News AFL to overhaul the draft, discuss changes to Academy and FS bid matching

[giantroo]

 

[Andre the Giant]

sounds like they did you a favor....

They did but it’s hardly the point. If Eddie McGuire and the usual media people were not claiming the sky was falling these things could have been reviewed and dealt with appropriately. The Marshall thing was one of the biggest FIFA style rorts of all time.

I think the AFL can introduce some assistance for cost of living which is a real issue, I think Academies are important but perhaps just allow clubs to pre-list one player per year and let the others flow through the draft and be spread amongst the comp.

Same with father son, pre-list one and let the other if there are more than one be naturally drafted. If there is a F/S and Next Gen make the club choose one and let the others go through.

Basically remove as much compromise as possible and allow the draft to do what it’s supposed to do.

 

[Andre the Giant]

Sure but (correct me if I’m wrong) you hadn’t invested any draft capital that was then worthless when they made those changes. All you lost was the access to those players

We invested in the player and in developing him and our other plans for list build were compromised. The point is they made these changes mid season and we were not given the chance to plan for them.

Two wrongs don’t make a right but the loud protesting is funny as nobody said boo when those changes occurred.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Just a thought. I'm all for a recalibration of the points value index with higher picks going up in value and lower picks going down (not fair to do it this year but enough has been said on that).

However, the proposal seems to be for picks beyond 40 to have no value. I wonder how this would work for bids made close to or after that range? If a player gets bid on at pick 39 and a clubs next pick is 41, they theoretically can't pay for that player unless they go into deficit the following year as pick 39 will have a value attached and 41 none. Doesn't make sense. What if a player gets bid on at 41 and the clubs next pick is 46? Neither have value attached to them.

The only way it would work is if after a certain pick, say pick 20, the points value index no longer applies, and clubs just have to use their next pick. In which case the new system almost becomes a hybrid of current and old system. Think that's needlessly complicated but it could work.

I'm sure the AFL hierarchy have considered this although my confidence in them is at an all-time low. Seems easier to me to just keep points values up to pick 60 and just scale them more reflectively.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Where were the howls when Todd Marshall was ruled ineligible for the Giants Academy because of an alleged “registration error”?? Silent movie again…

They removed Marshall because the Giants tried to add him into the Academy in his draft year. The Giants hadn't lost out on anything with Marshall.

And the Giants lost out on being able to claim they were "developing" players who were a part of the TAC Cup system for the Murray Bushrangers.

 

[tiger_tough]

They removed Marshall because the Giants tried to add him into the Academy in his draft year. The Giants hadn't lost out on anything with Marshall.

And the Giants lost out on being able to claim they were "developing" players who were a part of the TAC Cup system for the Murray Bushrangers.

Seems fair enough.

 

[Sphynx]

They removed Marshall because the Giants tried to add him into the Academy in his draft year. The Giants hadn't lost out on anything with Marshall.

And the Giants lost out on being able to claim they were "developing" players who were a part of the TAC Cup system for the Murray Bushrangers.

It was basically in reaction to the Jacob Hopper recruitment the year before.

He had very little to do with the program, despite being in it for 4 years.

He was developed almost entirely at St Pats Ballarat and the GWV Rebels.


The current issue is the Northern Academy sides now actively scoping and pitching players to school sporting directors for Victoria private school boarding scholarships for their best players, so as they can spend their NAB League eligible years in Melbourne playing NAB League and School Football rather than their own programs.

Should void the eligibility imo.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Latest Getable.





Competitive balance - changes for this year (not official, but they normally have a good idea about what will occur)

Points change this year like a lot have been asking for the last 5 years
Limit picks to number of list spots in draft. (Won't be able to add more picks during the draft like you could previously)
Picks can be traded two years in the future.

 

[Sphynx]

All they need to do is eliminate the discount

That’s it , it’s that easy

What they are about to do is actually perfect.

