Opinion Sydney Swans Academy and Rebuild

[RUNVS]

I have said it before but moving to a complete points based system for the AFL's trading and draft would fix the academy system completely.

I have posted this on other threads before but I think it deserves its own thread at least in terms of the discussion.

The problem with the current system is that it is so hard to get proper value for a player, getting exactly what that player is worth rather than trying to find a deal with picks, picks that won't necessarily match what the player is actually worth.

That is very convoluted.

I will be honest and say I think the best solution is actually going entirely points based for drafting and trading.

Each team has points at the start of the trading process based on their ladder position

18th position - 4647 points
17th position - 4088 points
16th position - 3740 points
15th position - 3478 points
14th position - 3263 points
13th position - 3077 points
12th position - 2913 points
11th position - 2765 points
10th position - 2631 points
9th position - 2504 points
8th position - 2388 points
7th position - 2279 points
6th position - 2174 points
5th position - 2077 points
4th position - 1983 points
3rd position - 1894 points
2nd position - 1809 points
1st position - 1726 points

and lets use the Kelly example from a few years ago where West Coast didn't really have anything Geelong wanted. They could instead under this system simply pay Geelong 1950 points and West Coast would get Kelly (both teams negotiating how many points Kelly is worth).

Then come the draft day pick 1 is announced and every team has 2 minutes to submit who they want with pick 1, and the points they are willing to pay for pick 1.

Then, the team that handed over the most points for pick 1 gets the player they nominated (and it is not shown what the other teams did). We then move onto pick 2, teams placing bids, stating the player they want and the points they are willing to pay and then the team that submitted the highest points total gets the player they want, then moving onto pick 3 etc.

If an academy kid is nominated at some point in the draft then the side the academy kid is attached to has a right to match the bid the rival team placed on said academy player, paying the points the rival team wants to pay.

It also potentially allows a lot more freedom in the draft for individual clubs to do what they think is best. For instance Adelaide could really really want Jason Horne, a local boy and supposedly the best player in the draft. They could use almost all their points on a pick 1 bid and get Jason Horne. It would mean having really crappy later picks but it would get the player they really want. Then we could have North Melbourne who could decide that no, we are not going to go after pick 1, and instead we are going to use our points later in the draft and bid on picks 7, 8 and 9, and suddenly North have 3 top 10 players and are able to turbocharge their rebuild.

Also clubs can bank points, so if a club decides not to use 1000 points they will have those points in next years draft.

To me this is a much fairer system, not just for the academies, but for the trading and drafting system in general.

What do you think? What do you like about the idea, what are the flaws, and do you think the idea is fesible?

Have that system and if someone wins a bid on an academy player then the academy side that has rights to that player has the option of matching the points bid or not. A simple and fair system.

 

[Back One Out]

I have said it before but moving to a complete points based system for the AFL's trading and draft would fix the academy system completely.

Have that system and if someone wins a bid on an academy player then the academy side that has rights to that player has the option of matching the points bid or not. A simple and fair system.

Not if the Swans get to train their academy kids from an early age. That's a huge advantage which other clubs don't get.

Please don't compare apples with oranges either. The "Next Generation" academies are not the same as the NSW academies.

 

[RUNVS]

Not if the Swans get to train their academy kids from an early age

That's a huge advantage which other clubs don't get.

Yes but they only get the player if they can and are willing to match the points bid. Sure the Swans would have first dibs, but they would still need to pay what the other team wanted to pay. I think most people would see that as a much fairer system.

 

[juddy_Like]

An advantage that West Coast for instance get over Sydney is the ability to draft mostly from WA if you guys want in order to limit the go home factor, and from memory West Coast do draft a lot from WA compared to most clubs. You also get the go home factor like Kelly, Yeo and Kennedy which Sydney don't get. In fact the last time we had the go home factor was Nick Davis, and that was quite a while ago.

Look at Adelaide as well. Traded for Dawson last year and about to pick up Rankine as well, so they are definitely benefitting from the go home factor.

