Expansion QLD and NSW academies

[Johnny Bananas]

What really irks fans is that Brisbane who are currently contenders had access to W Ashcroft 2 & Fletcher 12, then L Ashcroft 5 and Marshall 25 over two drafts in 3 years. Gold Coast who are on the up added 5 first round academy players over back to back drafts. Similarly the Bulldogs have been able to add Ugle-Hagan, Darcy, Croft and West in recent years. Meanwhile my team that is historically bad gets picks 1 and 30. Cool. Why even have a draft if you can make the GF and have a top 5 pick or have 4 first round picks in one year? Getting close to the point of just letting teams add 5 or 6 18 year olds a year and be done with it.

If you want to get rid of F/S immediately, sure, I don't mind. We've had our superstar F/Ss come in already, you're about to get Drew Banfield's son, but if it's so unfair, I'm happy to scrap it before he's eligible.

 

[morsie]

Get back to me when the Northern clubs have a similar percentage of home grown players to the Victorian clubs.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

QLD and NSW clubs are spoon fed because the AFL want to prioritise those clubs winning flags first and foremost, even if it means screwing over clubs in Victoria.

Exactly, and that's why the GF is only ever held in Queensland or New South Wales, and teams from those states don't have to get on a plane for a month at a time while those poor Victorian clubs are travelling every second week. Wait...

Had anyone suggested 20 years ago that QLD will one day surpass SA in terms of participation, TV ratings and producing talent for the AFL they would have been laughed at.

You need facts rather than just feelpinions. How many Brownlow Medallists have Queensland produced in the last 20 years compared to SA?

QLD is on track to surpass WA in these metrics within the next decade, after that is when I fear QLD will emerge as a threat to Victoria as the number one Australian Football state.

I see.

Chief , I would like to petition that this thread be renamed to "Taper's big whinge about Victoria someday not being the greatest" or similar.

 

[giantsully]

You have the advantage however, of players wanting to "go home", which the northern clubs, at the moment, rarely benefit from (and hopefully, in time, the Academies address).

Each and every year, the majority of players moving, move to "go home". On top of that, you have players openly (or otherwise) thumbing their nose at the "open" draft, and making it clear they only want to stay in their home state.

This is the inherent advantage "footy states" have.

Spot on, the "go home" factor is the non-northern states' "academies".

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Spot on, the "go home" factor is the non-northern states' "academies".

We don’t have multiple first round draft picks coming home every second year.. it’s not at all the same.

The Swans have been in 4 GFs in the past 11 years while cashing in on multiple first round academy picks and now potentially 3 more this year.

No club in the league has access to that amount of high end talent as a go home factor.

 

[giantsully]

We don’t have multiple first round draft picks coming home every second year.. it’s not at all the same.

The Swans have been in 4 GFs in the past 11 years while cashing in on multiple first round academy picks and now potentially 3 more this year.

No club in the league has access to that amount of high end talent as a go home factor.

The last time we had a first round Academy pick was Braeden Campbell in 2020. Since then, you've had the #1 pick JHF given to you on a platter.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

The last time we had a first round Academy pick was Braeden Campbell in 2020. Since then, you've had the #1 pick JHF given to you on a platter.

You’ve also had Heeney, Mills and Blakey as first rounders. All picked up relatively for peanuts due to being academy products. Now you have another 3 potential top end picks coming through this year.

Outside of JHF (who cost us 2 firsts compared to your peanuts) what other top end talent have we had as a go home factor? Luko has never lived up to potential but was still a first round pick as well if you want to include him.

So it’s go home factor (2 players = 3 first round picks traded) for us.

Academy (4 players for peanuts relative to their draft position + potentially 3 more)

7-2 is quite the advantage to the academies over go home factor at the top end of the draft.

 

[Handsuper47]

I've got no issues with them, they were always a long-term prospect to help grow the game in those states mainly dominated by rugby and soccer. They don't have a big history in the game, they don't have the 'go home' factor just yet, and Brisbane have only just recently started to get father-son picks. There's more pressing issues the game should address first (the umpiring, the grand final locked to the MCG, the draft, the fixture, Gold Coast's guernsey etc.)

 

[giantsully]

You’ve also had Heeney, Mills and Blakey as first rounders. All picked up relatively for peanuts due to being academy products. Now you have another 3 potential top end picks coming through this year.

Outside of JHF (who cost us 2 firsts compared to your peanuts) what other top end talent have we had as a go home factor? Luko has never lived up to potential but was still a first round pick as well if you want to include him.

So it’s go home factor (2 players = 3 first round picks traded) for us.

Academy (4 players for peanuts relative to their draft position + potentially 3 more)

7-2 is quite the advantage to the academies over go home factor at the top end of the draft.

So that's four first round picks in 10 years, a long way short of your "multiple first round picks every couple of years" (and a long way short of what the Vic and WA clubs manage to score from "go homers").

