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

[Mug Punter]

Trading future picks works in the NFL because there's a clear pipeline of talent coming out of the highly competitive college system. I'm not sure it would work as well in the AFL where teams are recruiting unproven 17 and 18 year olds and predicting how strong a draft will be two or three years from now would be an exercise fraught with risk.

It kind of makes sense in terms of unfair advantage

We have the ability to effectively double up in one year on top end talent if we see the following year as bare so I can see how teams without the F/S might say we have added flexibility in terms of list management.

If that is a way of ensuring the Academy provisions aren't further diluted, like in saying we cannot dip into the following year and must fund any points deficit in the current draft, then I'll support the changes.

On the whole though I think clubs would be loathe t use it but they may, depending on where they sit on their developmen cycle

[Ludwig]

It kind of makes sense in terms of unfair advantage

We have the ability to effectively double up in one year on top end talent if we see the following year as bare so I can see how teams without the F/S might say we have added flexibility in terms of list management.

If that is a way of ensuring the Academy provisions aren't further diluted, like in saying we cannot dip into the following year and must fund any points deficit in the current draft, then I'll support the changes.

On the whole though I think clubs would be loathe t use it but they may, depending on where they sit on their developmen cycle

I don't know what these guys are complaining about. If they left the system alone this wouldn't have ever come up. But instead they devised a bidding system so that we couldn't draft Mills even if we used ALL of our current year draft picks. How nice of them to let us dip into the following year and use our 1st round pick in 2016 as well. And now they complain that this is an unfair advantage. They are really up themselves.

When Gillon McLachlan said WE couldn't have everything, he was looking the wrong way. There is no end to the whining from Collingwood and Hawthorn unless they get everything their own way.

[dimelb]

Last Sunday we (mrs d and I) went to the MCG and sat in front of a couple of blokes, strong Collingwood supporters. They griped and griped about how the AFL is against them, wants to see them fail, will not recognise a worthy cause when they see it, etc etc, until finally mrs d burst out laughing and joined the conversation saying, "That's what WE think the AFL's doing to us!" We chatted with them on and off through the match on friendly terms - it was an interesting exercise in how the other half lives.

Having said that, I still wonder how clearly the Melbourne fans in general see the necessity of growing the game, and the academies as part of that aim.

[707]

The AFL have also been reluctant to allow trading of future picks for fear that poorly managed clubs would be a basket case for years if they stuff it up.

Like Carlton, reckon they'd like to use their next 10 years picks this year to build an AFL list to replace the VFL list Mick has left them holding! Their last AFL player has just retired :-)

What about if future picks had been in place during Melbourne's disastrous recruiting nightmare ........ no wonder the AFL is nervous.

[Mug Punter]

Last Sunday we (mrs d and I) went to the MCG and sat in front of a couple of blokes, strong Collingwood supporters. They griped and griped about how the AFL is against them, wants to see them fail, will not recognise a worthy cause when they see it, etc etc, until finally mrs d burst out laughing and joined the conversation saying, "That's what WE think the AFL's doing to us!" We chatted with them on and off through the match on friendly terms - it was an interesting exercise in how the other half lives.

Having said that, I still wonder how clearly the Melbourne fans in general see the necessity of growing the game, and the academies as part of that aim.

The insular nature of the Melbourne clubs and their supporters is just insane

One one hand they need the best TV possible to prop up clubs like St Kilda the Dees and Footscray so a bumper TV deal becomes essential. The only way to get those TV dollars is for more content into new markets. Cue two new clubs in developing markets. one bery hastilly established...

But to sustain those two new clubs you need an additional genuine 80 AFL players to be in the player pool that weren't there before if you wish to sustain the standard of the comp and therefore justify the prevsiouly required huge TV deal. That an additional 10-12 player each year of current draft quality that don't exist.

Where will these players come from?
A: New markets

But how can these new markets provide them when we don't invest in them and kids are turned off by having to move interstate?
A: We will create academies, that these clubs fund 100%, not diluting the abovementioned TV money, and build a model of sommunity engagement that provides a pathway to senior football in developing states.

But what if these academies actually do what we need them to do and actually start to create these 10-12 players a year?
A: We crack the @@@@s because they are doing their job and close them down

It is insane

- - - Updated - - -

Like Carlton, reckon they'd like to use their next 10 years picks this year to build an AFL list to replace the VFL list Mick has left them holding! Their last AFL player has just retired :-)

What about if future picks had been in place during Melbourne's disastrous recruiting nightmare ........ no wonder the AFL is nervous.

I'd imagine you would only be allowed to draft into one future period and probably only one player

[bodgie]

well said mug

[tasmania60]

Stupid idea why cant all clubs have academies from there zones ,its the only way, its fair . I know some clubs would say no we cant afford to but a least the young kids that fall through the cracks are picked up . Melbourne ,Dogs , Saints ,Carlton and North Melbourne would have to pick up kids . If your club is efficient and talent scouts its gotta work . I know the Collingwoods would try and bend the rules, but if rules where put in place ,cant see why it wouldn't work . Change the draft so that its not a penalty if a gem comes through . Some years clubs will win with 1 or 2 stars but why penalize them. But maybe it would help the football department that don't recruit well .To simple ?

[Kelpie_X]

The AFL have also been reluctant to allow trading of future picks for fear that poorly managed clubs would be a basket case for years if they stuff it up.

Any different than now?

