Game Day 2023 AFL DRAFT

[119others]

I’ve heard Leake Wilson Edwards and Goad were all on our list

Most likely preference order was Leake Edwards Wilson Goad Ryan from what I’ve heard so we’d be pretty happy to be able to get Edwards

ok thanks Jeff, was that thru publicly available articles or sourced through 'alternative sources'? Sounds like Leake, Edwards or Wilson at 10 were most likely then but Curtin and Edwards in a much better than hoped for pick 1/2 punch. Do you have any thoughts on Ryan? Seen anything of him? Bicks sounded a fan based on my perception of his comments

 

[Vader]

Its crazy when you think about it as it could be pick 1..we were rumored to have knocked it back as well

For the same reason as GWS knocked them back - because what they were asking in return would have effectively put us out of the draft. More to the point, we would have been looking at making our remaining picks in the Port Adelaide region of the draft. That was unacceptable, and both Adelaide & GWS knocked them back as a result.

 

[Cap]

I have seen a fair bit of banter, or like Victorians complaining about the GC academies

Any draft watchers have problems with it outside the normal AFL inconsistency?

 

[DangerSloane]

I cant believe people here are genuinely arguing that it was a mistake keeping Sloane for one more year vs a pick in the 50s.

Even if he's not best 22, having Rory as a back-up will be far better than the 5% chance that a pick in the 50s turns into a good player.

Thats before you bring in the marketing stuff and the fact that he's a club legend. Hes still a better footballer than 15 guys on our list.

 

[119others]

Didn't they say that a major factor in why he was signed was because of the leadership he brings and the fact they feel that still has genuine value for the overall development at the club?

yes they did. Specifically Dawson was leaning on Sloane from a leadership and captaincy perspective which Dawson was finding challenging according to Silvers.

Its not hard to believe Dawson had such a great year partly BECAUSE Sloane was there supporting him. But that's glass half full, rather than the opposite, and we will never know until Dawson is asked this specifically.

If the Crows are to bank as many wins in the short term - 2024 - it will be more a function of Sloane being on the list than a pick 60 ish we would have taken as a 1% chance of paying off - certainly in the short term. We couldnt afford to give up any further 2024 draft collateral after already giving up (as we should have) our second rounder to get Curtin. We aint getting another pick before 40 without giving up a second rounder or a couple of thirds - both needed to match for Welsh.

Not sure some understand we already have basically the youngest list and team - its probably actually too young to contend - and they are wanting to get rid of one of our most experienced and best leaders at the expense of a highly speculative pick in the 60's.

 

[Crow till I die]

For the same reason as GWS knocked them back - because what they were asking in return would have effectively put us out of the draft. More to the point, we would have been looking at making our remaining picks in the Port Adelaide region of the draft. That was unacceptable, and both Adelaide & GWS knocked them back as a result.

Where has that been reported? - My understanding the swap was for pick 7

 

[119others]

For the same reason as GWS knocked them back - because what they were asking in return would have effectively put us out of the draft. More to the point, we would have been looking at making our remaining picks in the Port Adelaide region of the draft. That was unacceptable, and both Adelaide & GWS knocked them back as a result.

has it been reliably reported on what Weagles were wanting to give up F1 - besides Curtin? I ASSUME they wanted more (perhaps our pick 14 for starters, even a F1 of ours - but all guess work).

Are we sure it just wasnt a Curtin for Weagles F1 in the end?

 

[119others]

I have seen a fair bit of banter, or like Victorians complaining about the GC academies

Any draft watchers have problems with it outside the normal AFL inconsistency?

News article today in Herald Sun saying Vic clubs were contemplating making a protest about the ridiculously generous GCS concessions and NOT BIDDING on any of the 4 first rounders. It is a complete joke. They will become a super team with another draft or 2 like that. And this time the lads do NOT want to leave GC. They are already stacked with talent in the (underperforming) squad and now adding 4 A graders inc 2 top 10 picks. This $hit needs to be stopped now otherwise they will be beating us in big finals later this decade bsaed on their draft concessions. 20% discount on ALL players in MASSIVE zones. Article says various teams like Crows and Cats have only ever had 2 academy players (I assume Borlase and Newchurch) and currently can only match after pick 40. Northern Academies get to match ALL of them (like Walters at pick 3), with a 20% discount on MASSIVE zones.

Expect big uprising to occur on this issue over coming mths as cant be allowed to continue

 

[119others]

further to my above post

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-draft-2023-clubs-considered-protest-against-leagues-broken-academy-system/news-story/c3153fc01a7b98c085febacb5e96710d

AFL Draft 2023: Clubs considered protest against league’s ‘broken’ academy system​

More than half of the AFL’s clubs considered a draft protest as pressure builds on the league to review its controversial academy system.