I don't know your list that well, but I'm guessing over that period Port have probably done something similar. In the meantime, shall I list the players we've lost to the go home factor (and we do a whole lot better on that front than the poor old expansion clubs)?

Don't get caught up in the hype on this year's batch of Academy talent; the over-valuation of Academy prospects happens every year - there is almost no chance that all three Swans prospects go first round, and some chance that none do. As I understand it, none are likely to go top 10.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

So that's four first round picks in 10 years, a long way short of your "multiple first round picks every couple of years" (and a long way short of what the Vic and WA clubs manage to score from "go homers").

I don't know your list that well, but I'm guessing over that period Port have probably done something similar. In the meantime, shall I list the players we've lost to the go home factor (and we do a whole lot better on that front than the poor old expansion clubs)?

Don't get caught up in the hype on this year's batch of Academy talent; the over-valuation of Academy prospects happens every year - there is almost no chance that all three Swans prospects go first round, and some chance that none do. As I understand it, none are likely to go top 10.

Other clubs also lose players to this go home factor. Except we can’t compensate for that to the degree the academies allow clubs like the Swans to.

4 top end players for peanuts makes a big difference to a team over a long period. Instead we lose players as well and then if any top quality player wants to return, it costs us multiple early picks to facilitate the trade.

It cannot be argued we are better off than the likes of the Swans as it’s simply not true.

Yes other states may have a greater quantity of overall players returning home however they aren’t of the calibre of what the academies allow these clubs to pick at the top end majority of the time. The academies allow your club to pick multiple top end players on a much more regular basis.

It’s a huge advantage.

 

[Scotland]

The last time we had a first round Academy pick was Braeden Campbell in 2020. Since then, you've had the #1 pick JHF given to you on a platter.

JHF who Port traded pick 8 and a future first round pick (14) for you mean.

Would you rather just get Isaac Heeney at pick 2 the year you make the GF, or let Melbourne pick him and you can trade for him later?

WC were pretty keen on Dan Curtin in 2023 who went pick 8. But every man and his dog knew Harley Reid was the best kid in the draft. How about we just get Curtin at 8 for some picks in the 30s and 40s on top of Reid and push the draft order back? Sound good?

 

[Denno]

Other clubs also lose players to this go home factor. Except we can’t compensate for that to the degree the academies allow clubs like the Swans to.

4 top end players for peanuts makes a big difference to a team over a long period. Instead we lose players as well and then if any top quality player wants to return, it costs us multiple early picks to facilitate the trade.

It cannot be argued we are better off than the likes of the Swans as it’s simply not true.

Yes other states may have a greater quantity of overall players returning home however they aren’t of the calibre of what the academies allow these clubs to pick at the top end majority of the time. The academies allow your club to pick multiple top end players on a much more regular basis.

It’s a huge advantage.

No, it's not. You are at an advantage being in a football state.

If two players are rated the same, the club will go for the home grown talent. Clubs will also actively avoid "flight risks". Players drafted "interstate" have their home state clubs in their ear from the time they move (ironically, JHF being an example), to return. Evidently "going home" is just expected to be a perfectly acceptable reason to move (from an open draft), and we are all expected to move on.

Yes, other clubs lose players to the "go home", but again, they generally have the option to get another player back, if "footy states" are involved.

Trying to compare what the Northern Clubs paid previously for bid matching, to now, is disingenuous. It is now significantly harder to match bids, by accruing points via lower picks. Therefore, the ability to "pick multiple top end players on a much more regular basis" is simply not true. Under the new rules, Brisbane would likely have not been able to get both Ashcroft and Marshall (without a trade of some sort), and GC certainly wouldn't have been able to get the 4 they got a few years ago. It remains to be seen whether the "sweet spot" has been found.

As others have pointed out, it hasn't exactly been a conga line of top 10 picks for the Northern Clubs, whilst they continue to lose players, collectively, each and every season, to the "go home factor".

 

[Scotland]

Get back to me when the Northern clubs have a similar percentage of home grown players to the Victorian clubs.

Northern clubs don't care how many Qld/NSW players there are in the AFL.

They care about how many good players play for their clubs. They are quite happy to "pay for the development" of Ben Keays or Isaac Cumming if it means that Hugh McCluggage and Finn Callaghan are still available.

 

[Scotland]

No, it's not. You are at an advantage being in a football state.

Meanwhile Lachie Neale from Adelaide chose to join Brisbane and not Port. Josh Dunkley and Joe Daniher chose to join Brisbane. John Noble and Daniel Rioli chose to join Gold Coast. Lance Franklin chose to join Sydney. Ryan Griffen and Brett Deledio chose to join GWS.

