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

[Obeanie1]

Absolutely it’s a mini-industry in and of itself which is a great point and as you say it will never be gotten rid of. And I’m not saying it should as such I just don’t really agree with the fundamental principle of it.

In advertising there is a saying.

A bad ad can be the best ad.

Because it gets people's attention and reactions.

The AFL draft process is a diabolical steaming pile of shite.

But the AFL doesn't agree nor care. What shite for some clubs isn't bad for the AFL. They get teams they want playing finals and grand finals. And the crap draft and trade system gets plenty of clicks and coverage for the AFL.

They are laughing all the way to the bank and their personal bonuses going up.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Aside from it being 'unique' I've yet to hear one convincing argument that suggests Father-Son is a good thing.

It's romantic? It creates deeper connections between fans and clubs. It creates honour and legacy?

 

[FlowersByIrene]

I don't follow a specific club.


Regarding the rest of your post....It felt wrong to me that Geelong didn't win the flag in 1989. It felt wrong to me that St Kilda didn't win the flag in 2009.
It felt wrong to me that Greg Williams didn't win the Brownlow in 1993 or whenever it was that Wanganeen won it.

But the thought that the AFL would introduce rules to appease my notions of romance is just utterly unthinkable for a professional sporting code.

If you don't follow a club you wouldn't get it.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Are you saying if the daicos brothers weren’t drafted to Collingwood they d never have the chance to play for their dads club ever again??

That’s some real next level ignorant bizarreness going on right there…

Oh and btw you want to know just how much the rule should remain for such noble reasons like the “romanticism” of it and maintaining the fabric is ?

There’s a young player at your club atm, one of your most promising, his dad was freos inaugural captain , coached the club , been board member for 15+ years , vice president and only play 47 games for the club due to a degenerative knee condition .

Has his NAME on medal in honour of his football club for the BOF in the derby

His family on his dads side had Fremantle football heritage running through their veins through south Fremantle

Truly FFC royalty…

but guess what ?,just because he couldn’t play another couple seasons he goes into the draft to be ironically picked up gleefully by a club that’s one of the staunchest in defending the so called “integrity “ and rights of the f/s rule

Yeah that rule sure is sacred and would surely destroy the “fabric” of the competition if it was scrapped !

So you'd prefer a scenario where a Daicos or a Silvagni is drafted by force to a club, and then leaves that club to return to their fathers club (which as you say is an option and is likely a driving factor for those players to play at the club their father played at and they likely grew up supporting) after their two year contract? Where that club would just then complain that the player they spent a high pick on forced their way out of the club. We'd have minnows whinging "its not fair that this player wants to go to Collingwood and Collingwood aren't giving us fair value because they player is out of contract and has nominated them" wah wah.

 

[The Punter]

So you'd prefer a scenario where a Daicos or a Silvagni is drafted by force to a club, and then leaves that club to return to their fathers club (which as you say is an option and is likely a driving factor for those players to play at the club their father played at and they likely grew up supporting) after their two year contract? Where that club would just then complain that the player they spent a high pick on forced their way out of the club. We'd have minnows whinging "its not fair that this player wants to go to Collingwood and Collingwood aren't giving us fair value because they player is out of contract and has nominated them" wah wah.

1. Every player is drafted by force. That's the way rules work.

2. In your scenario, the club that had drafted the Daicos or Silvagni would be compensated. Richmond will receive no compensation for Ashcroft. North Melbourne did receive compensation for Horne-Francis. There is also the possibility that the Daicos or Silvagni likes their new club and decides to stay. Either way it would be fairer than the current situation where Richmond have no access to the best player in the draft despite finishing last.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

1. Every player is drafted by force. That's the way rules work.

2. In your scenario, the club that had drafted the Daicos or Silvagni would be compensated. Richmond will receive no compensation for Ashcroft. North Melbourne did receive compensation for Horne-Francis. There is also the possibility that the Daicos or Silvagni likes their new club and decides to stay. Either way it would be fairer than the current situation where Richmond have no access to the best player in the draft despite finishing last.

You won't be saying this when Riewoldt's sons are available.

Just focus on what your club can control and stop asking for hand outs from the rest of the competition.

 

[The Punter]

You won't be saying this when Riewoldt's sons are available.

Just focus on what your club can control and stop asking for hand outs from the rest of the competition.

Know our place. Right.

I am on the record on Riewoldt's sons: my joy at watching St Kilda players succeed does not change due to their parentage.

I am a realist, so know that the most money is made from big drawing games on Friday nights, but also that to a certain extent, it it a self-fulfilling prophesy, where the rich get richer from those games. So while St Kilda are ensuring the TV rights are where they need to be by guaranteeing that ninth game of the weekend on a Sunday twilight at Docklands against a non-Victorian team, I think a little equalisation cash is more than fair.

But we will continue to control what we can control: winning games where we have nothing to play for against teams with everything to play for. You are only as good as your last game.

 

[Cmarsh]

I'm not an NRL fan so not really across their off season.

