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

[giantroo]

 

[stallon]

Too lenient really.

This would make matching a bid on Ashcroft this year, who lets assume is pick 2, cost 2481 points under the new system.
If you have to limit it to 3 picks used with no discount, that would make picks 16, 19 and 20 be roughly the picks required to match the bid(4 points short).
Would a club trade pick 2 for those 3 picks? probably not, but they at least have to pay up a decent price.
If a club had pick 8, theyd need to find a couple of mid 20s picks to go with it, this also sounds about right, while still being just under the general trade value.

A bid on a guy taken at pick 30 would require 454 points. Picks 46, 47, and 48 would roughly get it done. Alternatively pick 35 +47 would do it. That sounds reasonably fair

Does this sound too lenient to you? It makes it reasonable to the point where its actually worth taking the kids, but also not allowing clubs to rort the system like they do currently.

Brisbane this year would have to use their 2024 1st and 2nd rounders PLUS their F1 and F2 to trade up get enough points to match Ashcroft this year under what I proposed. Then they have no way to match Marshall without trading out players.
Their 3rd pick of the draft would end up being right at the end.
They have to take 3 picks in every draft,, so theyd end up with 2 good picks and 4x 4th/5th round players over 2 drafts

It would cost them 2 drafts worth of picks PLUS a player or 2 to match the 2 players.
I think id be ok with it

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Does this sound too lenient to you? It makes it reasonable to the point where its actually worth taking the kids, but also not allowing clubs to rort the system like they do currently.

Brisbane this year would have to use their 2024 1st and 2nd rounders PLUS their F1 and F2 to trade up get enough points to match Ashcroft this year under what I proposed. Then they have no way to match Marshall without trading out players.
Their 3rd pick of the draft would end up being right at the end.
They have to take 3 picks in every draft,, so theyd end up with 2 good picks and 4x 4th/5th round players over 2 drafts

It would cost them 2 drafts worth of picks PLUS a player or 2 to match the 2 players.
I think id be ok with it

Im cartwheeling around Australia if im Brisbane under that proposal too. 2 x pick 18 and 2 x pick 39 for pick 1 is a bargain

I think they should be priced out of ever doing the move. Lets bring some common sense to the table. The team that won the Premiership shouldnt have the ability to get pick 1, regardless of which testicle they came out of

 

[stallon]

Im cartwheeling around Australia if im Brisbane under that proposal too. 2 x pick 18 and 2 x pick 39 for pick 1 is a bargain

I think they should be priced out of ever doing the move. Lets bring some common sense to the table. The team that won the Premiership shouldnt have the ability to get pick 1, regardless of which testicle they came out of

I had pick 16, 19, 20 as the required picks to match. Theyd have to use their 2 2nd rounders and whatever they can do to find a late teens pick.
Means more than those 4 picks

 

[melanChronic]

What about a 1% premium on the points cost for each pick between the bid and your first match. So if Levi is bid on at pick 1, and Brisbane can match with picks 18 and later, they must pay 3000*1.17=3510 points if they want him.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

I had pick 16, 19, 20 as the required picks to match. Theyd have to use their 2 2nd rounders and whatever they can do to find a late teens pick.
Means more than those 4 picks

Still too lenient though. Im saying it should be absolutely impossible as opposed to what you are suggesting

If we offered Richmond picks 16,19,20 for pick 1 what do you think that conversation looks lke?

 

[stallon]

Still too lenient though. Im saying it should be absolutely impossible as opposed to what you are suggesting

If we offered Richmond picks 16,19,20 for pick 1 what do you think that conversation looks lke?

I was suggesting those picks to match pick 2.
It would cost them basically 2 full drafts and a player worth a 2nd rounder to get Ashcroft at pick 2

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

I was suggesting those picks to match pick 2.
It would cost them basically 2 full drafts and a player worth a 2nd rounder to get Ashcroft at pick 2

Im suggesting it be physically impossible to do...

