Expansion QLD and NSW academies

[StevoJenkins]

Oh deary me 13 years of hell after winning a threepeat, how did you Brisbane fans handle that???

Literally had to have the AFL come in and replace our entire club because of how incompetent our administration was. When was the last time you saw that happen? The bottom finishes were just the bonus.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Literally had to have the AFL come in and replace our entire club because of how incompetent our administration was. When was the last time you saw that happen? The bottom finishes were just the bonus.

After a three-peat...

You will not find sympathy from a Saints or Blues fan on that lmao.

 

[Dogflogger]

Literally had to have the AFL come in and replace our entire club because of how incompetent our administration was. When was the last time you saw that happen? The bottom finishes were just the bonus.

Which year did the AFL come in and replace your whole administration?

 

[Philhawk]

Literally had to have the AFL come in and replace our entire club because of how incompetent our administration was. When was the last time you saw that happen? The bottom finishes were just the bonus.

If this is the qualification for an academy, then Essendon should get all of Australia as their exclusive academy.

 

[bear3]

Oh deary me 13 years of hell after winning a threepeat, how did you Brisbane fans handle that???

You're club was happy to send fitzroy to the other side of country and agreed to the conditions of the merger then complain about it after the fact when started winning. we deserved the concessions we got ,we still have around half the amount of locals on our list that victorian clubs do ,your club can bid on any academy player with your picks.

 

[Black Haze]

The issue is the academy rort has already paid off and will continue to do so for at least another decade. Ashcroft, Fletcher, Walter, Read, Annable etc are all extremely young still.

Being up in qld they're every chance of just hiding future players to tank their value so they can continue to pick up top line draftees for peanuts.

Geelong already do this with locals. See the likes of Jack Henry, Tom Atkins, Oliver Dempsey, Gryan Miers, Lawson Humphries and Tom Stewart for a few examples of this.

 

[.Shotties.]

, Lawson Humphries

I'm going to need to be walked through how Geelong hid the guy who grew up in WA and played WAFL with Swan districts.

 

[Vankri]

The heart of the problem: sustained periods of struggle for teams outside of footy heartland makes them unviable as a club (no crowd, unattractive to players, sponsors, require constant AFL work and funding).

So the AFL manufactures a way to keep them up. Salary cap and COLA, academies and assistance are all part of that goal. But in typical AFL admin fashion the short term is all that matters and the long term is forgotten.

So the entire system that allows them to keep their heads above the water in tough times is the same that now creates a monster with the likes of Brisbane building a great team, getting now the double benefit of f/s and academies and a supply of top talent through academies, and the attractiveness of a contender to free agents and trades just like any other well run and contending club does.

All this comes from a misdiagnosis of the original problem. Brisbane and GC weren’t unattractive because they were in QLD, but because of performance and culture. Now that it’s fixed they will get the compounding effects of their advantages. This was clearly an anticipated problem for those of us who were thinking longer term during the ridiculous outrage over the ‘go home five’, but is now about to become very clear to the masses.

 

[Dogflogger]

The heart of the problem: sustained periods of struggle for teams outside of footy heartland makes them unviable as a club (no crowd, unattractive to players, sponsors, require constant AFL work and funding).

So the AFL manufactures a way to keep them up. Salary cap and COLA, academies and assistance are all part of that goal. But in typical AFL admin fashion the short term is all that matters and the long term is forgotten.

So the entire system that allows them to keep their heads above the water in tough times is the same that now creates a monster with the likes of Brisbane building a great team, getting now the double benefit of f/s and academies and a supply of top talent through academies, and the attractiveness of a contender to free agents and trades just like any other well run and contending club does.

All this comes from a misdiagnosis of the original problem. Brisbane and GC weren’t unattractive because they were in QLD, but because of performance and culture. Now that it’s fixed they will get the compounding effects of their advantages. This was clearly an anticipated problem for those of us who were thinking longer term during the ridiculous outrage over the ‘go home five’, but is now about to become very clear to the masses.

as long as the league itself grows and gets more money then it is a success, the AFL is a business and the only metric for success is money.

 

[Vankri]

as long as the league itself grows and gets more money then it is a success, the AFL is a business and the only metric for success is money.

You won’t find me arguing against the fact that the AFL has the balance wrong in the commercial pursuit of the game, but it’s not black and white. If they over power the teams away from their heartland by an unacceptable margin (imagine now Brisbane and Sydney with COLA, extra salary cap, with no tweaks to academies and imagine then even more support just for the $$) then they will lose part of their heartland support and the ROI and business case stops making sense.

This is likely why the f/s and academies are seeing the tweaks coming up next year, AFL probably fears the consequences of going too far for too long with concessions.