Why is everything about "going home" with you guys? When players couldn't get out of Brisbane and Gold Coast quick enough Rockliff went to Port. Redden to WC. Dixon to Port. Polec went to North via Port. Beams wanted out, then wanted back in. Jack Martin went to Carlton. O'Meara to Hawthorn. Ah Chee moved an hour up the road.

 

[Denno]

Meanwhile Lachie Neale from Adelaide chose to join Brisbane and not Port. Josh Dunkley and Joe Daniher chose to join Brisbane. John Noble and Daniel Rioli chose to join Gold Coast. Lance Franklin chose to join Sydney. Ryan Griffen and Brett Deledio chose to join GWS.

Why is everything about "going home" with you guys? When players couldn't get out of Brisbane and Gold Coast quick enough Rockliff went to Port. Redden to WC. Dixon to Port. Polec went to North via Port. Beams wanted out, then wanted back in. Jack Martin went to Carlton. O'Meara to Hawthorn. Ah Chee moved an hour up the road.

If you read previous posts, it's because of a majority of players, each year, when traded, go to their home state. I don't know the % figure as of 2024, but there is a clear trend, over a large number of years. The chance of success is clearly one element of attraction (as is $$$), but what to do if a club isn't seen as having success on the horizon? It doesn't matter for the clubs in the footy states - they'll get players anyway.

Of course there's exceptions to the rule - there always will be. Excluding FA (which has skewed things - another AFL special), you know as well as I do that "going home" is a big factor in moves. Cherry picking certain players doesn't change the overall trend.

I'm loathe to go and pick off year upon year, but you conveniently forget to mention that Polec did in fact "go home", along with 4 others, in the one same year alone.

Take a look at WC's draft picks (plus players going back to WA) - multiple players from WA, each and every year. That is negating the go home factor before it starts. Plus you (and the other footy states) have the NGA's on top. Don't get me started on NGA's........

Right now, the Northern Clubs don't have the option (luxury), of drafting predominately locally based players, each draft. Yet.

Hopefully they eventually do, and then all clubs are on an even keel (from a recruitment perspective).

I get that it's perceived as an advantage for the Northern Clubs. As I said earlier in this thread, I see it as addressing a structural disadvantage.

 

[Scotland]

If you read previous posts, it's because of a majority of players, each year, when traded, go to their home state. I don't know the % figure as of 2024, but there is a clear trend, over a large number of years. The chance of success is clearly one element of attraction (as is $$$), but what to do if a club isn't seen as having success on the horizon? It doesn't matter for the clubs in the footy states - they'll get players anyway.

I think you will find the majority of players move to clubs in Victoria, where there are 10 clubs.

Of course there's exceptions to the rule - there always will be. Excluding FA (which has skewed things - another AFL special), you know as well as I do that "going home" is a big factor in moves. Cherry picking certain players doesn't change the overall trend.

I'm loathe to go and pick off year upon year, but you conveniently forget to mention that Polec did in fact "go home", along with 4 others, in the one same year alone.

No, I said he went to North via Port. He went home then a couple of years later moved away from home. And I am aware that Yeo, Karnezis, Docherty, Longer all left around the same time.

GWS have brought in Stringer, Hogan, Bedford in recent years. No connection to NSW. Cumming (academy) joined Adelaide. Perryman (academy) joined Collingwood. Peating (academy) was traded to Adelaide. Hill (WA) was traded to Collingwood. Hopper (acedemy) was traded to Richmond. Flynn (academy) joined WC. And yes they lost Setterfield, Taranto, Haynes, Bruhn who went "home". People put wayyy too much emphasis on "go home factor".

Freo have Luke Jackson, Shai Bolton, Jaeger O'Meara, Jordan Clark on their list. All from WA and all traded for. Pretty sure getting those players cost 4 firsts and an early second plus Lloyd Meek. O'Meara chose to move to Hawthorn over returning to WA and was moved on at age 28. They also brought in Will Brodie who is from Victoria, James Aish from SA and Oscar McDonald from Vic. They brought home Brad Hill then he moved to St Kilda. Did the same with Blake Acres and he moved to Carlton. And Lobb who is at the Bulldogs. And Hogan who is now at GWS. Griffin Logue (WA) moved to North. Lachie Neale (SA) moved to Brisbane. Sure they lost Adam Cerra and Lachie Schultz but it would be a pretty narrow viewpoint to say they have the advantage of WA players coming home.

Take a look at WC's draft picks (plus players going back to WA) - multiple players from WA, each and every year. That is negating the go home factor before it starts. Plus you (and the other footy states) have the NGA's on top. Don't get me started on NGA's........

NGAs are a joke.

What are you talking about multiple players every year? Last year the first 5 players picked from WA were picks 16, 24, 37, 45, 56. 0 to WC. 2023 it was 8, 13, 23, 28, 32. 0 to WC but we took Clay Hall at 38. Do you think we are at a massive advantage because picks 38 and 49 are from WA?