Kennedy didn't even want to leave and only ended up with us because we lost a handy player to the go-home factor ourselves.
Yeo left Brisbane with four other mates because they were a basket-case and poorly run.
Kelly came to us but we ended up having to pay the world for him.
Dawson & Rankine you might say were/are 'going home' but I'm off the impression Adelaide are paying way over the odds to entice them to 'come back'.

You're also only looking at it from one angle - "how many players we get to come back to us".
Another measure might be:

• How many interstate draftees leave?
• If they leave, is it because they are 'homesick' or is it because of cap pressure, them being no good, playing time, etc.
• How many players come to us instead of leaving - like JPK, Barry Hall, Buddy, Mumford, etc
• Advantages of corporate gigs being in a 'world city'
• Living in Coogee, Bondi, Randwick over say 'Geelong'
• Having a coffee every morning with nuffies interrupting you for a photo every time.

 

[SM]

So you're a victim lol

Enjoy the outrage champ haha

What on Earth are you on about?

 

[Number37]

Not sure why you're getting so worked up about it, I'm in favour of it champ

I am laughing champ, because it's hilarious champ. Laughing, champ, is the opposite of worked up, champ.

 

[RichLeMonde]

I am laughing champ, because it's hilarious champ. Laughing, champ, is the opposite of worked up, champ.

Wait a minute…

… do you really think that he’s a champ?

 

[Number37]

Wait a minute…

… do you really think that he’s a champ?

Of course not. Quite obviously sleeps with the lights on.

 

[RichLeMonde]

Of course not. Quite obviously sleeps with the lights on.

Wait a minute...

... does he really sleep with the lights on?

 

[Bjo187]

The academies are clearly a massive advantage about 5 of the swans best 22 are academy players, plus their two all Australians this year. In saying that I'm not sure what the alternative is. I like the idea of gws and gc getting an advantage until they are fully established, but the swans and lions definitely get an unfair advantage from it in the meantime.

 

[Number37]

Wait a minute...

... does he really sleep with the lights on?

A football club getting a player from an academy scares him, of course he sleeps with the lights on.

 

[RUNVS]

The academies are clearly a massive advantage about 5 of the swans best 22 are academy players, plus their two all Australians this year. In saying that I'm not sure what the alternative is. I like the idea of gws and gc getting an advantage until they are fully established, but the swans and lions definitely get an unfair advantage from it in the meantime.

My alternative

Opinion - Sydney Swans Academy and Rebuild

I have said it before but moving to a complete points based system for the AFL's trading and draft would fix the academy system completely. I have posted this on other threads before but I think it deserves its own thread at least in terms of the discussion. The problem with the current...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[SM]

The academies are clearly a massive advantage about 5 of the swans best 22 are academy players, plus their two all Australians this year. In saying that I'm not sure what the alternative is. I like the idea of gws and gc getting an advantage until they are fully established, but the swans and lions definitely get an unfair advantage from it in the meantime.

Which 5?

 

[Punts]

Which 5?

Chad Warner , Mccartin and McDonald are 3 also

 

[SM]

Chad Warner , Mccartin and McDonald are 3 also

Yeah I'm wondering who the fifth player he thinks is from the academy. Surely not arguing Campbell is Best 22.

 

[Bjo187]

Which 5?

Off the top of my head, mills, heeney, gulden, blakey, wicks. That doesn't even include Campbell yet, who I thought at the time was arguably the best under ager in the draft.

 

[Vic pokiesmon]

For the record there are currently 62 players on a current AFL list who have moved back to their original state.58 0f these are divided up between Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia and 4 have returned to NSW and Queensland.Giants have Brander and Davis who is originally from Canberra.For Brisbane I included Cameron as I remember him stating he had family ties to Queensland.Weller is the only Go home player for the Suns.

Swans are the only club that dont have any go home players.While obviously part of the reason for academies is to grow the game the other side is to even up this equation.I know it's stating the obvious but non traditional footy states can't have a bad year like the crows or Eagles and actively target players originally recruited from there states.Also Giants and Suns are a long way off being on equal footing with regards to recruiting father sons in the draft

 

[SM]

Off the top of my head, mills, heeney, gulden, blakey, wicks. That doesn't even include Campbell yet, who I thought at the time was arguably the best under ager in the draft.

