Analysis Cuts to Senior List Sizes

[Baygirl1977]

Afl has just released pay cuts ,


AFL player agents were briefed early on Wednesday afternoon regarding the changes.

Sources with knowledge of negotiations believe this deal is a win for players, who at one stage were facing a 15 to 20 per cent cut in salaries.

As first reported by foxfooty.com.au last Thursday, clubs will only be required to select a minimum of one player in December’s national draft, down from three.

Change in List Size numbers

2020 Total List Sizes: 38-47 | 2021 Total List Sizes: 37-44

2020 Primary List: 38-40 | 2021 Primary List: 36-38

2020 Cat A Rookies: 0-6 | 2021 Cat A Rookies: 0-6

2020 Cat B Rookies: 0-3 | 2021 Cat B Rookies: 0-2

 

[Kwality]

30 on a list is crazy. The chances of having 9 or more absences at once is rather high. Even 35 is too few.

Thrown out there to identify Caros 'deep throat'/source.

 

[footyfan1978]

If they reduced the team list for next year I’d suggest they’d increase the recruiting age to 19. Perfect time to do it.

Yep and make the under age comps either under 19's or under 21's going forward.

 

[briztoon]

List management will be brutal.

Long term injured players or players who may take a while to develop just will be cut sooner.

The second tier competition will get better as more players will stay in system for their chance.

Drafting wise it will devalue the draft and teams may only want to draft 2 players.

Third round picks won’t be worth much and first rounders will be expected to play straight away.

Teams in the window will likely draft older 20 or 21 year olds), ready made players out of the second tier competitions.

While teams rebuilding will load up on 8 to 10, 18 year olds across 2 drafts.

 

[Mego Red]

To be honest, I like it. Lists of 35, with year-round Delisted Free Agency. Have injured player slots, with the signed DFA coming in to replace a player for the length of time they're on the injury list.

I think it will free things up, and help clubs stay competitive.

 

[Pykie]

Yep and make the under age comps either under 19's or under 21's going forward.

I think an u/21 comp would be good idea.

National Championships still occur for u/18's, however they play the majority of their matches as 17/18 years olds in an u/21 competition.

They can still play as 16 year olds in the u/21 competitions if they are good enough, however cant get drafted until the year they turn 19.

I think this would be particularly good for KPP's, you should see less dominating of the gorilla Tom Boyd types at u/18 level that give a false sense of quality, especially once outside of the TAC Cup restriction on zones and double teaming etc. As there's also likely to be some 20 and 21 year old defenders who are more physically develop.ed

Would make that competition ultra competitive, the standard would be extremely high when incorporating 3-4 draft ages together.

 

[Pykie]

How much do you about basketball?

That’s not a criticism, just to know so we have a good dialogue.

Defensive principles don’t change much between teams and players can in and learn them fairly quickly.

Most teams will have multiple ways to defend the on ball screens. When a player moves they know straight away what to do.

Offensively most NBA run simple plays or patterns and therefore multiple players can come and know what to do straight away.

Not sure if AFL can fill in and do well straight away structurally wise.

I know a lot about it.


If we move away from being a structurally intensive game, to one that returns to being played more on instinct rather than defensive systems and mechanisms, that can only be a good thing.

 

[footyfan1978]

I think an u/21 comp would be good idea.

National Championships still occur for u/18's, however they play the majority of their matches as 17/18 years olds in an u/21 competition.

They can still play as 16 year olds in the u/21 competitions if they are good enough, however cant get drafted until the year they turn 19.

I think this would be particularly good for KPP's, you should see less dominating of the gorilla Tom Boyd types at u/18 level that give a false sense of quality, especially once outside of the TAC Cup restriction on zones and double teaming etc. As there's also likely to be some 20 and 21 year old defenders who are more physically develop.ed

Would make that competition ultra competitive, the standard would be extremely high when incorporating 3-4 draft ages together.

