The Academies - 2016

[harrisendblue]

I come from an NBA background. I'd prefer to see NBA style trading and free agency rules.

Basically a player is tied to a club for the first 7 years of their playing career before they can take full advantage of free agency rules.

But clubs can trade players, without the players having any say in their destination.

Personally not a fan as ultimately its a restraint of trade.

Clubs need to work harder to ensure that kids dont want to leave after their initial years.

 

[briztoon]

I can't see the afl changing the rules to allow that.

Well the talk at the Lions draft function in Melbourne is that this is already a rule. When the AFL changed the rules to restrict the number of draft picks to the number of available list spots, this rule was introduced. This was discussed after the draft in the BF Lions 2016 draft thread, when talk turned to the 2017 draft, where the Lions draft pick would likely fall, where the traded in pick from Port would likely fall, and where Connor Ballenden is rated.

Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

 

[Suma Magic]

Well the talk at the Lions draft function in Melbourne is that this is already a rule. When the AFL changed the rules to restrict the number of draft picks to the number of available list spots, this rule was introduced. This was discussed after the draft in the BF Lions 2016 draft thread, when talk turned to the 2017 draft, where the Lions draft pick would likely fall, where the traded in pick from Port would likely fall, and where Connor Ballenden is rated.

Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

Interesting, cheers for the info.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

So you are standing by your statement that academies wouldn't work under any other form?

You seem to be incapable of giving a straight answer.

By the way I agree with your whole post. I strongly support the clubs running the academy.

Oh I get it now. Sorry. I made the mistake of thinking I was debating an adult and not my 5yo son. I am embarrassed because I do this with my son many times a day and I should have recognised the game you were playing. "So you were wrong, Dad, weren't you. There are some times when it's ok to kick a man in the nuts."

You've taken a phrase out of a broader argument, isolated it away from any contextual meaning in that broader argument, made it the central point in that argument, and are now seeking the cheap victory. Congratulations. You are right and I am wrong.

Yes. Of course the Academies might work in a different format. Let's start with the Stalin example. Ban any competing ball sport, indeed any sport at all, and the Academies will no doubt work.

Of course what I meant was the Academies won't work under any other of the formats under consideration, most particularly the format where it is suggested that they be branded "AFL" rather than "Sydney etc" with a pathway to the "AFL" rather than the club.

 

[Suma Magic]

Oh I get it now. Sorry. I made the mistake of thinking I was debating an adult and not my 5yo son. I am embarrassed because I do this with my son many times a day and I should have recognised the game you were playing. "So you were wrong, Dad, weren't you. There are some times when it's ok to kick a man in the nuts."

You've taken a phrase out of a broader argument, isolated it away from any contextual meaning in that broader argument, made it the central point in that argument, and are now seeking the cheap victory. Congratulations. You are right and I am wrong.

Yes. Of course the Academies might work in a different format. Let's start with the Stalin example. Ban any competing ball sport, indeed any sport at all, and the Academies will no doubt work.

Of course what I meant was the Academies won't work under any other of the formats under consideration, most particularly the format where it is suggested that they be branded "AFL" rather than "Sydney etc" with a pathway to the "AFL" rather than the club.

I agree that I don't think that the afl branded approach would work. Other approaches - I think they definitely could. If your opinion is different, that's fine, bit just remember it's only an opinion.

No need to accuse me of being juvenile though: you made a claim and I questioned you about it. It was a claim in its own right and it required justification that wasn't there.

I questioned you because all too often on here Academy supporters will say the same thing. They will say "you can't make any changes as it will fail" and they genuinely believe they are stating the truth, as opposed to an opinion - and they seldom back it up with an explanation.

 

[Colonial]

I questioned you because all too often on here Academy supporters will say the same thing. They will say "you can't make any changes as it will fail" and they genuinely believe they are stating the truth, as opposed to an opinion - and they seldom back it up with an explanation.

As apposed to those against academies?

[emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[Suma Magic]

As apposed to those against academies?

[emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

They are guilty too. But usually in reference to other sub-issues.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I agree that I don't think that the afl branded approach would work. Other approaches - I think they definitely could. If your opinion is different, that's fine, bit just remember it's only an opinion.

No need to accuse me of being juvenile though: you made a claim and I questioned you about it. It was a claim in its own right and it required justification that wasn't there.

I questioned you because all too often on here Academy supporters will say the same thing. They will say "you can't make any changes as it will fail" and they genuinely believe they are stating the truth, as opposed to an opinion - and they seldom back it up with an explanation.

