Official Club Stuff Carlton Academy - Next Gen & Father/Son/Daughter Discussion

[The Bighouse]

Just leave it all alone, it’s not that broken. You win some and lose some.

Discount should apply for the investment made.

Perhaps go back to zones…develop away all & sundry.

 

[Arr0w]

Just leave it all alone, it’s not that broken. You win some and lose some.

Discount should apply for the investment made.

Perhaps go back to zones…develop away all & sundry.

I think it is broken

Removing discount still allows the likes of the Suns to nurture home grown talent, have first access and manipulate/setup their list management strategy

What needs to happen is the NGA, coming into line with academy and F/S bidding (still with removing the discount), so clubs invest more time with players in their zones

 

[Jimmae]

If they don't like the points distribution, adjust it. If they don't like the amount of the discount, adjust that. If they want to cap what's going on at the QLD/NSW academies, they can have at it.

Do not throw in all this other arbitrary crap for father-son selections.

 

[smashbox gill]

D

I think it is broken

Removing discount still allows the likes of the Suns to nurture home grown talent, have first access and manipulate/setup their list management strategy

What needs to happen is the NGA, coming into line with academy and F/S bidding (still with removing the discount), so clubs invest more time with players in their zones

Don’t like that at all as some clubs have benefited hugely from the zones they were given, whereas clubs like Carlton the zone has been dry af

 

[Arr0w]

D

Don’t like that at all as some clubs have benefited hugely from the zones they were given, whereas clubs like Carlton the zone has been dry af

Zones definitely need to be adjusted

 

[Pablito]

D

Don’t like that at all as some clubs have benefited hugely from the zones they were given, whereas clubs like Carlton the zone has been dry af

Agreed. The NGA zones are a disgrace. They've gone back in time to bring back bs zoning rules that are highly unbalanced and favour some teams over others.

****ing stupidity personified.

 

[AlecDuncan]

I think it is broken

Removing discount still allows the likes of the Suns to nurture home grown talent, have first access and manipulate/setup their list management strategy

True, but remember they don't have father-son opportunities. Academies are how the AFL evens things up.

 

[Arr0w]

True, but remember they don't have father-son opportunities. Academies are how the AFL evens things up.

Plenty more opportunities for academy prospects compared to F/S

 

[FitzroyBlueBagger]

Unfortunate timing for us but the system needs a realignment, we will just get the Campo twins in before the new AFL system comes into play…

* Get rid of the 20% discount altogether, ridiculous rule, clubs already have a leg up having the option to take the player and match the bid…

* Clubs keeping their highest pick for first and second round academy or f/s options, create a new system where teams can’t trade out higher picks for an abundance of later rounds picks to match up early round selections…

* For example any teams must use their first round pick (in the first round) to match any bid, for any extra points needed the team must use points from at least one second round selection/s to make up the difference and so on for the second round picks which would have third round points to match with…
Third round onwards is open for all remaining rounds…
1st - 2nd, 2nd - 3rd & 3rd and beyond…

* NGA selection aligned with Academy & F/S matching bids for them to be taken anywhere, maybe capped at one per round in the first two rounds if situation arises…

* Get trade week reeled back into a week, it’s a circus…

 

[Sector 7G]

If they don't like the points distribution, adjust it. If they don't like the amount of the discount, adjust that. If they want to cap what's going on at the QLD/NSW academies, they can have at it.

Do not throw in all this other arbitrary crap for father-son selections.

The late picks are over valued. While it depends a bit on the quality/depth of each draft
No one is swapping:
picks 19 and 20 for pick 5 (my value would be about pick 10)
picks 29 and 30 for pick 12 (my value would be about pick 20)
Picks 38 and 39 for pick 20 (my Value would be aboutpick 30)

 

[Coops93]

True, but remember they don't have father-son opportunities. Academies are how the AFL evens things up.

Not just F/S but having to bring in interstate players with the inherent disadvantage that a proportion of them will want to leave. Also to further develop the game in those areas (which has proven to be working) and increase the talent pool across the board.

Academies & F/S will be treated the same, as they should imo. The issue I have is the discount. I get that perhaps it was initially brought in along with the points system to get clubs across the line in accepting it, but by now it's long out served its utility and the points system as it is is a little archaic at this point and needs an update.