Clubs discussed not bidding on any of Gold Coast’s four academy stars in Monday night’s national draft as part of a protest against the league’s “broken” academy system.
Recruiting officials from Victorian clubs spoke about letting the Suns’ guns slide through to the late part of the draft as a way to thumb their noses at the academy concessions to northern clubs and rail against the top-40 cap on Victorian clubs.
OPINION: WHY AFL ACADEMY CRITICS HAVE IT SO WRONG
But the plot fell over as North Melbourne made clear it would bid on powerhouse forward Jed Walter at pick three after receiving a generous concession package from the AFL in September.
Tensions about the academy system – including the four northern academies and 14 next generation academies – has reached fever pitch in recent days as clubs vented their various frustrations.

Jed Walter gets his jumper from Damien Hardwick. Picture: Dylan Burns/AFL Photos via Getty Images
In particular, West Coast is furious it missed out on next generation academy product Lance Collard due to the cap restricting 14 clubs — outside of Queensland and New South Wales — from taking players inside the first 40 picks.
The Eagles have helped develop Collard but sat back with their hands tied as St Kilda swooped on the skilful forward at pick 28.
Essendon pinched defender Luamon Lual (Western Bulldogs academy), Collingwood took backman Tew Jiath (Hawthorn) and Geelong nabbed ruckman Mitch Edwards (Fremantle), inside the first 40 picks, making “a mockery” of the NGA system, according to one list boss.
But the four northern clubs have free reign on their local talent as Gold Coast swooped on four jets inside the first 25 picks — Walter, ruckman Ethan Read, livewire Jake Rogers and ballwinner Will Graham — leaving rebuilding West Coast in their wake.
The Eagles weren’t able to match St Kilda’s Lance Collard selection. Picture: Sarah Reed/AFL Photos via Getty Images
Club officials told the Herald Sun they spoke about not bidding on the four prodigious Gold Coast academy talents as part of a stand against it, but the idea did not receive full support.
Victorian clubs have lobbied the AFL to drop the cap on next generation academies to the first-round, meaning they have guaranteed access to NGA players outside the top-20.
The cap does not apply to the four northern states clubs — Gold Coast, Brisbane, GWS Giants and Sydney Swans.
But the 14 other clubs have pleaded with the AFL to make changes to the system to provide greater incentive and reward for the clubs south and west of the Murray River.
West Coast list chief Rohan O’Brien said the AFL had to act.
“It is really frustrating when you have done a lot of work with those (NGA) players (who are drafted elsewhere),” O’Brien said.
“It is time for a real discussion around what it might look like in the future.”

How should the AFL's NGA draft rule work?​

No restriction to match bids
Can't match a bid inside top-20
Can't match a bid inside top-40 (current rule)
Cast your vote

But Brisbane chairman Andrew Wellington responded to the “angst” on Wednesday, saying any attempt from the AFL to wind back the northern clubs’ academies would be an error.
The Northern clubs can draft local players from their own academy at a 20 per cent discount.
But the 14 other clubs want that discount to be removed so they pay a fairer price for top talent.
Wellington urged the AFL to ignore the complaints from Victorian clubs.
“Academies grow the game in non-traditional AFL states which makes the code stronger for everyone,” Wellington said.
“They address a disadvantage which is real and based on results there’s no evidence they have created 4 northern super clubs at the expense of other clubs.
“To unwind a strategy each time you get evidence it might be working appropriately would be a serious miscalculation.”
There is also a call to reassess the next generation academy zone boundaries for Victorian clubs due to some “barren catchment areas”.
Geelong, Adelaide, Carlton and Melbourne have only taken two players each from their NGA’s over the past eight years.

​

“There’s different zones are stronger than others and right at the moment if there was a way to even that up a bit, I think that would be good,” legendary Geelong recruiter Stephen Wells said.
Collingwood recruiting chief Derek Hine said he had to keep his thoughts to himself.
“I’m probably not the best one to ask about that I can tell you, I’ll get myself in trouble,” Hine said.

 

[Vader]

Where has that been reported? - My understanding the swap was for pick 7

They give us their F1 (potentially pick #1), and we give them pick #8 ... and? It's the rest of the equation which hasn't been reported, other than to say that it's the reason why GWS knocked them back, and almost certainly the reason why Adelaide did too.

My guess, and it's only a guess, is that they would have been asking for both pick #7 and pick #16, leaving us with #28 (as it became) as our only pick inside the first 3 rounds. That was never going to be acceptable.

 

[Vader]

has it been reliably reported on what Weagles were wanting to give up F1 - besides Curtin? I ASSUME they wanted more (perhaps our pick 14 for starters, even a F1 of ours - but all guess work).

Are we sure it just wasnt a Curtin for Weagles F1 in the end?

Absolutely not a straight swap of F1 for pick #8.

