Draft mechanisms under review

[sr36]

The issue is that the AFL is designed (somewhat poorly) to be cyclical, and therefore at some point Brisbane will probably be poor at some point, and it'll be interesting to see if they can still retain their players at that point. The struggling teams in Victoria can still fill their lists with Victorian talent from the draft without compromising too much on talent (see the Dogs' drafts from the '10s).

The struggling teams from Vic get raided just as hard as the Northern clubs.

In terms of the cyclical nature of the comp - it's been the struggling Vic teams who get stuck at the bottom for long stints without playing finals and then become unattractive. Sydney bounced back straight away on the back of academy picks and have missed finals 3 times in 20 years and aren't going down any time quick. We're at the beginning of the academy advantages really kicking in - it's going to be a very strong era for the Northern teams. Enjoy it. They'll change the system, but the nature of draft advantages is that they take a while to take effect and then take a while to wash through the system. So it'll be a strong and not short era for the Academy teams.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

The issue is that the AFL is designed (somewhat poorly) to be cyclical, and therefore at some point Brisbane will probably be poor at some point, and it'll be interesting to see if they can still retain their players at that point. The struggling teams in Victoria can still fill their lists with Victorian talent from the draft without compromising too much on talent (see the Dogs' drafts from the '10s).

On the bolded point, while what you're saying might be true, it's all subjective and based on speculation/opinion. Also struggling sides still have to pay 95% of the salary cap, so they've got to be paying someone. Issue is it's hard to sell a club that is struggling when there's 10 potential clubs back home who can offer you a similar contract. What we do know is that during that time, Polec, Yeo, Docherty, Longer, Karnezis and Schache all went to clubs back in their home state.

Hawthorn are similarly struggling on field the last few years, but haven't lost many youngsters they wanted to keep. A fair part of that is because Hawthorn is better run, but it's also easier being a struggling club when you're a big wealthy club in Victoria.

You make some good points.

However, I don't think Hawthorn is 'similarly' struggling. Brisbane failed to win more than 5 games for at least 5 seasons, including 4 years in a row. Hawthorn have only won less than 7 games once. We're obviously still going poorly but the vision for the future looks different when you are more competitive and seeming to improve as opposed to the situation at Brisbane where hope was at an all time low.

Even then, we had 3 younger/inexperienced players all seek a trade (for whom a contract was in place or offered) this season alone (Brockman, Kozi and Ryan). Besides, retention isn't only a 'young players' issue. Since our halcyon threepeat days (i.e. after Brisbane's 'go home' 5), Hawthorn have still lost Jordan Lewis, Sam Mitchell, Luke Hodge, Isaac Smith, Jack Gunston, Tom Mitchell, Jaeger O'Meara, Ryan Burton, etc, etc. (these are top tier players - some of those we contributed to but many we wanted to keep). This doesn't count all the second tier players also lost (Duryea, Suckling, Pittonet, Brockman, Anderson, Ceglar, O'Brien, etc, etc.).

Even then, I wouldn't say Hawthorn have particular retention issues - it's part of the competition and it's especially part of being a lower based club. Look at Fremantle - they're from a footy state (where there are only 2 clubs to choose from and the other is the worst team in the comp) and they seem to have wanted players requesting out all the time - including plenty from WA.

With all this said, even if retention really was a challenge for non footy state clubs - I don't think the current academy system is a fair counterbalance - with Sydney for example able to always remain competitive through really top end talent coming in very cheaply regardless of where they finish on the ladder. In a mostly equalised comp that as you say is designed to be cyclical, it's a very significant advantage.

 

[Frederico_WA]

According to Cal Twomey:

What changes would you like to see and what do you think will actually change?

Want to see: Complete overhaul to simplify the system that causes such controversy every year and can be exploited to the detriment of other teams.

• Combine the NGA and club-affiliated academies to form a single National AFL Academy Program (NAFLAP) independent of club affiliation/control.
  1. The intent of the NAFLAP is to attract/develop/identify youth following a set curriculum while simultaneous provide a pathway for Level 1/2 coach to accreditation
  2. NAFLAP is paid for by AFL but overseen by AFL Team Committee (1x from each club)
  3. Clubs hire the coaches who are then seconded to the NAFLAP to run the program
  4. NAFLAP provides a curriculum for beginner/intermediate/elite player talent
  5. NAFLAP provide all clubs with player information (strengths, weaknesses etc) and drafting reports
• No discount on draft night, no special access to youth players
• Remove father/son ... just because 'it's tradition' doesn't mean it needs to continue unchanged. Instead trigger F/S at the end of the rookie contract (year 3) so the kid can move then if he really wants to.

