In other news, Tom Fields played forward in the SANFL and kicked 2 behinds in amongst 18 possessions and a handful of marks in South Adelaides loss to the Crows reserves last weekend
A mate sent this to me today
http://www.bordermail.com.au/story/2432639/jydon-neagle-heads-to-big-time/?cs=10
Still a chance for the young fella
Going over some old grown here, but remember one of our NSW scholarship players Nick Ryan? kicking plenty of goals for St.Georges Dragons in AFLNSW league.
27 goals in 14 games in 2014
54 goals in 20 games in 2013
66 goals in 18 games in 2012
lol Adam McPhee's sons are named Taj and Cove...
lol Adam McPhee's sons are named Taj and Cove...
Darth Taj?
Updated. We have a Jake Long sighting! At this point I'm hoping to finally see him play next week, though tbh I'm not expecting too much. The NT u18s seem to be in absolute disarray at the moment, I think their opponent has doubled their score in every game they've played this year, and even the admin seems to be breaking down - selected teams and post-game stats coming in routinely very late or not at all. The AFL development people need to stop spending all their time defending Sydney's indefensible draft concessions and take a good hard look at what's going on there, imho.
Jett Bewick is also back playing for the first time this year, not much info on how he's going. Wallis and Daniher are both back down from TAC into the EDFL, though Wallis seems to be holding down a spot in the seniors, which is nice. Matthew Neagle seems to have vanished off the face of the earth - could be injured, could have been spirited away on some sort of ■■■■■ GWS Academy thing, who knows at this point?
Updated. We have a Jake Long sighting! At this point I'm hoping to finally see him play next week, though tbh I'm not expecting too much. The NT u18s seem to be in absolute disarray at the moment, I think their opponent has doubled their score in every game they've played this year, and even the admin seems to be breaking down - selected teams and post-game stats coming in routinely very late or not at all. The AFL development people need to stop spending all their time defending Sydney's indefensible draft concessions and take a good hard look at what's going on there, imho.
Jett Bewick is also back playing for the first time this year, not much info on how he's going. Wallis and Daniher are both back down from TAC into the EDFL, though Wallis seems to be holding down a spot in the seniors, which is nice. Matthew Neagle seems to have vanished off the face of the earth - could be injured, could have been spirited away on some sort of ■■■■■ GWS Academy thing, who knows at this point?
For the love of Ben & Jerry be as good as your Dad.
Jett Bewick is also back playing for the first time this year, not much info on how he's going.
For the love of Ben & Jerry be as good as your Dad.
1 thing makes me pessimistic: He doesn't have red hair.
...aaaand I won't be seeing Jake Long play this weekend after all, too busy cleaning up storm damage. Le sigh...
Jett Bewick is also back playing for the first time this year, not much info on how he's going.
For the love of Ben & Jerry be as good as your Dad.
1 thing makes me pessimistic: He doesn't have red hair.
thats a massive dissapointment! (for us, not him!)
AFL floats changes to father-son bidding system
Peter Ryan August 7, 2014 7:21 PMCLUBS will pay a fairer price for young talent if the AFL adopts a revised father-son and Academy bidding system presented to AFL CEOs.
Under the proposal, each draft pick would be assigned value according to a statistical formula that will allocate points to each draft selection.These values would then be used to determine the fair price a club should pay if it wants to acquire a father-son or Academy selection.
The proposed system would also include a discount or credit to ensure clubs investing in father-son and academy programs retained enough incentive to continue to invest in developing that talent.
Under the current system a club only has to select the nominated player with its next available pick if an opposition club bids for him.If accepted it would mean that a club might have to use more than just its first-round pick if acquiring highly sought-after talent.
In the 2010 NAB AFL Draft, the Western Bulldogs snared Mitch Wallis at pick No.22 and Tom Liberatore at pick No.41, gaining an advantage because they had two father-son picks in the same season.Collingwood's father-son prospect Darcy Moore and Sydney Swans' Academy graduate Isaac Heeney are both considered potential first-round draft picks so those clubs may have to deliver more than a first-round pick if the new system is adopted for this year‘s national draft. However it remains to be seen whether the system will be ready in time.
The proposal of the revised bidding system was presented to AFL CEOs at a two-day meeting and a working group will be set up to work through the three issues that need to be resolved:- The statistical chart needs to tested to ensure it makes sense
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan said there was still a chance the system could be introduced for the 2014 NAB AFL Draft.
