Does the Academy selections encourage tanking?

[Suma Magic]

Yes they are. It means there is a much greater talent pool and a guy who is drafted using pick 70 in 2016 is about the same as drafting a guy using pick 55 in 2013. It makes a big difference.

It's about relative advantage/disadvantage.

Not absolute advantage/disadvantage.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

I had all that information in the post.

That's funny. I didn't ask for all that information, just what picks were used to get Mills. So this is what, the 7th time you've avoided the question?

Don't bother answering, everyone knows that Sydney were able to get a top 3 elite player for picks in the 30's, everyone knows that it's a rort.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

You cannot be this naive? This is a competition, you need to beat other clubs. If St Kilda and Carlton improve but other teams improve more because they have an unfair advantage, then the net result is St Kilda and Carlton are hindered.

It's hilarious watching his arguments, isn't it.

 

[Happy_Neale]

Why don't we have Academies in Canada, the amount of talent we are losing to curling is staggering.

I'm being flippant but my point stands.... Personally, I don't care if we lose players to other sports because we wouldn't know anyway. I don't think I'm being rash to say it wouldn't dampen the general public's opinion on the quality of football one little bit.

Its just my thoughts, end of the day nothing is changing, happy to agree to disagree.

Sorry, are you saying you don't care if the standard of football is better overall or not? Surely you would want to see the best footballers out there each week?

 

[Happy_Neale]

That's funny. I didn't ask for all that information, just what picks were used to get Mills. So this is what, the 7th time you've avoided the question?

Don't bother answering, everyone knows that Sydney were able to get a top 3 elite player for picks in the 30's, everyone knows that it's a rort.

Stacked up against the points system so those picks were deemed by the AFL to be of equal value. What's the issue with that?

 

[Colonial]

Areas where AFL has traditionally been a popular sport. Parts of the Riverina.

Hmmm so traditionally and popular there would be a ton of draftees from there yes?

But theres been hardly any. Well at least until the academies.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

Sorry, are you saying you don't care if the standard of football is better overall or not? Surely you would want to see the best footballers out there each week?

I don't want to see the best players continually going to Sydney, no.

 

[Colonial]

I have never cried about that. Nice hive mind post bud. What do you mean by 'people like you' anyway?

Not only does it not bother me, I think it's a complete non issue. Someone has to be on top, someone has to be on the bottom. Someone has to be the 22nd player picked each week.

Not at all. As i said like you. If your traditional club was at the bottom you would. Lucky you guys got tassie eh?

 

[Colonial]

So the academies are helping Cartlon and St Kilda now? You sir are a muppet.

4 clubs benefit from the academies and the rest are hindered because 4 clubs have a distinct and unfair advantage on them.

Unlike the distinct unfair advantage of your club being based where over 90% of draftees come from?

 

[Marc_Remillard]

Stacked up against the points system so those picks were deemed by the AFL to be of equal value. What's the issue with that?

I'm arguing against an AFL created system that they deem to be fair so obviously I'm against it. I thought that would have been obvious.

Let's look at it in another way. Has a club ever traded a couple of picks in the 30's for a top 3 pick?

The answer is no, why do you think that is so?

 

[RUNVS]

Hmmm so traditionally and popular there would be a ton of draftees from there yes?

But theres been hardly any. Well at least until the academies.

I would be very curious to know how many players were drafted from the Riverina between 2005 and 2012 and then compare it to how many were drafted in 2014 and 2015.

 

[Suma Magic]

This reminds me of the CoLA debate, and posters trying to justify players needing an extra 50-100k a year to account for cost of living differences.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

Unlike the distinct unfair advantage of your club being based where over 90% of draftees come from?

That's just not true, 90% of the players do not come from Vic

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Not at all. As i said like you. If your traditional club was at the bottom you would.

My opinion on this wouldn't change if my club was at a the bottom.

 

[Colonial]

So isnt it a distinct and unfair advantage that traditional clubs are based where the massive majority of players come from?
Or is it because its traditional it doesnt matter and is just bad luck?

 

[Colonial]

That's just not true, 90% of the players do not come from Vic

No?

 

[Marc_Remillard]

So isnt it a distinct and unfair advantage that traditional clubs are based where the massive majority of players come from?
Or is it because its traditional it doesnt matter and is just bad luck?

You're wrong though, more than 90% do not come from Victoria. Your argument is based on incorrect facts

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Sorry, are you saying you don't care if the standard of football is better overall or not? Surely you would want to see the best footballers out there each week?

I'm ambivalent about academies, I don't think they are the god send many others do, but I can understand why they are there.

But let every Australian kid be available equally for every Australian club.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

No?

About 57% last year were from Victoria. There are what, 11 Vic clubs? That's 61% of the competition, so the numbers are actually under.

Note: Hopper was listed under North Ballarat but I included him as a non-Vic

 

[Number37]

The usual Victorian whingers with the usual it is all about Victorian teams. BORING.
Get over the fact that there are northern academies and that northern teams will get benefits from these academies.
Yeah we get it, Victorians don't give a crap if the game is made stronger in NSW & Qld. What is important is if the Big4 are sh!te and how the AFL can give them a leg up financially and with draft picks so that they don't suck so much.
Add up all the benefits given to Victorian teams and compare that to the benefits given to Northern teams.
The supposed stronghold of AFL is nothing more than a basket case waiting for its next handout.

 

[Doggy Dan]

Unlike the distinct unfair advantage of your club being based where over 90% of draftees come from?

Draftees like Sheil and Cameron, yes that has been a significant advantage for us.

 

[Colonial]

Draftees like Sheil and Cameron, yes that has been a significant advantage for us.

Who were we going to draft?

 

[Colonial]

About 57% last year were from Victoria. There are what, 11 Vic clubs? That's 61% of the competition, so the numbers are actually under.

Note: Hopper was listed under North Ballarat but I included him as a non-Vic

Yep and thats because all 4 northern clubs had academies that they drafted from instead.

 

[TiggerMan22]

The usual Victorian whingers with the usual it is all about Victorian teams. BORING.
Get over the fact that there are northern academies and that northern teams will get benefits from these academies.
Yeah we get it, Victorians don't give a crap if the game is made stronger in NSW & Qld. What is important is if the Big4 are sh!te and how the AFL can give them a leg up financially and with draft picks so that they don't suck so much.
Add up all the benefits given to Victorian teams and compare that to the benefits given to Northern teams.
The supposed stronghold of AFL is nothing more than a basket case waiting for its next handout.

Yeh I remember all the handouts Richmond got. Remember when we were called the "worst team since Fitzroy"? Yeh we got a nice pick 6 as our first pick that year. Pick 15 the next year! In drafts that already had players taken from them!
While Sydney finish top 4 and get access to better players.

 

[Scotland]

Yeh I remember all the handouts Richmond got. Remember when we were called the "worst team since Fitzroy"? Yeh we got a nice pick 6 as our first pick that year. Pick 15 the next year! In drafts that already had players taken from them!
While Sydney finish top 4 and get access to better players.

Get any decent draft picks between, say, 2004 and 2009?