I do also think the idea you can spend a couple 2nd round picks to get a top 5 pick in return essentially is just wrong, so I can see the idea whereby you need to be within 10 picks or whatever it is and why that might be attractive, but I don't think that's the answer. I don't have a solution to throw up but I'm not sure that one is it.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Several articles suggest any changes wont come into place until 2025. Fingers crossed.

It is common sense so should be that way. A number of clubs have made trades for future points with the current rules in mind. I doubt Richmond makes those trades on draft night without checking whether changes will be relevent next year.

 

[Stamos]

Not just F/S but having to bring in interstate players with the inherent disadvantage that a proportion of them will want to leave. Also to further develop the game in those areas (which has proven to be working) and increase the talent pool across the board.

Academies & F/S will be treated the same, as they should imo. The issue I have is the discount. I get that perhaps it was initially brought in along with the points system to get clubs across the line in accepting it, but by now it's long out served its utility and the points system as it is is a little archaic at this point and needs an update.

I do also think the idea you can spend a couple 2nd round picks to get a top 5 pick in return essentially is just wrong, so I can see the idea whereby you need to be within 10 picks or whatever it is and why that might be attractive, but I don't think that's the answer. I don't have a solution to throw up but I'm not sure that one is it.

The very first thing to fix is the points curve.
It doesn't match reality at all, and is responsible for a lot of the unevenness/unfairness.

I'm not sure that some sort of discount is necessarily bad, but we can't even start on that until the points values are fixed.

 

[Coops93]

The very first thing to fix is the points curve.
It doesn't match reality at all, and is responsible for a lot of the unevenness/unfairness.

I'm not sure that some sort of discount is necessarily bad, but we can't even start on that until the points values are fixed.

Maybe a discount after the first round, but access to the top, top talent shouldn't be discount. Daicos for example shouldn't get through for a couple 2nds.

However, after the first round then yeah, there's not really the same obnoxious effect on things so let the F/S get to their clubs. It's the high end talent that has a real effect.

 

[Stamos]

Maybe a discount after the first round, but access to the top, top talent shouldn't be discount. Daicos for example shouldn't get through for a couple 2nds.

However, after the first round then yeah, there's not really the same obnoxious effect on things so let the F/S get to their clubs. It's the high end talent that has a real effect.

Again, if the points were fixed, some sort of discount might not seem nearly as egregious as it does now.

 

[Coops93]

Again, if the points were fixed, some sort of discount might not seem nearly as egregious as it does now.

What really is the point of a discount of the points are only ever relevant to F/S/Academy picks anyway? The points serve no other purpose, so they're discounting something that is never actually used aside from when it's discounted... making the "full price" of the points redundant.

It's something I've never understood so I assume I'm missing something somewhere but I've always found it odd.

 

[Stamos]

What really is the point of a discount of the points are only ever relevant to F/S/Academy picks anyway? The points serve no other purpose, so they're discounting something that is never actually used aside from when it's discounted... making the "full price" of the points redundant.

It's something I've never understood so I assume I'm missing something somewhere but I've always found it odd.

I guess the discount is just part of the mathematical formula.
You can't have the same pick as a player is bid on with, so the discount allows you to match with another pick, without necessarily damaging the rest of your draft hand.

Say your player is bid on at #21, and you have #24, should your pick after that be damaged?
I don't think a discount in itself is a problem, it's all about the points scale, and then how much the discount should be, and if there are different levels of discount.

 

[Blue and Silver]

Here's an idea.

Bids can be matched with no more than 2 picks.

So a bid for pick 1 (3000) can be matched with at lowest pick 12(1268) & pick 13 (1212) with the discount still in place.

A bid at 20 could be matched with 43 & 44

If you remove discount it's more like

Pick 1 = Pick 8 & Pick 9

Pick 20 = Pick 38 & Pick 39



On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[marcmurphy3]

While I agree on academies and father son being treated the same in terms of draft mechanisms (and am actually for academies), I find the argument that northern states need academies because southern clubs have father sons, funny.

