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

[giantroo]

 

[danster168]

Also, I’m positive I watched Geelong beat us in the rain and GWS beat us in the dry at the Gabba last season.

So I’m thinking you’re making stuff up atm.

View attachment 2178841View attachment 2178842

making stuff up. you said you were hard done by at the gabba. I proved that to be incorrect.

which ends this whole debate. Brisbane gets a massive umpiring advantage each time you get a home game. Victorian teams do not.

 

[sr36]

Because we're currently a good team. Prior to 2019, we lost more games after travel occured for the best part of a decade. Because we weren't a good team.

Funny how being a good team increases the likelihood of winning.

It's every non-vic team and includes periods when you aren't good. Your home game record is essentially your record after travel, which for all non-vic teams is much better than your away records. The lessened recovery doesn't cost you. The recovery theory isn't an issue. Now it might cost you if you were a Vic team returning from an interstate trip to play a neutral venue game - but the home ground advantage that follows a travel means that you don't get impacted. It's why despite all the carry on, home and away ladders show nothing to suggest any reality to this supposedly significant disadvantage of 4 or 5 extra return flights in the home and away season.

 

[sr36]

Every time a Vic kid says they don't want to move interstate, that disadvantages the non Vic clubs. Especially when more often than not it's the Vic kids at the top of the draft saying it. A few we've drafted ourselves as no other club bid on them.

Speaking for my own club, we've had 1 first round academy kid in 14 years. Most of our academy kids have been late second or third round picks. Admittedly we've had 3 recent father sons as first round kids.

Gold Coast have had 6 first round academy kids in 13 years, though Bowes now plays for Geelong, it's just that 4 arrived in one draft. Sydney have had 5 in 14 years. Haven't looked up GWS total list, but they've currently got 3 first round academy kids on their list, and most punters couldn't name the third.

I don't believe the academies are as big an advantage as most here think they are.

Those numbers aren't small. Pies got lucky with father son - 2 first round kids in the same time frame, without them we would have been unlikely to make the finals in 2023 rather than winning the flag. And the numbers will grow.

The luck that we got is built in for academy teams, and Brisbane and Sydney can also get that same father son luck on top.

It's massively impactful and just beginning to kick in. Don't expect to see academy teams missing finals much over the coming decade.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Was thinking about this the other day. Would the competition really be worse off without st Kilda, north, bulldogs and Melbourne? I actually think this has some merit. Could end up with a number of teams where we could have everyone play each other twice.

It's the problem of being an evolved (rather than created) competition. 30 years ago my club was part of that conversation, despite having been the most successful club in the league through that time. Over the same 30 years virtually every club has been financially insolvent, or hopeless incompetent on-field (or both!) - reliant on the AFL to survive.

If you could snap your fingers and start again (Kerry Packer style), there'd probably still be 7 teams in Victoria. (Tasmania and 2 x WA, SA, NSW, QLD). A new competition, with 6 Melbourne sides and Geelong.

No club will vote itself out of existence - and forceably reducing number of clubs/matches will reduce TV revenue and hurt everyone. So it's up to clubs to lift themselves up, or find alternatives. Honestly Gold Coast, GWS and Tasmania should have been merger/moves rather than new clubs. Introduce a 3rd WA side and the balance is a lot closer to what it 'should' be. If the AFL reduced their financial support, how many clubs would go back to operating under threat of bankruptcy?

AFL investing in NSW/QLD is a club-supported, league growth objective - but we're 40 years in and still not self-sustaining. To continue this goal, in another 40 years we could well see 3rd clubs in all states - dilution of the Vic-centralisation through increased clubs. (3 x WA/SA/NSW/QLD + Tas for 24 clubs). OR, we may see the merger/removal of 3-4 Vic clubs. Either way I don't see the status quo remaining.

 

[beatnik]

Strange that you nearly always win the game after this occurs.

Strange that you refuse to engage with the actual point of the discussion - instead you snipe around the edges like an old, slow, talentless hack in the local reserves looking to end the careers of promising young fellas with an out-of-context cheap shot

 

[beatnik]

Those numbers aren't small. Pies got lucky with father son - 2 first round kids in the same time frame, without them we would have been unlikely to make the finals in 2023 rather than winning the flag. And the numbers will grow.

The luck that we got is built in for academy teams, and Brisbane and Sydney can also get that same father son luck on top.

It's massively impactful and just beginning to kick in. Don't expect to see academy teams missing finals much over the coming decade.

Yet the AFL didn’t overhaul the entire F/s points system when the Pies ‘got lucky’ but when the Lions did the same with the Ashcrofts the AFL said “hold my beer, boys”!