- The discussion around incentives and discounts that apply for father-son and academy players needs to be determined.
- The mechanics of how the bidding system might work in practical terms leading into the draft needs be developed and tested."If we can get it right … it'll come in, and if it's not it won't," McLachlan said.
McLachlan indicated there was support among club CEOs for the idea of finding fair value."People understood where it was at, why it was in place and what it could do. But it's got some iterating to do yet and we'll continue to discuss with the clubs," McLachlan said.
The amount of discount clubs will receive for running the academies remains a contentious issue for northern states although they are understood to accept the need to pay fair value to ensure the draft is not compromised.AFL.com.au understands clubs were presented with the trade Collingwood and West Coast made during last year's trade period when the Magpies received pick six and 44 and gave the Eagles pick 11, 31 and 49 in return, to show how the allocation of points to picks might work.
Observers have suggested that although the revised system might seem more complicated, it should provide a more accurate representation of value when father-son and academy picks are considered.On Wednesday, 35 draft-eligible club academy players were lodged with the AFL as potential bid selections for this year‘s NAB AFL Draft.
The academy system is seen as an important method of growing the talent pool in northern states with the Sydney Swans investing more than $1 million per annum - funded largely through donations and corporate support.The northern states argue academies need to be club branded to gain traction in non-traditional football states.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-07/fatherson-bidding-changes
I find this baffling. The AFL is now deciding what value it thinks a player is, then forces a club to take a player with or prior to that pick, and if the club doesn't have that pick they have to trade to get the pick they require to pick a guy under father-son? Wat? Am I reading this right?
That seems a little strange? How can you offer 'more" than a single pick for a player in a draft? If they do that then will they force the clubs who end up picking him when the father/son club pass to pay the extra price too?
Bizarro world
AFL floats changes to father-son bidding system
Peter Ryan August 7, 2014 7:21 PMCLUBS will pay a fairer price for young talent if the AFL adopts a revised father-son and Academy bidding system presented to AFL CEOs.
Under the proposal, each draft pick would be assigned value according to a statistical formula that will allocate points to each draft selection.These values would then be used to determine the fair price a club should pay if it wants to acquire a father-son or Academy selection.
The proposed system would also include a discount or credit to ensure clubs investing in father-son and academy programs retained enough incentive to continue to invest in developing that talent.
Under the current system a club only has to select the nominated player with its next available pick if an opposition club bids for him.If accepted it would mean that a club might have to use more than just its first-round pick if acquiring highly sought-after talent.
In the 2010 NAB AFL Draft, the Western Bulldogs snared Mitch Wallis at pick No.22 and Tom Liberatore at pick No.41, gaining an advantage because they had two father-son picks in the same season.Collingwood's father-son prospect Darcy Moore and Sydney Swans' Academy graduate Isaac Heeney are both considered potential first-round draft picks so those clubs may have to deliver more than a first-round pick if the new system is adopted for this year‘s national draft. However it remains to be seen whether the system will be ready in time.
The proposal of the revised bidding system was presented to AFL CEOs at a two-day meeting and a working group will be set up to work through the three issues that need to be resolved:- The statistical chart needs to tested to ensure it makes sense
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan said there was still a chance the system could be introduced for the 2014 NAB AFL Draft.
- The discussion around incentives and discounts that apply for father-son and academy players needs to be determined.
- The mechanics of how the bidding system might work in practical terms leading into the draft needs be developed and tested."If we can get it right … it'll come in, and if it's not it won't," McLachlan said.
McLachlan indicated there was support among club CEOs for the idea of finding fair value."People understood where it was at, why it was in place and what it could do. But it's got some iterating to do yet and we'll continue to discuss with the clubs," McLachlan said.
The amount of discount clubs will receive for running the academies remains a contentious issue for northern states although they are understood to accept the need to pay fair value to ensure the draft is not compromised.AFL.com.au understands clubs were presented with the trade Collingwood and West Coast made during last year's trade period when the Magpies received pick six and 44 and gave the Eagles pick 11, 31 and 49 in return, to show how the allocation of points to picks might work.