 

[Scorpus]

I have seen a fair bit of banter, or like Victorians complaining about the GC academies

Any draft watchers have problems with it outside the normal AFL inconsistency?

It's funny hearing Victorians sook about the Gold Coast Academy when:

Steven May left to Melbourne
Tom Lynch left as a free agent for Richmond
Dion Prestia left to Richmond
Josh Caddy left to Geelong
Jaeger O'Meara left to Hawthorn
Jack Martin left to Carlton for free after demanding a trade
Adam Saad left to Essendon
Jack Scrimshaw left to Hawthorn for peanuts

I mean give me a ****ing break. Gold Coast lost a heap of players they wanted to keep for unders to Victorian teams because they don't have a base of home talent

That's not to mention the constant speculation around players like Ben King, and losing several other players back to their home state (eg. Rankine)

The way Gold Coast can access Academy players with junk picks is dumb, but what has the AFL done to ensure teams like Gold Coast can retain Victorian players they draft? Oh that's right, jack shit

 

[119others]

Absolutely not a straight swap of F1 for pick #8.

you are probably right but that's your guestimate only - correct?

 

[119others]

It's funny hearing Victorians sook about the Gold Coast Academy when:

Steven May left to Melbourne
Tom Lynch left as a free agent for Richmond
Dion Prestia left to Richmond
Josh Caddy left to Geelong
Jaeger O'Meara left to Hawthorn
Jack Martin left to Carlton for free after demanding a trade
Adam Saad left to Essendon
Jack Scrimshaw left to Hawthorn for peanuts

I mean give me a ******* break. Gold Coast lost a heap of players they wanted to keep for unders to Victorian teams because they don't have a base of home talent

That's not to mention the constant speculation around players like Ben King, and losing several other players back to their home state (eg. Rankine)

The way Gold Coast can access Academy players with junk picks is dumb, but what has the AFL done to ensure teams like Gold Coast can retain Victorian players they draft? Oh that's right, jack s**t

but its gone from one extreme to the other. the real benefit of the Northern Academies will be felt over the next decade when they steamroll traditional clubs like ours in big finals with these bargain basement academy players starring

My view:

- Reduce discount from 20% to between 5-10% (perhaps this is rolled out league wide)

- Reduce some of their massive zones (GC has chunks of NT also, a massive breeding group of talent). Crows have had 2 marginal players in 8 years playing in total a handful of games. GCS get 4 first rounders, inc 2 top 10 picks, this year alone. Surely this is way out of balance?

- Maximum 2 players per year from northern academies per club

This will offer strong incentive to develop local talent but not the absolute free hit they currently have as will balance things up

 

[Scorpus]

but its gone from one extreme to the other. the real benefit of the Northern Academies will be felt over the next decade when they steamroll traditional clubs like ours in big finals with these bargain basement academy players starring

My view:

- Reduce discount from 20% to between 5-10% (perhaps this is rolled out league wide)

- Reduce some of their massive zones (GC has chunks of NT also, a massive breeding group of talent). Crows have had 2 marginal players in 8 years playing in total a handful of games. GCS get 4 first rounders, inc 2 top 10 picks, this year alone. Surely this is way out of balance?

- Maximum 2 players per year from northern academies per club

This will offer strong incentive to develop local talent but not the absolute free hit they currently have as will balance things up

From one extreme to the other?

Gold Coast, GWS, Brisbane and Sydney have combined for zero flags since the Academies got serious around 2014 with the drafting of Heeney to Sydney, Steele to GWS and Andrews to Brisbane

Sydney have played in two Grand Finals, losing to Victorian sides Geelong and Western Bulldogs
GWS have played in a grand final, losing to Victorian side Richmond
Brisbane have played in a grand final, losing to Victorian side Collingwood

There is no evidence to suggest the deck is stacked in the favor of those northern teams because they get Academy access. Gold Coast has literally never even played a final.

Where is the "lets change the rules" outcry when a player like Bailey Smith refuses to be drafted outside of Victoria, or when Tanner Bruhn famously sooks on draft night and gets traded back to Victoria for peanuts after 2 years?

 

[Vader]

you are probably right but that's your guestimate only - correct?

It's the reason GWS have given for refusing it. Stands to reason that the AFC refused for the same reason.

 

[Crow till I die]

It's the reason GWS have given for refusing it. Stands to reason that the AFC refused for the same reason.

Where was that reported?

 

[119others]

From one extreme to the other?

Gold Coast, GWS, Brisbane and Sydney have combined for zero flags since the Academies got serious around 2014 with the drafting of Heeney to Sydney, Steele to GWS and Andrews to Brisbane

Sydney have played in two Grand Finals, losing to Victorian sides Geelong and Western Bulldogs
GWS have played in a grand final, losing to Victorian side Richmond
Brisbane have played in a grand final, losing to Victorian side Collingwood

There is no evidence to suggest the deck is stacked in the favor of those northern teams because they get Academy access. Gold Coast has literally never even played a final.