 

[The King!]

The heart of the problem: sustained periods of struggle for teams outside of footy heartland makes them unviable as a club (no crowd, unattractive to players, sponsors, require constant AFL work and funding).

So the AFL manufactures a way to keep them up. Salary cap and COLA, academies and assistance are all part of that goal. But in typical AFL admin fashion the short term is all that matters and the long term is forgotten.

So the entire system that allows them to keep their heads above the water in tough times is the same that now creates a monster with the likes of Brisbane building a great team, getting now the double benefit of f/s and academies and a supply of top talent through academies, and the attractiveness of a contender to free agents and trades just like any other well run and contending club does.

All this comes from a misdiagnosis of the original problem. Brisbane and GC weren’t unattractive because they were in QLD, but because of performance and culture. Now that it’s fixed they will get the compounding effects of their advantages. This was clearly an anticipated problem for those of us who were thinking longer term during the ridiculous outrage over the ‘go home five’, but is now about to become very clear to the masses.

They were unattractive because big vic clubs just lured players back home to Melbourne .

 

[Vankri]

They were unattractive because big vic clubs just lured players back home to Melbourne .

Yes, superstars like Patrick Karnezis and Billy Longer, and infamous Melbourne clubs West Coast and Port Adelaide for the go home 5.

Correct me if I’m wrong but are any of the following players from QLD/NSW? Dunkley (non qld), Daniher, Grundy, Adams, Rioli, Noble, Draper, Allen, Curnow? Case in point.

If you want to make a point that the only way northern clubs were to become attractive again (not that yours has ever not been) was to give them a leg up via exclusive talent, I will say that with harder thinking other ways can be found, but even then the academies priorities and double dip with f/s should have therefore only been an emergency assistance package and temporary, not a permanent fixture that we are now about to see the extreme consequences of.

 

[jonnobackpocket]

Literally had to have the AFL come in and replace our entire club because of how incompetent our administration was. When was the last time you saw that happen? The bottom finishes were just the bonus.

Who gives a shit what any of them think Stevo, all born out of jealousy. We won again and will keep doing it. Carlton and St Kilda supporters, last time Carlton were any good they were cheating. And St Kilda- shit the bed when they had a chance at some flags. Pay average players heaps of money and get a coach whose believes best way to win is to keep a team to under 10 goals on a lightning deck under a roof. Big bad Brisbane taking advantage of rules that have been around forever and having pick 60 odd Harris Andrew’s in the team. Bullies.

 

[jonnobackpocket]

Yes, superstars like Patrick Karnezis and Billy Longer, and infamous Melbourne clubs West Coast and Port Adelaide for the go home 5.

Correct me if I’m wrong but are any of the following players from QLD/NSW? Dunkley (non qld), Daniher, Grundy, Adams, Rioli, Noble, Draper, Allen, Curnow? Case in point.

If you want to make a point that the only way northern clubs were to become attractive again (not that yours has ever not been) was to give them a leg up via exclusive talent, I will say that with harder thinking other ways can be found, but even then the academies priorities and double dip with f/s should have therefore only been an emergency assistance package and temporary, not a permanent fixture that we are now about to see the extreme consequences of.

We were shit for 15 years and used this thing called the draft to get players while we were down the bottom. Strange concept hey Christ

 

[Vankri]

We were shit for 15 years and used this thing called the draft to get players while we were down the bottom. Strange concept hey Christ

Very intelligent response.

 

[Wraptor]

One of the reasons for the academies is locking in local talent. Sydney have lost a few Academy players to the NRL who are able to sign players and guarantee they can stay in their local area. Without the Academy Sydney can't promise these young players the ability to stay home, and as a result they will sign with a NRL club who can.

Is it a coincidence the AFL are changing the rules just as clubs like Port and Carlton have highly rated players coming through the juniors?

I can't help but feel the reason why the AFL waited until this year to tighten up the rules is because they wanted to make sure clubs like Gold Coast and Brisbane had finished filling their boots with top end talent at bargain basement prices.

Exhibit A - Brisbane being able to draft Will Ashcroft while still being able to trade for Josh Dunkley.
Exhibit B - Gold Coast being able to draft Zeke Uwland while still being able to trade for Christian Petracca.

 

[Obeanie1]

We were shit for 15 years and used this thing called the draft together with AFL assistance and AFL funded academies to get priority access to players while we were down the bottom. Strange concept hey Christ

Corrected for accuracy.

So are you pretending the AFL didn't move heaven and earth to get the Lions priority access to multiple players?

Oh. And you missed the bit where your club recently rebuilt its midfield with elite 3 x top 5 picks utilising priority access policies whilst playing in 3 grand finals in a row and winning two.

