Novice draftees are list cloggers!

[Courtney_Fish 183]

For 4 or so years you are nurturing them. Then you might get 4 or so years good service. Then, if they are really good and in an average team, they leave under the agency rules. Only about 1 in 3 top 10 or so picks end up being really good players and about 1 in 3 are duds. I laugh when I see some clown's saying Frawley isn't worth pick 3. He's ready made and a very good player.

I'm now loving GWS because so many players want to return home and a lot of the nurturing been done and we have more of an idea of what they are worth.

[Chook 15,022]

Yep. Draftees are list cloggers. We should delist them so we can draft new people to the club.

[Beats 190]

Draftees are a lottery, there's always a number who come in and play straight away. What you meant to say was skinny kids who aren't super quick/ have tricks need to get bigger in size before playing.

[Little Goffy 14,645]

Yep. Draftees are list cloggers. We should delist them so we can draft new people to the club.

I think we can close this thread now.

[deanox 9,989]

The reason why I think the AFL should either:

reduce lists to 30ish players and throw lots of money into a quality, independent, second tier competition for development; or

Increase list sizes to 55ish and throw lots of money at a quality, "reserve" division.

There are 404 players running around the AFL every week, and at least 25% are there either based on "potential", because better players who have reached their ceiling have been moved on. A better quality second tier competition means that the best will play the best each week.

[Adzman 2,154]

Injury plays a big part in whether or not a player makes it or not. Luck can be cruel for some, and cut them down before they even get a chance to show what they are capable of.

[Theo 276]

The AFL Players Association want FA to come in after a player has been at a club for only 6 years. Clubs like ours will be nothing more than a development nursery for the more successful clubs. Unless we can climb up the ladder quickly our best players will always be tempted to leave.

What should happen is that FA players should only be allowed to choose a club that did not make the top 8 for maybe top 4.

[Green Machine 63]

Injury plays a big part in whether or not a player makes it or not. Luck can be cruel for some, and cut them down before they even get a chance to show what they are capable of.

James Strauss says hello, was just starting to string some consistent games together and was playing some solid footy when he broke his leg. Was that 2012 ?

[Chook 15,022]

The reason why I think the AFL should either:

reduce lists to 30ish players and throw lots of money into a quality, independent, second tier competition for development; or

Increase list sizes to 55ish and throw lots of money at a quality, "reserve" division.

There are 404 players running around the AFL every week, and at least 25% are there either based on "potential", because better players who have reached their ceiling have been moved on. A better quality second tier competition means that the best will play the best each week.

So it's a case of 404 Error: Skill not found?

[Courtney_Fish 183]

I think there's lots of possible ways to approach this such as making the draft age higher (and of course that means players who are ready to play have to wait longer) but it's arguable that it's better to pick up a 22 year old and get 8 years of good service than an 18 year old and get far less. It's just awful to see guys who have years to go in them that you have pinned your hopes and plans on leave for another club high up the ladder.

Edited October 3, 2014 by Courtney_Fish

[daisycutter 29,743]

6 year FA will be a disaster for long developing big fellas such as ruckmen and skinny kpp's

clubs wouldn't want to touch them for potentially small returns

[Courtney_Fish 183]

I suspect that what is required is a scheme for higher salary caps for lowly teams. Perhaps more money is how we overcome the allure of the higher teams. The extra in the cap should be paid by the AFL not only because lower clubs have lower gate takings but it's the AFL's job to provide an equal playing field and they should take some responsibility.

[dee-luded 2,959]

The AFL Players Association want FA to come in after a player has been at a club for only 6 years. Clubs like ours will be nothing more than a development nursery for the more successful clubs. Unless we can climb up the ladder quickly our best players will always be tempted to leave.

What should happen is that FA players should only be allowed to choose a club that did not make the top 8 for maybe top 4.

So the AFL should then start to grade players during the course of each season into class categories. then make it AFL law that No club can have more than lets say 8 'A'-grade players on their lists at end of season. Or a points system to weigh up each clubs lists, & equalize.

meaning the top clubs would have to trade off they're surplus 'A'-grade players.

they need to do something to even the comp up; & the fixtures.

[deanox 9,989]

Easy fix.

Draftees get 2 year contracts with club option to hold them for an extra 2.

Free agency for all players after 4 years when out of contract, or whenever any contact expires. But, a transfer fee system needs to be developed. That is, "buying" clubs will pay a transfer fee to the "selling" clubs in the form of a draft pick, salary cap space etc.

Players lose the right to veto trades at any time while under contract (that is, it is up to the club, not the player).

The is now an open market. The biggest problem to restriction of trades isn't clubs not paying, but other clubs requiring too much.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

I still think that the minimum draft age should be raised to 20 years old. You can't draft a key position player at 18 and think they can dominate. Yes hogan looks like a beast and so does Hawkins but it still took Tom a long time to settle. I don't see much point drafting a ruck men. That's 4 years of waiting. Mids can be a bit easier to judge at 18 but we all know the wines vs toumpass debate. Drafting is never going to be a perfect science but if players were more mature physically and mentally you could battle the bigger clubs and their free agents because your top draft picks would be ready to go in their first year. Lower clubs need a quicker way up the ladder not a 5 year plan with teenagers who a club are hoping on.

