If there is one thing the AFL does better than any other sport in the world, it is making up rules on the spot to solve a short term problem, which then require a ridiculously elaborate fix soon after.
Take the Academies for the northern clubs, or more accurately, the Swans Academy. When the AFL gave Sydney the Academy rights is could hardly have foreseen that the Swans would proceed to get a series of top three ranked players from it – Isaac Heeney last year, Callum Mills this year – and only have to give up picks closer to twenty than one.
Add to that the fact that the genetic lottery has been blessing the Swans of late – Tom Mitchell a few years ago (again snared well below market value), Josh Dunkley a possibility this year – and the club that’s already annoyed the rest of the league by managing to recruit the boom free agent year after year is now corralling the best young talent for next to nothing as well.
So what is the AFL to do? The introduction of free agency, something the league fought tooth and nail against, means that the draft is permanently compromised by compensation picks. In what universe was James Frawley ever worth pick 3 for example?
The AFL aims to do what it always does – make up yet another rule to try and fix the unintended consequences of the last rule it made up. And you can be sure this one will, well, you get the idea.
According to The Age, this is how the AFL intends to solve the Academy and father/son issue:
Under the plan, the league would establish a draft value index that assigns a points value for each selection. These points are calculated using statistical analysis of player salaries from 2000 to 2014, which the league says shows the relative market value of players at each draft.
The No.1 pick is rated at 3000 points, with the last pick — No.74 — not having a score. Clubs also must determine whether a 25 per cent discount is applied to both father-son and academy selections, or a 15 per cent discount applied to father-son selections and 25 per cent to academy selections.
The present bidding system is retained, with clubs bidding or nominating for father-son or academy picks. But rather than a rival club securing the player only with its next available pick, which drew criticism last year, the nominating club must use one or more subsequent picks using the value of the points rating.
For instance, Melbourne last year bid its first pick, No.2 overall, for promising Swans’ academy midfielder Isaac Heeney, rated a top-three selection by club recruiters. This meant the Swans had to use their first pick, but that was a relatively low 18th pick overall because of where the Swans finished on the ladder. Heeney’s selection was dubbed a “steal” by rival clubs.
Under the proposal, with a 25 per cent discount applied as Heeney is an academy player, the Swans would now owe 1888 points (pick two in the draft is rated at 2517 points) and would have to use their first, second (owing 903 points) and third (owing 420 points) round selections. But they would not entirely lose these second and third-round selections – they would shift to the end of the draft.
If a team has leftover points or is in debt, this would carry over to the next year.
Marry to this to the suggestion that clubs will be given the right to trade future draft picks and things just become chaotic verging on unmanageable. At the very least, nobody outside of the clubs and the deep footy nerds will really understand what is going on. And even then, clubs will inevitably stuff up simply because the system is so idiotically complex. Which is an achievement given the draft is based on a very simple principle – the worst team gets the best pick.
There are those who will point to US systems where future pick trading and the like works well. But the AFL is not the NBA or the NFL. It is its own unique competition with its own unique quirks and pressures.
How will this reform play out if and when it is passed? I honestly don’t know. Nobody does. Including the AFL, which is the most worrying element of all. But one thing we can be sure of is that the league will be back to “fix” it again sooner rather than later.