Fair enough, but in the context of what you were talking about I think what they have in their offseason s*its all over just the draft and trades which dominate the AFL offseason.

 

[Obeanie1]

It's romantic? It creates deeper connections between fans and clubs. It creates honour and legacy?

All great.

If they weren't picked up after a fat discount.

Especially on top of an academy discount.

PLUS bringing in a free agent at no cost. Aka another discount.

This is where clubs double and triple dip into the generous AFL policies concerning g player movements and drafting.

Set a pragmatic limit on how much one club can rort over a period of time. A "speed limit" of sorts that stops any one club making significant gains via these discounts.

That's how you equalise a competition.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

All great.

If they weren't picked up after a fat discount.

Especially on top of an academy discount.

PLUS bringing in a free agent at no cost. Aka another discount.

This is where clubs double and triple dip into the generous AFL policies concerning g player movements and drafting.

Set a pragmatic limit on how much one club can rort over a period of time. A "speed limit" of sorts that stops any one club making significant gains via these discounts.

That's how you equalise a competition.

Agree at the no discount concept, but the players need to be reasonably accessible. Points mechanism is fine, but it shouldn't have a discount.

There should also be no Academies.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

If you don't follow a club you wouldn't get it.

Maybe that gives me a better perspective? Some clarity.

 

[CrowToon]

It's romantic? It creates deeper connections between fans and clubs. It creates honour and legacy?

None of that does anything to advance fairness in a professional competition.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

None of that does anything to advance fairness in a professional competition.

This isn't a chess competition, it's a professional team sport. The aim is to make an entertaining product, father sons contribute to that. If it was "fair" we'd abandon the matches and just award the premiership cup in rotation.

 

[CrowToon]

This isn't a chess competition, it's a professional team sport. The aim is to make an entertaining product, father sons contribute to that. If it was "fair" we'd abandon the matches and just award the premiership cup in rotation.

You are conflating fairness and equality. It's embarrassing actually.

There is not a single person who would burn a membership over the end of Father/Son.

It adds ZERO to the entertainment other than it makes fans get excited when there is one with a bit of skill.

But that completely compromises the draft.

But why waste my time with someone who thinks fairness means rotating the flag.

 

[Fadge]

Answer: I hope so.

 

[GC2015]

The major advantage of both the Academies and the Father-Son system is that clubs get untrammeled access to a player before they are drafted, and hence can give them support prior to drafting - hence there's an argument, IMO, that F/S players do tend to excel.

It's very obvious that the AFL has allowed clubs greater access to their father-son prospects over the last decade with players spending time training with the club in the summer months, lining up for VFL teams throughout the season etc and it's not a coincidence to see a greater number of F/S prospects being drafted in the first round as a result. Expect this to continue until the AFL changes the rules by either cutting off early access before they're drafted or making it virtually impossible to draft them if you're already placed in the top 4. I doubt either of those things will be happening anytime soon so I fully expect father-son picks to continue to have a big say over which team wins the flag for the next decade or so.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

This isn't a chess competition, it's a professional team sport. The aim is to make an entertaining product, father sons contribute to that. If it was "fair" we'd abandon the matches and just award the premiership cup in rotation.

I totally agree about the 'entertaining product' part.

That's what sport is about. It's no different to the movies, Netflix or whatever other thousands of entertainment products people now get to choose from.

As such, it needs to compete and find ways to get eyes on screens.

What I don't agree with is that choreographing outcomes adds to the entertainment factor.

This is where sports need to be very, very careful. The moment people get a whiff that it's rigged, fixed or even choreographed - they lose interest. You can get that shit on Netflix.

This is why the Father-Son has no place in a professional sporting code.

And this segues into my next point, which is that I think you misinterpret what 'fair' means in the context of sport.

'Fair' doesn't mean everyone gets an equal amount of success. Again, you can get that shit on Netflix.

'Fair' just means that the odds aren't stacked for or against anyone.

For example, the Draft applies to everyone. But each year the talent will be different. You might get a dud at pick 1, or you might get Luke Hodge.

Process is 100% fair - but the outcome varies. It might suck that you got a dud - but it's still fair.

Like the Melbourne Cup, as another example. Getting barrier 24 instead of barrier 6 totally sucks and pretty much screws your chances - and means your chances of winning are negatively impacted, whilst someone else's are drastically improved. It sucks bad - but it's fair.


The Father-Son thing is just rubbish. Not only does it drastically improve one club's chances and negatively impacts everyone else's - the process itself is not fair.

Not everyone has ex-players that have children. Not everyone has ex-players that have boys. Not everyone has ex-players that have sons that choose to play footy. Not everyone has ex-players that have sons that choose to play footy that are any good.

On top of the unfair advantage, on what planet is the above any reason for a club to gain an advantage over the rest of the competition???!!! It just makes zero sense.

And there's also the fact that no draftee is allowed to choose who they play for. That's the rules. Unless your dad played AFL footy - then you're special for some unbeknown reason, and unlike all the other kids, you get to choose where you want to play.