Charity shouldnt go to the strongest. Its why Apple dont have a GoFundMe page

 

[stallon]

Im suggesting it be physically impossible to do...

Charity shouldnt go to the strongest. Its why Apple dont have a GoFundMe page

Thats the thing though, I dont think it should be impossible. Should just be a fair price.

 

[A Bit Dusty]

I was suggesting those picks to match pick 2.
It would cost them basically 2 full drafts and a player worth a 2nd rounder to get Ashcroft at pick 2

The Tigers aren't bidding on Ashcroft

 

[stallon]

The Tigers aren't bidding on Ashcroft

who bids on him is irrelevant, its just an example

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

The Tigers aren't bidding on Ashcroft

You would just take him if you knew you could. Not even a doubt

In any case Levi Ashcroft is in the too late basket so not really topic to deal with

Equality trumps whatever fairytales people want to indulge in when it comes to things like academies/direction of man juice so all decisions should exist to promote equality. That includes the next Levi Ashcroft going to Richmond/WCE/North next year as opposed to Gold Coast

 

[danster168]

People now finally coming around to the joke that is the academy and F/S picks, something that I've been banging on about for over a decade. People shouldn't have needed Levi Ashcroft to realise how unfair the system is. There has been more than enough players to make people wake up and how the AFL ladder really doesn't mean anything anymore such is the lack of integrity in the competition.

 

[stallon]

People now finally coming around to the joke that is the academy and F/S picks, something that I've been banging on about for over a decade. People shouldn't have needed Levi Ashcroft to realise how unfair the system is. There has been more than enough players to make people wake up and how the AFL ladder really doesn't mean anything anymore such is the lack of integrity in the competition.

The general public has been saying it since last year. People complained when JUH got drafted and the rules got changed. People complained when Sydney got Heeney and Mills 2 years in a row.

Anybody who paid any attention knew it was a joke for a long time now, its just that this time of year it pops up again every time.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

The general public has been saying it since last year. People complained when JUH got drafted and the rules got changed. People complained when Sydney got Heeney and Mills 2 years in a row.

Anybody who paid any attention knew it was a joke for a long time now, its just that this time of year it pops up again every time.

Last year was insanely too late, as was the absurdly dumb rule change that was made when JUH got drafted which did nothing more then make it less equal then it was before

Most CEOs are just pencil pushing cowards. When asked about inequality Pyke literally said there is nothing he can do about it during the last rounds discussion with the fans.... I think this operates under the same remit

 

[SurreyBlue]

Father sons are a big part of the foundation clubs and heritage of the AFL.
New clubs will build the same, as they have started and when that occurs, hopefully the Academies will be removed!!!
I don’t believe they will, but if the AFL take the FS away, will be the day the AFL will destroy its soul.

 

[danster168]

The general public has been saying it since last year. People complained when JUH got drafted and the rules got changed. People complained when Sydney got Heeney and Mills 2 years in a row.

Anybody who paid any attention knew it was a joke for a long time now, its just that this time of year it pops up again every time.

Fair call. but why does it pop up again? People just need to accept that it's not an even competition, it's not remotely close to an even competition, and the ladder really doesn't mean anything nor does which team wins the flag. most of the time the team that wins the flag is one of the most fortunate with academy/father-son picks.

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

Lump FS/academy/NGA all together.

Teams making the prelim's - no matching in the first round
Teams 5-8 - 1 match in the first round
Teams missing the finals - 2/3/unlimited matching (whatever you like)

Pretty simple. So this year Brisbane would need to trade up to get Levi (probably impossible) or Marshall. They would not be able to match. Helps the lower teams, slows the top teams.

I'd also remove the discount on matching. No idea why it exists.

 

[Dockeroo]

Father sons are a big part of the foundation clubs and heritage of the AFL.
New clubs will build the same, as they have started and when that occurs, hopefully the Academies will be removed!!!
I don’t believe they will, but if the AFL take the FS away, will be the day the AFL will destroy its soul.