[Bossdog 2,002]

I still think that the minimum draft age should be raised to 20 years old. You can't draft a key position player at 18 and think they can dominate. Yes hogan looks like a beast and so does Hawkins but it still took Tom a long time to settle. I don't see much point drafting a ruck men. That's 4 years of waiting. Mids can be a bit easier to judge at 18 but we all know the wines vs toumpass debate. Drafting is never going to be a perfect science but if players were more mature physically and mentally you could battle the bigger clubs and their free agents because your top draft picks would be ready to go in their first year. Lower clubs need a quicker way up the ladder not a 5 year plan with teenagers who a club are hoping on.

So where do they play for 2 years?.....If you raise the age of the TAC cup to 20 they will still be playing against their peers and not against mature men, or do you start another competition....Just wondering...Serious question

[DeeSpencer 26,084]

I still think that the minimum draft age should be raised to 20 years old. You can't draft a key position player at 18 and think they can dominate. Yes hogan looks like a beast and so does Hawkins but it still took Tom a long time to settle. I don't see much point drafting a ruck men. That's 4 years of waiting. Mids can be a bit easier to judge at 18 but we all know the wines vs toumpass debate. Drafting is never going to be a perfect science but if players were more mature physically and mentally you could battle the bigger clubs and their free agents because your top draft picks would be ready to go in their first year. Lower clubs need a quicker way up the ladder not a 5 year plan with teenagers who a club are hoping on.

It would be nice, but really there's too many 18 and 19 year olds who are best 22 across the competition - Viney, JKH, Salem were all important for us. Tyson's not much older. And Wines of course.

And yes do you go to College AFL and then compete against your own sport or do you leave these kids out in the wilderness in second tier unprofessional leagues.

What we need is just to make sure that after 1 or 2 years down the bottom you bounce back, not off the back of kids just off the back of a quick retooling of your side. The picks as well as PSD and salary cap should give you the opportunity to trade in a little help, plus when you first go down you should trade out someone like a Travis Johnstone who's done his dash. And there should be overflow from top clubs in guys wanting a game.

One of the strangest things I've heard in trade week is Schoenmakers and Hallahan want to stay at Hawthorn. Good luck to them but I think they are brainwashed. Get out, go to another club and play 22 games FFS! That's how a salary capped competition should work.

Melbourne 2007-2010 is actually a fair comparison to how at the absolute worst i should work it's just we screwed it majorly post then. But whilst they contributed it wasn't so much Scully, Trengove and Watts who bolted us back from horrible to reasonable side. It was more we had a group of guys who had found some form down the bottom and then come together to produce a better side again.

2010 b+f = Green, Frawley, Jamar, Davey, Sylvia, Bruce, Moloney, Scully, Garland, McDonald. That was Bailey's 3rd year and from there it should've been that the top picks kicked in and we pushed towards the 8.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

So where do they play for 2 years?.....If you raise the age of the TAC cup to 20 they will still be playing against their peers and not against mature men, or do you start another competition....Just wondering...Serious question

I haven't thought about that too much but at a guess you could keep the TAC for under 21's. At least then they have completed high school and I agree it's not against men but their bodies will be bigger and the Morton type of players with all the skill and no nuts would get found out. I find it laughable when I see College basketball rejects from the states get a spot on a list just because they are from the states and they break a vertical leap record. Some kids don't mature physically until their mid 20's.

[deanox 9,989]

What about:

Introduce a "college AFL" as suggested, "under 22's" OR a unified, nation wide 2nd tier comp, where players are "part time" but get paid sufficient ~$50-100 K

Keep the draft age as is.

Cut the lists to 32.

Any players not drafted can play and develop in the "tier 2" competition.

Clubs can place injured players on "long term injury list" (say 6 weeks) and sign any replacement from tier 2 at any time. (Some details are obviously needed).

[Vipercrunch 2,827]

A very high percentage of players that are going to have long and successful careers would be regular senior players by their second year, so even if they do leave after 8 years, a team can get 7 years of good football out of them.

Teams (ours especially) need to nail their top 50 picks AND develop them into AFL players better.

Would love some examples of good AFL players (from any team) that took 4 years of nurturing before they became any good. Examples from the last 10 years especially.

Perhaps the industry needs to become harsher (and possibly more realistic) in how it views 3rd and 4th year players. Unless they have been very unlucky with injuries or have been kept out of the seniors by other, very good players maybe they are just not AFL standard?

[deanox 9,989]

The AFL shouldn't be the place to trial and develop young kids. It should be where ready made footballers step in and play. Whether they are 18 or 24 when they make it on to an AFL last shouldn't matter.

The reasons the industry is soft on 3rd and 4th years players are:

-There is no where else for the to develop, after they are of of the AFL system it is a very low chance they'll improve sufficiently to get back into it.

-Lists are big enough to carry payers while they "develop"

-the AFL drafts on potential, so a3rd year player who hasn't"come on" still hasa more developed body and often is slightly ahead of the younger Draftees. The draftees may pass him that year or next, but at the time of drafting there is a large difference.