Swans' academy.

[grimlock]

You do realise other clubs effectively fund part of your academy funding?

We can divide part of the payment with the other 17 clubs. A second independent tribunal (independent from the first independent tribunal) will gather at Eddie's house (can't be at Gil's again as to maintain impartiality from the first tribunal) to determine the financial contributions of each of the 17 clubs to the player's growth and development.

 

[TedDougChris]

We can divide part of the payment with the other 17 clubs. A second independent tribunal (independent from the first independent tribunal) will gather at Eddie's house (can't be at Gil's again as to maintain impartiality from the first tribunal) to determine the financial contributions of each of the 17 clubs to the player's growth and development.

Just let me know when you want assistance with the net....

 

[PeteSummer]

We can divide part of the payment with the other 17 clubs. A second independent tribunal (independent from the first independent tribunal) will gather at Eddie's house (can't be at Gil's again as to maintain impartiality from the first tribunal) to determine the financial contributions of each of the 17 clubs to the player's growth and development.

Sydney themselves, the club, fund very little of the academy. Citibank, the AFL & club supporters tip in more than the football club.

 

[grimlock]

Sydney themselves, the club, fund very little of the academy. Citibank, the AFL & club supporters tip in more than the football club.

You've got the wrong sponsor. But hey, let's just keep up the charade that you somehow have access to the financial statements of the Academy.

 

[MickyG]

You started off so well on the first 3 points and then you lost it. Such a shame.

After Geelong got Ablett, Scarlett and Hawkins all for 3rd round picks they changed the father son rule. I bet Sydney and every other club were happy. To think that you'd wait until the Northern clubs got a first round pick cheaply every year is delusional.

And what exactly does it matter where Mitchell and Dunkley or any other father son for the Swans played?

Thank you. I think you've misunderstood something. 22% draftees and 4 out of the first 18 coming from NSW and QLD does not mean the Swans are getting "a first round draft pick cheaply every year". It will mean NSW and QLD clubs will not have the go home factor disadvantage anymore. Do you want to keep that unfair advantage for Victorian clubs? Thinking the Academies are going to produce four first round draft picks anytime soon is delusional. Heeney and Mills are most likely good luck and unlikely to be repeated. If we slip out of the eight next year and Mills is a late first rounder will we then get an extra second round pick if we have to give up a top ten pick for him? No it's only when it's round the other way that you are whining.

 

[worthy]

your comment implies that there can't be two benefits and that they are mutually exclusive. Growing the game is great, but if that is the job and sole goal it should be funded by the AFL.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Cleric]

Nice try. But I think that's a much different issue to the academies. The VFL aren't going to fund the TAC cup as they aren't directly linked. Although they are both under the AFL Victoria banner. Obviously in WA and SA the teams were set up under control of the state leagues and hence the junior funding. But if you want I'm sure your clubs could work out how to stop those payments, but they'd likely just be hit with great equalisation payments and then have that money flow back in to juniors. Of course an equal national structure is the fairest way but I wouldn't be complaining too much about funding models for SA and WA clubs. There's plenty of cash to go around to give some back to junior development particularly with the new Adelaide Oval and soon to be Perth Stadium.

The AFL is still the VFL but with a new name. SA and WA does not recieve its fair share from the AFL with jr development. Infact those states AFL clubs have to pay to help finance not only the weaker states but even Victoria. Have a look at the AFL club dividends every year, Adelaide, Freo and Eagles get less, sometimes many millions less, dividends from the AFL than Vic and non traditional state teams do.
And then when the AFL doesnt contribute to SA U18 football, people bitch that the SANFL have to get as much money from things like the AO to help pay for it.
The AFL needs to start over.

 

[worthy]

Thank you. I think you've misunderstood something. 22% draftees and 4 out of the first 18 coming from NSW and QLD does not mean the Swans are getting "a first round draft pick cheaply every year". It will mean NSW and QLD clubs will not have the go home factor disadvantage anymore. Do you want to keep that unfair advantage for Victorian clubs? Thinking the Academies are going to produce four first round draft picks anytime soon is delusional. Heeney and Mills are most likely good luck and unlikely to be repeated. If we slip out of the eight next year and Mills is a late first rounder will we then get an extra second round pick if we have to give up a top ten pick for him? No it's only when it's round the other way that you are whining.

Not sure about this "go home" factor anymore, how many decent players have the Swans lost to the "go home" factor in the last 5 years? on the contrary, the Swans should be penalised for the "New home" factor, they seem to be attracting plenty of "lifestyle" players.

 

[The Gong]

Not sure about this "go home" factor anymore, how many decent players have the Swans lost to the "go home" factor in the last 5 years? on the contrary, the Swans should be penalised for the "New home" factor, they seem to be attracting plenty of "lifestyle" players.

Maybe we could put in an equalisation measure where Swans players have to live in Mt Druitt instead of Bondi

 

[replicant]

Not sure about this "go home" factor anymore, how many decent players have the Swans lost to the "go home" factor in the last 5 years? on the contrary, the Swans should be penalised for the "New home" factor, they seem to be attracting plenty of "lifestyle" players.

