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

[707]

It's always the two most advantaged clubs presidents that do all this bleating about equalisation when they just want equalisation on things that they are not leading in but anything that is an advantage to them they want left alone.

The equalisation tax on footy spending is a joke, these two muppets managed to talk the VFL down to a maximum tax of $500k whilst both those clubs spend millions more in their footy departments than the poorer clubs.

Time for the VFL and Gillon to grow some nuts and show that the tail doesn't wag the dog but I'm less than hopeful that the VFL won't collapse again.

Given how long ago the new draft rules were made public, I'm surprised it's taken Newbold (and fat Eddie) this long to work out that his club couldn't use future draft picks!

[Ampersand]

The only reason they've allowed us to use future draft picks is because the points system they've devised is so draconian that it's almost impossible now to take more than one decent Academy prospect per draft.

I think it would have been preferable to put some mechanism in place that allows high draft pick teams to take an Academy player but compensate the Swans when they do so. For e.g. If Carlton really, really want Mills then, in recognition of the time and money Sydney spent developing him, they have to compensate Sydney with their second round pick as well.

Again, this is just a case of killing the goose before it could even lay the golden egg. If they'd allow the existing Academy to grow and thrive there would have ended up being more NSW and QLD players available in the first round than Academy clubs could have possibly taken under the old system. Other clubs would have benefitted massively from that overflow of talent.

What's the incentive now to strive to produce more than a first rounder per year from our Academy system? All our other picks will be gone anyway.

[Dan]

Look, I'm not a fan of the new draft bidding/point allocation process but... I can see why it has been put in place. The whole point of the draft is to advantage the bottom clubs, which we are not. Imagine if we were a bottom 4 team, this discussion most likely wouldn't even be taking place. Yes we spend money on the academy and should get some sort of benefit from it. However, since we will most likely finish closer to the top of the ladder than the bottom this benefit will decrease and I believe this is fair enough. I don't want to see the Swans drop down the ladder, but as a fan of the game who wants to see Melbourne or other teams just hang around the bottom for years on end. I don't believe that is good for anyone, it will come to a week against them and people will become disinterested with the game.

Heeney and Mills are two exceptional young talents, but not every single draft year will there be players from our academy of this caliber. I think events like Mills going for a top 5 pick will be an exception, not the norm. We have been super lucky to have two young guns in two consecutive drafts.

My younger brother is part of the Swans Academy, I think it has an advantage over just producing players that the Swans can draft, so I don't having a dummy spit and giving up on it is a very good idea. It gives the kids something to look forward to and enjoy. He recently got to attend a closed training session and run water to all the players just before the Giants game. These kids look up to the players like gods, if it keeps them fit, healthy and happy I'm all for keeping the academy going even with the more difficult draft system. Plus it isn't like the Swans are paying everything, I think it costs my brother $400 a year for the academy. I'm not sure how many kids they currently have in the system but a lot of the funding would come from the parents as well.

In short; we are one of the best teams in the AFL, the draft is used to advantage the lower teams, so it makes sense we will be disadvantaged at the present time.

[Ampersand]

Who says that the Acadmies regularly producing multiple First Round talent won't become the norm, given the population, talent pool and excellent training environment? Victoria does it every year with less population because they have an established football culture. NSW doesn't but that's what the Academy is designed to foster.

For me the equation is simple:

Swans pay and administer = Swans should get a benefit at the draft

AFL pays and administers = Swans don't

Anyone who is a fan of the game should want to see it succeed in QLD and NSW. The Academies are a fundamental component of that success. Since it's clear that the AFL have no interest in paying the full cost and managing admin of Northern academies it's basically now a choice between Academies or no Academies.

[Melbournehammer]

Swans do get a benefit. They get a discount on the pick.

Sure the AFL has changed the rules midstream and I think we are within our rights to be bitter about that. But lets not pretend there isn't an advantage which accrues to the swans by virtue of accessing players for cheaper than their true value.

Sure in the long term the game may benefit from having an increased number of players from NSW and Qld, but in terms of the AFL comp advantages accrue to people who can use lower draft picks to get better under 18 players. No one knows whether they will make it or not thereafter and that will be partly due to development coaches, club structures and so on. But i do wish we would stop bleating as though the world is about to end because we might have to draft some players with picks closer to their true value.

[ugg]

Jackson Kelly called up by the RAMS for the last two U18 championship games.

[baskin]

Does anyone else see something strange in Hawthorn's angst about an unequal draft? I didn't see him getting upset when the Swans were stopped from trading. I would hardly call that equal rights.

[Dosser]

Does anyone else see something strange in Hawthorn's angst about an unequal draft? I didn't see him getting upset when the Swans were stopped from trading. I would hardly call that equal rights.

Newbolt was on SEN this morning beating the drum about wanting an uncompromised draft. He was saying that either all clubs can trade future picks or none at all. His point was that the draft was to be pure and uncompromised. The problem was that when the subject of FS was brought up he dismissed it by saying that wasnt the issue. You cant have it both ways, sunshine. He was saying that it is not just a Hawthorn issue, but rather he is thinking about the good of the future of the game. Spare me.

[Mug Punter]

Who says that the Acadmies regularly producing multiple First Round talent won't become the norm, given the population, talent pool and excellent training environment? Victoria does it every year with less population because they have an established football culture. NSW doesn't but that's what the Academy is designed to foster.

