List Mgmt. Next Generation Academy List

[Mojorisin]

Honestly it did need an overhaul, it's ridiculous that someone can pay for pick 2 with a bunch of second and third round picks.

It definitely needed to be adjusted but you just know the afl will do a complete knee jerk and go too far the other way.

 

[Mr. Walker]

I like the idea that if you have a player who will probably go in the first round then you have to use a first round pick. If you have pick 2 and you think the kid will go around pick 10 you have a decision to make.Use pick 2 on someone else and miss the kid, take the kid with pick 2, trade pick 2 for pick 10 and something else or trade pick 2 for pick 18 and something else.
Stops clubs getting a pick 10 player by using a bunch of picks in the 40s.

 

[Ash1337]

Really they need to go back to bids before the draft with an adjusted points system. It makes the draft too long. In fact make it the night before an televise it. Maybe have clubs bid with points and the club tied to the player has to match.

Also FS and NGA should be more like Northern Academies with ladder position but a bit harsher. For instance top 4 get to match 1 player bid on above a certain amount and bottom 4 can match all players.

 

[stefoid]

You cant spend more than 2 picks to match - wouldnt this solve most issues in a simple way without all the '9 spots below' rubbish?? does the math work?

pick 2 is worth 1900 pts (with a 25% dicsocampaigner included)

that could be matched by pick 10+pick36 for instance, or pick 18 + pick 20

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

I like the 'need a pick in the same round' idea and think it will work well. Zero need for it to be in place for F/S, though.

 

[dogwatch]

I like the idea that if you have a player who will probably go in the first round then you have to use a first round pick. If you have pick 2 and you think the kid will go around pick 10 you have a decision to make.Use pick 2 on someone else and miss the kid, take the kid with pick 2, trade pick 2 for pick 10 and something else or trade pick 2 for pick 18 and something else.
Stops clubs getting a pick 10 player by using a bunch of picks in the 40s.

The need to do this proves that the seemingly elegant draft points index was in fact a flop in the area that it was most important it succeeds: top 10 picks. As they usually do clubs found ways to exploit the rules at low cost to themselves.

So we’re now into tweak territory, where the AFL embarks on a sequence of fixes in the quest to keep up with the crafty list managers. This year's fix will be next year’s loophole which will get fixed a couple of years later. And on it goes.

If tweaks it must be, I like the one where you can only use a maximum of two picks to match a bid. But it will be called a failure when a club has two highly rated FS prospects and has to pass on one of them. Imagine if that rule was in place the year we got Wallis and Libba. We might have passed on Libba if there were early bids on both.

The discount should go too. Or else you start with a 10% discount but the matching price goes up 10% with every extra pick you use after the first. As follows:
Use 1 pick: 10% discount
2 picks: full points
3 picks: full points plus 10%
4 picks: full points plus 20%
And so on.

 

[Libbaaaa]

Clubs having a sook over father/son is hilarious. The AFL should be more focused in punishing collusion for non bids like Daicos going at #4 and North inexplicably not bidding on Walter with #2.

 

[dogwatch]

I like the 'need a pick in the same round' idea and think it will work well. Zero need for it to be in place for F/S, though.

Too much emphasis on “rounds” for my liking. It’s artificial and largely irrelevant these days, now that we have so much pick trading. It could result in some really distorted pick trading.

An example off the top of my head - the premier (19) holds out for an inflated price to a club desperate to get anything in the first round. The premier ends up with something like picks 20, 22 and 25 in exchange for 19.

Whatever the solution I’d prefer all picks to be treated as part of a gradually diminishing continuum rather than discrete rounds.

 

[TBOW]

Too much emphasis on “rounds” for my liking. It’s artificial and largely irrelevant these days, now that we have so much pick trading. It could result in some really distorted pick trading.

An example off the top of my head - the premier (19) holds out for an inflated price to a club desperate to get anything in the first round. The premier ends up with something like picks 20, 22 and 25 in exchange for 19.

Whatever the solution I’d prefer all picks to be treated as part of a gradually diminishing continuum rather than discrete rounds.

Yeah, the same round would never work. You could theoretically match a bid at both pick 1 or pick 17 with pick 18.
It would need to be a specific pick range back from where the bid is placed.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Interesting it was Geelong who came up with this latest suggestion,I mean no agenda there for them considering they have had only two top 10 picks since 2007.

 

[LordC]

Just need to tighten the loopholes the clubs are using for example delisting players with promises to redraft just so they have vacant lists spots and corresponding points (I know we did it this year). If a you delist a player that's it you can not redraft them and are forced to use those extremely late picks on new players. You can also cap the number of players you match on in any round. Round 1 you can match 1 player, round 2 you match up to 2 players, etc... (lets face it after round 2 no one is really going to care)

Would have made GC night interesting having to choose between which of their first round selections they preferred (might not always be the one that gets nominated first) and coupled with the fact their forth pick almost made it to the second round. Don't tell me the Lual situation didn't create interest even if it didn't go our way. Imagine if that is expanded to F/S and tied to each round. Our 2025 draft would be a rollercoaster.