Observers have suggested that although the revised system might seem more complicated, it should provide a more accurate representation of value when father-son and academy picks are considered.On Wednesday, 35 draft-eligible club academy players were lodged with the AFL as potential bid selections for this year‘s NAB AFL Draft.
The academy system is seen as an important method of growing the talent pool in northern states with the Sydney Swans investing more than $1 million per annum - funded largely through donations and corporate support.The northern states argue academies need to be club branded to gain traction in non-traditional football states.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-07/fatherson-bidding-changes
I find this baffling. The AFL is now deciding what value it thinks a player is, then forces a club to take a player with or prior to that pick, and if the club doesn't have that pick they have to trade to get the pick they require to pick a guy under father-son? Wat? Am I reading this right?
It hasn't been clearly articulated anywhere I've read about it, which is likely proof that this is as much a work in progress as the government is with metadata. I think the answer to your question is no.
I take it there are two possible options right now. The first one is that you may have to give up more than one draft pick to select a high rated FS. Alternatively, you can pick him up with your top pick, but if that is under the odds then your second pick is adjusted accordingly - say from 35 to 55.
AFL floats changes to father-son bidding system
Peter Ryan August 7, 2014 7:21 PMCLUBS will pay a fairer price for young talent if the AFL adopts a revised father-son and Academy bidding system presented to AFL CEOs.
Under the proposal, each draft pick would be assigned value according to a statistical formula that will allocate points to each draft selection.These values would then be used to determine the fair price a club should pay if it wants to acquire a father-son or Academy selection.
The proposed system would also include a discount or credit to ensure clubs investing in father-son and academy programs retained enough incentive to continue to invest in developing that talent.
Under the current system a club only has to select the nominated player with its next available pick if an opposition club bids for him.If accepted it would mean that a club might have to use more than just its first-round pick if acquiring highly sought-after talent.
In the 2010 NAB AFL Draft, the Western Bulldogs snared Mitch Wallis at pick No.22 and Tom Liberatore at pick No.41, gaining an advantage because they had two father-son picks in the same season.Collingwood's father-son prospect Darcy Moore and Sydney Swans' Academy graduate Isaac Heeney are both considered potential first-round draft picks so those clubs may have to deliver more than a first-round pick if the new system is adopted for this year‘s national draft. However it remains to be seen whether the system will be ready in time.
The proposal of the revised bidding system was presented to AFL CEOs at a two-day meeting and a working group will be set up to work through the three issues that need to be resolved:- The statistical chart needs to tested to ensure it makes sense
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan said there was still a chance the system could be introduced for the 2014 NAB AFL Draft.
- The discussion around incentives and discounts that apply for father-son and academy players needs to be determined.
- The mechanics of how the bidding system might work in practical terms leading into the draft needs be developed and tested."If we can get it right … it'll come in, and if it's not it won't," McLachlan said.
McLachlan indicated there was support among club CEOs for the idea of finding fair value."People understood where it was at, why it was in place and what it could do. But it's got some iterating to do yet and we'll continue to discuss with the clubs," McLachlan said.
The amount of discount clubs will receive for running the academies remains a contentious issue for northern states although they are understood to accept the need to pay fair value to ensure the draft is not compromised.AFL.com.au understands clubs were presented with the trade Collingwood and West Coast made during last year's trade period when the Magpies received pick six and 44 and gave the Eagles pick 11, 31 and 49 in return, to show how the allocation of points to picks might work.
Observers have suggested that although the revised system might seem more complicated, it should provide a more accurate representation of value when father-son and academy picks are considered.On Wednesday, 35 draft-eligible club academy players were lodged with the AFL as potential bid selections for this year‘s NAB AFL Draft.
The academy system is seen as an important method of growing the talent pool in northern states with the Sydney Swans investing more than $1 million per annum - funded largely through donations and corporate support.The northern states argue academies need to be club branded to gain traction in non-traditional football states.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-07/fatherson-bidding-changes
I find this baffling. The AFL is now deciding what value it thinks a player is, then forces a club to take a player with or prior to that pick, and if the club doesn't have that pick they have to trade to get the pick they require to pick a guy under father-son? Wat? Am I reading this right?
It hasn't been clearly articulated anywhere I've read about it, which is likely proof that this is as much a work in progress as the government is with metadata. I think the answer to your question is no.