Paul Hasleby named a WA SOO side last year and 15 of the players don't play in WA. Sydney, Carlton, WB had as many players as Freo. GWS had more. But we got Hamish Davis at pick 65 and he's from WA though.

Right now, the Northern Clubs don't have the option (luxury), of drafting predominately locally based players, each draft. Yet.

Hopefully they eventually do, and then all clubs are on an even keel (from a recruitment perspective).

I get that it's perceived as an advantage for the Northern Clubs. As I said earlier in this thread, I see it as addressing a structural disadvantage.

How many Qld/NSW players are there in the AFL? Do you think this side would be competitive in the AFL? Or a Qld one?

Six Swans in 2024 NSW Origin Team

The team was announced by the NSW Australian Football History Society this week.

www.sydneyswans.com.au

I'm not sure why anyone entertains this fantasy about clubs having lists full of players from where the club is based. By my count more than half the Crows squad are not from SA and of the ones that are they had to trade to get Dawson, Rankine and Neal-Bullen.

If it's such a structural disadvantage maybe the Northern clubs should stop prioritising recruiting players from the Southern states then.

 

[Toffee Lion]

What really irks fans is that Brisbane who are currently contenders had access to W Ashcroft 2 & Fletcher 12, then L Ashcroft 5 and Marshall 25 over two drafts in 3 years. Gold Coast who are on the up added 5 first round academy players over back to back drafts. Similarly the Bulldogs have been able to add Ugle-Hagan, Darcy, Croft and West in recent years. Meanwhile my team that is historically bad gets picks 1 and 30. Cool. Why even have a draft if you can make the GF and have a top 5 pick or have 4 first round picks in one year? Getting close to the point of just letting teams add 5 or 6 18 year olds a year and be done with it.

I'm sorry but this entire paragraph is just a whinge that your club hasn't been as lucky with F/S as others. Boo-hoo.

It's not adding any value to the discussion regarding academies, which I think at this point has proven to be an overall positive for the AFL & AFL communities in the Northen states.

I'm fine with arguments surrounding the price that should be paid on academy players but it would be a mistake to abolish acadamies altogether (Not that anyone is arguing this but wanted to add my piece). Let's leave F/S out of academy discussions though, they're totally different and West Coast will eventually benefit. After Browny it took us about 20 years to benefit again while other clubs benefited, your time will come.

 

[WillHayward]

Eddie Maguire should lobby the AFL.

It's been a full 20 months since the Pies won a flag.

Must pare back northern academies.

[Eddie campaigning against the northern teams is a bit like Gina Rinehart campaigning against a mineral resources tax).

 

[Scotland]

I'm sorry but this entire paragraph is just a whinge that your club hasn't been as lucky with F/S as others. Boo-hoo.

I'm sorry but F/S, academies and free agency all impact the draft. If you don't like it don't respond. If you actually read what I said Brisbane got 3 F/Ss and an academy pick in quick succession while contending for flags. You reckon that doesn't annoy fans of other clubs? Quite happy to benefit from a rule that applies to everyone but also quite happy to benefit from a rule that doesn't.

I will repeat the last line for you. Getting close to the point of just letting teams add 5 or 6 18 year olds a year and be done with it. But I bet no Northern club would vote for that. You want the safety net of drafting the best young kids from Vic, SA and WA, you just don't want clubs from Vic, SA and WA drafting the best young kids from Qld and NSW. Which is why the argument is still going after 10 years.

It's definitely a whinge and a valid one if a team is at the bottom of the ladder and getting one pick in the top 30. However you spin the narrative it is up to 10 players a year taken early in the draft not based on ladder position.

It's not adding any value to the discussion regarding academies, which I think at this point has proven to be an overall positive for the AFL & AFL communities in the Northen states.

Ground breaking. Lance Franklin playing for Sydney was good for footy in Sydney. Watching him kick 8 goals against my team I guess I should have been thinking about growing the game in NSW.

I'm fine with arguments surrounding the price that should be paid on academy players but it would be a mistake to abolish acadamies altogether (Not that anyone is arguing this but wanted to add my piece). Let's leave F/S out of academy discussions though, they're totally different and West Coast will eventually benefit. After Browny it took us about 20 years to benefit again while other clubs benefited, your time will come.

I don't really care about F/S. Make all selections pre-draft for all I care. Clubs have no real control over whether sons of their former players turn out to be stars. Of the top 5 for games played by their father Rhylee West is probably the pick of the bunch. Jobe Watson is the only son of a 300 gamer that you would call a star at this point, Ashcroft x 2 being very young.

Nobody is arguing to abolish academies. Junior development in Vic is not the same as it is in WA or SA or Tassie or NT. The difference is that the best kid in WA is a free for all, the best kid in Qld or NSW isn't. And I've heard 1000 times how the academy players "need" to stay where they are. AFAIC the AFL needs to do away with the trade "period" and introduce live trading. You want Harley Reid, make us an offer after we pick him at #1. You want Levi Ashcroft, make an offer to Melbourne who picked him at #5. That is the only fair system. Otherwise just do away with the draft altogether. The NRL doesn't have one but still has a salary cap so the comp is fairly even.