Fair or unfair, they are all just kids and although the science behind selection is getting better it is still hit and miss after the first 10 or so picks and so reliant of the clubs ability to develop and the players want to deliver on their potential. It is only the an issue when the cream of the crop is in play, if the AFL can get that aspect of the nomination/matching process sorted the amount of angst would be minimal.

 

[flipper83]

The problem with this is, that if we don't have the northern academies then a lot of those players will be lost to NRL and other sports. You need to look at the bigger picture.

Is that what the objective of the Northern Academies is?

When the academies started I believe the justification was that Northern Clubs couldn't compete with southern clubs because all of the draftees were coming from the southern states and the 'lure to go home' meant that retention was a problem. It was around the time that Brisbane lost a whole lot of players back home.

I think the reality there is that those players left because the club was a basket case with a megalomaniac coach. I think the go home factor is very rarely a factor in player movement and is often just rolled out as an excuse.

I think a far bigger factor is that bigger clubs are able to better incentivise players to come to them due to third party arrangements. Smaller clubs seem to benefit from the go home factor far less than bigger clubs and often when they do it's due to big contracts being offered.

And even if we do assume that the justification is due to the go home factor, then surely, in an equitable system, the benefit of the northern academies is that there are players from the northern states dispersed through the competition that can be lured home in the same way other players can be lured out of northern teams.

If the purpose of the academies is to build grassroots football in northern states then do we really need to have the academy prospects going to the northern clubs at massive discounts for this to be achieved?

Northern Clubs will say that they need incentive to run the programs but the funding comes from the AFL anyway and having local prospects available should be enough incentive.

NGA players will trot out the line that they would be playing another sport if not for the NGA but that's just because it's the party line. As far as I know, no other national sport guarantees that a player will get to stay in their home town when they sign up and I don't think that is a major reason young people choose an elite sport to pursue. It would fall behind their enjoyment of playing each sport, their ability to play each sport and the financial potential of playing each sport.

And claims that this years draft, where 5 of the players taken in the first round were northern academy players, is a one off is clearly not true. Last years u16 all australian team had 4 of the top 22 players in the country tied to northern academies and this years u16 all Australian team has 11 of 22!

Clearly the access that the Northern teams have to these prospects is an unfair advantage.

Honestly I think the reason that the Northern Academies exist is that the AFL wants the Northern teams to be strong to try to attract more supporters in those states.

 

[flipper83]

I like the 'need a pick in the same round' idea and think it will work well. Zero need for it to be in place for F/S, though.

The problem with this is that matching a pick 1 bid costs the same as matching a pick 17 bid. It's really not that different from the old system of using your next pick.

I like the idea of giving clubs different amounts of bidding points based on where they finish. Then have an auction style draft where teams can bid for each pick and teams matching a bid simply have to hand over the same amount of points as the team who won the auction for that pick.

Any free agent compensaition or AFL assistance can then be more bidding points.

It nicely addresses the issue of the gaps between different tiers in the draft where pushing teams back one or two spots can make a big difference in the talent available.

 

[VitalDread]

Interesting it was Geelong who came up with this latest suggestion,I mean no agenda there for them considering they have had only two top 10 picks since 2007.

Geelong are also pushing for easier access to NGA
They have a lot of African prospect players coming through in the next couple of years

Their development team have done a great job in their area encouraging kids to play afl

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

The problem with this is that matching a pick 1 bid costs the same as matching a pick 17 bid. It's really not that different from the old system of using your next pick.

My understanding is that the points system would still be in place, it's not that any first round pick matches a first round bid. There's just an additional requirement for the first pick used to be somewhere in the vicinity of the bid.

 

[doggies ftw]

Is that what the objective of the Northern Academies is?

When the academies started I believe the justification was that Northern Clubs couldn't compete with southern clubs because all of the draftees were coming from the southern states and the 'lure to go home' meant that retention was a problem. It was around the time that Brisbane lost a whole lot of players back home.

I think the reality there is that those players left because the club was a basket case with a megalomaniac coach. I think the go home factor is very rarely a factor in player movement and is often just rolled out as an excuse.

I think a far bigger factor is that bigger clubs are able to better incentivise players to come to them due to third party arrangements. Smaller clubs seem to benefit from the go home factor far less than bigger clubs and often when they do it's due to big contracts being offered.

And even if we do assume that the justification is due to the go home factor, then surely, in an equitable system, the benefit of the northern academies is that there are players from the northern states dispersed through the competition that can be lured home in the same way other players can be lured out of northern teams.

If the purpose of the academies is to build grassroots football in northern states then do we really need to have the academy prospects going to the northern clubs at massive discounts for this to be achieved?

Northern Clubs will say that they need incentive to run the programs but the funding comes from the AFL anyway and having local prospects available should be enough incentive.

NGA players will trot out the line that they would be playing another sport if not for the NGA but that's just because it's the party line. As far as I know, no other national sport guarantees that a player will get to stay in their home town when they sign up and I don't think that is a major reason young people choose an elite sport to pursue. It would fall behind their enjoyment of playing each sport, their ability to play each sport and the financial potential of playing each sport.

