (NRL)… do we create huge concessions and compromise the equality of the competition to try and fight NRL in QLD and NSW?? Such as academy kids out the backside clogging up the first two rounds of the draft, or do we let them fight in the same circumstances as all other clubs do and take on rugby that way.

At the end of the day which is a priority?? The competitions integrity or $$ in NSW and QLD by cutting into NRL market share

Well I think it's pretty obvious to anyone who follows the game that the AFL has prioritised Queensland and NSW in terms of growing the game (to a degree, obviously) but any time it starts to look like the scales have tipped too far in their favour, the AFL has responded to criticism. The best example we have is when the AFL changed the northern academy bid matching rules to state that a northern club can only match a maximum of one academy bid in the first round should they make a preliminary final and two bids in the first round if they make the finals and are knocked out before the preliminary final weekend. That was a direct response to GWS hosting a preliminary final in 2016 and a month later drafting three first round picks out of their academy. They also lost academy access to the perceived talent rich portion of the Riverina near the state border.

So the rules surrounding the northern academies do favour lower ladder positions and that is in line with the purpose of the draft i.e. teams that finish lower get greater access to top end talent. For comparison, no such rule currently exists for the father-son access. If it did, Brisbane wouldn't have been able to match bids for Ashcroft and Fletcher in the first round after playing in a prelim last year. The same can be said about Carlton's Camporeale twins who are draft eligible next year and both considered good chances to be bid on in the first round. If Carlton make another prelim next year (which seems expected at this point) and both Camporeale twins continue their trajectory into first round prospects then there would be nothing stopping Carlton from matching bids on both via F/S access. Hypothetically - imagine if Carlton were to win the flag next year and a month later they got access to the #1 prospect in the country Ben Camporeale and the #2 prospect in the country Lucas Camporeale. That's what is currently possible with the F/S rule and not possible with the northern academies.

It's obvious that both F/S and northern academies compromise the draft but it's really just a question of how much compromise are we willing to allow before it's considered too much. Obviously Geelong getting the best junior in the land in Tom Hawkins for pick 41 in 2006 was too much and the rule changed accordingly. I'm still surprised that people seemed fine with preliminary finalists Brisbane getting the best junior in the land in Will Ashcroft as well as another top 12 talent in Jaspa Fletcher last year, but had such a massive problem with a bottom 4 Suns team getting several first round picks. Just to make it clear, if the Suns had made a preliminary final this year then they would have only been able to match a bid on Jed Walter and we would have seen both Ethan Read & Jake Rogers drafted elsewhere.

I also occasionally see others making arguments about 'what is the likelihood of two highly rated father-sons coming through in the same season' but we saw it last year with Brisbane (#2 Ashcroft, #12 Fletcher) and it's entirely possible we're going to see it again next year with Carlton's Camporeale twins. The fact of the matter is we've seen a massive rise in the amount of father-son picks who are being bid on in the first round over the last few years and yet the rule has remained unchanged. I guess that's why this thread exists because it seems F/S players are becoming a huge factor in which team ends up winning the flag.

 

[Caligo]

Well I think it's pretty obvious to anyone who follows the game that the AFL has prioritised Queensland and NSW in terms of growing the game (to a degree, obviously) but any time it starts to look like the scales have tipped too far in their favour, the AFL has responded to criticism. The best example we have is when the AFL changed the northern academy bid matching rules to state that a northern club can only match a maximum of one academy bid in the first round should they make a preliminary final and two bids in the first round if they make the finals and are knocked out before the preliminary final weekend. That was a direct response to GWS hosting a preliminary final in 2016 and a month later drafting three first round picks out of their academy. They also lost academy access to the perceived talent rich portion of the Riverina near the state border.

