Academy uproar rears again

[Sandridge]

Switched off watching FC tonight when the topic of our academy was raised. They had Chris Scott in place of Matthew Lloyd who talked the usual academy drivel. Whilst he acknowledged we've done really well with the academy he was trying to make out Sydney has a lot of untapped sporting talent being the biggest city & questioned whether we should have exclusive access to it. He was trying to come across as being diplomatic but you can tell he was having a whinge.

Hutchy then brought up a graphic of how many of our Academy players in total have got to play at least 1 senior game (something like 14 in total) which he said we deserve the success. Caro as usual was defending our academy highlighting more than half on that list would've not played AFL footy. Not sure how they were able to determine that, with Chris Scott highlighting Nick Blakey as one of the exceptions. That's when I turned off as I was getting the impression from Chris Scott (who I can't stand the best of time) that us getting access to Nick via Academy is somehow not fair, joining the usual whinge chorus you hear in Melbourne. I'm so sick & tired of hearing this like penchulalent children.

Caro repeated her prediction the noise surrounding our academy will grow louder again as the season progresses.

Yes, Scott was trying to be diplomatic but he certainly insinuated that we had an advantage over other clubs. Went down the Eddie McGuire "All we want is a level playing field" path. (Of course, Eddie wasn't concerned about a level playing field when his Pies played a Grand Final on their home ground against a higher ranked interstate team that had already beaten Collingwood in a lead up final!)

The graphic, I think, showed that 2,400 players had gone through the academy and only 12 have played senior AFL football.

I felt that both Caro and Hutchy were supportive of the Bloods.

[KSAS]

Yes, Scott was trying to be diplomatic but he certainly insinuated that we had an advantage over other clubs. Went down the Eddie McGuire "All we want is a level playing field" path. (Of course, Eddie wasn't concerned about a level playing field when his Pies played a Grand Final on their home ground against a higher ranked interstate team that had already beaten Collingwood in a lead up final!)

The graphic, I think, showed that 2,400 players had gone through the academy and only 12 have played senior AFL football.

I felt that both Caro and Hutchy were supportive of the Bloods.

Thanks Sandridge. To answer MattW query, they didn't compare this stat with the other academies. I agree both Caro & Hutchy came across as supportive with comments how well our academy are developing players, like it's a finishing school. Getting just reward for money & effort.

Caro mentioned the Swans were so confident with their academy programme that they initially told the AFL they wouldn't need to go to the draft pool. Apparently West Coast as well as the Melbourne clubs are gunning down our Academy according to Caro.

What irks me is that it seems ok for our Academy to produce average players but not elite ones! Nick Blakey has been used as an example of late by the haters (like Scott) overlooking the fact he CHOSE Sydney having grown up there (instead of Norf or Brisbane), same as other Vic F/S chose Melb clubs in same scenario. We lost out on Joe Daniher & Josh Dunkley as F/S in this regard which these haters also conveniently overlook. Had to pay overs to secure Tom Mitchell from the clutches of GWS even though we lost him for cap squeeze reasons (but again to a big Vic club).

[Rod_]

Football currency in players. If we don't recruit from local sources we pick the best from Vic, SA or WA. If the change the rules again we will still select the best option.

Just ours are doing well at the moment! *and we had to match bids to get 2 of the 3 that are playing well. Nothing tricky or underhanded there IMO. Just playing the ball! (Or the rules of the day)

[ugg]

Here's the video from the Chris Scott chat

There's been a lot of controversy around the Sydney Swans Academy, but now the Swans are reaping the rewards of putting time and money into its young stars from an early age.

So, is the current system fair?#9FootyClassified | Watch @channel9 pic.twitter.com/Hr9h4pn58d

— Footy on Nine (@FootyonNine) April 5, 2021

[MattW]

Thanks Sandridge. To answer MattW query, they didn't compare this stat with the other academies. I agree both Caro & Hutchy came across as supportive with comments how well our academy are developing players, like it's a finishing school. Getting just reward for money & effort.

Caro mentioned the Swans were so confident with their academy programme that they initially told the AFL they wouldn't need to go to the draft pool. Apparently West Coast as well as the Melbourne clubs are gunning down our Academy according to Caro.

