NGA - A complete rort

[threenewpadlocks]

People are also putting false equivalency with the NGA and Northern Academies (although it can help or hinder the argument on both sides). The Northern academies are all-encompassing to the point that the 4 academies now field their own team in the Division 2 Under 18 nationals to play NT and Tassie. The NGA academies are still placed in the context of SANFL/WAFL juniors, TAC Cup and State-Based U/18 nationals.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

It's been a real masterstroke of AFL branding to somehow call everything an 'Academy' and even put everything on the same page on their website: http://www.afl.com.au/news/game-development/nab-afl-rising-star-program/nga-clubacademies

The Swans Academy has 700 kids in it. I'd be surprised to see 700 kids spread across the 14 next gen 'Academies'.

The problem with the AFL is, as always, they are stupid and never think things through. Due to their shortsightedness they've allowed the Northern Academies to be defined by anomalies like Blakey and the Giants with their ridiculous access to the Riverina.

The Riverina thing was dumb from the start but I think the AFL knew that and didn't care because they were looking for a way to give the upstart team a leg up. The Blakey one is much trickier - obviously when you're coming up with an Academy for players in non-football regions you're not thinking of the son of a coach who is eligible for F/S at another club. But I'm not sure what the answer is? Sorry son you're not allowed to join the Academy because North will get angry about it. Have fun in the Sydney junior leagues which has produced like 5 good players ever.

The simple fact is the best way to grow the game and improve the quality is to spread the talent base into the 50% of the country that produces basically no players relative to its population. The AFL has tried that in various ways, including the scholarship program and AFL run academies. They all flopped because the 'AFL' as a brand is much weaker than say, the 'Sydney Swans' in Sydney so you're not really attracting people; or because it was just a way the clubs could cherry pick the elite and not care about anyone else.

It's also the best way to try and reduce the inherent inequality that exists in the league when four teams have to build sides made out of players from out of state who at best will demand more money to stay or will simply walk back home after demanding a trade.

So what's the best way to get more NSW/QLD talent onto the lists of the NSW/QLD teams?

Now I fully understand the competitive balance concerns. That's why I'm all for vigorous controls are put in place so you don't have the situation where Heeney goes at 18, which they've done. But they should be looking at tweaking those pick values all the time and probably put it more controls around hoarding later picks to use bids on. But you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

On top of that, the AFL is the only professional league in the country using a draft. Which is great when you essentially have a monopoly on the sporting talent in a region but when you're a 12 year old thinking "Hmmm, I could join this AFL academy and be sent to Perth, or I could just go over here and play in the Newcastle Knights Juniors and just go into their senior side if I'm good enough." That's why it's so important to have pathways into the local clubs.

The 700 figure for the Swans academy surprises me. ours has around 500. I thought your's was smaller.

Anecditally I heard Jack Buckley, who was in yours indicate it was hard to stay in. Kieren Briggs also said in a recent interview it was hard to enter. He was marginal playing his junior footy for Pennant Hills in your zone but living in Carlingford in ours.

I dont think the academies are just about finding the next Isaac Heeney, numbers matter because they can also have a positive influence on the standard of local comps in NSW generally.

 

[WilloTree]

Wait - you're telling me the AFL is a flip-flopping circus?

Go figure.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

This could be fixed very quickly.

All academies should be run by the AFL, not individual teams meaning that no one has 'dibs' on any player.

First in, best dressed in the draft.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Look at Josh Simpson, or Sydney Stack.

Would an academy have helped them.

You can add Waylen Mason, Dayle Garlett etc etc.

If it helps 1 in 5 players eligible, is it worth it.

 

[shintemaster]

This article is correct although pointing out the obvious. There is no fair way to have academies for some teams and not others. Instead of the AFL facing this and coming up with other ways to support growth of non traditional states and teams they decided to make the mess bigger. And here we are.

The only half reasonable thing about the current system is that at least clubs might have to pay market value (or higher) sometimes.

 

[Caj]

North's academy has 318 kids in it from Tasmania alone and is only 3 years old, so get surprised.

Unlike Sydney and the northern acadamies, The NGA academies develop kids that they don't have exclusive access to.

Can you say the same about your academy? You're only doing it for your own benefit.


http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-11-27/sydneys-littleknown-footy-factory-produces-yet-again

Football academy in a state where Aussie Rules is the most popular winter sport has 318 kids, how shocking

 

[vozzon]

I thought Brett was OK as Russell played a gazillion games before the 1990s. Craig Ebert played over 100 games for Port too but Brad wasn't eligible. I never understood the Port rules. I got that WC, Freo, Adelaide wouldn't have F/S players for 20 years but Port is Port. If 100 games for Richmond is good enough to be F/S at Richmond then 100 games at Port should always have been equivalent.