Actually happen: "Nothing to see here, it's perfect."

 

[RUNVS]

The struggling teams from Vic get raided just as hard as the Northern clubs.

In terms of the cyclical nature of the comp - it's been the struggling Vic teams who get stuck at the bottom for long stints without playing finals and then become unattractive. Sydney bounced back straight away on the back of academy picks and have missed finals 3 times in 20 years and aren't going down any time quick. We're at the beginning of the academy advantages really kicking in - it's going to be a very strong era for the Northern teams. Enjoy it. They'll change the system, but the nature of draft advantages is that they take a while to take effect and then take a while to wash through the system. So it'll be a strong and not short era for the Academy teams.

This is fairly disingenuous.

Warner
McDonald
McInerney
McLean
Amartey
Rowbottom

all players we have brought in in recent years from the draft. In fact the long academy players we have drafted in the first round since falling to our lows in 2019 was Campbell, and yes, that is only one player.

 

[Purple Suit]

This is fairly disingenuous.

Warner
McDonald
McInerney
McLean
Amartey
Rowbottom

all players we have brought in in recent years from the draft. In fact the long academy players we have drafted in the first round since falling to our lows in 2019 was Campbell, and yes, that is only one player.

Academies are just extra tickets in the lotto. They aren't always going to produce players but when they do, they can be better than other options as the kids have had an elite environment for longer. Get a gifted kid into that program and they will end up a long way in front.

It's happening all across Australia, there are less traditional pathway players making it in comparisons to years past. It's going to get to a point that to improve the league, academies need to occur in every state for the elite players from a young age all the way through, from all walks of life. Not just First Nations, Minority groups or NSW / QLD based players.

 

[sr36]

This is fairly disingenuous.

Warner
McDonald
McInerney
McLean
Amartey
Rowbottom

all players we have brought in in recent years from the draft. In fact the long academy players we have drafted in the first round since falling to our lows in 2019 was Campbell, and yes, that is only one player.

Sydney do a lot of things well. Drafting and coaching obvious ones. There's some blokes who are going to be good players in that list, but you bounced back in 2021 must of those guys played minor if any role in your bounce back.

I don't think it's disingenuous to suggest that your academy recruits have played a big part in you recovering really quickly after having had a team get too old after a very long stint in the finals. Mills and Heeney in particular. Plus the new ones coming through are solidifying the bounce.

When looking at the comparative advantages of go home factor versus academy recruits take a look at Richmond versus Sydney. Which way would you prefer to attempt a rebound after a good run - 5 top draft picks added to a decent team through your academy whilst also having some top draft picks. Or going all in on your picks and salary cap to pick up two 26 year olds returning home on really big and long contracts in a really risky move that could stuff you for years.

The academies take out the cyclical nature of talent acquisition. You'll get top tier talent regardless of draft position.

 

[Swanssince91]

Incorrect....

You didn't lose Shane Mumford in 2012 because of Kurt Tippett.

You lost Mumford in 2013 due to Lance Franklin

Yes, correct

 

[Caligo]

It is interesting that since COLA was removed sydney has stopped raiding other clubs.

I wonder if there is a connection?

 

[RUNVS]

It is interesting that since COLA was removed sydney has stopped raiding other clubs.

I wonder if there is a connection?

Players demand higher salaries living in Sydney to pay for housing, those higher salaries mean our salary cap is a lot tighter. Not exactly surprising.

 

[Caligo]

Players demand higher salaries living in Sydney to pay for housing, those higher salaries mean our salary cap is a lot tighter. Not exactly surprising.

Sydney house prices are indeed no joke, but the actual cost of living (excluding accommodation) is no different sydney vs Melbourne vs perth, and the sorts of players we are talking about aren't renting, so any house they buy in any city is just an investment in the long run anyway.

It doesn't explain the change at all. There is a different reason at play.