I'm not convinced about restricting 18 year old's from being drafted. Apart from that everything about an under 21 league I think works ok. But it still does not answer what happens to the players outside your senior team that still on a list that are 22 to 25 years old. Where are they playing if lists are 35 and there is no reserves team for him to play in? It needs serious thought put into it before we just go to 35 on list and not think it through how it works for all the players and leagues outside the AFL. Foe me, the under 21's works best if the league maintain lists big enough to have a reserves comp too. So you have your senior AFL team, their reserves side too and within each state the youngsters hoping to be drafted have a SANFL, WAFL and TAC Under 21's league as the pathway to get drafted with stand alone VFA clubs becoming under 21 teams such as Port Melbourne but the guys too old for that can still get looked at as tops ups for each AFL reserve team each season. If lists goto 35, that is not possible, which is what concerns me if not all thought through properly. It is why clubs you only revert to 35 lists if the finances are so bad, it has to.

 

[Obeanie1]

The big question is what would the salary cap drop to?

Clubs would need some wriggle room to pay out players under contract if they wanted to re-sign a player but needed to cut someone contracted.

Can see some older decent players moving club's too. A club looking to rebuild won't have the spots to retain an aging star or two.

 

[eastfreo75]

I know a lot about it.


If we move away from being a structurally intensive game, to one that returns to being played more on instinct rather than defensive systems and mechanisms, that can only be a good thing.

You make a great point about structure intensive game.

High IQ offenses like the Triangle, Motion team and even the Melbourne Shuffle cut offense do badly when they is a high turnover of players.

If squads are reduced to 30, clubs will need to have Strategies that can be easily taught straight away and as you say are more instinctively.

It may lead to higher scoring and more open play.

 

[footyfan1978]

The big question is what would the salary cap drop to?

Whatever the league deems it can afford.
If you cut the lists to 35 there is no room for project players, older veterans or foot soldiers there for depth.
Guys like Burgoyne, Betts, Simpson and Ablett would not be playing this season and neither would any of rookie list guys.
It would be a brutal cut straight away.
I looked at my own club list just now and think guys like Newnes, Lang, Hugh Goddard and Cottrell gone straight away. It's when the club has to cut the Betts, Simpson, Ed Curnow and Levi Casboults over night too and then all rookie list players that you realise clubs will have no depth. Even a guy like Kruezer that injury prone would be looked at in such scenarios.

 

[The Nostradamus]

They won’t make this drastic change immediately unless god forbid we miss all of next year also


This is another close to doomsday hypothetical

The afl have secured a line of credit, cut the soft cap of all clubs by 3mil per year, players taking a 50% pay cut this year, there is no need for reduced lists size on top of all that

 

[briztoon]

They won’t make this drastic change immediately unless god forbid we miss all of next year also


This is another close to doomsday hypothetical

The afl have secured a line of credit, cut the soft cap of all clubs by 3mil per year, players taking a 50% pay cut this year, there is no need for reduced lists size on top of all that

This is seriously being considered for 2021.

The AFL doesn’t just fund the AFL. It also funds the NAB league etc.

And it’s obviously looking at a reduced income starting next year.

Pretty good bet that both 7 and Fox have told the AFL they won’t be able to meet their contract next year and beyond.

And there was already talk the next tv rights deal wasn’t going to be as big.

Then factor in reduced memberships and club sponsors pulling out. Not to mention having to pay off the debt.

 

[philthy05]

I don’t think it’s a wise or efficient way to cut costs.

Teams will lose the last few players on the back end of their lists, the cheapest players.

It will still save money off a cap, but it’s a pretty ass about way to do it that’s probably not great for developing young players

 

[briztoon]

I don’t think it’s a wise or efficient way to cut costs.

Teams will lose the last few players on the back end of their lists, the cheapest players.

It will still save money off a cap, but it’s a pretty ass about way to do it that’s probably not great for developing young players

I don’t disagree with you. Especially about young players possibly getting a fair chance.

Both the tpp and soft cap look to be cut significantly.

My guess is the tpp might be decreased by as much as 25%. Which will require contracts to be renegotiated for even 35 players to fit under the cap.

I don’t remember who said it, but one journalist said the majority of players have already signed the richest contract they ever will sign.