Not 100% sure on the ruling of Brett but read he wasn't officially eligible which is a joke itself as his father player enough games but wasnt in the strict dates the AFL implemented. Apparently wasnt checked as it was assumed our greatest ever player's son would be eligible. Just shows that the AFL put restrictions in place that made it impossible for the SA clubs to ever benefit while Geelong built a dynasty with Ablett, Scarlett and added Hawkins, Bulldogs won a GF with Wallis, Hunter and Libba, Collingwood also won a GF with cloke and Shaw x2.

 

[vozzon]

You've got it backwards. Its 150 games in WAFL sides for West Coast and Freo. Its 200 SANFL games for the Crows and Port.

As for Brett Ebert, he was taken as a father-son but it was later revealled that he shouldn't have been eligible. Because although Russell Ebert played 391 games for Port Adelaide, he played 25 games for North Melbourne in 1979. Only games after that North Melbourne stint were supposed to count, and that doesn't reach 200.


Nah, in the overall standing North still got a cheap deal. Without the NGA standing, North would've had to give up far more to be able to recruit Thomas and still trade for Jared Polec.

Thanks for that confirmation, how he wasnt eligible even though Brett didnt have a huge impact is still a joke and went against everything the F/S picks are about.

 

[The_Reaper]

I dont agree the NGA's are a rort, I do think they need to be more inclusive.

It's nonsense to say the Swans would develop a player for North as a favour though. It's a competition. Their chairmans son Jack Buckley is actually a rookie on our list. It's not a favour though. He did it the hard way through the local Sydney comp and impressing in NEAFL games after being selected as a filler.

All if this completely misses the point anyway, it was Blakey's hoice to nominate through the academy or as a father son.

We've nominated 5 players for the draft this year through our academy and will likely choose 2. We usually nominate twice as many as we will bid on. The others are being given their opportunity for an AFL career.

Our academy so far has had 16 players debut at AFL level. 5 for other clubs. It's not as simple as some seem to think.

And West Coast pays the bills for every WA player drafted over the last two decades.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

And West Coast pays the bills for every WA player drafted over the last two decades.

Keh?

 

[Mkcaptain]

http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/video/2018-11-28/learn-about-our-nga

 

[StillWaiting5689]

Not 100% sure on the ruling of Brett but read he wasn't officially eligible which is a joke itself as his father player enough games but wasnt in the strict dates the AFL implemented. Apparently wasnt checked as it was assumed our greatest ever player's son would be eligible. Just shows that the AFL put restrictions in place that made it impossible for the SA clubs to ever benefit while Geelong built a dynasty with Ablett, Scarlett and added Hawkins, Bulldogs won a GF with Wallis, Hunter and Libba, Collingwood also won a GF with cloke and Shaw x2.

I get your point but for accuracy only one Shaw won a gf for Collingwood, Reece played in at least one gf loss against Brisbane (with the other Cloke!) - this was before the bidding system so they were all late picks (same with the Geelong boys you mention), Hawkins the big one as he was a top 5 pick otherwise and dominated in the 2011 gf.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Kummerspeck]

North's academy has 318 kids in it from Tasmania alone and is only 3 years old, so get surprised.

Unlike Sydney and the northern acadamies, The NGA academies develop kids that they don't have exclusive access to.

Can you say the same about your academy?

Yes. Marshall, Spargo, Davis, and Weller are names that are in the AFL that were developed in the northern academies despite not being eligible. Weller was in the Gold Coast academy for longer than Thomas was in the North academy but wasn't able to be picked up.

 

[Kummerspeck]

And West Coast pays the bills for every WA player drafted over the last two decades.

No, your owners do that.

 

[vozzon]

I get your point but for accuracy only one Shaw won a gf for Collingwood, Reece played in at least one gf loss against Brisbane (with the other Cloke!) - this was before the bidding system so they were all late picks (same with the Geelong boys you mention), Hawkins the big one as he was a top 5 pick otherwise and dominated in the 2011 gf.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah thats fair enough, end of the day the rules were in place so why not make use of them (like sydney and COLA). Add in the priority pick you guys got with all the F/S's, it did help you guys build a solid list during that period. Would have been nice if they relaxed the rules for the SA clubs, not that port had anyone of significance anyway.

 

[jackess]

Look at Josh Simpson, or Sydney Stack.

Would an academy have helped them.

You can add Waylen Mason, Dayle Garlett etc etc.

If it helps 1 in 5 players eligible, is it worth it.

Nobody has an issue with clubs having academies. It's the bidding system that's the issue.

