Opinion Is father-son access going to heavily dictate the next decade of premiers?

[LoungeLizard]

Because they are fairer competitions. They invented the draft, we adopted a draft but keep adding qualifiers that negate the reason one has a draft.

And I can follow more than one competition.

The 34 years ropes in the period from 2000-2009 when we had:

• 16 teams in the competition
• automatic priority picks for poor teams
• every team make a preliminary final

Go from 2012 when GWS (and their concessions) came in, and the equalisation picture is less rosy. With 18 teams automatic priority picks (based on on-field performance and not bedroom performance) are even more needed.

Adelaide - no finals since 2017
Carlton - no GF this century
Essendon - no finals win in 20 years
Fremantle - no premierships, no prelim since 2015
North Melbourne - no finals since 2016
St Kilda - no prelim since 2010

All of those teams except Freo have finished last since 2010.

Teams finishing last from Port entering the comp (and there first prelim appearance after)

Melbourne 1997 (Prelim 1998)
Brisbane 1998 (Prelim 1999)
Collingwood 1999 (Prelim 2002)
St Kilda 2000 (Prelim 2004)
Fremantle 2001 (Prelim 2006)
Western Bulldogs 2003 (Prelim 2008)

I've excluded Carlton from that period because they didn't have the full draft capital due to their salary cap penalties.

There is no reasonable denial that the AFL has an equalisation problem and has had one for over a decade. The Father-Son rule only exacerbates that problem.

Oh my, another who just picks and choices where to start and finish.

I chose the whole of the AFL, 34 years, every club bar 1 has played in a Grand Final, every club bar 4 have won a Grand Final.
Now if you want to compare with these "fairer comps" show us these "fairer comps" that have better strike rates?

 

[werdna78]

Getting cheap access to a young gun so good that he won the Norm Smith medal helped that along.

Just like Alex Rance helping you win the 2017 flag. Swings and roundabouts.

 

[The Punter]

Oh my, another who just picks and choices where to start and finish.

I chose the whole of the AFL, 34 years, every club bar 1 has played in a Grand Final, every club bar 4 have won a Grand Final.
Now if you want to compare with these "fairer comps" show us these "fairer comps" that have better strike rates?

I was making the point that the competition got less fairer when GWS came in, roughly the same time as the effects of the abolition of the automatic priority picks started to be fully felt.

The system would be fairer, and the father-son rule would have less effect, if poor teams had access to automatic priority picks. But tanking.

Our draft started in 1986: why not start there? Everyone makes judgements about what best to quote to make their argument, so I do not assume anyone (including myself) spotless in this regard. But it's been structurally harder to go from bottom to top since 2012.

Also, not for nothing, but arguments for the Father-Son rule are weak. No supporter would stop following football if it was abolished. Our game didn't used to have interchange either: that move was made to make the game fairer.

 

[LoungeLizard]

I was making the point that the competition got less fairer when GWS came in, roughly the same time as the effects of the abolition of the automatic priority picks started to be fully felt.

The system would be fairer, and the father-son rule would have less effect, if poor teams had access to automatic priority picks. But tanking.

Our draft started in 1986: why not start there? Everyone makes judgements about what best to quote to make their argument, so I do not assume anyone (including myself) spotless in this regard. But it's been structurally harder to go from bottom to top since 2012.

Also, not for nothing, but arguments for the Father-Son rule are weak. No supporter would stop following football if it was abolished. Our game didn't used to have interchange either: that move was made to make the game fairer.

I don't care if the father son rules are changed or stopped.

I like the idea of having sons of greats playing for the same club, but if it doesn't happen, well meh.

The VFL/AFL have been changing rules forever, in the eyes of some (mainly losers) they will never get it right.

But IMO clubs lose GF's not the AFL, St.Kilda have 1 flag, mainly from their own doing, you couldn't win in the VFL days and can't win in the AFL days, nothing has changed.

St.Kilda did something bad to the gods, i'm sure of it.

 

[The Punter]

St.Kilda did something bad to the gods, i'm sure of it.

I have a sneaky suspicion what comes next.

From a Collingwood supporter, it's usually a mention of John Greening.

 

[Iago]

Barry Mitchell, yeah? Carlton and Sydney.

Yeah that's the fella, Carlton and Sydney. And Collingwood.

 

[iameviljez]

I don't care if the father son rules are changed or stopped.

