Ah yes... the academy zones. Given to us because the states in the north had an unfair advantage. 

A chance for us to develop some talent and get something back. Except when we do develop the kids the states in the north just draft them anyway. 

Seems really fair and worth our time and money.

So yeah. Let not develop them too well so we can actually have access to them.

The academies are a joke, the AFL is the governor of not just the league but the sport as well since it usurped this role from the ANFC. It is therefore the afls responsibility to manage development programs but they have delegated responsibility to the club's. And this was done as some kind of appeasement due to the northern state club's having their own academies which in themselves are a rort, particularly for the NSW club's. Now the non-northern state club's derive close to zero benefit as seen by us this year and this is only going to get worse as the AFL expands the rules so that club's can't match bids within the first 40 picks - so what is the point?

Get rid of all academies, I'd even be happy to get rid of the father/son rule (which is nice but an anachronism) and move towards a pure draft. Footscray getting back to back number 1 picks while making a GF, the Swans getting Heeney, Mills, Gulden, Campbell et al while being perennial finalists - the system is a joke and the AFL is trying to have a bob each way. A pure draft is the only way to go in a league focused on parity/equalisation.

Love how the northern clubs complain about their disadvantages due to not being in AFL heartlands and should therefore be compensated.

Maybe they shouldn’t have applied for licenses then. They knew the risks (GC & GWS), and Souths chose to relocate to Sydney. They should be accountable and deal with the consequences of their actions.

Academies should not be created just for draft advantages.  It should be part of community building, giving less advantaged kids a chance.  As an upside, it also gives us a chance to build supporters in these communities and create connection between communities and our club.  They are powerful for those that get the benefits, and low cost/impost on clubs to run.  I am all for them, even with the loss of access to top end talent because of the rule changes.

Hopefully if the AFL makes rule for the NGAs it has the integrity to apply  them. I don't expect all the rules to be immutable but to introduce a rule retrospectively as was the case with Mac Andrew was clearly dishonorable.We were the only club with a potential first round draftee (I think Michito Owens drafted by the saints at 33 was next) so we were the only club to suffer  detriment .In the interest of fairness Mac should have been exempted from the rule change .A club should be hesitant in investing  resources in NGA and risk this type  this type of ad hoc rule change.

41 minutes ago, kallangurdemon said:

A club should be hesitant in investing  resources in NGA and risk this type  this type of ad hoc rule change.

Agreed. Unless a club is guaranteed access to NGA prospects, the whole NGA system needs to be funded entirely by the AFL, without clubs needing to contribute a cent.

And where did Macintosh end up?

Academies for anyone except The Sydney Swans are a complete joke

5 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The academies are a joke, the AFL is the governor of not just the league but the sport as well since it usurped this role from the ANFC. It is therefore the afls responsibility to manage development programs but they have delegated responsibility to the club's. And this was done as some kind of appeasement due to the northern state club's having their own academies which in themselves are a rort, particularly for the NSW club's. Now the non-northern state club's derive close to zero benefit as seen by us this year and this is only going to get worse as the AFL expands the rules so that club's can't match bids within the first 40 picks - so what is the point?

Get rid of all academies, I'd even be happy to get rid of the father/son rule (which is nice but an anachronism) and move towards a pure draft. Footscray getting back to back number 1 picks while making a GF, the Swans getting Heeney, Mills, Gulden, Campbell et al while being perennial finalists - the system is a joke and the AFL is trying to have a bob each way. A pure draft is the only way to go in a league focused on parity/equalisation.

I could not have summed up my own thoughts any better than you just did.

Why spend a cent on developing talent for another team?

5 hours ago, buck_nekkid said:

Academies should not be created just for draft advantages.  It should be part of community building, giving less advantaged kids a chance.  As an upside, it also gives us a chance to build supporters in these communities and create connection between communities and our club.  They are powerful for those that get the benefits, and low cost/impost on clubs to run.  I am all for them, even with the loss of access to top end talent because of the rule changes.

The AFL should be paying for these pointless academies if this is the case.

9 minutes ago, faultydet said:

The AFL should be paying for these pointless academies if this is the case.

I think they do subsidize them to an extent but I’m not convinced it’s worth it when any player in your NGA can be taken without a right to bid against a nomination made in the top 40.

Just now, Freddy Fuschia said:

I think they do subsidize them to an extent but I’m not convinced it’s worth it when any player in your NGA can be taken without a right to bid against a nomination made in the top 40.

Spending money for a slightly discounted 3rd round pick?

Nah, spend the money on facilities instead and let the AFL foot the bill for the feel-good exercise.

So, on a straw poll, that'd be a 'No', a "No', a 'No', a "No', a 'No', a "No', a 'No', and a "No'.

Where might I find a case for 'Yes, that's a good idea'?

2 hours ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

So, on a straw poll, that'd be a 'No', a "No', a 'No', a "No', a 'No', a "No', a 'No', and a "No'.

Where might I find a case for 'Yes, that's a good idea'?

At AFL House.

Scrap this joke of an idea. Take the FS with it too but only after we get Whitey’s kid 😂

I seem to recall the academies were originally created to compensate GWS and Gold Coast for not having access to any father-son prospects for a generation. If that's correct, it makes sense. I can understand why Sydney and Brisbane might have academies given the need to continue to develop local talent in non-AFL states. 

I'm not sure why other clubs have academies, but I see no problem with them if they continue to nurture talent which might otherwise find its way to other codes or just fall by the wayside.

The issue is not having academies per se but determining what is a fair system for allocating the talent that the academies produce.