The Academies - 2016

[Suma Magic]

You've developed a local talent who will likely want to play for your club as long as he can.

It's draft day. Currently you pay:

Pick 23 (for example) - you think there is a huge benefit.

If there was no discount

Pick 17 - you are arguing there was almost no point in investing in the player?

This argument is ridiculous.

 

[dlanod]

I just don't see how having to pay pick 17 instead of pick 23 for a local player would kill off nearly all investment. I struggle to see how you could take that view.

Ok, that's fair enough. What you're missing:
- clubs would absolutely take the elite talent still. The Mills and Hipwoods and Keayses and Hoppers would still get picked up, regardless of discount and investment. Most of these guys could get identified, signed and developed. Maybe a few of these guys disappear off the map (Kennedy probably stays local, Heeney stays with league).
- however the majority of academy investment is going into junior clubs to build the talent base. It's also being spread across dozens of kids. This is one of the main aims of the academies - to build the sport as a whole in these states. This increases the overall talent base.
- clubs like Brisbane are doing this to fill out their roster with locals - they've taken players like Freeman, Bourke, William and Andrews that came through their academy.

Now if you remove the discounts entirely players like Himmelberg and Flynn and Freeman and Hiscox and Davis and Andrews become less attractive prospects because a lot of these guys are more speculative. That's why they go late in the draft. If they're less attractive, why spend the majority of academy money that's going to developing the overall talent base such that these guys emerge?

The clubs would cut their funding and only invest and pick up the sure things. They've said so. That'll basically remove the main point of the academies in terms of developing AFL as a sport of interest in these states and we revert to the NSW scholarship scheme.

 

[Suma Magic]

Ok, that's fair enough. What you're missing:
- clubs would absolutely take the elite talent still. The Mills and Hipwoods and Keayses and Hoppers would still get picked up, regardless of discount and investment. Most of these guys could get identified, signed and developed. Maybe a few of these guys disappear off the map (Kennedy probably stays local, Heeney stays with league).
- however the majority of academy investment is going into junior clubs to build the talent base. It's also being spread across dozens of kids. This is one of the main aims of the academies - to build the sport as a whole in these states. This increases the overall talent base.
- clubs like Brisbane are doing this to fill out their roster with locals - they've taken players like Freeman, Bourke, William and Andrews that came through their academy.

Now if you remove the discounts entirely players like Himmelberg and Flynn and Freeman and Hiscox and Davis and Andrews become less attractive prospects because a lot of these guys are more speculative. That's why they go late in the draft. If they're less attractive, why spend the majority of academy money that's going to developing the overall talent base such that these guys emerge?

The clubs would cut their funding and only invest and pick up the sure things. They've said so. That'll basically remove the main point of the academies in terms of developing AFL as a sport of interest in these states and we revert to the NSW scholarship scheme.

How about keeping the discount outside the first two rounds? Or outside the top 30?

Your issue would be addressed, and so would mine.

 

[dlanod]

How about keeping the discount outside the first two rounds? Or outside the top 30?

Your issue would be addressed, and so would mine.

Outside the first round makes the most sense as a compromise if something had to be applied. There's already special rules in place for the first round as teams don't get a pick back during the first round with leftover points put in escrow and get forfeited if unused and it's where the 20% discount applies - after that teams get an increased discount based on 20% of pick 18. Obviously I don't think further changes are necessary, but I admit some bias there.

 

[Suma Magic]

Outside the first round makes the most sense as a compromise if something had to be applied. There's already special rules in place for the first round as teams don't get a pick back during the first round with leftover points put in escrow and get forfeited if unused and it's where the 20% discount applies - after that teams get an increased discount based on 20% of pick 18. Obviously I don't think further changes are necessary, but I admit some bias there.

Good discussion. We may not agree but I feel like we both got some good points across.

 

[Tippett2Goal]

Priority access to local players means you pay a maximum of market value. And recruiting locally helps to address go home issues. This is a huge advantage in non-traditional states.

Except it isn't priority access anymore, you've removed that with the discount.

 

[dlanod]

Except it isn't priority access anymore, you've removed that with the discount.