They are completely different. While a club can get lucky with a good father son, it is just that. Luck. No club can create a sustainable advantage off father sons unlike academies so it's not really a big issue with regards to overall equalisation. It looks worse because we have had a couple of really good ones the last few years (Ashcroft and Daicos) but this is not the norm.

In the last 10 years 20 northern academy players have attracted 1st round bids vs 7 father sons. This is despite the academy system only being available to 4 clubs vs 16 clubs having access to father son.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Here's an idea.

Bids can be matched with no more than 2 picks.

So a bid for pick 1 (3000) can be matched with at lowest pick 12(1268) & pick 13 (1212) with the discount still in place.

A bid at 20 could be matched with 43 & 44

If you remove discount it's more like

Pick 1 = Pick 8 & Pick 9

Pick 20 = Pick 38 & Pick 39



On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Don't mind the 2 picks rule although based on your calculations I would keep the discount. It still needs to be feasible for clubs to match at least 1 bid wherever they are on the ladder. Requiring 2 top 10 picks to match pick 1 is not really feasible (by that I mean it would be impossible for a club ranked around the 8 to acquire those picks).

On a separate note, if a rule like this did come in, I wonder if clubs start playing funny business with regards to how they treat upcoming father sons.

If Cody Walker is looking like a prospective number 1 pick coming into his draft year, and we know it would impossible to match his bid, we could just tell him to focus on school footy with a guarantee we'll draft him at the end of the year. Maybe take a long break every time he has a niggle. Not talk to other clubs. It couldn't be completely blatant, as the afl might accuse you of draft tampering but there are plenty of ways you detract enough value from a draft prospect, to avoid a top 5 bid, without crossing that line.

 

[agro]

Don't mind the 2 picks rule although based on your calculations I would keep the discount. It still needs to be feasible for clubs to match at least 1 bid wherever they are on the ladder. Requiring 2 top 10 picks to match pick 1 is not really feasible (by that I mean it would be impossible for a club ranked around the 8 to acquire those picks).

On a separate note, if a rule like this did come in, I wonder if clubs start playing funny business with regards to how they treat upcoming father sons.

If Cody Walker is looking like a prospective number 1 pick coming into his draft year, and we know it would impossible to match his bid, we could just tell him to focus on school footy with a guarantee we'll draft him at the end of the year. Maybe take a long break every time he has a niggle. Not talk to other clubs. It couldn't be completely blatant, as the afl might accuse you of draft tampering but there are plenty of ways you detract enough value from a draft prospect, to avoid a top 5 bid, without crossing that line.

A drink driving indiscretion the night before the draft always works well.

 

[Stamos]

A drink driving indiscretion the night before the draft always works well.

Why would you do something dangerous like drink driving when you can just find a booze bus and refuse a test?

 

[AndyLucimitis]

Zones definitely need to be adjusted

I'd adjust the zones - give Carlton Haileybury, Caulfield Grammar, St. Kevins, Xavier etc.

Collingwood get Reservoir High.

 

[Blue and Silver]

Don't mind the 2 picks rule although based on your calculations I would keep the discount. It still needs to be feasible for clubs to match at least 1 bid wherever they are on the ladder. Requiring 2 top 10 picks to match pick 1 is not really feasible (by that I mean it would be impossible for a club ranked around the 8 to acquire those picks).

On a separate note, if a rule like this did come in, I wonder if clubs start playing funny business with regards to how they treat upcoming father sons.

If Cody Walker is looking like a prospective number 1 pick coming into his draft year, and we know it would impossible to match his bid, we could just tell him to focus on school footy with a guarantee we'll draft him at the end of the year. Maybe take a long break every time he has a niggle. Not talk to other clubs. It couldn't be completely blatant, as the afl might accuse you of draft tampering but there are plenty of ways you detract enough value from a draft prospect, to avoid a top 5 bid, without crossing that line.

Frankly I don't mind if a club has to move around a lot of value to get the best kid in the draft.

On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[marcmurphy3]

Frankly I don't mind if a club has to move around a lot of value to get the best kid in the draft.

On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

I dont mind either but there comes a point where clubs just wont trade for anything. Like this year the first 6 picks were pretty much unequivocally off the table for trade.