Bulldogs Father-Son and NGA Prospects

[soupman]

The NGA should be run by the AFL, not the clubs.

Sure, but surely self interest is the best way to incentivise investment in this area.

I'd be really interested in whether the biggest whingers about the academies (Saints, Freo), have been screwed over by poor zones or just havent put in the right resources to get the most out of it.

Freo in particular, I expect would have a lot of indigenous prospects in their zone. Surely They should be able to develop some talent there, or are there other factors at play? Mjp would be better positioned to comment on this (and presumably NGAs effectiveness altogether).

[Grantysghost]

Sure, but surely self interest is the best way to incentivise investment in this area.

I'd be really interested in whether the biggest whingers about the academies (Saints, Freo), have been screwed over by poor zones or just havent put in the right resources to get the most out of it.

Freo in particular, I expect would have a lot of indigenous prospects in their zone. Surely They should be able to develop some talent there, or are there other factors at play? Mjp would be better positioned to comment on this (and presumably NGAs effectiveness altogether).

Very good points.

I'm unsure why they're conflating F/S and NGA. They should be dealt with separately.

[jazzadogs]

Are the northern NGAs working so well because they are properly funded, while Victorian/state/AFL run pathways are being underfunded?

How much does the AFL kick in to the northern NGAs, as opposed to the others?

[GVGjr]

I think they have got themselves into a real awkward spot.

The Nga and FS stuff is compromising the draft, clearly, but im not sure cutting clubs off from that access is beneficial.

FS is cool on many levels, its really kills it to say you can only get them if they aren't that good. Having multiple players of the same family be guns is half the fun and a big part of the legacy aspect.

They need to tighten it up as jazzadogs suggested. Remove the discount and make sure multiple picks in the 3rd round don't land top 5 talents to the stronger clubs
It does undermine the draft

I think they have got themselves into a real awkward spot.


NGA is a weird beast, isn't the whole point to develop players that typically would be lost to the game (or not developed as well) into AFL prospects? Isn't the whole plan to incentivise clubs to do this for the AFL? What's the incentive when if you develop them too well you don't get them anymore? Indigenous numbers are already low, is this going to help? I'd be very curious to see the stats on the NGA, heaps of prospects are going high, I'd suggest more and higher than ever before. The amount of QLD talent coming into the league through the academies for instance must be vastly higher than years past.

How do you fix the draft compromise? At the moment top clubs are able to get great prospects without having to pay the price, and simultaneously depriving the bottom clubs from access to the top talent. This is compounded by a broken free agency system which has been proven not to help the crap clubs get quality (with the extra salary cap) but to make the stronger clubs stronger at the weak ones expense, (see Oscar Allen), and the only cost being everyone gets their pick pushed back one.

Brisbane are the biggest example of how broken the system is, look at the talent they have been able to bring in compared to North despite their success, their draft picks, their presumably tighter salary cap, and all the disadvantages of being in an "unattractive non football state" that they bitch and moan about.

Clubs need to be paying a bigger price to jump up the draft order to secure these priority guys, and should also have to pay part of the price of introducing the compensation pick when a free agent gets taken.

Brisbane are getting a massive benefit with both top end draft talent through the father son process and then getting 2nd and 3rd bites with NGA links.
And this is going to a consistent top 4 side. That's not a great outcome for the competition.

Great post Soup

[Countrydog5]

With the first round being locked out, we will want to hope West and El Souki have decent but not great years. Both players of need for us, and could go first round based on their top age year. Would love to know where any draft watchers have them pencilled in as far as draft range goes next year. I reckon both would be in the 20-40 mark at this stage.

[FrediKanoute]

I like the Father Son concept and it should be retained. For every Sam Darcy, there is a Euan MacPherson or an Ollie Liberatore. Views of the unfairness of the system are clouded by confirmation bias where only the Darcy, Libba, Ashcroft, Ablett, Daicos successes are lauded and the underwhelming Browns, Wallis', MacPhersons, Fletcher, etc are conveniently ignored.