I take it there are two possible options right now. The first one is that you may have to give up more than one draft pick to select a high rated FS. Alternatively, you can pick him up with your top pick, but if that is under the odds then your second pick is adjusted accordingly - say from 35 to 55.
But that is illogical because if he wasn't picked up F/S then the other club would only pay one pick. You cannot penalise a club in such fashion and if they try then they will end up with no F/S ever happening.
AFL floats changes to father-son bidding system
Peter Ryan August 7, 2014 7:21 PMCLUBS will pay a fairer price for young talent if the AFL adopts a revised father-son and Academy bidding system presented to AFL CEOs.
Under the proposal, each draft pick would be assigned value according to a statistical formula that will allocate points to each draft selection.These values would then be used to determine the fair price a club should pay if it wants to acquire a father-son or Academy selection.
The proposed system would also include a discount or credit to ensure clubs investing in father-son and academy programs retained enough incentive to continue to invest in developing that talent.
Under the current system a club only has to select the nominated player with its next available pick if an opposition club bids for him.If accepted it would mean that a club might have to use more than just its first-round pick if acquiring highly sought-after talent.
In the 2010 NAB AFL Draft, the Western Bulldogs snared Mitch Wallis at pick No.22 and Tom Liberatore at pick No.41, gaining an advantage because they had two father-son picks in the same season.Collingwood's father-son prospect Darcy Moore and Sydney Swans' Academy graduate Isaac Heeney are both considered potential first-round draft picks so those clubs may have to deliver more than a first-round pick if the new system is adopted for this year‘s national draft. However it remains to be seen whether the system will be ready in time.
The proposal of the revised bidding system was presented to AFL CEOs at a two-day meeting and a working group will be set up to work through the three issues that need to be resolved:- The statistical chart needs to tested to ensure it makes sense
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan said there was still a chance the system could be introduced for the 2014 NAB AFL Draft.
- The discussion around incentives and discounts that apply for father-son and academy players needs to be determined.
- The mechanics of how the bidding system might work in practical terms leading into the draft needs be developed and tested."If we can get it right … it'll come in, and if it's not it won't," McLachlan said.
McLachlan indicated there was support among club CEOs for the idea of finding fair value."People understood where it was at, why it was in place and what it could do. But it's got some iterating to do yet and we'll continue to discuss with the clubs," McLachlan said.
The amount of discount clubs will receive for running the academies remains a contentious issue for northern states although they are understood to accept the need to pay fair value to ensure the draft is not compromised.AFL.com.au understands clubs were presented with the trade Collingwood and West Coast made during last year's trade period when the Magpies received pick six and 44 and gave the Eagles pick 11, 31 and 49 in return, to show how the allocation of points to picks might work.
Observers have suggested that although the revised system might seem more complicated, it should provide a more accurate representation of value when father-son and academy picks are considered.On Wednesday, 35 draft-eligible club academy players were lodged with the AFL as potential bid selections for this year‘s NAB AFL Draft.
The academy system is seen as an important method of growing the talent pool in northern states with the Sydney Swans investing more than $1 million per annum - funded largely through donations and corporate support.The northern states argue academies need to be club branded to gain traction in non-traditional football states.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-07/fatherson-bidding-changes
I find this baffling. The AFL is now deciding what value it thinks a player is, then forces a club to take a player with or prior to that pick, and if the club doesn't have that pick they have to trade to get the pick they require to pick a guy under father-son? Wat? Am I reading this right?
It hasn't been clearly articulated anywhere I've read about it, which is likely proof that this is as much a work in progress as the government is with metadata. I think the answer to your question is no.
I take it there are two possible options right now. The first one is that you may have to give up more than one draft pick to select a high rated FS. Alternatively, you can pick him up with your top pick, but if that is under the odds then your second pick is adjusted accordingly - say from 35 to 55.
But that is illogical because if he wasn't picked up F/S then the other club would only pay one pick. You cannot penalise a club in such fashion and if they try then they will end up with no F/S ever happening.
I don't know if logic comes into it. It is the AFL after all.
Having said that, it will only really apply for FS picks rated in the top 5 I would think. Clearly pick 1 is worth a lot more than pick 10. You see deals on the table all the time to bundle multiple picks in exchange for a top 3 pick. This is pretty much the same. What is pick 1 worth - 2 second round picks? A first round and 3rd round pick? Or just a first round pick and a drop from 2nd to 3rd round? The variability comes into it with the quality of the draft, and how deep it goes. There should not be a standard equation.