And claims that this years draft, where 5 of the players taken in the first round were northern academy players, is a one off is clearly not true. Last years u16 all australian team had 4 of the top 22 players in the country tied to northern academies and this years u16 all Australian team has 11 of 22!

Clearly the access that the Northern teams have to these prospects is an unfair advantage.

Honestly I think the reason that the Northern Academies exist is that the AFL wants the Northern teams to be strong to try to attract more supporters in those states.

Bingo, absolutely nailed it here.

The other part I find funny, if the go home factor is so important then surely it wouldn’t matter if Northern clubs don’t get access to their prospects, because if they filter throughout the league well they’ll just come home at some stage and you’ll get them on the cheap right?

As you said these junior teams are getting stronger and stronger and it’s going to get ridiculous - that’s great for the talent pool of the AFL, but they should be going to the wider draft like every other states players. Brisbane for example are getting top rated F/S and Academy prospects ffs

 

[House_of_Dahl]

pick 2 is worth 1900 pts (with a 25% dicsocampaigner included)

 

[hujsh]

So when people say without the northern academies those players would be lost to the game...yeah okay sure thing. Why does that mean they should 100% all be going to the one club? You've already go them to the point of being professional athletes in what I would think would be the highest paid professional sport in the country. Do they walk away on draft night because they have to go to Melbourne or Sydney?

Or is the idea that without a strong guarantee they stay in Queensland they won't sign up in the first place?

 

[dogwatch]

Another aspect of the draft I question is that the draft order is repeated for every round (before they all get jumbled up by compensation picks, trading, bid-matching, etc). The compensation for finishing last is #1 pick which is fair enough, but this gets mirrored in every round with pick #19, pick #37, pick #55 etc. So instead of just becoming compensation it can become a reward system that amplifies the incentive for tanking. When you clearly have no chance at the top 8 with say 5 rounds to go it makes sense to put your best players in for early surgery, give some fringe kids their debuts, experiment with players in different roles ... and all the other plausible but legal strategies used for tanking.

There are any number of ways this pronounced advantage could be diluted without being removed altogether, such as a weighted random draw in clusters of six teams (18th-13th, 12th-7th, 6th-1st). But I'd keep the first round in strict reverse ladder order, as it is now.

 

[Nat Fyfe]

Another aspect of the draft I question is that the draft order is repeated for every round (before they all get jumbled up by compensation picks, trading, bid-matching, etc). The compensation for finishing last is #1 pick which is fair enough, but this gets mirrored in every round with pick #19, pick #37, pick #55 etc. So instead of just becoming compensation it can become a reward system that amplifies the incentive for tanking. When you clearly have no chance at the top 8 with say 5 rounds to go it makes sense to put your best players in for early surgery, give some fringe kids their debuts, experiment with players in different roles ... and all the other plausible but legal strategies used for tanking.

There are any number of ways this pronounced advantage could be diluted without being removed altogether, such as a weighted random draw in clusters of six teams (18th-13th, 12th-7th, 6th-1st). But I'd keep the first round in strict reverse ladder order, as it is now.

The NBA system has its flaws, but they do things better than the AFL in a lot of ways (caps on contracts based on hitting certain benchmarks, lottery system for early picks, free agency). There are issues for sure, but it’s a hell of a lot closer to a fair competition than the AFL is

 

[VitalDread]

HS Reporting:
The league is expected to loosen NGA rules which ban clubs from drafting their academy players in the first 40 national draft selections.

The report balancing the comp is due on Friday, so expect information after reviews in the second half of the year

 

[weltschmerz]

HS Reporting:
The league is expected to loosen NGA rules which ban clubs from drafting their academy players in the first 40 national draft selections.

The report balancing the comp is due on Friday, so expect information after reviews in the second half of the year

Naturally not until after we were punished for benefiting too much from a league wide rule. Do any of the big four clubs have a NGA kid coming up? Gotta make sure they don’t miss out, just the minnows who don’t deserve the benefits.

 

[hatescaptcha]

Good to hear changes are ahead. Looks like we have a few promising prospects coming up.

Especially like Kobe Williams - we just need to convince him to nominate us and not the hawks as a F/S..


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[doggies ftw]

Naturally not until after we were punished for benefiting too much from a league wide rule. Do any of the big four clubs have a NGA kid coming up? Gotta make sure they don’t miss out, just the minnows who don’t deserve the benefits.

So long as Marra is on our list I’m not going to complain too much about the NGA rules, but yeah it is frustrating that we missed out on Lual the year before the changes and will be hard to watch if he comes on as a good player

 

[Bulldogs85]

Naturally not until after we were punished for benefiting too much from a league wide rule. Do any of the big four clubs have a NGA kid coming up? Gotta make sure they don’t miss out, just the minnows who don’t deserve the benefits.

Essendon has one NGA kid in this year’s draft Isaac Kaku 175cm forward