 

[StevoJenkins]

WC were pretty keen on Dan Curtin in 2023 who went pick 8. But every man and his dog knew Harley Reid was the best kid in the draft. How about we just get Curtin at 8 for some picks in the 30s and 40s on top of Reid and push the draft order back? Sound good?

Your club wasting picks on players who clearly don't want to be there is not a fault of academies or father sons. It's a fault of your club. They wasted picks on Tim Kelly, and they wasted a pick on Harley. If the list management team thought that Dan was the man, then they should've downgraded their pick and turned it into more picks. They didn't, and got a player that everyone knew didn't want to be there. If he leaves this year, you will get more picks and get to try again. That's how drafting works.

For my club, there were so many players Brisbane could've got with pick 1 in 2017 (seriously, there's an entire thread on the main board run by Dannster if you want to see who we could've got). Rayner at the time was not touted as the number 1 pick, it was surprising that he was picked at number 1, but the club did it anyway. Rayner wasn't picked because he was the best, he was picked because he wanted to be at Brisbane and Brisbane wanted to make Rayner a centerpiece of the new Brisbane. It helps that he is actually a decent player too.

I'm sorry but F/S, academies and free agency all impact the draft. If you don't like it don't respond. If you actually read what I said Brisbane got 3 F/Ss and an academy pick in quick succession while contending for flags. You reckon that doesn't annoy fans of other clubs? Quite happy to benefit from a rule that applies to everyone but also quite happy to benefit from a rule that doesn't.

Brisbane getting 3 father sons and 1 high academy pick is purely luck.

The last 5 father sons we had access to before this were Vossey's kid (undrafted), one kid that fell under the Bombers NGA, Schache (decided he didn't want to be there and went to the Dogs), Marc Murphy (chose to not nominate and went to Carlton) and Browny (in 1999). The fact that we got 3 good ones is luck. Nothing more to it. Could it have happened at a worse time? Sure, but I don't think either of the Ashcroft's would've come to Brisbane had they been draftable in 2013/14. Fletcher maybe, but there was a lot of talk that his dad didn't want him to nominate Brisbane before he got drafted.

But again, it's got nothing to do with being in the premiership window, it's got everything to do with timing.

For the academy player (I'm assuming you're referring to Marshall and not Coleman), that was luck too. Andrews, Payne, Kiddy, Bruce and Hipwood were the only players on our list from our academy before Marshall (not counting Carter Michael). Hipwood is the only one to fall in the top 20 of his draft. Marhsall was in the first round but was in the twenties.

Also, the AFL clubs do not care what the opinion of opposition fans are. Why would you even use that as an argument?

Getting close to the point of just letting teams add 5 or 6 18 year olds a year and be done with it. But I bet no Northern club would vote for that. You want the safety net of drafting the best young kids from Vic, SA and WA, you just don't want clubs from Vic, SA and WA drafting the best young kids from Qld and NSW. Which is why the argument is still going after 10 years.

I have not seen anyone making this argument. You are jumping at shadows. The only reason why we don't see more kids taken out of NSW and QLD is because the talent pool is not the same. The kids that have had a lot of effort put into them by the clubs are ones being drafted and thus stick out more because of that.

However, players in these states have been picked out. Samson Ryan and Noah Cumberland were taken by the Tigers years ago, depending on how far you want to go back, Dayne Beams was a Southport kid.

Ground breaking. Lance Franklin playing for Sydney was good for footy in Sydney. Watching him kick 8 goals against my team I guess I should have been thinking about growing the game in NSW.

Your issue here should be with Hawthorne then. They drafted him, not Sydney.

I don't really care about F/S. Make all selections pre-draft for all I care. Clubs have no real control over whether sons of their former players turn out to be stars. Of the top 5 for games played by their father Rhylee West is probably the pick of the bunch. Jobe Watson is the only son of a 300 gamer that you would call a star at this point, Ashcroft x 2 being very young.

So, you do and don't care about father sons?

 

[Scotland]

Your club wasting picks on players who clearly don't want to be there is not a fault of academies or father sons. It's a fault of your club. They wasted picks on Tim Kelly, and they wasted a pick on Harley. If the list management team thought that Dan was the man, then they should've downgraded their pick and turned it into more picks. They didn't, and got a player that everyone knew didn't want to be there. If he leaves this year, you will get more picks and get to try again. That's how drafting works.

Kane Cornes level insight. A trade for Tim Kelly from 6 years ago has nothing to do with anything I said.