1. Increase the first round points value by approx 20%.
2. Remove points value for picks 40+

These two changes fix most of the problems. They are then:

3. Reverting NGA bid matching eligibility back to Picks 20+ in lieu of 40+

- No public comment regarding point discount changes, Northern Academy pick thresholds etc.

- Edmund has stated that the AFL's intention is try and make the NGA, Northern, FS process uniform. I don't know how they would exactly do that without creating a threshold of eligibility for FS and Northern Academies.



Now I would have had an issue with the NGA eligibility process, as the entire issue with the draft is the reduced open talent pool. Moving this threshold lower, only makes the open talent pool even less.

However, when looking at it in conjunction with changes 1 and 2, it's impact is severely reduced. To match an NGA bid, because of the 0 points value of picks 40+, you need to use a Pick(s) between 20-40 anyway, it will reduce the ability to stock pile junk pinks. Im pretty comfortable with that.


By increasing the R1 points value and removing the 40+ picks, it renders Brisbane and Gold Coasts normal tactics as fairly redundant.

It will prevent crap like I've posted below occurring seconds into draft night and bulk late seconds and third rounders being used to match a Top 2 pick. (Brisbane aren't the only ones to do it, Im using this as an example).

It will also limit strategies like the Logan McDonald/Braeden Campbell situation. Not only will you not be able to use a heap of junk picks to complete this, the jumped pick basically puts pressure on the points value of the second pick. If you are using 2-3 selections to match, it means in a scenario like McDonald/Campbell, Sydney probably would have had to have 2-3 early second rounders to match Campbell, as well as then taking 2 kids at pick 70 & 71 to comply with selection rules.

So to make this decision, they may have to delist or trade players they don't want to, to simply clear the list space.

The reports of actually enforcing a cap on used draft picks to open list spots is a great move, it will kill most teams in the water circumventing them, this will be the single biggest change imo

IMO - If the bid is not a realistic trade and doesn't pass the sniff test it shouldn't be allowed. No list manager in history trade's picks 2, 41 for 34, 35 , 38, 41

 

[Tedeski]

If clubs are terrible at developing players, whether high end or rookies, then that will stay the same when rules are adjusted.
The Swans for example have 13 rookie drafted players on our list.

8 of them are top 22 senior players.
Rampe, Lloyd, Melican, Papley, Wicks, Cunningham, Fox & a bloke many of you may not know of yet, Amartey.
These blokes have been part of the 22 that are sitting on clear top of the ladder.
They were all there for every other club to take for nothing. But they didn't.

I watched a bloke run around for North the other day. Phillips who was a pick 3 in the 2020 draft & who was used as a tagger on Daicos.
He was subbed off because his coach said he was tired & fresh legs were needed.
Wonderful development right there.

The father son has been a big advantage to the Cats & Pies who can attribute their premierships to that advantage.
Bulldogs the same.
What won't change is the big Vic clubs taking talent from these Northern clubs just when they are about to peak.
Lynch & Prestia to Richmond for example.

But hey, lets even things up except the things that are dressed up as traditional Victorian treasures.

Grand Final at the G. Anzac Day. Dreamtime at the G. Kings Birthday.
Traditions all favouring the big Vic clubs

 

[THE_GUN]

No problem with any changes

Just give the clubs reasonable notice to plan and not pull the rug from under them

Yeah sure my team is Richmond and picks after 40 would lose their value but its only 535 points which is nothing really
49, 58, 68, 72

But just the fairness to the clubs to get sufficient warning

 

[Dogflogger]

will clubs on the lower end of the ladder actually bid on a father son from a top 8 team though?

 

[Purple Suit]

No problem with any changes

Just give the clubs reasonable notice to plan and not pull the rug from under them

Yeah sure my team is Richmond and picks after 40 would lose their value but its only 535 points which is nothing really
49, 58, 68, 72

But just the fairness to the clubs to get sufficient warning

Why do you need time for the new rules to come in when all they are doing is reducing a current advantage? Rules change all the time with the AFL with little warning for issues bigger than one or two team's impacted position, this is no different.