You’re not doing much to counter the evidence of #vicbias #VICBIAS

 

[beatnik]

making stuff up. you said you were hard done by at the gabba. I proved that to be incorrect.

which ends this whole debate. Brisbane gets a massive umpiring advantage each time you get a home game. Victorian teams do not.

This is either satire or the lamest attempt at rage trolling I’ve ever read

 

[jdstorm]

No it doesn’t.

I’ve just got to pack and jump in my car to drive to Noosa.

To fly to Melbourne, I’ve got to pack, take a 20 minute Uber ride to the airport, wait an hour+ for the flight, sit on the tarmac in queue for another 20 minutes, fly to Melbourne, sit on the tarmac for another 20 minutes before embarking, wait for my luggage and get an Uber and drive for 40 minutes to my accommodation.

Every Melbourne club will 100% choose shared tenancy over their “home” ground, rather than travel as much as the non Victorian teams.

We’ve already seen Richmond complain about the travel involved when playing at Marvel, and Carlton complain about not wanting to play anymore interstate games because of the travel.

You’re acting like it’s nothing. But your clubs whinge a different story.

You’re full of b.s. and everyone knows it, including the administration and coaches running the Vic clubs.

If teams are waiting an hour plus in a terminal then that’s just because the AFL/sponsors are cheap.

They could easily arrange a private plane to fly the teams around. Meet at the club drive straight onto the tarmac. 1-2 hour flight to Sydney and Melbourne. Just carry on because they aren’t staying

Also you cited Dimma complaining about the distance to travel to marvel, so I think your just digging in on an argument to try and gain a perceived benefit for your club.

I like academies and think northern clubs (and all clubs should have them) it’s good for the product overall. The issue is that currently teams aren’t paying fair value for access to premium talent and that’s the most significant advantage in the game

 

[sr36]

Yet the AFL didn’t overhaul the entire F/s points system when the Pies ‘got lucky’ but when the Lions did the same with the Ashcrofts the AFL said “hold my beer, boys”!

You’re not doing much to counter the evidence of #vicbias #VICBIAS

Oh dear, you're living in a paranoid nana land if you think the pressure to change the system came from Ashcroft being taken as a father son. Lots of top players being added for peanuts influenced it, with GC haul the biggest factor

It was a terrible system that gave a massive advantage to teams with priority access to top kids. Much worse than the system it replaced.

And the AFL had built it so Brisbane and Sydney were much more likely to get that advantage and Port and Freo the least likely due to not having been in the comp long enough for FS benefits to be as likely to accrue to them. And the Northern advantage was designed to continue to grow over time - otherwise what's the purpose of the academies?

 

[danster168]

This is either satire or the lamest attempt at rage trolling I’ve ever read

please explain. Brisbane lost the free kick count 3 out of 12 games at the Gabba. That's satire? No. that's facts. People using the term troll way too freely, not even knowing what it means. Like I said, 3 out of 12.

 

[beatnik]

Oh dear, you're living in a paranoid nana land if you think the pressure to change the system came from Ashcroft being taken as a father son. Lots of top players being added for peanuts influenced it, with GC haul the biggest factor

It was a terrible system that gave a massive advantage to teams with priority access to top kids. Much worse than the system it replaced.

And the AFL had built it so Brisbane and Sydney were much more likely to get that advantage and Port and Freo the least likely due to not having been in the comp long enough for FS benefits to be as likely to accrue to them. And the Northern advantage was designed to continue to grow over time - otherwise what's the purpose of the academies?

I’m sorry you don’t understand the topic you’re commenting on but it’s not my job to bring you to speed on the history of equalisation measures and the way they benefited your club and the competition as a whole

 

[beatnik]

please explain. Brisbane lost the free kick count 3 out of 12 games at the Gabba. That's satire? No. that's facts. People using the term troll way too freely, not even knowing what it means. Like I said, 3 out of 12.

Ploose explayne?!?

 

[danster168]

lol why are Brisbane fans even arguing? They've had 2 x top 1 picks. lol. Couldn't get more kissed. And the kissing continues with the afl changing the rules next year meaning clubs can't even play catch up. not that it's possible anyway.

 

[danster168]

Ploose explayne?!?

doesn't really need explaining. It's clear. Brisbane get kissed by the umpiring with the noise of affirmation at all of their home games. Something Victorian teams don't get when playing 'home' games. That's where the advantage is.