 

[jackess]

I think the rules just need to be tightened up around the ones that go high up in the draft. Reduce the discount or something similar.

Nobody really cares about the ones that are taken later in the draft.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

I think the rules just need to be tightened up around the ones that go high up in the draft. Reduce the discount or something similar.

Nobody really cares about the ones that are taken later in the draft.

They kinda did when we had a bumper crop in 2016. There were very specific restrictions introduced for the Northern academies. You can only match 1 bid in the top 10 if you finish top 4 on the ladder etc. So specific they may never be applicable to any club.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Nobody has an issue with clubs having academies. It's the bidding system that's the issue.

The title of this thread suggests otherwise.

Agree the bidding system is a joke.

 

[Pykie]

Yes. Marshall, Spargo, Davis, and Weller are names that are in the AFL that were developed in the northern academies despite not being eligible. Weller was in the Gold Coast academy for longer than Thomas was in the North academy but wasn't able to be picked up.

Great,

5 out of 500.


A vast % of kids in all the NGA academies aren't eligible but are admitted from the very start of the academy.

The NGA admission isn't restricted to kids from multicultural backgrounds, clubs admit all kids but only have exclusive draft access to a small % of them.

 

[Kummerspeck]

Great,

5 out of 500.


A vast % of kids in all the NGA academies aren't eligible but are admitted from the very start of the academy.

The NGA admission isn't restricted to kids from multicultural backgrounds, clubs admit all kids but only have exclusive draft access to a small % of them.

So you were wing and now you're shifting the goal posts. You're unable to discuss this in good faith. You're either cripplingly ignorant or are just straight up dishonest

 

[telsor]

The 700 figure for the Swans academy surprises me. ours has around 500. I thought your's was smaller.

Anecditally I heard Jack Buckley, who was in yours indicate it was hard to stay in. Kieren Briggs also said in a recent interview it was hard to enter. He was marginal playing his junior footy for Pennant Hills in your zone but living in Carlingford in ours.

I dont think the academies are just about finding the next Isaac Heeney, numbers matter because they can also have a positive influence on the standard of local comps in NSW generally.

Which is another reason to get the clubs out of it.

Clubs, quite naturally and reasonably, lose interest in players when they're no longer going to be potential recruitment candidates for them. Of those hundreds mentioned, I dare say most are young, and, as per your quote from Jack Buckley it's hard to stay in (i.e. numbers get reduced as they get older and clubs realise these kids aren't up to the required standard for the club to benefit).

A less (AFL) club oriented academy system would produce more/better second tier players.

Indeed, if there are any ties, make them to the 2nd tier (e.g WA colts, and/or TAC cup), but have the money currently allocated to the AFL academies go into improving the standards, making sure they're similar across the country, and ensuring those outside the normal youth/development processes get extra help.

As an added bonus, it'd also make the draft a hell of a lot fairer/simpler.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Which is another reason to get the clubs out of it.

Clubs, quite naturally and reasonably, lose interest in players when they're no longer going to be potential recruitment candidates for them. Of those hundreds mentioned, I dare say most are young, and, as per your quote from Jack Buckley it's hard to stay in (i.e. numbers get reduced as they get older and clubs realise these kids aren't up to the required standard for the club to benefit).

A less (AFL) club oriented academy system would produce more/better second tier players.

Indeed, if there are any ties, make them to the 2nd tier (e.g WA colts, and/or TAC cup), but have the money currently allocated to the AFL academies go into improving the standards, making sure they're similar across the country, and ensuring those outside the normal youth/development processes get extra help.

As an added bonus, it'd also make the draft a hell of a lot fairer/simpler.

You're barking up the wrong tree on this tack.

We very regularly send AFL players to junior training sessions to promote the game and the club. It's 9ften those with kids that play that have inside info with us, the players are pretty frank with the kids about injuries etc. We also distribute free tkts to games through the juniors to the kids and their parents. Schools as well.

This is independent of the three game junior membership thing the AFL does for Auskick.The AFL also employs development staff in NSW and the ACT at least, I'm not sure of the boundaries.

Growing the juniors is our clubs focus for sustainable growth.

 

[telsor]

Nobody has an issue with clubs having academies. It's the bidding system that's the issue.

I certainly do.

But as I very much doubt the vested interests would allow them to be removed, a major alteration to the bidding system would suffice.

2 changes.

1) Discount varies (both as a percentage and total pts), declining the more players you've picked up over the previous years (FS would also count against this). Potentially losing FA players could add to available discount, as could the number of local players (although how they would be worked in fairly could be tricky).

2) You need a pick within 1 round of the bid you're matching.