'Sweeping changes' to Academy and Father/Son bidding system

[Ludwig]

If that is the case then it will hurt Collingwood just as much as us. Darcy Moore F/S Collingwood is rated higher than Heeney. I say to Eddie:

"Be careful what you wish for, you may get it".

Collingwood will end up with around pick 8, so it will be deemed fair value. The rule will only apply to the Swans and can change from year to year dependent upon the respective ladder positions of the Swans and Collingwood. It's Eddie's new push for flexible equalisation.

I do not necessarily object to future changes to the Academy bidding system (and would support the total abolition of the F/S system). However, as I have earlier expressed in more detail in the Academy thread, my view is that if the AFL changes the draft pick rules for Academy players with immediate or near-future application, then that should be challenged as a retrospective change, not least by QBE as the corporate sponsor of the Swans Academy. The Swans have run the Academy, and QBE and individual contributors have made majority funding to it, for 5 years under a set of rules which included an agreed bidding system for any Academy players good enough to be considered for the draft. It is a breach of an implicit contract to change those rules just as players such as Heeney and Mills graduate from the Academy. Any change should only apply to boys who go into the Academy from 2015 onwards.

Agree 100%. If there's any of this funny business directed specifically against the Swans, QBE and the Swans should drop the Academy and sue the AFL for damages. If Essendon can drag the AFL through the courts, the so can we. I hope Barrett is just mouthing Eddie's wish list like he usually does.