Can Sydney keep Warner and avoid more trade bans?

[Dangerousfield]

Vicbias to the fore - yet again!

 

[Eshay187]

Victorians really don’t understand that High Schools don’t play Saturday AFL for the most part here. There are no AFL scholarships, there are no school or development AFL programs, with the sole exception of the academies.

If you can’t see what an advantage it is to have basically hundreds of local academies for local players, then you’re a lost cause.

The AFL tried doing independent performance programs before the club ones, but there was no integration into an elite competition or facilities, not incentive to make it work. Hence academies.

Use your brains.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Because it's easier to keep a player in a city where their social and family networks are. Because there have been repeated cases of high draftees saying they don't want to leave their home state. Because recruiters have mentioned preferring the home state option if a choice came up between two equal players.

All those things you say are somewhat true, but let's be honest they don't make it that difficult to make a successful team of players many of whom are not in their home state.
And even when things like this happen, compensation for the specific instances is dealt with through the trade economy. My own team lost JHF to this phenomenon, but without we don't have Wardlaw AND Sheezel (the specifics of the trade were more complex, but that's the big picture).
Preferential draft picks for northern clubs are not a natural solution to the problems you describe. They are generalised issues, and should be addressed through general measures to grow the game in those states. Academies and talent pathways are part of that, but there is no reason why they should not culminate in an open draft.

 

[The acurate one]

Victorians really don’t understand that High Schools don’t play Saturday AFL for the most part here. There are no AFL scholarships, there are no school or development AFL programs, with the sole exception of the academies.

If you can’t see what an advantage it is to have basically hundreds of local academies for local players, then you’re a lost cause.

The AFL tried doing independent performance programs before the club ones, but there was no integration into an elite competition or facilities, not incentive to make it work. Hence academies.

Use your brains.

So I suppose the question is it about growing the game or growing the Swans. If an academy player was taken by another club. I’m not sure he’s lost to the game.
As it stands you have talent no one else can access while you can access everyone, minus other clubs with similar academies.
It’s crackers and all know it. Sydney have been around for 40 bloody years.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

So I suppose the question is it about growing the game or growing the Swans. If an academy player was taken by another club. I’m not sure he’s lost to the game.
As it stands you have talent no one else can access while you can access everyone, minus other clubs with similar academies.
It’s crackers and all know it. Sydney have been around for 40 bloody years.

The unfortunate truth is that growing the game in NSW and QLD does mean growing the Swans. And Giants and Suns and Lions.

Yes Sydney has been around for 40 years, but rugby league has been the dominant football code in NSW/QLD for close to a hundred years.

Aussie Rules in NSW (and I assume QLD much the same or worse) was as good as nonexistent for most of the 20th century.

Only alternative is starting a whole new comp from scratch.

 

[.Shotties.]

All those things you say are somewhat true, but let's be honest they don't make it that difficult to make a successful team of players many of whom are not in their home state.

No, they're all true and they have a culmative effect. Being able to build your team from players from your area is an advantage. Having to build a team from 85% + interstate players is a disadvantage.

And even when things like this happen, compensation for the specific instances is dealt with through the trade economy. My own team lost JHF to this phenomenon, but without we don't have Wardlaw AND Sheezel (the specifics of the trade were more complex, but that's the big picture).

That's great. We lost Dawson and got pick 18, which is a far more common scenario.

Preferential draft picks for northern clubs are not a natural solution to the problems you describe.

Sure they are. Northern states have severely limited access to home state talent. Until it comes to a point where they could reasonably select a home state player without reaching at most points in the draft like other teams, this allows them a chance to do so now.

They are generalised issues, and should be addressed through general measures to grow the game in those states. Academies and talent pathways are part of that, but there is no reason why they should not culminate in an open draft.

So we should keep watching hack-handed attempts like the NSW rookie scholarships instead of keeping on with a system that a) actually is growing the game and participation and b) provides a counter-balance to the inherent disadvantage that northern teams face?

 

[sherb]

The balls on these Swans fans... to whinge about being done over by the AFL

This is a joke, right?

Talk about people living in alternate realities and spreading "fake news"

Including this season, the mollycoddled Swans have made the finals 19 times in 22 years.

It's probably written in the AFL's tv contract with Channel 7 that we can't have them finishing down the ladder with a half empty SCG. Friday night footy with Swans vs Pies/Blues/Bombers/Cats/Tigers is one of Channel 7's golden geese in the TV ratings.

I look forward to the day when the AFL removes all the recruiting concessions, ambassador payments, salary cap swindles, special handouts, favours, inside info, and just makes it a level playing field with the same rules & opportunities for every club.

It's a dream I have... Probably never happen... The AFL is all about money & maximising their revenue

But I'm allowed to dream.