 

[sr36]

I’m sorry you don’t understand the topic you’re commenting on but it’s not my job to bring you to speed on the history of equalisation measures and the way they benefited your club and the competition as a whole

I'll explain the draft concessions part to you, which is what this thread is about.

Father Son predates the AFL and was popular so it was kept. They attempted to make it even for the Western teams by giving access to Sanfl and Waafl father sons, but with different games qualification due to having more eligible clubs - results suggest they didn't get it even.

Sydney were always on an even playing field with Vic teams. Brisbane became so when they merged with Fitzroy. Results suggest the WA and SA teams were disadvantaged. WCE and Adelaide have probably been in the comp long enough now that it will be even for them going forward. Freo and Port still probably disadvantaged. GWS and Gold Coast no access yet.

The access system has had 2 significant changes, with a third one coming in:

Hawkins for a third round pick was seen as the big tipping point for the first significant change which moved the system to clubs bidding before trade week and players being taken with their next available pick. Eg Collingwood paid pick 9 for Darcy Moore, because Dogs had offered pick 4 or 5. Then when Sydney got Heeney for 18, it was decided that the system actually advantaged top teams - as the most they could pay for a top 5 pick was a late first, whereas a middle table team paid a higher price for them.

So they moved to points matching. They clearly stuffed up the points values, making the advantage of getting access to a top kid much bigger than it was under the previous system - eg Pies paid Pick 9 for Darcy Moore under the previous system, but under the system about to go, we probably would have gotten a future first and Darcy Moore for that pick 9.

Just before they moved to this more advantageous system for teams who had priority access to top kids, they added in a special provision for 4 clubs to have priority access to a number of kids - with the number of top kids they had prior access to designed to grow over time - otherwise why have Northern academies.

That's without going into the strange decisions around NGA.

Under the incoming system, the advantage has been reduced, but it will clearly remain an advantage to have priority access to top kids.

It's pretty clear that the ladder of advantage and likelihood to get top kids through this way goes:

Sydney and Brisbane
GWS and GC
Vic teams,WCE, Adel
Port, Freo

Although WCE and Freo might be a touch higher as their NGA academies should be stronger than the other NGA academies.

The moral of the story is that since about 2012 the rules have intentionally favoured Sydney and Brisbane in terms of preferential draft access. It's not even debatable. But hey, keep whinging about 5 more flights a year.

 

[Elixuh]

Oh dear, you're living in a paranoid nana land if you think the pressure to change the system came from Ashcroft being taken as a father son. Lots of top players being added for peanuts influenced it, with GC haul the biggest factor

It was a terrible system that gave a massive advantage to teams with priority access to top kids. Much worse than the system it replaced.

And the AFL had built it so Brisbane and Sydney were much more likely to get that advantage and Port and Freo the least likely due to not having been in the comp long enough for FS benefits to be as likely to accrue to them. And the Northern advantage was designed to continue to grow over time - otherwise what's the purpose of the academies?

To produce a talent pipeline for the competition to accommodate expansion. For example, in the 2009 draft prior to GCS and academies there were 2 players from Qld - taken at picks 75 and 84. If you want to have 20 AFL teams then long-term you need NSW and Qld producing every draft.

It is interesting calling it an advantage. I see VFL clubs being able to largely draft players who don't have to move away from their family an advantage. So I guess this is an advantage equal to that.

 

[sr36]

To produce a talent pipeline for the competition to accommodate expansion. For example, in the 2009 draft prior to GCS and academies there were 2 players from Qld - taken at picks 75 and 84. If you want to have 20 AFL teams then long-term you need NSW and Qld producing every draft.

It is interesting calling it an advantage. I see VFL clubs being able to largely draft players who don't have to move away from their family an advantage. So I guess this is an advantage equal to that.

I've actually got nothing against academies. I think they're a great idea, even more for growing the supporter base than providing top end players, because if you played a sport you're more likely to follow that sport. But under current and incoming draft rules, northern clubs are given a clear advantage at the draft by the rules surrounding access to academy players. No idea how you can argue it.

 

[Elixuh]

I've actually got nothing against academies. I think they're a great idea, even more for growing the supporter base than providing top end players, because if you played a sport you're more likely to follow that sport. But under current and incoming draft rules, northern clubs are given a clear advantage at the draft by the rules surrounding access to academy players. No idea how you can argue it.

Of course. In isolation it is clearly an advantage. Context is important though, I think.

 

[sr36]

Of course. In isolation it is clearly an advantage. Context is important though, I think.

Yes it is.