I think the NGA is a bigger problem. Kids can't be in Father-Son and NGA. So William's kid should really be in one or the other program and I am leaning to it being the Father Son as the priority.

NGA's should have a tighter set of criteria - indigenous communities (like JUH); refugees; 1st generation immigrants and the exceptions to those rules should be AFL determined against a set of criteria which are transparent.

I think the current bidding system for NGA and FS works. It is going to throw up the odd problem, but again this is confirmation bias. If you took a view on all the father sons that have been drafted and looked at how many are A-Grade, Elite, it would be a minority. There are a lot that are good AFL players, but not many that are in that top echelon.

The thing I believe needs to happen is that clubs need to stop being so accommodating when it comes to facilitating trades and not bidding on players. The bigger issue for me is where a player expresses a clear preference for a club (ie Smith/Dunks) and makes it impossible for the club to negotiate alternatives. That is a problem. Free Agency should see a player like Oscar Allen going to an open market and teams bidding for his services in an open market. How do Brisbane fit him into their salary cap? Clubs need to be more ruthless and stop colluding.

[Hot_Doggies]

Father son is a must keep.
I would get rid of the point system for father son.
If someone bids on your player in the first round you have to use a your first round pick to match. None of the pick 35,48 and 62 equals pick 4 rubbish.

And have a rule to stop teams getting around the system. If you have pick 12 and somehow swap it for pick 6. And your father son prospect gets picked by another club at pick 10 then it’s too bad (unless you can come up with another first rounder). Should have stuck with the original pick.
But if you kept pick 12 and the bid comes in at 14, then you use your next pick ie 2nd rounder.

[Happy Days]

I dunno why there is and has ever been a discount, you already get to jump the queue, why should you get to pay less as well?

Should be a loading if anything.

[The Underdog]

I’d get rid of any free agency compensation in the first round. (I’d probably make it 2 rounds to be honest, but the AFL are chickenshit). That cleans up one aspect of it easily.

[Bornadog]

I’d get rid of any free agency compensation in the first round. (I’d probably make it 2 rounds to be honest, but the AFL are chickenshit). That cleans up one aspect of it easily.

The team taking the player should give up the draft pick and that way doesn't compromise the draft

[Happy Days]

The team taking the player should give up the draft pick and that way doesn't compromise the draft

They have their stupid bullshit points formula why not put it to use to put a price on compensation

[jazzadogs]

From AFL.com.au Monday Calculations by Cal Twomey

DRAFT LOCKOUT NOT THE ANSWER THE DRAFT needs help. The worst teams need more ways to get better and the compromised nature of this year's crop makes for a melting pot of solutions and ideas.

But a 'lockout' of clubs being able to match bids on their Academy and father-son players in the first five, 10 or 20 selections isn't the answer.

As Gettable revealed a fortnight ago, club football bosses left a meeting run by the AFL earlier this month warned that there was change coming to the bidding system in 2026 and that everything was on the table, including not being able to match bids on tied players in a protected part of the draft.

Clubs walked away believing the AFL was preparing for significant change to see the early stages of the draft opened up so every player was available to the clubs at the bottom of the ladder. It comes as there could be four top 10 bids this year – on Gold Coast pair Zeke Uwland and Dylan Patterson, Brisbane's Dan Annable and Carlton father-son Harry Dean.

But a change as significant as stopping clubs from matching bids on their guns must be the last resort if other measures fail. And if that is the decision, it has to be phased in rather than be rushed through.

There are other fixes that should be considered first:

• a cap of one per year per club inside the first round or top-10;
• a rolling maximum of two per club over two years in the top-10;
• an allowance to only match a first-round bid by using a first-round pick, thus making sure they can't be matched with later selections or traded out;
• a premium bidding 'tax' added under the points system, rather than a discount, for clubs matching early bids;
• closing the loophole that allows clubs on draft night to use more picks than they have available list spots to match bids;
• giving clubs that are in the bottom part of the ladder multiple years in a row an extra mid-first round selection;
• changing free agency compensation so band one picks start after the non-finalists have had their first picks at No.11.