Would we have done a deal, or accepted a decline in our second pick to get JD? I reckon we would. Then there's the Bulldogs scenario with Liberatore and Wallis - they got a great deal. Perhaps giving away their third pick would have levelled it out.
I'm not advocating this solution, just trying to make sense of it. In actual fact I'm happy with the way it is now. Along with the bounce of the ball, I figure it's just one of those quirky anomalies that even up over the long tun.
The problem they're really trying to deal with is the academy picks, if this was just about F/S there wouldn't be any problem at all. Unfortunately the NSW/QLD teams have somehow convinced the AFL that academy and F/S picks should be dealt with in the same way, which is complete crap.
Academy players are in the academy system solely because they're good and they fall in the zone, and the only attachment the clubs running the academies have is that they like good players. F/S prospects are just good luck. Sydney are basically watching their trust fund earn guaranteed interest, and complaining when another club wins $100 on the scratchies.
Forcing clubs to pick between tradition and an AFL calculated "fair price" is completely against the point of the rule. I understand that a flat third rounder for all F/S picks is too unbalanced, but the system should definitely be tilted in favour of teams wanting to take F/S eligible players. It doesn't have to be fair every year, it's a generational rule, it has to be fair over thirty or forty years.
I remember the days when there were zones. Each club had it's own zone and put some work into developing the likely picks from it. Doing away with it to implement an open slather national draft perhaps equalised things, but it removed any incentive for the clubs to put time or money into their local zones.
I have nothing against the academy notion, but it must be equal for all. I'm actually sympathetic to the Swans et al trying to develop footballers in a non-AFL environment - but, if they are allowed to do that then other clubs should have the same opportunity. I would love to see some kind of limited zone option re-introduced, just don't know how it would work down here in the present environment.
AFL floats changes to father-son bidding system
Peter Ryan August 7, 2014 7:21 PMCLUBS will pay a fairer price for young talent if the AFL adopts a revised father-son and Academy bidding system presented to AFL CEOs.
Under the proposal, each draft pick would be assigned value according to a statistical formula that will allocate points to each draft selection.These values would then be used to determine the fair price a club should pay if it wants to acquire a father-son or Academy selection.
The proposed system would also include a discount or credit to ensure clubs investing in father-son and academy programs retained enough incentive to continue to invest in developing that talent.
Under the current system a club only has to select the nominated player with its next available pick if an opposition club bids for him.If accepted it would mean that a club might have to use more than just its first-round pick if acquiring highly sought-after talent.
In the 2010 NAB AFL Draft, the Western Bulldogs snared Mitch Wallis at pick No.22 and Tom Liberatore at pick No.41, gaining an advantage because they had two father-son picks in the same season.Collingwood's father-son prospect Darcy Moore and Sydney Swans' Academy graduate Isaac Heeney are both considered potential first-round draft picks so those clubs may have to deliver more than a first-round pick if the new system is adopted for this year‘s national draft. However it remains to be seen whether the system will be ready in time.
The proposal of the revised bidding system was presented to AFL CEOs at a two-day meeting and a working group will be set up to work through the three issues that need to be resolved:- The statistical chart needs to tested to ensure it makes sense
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan said there was still a chance the system could be introduced for the 2014 NAB AFL Draft.
- The discussion around incentives and discounts that apply for father-son and academy players needs to be determined.
- The mechanics of how the bidding system might work in practical terms leading into the draft needs be developed and tested."If we can get it right … it'll come in, and if it's not it won't," McLachlan said.
McLachlan indicated there was support among club CEOs for the idea of finding fair value."People understood where it was at, why it was in place and what it could do. But it's got some iterating to do yet and we'll continue to discuss with the clubs," McLachlan said.
The amount of discount clubs will receive for running the academies remains a contentious issue for northern states although they are understood to accept the need to pay fair value to ensure the draft is not compromised.AFL.com.au understands clubs were presented with the trade Collingwood and West Coast made during last year's trade period when the Magpies received pick six and 44 and gave the Eagles pick 11, 31 and 49 in return, to show how the allocation of points to picks might work.