They changes the NGA rules too without warning and they are different for certain clubs. It would be like having no holding the ball for teams wearing white shorts to even up the disadvantages of travel. No doubt, the AFL will be looking to implement that rule change without warning too.

 

[THE_GUN]

Why do you need time for the new rules to come in when all they are doing is reducing a current advantage? Rules change all the time with the AFL with little warning for issues bigger than one or two team's impacted position, this is no different.

They changes the NGA rules too without warning and they are different for certain clubs. It would be like having no holding the ball for teams wearing white shorts to even up the disadvantages of travel. No doubt, the AFL will be looking to implement that rule change without warning too.

Because clubs do planning 12-24 months ahead by trading in and out picks under the current system
I thought that would be an easy thing to understand

 

[Hawker399]

The rort needs fixing. Not the rort needs fixing in 12 months.

 

[Jeremias]

will clubs on the lower end of the ladder actually bid on a father son from a top 8 team though?

Why not?

 

[Bestbird]

Because clubs do planning 12-24 months ahead by trading in and out picks under the current system
I thought that would be an easy thing to understand

Just because clubs do planning 12-24 ahead to rort the current inequitable system doesn't mean you have to wait for a further period of years to fix the problem.

 

[Robroy22]

Can someone (anyone will do) please explain to me how the Father/son rule has advantaged one, two or three of the VFL clubs more than it has all the other VFL clubs (whether they've moved interstate or not)? I get that GC and The Tassie Side won't have been around long enough to breed sufficient stock yet....but all the rest of the clubs have been around long enough.

It's such a random precedent to claim...don't NSW or QLD/SA/WA have children or something?
Sydney has been in the comp over 40 years now (plenty of time to have a few kids I'd have thought) and yet they're carrying on about a few clubs getting lucky with a few father sons???

Did they object to Nick Davis when he "came home"?

 

[giantroo]

Well you have Leo's boy coming through..

 

[giantroo]

ROOS, PORT TO MISS FATHER-SON TALENT
NORTH Melbourne and Port Adelaide will miss out on father-son access to exciting teenage talent Dougie Cochrane who will spearhead South Australia's under-16s campaign starting this week.

Clubs have an eye on the under-16s championships, which began earlier this month, and a number of potential father-sons are among the squads, with some others having fatherly ties to the top level without being eligible to clubs.

Cochrane, an athletic tall who can play just about anywhere on the field and has terrific skills, is the son of former Kangaroos and Power midfielder Stuart and is eligible for the draft in 2026.

Stuart Cochrane

Stuart Cochrane

Age

46

Ht

189cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.2

2star

K

5.2

2star

HB

4.0

3star

M

2.2

2star

T

2.1

4star

No current season stats available

D

2.6

1star

K

1.6

1star

HB

1.0

2star

M

0.4

1star

T

0.4

3star

played 50 games with North Melbourne and 54 with Port Adelaide in his career, falling short of the 100 games required at either single club to meet father-son qualification.

DRAFT HUB Click here for the latest draft news

It shapes as another 'near miss' case similar to Noah Anderson

15

Noah Anderson

Age

23

Ht

192cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.0

3star

K

6.0

2star

HB

6.0

4star

M

2.0

2star

T

0.0

1star

CL

0.0

1star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.0

2star

HB

6.0

3star

M

2.0

2star

T

0.0

1star

CL

0.0

1star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.0

3star

HB

6.0

4star

M

2.0

3star

T

0.0

1star

CL

0.0

1star

, who went No.2 in the open draft in 2019 after his dad played 83 games with the Hawks and 67 with St Kilda.

There is a handful of players in the under-16s pool who do qualify, though, with Vic Country's Cody Walker tied to Carlton as a father-son where his dad Andrew played, while Cooper Hodge, the son of Hawthorn and Brisbane great Luke, will play for the Lions Academy under-16s side.

Hodge starred at under-15s level last year and will have the choice of joining the Hawks as a father-son or remaining with Brisbane as an Academy player in his draft year should his progress continue.