The League has said the father-son rule isn't going anywhere but the romance and history won't be preserved by father-sons picked outside the top rungs. Of the past five drafts, there have been 13 players drafted as father-sons after pick 25. They have averaged 16 games each per player so far.

There are three clubs that would be most hurt by a draft lockout being imposed as early as 2026.

There's Carlton, who have already committed to talented father-son Cody Walker in the 2026 draft.

There's Essendon, who have father-son Koby Bewick eligible in 2027 as well as rising Next Generation Academy prospect Blake Justice next year.

And there's Port Adelaide, whose submission to have access to potential top 2026 pick Dougie Cochrane as a NGA player next year remains pending with the AFL, but who in 2027 have father-son pair Louis Salopek and Tevita Rodan, as well as NGA talent Zemes Pilot, all eligible.

Pilot may not be in the football program, given his promise as a talented basketballer, without the Port Academy involvement. The same goes for many of the Northern Academy talents.

Port Adelaide has challenged for the premiership over the past decade and finished top-four in the home and away season three times of the past five years before this year. But the Power have not won a premiership since 2004, Essendon since 2000 and Carlton since 1995. Since the start of 2001, they have completed a combined 75 seasons for one flag and three Grand Final appearances.

They will fiercely challenge any draft lockout if the rules get changed just after last year's premiers land another top-five Academy jet in Dan Annable this November. The Lions' 2024 flag wasn't won because of the father-sons and Academies but as with all clubs, future planning has been important. Knowing they have been able to plan meticulously around the Ashcroft brothers, Jaspa Fletcher, Sam Marshall and Annable arriving as midfielders has allowed them to be even more specific and targeted with their recruits, with the club bolstering their front and back half at drafts.

It is why clubs with high-end father-sons and Academy players would have been doing the same for 2026 and 2027 as part of their list strategies, which are usually four to five years in advance.

After Jamarra Ugle-Hagan joined the Western Bulldogs as the No.1 pick in 2020 as a NGA player, the AFL quickly introduced a draft lockout for NGA players, with clubs not able to match bids inside the top-20 the following year and the top 40 the year after that. It then got changed back to the open pool and should make for a cautious approach with lockouts again being considered.

[hujsh]

1. Make the signing club pay for free agency compensation. Require a pick from the same round as the compensation.
2. Require all bid matching to involve a pick in the same round as the bid, remove all point discounts. Allow the use of future picks if not available this year.
3. Academies are available for all clubs equally or none. No special bonus for 'Northern Clubs'
4. Tighten up what allows prospects to qualify for academies (IDK how sons of former club champions are qualifying for academies)

[Bornadog]

1. Make the signing club pay for free agency compensation. Require a pick from the same round as the compensation.
2. Require all bid matching to involve a pick in the same round as the bid, remove all point discounts. Allow the use of future picks if not available this year.
3. Academies are available for all clubs equally or none. No special bonus for 'Northern Clubs'
4. Tighten up what allows prospects to qualify for academies (IDK how sons of former club champions are qualifying for academies)

Totally agree with this

[Rusty12]

Only the AFL could fumble this situation so badly. To let it be manipulated for so long, and do nothing, and then somehow, we are at a stage of lockouts. Why was there ever a discount, it should have been a tax from the start, the benifit is having first access to talent.

- All F/S, Academies and NGA should be completed outside of the draft
- No bidding system, the AFL has enough paid employees, who can work with the industry to assign a value to the player
- Value of a player is something like 1-5, 6-10, 11-20, 21-35, 36-50 ect (Data will tell you players picked inside the top 8 are much more likely to play 100 games, 200 games B&F or AA
- Yes, you must use round for round likeliness, but pick 18, does not get you a top 5 pick, it will take 2 picks in the teens, and future picks are okay.
- Take the Lions for example, I have no issue with them having 2XAshcroft, Fletcher, Marshall and Annabelle. But, they would have likely needed to trade some talent away, and probably use future picks 1st and some 2nd round, 3 years in advance to do it.

That's the choice and payoff. it really isnt that hard, and the AFL has been asleep for years.