What does any of that have to do with our current Best 22? Wicks is closer to being delisted than our Best 22 so that's rather laughable. But do tell me more about how much of our Best 22 is made up of the Academy. Until late last year Blakey was horrible and also close to being ditched. Things have clicked for him this year but that's through development in the side rather than any leg up from the Academy program.

 

[Maddo11]

What does any of that have to do with our current Best 22? Wicks is closer to being delisted than our Best 22 so that's rather laughable. But do tell me more about how much of our Best 22 is made up of the Academy. Until late last year Blakey was horrible and also close to being ditched. Things have clicked for him this year but that's through development in the side rather than any leg up from the Academy program.

Funnily, Blakey blossomed this year due to a position opening up for him that used to be filled by (arguably should have been all Australian) Dawson leaving.

 

[SM]

Funnily, Blakey blossomed this year due to a position opening up for him that used to be filled by (arguably should have been all Australian) Dawson leaving.

No it didn't.

 

[Lemma]

The importance isn't so they can stay home, it's to develop talent in NSW/QLD. You're fixating on an entirely irrelevant aspect of the Academies for their intended purpose. If a side effect is we are attracted to recruiting more players from NSW, leaving players from other states to other clubs, that's a tangential benefit, not the primary purpose.

Wasn't your whole argument about avoiding the 'go-home' factor?

 

[SM]

Wasn't your whole argument about avoiding the 'go-home' factor?

No?

 

[Scotland]

An advantage that West Coast for instance get over Sydney is the ability to draft mostly from WA if you guys want in order to limit the go home factor, and from memory West Coast do draft a lot from WA compared to most clubs. You also get the go home factor like Kelly, Yeo and Kennedy which Sydney don't get. In fact the last time we had the go home factor was Nick Davis, and that was quite a while ago.

Look at Adelaide as well. Traded for Dawson last year and about to pick up Rankine as well, so they are definitely benefitting from the go home factor.

This is a bit of a myth. The number of players drafted out of WA is higher, but the benefit to the WA clubs is overstated. Each club still gets one pick in every 18, so players like Naughton, Jackson, McDonald, Grainger-Barras etc. end up elsewhere. We can draft exclusively out of WA but that would be a poor strategy given most are taken 30-40 or later. If the best available player is from Vic or SA or wherever why wouldn't we pick them?

You can't really compare go home factor when there is no mechanism to keep WA players in WA. Who is being drafted out of NSW/Qld that isn't an academy pick? Adelaide have Dawson and Hateley who they poached from other teams, but have lost Dangerfield, Lever, Kelly, Atkins, Crouch, McGovern, Cameron, Lyons, Greenwood, Davis, Gunston etc. Of the non-expansion clubs they've easily been hit the hardest by players going home to Victoria (or elsewhere).

 

[dosser]

Swans fans would have to be the most deluded bunch of supporters in the AFL. They really believe their NSW academy is justified to "grow the game" in NSW. (Just like they believed in COLA and they didn't view that as a systemic leg-up.) They can't see it's a huge advantage for their club to handpick the best athletes in Sydney and teach them how to play footy from a young age.

It's no surprise to see many of their NSW kids hit the ground running in their AFL careers. Victorian, SA and WA kids have to wait until they are 18 or 19 before they get onto an AFL list and receive professional coaching. The Swans academy kids have already been in the Swans system for YEARS. They've received years of intensive coaching & prepping from the Swans development coaches & ex-players. They've already been schooled in the Swans way of playing football well before they were drafted.

Do you think other AFL clubs wouldn't like to have have exclusive rights to the best young athletes and coach them up from the age of 13, 14, 15 ?

I've seen Swans fans trying to pour cold water on the idea it's an advantage. They say, "Which Academy kids? Who exactly? Well, how about 2020 All Australians: Mills and Heeney just for starters? Then there is Blakey, Gulden and Campbell (pick 5 in 2020). That's 5 players in their 22. Or 4 players in their current best 18. The number is only going to increase over the next 10 years.