I like the idea of having sons of greats playing for the same club, but if it doesn't happen, well meh.

The VFL/AFL have been changing rules forever, in the eyes of some (mainly losers) they will never get it right.

But IMO clubs lose GF's not the AFL, St.Kilda have 1 flag, mainly from their own doing, you couldn't win in the VFL days and can't win in the AFL days, nothing has changed.

St.Kilda did something bad to the gods, i'm sure of it.

St Kilda hasn’t been well run, but the VFL - particularly post-war - did favour clubs with deeper coffers. Some clubs were playing with a stacked deck

 

[LoungeLizard]

St Kilda hasn’t been well run, but the VFL - particularly post-war - did favour clubs with deeper coffers. Some clubs were playing with a stacked deck

And before the war won nothing.

It's been going on forever, blame others for your mistakes, it's easy to do isn't it.

The only way the AFL can make this league as fair as can be, as some want, is to start culling clubs.

Do you want that to happen?
I don't.

 

[iameviljez]

And before the war won nothing.

It's been going on forever, blame others for your mistakes, it's easy to do isn't it.

The only way the AFL can make this league as fair as can be, as some want, is to start culling clubs.

Do you want that to happen?
I don't.

Oh look, “fairness” is always a balancing act, I agree.

F/S I would keep. Academies too, but I think the points system need serious work.

I do think there is good reason to start moving the GF around the country but I acknowledge that it’s just not do-able.

Priority picks are too much, IMO. They turbocharged a lot of clubs; it was overkill.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Oh look, “fairness” is always a balancing act, I agree.

F/S I would keep. Academies too, but I think the points system need serious work.

I do think there is good reason to start moving the GF around the country but I acknowledge that it’s just not do-able.

Priority picks are too much, IMO. They turbocharged a lot of clubs; it was overkill.

So, do exactly the same as now except take away the points system?

That's fair enough, but I would guess, this will not help St.Kilda one iota.

Moving the Grand Final also will not help St.Kilda.

The only thing that will help St.Kilda is St.Kilda.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

And before the war won nothing.

It's been going on forever, blame others for your mistakes, it's easy to do isn't it.

The only way the AFL can make this league as fair as can be, as some want, is to start culling clubs.

Do you want that to happen?
I don't.

Culling clubs obviously not on the table. It's barbaric.

Culling access father sons and academies is not, and would not change the fabric of the game for all the current supporters.

 

[Lingsface]

I reckon his old man played for Collingwood as well. So he got the success by going to his old man's club and leaving the one where his old man never played. The opposite of your theorem.

father son sydney left brownlow at Hawks.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Culling clubs obviously not on the table. It's barbaric.

Culling access father sons and academies is not, and would not change the fabric of the game for all the current supporters.

Seriously though, imo, changing it is not going to help St.Kilda win a premiership.

Brisbane are going to get extra lucky with the Ashcroft lads, no-one would say a word if these 2 came in while Brisbane was last.
I can understand that some clubs are pissed because it never seems to be them that get the advantage others get.

I like the idea of the sons of club greats playing for the same club, but if they stop or change it, so be it, but it is not going to help St.Kilda, one day they might even regret the change.

 

[dean33]

Just like Alex Rance helping you win the 2017 flag. Swings and roundabouts.

 

[iameviljez]

So, do exactly the same as now except take away the points system?

That's fair enough, but I would guess, this will not help St.Kilda one iota.

Moving the Grand Final also will not help St.Kilda.

The only thing that will help St.Kilda is St.Kilda.

Oh I couldn’t give two shits about StKilda specifically.

 

[iameviljez]

Culling clubs obviously not on the table. It's barbaric.

Culling access father sons and academies is not, and would not change the fabric of the game for all the current supporters.

Academies are, for now, the one major asset GWS and Gold Coast have against the Go Home factor. Until they are old enough to get the father-sons, they should be able to keep them.

 

[iameviljez]

They might as well be. They are banned from playing at their home states in grand finals lol

Brisbane famously banned from recruiting Ashcrofts and Fletchers, eh?

 

[BF Tiger]

Just like Alex Rance helping you win the 2017 flag. Swings and roundabouts.

Not quite. Rance was an end of first round priority pick (pick 18) for a long-term underperforming team. An equalisation measure.

Both Ashcrofts are F-S gifts to finals/premiership Brisbane who would otherwise have been snapped up in the top 5 by underperforming teams as an equalisation measure.

See the difference?