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

[Jewels]

Am I the only one on here that understands where Gordon is coming from?

Take the Geelong Falcons for an example of a talent pool that if the Cats had first crack at would definitely damage the integrity of the draft.. (first round picks and F/S)

I could be wrong here, but I wouldn't have thought the Geelong Falcons were financed by the Geelong Football Club whereas the Swans academy is 100% financed by The Sydney Swans Football Club so you really can't compare the two.

[Ludwig]

Footcray could have changed their name to the Greater Western Bulldogs and would be rolling in AFL money and have an academy all their own, and may have been competing for a flag considering the concessions they would have gotten, but instead decided to be placed on an AFL drip feed indefinitely and become a sycophantic lackey for Eddie McGuire and others with control of their life-support system.

It's difficult enough for the AFL to have to prop up 3 struggling northern clubs, who constantly have to fend off barbs from McGuire. But also have to feed those anaemic Melbourne clubs that are getting their fan base sucked clean by the bigger Melbourne clubs. The Brisbane problem was, in part, due to Eddie's yammering about them being too good, and made sure they became a loser again. We all know what an arduous journey it was for the Sydney Swans to become a respectable club, and now the same clique are trying to run us into the ground as well.

The AFL are not going to make up much ground if they keep shooting themselves in the foot. They made a commitment to bring the game into traditional rugby and soccer territory and they should see it through.

[Matt80]

What if they are the next Goodes, Parker, Jack?

I would back Heeney to get to the Parker level. Definitely a bit more pace to break away into space as well.

I think Hiscox and Davis are speculative. It's interesting that there is more talk about Melican who was last pick in the rookie draft than Davis and Hiscox.

[S.S. Bleeder]

McGuire has enabled Gordon into a false sense of entitlement. He should stfu and learn about respect.

Gordon's an ambulance chasing solicitor. I think he had a false sense of entitlement well before he got into bed with McGuire (ew that's a terrible picture).

[liz]

I would back Heeney to get to the Parker level. Definitely a bit more pace to break away into space as well.

I think Hiscox and Davis are speculative. It's interesting that there is more talk about Melican who was last pick in the rookie draft than Davis and Hiscox.

You have missed my point. Goodes and Jack were highly speculative. Parker's pre-draft CV indicates he wasn't, but nor was he a fashionable pick. The point very good players don't always get picked using high draft choices, and no-one begrudges a side that recruits such players with later picks. Clubs (and supporters) only seem to express recruiting envy when good players are obtained via early picks.

[dimelb]

I understand penga's point, and I agree with the ideal of as level a playing field as possible, but for that to happen would take more than changing the draft. To begin, the proposed model is (to my mind) quite cockeyed. To take only one example, the dropoff in point value from 1 to 10 is like a free fall; instead, the top ten should probably be rated on a much smaller gap between the talents, with a more drastic drop further into the draft.

Then we have to decide the father/son picks: do they stay or do we drop the whole idea? I rather like the tradition, but at present it heavily favours the Vic clubs over all the others.

Others have picked up the money issue (see Jewels above), and we have to find a way to balance the need to "purify" the draft against the legitimate claims of the clubs who actually run and pay for the academies. What is a fitting compensation for putting so much money, time and effort into growing the game if someone else gets first pick of the fruit?

The draft will be even when young players start leaving Victoria and go home to NSW and Queensland.

[JPK12]

Gordon's an ambulance chasing solicitor. I think he had a false sense of entitlement well before he got into bed with McGuire (ew that's a terrible picture).

He is not from..slater & gordon..is he?

[The Big Cat]

He is not from..slater & gordon..is he?

yes he is

[sprite]

Others have picked up the money issue (see Jewels above), and we have to find a way to balance the need to "purify" the draft against the legitimate claims of the clubs who actually run and pay for the academies. What is a fitting compensation for putting so much money, time and effort into growing the game if someone else gets first pick of the fruit?

How about the recruiting club has to pay the academy the equivalent of a rookie contract and included in TPP, this would reimburse the academy and cover the lost opportunity for the academy club.

Or: the AFL takes over running and funding all academies.

[Meg]

Couple more articles on AFL site. Seems as if the potential impact of proposed bidding system on father/son drafting is causing angst for a some clubs.
Proposal to scrap bidding for late-round father-son and academy players - AFL.com.au

On the move: Coaches have their say on father-son and academy system - AFL.com.au

[Untamed Snark]

Couple more articles on AFL site. Seems as if the potential impact of proposed bidding system on father/son drafting is causing angst for a some clubs.
Proposal to scrap bidding for late-round father-son and academy players - AFL.com.au

On the move: Coaches have their say on father-son and academy system - AFL.com.au

Roos: Having lived in Sydney and now Melbourne, this is all a reaction to Kurt Tippett and Lance Franklin going to the Swans. Nobody knew who Isaac Heeney was until now, and nobody really cares, but this is just a response from some clubs.

Thank you Mr Roos.
About as close to saying "this is another McGuire whine" as he can politely be

[penga]

You have missed my point. Goodes and Jack were highly speculative. Parker's pre-draft CV indicates he wasn't, but nor was he a fashionable pick. The point very good players don't always get picked using high draft choices, and no-one begrudges a side that recruits such players with later picks. Clubs (and supporters) only seem to express recruiting envy when good players are obtained via early picks.