There's multiple advantages and disadvantages in the system. If you choose one where your team is at a disadvantage and focus only on it - you're being ripped off. No idea how can weigh them up against each other and walk away with a clear understanding of which clubs are advantaged overall. Personally I think the draft access advantage is the biggest one, but I'm biased by supporting a club that has all the other advantages. Whereas Brisbane and Sydney fans think that they are disadvantaged overall by things like travel, but they're also biased and ignoring their very clear advantage in terms of the draft.

 

[GC2015]

If you could snap your fingers and start again (Kerry Packer style), there'd probably still be 7 teams in Victoria. (Tasmania and 2 x WA, SA, NSW, QLD). A new competition, with 6 Melbourne sides and Geelong.

Why 7 in Victoria? I still think that's too many. The AFL and NRL are the only professional national leagues in the world that focus so heavily on teams in one city/state and it's obviously because of the historical links. If you started again, there would be no historical links and therefore you wouldn't need/want that many teams in Melbourne. I think if you started again with no historical links at all, it would look more like this:

Melbourne x4
Sydney x3
Brisbane x2
Perth x2
Adelaide x2
Geelong x1
Gold Coast x1
Tasmania x1
Canberra x1
Darwin x1

18 team league that covers and services all of major population areas of Australia (except for north QLD which can be serviced by the other QLD/NT teams). Much better spread and would really maximise the crowds of ALL games in Melbourne.

I've actually got nothing against academies. I think they're a great idea, even more for growing the supporter base than providing top end players, because if you played a sport you're more likely to follow that sport. But under current and incoming draft rules, northern clubs are given a clear advantage at the draft by the rules surrounding access to academy players. No idea how you can argue it.

So then what's the fix? The AFL has already changed the rules to force clubs to pay more for academy players.

Every club currently has priority access to academy players, whether it's northern academy or NGA. For example, your club drafted first round pick Isaac Quaynor through NGA access and he's now a 100+ game premiership player at just 24 years of age. How is that any different to a northern academy graduate like Eric Hipwood becoming a premiership player this year?

 

[sr36]

So then what's the fix? The AFL has already changed the rules to force clubs to pay more for academy players.

Every club currently has priority access to academy players, whether it's northern academy or NGA. For example, your club drafted first round pick Isaac Quaynor through NGA access and he's now a 100+ game premiership player at just 24 years of age. How is that any different to a northern academy graduate like Eric Hipwood becoming a premiership player this year?

It's different as the Northern Academies are much more likely to produce top players than the much smaller pools available as NGA. I supect WA will get close to the Northern academies now that the new rules incentivize them to work their NGA academies much harder.

I don't think there is a fix. Just as I don't think there is a fix to travel.

I'm just pointing out that yes travelling 5 more times is a disadvantage, but how can you be complaining about that when you have the preferential draft advantage. I know which one I'd prefer.

 

[Elixuh]

Yes it is.

There's multiple advantages and disadvantages in the system. If you choose one where your team is at a disadvantage and focus only on it - you're being ripped off. No idea how can weigh them up against each other and walk away with a clear understanding of which clubs are advantaged overall. Personally I think the draft access advantage is the biggest one, but I'm biased by supporting a club that has all the other advantages. Whereas Brisbane and Sydney fans think that they are disadvantaged overall by things like travel, but they're also biased and ignoring their very clear advantage in terms of the draft.

We will never have an accurate answer, but I would love to know how many players Collingwood and Brisbane have to strike off their draft list as undraftable because of geography (especially in that 1-30 pick bracket) - say over the past 10-15 drafts. If I were a betting man, I'd wager Brisbane has had to strike off significantly more than Collingwood.

If you just focus on the draft, rather than bringing travel into it, there are inherent and historical advantages in the current system for Melbourne based clubs which are not shared by clubs like Brisbane and Sydney.

Equally, the advantage of the academy falls to Brisbane and Sydney, other clubs only see very marginal and often intangible benefits. These marginal or intangible benefits include...there are academy players who have been drafted by other clubs who would not have otherwise been in the AFL talent pathway but for academies and the increased talent means that players who would have ordinarily been drafted to say Brisbane or Sydney are now playing at other clubs because of the increase in the talent pool.

All this is to say, that if you care to look I think a lot of the advantages and disadvantages actually balance out in some form. Albeit not perfectly. It is just that some of the balancing is tangible (eg Brisbane picks Marshall at pick 25) and some intangible (see above).

 

[sr36]

We will never have an accurate answer, but I would love to know how many players Collingwood and Brisbane have to strike off their draft list as undraftable because of geography (especially in that 1-30 pick bracket) - say over the past 10-15 drafts. If I were a betting man, I'd wager Brisbane has had to strike off significantly more than Collingwood.