 

[Swanssince91]

It is interesting that since COLA was removed sydney has stopped raiding other clubs.

I wonder if there is a connection?

We just offered Aaron Naughton 10 years, wtf are you on about
We bring in one key forward after another, check the history

 

[Caligo]

We just offered Aaron Naughton 10 years, wtf are you on about
We bring in one key forward after another, check the history

Who have you brought in since COLA ended?

 

[Swanssince91]

Who have you brought in since COLA ended?

We had Buddy for 10 years, we didn't need anyone....
We've been doing this since 1995

 

[JasRulz63]

Even then, I wouldn't say Hawthorn have particular retention issues - it's part of the competition and it's especially part of being a lower based club. Look at Fremantle - they're from a footy state (where there are only 2 clubs to choose from and the other is the worst team in the comp) and they seem to have wanted players requesting out all the time - including plenty from WA.

I think what is happening at Freo is a good chance at happening at Brisbane when we start to struggle.

Granted they've lost a fair few players from WA as well, but I do think having a higher proportion of your list from the same state does help retention more, especially with the interstate clubs like the big Victorian ones being in the ear of draftees from the moment they're drafted interstate.

As it stands, only 25% of Brisbane's list is from Queensland. We've also only had one top 20 pick from our academy.

 

[.Shotties.]

It is interesting that since COLA was removed sydney has stopped raiding other clubs.

I wonder if there is a connection?

Is there a connection between a club who has to pay overs to retain and recruit having a reduced ability to do so when the mechanism to equalise that disadvantage is removed? Probably.

I'd also like to know what qualifies as raiding in terms of player recruitment.

 

[Swanssince91]

Is there a connection between a club who has to pay overs to retain and recruit having a reduced ability to do so when the mechanism to equalise that disadvantage is removed? Probably.

I'd also like to know what qualifies as raiding in terms of player recruitment.

Geelong raided GWS for Jeremy Cameron and Adelaide for Patrick Dangerfield, hope they're being investigated.
Richmond raided Gold Coast for Tom Lynch when they had Jack Riewoldt and Dustin Martin, hopefully they're being scrutinised aswell

 

[Guardian Hawk]

This is fairly disingenuous.

Warner
McDonald
McInerney
McLean
Amartey
Rowbottom

all players we have brought in in recent years from the draft. In fact the long academy players we have drafted in the first round since falling to our lows in 2019 was Campbell, and yes, that is only one player.

Yes and no.

Firstly, your list above of drafted talent looks no different to a list of drafted talent by any other team. It is not evidence of some kind of genius Sydney selecting. It's one or two good players and some role players - which any team - including the struggling ones - can boast.

Secondly, the players that have been the basis of Sydney's rise up the ladder since 2020 has been the improvement/emergence of Mills, Blakey, Gulden, etc. These players have been much more important than the likes or Rowbottom and McInerny and were all academy selections.

The issue, however, is that you have been able to select the top list AND the academy selections which is what creates the imbalance in contrast to other clubs.

Let's use the example you referred to in contrast to my club.

In 2020, Hawthorn won the last game of the year to move equal on points with Sydney, finishing 15th (Sydney 16th).

Hawthorn were set to finally get their first top 5 pick in 15 years (whilst Sydney already had multiple top 10 academy selections on their list despite not finishing low enough to have 'earnt' them).

By all reports, Hawthorn were predicted and set to take Logan McDonald with that pick. However, Sydney selected Logan McDonald. So, Hawthorn went to select their second choice - Braeden Campbell. However, as an academy product, Sydney could use some late picks to take him, at a discount, instead - gifting Sydney 2 top 5 selections before Hawthorn (who won the same number of games) had even made one! Hawthorn then got to select their third choice in DGB, with Sydney able to take BOTH their first and second choice.

As if that wasn't enough, Sydney then could still use some even later leftover junk picks to match a bid for Gulden at pick 32 - still a respectable 2nd round pick - that had likely slid due to being academy tied.

This is a huge advantage that allows clubs like Sydney to bounce back very quickly - and that's not even mentioning the other extra early first rounders they've been able to pick up even when competing for the flag.