So the rules surrounding the northern academies do favour lower ladder positions and that is in line with the purpose of the draft i.e. teams that finish lower get greater access to top end talent. For comparison, no such rule currently exists for the father-son access. If it did, Brisbane wouldn't have been able to match bids for Ashcroft and Fletcher in the first round after playing in a prelim last year. The same can be said about Carlton's Camporeale twins who are draft eligible next year and both considered good chances to be bid on in the first round. If Carlton make another prelim next year (which seems expected at this point) and both Camporeale twins continue their trajectory into first round prospects then there would be nothing stopping Carlton from matching bids on both via F/S access. Hypothetically - imagine if Carlton were to win the flag next year and a month later they got access to the #1 prospect in the country Ben Camporeale and the #2 prospect in the country Lucas Camporeale. That's what is currently possible with the F/S rule and not possible with the northern academies.

It's obvious that both F/S and northern academies compromise the draft but it's really just a question of how much compromise are we willing to allow before it's considered too much. Obviously Geelong getting the best junior in the land in Tom Hawkins for pick 41 in 2006 was too much and the rule changed accordingly. I'm still surprised that people seemed fine with preliminary finalists Brisbane getting the best junior in the land in Will Ashcroft as well as another top 12 talent in Jaspa Fletcher last year, but had such a massive problem with a bottom 4 Suns team getting several first round picks. Just to make it clear, if the Suns had made a preliminary final this year then they would have only been able to match a bid on Jed Walter and we would have seen both Ethan Read & Jake Rogers drafted elsewhere.

I also occasionally see others making arguments about 'what is the likelihood of two highly rated father-sons coming through in the same season' but we saw it last year with Brisbane (#2 Ashcroft, #12 Fletcher) and it's entirely possible we're going to see it again next year with Carlton's Camporeale twins. The fact of the matter is we've seen a massive rise in the amount of father-son picks who are being bid on in the first round over the last few years and yet the rule has remained unchanged. I guess that's why this thread exists because it seems F/S players are becoming a huge factor in which team ends up winning the flag.

People weren't fine with Brisbane getting all those elite talents and more to come. It is a big part of why there is an AFL review going on. Not sure why you keep saying people only lost it over GC. They lost it over JUH, Daicos and Ashcroft too.

 

[GC2015]

People weren't fine with Brisbane getting all those elite talents and more to come. It is a big part of why there is an AFL review going on. Not sure why you keep saying people only lost it over GC. They lost it over JUH, Daicos and Ashcroft too.

The proof is in the pudding in terms of the outrage. The rules are currently under review and look likely to change. The rules were not under review last year when Brisbane secured Ashcroft and Fletcher through the F/S rule. Same with Daicos the year before. If Daicos situation had led to similar rule changes then Brisbane would not have been able to secure both Ashcroft and Fletcher 12 months later.

I'll give you JUH because that did lead to a rule change but that had to do with a lack of romanticism attached to the NGA rules in the same way that people feel about the F/S rule. We'll see if anything happens next year with the Camporeale twins.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

I wasn't talking about that, but that was indeed a ripper deal. We lost Bud for pick 19. (I value them both about even)

The AFL literally came out and said at the time that they didn't feel pick 15 (the pick after your pick) was fair for GAJ and so they would increase the compensation to make it more fair.

Must be nice. (Unless you genuinely think Bud was only worth 19)

Ablett is argued and debated as the greatest player of all time, Franklin is just considered a modern day great of our game. I don’t consider them both even.

And yes, you got screwed also with Franklin. Not sure how that alters anything I said with how geelong has been bent over more than anyone in regards to the expansion teams.

Losing ablett for pick 7 and 15 in his prime was like selling the Mona Lisa for 100m at auction when it’s worth probably 900m-1B dollars. Crazy stuff.

We should have been given picks 1,2 in the draft for ablett.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Well I think it's pretty obvious to anyone who follows the game that the AFL has prioritised Queensland and NSW in terms of growing the game (to a degree, obviously) but any time it starts to look like the scales have tipped too far in their favour, the AFL has responded to criticism. The best example we have is when the AFL changed the northern academy bid matching rules to state that a northern club can only match a maximum of one academy bid in the first round should they make a preliminary final and two bids in the first round if they make the finals and are knocked out before the preliminary final weekend. That was a direct response to GWS hosting a preliminary final in 2016 and a month later drafting three first round picks out of their academy. They also lost academy access to the perceived talent rich portion of the Riverina near the state border.

