2015 academy discussion thread (with some FS thrown in for good measure)

[Mug Punter]

I think that worrying about the size of the discount is a peripheral issue. The most important thing is that the academy gives us FIRST DIBS on a gun player. It appears that Mills is a gun and is worth even paying the full amount so the 20% is a bonus.

Agreed but anything less than 20% will not be sufficient reward for effort.

Plus the reality is that Academies will not work unless there is a pathway to a local club rather than being drafted by Eddie McGuire

I have said it before and I'll say it again, anything less than a 20% discount and the four northern states should challenge the draft in the Supreme Court under restraint of trade.

[707]

Article just up on the AFL website about developing an app so it's easy for clubs and supporters to see what it will cost to pick up academy and F/S draftees.

Also mentions Josh Dunkley still not playing due to stress fractures, he has moved to Melbourne to be closer to treatment and has been given permission by the AFL to train with Richmond reserves :-(

That's not good for us, he gets familiar with a Melb based club and they get to see his potential and Richmond is likely to have their first round pick at an awkward stage of the draft for us, around the 10-11 mark which is higher than we want a bid on Dunkley to land.

[crackedactor]

Well thanks to Eddie's constant moaning it is highly unlikely we will get both Dunkley and Mills. But from what I heard getting Mills is a must have. By the way when does the AFL make the decision of introducing the new academy draft rules next year or the year after? I understand a definite decision has not been made yet.
PS. If it does come in, Swans get out of the academy structure and spend your monies elsewhere. Rather these guys go to rugby then Eddie grabbing a academy boy.

[jono2707]

. Rather these guys go to rugby then Eddie grabbing a academy boy.

Rugby league is a far greater chance of getting these guys, and Henney had pretty much confirmed he'd still be playing league if the Academy wasn't in place..... Not that Eddie would listen anyway.

[Ludwig]

There seems to be so little support for the rule changes proposed by the McGuire controlled AFL Executive. How can one person be allowed to get away with it, whatever that it may be. See artiicle:

No Cookies | Fox Sports News, Live Sport, Sports | Fox Sports

It seems that the only reason that the FS rule change was added this year is to prevent the Swans from getting Dunkley with a low draft pick. When you look at the list of FS selections, there really haven't been so many to get all that worried about.

Jarrad McVeigh is quoted:

McVeigh also believes the new system might mean ?the northern clubs walk away from academies, which would be a huge loss for the AFL??.

This would infer that dumping the academy has been openly discussed 'in the corridors' and the AFL are well aware of the possibility.

I have lots of ideas of what we should do about this, but it isn't worth speculating so close to the projected disclosure of the rule changes.

[liz]

I don't agree with the supposition that Eddie is pushing for the FS rules to be changed to prevent the Swans drafting Dunkley. I expect that Ed would prefer the FS rules to stay as they are, or even to revert to a more beneficial (ie less costly system). Of course, all those arguing for the cost of FS picks to be lower are forgetting how loudly they cried out when Geelong was able to add Hawkins to their list and also draft Selwood in the same year, when Hawkins was touted as a top 3 pick.

I think the romanticism of the FS rule is overplayed. Clubs are only interested in FS picks when they think they are going to become top line players - which is reasonable, since that is what drafting and list management are all about.

Let's face it, FS availability is dumb luck. Clubs do almost nothing to earn the right to a FS player. They add little to their development, for instance. Its inextricably linked to the academy issue because if a mechanism can be found whereby clubs pay something close to fair value for any player they have priority access to, the distorting effect on the draft goes away. The AFL is having to pick its way through the mine field of knowing it needs the northern academies and has to reward the four northern clubs, with the outcry from the rest of the competition.

What irritates me most about this situation is that the academies were set up 7 years ago. There must have been discussions about them for a year or two before they were set up. If the other clubs were so dead set against the perceived draft benefit to the northern clubs, why weren't they making all this noise back then? Why didn't they insist then that the academies were AFL run, and that the AFL actually invested a decent amount of time, effort and money into providing proper development opportunities for young NSW and Queensland players, rather than allowing the competition to leech off the four northern clubs all this time, before crying foul.

[Ludwig]

Don't you think it's odd, Liz, that these rule changes are being rushed through just at the very moment when the Swans will have access to one highly rated academy play and a highly rated FS player? They don't necessarily have to be inextricably linked. Nor does the value system have to arranged in such a manner that it particularly hurts a club that finishes high on the latter and has access to those players. There were so many different ways to approach this situation that would have been fair, yet have a different outcome.

And I certainly agree with you that it is excruciatingly irritating that that the academies were set up years ago, but the the MFL has decided this will be the year to change the rules.

I am also quite certain that if this change was not being championed by Eddie McGuire we would not be facing a change in the system this year, and perhaps for many years to come.

[liz]

Not really. I think it is all about Mills (and Heeney). I think it is the AFL saying to the rest of the clubs (and especially those who have benefitted far more from the FS rules than any northern club has - yet - from the academies) that if you are going to pressure us to change the academy bidding rules, we're going to do the same to the FS rules. To me it is the right thing to do. If the aim is to attribute "fair value" to these priority access players, it should be done to all such players.

I'm not opposed to the concept in principle. Let's face it, the academy does potentially provide a benefit to the Swans. We'd be up in arms if Hawthorn or Collingwood had the prospect of drafting a Heeney or Mills every single year for the cost of a late first round draft pick alone. The problem is that it is far too early to tell whether this will be the case. If the academies just churn out players worthy of 15-60 draft picks each year, they achieve their purpose without unduly distorting the draft. No-one can yet know if this is all just a knee-jerk reaction, or if there is some validity to it.