The list management team did split picks in 2022 and 2024 and drafted 3 WA kids in the first round. And brought in an experienced WA player. You know, because that is our we recruit players - we draft or trade or them. Which is why 2/3 of the best WA players don't play in WA, because it's not 1975,

Your argument seems to be that if players don't want to play for WC then don't pick them but at the same time you want special treatment so no one can have the best players from Qld/NSW.

For my club, there were so many players Brisbane could've got with pick 1 in 2017 (seriously, there's an entire thread on the main board run by Dannster if you want to see who we could've got). Rayner at the time was not touted as the number 1 pick, it was surprising that he was picked at number 1, but the club did it anyway. Rayner wasn't picked because he was the best, he was picked because he wanted to be at Brisbane and Brisbane wanted to make Rayner a centerpiece of the new Brisbane. It helps that he is actually a decent player too.

Good for Brisbane. Want me to list all the Victorian/South Australian players who have played entire careers in WA? No didn't think so.

Brisbane getting 3 father sons and 1 high academy pick is purely luck.

The last 5 father sons we had access to before this were Vossey's kid (undrafted), one kid that fell under the Bombers NGA, Schache (decided he didn't want to be there and went to the Dogs), Marc Murphy (chose to not nominate and went to Carlton) and Browny (in 1999). The fact that we got 3 good ones is luck. Nothing more to it. Could it have happened at a worse time? Sure, but I don't think either of the Ashcroft's would've come to Brisbane had they been draftable in 2013/14. Fletcher maybe, but there was a lot of talk that his dad didn't want him to nominate Brisbane before he got drafted.

But again, it's got nothing to do with being in the premiership window, it's got everything to do with timing.

For the academy player (I'm assuming you're referring to Marshall and not Coleman), that was luck too. Andrews, Payne, Kiddy, Bruce and Hipwood were the only players on our list from our academy before Marshall (not counting Carter Michael). Hipwood is the only one to fall in the top 20 of his draft. Marhsall was in the first round but was in the twenties.

You seem to have a lot of good luck. You got Marshall at 25 after you got Ashcroft at 5 after you won the flag and were therefore last in the draft order. The system is a joke. Richmond came last and had pick 1, then you had picks 5 and 25, then Richmond had their second pick at 28. It is not sustainable to have a first round that is 28, 20, 21, 29, 27 picks long. It's not a one off and it's not Brisbane's fault.

Also, the AFL clubs do not care what the opinion of opposition fans are. Why would you even use that as an argument?

Because that is where the AFL's billion dollars comes from. The AFL isn't just a pet project marketing campaign in NSW/Qld, it's a competition that is over 100 years old and has clubs anywhere from 150 to 30 years old in it. The AFL takes its success for granted but if ratings start falling they will act.

I'm well aware that Sydney for example probably don't care what a WC fan thinks, but the Northern clubs still love socialising their plight. Why would Don Pyke or Simon Garlick or Kochy care about the next highly rated 18 year old then club can't draft?

I have not seen anyone making this argument. You are jumping at shadows. The only reason why we don't see more kids taken out of NSW and QLD is because the talent pool is not the same. The kids that have had a lot of effort put into them by the clubs are ones being drafted and thus stick out more because of that.

A lot of effort goes into developing players in Vic, WA and SA too. Money that comes from the AFL, SANFL, WAFL and by extension AFL clubs in those states. Some drafts have an all Vic top 10. Some are WA heavy, some are SANFL heavy. I'd be rapt to see a NSW/Qld heavy top 10 but if none of them are actually available what's the point?

However, players in these states have been picked out. Samson Ryan and Noah Cumberland were taken by the Tigers years ago, depending on how far you want to go back, Dayne Beams was a Southport kid.

Samson Ryan was pick 40. Cumberland was pick 43. So generous of Brisbane to not match bids on two players taken in the 40s. Like I said, the Northern state clubs want to have their cake and eat it. Perryman, Cumming etc. moved because they weren't priorities to retain. Keays was delisted. These are professional clubs that want to have the best squad of 40 players they can at a given time.

Beams was drafted in 2008 before the Lions academy or Gold Coast existed so not sure what he has to do with anything. Nick Riewoldt was pick 1 out of Southport in 2000. If he was drafted today he would just end up at Gold Coast because that's "good for the game".

Your issue here should be with Hawthorne then. They drafted him, not Sydney.

Another point missed, well done. I have no issue with Hawthorn drafting Lance Franklin, or him deciding to join Sydney 8 years later. But as a supporter of West Coast I also don't really care that he won 2 flags with the Hawks or that the Swans membership went up 10% when he got there. Good for those teams, nothing to do with mine. Someone like Nat Fyfe it's great that he has had a long and storied career in WA but it's for Freo so I care why?

So, you do and don't care about father sons?

I only care that they **** up the draft even more. If the AFL got rid of the rule altogether or said anyone who is a F/S doesn't need to enter the draft I would be fine with it.