Now that IS a strange concept. The team winning flags gets more assistance than teams finishing last.

Christ!

 

[Scotland]

Is it a coincidence the AFL are changing the rules just as clubs like Port and Carlton have highly rated players coming through the juniors?

Yep.

Now is the only chance to do it before a compromised Tassie draft. Or you could wait until 2028 and instead of Port and Carlton it will be someone else.

Eventually they might (should) change the FA compo system too. Could've been us with Allen, North with McKay etc. but someone will lose out finishing at the bottom and losing a free agent for pick 10 or 20.

I can't help but feel the reason why the AFL waited until this year to tighten up the rules is because they wanted to make sure clubs like Gold Coast and Brisbane had finished filling their boots with top end talent at bargain basement prices.

100%. They could've done it last year, but they didn't want to risk Annable, Uwland and Patterson not getting to Brisbane and GC respectively.

 

[jonnobackpocket]

Corrected for accuracy.

So are you pretending the AFL didn't move heaven and earth to get the Lions priority access to multiple players?

Oh. And you missed the bit where your club recently rebuilt its midfield with elite 3 x top 5 picks utilising priority access policies whilst playing in 3 grand finals in a row and winning two.

Now that IS a strange concept. The team winning flags gets more assistance than teams finishing last.

Christ!

So you change someone’s post and then answer it, my god it’s actually that moronic I can’t even be bothered.

 

[GC2015]

Is it a coincidence the AFL are changing the rules just as clubs like Port and Carlton have highly rated players coming through the juniors?

Well first of all, Carlton had F/S access to pick 3 last year so you can't argue this was designed purely to screw over Carlton otherwise they would've done it the year before last. The timing has more to do with the fact that teams can trade two years into the future these days and they wanted to give teams a fair amount of time to prepare for the changes since they were first suggested back in early 2024.

We know it's not what you're suggesting because the AFL wanted to bring in harsher bid matching rules two years ago and decided against it because teams like Carlton and Richmond complained that they didn't have enough time to prepare the changes. History is repeating itself two years later with Carlton once again trying to convince the AFL to delay their suggested bid matching changes and Port Adelaide find themselves involved this time around.

It's not the conspiracy theory that you want it to be. If the AFL did what they wanted to do two years ago, then the Lions and Suns would've paid a higher price for their priority draftees. You can thank Carlton for delaying the rule changes because they were the most outspoken about it back then and it would appear they are the most outspoken again this year. It's important to once again point out that Carlton did benefit from the delay of the bid matching rules two years ago because they were able to trade down the draft order to accumulate multiple second round picks that they used to match a bid on pick 3 Carlton F/S Harry Dean last year. The same technique that everyone has criticised the QLD teams for using to match bids.

Carlton are just acting in their best interests and they obviously have a fair bit of influence on the AFL's decisions because they were able to convince them to delay the tighter rules two years ago and recent reports suggest the Blues are trying really hard to delay it again this year and that's obviously got to do with this year's pick 1 Carlton F/S Cody Walker.

 

[Obeanie1]

So you change someone’s post and then answer it, my god it’s actually that moronic I can’t even be bothered.

Its called satire DH.

Having a joke.

Obviously it hit a raw nerve.

Then again the best jokes always hold elements of truth.

 

[StevoJenkins]

Is it a coincidence the AFL are changing the rules just as clubs like Port and Carlton have highly rated players coming through the juniors?

I can't help but feel the reason why the AFL waited until this year to tighten up the rules is because they wanted to make sure clubs like Gold Coast and Brisbane had finished filling their boots with top end talent at bargain basement prices.

Replace Brisbane and GC with Carlton, and the bolded is correct. Refer to GC's post. This wasn't proof of the "Northern Conspiracy" that gets passed around. Was literally a VFL action.

Exhibit A - Brisbane being able to draft Will Ashcroft while still being able to trade for Josh Dunkley.
Exhibit B - Gold Coast being able to draft Zeke Uwland while still being able to trade for Christian Petracca.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and highlight that you're mentioned an Ashcroft in the academy thread. Fletcher, Will and Levi Ashcroft were not academy selections, this is not the same.

So are you pretending the AFL didn't move heaven and earth to get the Lions priority access to multiple players?

Oh. And you missed the bit where your club recently rebuilt its midfield with elite 3 x top 5 picks utilising priority access policies whilst playing in 3 grand finals in a row and winning two.

I suspect you have me blocked, but I will respond regardless.

How did the AFL move heaven and earth to make sure this happened? They literally changed the rules between Ashcroft 1 and 2. It led to a massive shuffle of picks to get those two in both of their draft years.

Ashcroft didn't even play out 2023, and Fletcher doesn't play in the midfield. Shows how little you know.