And while I think the non-northern clubs have no idea how much of a disadvantage it is to have to fight to keep pretty much every draftee from wanting to return home after their first contract, it's not something that has affected the Swans in any meaningful way since O'Farrell, Grant and Rocca. It clearly is still an issue for the Lions, and it will become more of an issue for us when we're no longer on the top of the success cycle. In addition, it is clear that the downside of playing in a relative AFL backwater is somewhat offset by the lifestyle offered by living in Sydney's eastern suburbs, and the attraction of getting out of a football fishbowl.

So it's about Heeney and Mills. But it's also about Lockett, Hall, Kennedy (even though that was more about being promised opportunities), Everitt (Peter - even though he was past his best) and, of course, Tippett and Buddy. And it's also about 2005 and 2012 to myopic and selfish Melbourne club presidents who want the financial benefits and national coverage of a national competition just so long as the premiership cup never has to leave Melbourne.

[Ludwig]

I think most of us here on RWO agree on the main issues. I've said many times that the Swans will pull through this regardless of the outcome and it will have a bigger impact on the other clubs and could end up having an extremely deleterious impact on the AFL and their future revenue stream.

But I do think that the inclusion of the FS nominees was not directed at other clubs as a counter to bringing other priority selections in line with academy selections, because it is specifically the Swans with the issue of having Mills and Dunkley in the same year and no other club has the same circumstance.

I know sometimes it must seem that I see McGuire's hand behind everything sinister that goes on in the AFL, but he has a history of this sort of thing and the kind of personality that we have seen all too often rise to positions of influence far beyond both logic and capabilities would suggest. A year of Gill has shown him to be a McGuire stooge and in a position out of his depth, in part evidenced by his handling of the ridiculous trading ban and his clear demonstration that he had little understanding of the issues.

The various comments that have come from many quarters suggest that most stakeholders would have been happy enough to leave things alone and see how it played out, because, as you have said, we really don't know how all this will play out in the long run, and it is very much a knee jerk reaction.

Yes, it's Tippett and it's Buddy and it's Heeney and Mill and Dunkley, and it's being called out by Adam Goodes and the ongoing animosity between the two camps. And it very much looks like one man's campaign to win his little personal war and the hell with whatever collateral damage might also come to pass. It's a shame that it does only take one bad apple to spoil the barrel, especially when it's a big plump apple. ( Do apples have chins?)

[707]

A discussion video on the AFL website this morning about the new bidding system. Appreciate a run down of what's being said as I can't get it to run with my poor internet speed.

Liz, spot on with what you posted earlier, well done.

[Blood Tunnel]

It's about Eddie being able to blow his trumpet at any opportunity, on any segment, on any of the multiple media gigs he has that are nothing short of a conflict of interest with most positions he holds.
How he is allowed to continue to commentate or provide opinions on anything Swans when he is supposed to be concerning himself with a game involving two other teams, shows a lack of 'national' credibility these shows have on a national basis for a sport that claims to be a National Competition.

Yeah right! 10 Vic teams where only 3 or 4 are not requiring AFL assistance to stay viable year in year out, up against another 8 teams scattered around the rest of the country.

[Reggi]

I don't think it is quite right to say F/s rule is just blind luck. The original 30 game limit was fair. By the time it was limited to 100 games, it benefits the larger Melbourne clubs that had more players that qualified. It is also only yen year s since Eddie had thw rule changed so Collingwood to two playwrs being allowed so that they could get Heath and Braeden Shaw

Either way academies are dead only an idiot would invest for such a small return

[Mug Punter]

I think most of us here on RWO agree on the main issues. I've said many times that the Swans will pull through this regardless of the outcome and it will have a bigger impact on the other clubs and could end up having an extremely deleterious impact on the AFL and their future revenue stream.

But I do think that the inclusion of the FS nominees was not directed at other clubs as a counter to bringing other priority selections in line with academy selections, because it is specifically the Swans with the issue of having Mills and Dunkley in the same year and no other club has the same circumstance.

I know sometimes it must seem that I see McGuire's hand behind everything sinister that goes on in the AFL, but he has a history of this sort of thing and the kind of personality that we have seen all too often rise to positions of influence far beyond both logic and capabilities would suggest. A year of Gill has shown him to be a McGuire stooge and in a position out of his depth, in part evidenced by his handling of the ridiculous trading ban and his clear demonstration that he had little understanding of the issues.

The various comments that have come from many quarters suggest that most stakeholders would have been happy enough to leave things alone and see how it played out, because, as you have said, we really don't know how all this will play out in the long run, and it is very much a knee jerk reaction.

Yes, it's Tippett and it's Buddy and it's Heeney and Mill and Dunkley, and it's being called out by Adam Goodes and the ongoing animosity between the two camps. And it very much looks like one man's campaign to win his little personal war and the hell with whatever collateral damage might also come to pass. It's a shame that it does only take one bad apple to spoil the barrel, especially when it's a big plump apple. ( Do apples have chins?)

Great post. This debacle has the potential to decimate the Brisbane clubs and stall desperately needed development. All because of one man's self interest and another's weakness and inability to show any leadership at all.

The current silence on this matter is deafening

[Doctor]

The quality of analysis on p50 has been outstanding. I'm interstate for work and, after a long day, I won't add my thoughts beyond saying Liz and Ludwig are spot on. Any statistician will tell you that you can't make an objective assessment on the fairness or otherwise on an academy system based on a couple of gun players coincidentally coming through in consecutive years. Any excessive correction by the AFL would be knee jerk at the very least. If we lost the academy in Sydney as a result it would be a very sad consequence.

[mcs]

The current silence on this matter is deafening

Nothing changes from the fools running at the AFL. I thought Demetriou was bad, but this fool even makes him look like a good administrator.