[Mug Punter]

Stupid idea why cant all clubs have academies from there zones ,its the only way, its fair . I know some clubs would say no we cant afford to but a least the young kids that fall through the cracks are picked up . Melbourne ,Dogs , Saints ,Carlton and North Melbourne would have to pick up kids . If your club is efficient and talent scouts its gotta work . I know the Collingwoods would try and bend the rules, but if rules where put in place ,cant see why it wouldn't work . Change the draft so that its not a penalty if a gem comes through . Some years clubs will win with 1 or 2 stars but why penalize them. But maybe it would help the football department that don't recruit well .To simple ?

IMO, and with respect, I think this misses the point of the academy system.

The academies are to grow the game and develop new talent that would have otherwise have gone to league, union, soccer or cricket - the talented sportskids. It's not designed as a recruitment zone, which is why I have a problem with GWS having the Riverina.

This new talent is needed because unless we generate more AFL standard players due to the two new teams then the overall product will fall.

Victoria has a well developed and mature development pathway. A return to the zone system would see the Melbourne clubs absolutely eating themselves. Actually, maybe it's not such a bad idea afterall

[barry]

The AFL, quite rightly , don't want the concept of future picks. They were forced to introduce it because of the excessive price academy players might cost. They couldn't make it impossible for a club like sydney to get its own academy kid.

Just shows how stupid the AFL is . They need to make up new rules to fix up I previous stupid rules.

Gillian was renowned as compromise negotiator. This is the way he operates. Makes for a @@@@house CEO.

[Mug Punter]

The AFL, quite rightly , don't want the concept of future picks. They were forced to introduce it because of the excessive price academy players might cost. They couldn't make it impossible for a club like sydney to get its own academy kid.

Just shows how stupid the AFL is . They need to make up new rules to fix up I previous stupid rules.

Gillian was renowned as compromise negotiator. This is the way he operates. Makes for a @@@@house CEO.

I know this will be a controversial post but if you read the AFL paper re the academy system bidding changes it is hard to argue against some of the points.

The argument re us getting a Pick 2-5 when all we give up is pick 17 and it being an unfair advantage if it continued is hard to argue against. Just as it is re F/S.

My main issue with Eddie was not that he voiced concerns as per the AFL's paper but the ignorant offensive way he sought to destroy the entire system and his lack of regard for the game's welfare.

I would have preferred a slightly higher discount for academy kids (even 25% would have helped) but I do think there is enough in this new system to still make it worth the Swans while. And I think we give up enough in top end talent to stop the system being torn down completely if it produces a genuine superstar.

[ernie koala]

The AFL, quite rightly , don't want the concept of future picks. They were forced to introduce it because of the excessive price academy players might cost. They couldn't make it impossible for a club like sydney to get its own academy kid.

Just shows how stupid the AFL is . They need to make up new rules to fix up I previous stupid rules.

Gillian was renowned as compromise negotiator. This is the way he operates. Makes for a @@@@house CEO.

I agree with you Barry. A hastily introduced scheme to placate McGuire and co.

Now they find themselves chasing their own tail due to their total lack of foresight.

No doubt this scheme will be chopped and changed over the coming seasons as more flaws emerge.

[tasmania60]

IMO, and with respect, I think this misses the point of the academy system.

The academies are to grow the game and develop new talent that would have otherwise have gone to league, union, soccer or cricket - the talented sportskids. It's not designed as a recruitment zone, which is why I have a problem with GWS having the Riverina.

This new talent is needed because unless we generate more AFL standard players due to the two new teams then the overall product will fall.

Victoria has a well developed and mature development pathway. A return to the zone system would see the Melbourne clubs absolutely eating themselves. Actually, maybe it's not such a bad idea afterall

I know academies are basically for the elite but not all kids develop as quick as some ,really think the swans should tier their academies ! The zone always was a good idea . Be honest 20 years down the track 2 Melbourne clubs will be relocated !

[Mug Punter]

I know academies are basically for the elite but not all kids develop as quick as some ,really think the swans should tier their academies ! The zone always was a good idea . Be honest 20 years down the track 2 Melbourne clubs will be relocated !

Where would they be relocated - maybe Tasmania I guess but I'm still not sure it has the corporate support and infrastructure?

I can se both GWS and Gold COast struggling long term - GWS will have on field success with that list for sure but their off-field challenges are enormous.

Reckon you'd get a LOT of oppositin from the Melbourne clubs if WA/SA each get to split their top kids between two clubs with the Melbourne clubs excluded. Bottom line is that I really can't see how the comp can sustain 10 Victorian sides from the Victorian recruitment base so on that masure I reckon a return to the zone system would get a lot of opposition from the

[barry]

I agree with you Barry. A hastily introduced scheme to placate McGuire and co.

Now they find themselves chasing their own tail due to their total lack of foresight.

No doubt this scheme will be chopped and changed over the coming seasons as more flaws emerge.

Simply solved by making the maximum price a premiership team has to pay for its 1st pick academy pick, all of its draft picks for that year.
This is the worst case scenario.
Eg. If Sydney win the flag, a Mills is considered best player in the draft (pick 1), Sydney would have to pay all picks, and have no picks in the draft at all. (Unless they trade a player for a pick independently).

No future borrowing, very simple formula. If anyone think its slightly generous, remember its a highly unlikely event that will be very very rare.
I bet an analysis of Sydney/Brisbane/GC/GWS average finishing position (say 9th) and analysis of average best draft pick from kids who are (or could have been in the past) academy kids (say pick 20) would show how its a scenario so remote it doesnt need any of this future hogwash