Where is the "lets change the rules" outcry when a player like Bailey Smith refuses to be drafted outside of Victoria, or when Tanner Bruhn famously sooks on draft night and gets traded back to Victoria for peanuts after 2 years?

thats why i said we havent seen the real impact yet. eg Have we ever seen one club get four first rounders previously? I dont believe so and the impact wont be fully felt for another 3-4 years plus. Do nothing over coming years its then too late to claw back. Clearly there is a delayed response between large numbers of highly rated academy players being drafted and the impact out on the footy field

Swans in recent years after the earlier Mills and Heeney have Blakey, Campbell, Gulden. Lions and Giants also various highly rated youngsters through academies but make the finals almost every year. Ditto Lions the last half a decade. GWS are perennial over-achievers. And the weakest link Suns are coming with a rush

We havent yet seem the full impact but what is clear is there is an increasing amount of highly rated youngsters being taken by northern academies. This year Lions lost the GF by a kick. Giants lost the prelim by a point. And Suns are about to become a super squad.

Watch this play out over coming mths but I have no doubt these generous concessions will get curtailed but lets wait and see. Not sure how my proposed watered down concessions dont offer a fairer and more balanced situation for all teams


- Reduce discount from 20% to between 5-10% (perhaps this is rolled out league wide)

- Reduce some of their massive zones (GC has chunks of NT also, a massive breeding group of talent). Crows have had 2 marginal players in 8 years playing in total a handful of games. GCS get 4 first rounders, inc 2 top 10 picks, this year alone. Surely this is way out of balance?

- Maximum 2 players per year from northern academies per club

 

[Carn The Texan]

- Reduce some of their massive zones (GC has chunks of NT also, a massive breeding group of talent). Crows have had 2 marginal players in 8 years playing in total a handful of games. GCS get 4 first rounders, inc 2 top 10 picks, this year alone. Surely this is way out of balance?

The lack of balance is completely by design.

- Maximum 2 players per year from northern academies per club

This will offer strong incentive to develop local talent but not the absolute free hit they currently have as will balance things up

Don't mind this at all. To nitpick, should really say maximum two academy picks per club per year - can then pick as many others as they want within normal rules.

 

[Crow till I die]

With the concessions, its looking like the back half of this decade will have North and GC right up near the top competing for the premierships. I think we are doing things right and could join them as our list is looking in very good shape and we know we will be trying to improve it with trade ins. It would be a hard pill to swallow if we ended up assembling one of our best ever squads without any assistance and not win a flag due to the other 2 sides having even more top end talent via concessions. It would be very bad timing for us.

 

[119others]

The lack of balance is completely by design.


Don't mind this at all. To nitpick, should really say maximum two academy picks per club per year - can then pick as many others as they want within normal rules.

yes agreed and even more the wording could be 2 academy kids at discounted levels (ie 20% discount and no barriers to matching ANY bid) to 2 Academy players under concessional rules and as many other academy players as they want under normal draft conditions (ie like any draft pick for any other team)

 

[119others]

With the concessions, its looking like the back half of this decade will have North and GC right up near the top competing for the premierships. I think we are doing things right and could join them as our list is looking in very good shape and we know we will be trying to improve it with trade ins. It would be a hard pill to swallow if we ended up assembling one of our best ever squads without any assistance and not win a flag due to the other 2 sides having even more top end talent via concessions. It would be very bad timing for us.

but its on the cards....

 

[Vader]

My suggestion...

• Maximum of 2 academy picks per year (northern or otherwise).
• Picks used for matching bids must include at least one pick from the same round as the bid, or the next round (i.e. matching a 1st round bid requires using a 1st or 2nd round pick - cannot be matched solely with 3rd/4th round picks).
• Northern Academy matches can be made from pick #1, Academy matches for other clubs from pick #20.

 

[Vader]

yes agreed and even more the wording could be 2 academy kids at discounted levels (ie 20% discount and no barriers to matching ANY bid) to 2 Academy players under concessional rules and as many other academy players as they want under normal draft conditions (ie like any draft pick for any other team)

I like that... 20% off for the first 2, then full price for any others.

 

[dogs105]

My suggestion...

• Maximum of 2 academy picks per year (northern or otherwise).
• Picks used for matching bids must include at least one pick from the same round as the bid, or the next round (i.e. matching a 1st round bid requires using a 1st or 2nd round pick - cannot be matched solely with 3rd/4th round picks).
• Northern Academy matches can be made from pick #1, Academy matches for other clubs from pick #20.

I think matching with no discount helps. Just being able to pick them is enough of an advantage.