Darren Jolly
Lewis Johnston (pick 12)
Andrejs Everitt (went for both more money, and also said that being close to family was a big part of his decision) - Note: It's possible he was squeezed out by buddy... I'm not sure what contract he was offered or even if he was offered one.

How many have Hawthorn lost to homesickness?

 

[The Gong]

Darren Jolly
Lewis Johnston (pick 12)
Andrejs Everitt (went for both more money, and also said that being close to family was a big part of his decision)

How many have Hawthorn lost to homesickness?

To be fair though Johnston was seeking more opportunities and Everitt was always going to be squeezed out after the Buddy deal came through.

I'd agree at the moment the go home factor is not huge for Sydney because we're at the top of the cycle. Everyone loves a winner. But if the northern teams struggle then the go home factor is going to be magnified to the nth degree.

 

[go_the_dockers]

To be fair though Johnston was seeking more opportunities and Everitt was always going to be squeezed out after the Buddy deal came through.

I'd agree at the moment the go home factor is not huge for Sydney because we're at the top of the cycle. Everyone loves a winner. But if the northern teams struggle then the go home factor is going to be magnified to the nth degree.

I think this is the balancing act, if you don't give the NSW\QLD any assistance they struggle when the team is in the bottom half or they have poor management, but if you offer them too much assistance once they start playing finals and have excellent management it becomes very easy to assemble brilliant list and dominate the competition.

Having the academies will prevent the issue of players returning home during the bad times, but if they aren't forced to pay an appropriate amount of compensation for receiving academy players there will be another period of domination by the NSW\QLD sides.

 

[The 747]

You started off so well on the first 3 points and then you lost it. Such a shame.

After Geelong got Ablett, Scarlett and Hawkins all for 3rd round picks they changed the father son rule. I bet Sydney and every other club were happy. To think that you'd wait until the Northern clubs got a first round pick cheaply every year is delusional.

And what exactly does it matter where Mitchell and Dunkley or any other father son for the Swans played?

No, it was just Hawkins, and it was also noted we got Selwood with our first round pick that year then won the flag by a record margin. Ablett and Scarlett weren't rated much higher than 3rd round picks as juniors.

 

[The Gong]

I think this is the balancing act, if you don't give the NSW\QLD any assistance they struggle when the team is in the bottom half or they have poor management, but if you offer them too much assistance once they start playing finals and have excellent management it becomes very easy to assemble brilliant list and dominate the competition.

Having the academies will prevent the issue of players returning home during the bad times, but if they aren't forced to pay an appropriate amount of compensation for receiving academy players there will be another period of domination by the NSW\QLD sides.

Yeah I'd agree with this. if the AFL retains the same system where the clubs run the academies then they'll just need to tweak the bidding system so fair market price is paid. In the end growing the market in QLD and NSW is only going to have a huge flow on effect for clubs in those states as far as revenue goes.

 

[MickyG]

Not sure about this "go home" factor anymore, how many decent players have the Swans lost to the "go home" factor in the last 5 years? on the contrary, the Swans should be penalised for the "New home" factor, they seem to be attracting plenty of "lifestyle" players.

You're right - not so much for us, now. Lifestyle factors were a big draw for Shaw, Tippett and Buddy. GWS and GC are going to lose some players and given the draft concessions they got that is probably fair. Swans may lose some good players with salary cap pressure and lack of opportunities pushing some out which is the way it is supposed to work. However will what happened at the Lions last year happen again? Could it happen to the Swans in the future? I think so and see the Academies as a way to overcome that disadvantage.

 

[worthy]

To be fair though Johnston was seeking more opportunities and Everitt was always going to be squeezed out after the Buddy deal came through.

I'd agree at the moment the go home factor is not huge for Sydney because we're at the top of the cycle. Everyone loves a winner. But if the northern teams struggle then the go home factor is going to be magnified to the nth degree.

Also, Sydney traded pick 15 for Jolly from Melb, got 5 of his prime years out of him, and then traded him to Collingwood for pick 14 & 46. not too bad.

Darren Jolly
Lewis Johnston (pick 12)
Andrejs Everitt (went for both more money, and also said that being close to family was a big part of his decision) - Note: It's possible he was squeezed out by buddy... I'm not sure what contract he was offered or even if he was offered one.

How many have Hawthorn lost to homesickness?

A few rippers over the years.

 

[PeteSummer]

Jolly didn't leave because he was homesick. He was happy to stay at Sydney.

He left because his wife got postnatal depression after pregnancy.

Sydney got Jetta & Rhyce Shaw out of the deal I believe.

 

[Scotland]

Swans may lose some good players with salary cap pressure and lack of opportunities pushing some out which is the way it is supposed to work. However will what happened at the Lions last year happen again? Could it happen to the Swans in the future? I think so and see the Academies as a way to overcome that disadvantage.

Errr, what disadvantage?

CoLA or no CoLA if you spend 20% of your salary cap on two players then lie in the bed you made.