The way things are going the AFL should just invite clubs and players to the combine and allow each club to make offers to players.

 

[Cleric]

As someone in the water treatment industry, sometimes when we sell filters to people they ring up and complain that they are having to replace the filters all the time.
You have to explain to them that you don't judge a filter badly by how much dirt and sediment it collects, infact you should judge it well if its blocking up quickly, it means it's doing its job.

It's the same thing with the Northern Academies. You don't judge them negatively by the fact that they are producing more top talent at the higher end of the draft, you should be judging them positively.
Every player that Sydney or Gold Coast draft with from their Academies means that more of the talented Vic, SA and WA kids are left on the draft boards for their state clubs to take.

Some people seem to view it as "if five of the top 10 are from Academies, then that means that the quality of the kids left from the traditional states mustn't be as good as in a year when there is less Academy picks"
That's just not true. Having more talented kids coming from Qld and NSW doesn't reduce the quality of the kids coming from the other states.
It means there is more good talent number wise than other years when there is less.
It's also worth noting that academy kids are normally over rated in their draft years.

My only issue is that the Northern clubs get the best local kids when there are good ones available, and if their Academies arnt producing one year they then get to pick from the best available kids from other states. If anything, they should be made to take more kids from their Academies, not less, and that includes years where there isn't any real good ones.
You can't just take the creme.

 

[StevoJenkins]

Kane Cornes level insight. A trade for Tim Kelly from 6 years ago has nothing to do with anything I said.

The list management team did split picks in 2022 and 2024 and drafted 3 WA kids in the first round. And brought in an experienced WA player. You know, because that is our we recruit players - we draft or trade or them. Which is why 2/3 of the best WA players don't play in WA, because it's not 1975,

Your argument seems to be that if players don't want to play for WC then don't pick them but at the same time you want special treatment so no one can have the best players from Qld/NSW.

The point about Kelly was in response to your comment about the picks available to your club, whilst NSW and QLD clubs are getting these players via academies and F/S. If you want to make points and not have people respond to them, don’t make them on a footy forum and publish a book instead.

Regarding drafting and trading, it doesn’t change the Harley Reed acquisition. Your club recruited someone who didn’t want to be there in the stead of someone who may have wanted to be there. Again, your club making bad decisions is not the fault of academies and F/S.

With WA players staying in WA, I didn’t make this argument, you’re putting words in my mouth. You once again put words in my mouth by claiming a I want special treatment for the northern clubs. You don’t know my stance regarding any treatment of anyone because I didn’t say anything remotely close to that.

Good for Brisbane. Want me to list all the Victorian/South Australian players who have played entire careers in WA? No didn't think so.

You claim later in your response that I “missed” your points, well this one of mine you (purposefully) skipped over, and have chosen to respond to out of context.

The Rayner example was to contrast the current situation at your club. Once again, your club making bad decisions isn’t the fault of the northern states, academies or the draft.

You seem to have a lot of good luck. You got Marshall at 25 after you got Ashcroft at 5 after you won the flag and were therefore last in the draft order. The system is a joke. Richmond came last and had pick 1, then you had picks 5 and 25, then Richmond had their second pick at 28. It is not sustainable to have a first round that is 28, 20, 21, 29, 27 picks long. It's not a one off and it's not Brisbane's fault.

If Brisbane seems to have a lot of luck, you either have a very poor memory, or have only recently followed football.

In the same year the Eagles won the premiership, Brisbane won 5 games for the year. 5 games after (besides 2011) a decade of doing nothing. Not only did we have to get priority picks (we got 1), we had to get our administration replaced. The Ashcrofts would not have nominated our club under the state the club was in.

Outside of this, I gave you examples of the father sons before the Ashcroft’s and you‘ve clearly chosen to ignore those points.

I can do that too. So, sorry that Ashcroft senior had two kids a year apart and they happened to be good players. Sorry that Richmond didn’t have the picks required to draft anyone after some abysmal trading years prior, and not being eligible for a priority pick due to winning the granny four years prior. Sorry that the drafting system is not to your fancy due to bad drafting and trading made by your club.

Sorry that the paragraph above is not me actually being sorry.

Because that is where the AFL's billion dollars comes from. The AFL isn't just a pet project marketing campaign in NSW/Qld, it's a competition that is over 100 years old and has clubs anywhere from 150 to 30 years old in it. The AFL takes its success for granted but if ratings start falling they will act.

Then provide some stats that point to AFL declining in viewers, participation or popularity, otherwise your point is moot. Also, whilst I’m at it, you didn’t address my point again. Why would the AFL clubs care about other clubs supporters?

I'm well aware that Sydney for example probably don't care what a WC fan thinks, but the Northern clubs still love socialising their plight. Why would Don Pyke or Simon Garlick or Kochy care about the next highly rated 18 year old then club can't draft?

