Swans Academy and player watch

[Ampersand]

While I agree with the point, that is a terribly written paragraph.

[ShockOfHair]

Lions and Swans - 8 players each
Suns and giants - 9 each

That's 34 players, and if more than half a dozen get drafted you'd think that's great for the AFL. In other words, here comes the whingeing.

[Reggi]

Pretty sure Jesse Maxfield in the u16s for Vic Metro

[Ludwig]

While I agree with the point, that is a terribly written paragraph.

How true! Eddie McGuire has become a plural entity.

[wolftone57]

Why is Eddie so peeved? Lets look at Collingwood and it's expansion plans before the abolition of the scholarship system. Eddie 'The Octopus' McGuire and Collingwood had scholarship and recruitment plans for NSW, Qld & NT. He had agreements with several NT clubs, was poaching heavily the Lions & Swans territory and was trying to set up pseudo academies in all states. Then the AL decided to allow Swans & Lions to set up academies to develop players in their states.

We don't have the schools system you have in Vic, SA & WA where the state government finances football development in schools. The AFL also contributes more to development in Victoria with it taking 70% of the development fund. The other states are furious about this situation but keep getting voted down at the AFL commission.

So the academies are meant to replace the schools development program that is in place in the other states. The only catch is that the clubs have to pay 4/5ths of the cost. The AFL contribute only $250,000. This is about half of the AFL development money given to our zone in NSW. So we get about $1million in development funds for both Swans & GWS and the Victorians get about $10million/club in reality. Eddie can't poach players without consulting with the academies but with scholarships he could sign a player, pay nothing to develop him or his league and reap the benefit. He now wants to do the same with the academies.

Why Indigenous footy clubs in Australia, Darwin to be exact, would make deals with Eddie McGuire and the Collingwood footy club is beyond me. Like Indigenous organisations and people making deals with the Abbott government it would be like the Black Panthers making deals with the Ku Klux Klan. Notice how racists can't even spell! Harry Truman's Jewish advisor once commented that to buy a $2 sheet for $20 the Klan must have a very good Jewish draper. Eddie has time and again proved his racist credentials and his ourburst on radio about Adam Goodes is on public record. His club has an incredibly poor record on racism. The incident that caused the racism debate was an incident involving Damien Monkhurst who made racist remarks to Nicky Winmar.

Eddie wants to control footy and Collingwood is the most powerful club in football. What he is afraid of is that Pies huge supporter base in both Western Sydney and Gold Coast will be eroded and Pies will no longer be the most powerful footy club. It is certainly being eroded on the gold Coast and Western Sydney will follow as kids play footy in the GWS development zone with GWS coaches. Eddie, like any psychopathic personality (a personality who desires power at any cost), will use any method no matter how underhanded to protect his power base. Watch out Andrew Newbold & Peter Gordon as you are being sucked in by Eddie and as soon as he has no use for you, you might be the next he goes after if he thinks you are getting too powerful. Andrew Hawks are getting too powerful.

So that is why Eddie needs to destroy our academies. He has told the AFL the scholarship scheme was working fine and he can't see why it was abandoned. The scholarship scheme worked well for Eddie and the rich Victorian clubs but the poor clubs and the non Victorian clubs suffered under it and he knows it. so much for Eddie wanting equity. What a load of bunkum. He wants POWER nut POWER SHARING

[aardvark]

Was it just me or did everyone here fail to notice Paul Kelly's 17 year old son played with the ressies friday night?

Kellys back at SCG

So is he any good?

[ernie koala]

AFl floats changes to father-son bidding system - AFL.com.au

So going by this article, the new convoluted 'equalising' measures, for academy and father/son picks, are just around the corner.

Based on a yet to be determined dubious points rating system. Then using 1 pick from the appropriate round plus the swapping of 1 or 2 others.

So for a player like Heeney, it will cost a first round pick, then moving down the board with 1 or 2 of our later round picks.

Hopefully we can put up enough hurdles and complications to leave it high and dry for this years draft.

Then deal with next year for Mills and co.

[DamY]

This secret formula sounds like a crock.