When he says priority access he just means that the clubs will still be able to match bids made.

 

[Suma Magic]

Except it isn't priority access anymore, you've removed that with the discount.

Priority - in that if someone bids for them you can take them. You get priority over other clubs to select Academy players if you want to.

The discount is separate to the concept of priority access.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Was hearing on FC that GWS have got rid of their SA and WA recruiters as they believe their zone will give them a lot of the talent they need.
This is crazy and really needs to be looked at by the AFL.
In good times get first preference on the top talent in that area and when it is a lean year feel free to have at the talent from everywhere else.
This should even anger other Zoners such as Sydney, Brisbane and GC.

The AFL is going to ensure the Giants win a flag/s by hook or by crook. Same as with Brisbane and the Swans previously. It is paramount to their expansion plans that these clubs win multiple flags to ensure they're tens of millions aren't being pissed up against the wall.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Its basically, why try to sign players from the other side of the country with the "Cam risk", smart move not to waste money..

Hang on, I thought this was a professional competition? To think some clubs should get multiple priority picks in the draft each year (which is what academy and yes Father/Son selections are) just because there's a risk the players they draft might decide to leave in a couple of years is ludicrous. If you can't compete on an equal footing with the rest of the clubs relying on an uncompromised draft and salary cap then maybe you're not viable as an AFL club.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Gives other clubs access? What other club had access to hopper? The bidding system only makes them pay fair value. At most you can say it gives teams access to players who they are not as interested in or have room for ie Dougal Howard. The bidding system is a big improvement but I would not say it gives other clubs access to them when the players you have access to are the small percentage they really don't want that badly. They can match and take the players, so it is truly only what they pass on you can access.

The other problem with the bidding system is that with FS picks it used to occur prior to trade period to prevent clubs dropping down the draft order knowing they would use that pick on a bid. Now with the trade period occurring prior to the bidding system it allows clubs to rig the draft and drop down from a top 10 pick to multiple picks in the 30's. Ridiculous.

 

[Tippett2Goal]

When he says priority access he just means that the clubs will still be able to match bids made.

Priority - in that if someone bids for them you can take them. You get priority over other clubs to select Academy players if you want to.

The discount is separate to the concept of priority access.

Except as already pointed out, without the discount there is an incentive to do less development, which is part of the problem, AFL needs the academies to provide a pathway, which means development of large numbers of kids(600, 11-19 in Sydneys).

Whilst the clubs running the academies require there to be some benefit to them if the reward for developing a kid is that you end up using a pick you would have otherwise used on someone else, and pay more for a kid than you'd otherwise have to then the academy incentive quickly disappears, you're essentially punishing development.

 

[Suma Magic]

Except as already pointed out, without the discount there is an incentive to do less development, which is part of the problem, AFL needs the academies to provide a pathway, which means development of large numbers of kids(600, 11-19 in Sydneys).

Whilst the clubs running the academies require there to be some benefit to them if the reward for developing a kid is that you end up using a pick you would have otherwise used on someone else, and pay more for a kid than you'd otherwise have to then the academy incentive quickly disappears, you're essentially punishing development.

I disagree about the impact of the discount on investment.

I've made my points.

My post at the top of this page summarises my view in the most succinct way.

 

[dlanod]

If you can't compete on an equal footing with the rest of the clubs relying on an uncompromised draft and salary cap then maybe you're not viable as an AFL club.

If you can't realise that clubs operating in a non-AFL state are in a fundamentally different environment to every other club, you're desperately short-sighted.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Those other teams are in footy heartland where go home factor is almost non existent.

I'll be sure to remember this next time someone mentions Hogan going back west.

 

[tigs2010]

Lions academy graduates currently reside on the lists of North Melbourne, Richmond and Fremantle. And we've only just begun.

Good for footy.

You're welcome everyone.

We are very happy with Chol. Already a cult hero.

From speaking to someone at one of the Vic clubs, the biggest gripe seems to be the Riverina being gifted to GWS (unless you're Eddie and want to sook about everything) Apparently Brisbane and Sydney have done a great job of actually building up the talent in their area where as GWS were more just gifted a great area and didn't have to put in the hard yards like your own club and the Swans.