 

[eastfreo75]

I don’t think it’s a wise or efficient way to cut costs.

Teams will lose the last few players on the back end of their lists, the cheapest players.

It will still save money off a cap, but it’s a pretty ass about way to do it that’s probably not great for developing young players

I agree that the rookie list and cheap players on the back of the list doesn’t cost much at all.

Players require coaches and other staff to develop them. The soft cap on football department will be massive cut.

 

[Obeanie1]

List management will be brutal.

Long term injured players or players who may take a while to develop just will be cut sooner.

The second tier competition will get better as more players will stay in system for their chance.

Drafting wise it will devalue the draft and teams may only want to draft 2 players.

Third round picks won’t be worth much and first rounders will be expected to play straight away.

How is the draft devalued?

Sure teams will take less players all round say 3 or 4 picks not 7 or 8.

But they will still target the cream of the crop.

We won't see too many Matt Priddis types or even Kelly or Pickett which would be a shame.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Cutting to 30 seems lunacy - Dockers would never have 22 on the field.

I could see 35 at a push and personally would be happiest removing the rookie list and reducing it to 40.

I’d love to see them keep a cat b rookie spot to incentivise international and remote recruiting. Kids like Leno Thomas and Isaiah Butters who we drafted last year don’t get on a list without the cat b Category.

 

[briztoon]

How is the draft devalued?

Sure teams will take less players all round say 3 or 4 picks not 7 or 8.

But they will still target the cream of the crop.

We won't see too many Matt Pride is types or even Kelly or Pickett which would be a shame.

I see future drafts differently.

I expect most teams to draft 2 or 3 players only.

A rebuilding team might hit the draft harder.

Teams will target the top U18 players in the first 15 odd picks, but I can see teams in the window drafting the best mature age talent in the back end of the first round.

We’ll see more 19 and 20 year olds drafted in the second round, especially KPP types, as more kids are developed in the State leagues.

 

[eastfreo75]

How is the draft devalued?

Sure teams will take less players all round say 3 or 4 picks not 7 or 8.

But they will still target the cream of the crop.

We won't see too many Matt Pride is types or even Kelly or Pickett which would be a shame.

Less spots for development players and therefore making later picks more of risk.

I would argue that the mature aged players will be picked up more often as clubs will want players who can play straight away.

Making the likes of Pickett and Kelly more likely to be picked up as replacements for injuries.

Back to the drafting.

The Main draft has been reducing in value due to the mid season draft, delisted free agency, free agency and pre season selections ie Stack.

Most teams contenders have a best 30 and that only leaves 5 spots.

Now if you take out a depth ruck and maybe 1 or 2 depth that leaves only 2-3 development spots.

The late third round picks will be a waste for the top teams.

I predict that the draft numbers will in the 50’s and therefore making third round picks every little in value.

 

[coniglio_number1]

Given that every club now has either a reserves or an affiliate team in the 2nd tier competitions then I don’t see why the axed players can’t be shifted to the reserves team and allow clubs to harvest from B team to allow for injury cover.
I’m personally all for list reduction as it would ensure that clubs would go for ready to go players such as marlion Pickett, Tim kelly, Daniel Lloyd, etc. there’s already too many players in the league that are subpar but kept due to “potential”. Let that potential develop in the B league and bring up the blokes that can perform right now.

 

[coniglio_number1]

I'm not convinced about restricting 18 year old's from being drafted. Apart from that everything about an under 21 league I think works ok. But it still does not answer what happens to the players outside your senior team that still on a list that are 22 to 25 years old. Where are they playing if lists are 35 and there is no reserves team for him to play in? It needs serious thought put into it before we just go to 35 on list and not think it through how it works for all the players and leagues outside the AFL. Foe me, the under 21's works best if the league maintain lists big enough to have a reserves comp too. So you have your senior AFL team, their reserves side too and within each state the youngsters hoping to be drafted have a SANFL, WAFL and TAC Under 21's league as the pathway to get drafted with stand alone VFA clubs becoming under 21 teams such as Port Melbourne but the guys too old for that can still get looked at as tops ups for each AFL reserve team each season. If lists goto 35, that is not possible, which is what concerns me if not all thought through properly. It is why clubs you only revert to 35 lists if the finances are so bad, it has to.