Gold Coast is another example from this year - Hawthorn finished 16th and would love to pick up Jed Walter if available (we're desperate for key forwards). But Gold Coast can trade pick 4 (later than our pick 3) for 3! first rounders and STILL pick up Walter! They then get exclusive access to 2 other top 12 prospects. That means they get exclusive, discounted, double dipping access to more top 12 picks in 1 draft than some clubs have had for 20 years! The advantage is too big.

 

[Caligo]

Is there a connection between a club who has to pay overs to retain and recruit having a reduced ability to do so when the mechanism to equalise that disadvantage is removed? Probably.

I'd also like to know what qualifies as raiding in terms of player recruitment.

I define raiding as recruiting an actually wanted player (as opposed to when a club dishonestly says a player is wanted) who is best 22 at both clubs.

Obviously the concept of a genuinely wanted player as opposed to a falsely claimed wanted player is a subjective decision (hawthorn said Mitchell and omeara were wanted, but they clearly weren't in my opinion, hence they weren't raided, in contrast someone like Cerra or Jackson were raided because they were genuinely wanted).

 

[Swanssince91]

Yes and no.

Firstly, your list above of drafted talent looks no different to a list of drafted talent by any other team. It is not evidence of some kind of genius Sydney selecting. It's one or two good players and some role players - which any team - including the struggling ones - can boast.

Secondly, the players that have been the basis of Sydney's rise up the ladder since 2020 has been the improvement/emergence of Mills, Blakey, Gulden, etc. These players have been much more important than the likes or Rowbottom and McInerny and were all academy selections.

The issue, however, is that you have been able to select the top list AND the academy selections which is what creates the imbalance in contrast to other clubs.

Let's use the example you referred to in contrast to my club.

In 2020, Hawthorn won the last game of the year to move equal on points with Sydney, finishing 15th (Sydney 16th).

Hawthorn were set to finally get their first top 5 pick in 15 years (whilst Sydney already had multiple top 10 academy selections on their list despite not finishing low enough to have 'earnt' them).

By all reports, Hawthorn were predicted and set to take Logan McDonald with that pick. However, Sydney selected Logan McDonald. So, Hawthorn went to select their second choice - Braeden Campbell. However, as an academy product, Sydney could use some late picks to take him, at a discount, instead - gifting Sydney 2 top 5 selections before Hawthorn (who won the same number of games) had even made one! Hawthorn then got to select their third choice in DGB, with Sydney able to take BOTH their first and second choice.

As if that wasn't enough, Sydney then could still use some even later leftover junk picks to match a bid for Gulden at pick 32 - still a respectable 2nd round pick - that had likely slid due to being academy tied.

This is a huge advantage that allows clubs like Sydney to bounce back very quickly - and that's not even mentioning the other extra early first rounders they've been able to pick up even when competing for the flag.

Gold Coast is another example from this year - Hawthorn finished 16th and would love to pick up Jed Walter if available (we're desperate for key forwards). But Gold Coast can trade pick 4 (later than our pick 3) for 3! first rounders and STILL pick up Walter! They then get exclusive access to 2 other top 12 prospects. That means they get exclusive, discounted, double dipping access to more top 12 picks in 1 draft than some clubs have had for 20 years! The advantage is too big.

32 picks overlooked Gulden

 

[Guardian Hawk]

32 picks overlooked Gulden

Yes, I mentioned that. But even then - academy selections often slide as clubs could not be bothered picking a player they won't get and a second round pick is not insignificant in the context of already having access to 2 top 5 picks (using picks around the one you got Gulden with to obtain).

 

[RUNVS]

Yes, I mentioned that. But even then - academy selections often slide as clubs could not be bothered picking a player they won't get and a second round pick is not insignificant in the context of already having access to 2 top 5 picks (using picks around the one you got Gulden with to obtain).

Had someone bid on Gulden at 10 they would have got him.

 

[Swanssince91]

Had someone bid on Gulden at 10 they would have got him.

Correct, we had nothing to match.

 

[RUNVS]

Correct, we had nothing to match.

and on one can say Gulden would not have been worth a bid at pick 10.

 

[Swanssince91]

and on one can say Gulden would not have been worth a bid at pick 10.

He performed well in his final year, I guess they thought he was too short

 

[RUNVS]

He performed well in his final year, I guess they thought he was too short

They did, even though in the U17's Future's Game he was the best player on the field. He wasn't exactly hiding what he could do.