 

[The 747]

You're right - not so much for us, now. Lifestyle factors were a big draw for Shaw, Tippett and Buddy. GWS and GC are going to lose some players and given the draft concessions they got that is probably fair. Swans may lose some good players with salary cap pressure and lack of opportunities pushing some out which is the way it is supposed to work. However will what happened at the Lions last year happen again? Could it happen to the Swans in the future? I think so and see the Academies as a way to overcome that disadvantage.

The Lions lost a bunch because they have an incompetent administration that left their players disillusioned.

 

[Jumparoo]

Maybe the compromise is that no club in the competition can take advantage of preference bidding for an academy player OR a Father/Son in a year in which they make the finals. Thus meaning that when you are good (like Sydney is now) you can't access players that should be spread around, but you get them when you are crap. This seems fair to me as it keeps top teams from getting prime talent.

Because lets be honest if Sydney and Collingwood switched ladder positions no one would be hearing about the academy and Heeney next year and no one would be complaining.

 

[worthy]

You're right - not so much for us, now. Lifestyle factors were a big draw for Shaw, Tippett and Buddy. GWS and GC are going to lose some players and given the draft concessions they got that is probably fair. Swans may lose some good players with salary cap pressure and lack of opportunities pushing some out which is the way it is supposed to work. However will what happened at the Lions last year happen again? Could it happen to the Swans in the future? I think so and see the Academies as a way to overcome that disadvantage.

I think the Lions maybe had themselves to blame a bit there, the club was a bit of a shambles, not something you would expect at the Swans anytime soon.

Tell you what though, it's good to have some footy discussion without hostility, even though it's a touchy subject.

 

[The 747]

Maybe the compromise is that no club in the competition can take advantage of preference bidding for an academy player OR a Father/Son in a year in which they make the finals. Thus meaning that when you are good (like Sydney is now) you can't access players that should be spread around, but you get them when you are crap. This seems fair to me as it keeps top teams from getting prime talent.

Because lets be honest if Sydney and Collingwood switched ladder positions no one would be hearing about the academy and Heeney next year and no one would be complaining.

I dont mind this idea

 

[Jumparoo]

Errr, what disadvantage?

CoLA or no CoLA if you spend 20% of your salary cap on two players then lie in the bed you made.

My gripes about these types of comments are they completely ignore the realties of how the Swans are managing their list (and show the complete lack of imagination (or b$lls) by every other club).

The reality about this is that Tippett after this year is half way through his contract so that is not such an albatross (and lets face it he hasn't been on the ground much).

The second reality is that no one knows how Buddy's contract is structured but based on comments it is clear it is back weighted so he gets more later in contract and less now (thus being under the cap now), but the reason it is back dated is that the Swans can fit him intot the current structure but they also recognise that the cap will be going up as TV revenues increase. Thus in 9 years Buddy's contract will not be this high water mark but will be a fairly common amount (although it may be high relative his contribution at the time). The simple mistake that all commentators are making is that the Swans have pulled some crazy fast one this year when in fact they have merely replaced Everitt, Mumford and White with Buddy, Laidler and Derrixxxxx but with Buddy probably coming in around $700k rather than the big number Eddie likes to throw out (I don't think it is a coincidence that it was Eddie who first coined the term Bondi Billionaire as a term of derision). He has made it his goal to belittle everything the Swans do and paint a certain picture of them that often doesn't reflect reality. Sadly based on the comments here on Big Footy a number of people have fallen for them.

 

[The Gong]

Maybe the compromise is that no club in the competition can take advantage of preference bidding for an academy player OR a Father/Son in a year in which they make the finals. Thus meaning that when you are good (like Sydney is now) you can't access players that should be spread around, but you get them when you are crap. This seems fair to me as it keeps top teams from getting prime talent.

Because lets be honest if Sydney and Collingwood switched ladder positions no one would be hearing about the academy and Heeney next year and no one would be complaining.

It depends on if you're looking for tue equalisation or just premiership cycles.

True equalisation is that every team in the comp has a chance to be competitive and a fair crack at winning a premiership. If you're restricting top performing teams from accessing good talent just because they've been successful then I don't really see that as equalisation. It's just trying to create the cycle of teams going up and down the ladder over a number of seasons which is what the draft order is really doing now. I think a draft lottery is a really good measure but you keep the academy and f/s bidding for everyone.

 

[worthy]

Maybe the compromise is that no club in the competition can take advantage of preference bidding for an academy player OR a Father/Son in a year in which they make the finals. Thus meaning that when you are good (like Sydney is now) you can't access players that should be spread around, but you get them when you are crap. This seems fair to me as it keeps top teams from getting prime talent.

Because lets be honest if Sydney and Collingwood switched ladder positions no one would be hearing about the academy and Heeney next year and no one would be complaining.

Maybe,

Option:1 Say Sydney had pick 18 and another team offered pick 10 for Heeney, Sydney would need to beat that pick to get Heeney, as it stands now, Sydney would only need to use pick 18.

Option:2 maybe have a spread, if a player was rated or another team offered pick 10, Sydney would need to have or aquire a pick within 4? picks of pick 10, allowing them some trade options in the 10 to 14 range.