With your "level playing field" comment, you forgot to mention that only certain clubs get to play the GF on their home ground.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

That's great. We lost Dawson and got pick 18, which is a far more common scenario.

Pick 18 for someone who cost you pick 56 and managed 64 games in 5 seasons? You made out like bandits.

 

[.Shotties.]

Pick 18 for someone who cost you pick 56 and managed 64 games in 5 seasons? You made out like bandits.

No, getting pick 18 for a player like Jordan Dawson is not making out like bandits.

At this point I feel like we're finished.

 

[Ed_Gein]

Pick 18 for someone who cost you pick 56 and managed 64 games in 5 seasons? You made out like bandits.

Did we? Ask both sets of supporters on who they feel made out like bandits. I guarantee it will be Crows supporters.

Funny, Dawson in his last season with us was fulfilling his potential as a player and we were desperate to keep him, Crows supporters didn't see him as a player, and they felt they were overpaying with Pick 18. Ask them if they still think that now.

 

[Crankyhawk]

It’s an uncomfortable reality for the vIc BiAs types that Vic clubs like the Bulldogs and Saints actually never get to play a home final on our home ground. We have to play them at the MCG, a ground the Dogs play on less than the Swans. And we share our “home ground” with three other sides that we have to play “home games” against there. Just amazing, so much juicy bias in our favour.

you also get away games at your home ground against MCG tenants too

 

[The 747]

Did we? Ask both sets of supporters on who they feel made out like bandits. I guarantee it will be Crows supporters.

Funny, Dawson in his last season with us was fulfilling his potential as a player and we were desperate to keep him, Crows supporters didn't see him as a player, and they felt they were overpaying with Pick 18. Ask them if they still think that now.

As a neutral Dawson was an absolute steal. I hope another club does the same to the Crows with the PSD threat sometime in the future.

 

[Number37]

Lol, hasn't there been a shitload of pearl-clutching by dyed-in-the-wool RL types in NSW about parents with safety concerns about RL diverting their kids to footy? Maybe ride the back of that?

Who has actually been lost to the game because they chose RL over AFL? And do we really care? There is space for both sports.

Overall I would think the answer to your questions is to focus on the 6-7 year olds, that is the time to get kids into footy, not at 16 or 17.

Perhaps you did not understand what I said.
At age 17 NRL clubs can sign kids to their list.
At age 16 Rugby clubs can sign kids to their list.

Kids are not permitted to sign with AFL clubs ever, unless they FIRST go through the AFL draft after they turn 18.
ie they can't choose who they want to play for.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

No, getting pick 18 for a player like Jordan Dawson is not making out like bandits.

At this point I feel like we're finished.

Did we? Ask both sets of supporters on who they feel made out like bandits. I guarantee it will be Crows supporters.

Funny, Dawson in his last season with us was fulfilling his potential as a player and we were desperate to keep him, Crows supporters didn't see him as a player, and they felt they were overpaying with Pick 18. Ask them if they still think that now.

Jordan Dawson is undoubtedly a very good footballer. But getting back pick 18 for a "wantaway" South Australian who you selected with pick 56 is hardly evidence of a talent drain from the Swans that requires additional compensation in the form of draft concessions.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Perhaps you did not understand what I said.
At age 17 NRL clubs can sign kids to their list.
At age 16 Rugby clubs can sign kids to their list.

Kids are not permitted to sign with AFL clubs ever, unless they FIRST go through the AFL draft after they turn 18.
ie they can't choose who they want to play for.

And why do we care? How many talented 16/17 year olds are we losing to RU/RL because of this?

 

[Number37]

And why do we care? How many talented 16/17 year olds are we losing to RU/RL because of this?

Not many because most NSW and Qld kids don't bother with Aussie Rules because they don't have a pathway to the elite comp. Unlike those kids who pursue League or Rugby who can get snapped up by rugby clubs should they show enough talent.

If only there was a pathway that kids from rugby states could pursue to get into the elite comp?
Maybe they could try something like an academy system?
Maybe a carrot for joining the academy could be that they don't have to move to ****ing Victoria to pursue their Aussie Rules dream, they could play for their local team?

 

[Number37]

Jordan Dawson is undoubtedly a very good footballer. But getting back pick 18 for a "wantaway" South Australian who you selected with pick 56 is hardly evidence of a talent drain from the Swans that requires additional compensation in the form of draft concessions.

Another point you did not get.
Dawson wanted to go home.
The Swans can't lose a NSW kid from the academy system because he wants to go home.
The more NSW kids on the Swans list the less chance there is of a player on the list wanting to go home.
The way to get more NSW kids on the Swans list is by having a local academy to encourage the local kids to play Aussie Rules.