If you just focus on the draft, rather than bringing travel into it, there are inherent and historical advantages in the current system for Melbourne based clubs which are not shared by clubs like Brisbane and Sydney.

Equally, the advantage of the academy falls to Brisbane and Sydney, other clubs only see very marginal and often intangible benefits. These marginal or intangible benefits include...there are academy players who have been drafted by other clubs who would not have otherwise been in the AFL talent pathway but for academies and the increased talent means that players who would have ordinarily been drafted to say Brisbane or Sydney are now playing at other clubs because of the increase in the talent pool.

All this is to say, that if you care to look I think a lot of the advantages and disadvantages actually balance out in some form. Albeit not perfectly. It is just that some of the balancing is tangible (eg Brisbane picks Marshall at pick 25) and some intangible (see above).

Your intangibles appear to be very biased to me. Vic producing a heap of players that head interstate is described as a big advantage to Victoria. Meanwhile you're suggesting that when Northern academies produce excess players that's good for non-Northern clubs? How do these two theories go together?

I'm agreeing with you that there is a lot more balance in the system than is described by the constant complaining about advantages. It's why it's such an even comp. But yeah I think the Northern clubs have a good decade or two ahead of them due to draft concessions. As a category, I think they'll perform well above par. Good times ahead for Northern supporters.

 

[Elixuh]

Your intangibles appear to be very biased to me. Vic producing a heap of players that head interstate is described as a big advantage to Victoria. Meanwhile you're suggesting that when Northern academies produce excess players that's good for non-Northern clubs? How do these two theories go together?

I'm agreeing with you that there is a lot more balance in the system than is described by the constant complaining about advantages. It's why it's such an even comp. But yeah I think the Northern clubs have a good decade or two ahead of them due to draft concessions. As a category, I think they'll perform well above par.

It goes to the historical context of established talent pathways in VFL - ingrained for a century - as against Qld which introduced formal talent pathways in ~2010. Prior to then it was just haphazard whether any draftees came out of Qld. So until there is a relative balance, yes there are distinguishing factors.

I hope so re the amount of talent the academies produce over the next decade or two. The comp needs it.

Just quietly, not you, but many on here bemoan the academies like we are getting multiple top of the draft picks every few years when in reality I think Hipwood (14) and Marshall (25) are our only first round picks.

 

[GC2015]

It's different as the Northern Academies are much more likely to produce top players than the much smaller pools available as NGA. I supect WA will get close to the Northern academies now that the new rules incentivize them to work their NGA academies much harder.

I don't think there is a fix. Just as I don't think there is a fix to travel.

I'm just pointing out that yes travelling 5 more times is a disadvantage, but how can you be complaining about that when you have the preferential draft advantage. I know which one I'd prefer.

Sure, but you're also ignoring that only 50% of the northern teams currently have access to the father-son rule and that's a rule that has led to first round picks that later became premiership stars joining the Pies like Heath Shaw, Travis Cloke, Nick Daicos, Darcy Moore etc. Brisbane have only just started to really benefit from the F/S rule in the last 2-3 years and Sydney don't have any F/S picks worth mentioning on their list. It's a rule that Gold Coast and GWS literally cannot use for at least another decade.

People don't seem to have an issue with NGA access these days and the Suns would still have access to 3 of the last 5 first round draftees through an NGA - Jake Rogers (South African mother), Leo Lombard (Cuban father) & Will Graham (Canadian father). So the northern academies, at least on the GC, are also growing the game in non-traditional families in the same way that the NGA are. That's a fact that people seem to overlook.

We know the go-home factor is an issue that's plagued northern teams in the past and Victorian teams are the biggest culprits when it comes to raiding the northern teams. That's obviously mostly driven by the fact that over 50% of players in the league grew up in Victoria. It's a natural advantage that Vic teams have over northern teams and there isn't much you can do about that inequality unless you try to increase the pool of draftable talent from QLD/NSW, which is exactly what the northern academies aim to achieve.

No matter your perspective on all this, it'll never be 100% fair. The most important stat in my mind is winning premierships and in the northern academy era (2013-) we've seen 10 premierships go to Victorian teams, 1 to Western Australia and 1 to Queensland. To me that's telling in terms of weighing up all the advantages/disadvantages that exist within the league. In theory, northern teams should be winning the premiership 22% of the time and we've only seen one flag claimed by a northern team during the northern academy era, which equates to an 8% conversion rate. In that sense, the northern teams are drastically underperforming and the Victorian teams are overperforming.