Observers have suggested that although the revised system might seem more complicated, it should provide a more accurate representation of value when father-son and academy picks are considered.On Wednesday, 35 draft-eligible club academy players were lodged with the AFL as potential bid selections for this year‘s NAB AFL Draft.
The academy system is seen as an important method of growing the talent pool in northern states with the Sydney Swans investing more than $1 million per annum - funded largely through donations and corporate support.The northern states argue academies need to be club branded to gain traction in non-traditional football states.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-07/fatherson-bidding-changes
I find this baffling. The AFL is now deciding what value it thinks a player is, then forces a club to take a player with or prior to that pick, and if the club doesn't have that pick they have to trade to get the pick they require to pick a guy under father-son? Wat? Am I reading this right?
It hasn't been clearly articulated anywhere I've read about it, which is likely proof that this is as much a work in progress as the government is with metadata. I think the answer to your question is no.
I take it there are two possible options right now. The first one is that you may have to give up more than one draft pick to select a high rated FS. Alternatively, you can pick him up with your top pick, but if that is under the odds then your second pick is adjusted accordingly - say from 35 to 55.
But that is illogical because if he wasn't picked up F/S then the other club would only pay one pick. You cannot penalise a club in such fashion and if they try then they will end up with no F/S ever happening.
I don't know if logic comes into it. It is the AFL after all.
Having said that, it will only really apply for FS picks rated in the top 5 I would think. Clearly pick 1 is worth a lot more than pick 10. You see deals on the table all the time to bundle multiple picks in exchange for a top 3 pick. This is pretty much the same. What is pick 1 worth - 2 second round picks? A first round and 3rd round pick? Or just a first round pick and a drop from 2nd to 3rd round? The variability comes into it with the quality of the draft, and how deep it goes. There should not be a standard equation.
Would we have done a deal, or accepted a decline in our second pick to get JD? I reckon we would. Then there's the Bulldogs scenario with Liberatore and Wallis - they got a great deal. Perhaps giving away their third pick would have levelled it out.
I'm not advocating this solution, just trying to make sense of it. In actual fact I'm happy with the way it is now. Along with the bounce of the ball, I figure it's just one of those quirky anomalies that even up over the long tun.
System is already fair for father and son, afl are just trying to penalise Swans as it is a bad look that they get academy picks cheaply given their recent onfield success. this wasnt a problem when there were rubbish NSW kids getting selected. Eddie whinging about it may make the system worse for everyone.
I liked the 3rd round pick rule....some clubs probably paid overs for guys that werent that good just to get to their dads club. Then you have the hawkins, Abbletts, Watsons, kennedys, etc who turn out as guns and were gotten cheaply.
The bidding system is ok, and i was happy to get JD at ten. Given the discrepancies in lists etc. it is going to be harder for clubs to catch up to established lists like swans/cats/hawks as has been proven the last 6 years.
Dogs getting wallis and Libba is just lucky and should be viewed that way. less afl interference in father son drafting the better. The AFL always have to tamper with the rules, tyring to create a level playing field.
They should just say sometimes things wont be 100% fair/level, but we make that decision to keep the heritage alive for football families.
As for NSW academies the AFL should pay for them not the swans/GWS or their sponsors. and players should be available to all clubs.
As if they let clubs develop Zones - this will just make the strong clubs get stronger and goes against the draft notion.
This is absolutely idiotic by the AFL. F/S should be protected, and is one of the beauties of the game. It gets fans dreaming. Just look at this thread. There should always be a discount, and the current system actually encapsulates it well. The discount is random, and the determining factor is how other clubs rate the player. That sets the bar.
With this new system, it is going to be full of judgement calls. How the hell do you assign a price to Long this year, Ablett when he went, Hawkins, Daniher, Viney? Was Daniher worth pick #1 or #5? What wait do you give Ablett’s heritage when assigning a pick? The same with Watson. How do you value Long this year?
It will be absolutely rubbish.
And then you have to figure out how your draft picks, which by their nature are hard to move around, will compensate. Will that reflect the draft quality? In 2008 a 2nd round pick was worth far more than say 2004 when it was almost worthless. If the draft quality is deep does the team who has pick #19 get to pay less than if the draft is really weak?
And I thought the AFL couldn’t get any stupider.
Apparently with the new MRP system coming in there will be a lot of staffers needing re-deployment. They‘d be perfect for this.