I mean, if something affected your club for decades, would you not speak up like yourself in this thread? The Go-home factor is a real thing. It’s occurred as recently as Jordan Dawson going back home. It’s happened with all the northern expansion clubs for a long time and it not going to go away just because two of those clubs have been in the premiership window. The CEO’s you’ve listed shouldn’t care about other clubs, they’re employed to care about their own.

A lot of effort goes into developing players in Vic, WA and SA too. Money that comes from the AFL, SANFL, WAFL and by extension AFL clubs in those states. Some drafts have an all Vic top 10. Some are WA heavy, some are SANFL heavy. I'd be rapt to see a NSW/Qld heavy top 10 but if none of them are actually available what's the point

Because if there was a top 10 filled with QLD and NSW players, the northern clubs would not be able to get them all. That’s the point it seems you are actively ignoring. If QLD ad NSW start getting bigger talent pools, they won’t be able to get all these players. Other posters have made this point in this thread, it just seems that posters like you don’t want to acknowledge this point.

Personally, I think NGA players should be able to be bid on wherever they fall in the draft order, but the AFL doesn’t want this for some reason. Not the fault of academies and the northern states though.

Samson Ryan was pick 40. Cumberland was pick 43. So generous of Brisbane to not match bids on two players taken in the 40s. Like I said, the Northern state clubs want to have their cake and eat it. Perryman, Cumming etc. moved because they weren't priorities to retain. Keays was delisted. These are professional clubs that want to have the best squad of 40 players they can at a given time.

So now we’ve gone from you claiming to know how drafting works, to then complaining about high picks leaving because they can’t break into the 1’s and players not getting picked earlier than your preference.

I have no idea why players are picked where they are. Obviously there are players who are above and beyond, but if you need a ruckman, I think you draft a ruckman. If you draft said player who ends up not being a need or doesn’t work out, you trade or delist.

Keays was not breaking into a team that had both of his positions covered. He wasn’t breaking into a midfield with Bags, Berry, (later on) Neale, Robinson, Rich, Beams or Zorko. He also wasn’t breaking into a forward line that had Taylor, (later) Cameron, Bailey, Hippy, McStay, the Big O and others who were being trialed at the time. He wasn’t there yet. Happy he made it to the big time. Met the guy at Sushi Kotobuki during the 2020 season, don’t have a bad word to say about him, but he was never making it in our team even then.

Can’t talk about the others you mentioned, there are some GWS stans who can take up that fight with you, but getting High picks that don’t work is a part of the game. Just ask the Crows about picks that didn’t work out.

Beams was drafted in 2008 before the Lions academy or Gold Coast existed so not sure what he has to do with anything. Nick Riewoldt was pick 1 out of Southport in 2000. If he was drafted today he would just end up at Gold Coast because that's "good for the game".

I kind of implied a point here, so let my clarify. I’ve brought up these players as an example of a shallow talent pool. There aren’t a heap of players who get drafted from QLD. Before the academies, AFL was not a pathway. Just ask Kalyn Ponga.

That should change in the next decade if the participation numbers are to be believed. Once the northern clubs can’t draft everyone, I’m sure you’ll be happy, if not still impatient.

Another point missed, well done. I have no issue with Hawthorn drafting Lance Franklin, or him deciding to join Sydney 8 years later. But as a supporter of West Coast I also don't really care that he won 2 flags with the Hawks or that the Swans membership went up 10% when he got there. Good for those teams, nothing to do with mine. Someone like Nat Fyfe it's great that he has had a long and storied career in WA but it's for Freo so I care why?

Okay, so if you don’t care that Lance was drafted and taken out of state, don’t care about a legend in your own state, then why bring this up? Have I really missed a point if you’re not going to make one and just dribble on?

I only care that they **** up the draft even more. If the AFL got rid of the rule altogether or said anyone who is a F/S doesn't need to enter the draft I would be fine with it.

But that’s not the way the game works. The AFL has set the rules and likes them that way. But, again, this is not the fault of the academies.

 

[JasRulz63]

The list management team did split picks in 2022 and 2024 and drafted 3 WA kids in the first round. And brought in an experienced WA player. You know, because that is our we recruit players - we draft or trade or them. Which is why 2/3 of the best WA players don't play in WA, because it's not 1975,

Your argument seems to be that if players don't want to play for WC then don't pick them but at the same time you want special treatment so no one can have the best players from Qld/NSW.

When Brisbane were in the same situation as WC are now and languishing near the bottom, we were essentially left little choice but to take kids from interstate, some of whom decided to leave for various reasons (including Yeo to WC).

We didn't have the luxury of taking 3 first round talents from Queensland to help mitigate the 'go home' risk. Leaving out the father/sons who we would have access to without the academies, the Brisbane academy has produced one top 20 pick so far.

 

[Nunez]

God Annable looks good doesn't he.