Before you go off the deep end, again, that is NOT THE ONLY reason for having an academy.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

No, they're all true and they have a culmative effect. Being able to build your team from players from your area is an advantage. Having to build a team from 85% + interstate players is a disadvantage.

That's great. We lost Dawson and got pick 18, which is a far more common scenario.

Sure they are. Northern states have severely limited access to home state talent. Until it comes to a point where they could reasonably select a home state player without reaching at most points in the draft like other teams, this allows them a chance to do so now.

So we should keep watching hack-handed attempts like the NSW rookie scholarships instead of keeping on with a system that a) actually is growing the game and participation and b) provides a counter-balance to the inherent disadvantage that northern teams face?

The success of 3 of the 4 northern teams suggests that being able to build a team in a non-traditional football state is not much of a disadvantage at all. Swans, GWS and Brisbane have all been entrenched in the top 8 for several years now, and all have played off in recent grandfinals. They are clearly outperforming 3 of the WA/SA teams, and West Coast as well depending on how you look at it.

Gatekeeping talent is simply obtaining an advantage, and it is hardly surprising that yourself and your club make fallacious arguments to justify rent-seeking. But let's not pretend that it anyway addresses these imaginary issues, or is fair compensation for them.

 

[Maddo11]

So I suppose the question is it about growing the game or growing the Swans. If an academy player was taken by another club. I’m not sure he’s lost to the game.
As it stands you have talent no one else can access while you can access everyone, minus other clubs with similar academies.
It’s crackers and all know it. Sydney have been around for 40 bloody years.

So academies good but swans academy bad. Riiight

 

[Number37]

The success of 3 of the 4 northern teams suggests that being able to build a team in a non-traditional football state is not much of a disadvantage at all. Swans, GWS and Brisbane have all been entrenched in the top 8 for several years now, and all have played off in recent grandfinals. They are clearly outperforming 3 of the WA/SA teams, and West Coast as well depending on how you look at it.

Gatekeeping talent is simply obtaining an advantage, and it is hardly surprising that yourself and your club make fallacious arguments to justify rent-seeking. But let's not pretend that it anyway addresses these imaginary issues, or is fair compensation for them.

How many WA/SA/Vic kids are playing League or Rugby at the highest level?
Very very few.
Why?
They are all playing Aussie Rules.
There is no pathway to the elite comps of League or Rugby in WA/SA/Vic.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Not many because most NSW and Qld kids don't bother with Aussie Rules because they don't have a pathway to the elite comp. Unlike those kids who pursue League or Rugby who can get snapped up by rugby clubs should they show enough talent.

If only there was a pathway that kids from rugby states could pursue to get into the elite comp?
Maybe they could try something like an academy system?
Maybe a carrot for joining the academy could be that they don't have to move to ****ing Victoria to pursue their Aussie Rules dream, they could play for their local team?

I mean really - kids don't bother with footy because there is no elite pathway? I cannot think why that would be the concern of any child under the age of about 13.
But I'm all for a pathway. I'm all for an academy system. But no, I honestly don't see why they should require the additional incentive of being able to remain in NSW/Qld to enter the pathway. It's not compatible with the draft system that we use in the AFL.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

How many WA/SA/Vic kids are playing League or Rugby at the highest level?
Very very few.
Why?
They are all playing Aussie Rules.
There is no pathway to the elite comps of League or Rugby in WA/SA/Vic.

How is that relevant to what I wrote?

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Another point you did not get.
Dawson wanted to go home.
The Swans can't lose a NSW kid from the academy system because he wants to go home.
The more NSW kids on the Swans list the less chance there is of a player on the list wanting to go home.
The way to get more NSW kids on the Swans list is by having a local academy to encourage the local kids to play Aussie Rules.

Before you go off the deep end, again, that is NOT THE ONLY reason for having an academy.

But so what if Dawson wanted to go home? Happens all the time, to all teams. And as far as I can tell, the Swans are travelling a lot better than the Crows right now, and for about the last 20 years. Where is the evidence that this inability to draft local talent is an impediment to success?

 

[The acurate one]

So academies good but swans academy bad. Riiight

No, what? They’re all bad and as many have said the AFL should run them. 40 years is a heck of along time to be in the development stage.

When does it end, I’d suggest never. Melbourne Storm get SFA. But have managed to be successful without assistance. I’m sure the Swans would be fine without free hits. Just as I’m sure a youngster from an academy that went to another state wouldn’t burst into flames on arrival.

 

[.Shotties.]

Jordan Dawson is undoubtedly a very good footballer. But getting back pick 18 for a "wantaway" South Australian who you selected with pick 56 is hardly evidence of a talent drain from the Swans that requires additional compensation in the form of draft concessions.

Diminishing the player Dawson was at the point of the trade to argue against a point not being made is being deliberately disingenuous.