So the rules surrounding the northern academies do favour lower ladder positions and that is in line with the purpose of the draft i.e. teams that finish lower get greater access to top end talent. For comparison, no such rule currently exists for the father-son access. If it did, Brisbane wouldn't have been able to match bids for Ashcroft and Fletcher in the first round after playing in a prelim last year. The same can be said about Carlton's Camporeale twins who are draft eligible next year and both considered good chances to be bid on in the first round. If Carlton make another prelim next year (which seems expected at this point) and both Camporeale twins continue their trajectory into first round prospects then there would be nothing stopping Carlton from matching bids on both via F/S access. Hypothetically - imagine if Carlton were to win the flag next year and a month later they got access to the #1 prospect in the country Ben Camporeale and the #2 prospect in the country Lucas Camporeale. That's what is currently possible with the F/S rule and not possible with the northern academies.

It's obvious that both F/S and northern academies compromise the draft but it's really just a question of how much compromise are we willing to allow before it's considered too much. Obviously Geelong getting the best junior in the land in Tom Hawkins for pick 41 in 2006 was too much and the rule changed accordingly. I'm still surprised that people seemed fine with preliminary finalists Brisbane getting the best junior in the land in Will Ashcroft as well as another top 12 talent in Jaspa Fletcher last year, but had such a massive problem with a bottom 4 Suns team getting several first round picks. Just to make it clear, if the Suns had made a preliminary final this year then they would have only been able to match a bid on Jed Walter and we would have seen both Ethan Read & Jake Rogers drafted elsewhere.

I also occasionally see others making arguments about 'what is the likelihood of two highly rated father-sons coming through in the same season' but we saw it last year with Brisbane (#2 Ashcroft, #12 Fletcher) and it's entirely possible we're going to see it again next year with Carlton's Camporeale twins. The fact of the matter is we've seen a massive rise in the amount of father-son picks who are being bid on in the first round over the last few years and yet the rule has remained unchanged. I guess that's why this thread exists because it seems F/S players are becoming a huge factor in which team ends up winning the flag.

Quick question: do you believe father son selections and academy selections have a similar compromising impact on the draft? Despite Sydney GWS GCS having much larger quantity of academy players than the average team has father sons listed.

You talk as if both are causing the same disruption when it’s clear they really aren’t

 

[Caligo]

Ablett is argued and debated as the greatest player of all time, Franklin is just considered a modern day great of our game. I don’t consider them both even.

And yes, you got screwed also with Franklin. Not sure how that alters anything I said with how geelong has been bent over more than anyone in regards to the expansion teams.

Losing ablett for pick 7 and 15 in his prime was like selling the Mona Lisa for 100m at auction when it’s worth probably 900m-1B dollars. Crazy stuff.

We should have been given picks 1,2 in the draft for ablett.

If you genuinely think GAJ is the greatest of all time you need to go back and look at Lethal's record. Has him well covered and then some. It isn't even close. About a dozen seasons averaging 20 possessions and 2 goals a game. One of his seasons had over 90 goals and over 500 kicks. GAJ never had a season even remotely comparable.

Nice analogy though. You are just breaking your own records for hot takes.

Most intelligent supporters have gaj and bud pretty close though. Even the majority of Geelong supporters. Nobody is kicking 100 in a season any time soon.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

It's not like the Gold Coast are regularly making finals & are a premiership threat.

Perhaps we can review their concessions if they become a dominant team for a while.

It's healthier for retention if they can draft more local players.

Equality of outcomes has no place in the AFL.
You keep it or scrap it based off equality of opportunity and that is the bottom line.