[Ludwig]

It sounds like a dumb system right from the start and will come under much criticism over the years. Just like the MRP with it's somewhat subjective points system, there is no way to rate players based on some statistical system. How would they account for players out injured for a period of time? How will they rate the stats in respect to the quality of opposition? Are TAC cup 1st dividion disposals worth more than 2nd division disposals and by how much? It would take years to test any such system under real conditions to see how well the system panned out in reality.

In another post Wolftone made a telling point about how he judges a player's quality, and it's simply that you can tell by how they move and play the game without ever looking at a stat, and those that know the game call tell.

Then there will always be the specter of player tanking to get the stats down, whether it is true in fact or not.

How will the AFL find equivalency in draft position versus investment in an academy program? Will it take into account the investment made in years when there aren't any top picks. For example, if 2016 doesn't produce any worthy academy players, will the Swans nonetheless be able to move up their draft position to compensate for their investment in the academy?

No need to get ahead of myself before the anything is official. I'm happy enough for the AFL to modify the system with the aim of greater fairness, but it's hard to imagine how they will succeed in doing so.

[Steve]

What exactly do they think they've devised? Whatever it is, according to that article:

- it needs to tested to ensure it makes sense
- incentives and discounts that apply need to be determined
- how the bidding system might work in practical terms needs be developed and tested

It's fine in principle to say a club should pay as close to 'fair value' as possible, but just like a trade situation i) everyone puts differing values on draft picks and players, and ii) you only get allocated every 18th pick in the draft, so it's completely impractical to say, for example, that Heeney is worth pick 8 if we only have 18, 36, 54 and 72.

It's also completely flawed logic if they think they can come up with a formula that can be applied from year-to-year. How two clubs in 2013 equated picks 6 + 44 = 11 + 31+ 49 is a completely isolated case which really means nothing when there are so many other variables, many of which change from year-to-year.

I'd now be staggered if they introduced any changes this year - even if they try, there are going to be so many flaws that it will be picked to pieces and ridiculed.

All of the subjective assessments and comparisons they seem to be proposing will just provide greater incentive/temptation for the northern clubs to hide their academy players, encourage them to sit out extended periods with 'injuries' etc - which is surely not a system anyone wants.

[jono2707]

At least the article acknowledges the importance of the academies and the fact that they are funded through donations and corporate sponsorship. I'd say Eddie didn't write this....

[CJK]

each draft pick would be assigned value according to a statistical formula that will allocate points to each draft selection.

Sounds like a fool proof plan.

If only this 'statistical formula' was more widely available the draft would not be the the lottery it is now. Looks like the geniuses at AFL House have finally cracked it. Time machine?

Alternatively I look forward to the compensation picks three years down the line when 'formula' forces a club to use pick 5 for a dud.

Even better the AFL can use the formula to determine the value of every draftee and then just dish them out to the clubs, no need for picks. Thanks AFL.

[Reggi]

Exactly they will get some really wrong. So can you get a tefund. Again a scheme from the work experience guy

[DamY]

Sounds like a fool proof plan.

If only this 'statistical formula' was more widely available the draft would not be the the lottery it is now. Looks like the geniuses at AFL House have finally cracked it. Time machine?

Alternatively I look forward to the compensation picks three years down the line when 'formula' forces a club to use pick 5 for a dud.

Even better the AFL can use the formula to determine the value of every draftee and then just dish them out to the clubs, no need for picks. Thanks AFL.

That's succinct and clear and points out the fallacies of this new system! You should send it to the bigwigs

[Industrial Fan]

The current father son rule is a vast improvement over previous versions. Dont think its broken, the bidding system works, and is far better than the system used when Geelong reaped the benefits.

I really dont like the veterans allowance being stripped back - its good for the game, from a players and fans point of view. Gives a handy tool to fight free agency and pay 'overs' to keep a favourite son. We would have lost O'Keefe before his norm smith as a start.

I also dont like free agency in that we can pick up Buddy for salary cap space alone. Even if the club losing the player isnt compensated fairly, the club gaining the player doesnt pay in draft terms at all. We should have been made to pay a fair draft value for Buddy.

So then we spend all this time mucking around with academy and father son picks, and then pevert the draft at the other end of the career through free agency.

Dermott complains about buying 10 memberships and that income for the club being taxed. What about QBE pouring their cash into the academy and not seeing any benefit for the swans?

@@@@ off eddie. @@@@ off Dermott and @@@@ off AFL administration.