Now that IS a strange concept. The team winning flags gets more assistance than teams finishing last.

Christ!

I'm going to say the same thing I've said in response to you, and every other WC poster who keeps posting this dribble:

West Coast making bad list decisions is not the fault of the Northern states, or academies. Trading the farm for players like Tim Kelly and not drafting for need have led to where they are now. Feel free to talk to your list management department or ask Adam Simpson if you would like to know more.

Yep.

Now is the only chance to do it before a compromised Tassie draft. Or you could wait until 2028 and instead of Port and Carlton it will be someone else.

Eventually they might (should) change the FA compo system too. Could've been us with Allen, North with McKay etc. but someone will lose out finishing at the bottom and losing a free agent for pick 10 or 20.

You and I actually agree on FA. FA literally exists to try and compensate bottom clubs for staying at the bottom and is now a joke being used as an excuse to give clubs priority picks.

However, I believe they are changing things further by giving bottom clubs another pick for FA moves. Don't know if it will work, as using pure picks has not worked for the Kangas, but stranger things have happened.

100%. They could've done it last year, but they didn't want to risk Annable, Uwland and Patterson not getting to Brisbane and GC respectively.

Or for Carlton to get their man at pick 3. Refer to GC2015.

 

[Scotland]

You and I actually agree on FA. FA literally exists to try and compensate bottom clubs for staying at the bottom and is now a joke being used as an excuse to give clubs priority picks.

Easily solvable by simply placing transparent contract term requirements on FA band levels. TDK isn't a top 10 player or probably even a top 100 player in the comp, but he's 100% worthy of band 1 compo.

However, I believe they are changing things further by giving bottom clubs another pick for FA moves. Don't know if it will work, as using pure picks has not worked for the Kangas, but stranger things have happened.

Knee jerk reaction that ignores the actual problem, which is how compromised the draft is. A team with pick 1 in the draft doesn't want pick 3 and 20. They want pick 1.

Our pick 2 was pick 4. Richmond and Essendon and Melbourne had their picks pushed back etc.

Or for Carlton to get their man at pick 3. Refer to GC2015.

Carlton were at no risk of missing Harry Dean.

 

[StevoJenkins]

Knee jerk reaction that ignores the actual problem, which is how compromised the draft is. A team with pick 1 in the draft doesn't want pick 3 and 20. They want pick 1.

Our pick 2 was pick 4. Richmond and Essendon and Melbourne had their picks pushed back etc.

This isn't being introduced to fix the draft, it's getting introduced to attempt to even the system. Any change you make that involves more picks will compromise the draft anyway. This is the same with priority picks.

The AFL doesn't seem to care about the draft itself, they seem to only care about the overall system, which includes trades and FA/RFA. The only reason why they even make changes to bidding rules is push back from clubs.

Carlton were at no risk of missing Harry Dean.

Correct, however; using GC and Bris as the sole examples of a factor influencing a rule is arguably disingenuous, given Carlton's complaints to the AFL.

 

[Scotland]

This isn't being introduced to fix the draft, it's getting introduced to attempt to even the system. Any change you make that involves more picks will compromise the draft anyway. This is the same with priority picks.

That's the point. The draft is broken and you don't fix it by breaking it further.

2025 draft was 1-2 WC, 3-4 Rich, 5-6 Ess with the way the ladder, trades and FA panned out. Those picks were actually 1, 4, 7-10. Under the AFL's reported plan some of those picks warrant a bonus end of first round pick and some don't. It's farcical. Pick 2 is pick 2 regardless of where it came from and if it gets pushed back 2 picks then that either "needs" to be compensated or it doesn't.

The AFL doesn't seem to care about the draft itself, they seem to only care about the overall system, which includes trades and FA/RFA. The only reason why they even make changes to bidding rules is push back from clubs.

The AFL only cares about academy players staying in Qld/NSW and having a compo mechanism they can play tunes with.

Correct, however; using GC and Bris as the sole examples of a factor influencing a rule is arguably disingenuous, given Carlton's complaints to the AFL.

They aren't the sole examples, they are the most recent examples to benefit significantly. Gold Coast, Brisbane, Sydney and GWS have all had academy players go in the top 10. Brisbane have the Ashcrofts on top of that. The only NGA players to go top 10 are Ugle-Hagan, Thomas and Liam Henry. Mac Andrew was pick 5 in 2021 but ended up at Gold Coast all the same.

Carlton haven't really benefited from F/S recently other than in 2025. They got the Camporeale twins but they were picks 43 and 54 so who cares?

The AFL could have changed the rules and made it harder for Bris, GC and Carlton last year and did not. And if we're honest no one was expecting them to or is surprised they didn't.