SA Footy

Pittard looks like he has trimmed up significantly in the off season.

Dutchy wrote:Pittard looks like he has trimmed up significantly in the off season.

Pony tail went mid-'18 mate.

Can't remember the rules these days - Was Johnny Blakey's lad unavailable under FS because Academy picks have priority (or something along those lines)?

JK wrote:Can't remember the rules these days - Was Johnny Blakey's lad unavailable under FS because Academy picks have priority (or something along those lines)?

Yep, absolute joke that an academy trumps father/son.
Another Swans leg up...

Pretty sure academies have priority. Fair enough for him as if he had to choose i'd think he would choose sydney as he already lives there, trains with them and father works for them. Not a fair system until ALL clubs have equal access to academies

Spargo wrote:

JK wrote:Can't remember the rules these days - Was Johnny Blakey's lad unavailable under FS because Academy picks have priority (or something along those lines)?

Yep, absolute joke that an academy trumps father/son.
Another Swans leg up...

you mean we develop the players from a young age, then we have to give up several picks to get them... Yeah definite leg up... Blakey also has an option to pick the kanga's but doesn't want too...

Every club would happily develop a talent like that, will be an absolute gun for the Swannies

JK wrote:Every club would happily develop a talent like that, will be an absolute gun for the Swannies

with the number of kids who go through the academy, majority of them don't get picked up...

It wasn't really an issue til we got Heeney and Mills out of it.

woodublieve12 wrote:

Spargo wrote:

JK wrote:Can't remember the rules these days - Was Johnny Blakey's lad unavailable under FS because Academy picks have priority (or something along those lines)?

Yep, absolute joke that an academy trumps father/son.
Another Swans leg up...

you mean we develop the players from a young age, then we have to give up several picks to get them... Yeah definite leg up... Blakey also has an option to pick the kanga's but doesn't want too...

Are all teams allowed to have Academy's?

Spargo wrote:

JK wrote:Can't remember the rules these days - Was Johnny Blakey's lad unavailable under FS because Academy picks have priority (or something along those lines)?

Yep, absolute joke that an academy trumps father/son.
Another Swans leg up...

maybe if North were more appealing he'd choose them

woodublieve12 wrote:

Spargo wrote:

JK wrote:Can't remember the rules these days - Was Johnny Blakey's lad unavailable under FS because Academy picks have priority (or something along those lines)?

Yep, absolute joke that an academy trumps father/son.
Another Swans leg up...

you mean we develop the players from a young age, then we have to give up several picks to get them... Yeah definite leg up... Blakey also has an option to pick the kanga's but doesn't want too...

You get a chance to develop them (and hide them) from an early age because you’ve got a bloody academy - if only every club had this luxury.
To slightly offset this huge advantage the AFL should’ve allowed Father/son picks to supersede Academy recruits, but chose not to. The kid’s a gun, what ever picks you give up will be pittance compared to what you are getting.
You know it, I know it, the whole league knows - it’s another leg up.

beef wrote:Pretty sure academies have priority. Fair enough for him as if he had to choose i'd think he would choose sydney as he already lives there, trains with them and father works for them. Not a fair system until ALL clubs have equal access to academies

Clubs can bid for players in the academies. It's up to the club ie sydney to have enough points to keep them... That's why sydney traded for extra picks to get enough points to get Blakey. We certainly don't get them for nothing. Even though we've spent thousands developing them

woodublieve12 wrote:

beef wrote:Pretty sure academies have priority. Fair enough for him as if he had to choose i'd think he would choose sydney as he already lives there, trains with them and father works for them. Not a fair system until ALL clubs have equal access to academies

Clubs can bid for players in the academies. It's up to the club ie sydney to have enough points to keep them... That's why sydney traded for extra picks to get enough points to get Blakey. We certainly don't get them for nothing. Even though we've spent thousands developing them

Can other clubs get "points" to get academy players?

It didn't superseed Father Son, he had a choice and chose Sydney as he lives there.

All clubs have academies now, some like the Crows choose not to invest in it heavily though. Port do however.

Spargo wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:

Spargo wrote:

JK wrote:Can't remember the rules these days - Was Johnny Blakey's lad unavailable under FS because Academy picks have priority (or something along those lines)?

Yep, absolute joke that an academy trumps father/son.
Another Swans leg up...

you mean we develop the players from a young age, then we have to give up several picks to get them... Yeah definite leg up... Blakey also has an option to pick the kanga's but doesn't want too...

You get a chance to develop them (and hide them) from an early age because you’ve got a bloody academy - if only every club had this luxury.
To slightly offset this huge advantage the AFL should’ve allowed Father/son picks to supersede Academy recruits, but chose not to. The kid’s a gun, what ever picks you give up will be pittance compared to what you are getting.
You know it, I know it, the whole league knows - it’s another leg up.

How do we hide them????

They play in local leagues like everyone else and you don't have to be in the 4 walls of sydney to know that a certain kid is talented...

With father son it's up to the kid if he wants to follow his dads footsteps, so even if they aren't in an academy they could still say no.

Brisbane, Gold coast and GWS all have academies, i wonder why that is???

South Australia, Victoria and western Australia don't have and massive emphasis on academies, wonder why that is????

woodublieve12 wrote:

beef wrote:Pretty sure academies have priority. Fair enough for him as if he had to choose i'd think he would choose sydney as he already lives there, trains with them and father works for them. Not a fair system until ALL clubs have equal access to academies

Clubs can bid for players in the academies. It's up to the club ie sydney to have enough points to keep them... That's why sydney traded for extra picks to get enough points to get Blakey. We certainly don't get them for nothing. Even though we've spent thousands developing them

If you want a particular player, you get that player.

Dutchy wrote:It didn't superseed Father Son, he had a choice and chose Sydney as he lives there.

All clubs have academies now, some like the Crows choose not to invest in it heavily though. Port do however.

so all clubs have academies and choose not to invest much into them, but sydney have the leg up... riiiiiiiight

PatowalongaPirate wrote:https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/dubious-world-of-afl-s-next-generation-academies-20181121-p50hhx.html

interesting...

"Northern Academies are a necessary evil. Given a choice between playing in front of 8000 at Gold Coast or GWS and 80,000 at the MCG in his home city for the same money, how many players contemplating their future will prefer life at the outpost? Players, on the whole, will only stick fat in the north if they can envisage success, or if they’re paid over the odds".

Dutchy wrote:It didn't superseed Father Son, he had a choice and chose Sydney as he lives there.

All clubs have academies now, some like the Crows choose not to invest in it heavily though. Port do however.

Congratulations - you win this months award for the most irrelevant reference to the Crows in a topic thread