OK, well I'll do you the courtesy of explaining why, particularly Swans supporters, are of a particular view not to change things. And it's got very little to do with Heeney and Mills.

As it stands, the Swans are a good side. Perhaps even a "destination club". That's great whilst things are going well. But a quick look north at Brisbane will tell you things don't necessarily continue to go well. And when things don't go well, young players begin to miss their friends and family. Suddenly, the excitement of living away from home in this "great cultural environment", is very isolated. There are few "non football friends" to be around and the support of fans doesn't exist to the same extent. Brisbane is the very example of why the Academies must succeed.

Now as an old South supporter I've seen various "solutions" come and go. The Edelsten fanfare, the scholarships, you name it. 30 years. The Academies is the first that appears to have had the effect of creating organic growth in the participation in and support of Australian football in the Northern states. This organic support is something the Southern states take for granted. It exists and has existed since the early part of last century and will never die.

 

[Suma Magic]

OK, well I'll do you the courtesy of explaining why, particularly Swans supporters, are of a particular view not to change things. And it's got very little to do with Heeney and Mills.

As it stands, the Swans are a good side. Perhaps even a "destination club". That's great whilst things are going well. But a quick look north at Brisbane will tell you things don't necessarily continue to go well. And when things don't go well, young players begin to miss their friends and family. Suddenly, the excitement of living away from home in this "great cultural environment", is very isolated. There are few "non football friends" to be around and the support of fans doesn't exist to the same extent. Brisbane is the very example of why the Academies must succeed.

Now as an old South supporter I've seen various "solutions" come and go. The Edelsten fanfare, the scholarships, you name it. 30 years. The Academies is the first that appears to have had the effect of creating organic growth in the participation in and support of Australian football in the Northern states. This organic support is something the Southern states take for granted. It exists and has existed since the early part of last century and will never die.

I agree that the benefits are great and that things are working from a growth perspective.

But that's only half the deal. The other half is making sure that the growth/equity trade-off is suitable.

You and others think the current approach is a good balance.

I think the current approach risks losing the support from a critical mass of key stakeholders who don't feel that the draft day benefits enjoyed by academy clubs are necessary or equitable. As we have seen with many policies, sometimes a small adjustment is preferential to steadfast refusal to change - as this can often lead to more drastic changes down there track.

I personally think a small tweak is needed to ensure that the necessary support for the academies remains in the medium term, whilst retaining the key elements that are providing the growth.

I've made it clear what I think that tweak should be:
- keep the academies run by the clubs and branded by the clubs. This is essential.
- remove or significantly reduce the discounts. This won't remove priority access it will just reduce the benefit on draft day of accessing local talent.
- provide afl funding to ensure investment remains. Clubs could still invest their own funds on top of this.

I think the same changes to the discounts would have to occur for f/S and for the new indigenous/multicultural academies.

I'm happy to agree to disagree about whether this approach would provide a better balance of growth/fairness in the long/medium term.

 

[Furn2]

I still don't see why all clubs cant have academies in NSW and QLD or other areas that don't traditionally produce players ?

Give the northern clubs access to kids actually from Sydney, Bris and GC and let the other clubs set up in other areas.

If a kid is from Cairns there's no go home factor, he's not going to not play footy because he might have to move if he gets drafted. He's moving regardless playing any sport.

 

[coniglio_number1]

I still don't see why all clubs cant have academies in NSW and QLD or other areas that don't traditionally produce players ?

Give the northern clubs access to kids actually from Sydney, Bris and GC and let the other clubs set up in other areas.

If a kid is from Cairns there's no go home factor, he's not going to not play footy because he might have to move if he gets drafted. He's moving regardless playing any sport.

Doesn't your club have access to the NT. It's a traditional afl heartland that's produced champions like Rioli

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I still don't see why all clubs cant have academies in NSW and QLD or other areas that don't traditionally produce players ?

Give the northern clubs access to kids actually from Sydney, Bris and GC and let the other clubs set up in other areas.

If a kid is from Cairns there's no go home factor, he's not going to not play footy because he might have to move if he gets drafted. He's moving regardless playing any sport.

Go home factor occurs only when there's a home to go to that compares favourably with the place you're at which is making you miserable.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I agree that the benefits are great and that things are working from a growth perspective.

But that's only half the deal. The other half is making sure that the growth/equity trade-off is suitable.

You and others think the current approach is a good balance.