 

[GC2015]

Quick question: do you believe father son selections and academy selections have a similar compromising impact on the draft? Despite Sydney GWS GCS having much larger quantity of academy players than the average team has father sons listed.

You talk as if both are causing the same disruption when it’s clear they really aren’t

That depends on how you want to view the "compromise" of the draft. While it would be true to say more players have been drafted with academy access than those drafted as F/S selections, I assume people out there aren't too worried about pick 50 being matched because the higher priority is clearly the earlier picks as they are the ones most likely to have a significant impact at a club - quality over quantity. Do you view the compromise of academy pick 59 Harvey Thomas on the same level F/S pick 2 Will Ashcroft? If, like me, you take the quality of prospect into account then it's probably more in favour of the F/S rule than you think.

The number of father-son picks taken in the first round over the last three years is 7 and the number of academy picks taken in the first round over the last three years is 6. That gap looks set to widen next year with current draft predictions suggesting F/S picks Levi Ashcroft, Tyler Welsh and Ben Camporeale are all expected to be bid on with top 10 picks. Lucas Camporeale also looks a decent chance to be bid on with a first round pick. There's currently two northern academy prospects (Lombard & Marshall) that look a chance to be bid on in the first round but neither are currently rated inside the top 10.

So I guess the answer to your question is yes and no depending on how you want to view it. Yes they are similar/more advantageous for F/S if we're looking at the high end talent that every team seems desperate to secure and no if we're purely looking at the total amount of picks irrespective of when the prospects are taken in the draft. I used this example in an earlier post - would you rather draft two top 10 picks Nick Daicos and Darcy Moore or draft four third round picks from a northern academy. It's double the amount of players if you go down the academy route but there is a significant difference in quality. I'm taking Daicos/Moore all day. Quality over quantity for mine.

 

[Caligo]

Equality of outcomes has no place in the AFL.
You keep it or scrap it based off equality of opportunity and that is the bottom line.

You really have a thing about your idea of equality of opportunity. If Port Adelaide win the minor premiership and the preliminary final where will the GF be held? Adelaide Oval right? Since they would be ranked number.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Aside from Naicos and Ashcroft in recent years, when was the last time a (projected at the time) Father-Son prospect drafted was the best available talent in his draft class (at that time) ?

Even GAJ was a slow burn to begin with

The Father-Son points and bidding doesn't really require much tinkering imo.

If it wasn't for those two players I mentioned, there really wouldn't be calls for it to be changed at all imo.

 

[Caligo]

Aside from Naicos and Ashcroft in recent years, when was the last time a (projected at the time) Father-Son prospect drafted was the best available talent in his draft class (at that time) ?

Even GAJ was a slow burn to begin with

The Father-Son points and bidding doesn't really require much tinkering imo.

If it wasn't for those two players I mentioned, there really wouldn't be calls for it to be changed at all imo.

Under the current system? None. Under the old rules the last presumptive pick 1 f/s was Hawkins.

2 is already enough to make it clear it needs fixing. It only took 1 NGA to realise it couldn't continue.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Under the current system? None. Under the old rules the last presumptive pick 1 f/s was Hawkins.

2 is already enough to make it clear it needs fixing. It only took 1 NGA to realise it couldn't continue.

The only changes I would make to the Father/Son is to make it easier for WA and SA clubs to get access to eligible WAFL and SANFL progenies (say a 150 game threshold instead if the current 200 game minimum)

Got no idea how to fix the NGA system Tbh.

I do firmly support the Suns and Giants having their own academies though, not convinced any other club need them any more tbh.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Equality of outcomes has no place in the AFL.
You keep it or scrap it based off equality of opportunity and that is the bottom line.

Where did I claim it was about equality of outcomes?

Do you think Gold Coast have had equal opportunities to make finals since they came into the AFL?

They certainly don't have the ability to attract ready made players like Geelong... so wouldn't it then make sense to give them 1st access to local players so they can improve their retention rate?