They've drafted plenty of other Sydney kids via their NSW academy who haven't made the grade for whatever reason. Plus the likes of Rampe, Naismith and Kieren Jack & his brother Brandon who were recruited from the Sydney region before the academy was set up. Obviously there is plenty of talent in the nation's most populous region.

I get that Swans fans think it "evens out" the disadvantage of them losing Victorian born and bred players to poaching raids from Vic clubs. But when was the last time that happened? Which players have the Swans lost over the past 15 years? Hannebery was washed up and should've retired. Lewis Jetta went home to WA. Tom Mitchell wanted more opportunity to play on ball and earn the big bucks. Swans had Kennedy, Hannebery, Parker, Jack, McVeigh. (Plus he felt he wasn't treated well by Longmire, being made to play games in the Reserves, when lesser talented players were playing seniors.)

The Swans were pretty happy to get those guys off their books in return for players or picks. Jordan Dawson was one that got away, but every club has a story like that. The bad old days of their top picks deserting them have long gone. (Anthony Rocca, Shannon Grant, Darren Gaspar)


The Swans are a brilliantly well-run club who recruits and develops kids from Vic, SA and WA better than almost every other club. Most of their talented young players are happy to stay in Sydney because of the great club culture, the lifestyle and the relative anonymity of playing AFL footy in a rugby town.

Kudos to the Swans.

But then you factor in the expanded salary cap (COLA) which enabled them to poach the likes of Franklin, Tippett, Mumford, Kennedy, Benny McGlynn, Rhyce Shaw, Marty Matter, Darren Jolly, Spida Everett, Ted Richards, etc. The AFL finally nixed their COLA after the Swans signed Buddy as a free agent and trumped the AFL's plan for him be the Giants marquee player. Swans fans lament the short-lived "trade ban", but meanwhile their club were given sole rights to Sydney, the Central Coast and Northern NSW as their recruiting zone.

Is it any wonder the Swans have a near permanent residency in the Top 8 ?

Why the hell can't the AFL's northern franchises play by the same rules as everyone else? Why must the AFL always hand them competitive advantages?
The Swans have proved that if you have a well-run club, then your players are more likely to stick around.

That's a pretty good post, but I think there needs to be a bit more clarification of this paragraph. For example, the year that Sydney got Tippett, they had to clear players worth $1.3mil from their list (just like any other club would) and the next year they had to clear $1.5mil when they got Franklin. Ironically, they had to clear the aforementioned Mumford to do just that. This is normal in any team - COLA or not - and is simple list management. The idea that Sydney was able to get Tippett and Franklin because of COLA is simply ludicrous. When all of this was being played out in the media, Richard Colless offered to open their books on the topic and stated that in their first year together, Tippett and Franklin received a grand total of $45k combined in COLA allowance. I somehow don't think that was the reason they came to the Swans.

What also seems to get lost in the whole discussion (not related to your post BOO) is that part of the reason for COLA in the first place was that AFL players in AFL states have the opportunity to earn money outside of football during their careers. This is done through endorsements, advertising appearances, speaking engagements, etc which all had to be given up by players who moved from Vic to NSW as those opportunities almost always go to NRL players.

Now, the idea of COLA isn't a bad one if applied correctly, however the rules were very clumsy in that it applied to someone on a $1m contract as well as someone on a $85k contract when obviously the wealthier player didn't need it. However, the wealthier player could then claim that by moving to Sydney they were losing the opportunity to earn those extra $ in endorsements. It's not an easy balancing act, which is why it got scrapped and a new system of compensating the lower-paid players began.

 

[JyeDye]

I have said it before but moving to a complete points based system for the AFL's trading and draft would fix the academy system completely.



Have that system and if someone wins a bid on an academy player then the academy side that has rights to that player has the option of matching the points bid or not. A simple and fair system.

Decent idea and I reckon it would help stop academy based teams from trading their early picks for a bunch of later picks that come out to be worth more points so they can abuse the bidding system. I really think most people's issues with the academies does just come down the the current points system.