I think the current approach risks losing the support from a critical mass of key stakeholders who don't feel that the draft day benefits enjoyed by academy clubs are necessary or equitable. As we have seen with many policies, sometimes a small adjustment is preferential to steadfast refusal to change - as this can often lead to more drastic changes down there track.

I personally think a small tweak is needed to ensure that the necessary support for the academies remains in the medium term, whilst retaining the key elements that are providing the growth.

I've made it clear what I think that tweak should be:
- keep the academies run by the clubs and branded by the clubs. This is essential.
- remove or significantly reduce the discounts. This won't remove priority access it will just reduce the benefit on draft day of accessing local talent.
- provide afl funding to ensure investment remains. Clubs could still invest their own funds on top of this.

I think the same changes to the discounts would have to occur for f/S and for the new indigenous/multicultural academies.

I'm happy to agree to disagree about whether this approach would provide a better balance of growth/fairness in the long/medium term.

They tweaked it last year. You can't wait a couple of years before tweaking it again? I notice they have to a large extent fixed a number of the fixturing issues although it took a pretty brutal effort from Footscray to finally achieve this.

Ultimately, there should be no discounts, I agree. But when assessing when it is time to remove the discounts they should be looking less at the Sydney/GWS situation and more so at the Brisbane/Gold Coast situation.

I've said before that the Riverina situation should be assessed on numbers being drafted from that area both before and since the GWS Academy. If there has been a substantial increase, then GWS should keep that area (as much as that shits me being an old Blood). If not, then it's a piss take.

If I was Gillon, I'd actually make a change the other way. I'd say to the 2 Queensland clubs that the old rules apply to their Academies. For 5 years. So if a player is bid on, they must take that player with their next pick. But seriously, the 20% discount is way overstated as an advantage. It's a small recognition that the club has invested in the player. I'd like to think that if they took away the discount, my club would still invest in local talent. In fact I'm certain they would. They must.

And I think that the model should be replicated Australia-wide, although I think some of the Victorian clubs simply don't have the maturity to manage such a program effectively so the TAC Cup system is probably best for the moment. But an ideal world to my mind would have a system down to Under 17s with a rule preventing senior contracts before age 20 or 21, with a degree or a trade as a prerequisite.

 

[Fatcat08]

I said that port and crows put a tonne of money into the sanfl which went through the sanfl and all its junior clubs , as well as all the work they do with local football clubs. They do this knowing they don't get first dibs on the players produced.

Hence why it is a valid counterpoint to the repetitive cries of why would or should expan teams put effort or money into local clubs when they don't get first access to players.

How do I have to repeat this several times?

I don't want to argue about the academies here but I do want to highlight the above.

Lets not confuse the Crows and Port giving the SANFL money out of the goodness of the heart to develop talent vs distributing funds to their owners. I wonder how much they will distribute each year at the end of their 5 year license purchase payback periods.

As for work with local football clubs, all clubs do that now and previously, even the current northern state clubs

 

[Suma Magic]

They tweaked it last year. You can't wait a couple of years before tweaking it again? I notice they have to a large extent fixed a number of the fixturing issues although it took a pretty brutal effort from Footscray to finally achieve this.

Ultimately, there should be no discounts, I agree. But when assessing when it is time to remove the discounts they should be looking less at the Sydney/GWS situation and more so at the Brisbane/Gold Coast situation.

I've said before that the Riverina situation should be assessed on numbers being drafted from that area both before and since the GWS Academy. If there has been a substantial increase, then GWS should keep that area (as much as that shits me being an old Blood). If not, then it's a piss take.

If I was Gillon, I'd actually make a change the other way. I'd say to the 2 Queensland clubs that the old rules apply to their Academies. For 5 years. So if a player is bid on, they must take that player with their next pick. But seriously, the 20% discount is way overstated as an advantage. It's a small recognition that the club has invested in the player. I'd like to think that if they took away the discount, my club would still invest in local talent. In fact I'm certain they would. They must.

And I think that the model should be replicated Australia-wide, although I think some of the Victorian clubs simply don't have the maturity to manage such a program effectively so the TAC Cup system is probably best for the moment. But an ideal world to my mind would have a system down to Under 17s with a rule preventing senior contracts before age 20 or 21, with a degree or a trade as a prerequisite.

I agree with more than I disagree with here. Good post.

 

[footyfan1978]

I agree with more than I disagree with here. Good post.

I disagree with your level of agreement.

 

[go_the_dockers]

I don't want to argue about the academies here but I do want to highlight the above.