You've also missed my point. Ablett, Hodge, and Bartel were all taken in the same draft. Geelong got a steal with Ablett as a third rounder father and son pick (where he took quite some time to blossom at the top level), recruited wisely with Bartel, and if they had Hodge as well, the rest of the League would, quite rightly, be up in arms.

Personally I would prefer access to one player, per bidding process however that works out, and then have the go-home factor happening in reverse, where previous academy listed players want to come back to Sydney, therefore there is a risk in other clubs recruiting these players. I would hate to see a situation arise where we are in such a dominant position with recruitment that we have a salary cap squeeze and we can gain high draft picks each season by trading off the surplus players which are stars.

I could be wrong here, but I wouldn't have thought the Geelong Falcons were financed by the Geelong Football Club whereas the Swans academy is 100% financed by The Sydney Swans Football Club so you really can't compare the two.

You're right. Geelong Falcons have no funding, at least to my limited awareness, from the Cats, but it is an example of a stacked talent pool that may arise from our academy. Where I agree with dimelb, that a monetary compensation seems more apropriate to me. Say the AFL pays the Swans, Giants, Suns or Lions a percentage of the player's contract after the academy club gets outbid at the draft. I'm not sure of a solution, but as is, I think it is unfair.

Tom Mitchell, Lloyd Perris, Isaac Heeney, with Callum Mills and Josh Dunkley on top? We're asking a bit much.

[707]

I would hate to see a situation arise where we are in such a dominant position with recruitment that we have a salary cap squeeze and we can gain high draft picks each season by trading off the surplus players which are stars.

Which is what GWS has been doing and will continue to do for another 7-8 years such was the generosity of the start up concessions they were given.

They are trading back excess but still highly regarded former high draft picks for new high draft picks making a mockery of a level draft.

GWS have 17 players drafted in the top 10, 5 drafted 11-20 and 6 drafted 21-30 PLUS at least 4 pre draft players who would have been top 10 picks like Cameron, Hampton, Shiel, Treloar.

So that's a full team of top 10 picks! This is a juggernaught in the making that WILL make Eddie's head explode. I wonder how he will get the AFL to nobble GWS in the future?

[liz]

You've also missed my point. Ablett, Hodge, and Bartel were all taken in the same draft. Geelong got a steal with Ablett as a third rounder father and son pick (where he took quite some time to blossom at the top level), recruited wisely with Bartel, and if they had Hodge as well, the rest of the League would, quite rightly, be up in arms.

Personally I would prefer access to one player, per bidding process however that works out, and then have the go-home factor happening in reverse, where previous academy listed players want to come back to Sydney, therefore there is a risk in other clubs recruiting these players. I would hate to see a situation arise where we are in such a dominant position with recruitment that we have a salary cap squeeze and we can gain high draft picks each season by trading off the surplus players which are stars.



You're right. Geelong Falcons have no funding, at least to my limited awareness, from the Cats, but it is an example of a stacked talent pool that may arise from our academy. Where I agree with dimelb, that a monetary compensation seems more apropriate to me. Say the AFL pays the Swans, Giants, Suns or Lions a percentage of the player's contract after the academy club gets outbid at the draft. I'm not sure of a solution, but as is, I think it is unfair.

Tom Mitchell, Lloyd Perris, Isaac Heeney, with Callum Mills and Josh Dunkley on top? We're asking a bit much.

Except that Ablett was rated about where he was drafted. There was no major FS discount. It is hardly the fault of that system that he has subsequently become the best player of his generation - by some margin.

And the Cats didn't draft Hodge, so he's irrelevant.

Prior to Heeney, one NSW player had been drafted in the first round of the national draft in 15 odd years - our very own McVeigh. Only one player from NSW had been drafted in even the second round since that date - LRT. There is hardly a steady stream of top draftees emanating from NSW. As and when there is, I agree that the current system would be overly generous. But right now, there is no evidence that Heeney and Mills aren't just freak blips on the radar. The academies just haven't been given long enough to put down roots and bear fruit for any judgement to be made.

[Ludwig]

Tom Mitchell, Lloyd Perris, Isaac Heeney, with Callum Mills and Josh Dunkley on top? We're asking a bit much.

Mitchell and Dunkley are both FS selections. I'm fine with changing the rules on FS. But if they do, they should phase it in and not start in the current year when it is clear that the rule would be prejudice clubs with known FS talent. Let's start in 2017, so there's no clear individual or club being targeting.

The proposed Academy bidding system takes most of the benefit out of running the academies. It's almost better to let a highly bid player go to an out of state club and then have them cry 'homesick' after a couple of years and demand to be traded back to their 'home' club, like they do in the other states. Just for example, let's see what happened with Jarrod Polec. He was originally a draft pick # 5 with value points 1878 or 1408 with a 25% discount. This would cost a high finishing side their first 2 draft picks. The net points value that Brisbane got for Polec was 357 in a complicaed deal involving an exchange of 4 picks. That turns out to be a pick 44. So why pay picks 18 and 36 for a player that you might get in 2 years time for a pick 44?

There would be no argument if the AFL ran and paid for the academies. Then the talent developed should go into the regular draft. But why should a club allocate a major proportion of their development resources for no benefit? The proposed system has little impact for a club that finishes in the bottom half of the ladder. It is specifically designed to be very costly for a high finishing club that happens to develop a top talent through their academy in the same year. Now, which of the 18 AFL clubs fits that description?

What a coincidence!