 

[dlanod]

GWS were more just gifted a great area

Not really true. More players were taken in the ND from Sydney and Brisbane's zones over the last ten years than from the Riverina.

 

[tigs2010]

Not really true. More players were taken in the ND from Sydney and Brisbane's zones over the last ten years than from the Riverina.

Is that because they are better areas or because Sydney and Brisbane have done a good job of developing their areas? I actually don't know. Was just passing on what I was told.

 

[philthy05]

The other problem with the bidding system is that with FS picks it used to occur prior to trade period to prevent clubs dropping down the draft order knowing they would use that pick on a bid. Now with the trade period occurring prior to the bidding system it allows clubs to rig the draft and drop down from a top 10 pick to multiple picks in the 30's. Ridiculous.

I don't mind that it gives teams a chance to trade into a higher pick. Although I don't like that a team can bid say their pick 5 on a player , then a team can match with their pick 13 and 2 late 4th rounders that would normally have sfa value.

Ie pick 5 = 1878 points minus 20%!discount = 1503 points

Pick 13 = 1212 1503 - 1212= 291 points

Picks 58 170p and 62 123p gives them enough points to select the highly rated prospects. Those values are way off. 4th round picks have next to no value and no team would ever even be able to move one pick up in the draft much less from pick 13 to 5. I don't mind the discount but being able to use 4th round picks to bridge the gap is pretty crap Imo. Pick 58 and 62 should have no place closing the gap between pick 13 and pick 5.

Should be a rule that teams can only use picks in the round following the round the bid was placed. Ie , a first round bid means points can only be matched by a combination of 1st and/or 2nd round picks. A bid in 2nd can be matched with 2nd and/or 3rds and so on.

If the team wont be able to acquire the picks in trade then it comes out of their next years picks if they really want the player that bad.

 

[M Malice]

list of lions academy players for 2016, there are players in there who are not eligible do be drafted as academy prospects. the broader football community only think about the success stories, a lot of effort and financial resources go into the academies for sometimes no result for the club.

http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL ...ments/2016 Initial BL Academy Squads (v2).pdf

at a quick count i made that 261 academy boys in 2016.

 

[philthy05]

The positives I feel that can come out of the academies is that it can increase the level of talent around the local leagues and better opposition is only going to help others in a bunch of different ways.

It's one reason why I don't like elite academy prospects boarding at vic schools in the tac comp.

The guys who have that as an option should and could already be there in that environment and the academy focusing on developing another local kid who isn't going to have the same opportunities to high level coaching.

 

[dlanod]

Is that because they are better areas or because Sydney and Brisbane have done a good job of developing their areas? I actually don't know. Was just passing on what I was told.

I'm talking pre-academy, so no slight on developing areas in either case. The anti-Riverina arguments just love glossing over the actual facts:

- Before the academy changes, the Riverina only produced one player taken in the National Draft in ten years.
- After the academy changes, the Riverina starts producing players again.

Because people don't like other teams get talented players, Riverina is now deemed a rich pipeline of talent - except there hadn't been any evidence of that pipeline in years until GWS got involved. Now GWS should be getting out? This "rich pipeline" will dry up just as quickly as it did before they got involved.

 

[TradeDraft]

How hard are Eddy and his merry band of lemmings trying to get the Riverina!

First they bought Callum Twomey then they moved onto Jay and Sam from the Hun now they've gone for the biggest cash for comment whore of them all..big Damo.

How pathetic and jealous...bet they won't have any qualms about the TV Rights.

Self serving *****

Then the AFL should let teams to sign who ever they want from there Zones then and not just Multicultural people then

 

[TradeDraft]

Lions academy graduates currently reside on the lists of North Melbourne, Richmond and Fremantle. And we've only just begun.

Good for footy.

You're welcome everyone.

Yeah the ones the Lions did not want. So the Rejects

 

[TradeDraft]

Plus Melbourne (Wagner) and Collingwood (Smith).

Was smith part of the Academy as he is 22 when Rookied?