Lets not confuse the Crows and Port giving the SANFL money out of the goodness of the heart to develop talent vs distributing funds to their owners. I wonder how much they will distribute each year at the end of their 5 year license purchase payback periods.

As for work with local football clubs, all clubs do that now and previously, even the current northern state clubs

Sa had 3 people drafted. Talk about a state that needs an academy or at least some money put into Junior football.

NSW had 8.

Does anyone care about juniors in SA. Can we have an academy as well.

 

[Fatcat08]

Sa had 3 people drafted. Talk about a state that needs an academy or at least some money put into Junior football.

NSW had 8.

Does anyone care about juniors in SA. Can we have an academy as well.

Yes cause that reply had nothing to do with my post. Bravo

 

[Colonial]

Sa had 3 people drafted. Talk about a state that needs an academy or at least some money put into Junior football.

NSW had 8.

Does anyone care about juniors in SA. Can we have an academy as well.

Yep. 100% agree. Academies in WA for WA clubs. SA as well.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[dlanod]

Sa had 3 people drafted. Talk about a state that needs an academy or at least some money put into Junior football.

NSW had 8.

Does anyone care about juniors in SA. Can we have an academy as well.

There was a poster in this forum explaining how SANFL doesn't and shouldn't care about getting kids drafted to the AFL, as it was "rightly" focusing on developing them to stay in their local comp.

If that's a common attitude within the state hierarchy, I don't think academies are going to help because they're going to be undermined by the state league (unlike NSW and Qld, where the AFL is basically the state leagues).

 

[Bokonon_]

I disagree with your level of agreement.

I find your disagreement somewhat agreeable

 

[doona]

There was a poster in this forum explaining how SANFL doesn't and shouldn't care about getting kids drafted to the AFL, as it was "rightly" focusing on developing them to stay in their local comp.

If that's a common attitude within the state hierarchy, I don't think academies are going to help because they're going to be undermined by the state league (unlike NSW and Qld, where the AFL is basically the state leagues).

Acadamies in South Australia would help actually, because if the AFL clubs were in control (Port Adelaide & Adelaide) it would remove the control of junior football from the state hierarchy and place it squarely in the hands of the AFL clubs. Where the clubs would have a vested interest in getting the players into the AFL. You would need a re-architecture though of Junior football though as the clubs would want to be in control of coaching and have influence on the academy products career trajectory.

 

[Bokonon_]

There was a poster in this forum explaining how SANFL doesn't and shouldn't care about getting kids drafted to the AFL, as it was "rightly" focusing on developing them to stay in their local comp.

If that's a common attitude within the state hierarchy, I don't think academies are going to help because they're going to be undermined by the state league (unlike NSW and Qld, where the AFL is basically the state leagues).

Naah
How you going to convince a talented youngster to aim at not much money and very little attention? I get the SANFL matters in the sheme of things. The argument about the SANFL not giving up talent to the AFL was lost long before the Crows were born.
Fair point about the SANFL and the AFL clubs not being in synch if that's what your saying.
If it takes academies with an AFL focus as independent entities so be it.

 

[dlanod]

Naah
How you going to convince a talented youngster to aim at not much money and very little attention? I get the SANFL matters in the sheme of things. The argument about the SANFL not giving up talent to the AFL was lost long before the Crows were born.
Fair point about the SANFL and the AFL clubs not being in synch if that's what your saying.
If it takes academies with an AFL focus as independent entities so be it.

I don't think his point was about the youngsters not wanting to play in the AFL. It's about not effectively developing their talent in such a way as to maximize their chances of being drafted, instead using them to maximize their SANFL's clubs' results and future. Playing what might be a promising midfield talent as a small forward, for instance, because of the club's needs.

 

[Bokonon_]

I don't think his point was about the youngsters not wanting to play in the AFL. It's about not effectively developing their talent in such a way as to maximize their chances of being drafted, instead using them to maximize their SANFL's clubs' results and future. Playing what might be a promising midfield talent as a small forward, for instance, because of the club's needs.

Fair enough
I think the disunity is the real problem though. I spent a lot of time and have had an interest in the SANFL for most of that. I hope the locals wont be too offended when I say that they remind me of Scottish history. Unable to unite and fight the common enemy.
To your point. I would have thought with Crows and Port reserves that wouldn't be the case. Can see it would be an issue with players making their way through the other SANFL clubs.
Would be similar in the other tier two comps. The SANFL does have an insular nature that might be unique though.