For me the equation is simple:

Swans pay and administer = Swans should get a benefit at the draft

AFL pays and administers = Swans don't

Anyone who is a fan of the game should want to see it succeed in QLD and NSW. The Academies are a fundamental component of that success. Since it's clear that the AFL have no interest in paying the full cost and managing admin of Northern academies it's basically now a choice between Academies or no Academies.

I think there is an additional and critical extra dimension to that equation.

That is, that the AFL can pour all the money they like into junior development but if there isn't a guaranteed pathway to local clubs (i.e. if kids won't be forced interstate away from their families and friends at 18) then the system will not be embraced

And it's also about community engagement to make the local clubs viable

[Mug Punter]

Swans do get a benefit. They get a discount on the pick.

Sure the AFL has changed the rules midstream and I think we are within our rights to be bitter about that. But lets not pretend there isn't an advantage which accrues to the swans by virtue of accessing players for cheaper than their true value.

Sure in the long term the game may benefit from having an increased number of players from NSW and Qld, but in terms of the AFL comp advantages accrue to people who can use lower draft picks to get better under 18 players. No one knows whether they will make it or not thereafter and that will be partly due to development coaches, club structures and so on. But i do wish we would stop bleating as though the world is about to end because we might have to draft some players with picks closer to their true value.

I would have liked a slightly higher discount buit I think the new system is essentially fair and provides some certainty.

Whether other clubs can trade inter-year I really couldn't care less, as long as the academy system is set in stone, and I think this compromise is a long term solution, then we should all just move on.

In many ways we have the Qld clubs to thanks for the saving of the academy system - they illustrate clearly how important they are, especially the Lions. I have no doubt at all if it was just us, or if all four clubs were strong that the whole thing would be torn down

- - - Updated - - -

Newbolt was on SEN this morning beating the drum about wanting an uncompromised draft. He was saying that either all clubs can trade future picks or none at all. His point was that the draft was to be pure and uncompromised. The problem was that when the subject of FS was brought up he dismissed it by saying that wasnt the issue. You cant have it both ways, sunshine. He was saying that it is not just a Hawthorn issue, but rather he is thinking about the good of the future of the game. Spare me.

I think that is a fair call. Let them do it as far as I am concerned, who really cares

[barry]

The "future draft" picks is a "wedge" Eddie cleverly put in the academies rules, to enable him and his robot (Newbolt) to attack on a new front. The AFL's are fools for letting this, as I explained earlier in this thread.

Should the Swans (and other northern teams) get preferential treatment on local players? Is this unfair ? On its own, it is unfair.
But they need it to counterbalance the unfairness they already have to bare with regards to having so few local players on their list. They are disadvantaged as more players have to move interstate, and get homesick. Many a deal has fallen through because a player didnt want to move state. The academies are a solution to that problem. An unfairness to balance another unfairness. A long term solution.

If the AFL was smart, which unfortuntely they are not, they would word the academy pick discounts to be available to any team with less than 50% (or some number) of locally born players (by state).
A victorian team can only recruit outside its state, go below 50%, then set up an academy, and take its benefits, if they want.. But who would? The disadvantages and cost outweigh benefits.

The failure of the AFL to do this, to communicate the full extent of the rulings, now and in the past, always causes this victorian white-anting of anything worthwhile outside victoria.

[jono2707]

I think there is an additional and critical extra dimension to that equation.

That is, that the AFL can pour all the money they like into junior development but if there isn't a guaranteed pathway to local clubs (i.e. if kids won't be forced interstate away from their families and friends at 18) then the system will not be embraced

And it's also about community engagement to make the local clubs viable

So kids from Vic, SA or WA shouldnt have to leave their home states either?

This is a professional sport and young players have to be willing to play anywhere when they enter the system via the draft.

[liz]

So kids from Vic, SA or WA shouldnt have to leave their home states either?

This is a professional sport and young players have to be willing to play anywhere when they enter the system via the draft.

The contribution of talent from NSW and Queensland (especially NSW) over the past decade has been pathetic, given these states support 4 of the 18 teams and more than 50% of the country's population. The AFL community can either accept this as an unchangeable situation or can do something to try and change it. To try and change it, they need to recognise the specific circumstances of competition for talent in those two states, and the development pathways available to that talent. Both are clearly different to the traditional AFL states, and hence a different approach is needed, unless we are just to accept that bugger all talent will be contributed by NSW and Queensland.

The academies are a solution to this challenge. The early signs are promising. The competition has a choice - either accept a different approach is required in NSW and Queensland or accept the status quo in terms of talent out of these two states. Pretty straightforward.

[707]

It's pathetic how Fatso and Newbold trumpet that their only concern is for the good of the game like they are white knights saving the game from the evil empires of the north.

% of local talent on lists is a big unequal factor that can be addressed by the academies. Just wait and see what these white knights say if Aish a number 7 draft pick bails out of Brisbane after just two years.

Both of their clubs have lured home players after the players initial two year contract so they have blood on their hands in promoting unequalisation. I'm thoroughly sick of them both and their forked tongue crap. Just hoping all of Heeney, Mills and Dunkley (if we can still get him) turn into gun players.

[Conor_Dillon]

Another positive article on the influence of the Swans and our academy, worth a read. All the best to Max this weekend, I'm sure he won't be the last kid to be inspired by Heeney and the path he has taken.

Max Hillier inspired by Heeney's fast rise | Newcastle Herald