Two other players in similar situations are Aidan McCartney, the son of Jason, and Ethan Kingsley, son of Adam. McCartney is eligible to North Melbourne as a father-son, where his dad Jason played 107 of his 182 AFL games, and Kingsley is eligible to join the Power where his dad played 170 games.


However, in a quirk for the current Giants coach and football manager, both sons will line up for crosstown rivals Sydney's under-16s side as members of the Swans Academy.

Also playing for the Swans in the under-16 carnival as an over-ager after having last season hit by injury will be James O'Loughlin, the son of Sydney champion Michael. He is eligible for the draft in 2025.

South Australia has Jack Leys, the son of 110-game Richmond player Brian, on its under-16s list.

Other players with fatherly links to the AFL who are not eligible to join their dad's clubs and who have been named in the under-16 squads include Western Australia's Koby LeCras (the son of ex-Roo Brent and nephew of former Eagle Mark) and South Australian Gabriel Patterson (son of former Magpie Stephen).

South Australia and Western Australia will play their first game of the under-16s carnival on Saturday in Adelaide, with the championships concluding in July on the Gold Coast. – Callum Twomey

 

[THE_GUN]

Just because clubs do planning 12-24 ahead to rort the current inequitable system doesn't mean you have to wait for a further period of years to fix the problem.

What a load of rubbish you have posted

The clubs traded in good faith under the rules that are in place
I dont think you even know what you are posting or just being argumentative just for the sake of accumulating posts

 

[juddy_Like]

Because clubs do planning 12-24 months ahead by trading in and out picks under the current system
I thought that would be an easy thing to understand

Or other clubs such as West Coast can go through another diabolical year (be it not as bad as last year) and only get 1 pick in the top 30 odd picks again?

The draft isn't about the draft anymore, more so on how any shortcuts, advantages or gaming the system we can do to maximise our own self interests.

 

[THE_GUN]

Or other clubs such as West Coast can go through another diabolical year (be it not as bad as last year) and only get 1 pick in the top 30 odd picks again?

The draft isn't about the draft anymore, more so on how any shortcuts, advantages or gaming the system we can do to maximise our own self interests.

Yes but you can only play by the rules that the AFL set out and allow
If the AFL allows future pick trading then there needs to be credibility that comes with that and by changing rules when the trades have already been done gives no credibility to their system or rules

 

[Bestbird]

What a load of rubbish you have posted

The clubs traded in good faith under the rules that are in place
I dont think you even know what you are posting or just being argumentative just for the sake of accumulating posts

Richmond might get a small windfall by taking advantage of the rort with a few junk picks garnered.

That will be wiped out to a degree if Richmond's current ladder position remains when your 2 round pick 20 becomes 30 odd due to the compromised draft.

Meanwhile Brisbane make out like bandits using the junk picks to garner yet another elite talent .

 

[THE_GUN]

Richmond might get a small windfall by taking advantage of the rort with a few junk picks garnered.

That will be wiped out to a degree if Richmond's current ladder position remains when your 2 round pick 20 becomes 30 odd due to the compromised draft.

Meanwhile Brisbane make out like bandits using the junk picks to garner yet another elite talent .

How exact does our pick 20 become 30 ?

Your extremely hard to follow

 

[TigerTime88]

Just want to point out that if Bailey Humphrey was in this draft the Suns would not be able to draft him on account of needing picks/points/list spots to draft several local SE Qld kids that have developed elite aussie rules talents and skills in an area that has historically been thin for AFL draftees.

And b/c of the investment in the AFL pathway in Queensland there are more coming, b/c there really wasn't a pathway or facilities before.

So if you want the Suns to keep drafting Rowells and Kings and Humphreys from Victoria, Will Powell's from WA, Lukosious's and Ballards from SA, change the academy rules to limit how many we can draft. Then we can get in the ear of the GC locals about 'coming home' after 2 or 4 years. That is something that we know all about.

tldr.
Careful what you wish for.

And when you say investment you mean funds given to the Suns generated by the other clubs.