It is just stupidity beyond words.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Not sure I agree with the premise of the thread, but kinda hope it does eventuate as we took bookends as Father sons last year, and although McCabe was the only one taken in the first round Calsher Dear certainly looks like he should have been taken that high too.

 

[GC2015]

Not sure I agree with the premise of the thread, but kinda hope it does eventuate as we took bookends as Father sons last year, and although McCabe was the only one taken in the first round Calsher Dear certainly looks like he should have been taken that high too.

Every team outside of GWS, GC, Freo & St Kilda currently have father-son picks on their list and most have at least one in their best 22:

Adelaide: Max Michalanney, Tyler Welsh
Brisbane: Will Ashcroft, Jaspa Fletcher, Levi Ashcroft*
Carlton: Jack Silvagni, Ben Camporeale, Lucas Camporeale
Collingwood: Darcy Moore, Josh Daicos, Nick Daicos
Essendon: Alwyn Davey Jr
Geelong: Jew Bews
Hawthorn: Finn Maginness, Calsher Dear
Melbourne: Jack Viney, Taj Woewodin
North Melbourne: Luke McDonald, Bailey Scott, Jackson Archer
Port Adelaide: Jackson Mead, Jase Burgoyne
Richmond: Maurice Rioli Jr
Sydney: Indhi Kirk
West Coast: Jake Waterman
Western Bulldogs: Tom Liberatore, Rhylee West, Sam Darcy

It's a rule that's benefitting most of the league and it's likely that we're going to see the presence of at least one father-son pick in the premiership winning team for the foreseeable future.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Every team outside of GWS, GC, Freo & St Kilda currently have father-son picks on their list and most have at least one in their best 22:

Adelaide: Max Michalanney, Tyler Welsh
Brisbane: Will Ashcroft, Jaspa Fletcher, Levi Ashcroft*
Carlton: Jack Silvagni, Ben Camporeale, Lucas Camporeale
Collingwood: Darcy Moore, Josh Daicos, Nick Daicos
Essendon: Alwyn Davey Jr
Geelong: Jew Bews
Hawthorn: Finn Maginness, Calsher Dear
Melbourne: Jack Viney, Taj Woewodin
North Melbourne: Luke McDonald, Bailey Scott, Jackson Archer
Port Adelaide: Jackson Mead, Jase Burgoyne
Richmond: Maurice Rioli Jr
Sydney: Indhi Kirk
West Coast: Jake Waterman
Western Bulldogs: Tom Liberatore, Rhylee West, Sam Darcy

It's a rule that's benefitting most of the league and it's likely that we're going to see the presence of at least one father-son pick in the premiership winning team for the foreseeable future.

The thing is that the majority of father sons are your run of the mill players, nothing special.

 

[GC2015]

The thing is that the majority of father sons are your run of the mill players, nothing special.

Are you sure about that? Maybe historically, but recent drafts suggest otherwise:

2023
Top 20 F/S picks: 2
Outisde top 20 F/S picks: 2

2022
Top 20 F/S picks: 3
Outside top 20 F/S picks: 3

2021
Top 20 F/S picks: 2
Outside top 20 F/S picks: 3

Virtually a 50/50 split between first round picks and non-first round picks over the last 3 drafts. To be clear, 3 of the 7 top 20 F/S picks between 2021-23 were top 4 picks and we're about to see another with Levi Ashcroft. So that's 4 top 4 picks in 4 years and 8 first round picks in 4 years. First round picks are not run of the mill players and top 4 picks certainly aren't run of the mill players. Then you've got other F/S picks that were taken later in the draft and end up kicking on to become stars like Josh Daicos or Jake Waterman.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Are you sure about that? Maybe historically, but recent drafts suggest otherwise:

2023
Top 20 F/S picks: 2
Outisde top 20 F/S picks: 2

2022
Top 20 F/S picks: 3
Outside top 20 F/S picks: 3

2021
Top 20 F/S picks: 2
Outside top 20 F/S picks: 3

Virtually a 50/50 split between first round picks and non-first round picks over the last 3 drafts. To be clear, 3 of the 7 top 20 F/S picks between 2021-23 were top 4 picks and we're about to see another with Levi Ashcroft. So that's 4 top 4 picks in 4 years and 8 first round picks in 4 years. First round picks are not run of the mill players and top 4 picks certainly aren't run of the mill players.

Go back further. Plenty of father sons that don’t amount to much.

 

[GC2015]

Go back further. Plenty of father sons that don’t amount to much.

Right, but the point of the thread is that the father-son rule appears to have become more advantageous these days than it ever was in the past and whether that will heavily dictate the next decade of premierships. It's undeniable that Nick Daicos, Darcy Moore and Will Ashcroft had a big say in the two premierships that have been won since this thread was started.

So what's changed? It appears that some clubs are putting a lot more time/resources into the development of their F/S prospects and are getting early access to develop them (training wise) thanks to the AFL relaxing their rules. It's kind of like the NGAs when we started seeing top 10 picks coming through after the AFL chose to incentivise the development of those players for clubs.