AFL jacks up Father/Son and Academy player costs

[SydneyRox]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-clubs-to-pay-higher-draft-price-for-father-son-academy-stars/story-fni5f22o-1227198697857

Report in the HS about proposed changes.

The math on what Heeney would have cost Sydney is ridiculous!! Basically their Rnd 1, Rnd 2 and Rnd 3 Picks!



How the Isaac Heeney case would have played out under the AFL’s proposed new father-son/academy bidding system

â€" Melbourne bids pick No. 2 (worth 2517 points) for Swans academy member Heeney.

â€" Sydney matches the bid and lands player, but “owes” 1888 points (2517 points, discounted by 25 per cent) to the draft.

â€" Points are matched to Sydney’s original first pick, No. 18 (985 points), and that pick is moved to the back of the draft. The Swans still owe 903 points.

â€" Remaining points are matched to Sydney’s next pick, No. 37 (483 points) and that pick is moved to the back of the draft. The Swans still owe 420 points.

â€" Remaining points are matched to Sydney’s next pick, No. 38 (465 points). The 45 leftover points entitles Sydney to “buy” pick No. 70 rather than go to the back of the line.

â€" Sydney would have effectively sold picks 18, 37 and 38 for 2 (Heeney), 70, 88 and 89. The Demons then would have taken Christian Petracca and Angus Brayshaw at No. 3 and 4.

â€" Last year they were able to select Heeney at No. 18 and retain picks No. 37 and 38. They selected two more academy players, excluded from this scenario.

[nrich102]

Ridiculous.

[Grazz]

What are they doing?  :o

[Ringo]

What are they doing?  :o

Giving Eddie and co their wishes with access to the States academy development. Bullshower as it further disadvantages both non AFL dominant states.

In 4 years time we have a number of father son coming through Voss and McRae two from memory without having to delve further.  Both in the Lions academy as well. So in 3 or 4 years when Lions finish 1st we will lose a couple of early round picks to secure Voss Jnr. Bullshower.

[Pkbaldy]

What are they doing?  :o

Giving Eddie and co their wishes with access to the States academy development. Bullshower as it further disadvantages both non AFL dominant states.

In 4 years time we have a number of father son coming through Voss and McRae two from memory without having to delve further.  Both in the Lions academy as well. So in 3 or 4 years when Lions finish 1st we will lose a couple of early round picks to secure Voss Jnr. Bullshower.

Going to damage Sydney and Brisbane this year. Both Mills and Keays highly rated at this time haha.

[GoLions]

I'm not sure what's worse: These proposed changes, or SR's spelling of the word "academy"

[Nige]

I blame Sydney. :P

[Kellogscrunchynut]

This is an absolute joke, they had no problem when the academies were shipping out average players.

[AFEV]

This is an absolute joke, they had no problem when the academies were shipping out average players.

No they didn't, and it makes perfect logical sense that now that these academies have started to generate players that should be going higher in the draft that it has become an issue that needs to be addressed.
After Heeney and Hiscox this year, as well as more first round prospects set to land at Brisbane and Sydney in the 2015 draft, it is something that has to be considered.

The notion that the non-footballing states are somehow disadvantaged is frankly a little ridiculous, they have the same access to father son players that Victorian clubs do. Brisbane has access to players from the Bears and Fitzroy meaning that should their ex-players produce kids they will have access to them. Sydney is much the same having been around since the early 1980s, and still having access to South Melbourne players as well. We have already seen them enter the draw for Joe Daniher a few years back.

The national draft makes the league as equal as it will need to be, the academies are honestly a concession that is not required in any way for Sydney or Brisbane, FS is enough although that rule doesn't need to be tinkered with.

Just because your club is an expansion team does not entitle you to concessions which will further concentrate the talent pool in the AFL, making it all the more difficult for Fremantle, Melbourne, Footscray etc to experience any worthwhile success.

Since the turn of the century, expansion/relocated teams have won 7 premierships out of 14 (despite only making up ~30% of the league) and made 10 out of 14 grand finals. I would say that indicates there is not a great deal of struggle for these sides, and it is time to kick the crutches out from under them and let them walk on their own.

[AFEV]

That being said I doubt they'll implement this, and it would essentially cripple the FS tradition.

[SydneyRox]

If the AFL were the ones funding the Academies (thanks GL) then I dont think anyone would even care/notice, but since the four clubs are the ones paying for the bulk for the academies (and the Swans paid over $1M towards theirs last year). There has to be something in it for them. If the AFL implement rules like this it makes no sense for any club to try and find and nurture young talent that would otherwise go to other sports.

[Ringo]

But AFEV same rules are going to be applied to F/S if I read the article correctly. So if you want a F/S you may be losing 2 or more draft picks as well.

Sydney and Brisbane started AFL academys to give opportunites and development to youngster and try and steer away from League and Union. Considerable expense has gone into these academies which the AFL has sactioned so why should we not get a return on investment by having a prioity pick from the graduating players.

So either change it for all including father/son or leave as is.

[GoLions]

If the AFL were the ones funding the Academies (thanks GL) then I dont think anyone would even care/notice, but since the four clubs are the ones paying for the bulk for the academies (and the Swans paid over $1M towards theirs last year). There has to be something in it for them. If the AFL implement rules like this it makes no sense for any club to try and find and nurture young talent that would otherwise go to other sports.

100% agree with this. If the AFL want to fund this then by all means don't give us priority to those players. But if we're putting the time and money into these kids, we deserve something in return.
And it also helps with the "go home" factor, as we're actually able to draft kids from our own states who are less likely to leave the club. Barely any kids would be drafted from NSW or QLD otherwise if it weren't for the academies.

[AFEV]

Fairly simple solution might be for the AFL to fund the academies?
Granted a small sample size, but it seems that academies will consistently produce AFL quality players - which you'd think they would given that they have the opportunity to select the players for their academy while FS prospects are largely luck based.

Besides, these clubs have access to FS just like every other club, it is absurd to suggest they should then benefit from the existence of academies while others cannot.

Coupling academies and FS is over simplistic, aside from both being bid-to-win systems they are entirely different entities. As opposed to creating unnecessary concessions for successful teams at the highest level, create more competitive youth leagues and fund for TAC like competitions to be established and developed in those areas, or just make the club affiliated academies funded by the AFL and the players generated by it are treated as any other prospect.

EDIT: the 'go home' factor usually seems like more of a PR spin on a player escaping a club they don't enjoy. These guys are professionals and adults and should be able to adjust to living a 2 hour plane ride away from mum and dad while they make the bulk of their career money.
You rarely see players from successful clubs with opportunities etc decide that they miss their home town.

[JBs-Hawks]

Good move by the afl. Sydney paying a late first round pick for Mills would  be absolute bullshower