Why is there a points discount on FS? its completely unnecessary

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Why is there a points discount on FS? its completely unnecessary

Yep that's the rub.

They're updating the points scale and reducing the discount to 20% to 10% but what argument is there for 10% to 0%?

Putting points value aside and assume that a club is paying a fair draft hand anyway.

The right to match is already an advantage in an of itself. If you rate the F/S you don't have to commit to the player until you're certain someone else is valuing them, then assess there and then.

Say you rate your own father/son the 10th best player and you have pick 10. If they weren't a father son you would risk another club taking them if you pass them over, even if you think other clubs rate them less.

However with F/S you can take a different player with pick 10 then wait until someone else takes them (with pick 15, 20, whatever).

If someone else bids on them too early, let them take them, if you don't rate them. It's been done before (e.g. way back in the days of Liam Picken and other more recent examples like James Stewart). You still keep your pick 10 and later picks that were used to match a later bid anyway.

If points values truly represented trade hand, in theory, you would see some teams simply not matching bids. The fact thag it never happens is evidence in itself.

 

[danster168]

Father sons are a big part of the foundation clubs and heritage of the AFL.
New clubs will build the same, as they have started and when that occurs, hopefully the Academies will be removed!!!
I don’t believe they will, but if the AFL take the FS away, will be the day the AFL will destroy its soul.

what a load of baloney. the day the AFL take the FS away is the day that the competition can be taken seriously. who really cares that Joe Daniher is playing for Brisbane and not Essendon, or that Tom Mitchell moved to Sydney. Bulldogs fans must've been devastated when Lachie Hunter went to the dees. How dare Collingwood delist Tyler Brown.

If the father/son is to stay it should be 1 father/son allowed every 10 years or something. The dees have had 1 good one in 20 years, a major disadvantage over clubs that have had up to 10.

 

[danster168]

Lump FS/academy/NGA all together.

Teams making the prelim's - no matching in the first round
Teams 5-8 - 1 match in the first round
Teams missing the finals - 2/3/unlimited matching (whatever you like)

Pretty simple. So this year Brisbane would need to trade up to get Levi (probably impossible) or Marshall. They would not be able to match. Helps the lower teams, slows the top teams.

I'd also remove the discount on matching. No idea why it exists.

that wouldn't work. if you had say a Nick Daicos coming to your club, it would entice tanking to make sure you don't go deep into the finals.

I like the merit of what you're saying though.

 

[Azz 27]

3 picks max able to be used to match any bid and no discounts.

Problem sorted, AFL where do I send the invoice for my consultancy

I would go one step further, and limit it to 2 picks.

It would be make getting enough points for Ashcroft very difficult.
Maybe give them the option to use the next year first, up to xx points but if they have traded it away, they lose this option.

 

[stallon]

I would go one step further, and limit it to 2 picks.

It would be make getting enough points for Ashcroft very difficult.
Maybe give them the option to use the next year first, up to xx points but if they have traded it away, they lose this option.

If you make it 2, its almost just too hard to match that top 5 pick f/s kids wouldnt get matched. I still want every f/s to be able to be matched, just make it fairer.
To match pick 2 with 2 picks, you need picks 10 and 11 worth of points, if the clubs in the 6-15 part of the draft dont want to downgrade then its just not possible to match a bid

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

that wouldn't work. if you had say a Nick Daicos coming to your club, it would entice tanking to make sure you don't go deep into the finals.

I like the merit of what you're saying though.

No club will tank the chance of flag for a father son.

 

[danster168]

If you make it 2, its almost just too hard to match that top 5 pick f/s kids wouldnt get matched. I still want every f/s to be able to be matched, just make it fairer.
To match pick 2 with 2 picks, you need picks 10 and 11 worth of points, if the clubs in the 6-15 part of the draft dont want to downgrade then its just not possible to match a bid

Good. that's called an even competition. People are just so used to an unfair competition that they can't even recognise what fair is anymore.