I think that we could keep the draft age but reduced list sizes would stop clubs from stockpiling beanpoles in the hopes that they get good rather than taking the ready to go bloke. The beanpoles that don’t make it then don’t spend years clogging the top tier and taking undeserved cash from those that should be getting it
The 18yr olds that are actually ready to play will get selected such as when NBA players get picked up straight out of high school eg kevin garnett

 

[Mt Isa Mustang]

Given that every club now has either a reserves or an affiliate team in the 2nd tier competitions then I don’t see why the axed players can’t be shifted to the reserves team and allow clubs to harvest from B team to allow for injury cover.
I’m personally all for list reduction as it would ensure that clubs would go for ready to go players such as marlion Pickett, Tim kelly, Daniel Lloyd, etc. there’s already too many players in the league that are subpar but kept due to “potential”. Let that potential develop in the B league and bring up the blokes that can perform right now.

A guy like Jake Riccardi or Tom Hutchesson may not want to stick around Sydney if they aren't earning a living playing in the GWS Neafl side.

 

[coniglio_number1]

A guy like Jake Riccardi or Tom Hutchesson may not want to stick around Sydney if they aren't earning a living playing in the GWS Neafl side.

They Would likely head home but then probably be good enough to be on club lists in their home state. We are a unique example though.

 

[Obeanie1]

Less spots for development players and therefore making later picks more of risk.

I would argue that the mature aged players will be picked up more often as clubs will want players who can play straight away.

Making the likes of Pickett and Kelly more likely to be picked up as replacements for injuries.

Back to the drafting.

The Main draft has been reducing in value due to the mid season draft, delisted free agency, free agency and pre season selections ie Stack.

Most teams contenders have a best 30 and that only leaves 5 spots.

Now if you take out a depth ruck and maybe 1 or 2 depth that leaves only 2-3 development spots.

The late third round picks will be a waste for the top teams.

I predict that the draft numbers will in the 50’s and therefore making third round picks every little in value.

The minimum list turnover is three already excluding trades.

I don't see that changing to 2. Third round picks will still hold decent value, especially after several years when the state league comps get better and that mature age pick shows promise.

Round 4 on-wards will look like the Sydney CBD right now....................empty!!

 

[eastfreo75]

The minimum list turnover is three already excluding trades.

I don't see that changing to 2. Third round picks will still hold decent value, especially after several years when the state league comps get better and that mature age pick shows promise.

Round 4 on-wards will look like the Sydney CBD right now....................empty!!

When you draft a player you commit to a 2 year contract.

Let’s use West Coast as an example because you know them well and they are in flag contention.

Nick Nat is coming back from a knee injury. The Eagles like to play 2 rucks as a structure.

Now do you go with 2 or 3 other rucks on your list. Or do wait for an injury and get a ruck in the mid season draft.

Either way, you don’t draft a ruck in the main draft. You need depth cover for injuries.

Key backs you have McGovern,Barass, Schofield and Brander who play on a wing. Williams as a developing tall.

Now do you draft another key ball who could 3-5 years to develop or do you get a Delisted free agent as depth cover.

Say Willie Rioli is still suspended in 2021. Say the Eagles keep him on 35 list. Then you have 34 players to pick from.

Do the Eagles still want to draft a kid as a late third pick? or Do they get in a delist free agent?

Venables is out with concussion. If he is still out and you keep him on the list. That reduces the Eagles having an extra spot for a development player.

Let’s look at the great mature Picks from West Coast in recent times.

Liam Ryan had big questions over his fitness and professionalism. He did a great preseason with Subi. He would have been picked at the mid season draft.

Rioli was too fat and did a great season and lost a massive amount of weight. Again, you have gone mid season draft.

Kelly professionalism wasn’t up to standard. He did a great preseason and his numbers went through the roof.

Clubs can use the mid season draft and their risk is only 6 months on players who have a body of work.

Why would you go a late third pick on a 18 kid and be committed for 2 years years.