What irks me is that it seems ok for our Academy to produce average players but not elite ones! Nick Blakey has been used as an example of late by the haters (like Scott) overlooking the fact he CHOSE Sydney having grown up there (instead of Norf or Brisbane), same as other Vic F/S chose Melb clubs in same scenario. We lost out on Joe Daniher & Josh Dunkley as F/S in this regard which these haters also conveniently overlook. Had to pay overs to secure Tom Mitchell from the clutches of GWS even though we lost him for cap squeeze reasons (but again to a big Vic club).

Good post.

Can you or someone unpack Caroline's comment for me please? If they didn't go into the draft pool, how would they get on our list? We'd have a dedicated Academy pick?

[Thunder Shaker]

What irks me is that it seems ok for our Academy to produce average players but not elite ones! Nick Blakey has been used as an example of late by the haters (like Scott) overlooking the fact he CHOSE Sydney having grown up there (instead of Norf or Brisbane), same as other Vic F/S chose Melb clubs in same scenario. We lost out on Joe Daniher & Josh Dunkley as F/S in this regard which these haters also conveniently overlook. Had to pay overs to secure Tom Mitchell from the clutches of GWS even though we lost him for cap squeeze reasons (but again to a big Vic club).

Excellent points.

Another point the haters conveniently overlook is the number of players who have started their career with the Swans but ended up going "home", often to a Victorian club. It's roughly 100 players since the club relocated in 1982. The haters whined so much when the Swans recruited players like Anthony Rocca, Shannon Grant and Darren Gaspar (despite the recruitment being completely within the rules), but didn't say a thing when these players left Sydney for a Victorian club.

And the haters have nothing to say about just how badly the Swans have been treated by the league over the years.
* The only club forcibly relocated by the league.
* The only foundation club that has been required to pay licence fees to participate in the competition.
* The only club that has been handed recruitment bans of players from other clubs despite not breaking any rules - despite other clubs routinely recruiting Swans players over the years.
* The first non-Victorian club that was required to play "home" finals in Victoria.

[liz]

Good post.

Can you or someone unpack Caroline's comment for me please? If they didn't go into the draft pool, how would they get on our list? We'd have a dedicated Academy pick?

When the Swans first raised the possibility of their own academy to develop NSW talent (in the mid noughties, I believe), they suggested that they would withdraw completely from the National Draft and rely exclusively on that academy. The AFL knocked that back because they didn't believe the Swans could produce sufficient talent.

I suspect the AFL was correct, at least then. The academy has been operating for around a decade now, and certainly hasn't produced enough talent to feed an entire squad, even if you factor in the Giants players too (since there was only one team in Sydney back then). But give it another decade and the picture might look quite different.

[liz]

That FC clip is quite an odd mishmash of issues and mis-issues.

Hutchy starts the conversation by asking if we have a soft cap advantage because the academy is completely separate from the senior list (and outside the cap). Huh? Do any of the other clubs have NAB Cup costs in their soft cap?

Scott starts off saying that "most of the population" lives in Sydney, before realising himself that this is completely untrue. Later on he says that the WA and SA clubs would have their advantages diluted if another team were to be introduced in those states, the implication of which is that they do have an advantage because they have close access to a larger pool of already developed talent (whether by picking up rookies playing locally that have less national exposure, or via the go-home factor).

And Scott, if you (and the other big Melbourne clubs) want an even playing field, how about we find out about how many property or sponsorship "side deals" the Geelong players - in particular - are afforded by the local one team-town footy mad community.

[Bangalore Swans]

The northern academy clubs haven’t had a lot of on field success. One premiship in 10 or so years of academy existence and that premiership team had no academy graduates.

The Victorian clubs bar West Coast in 2018 have won all the other primerships. I don’t even think one academy graduate from any system has become a premiership player.

The Victorian clubs are doing far better with their onfield success than the Academy clubs.

Maybe the Academy clubs conscious of supporting their youth structures are not picking the best available talent in the draft.

Picking Davis and Hiscox was about supporting the academy, however they didn’t end up being medium term players.

Maybe a club like Geelong who can have players like Issac Smith, Jeremy Cameron and Shaun Higgins desperate to play for them should be grateful of their own advantages and be happy for talent to be nurtured nation wide.

[KSAS]

When the Swans first raised the possibility of their own academy to develop NSW talent (in the mid noughties, I believe), they suggested that they would withdraw completely from the National Draft and rely exclusively on that academy. The AFL knocked that back because they didn't believe the Swans could produce sufficient talent.

I suspect the AFL was correct, at least then. The academy has been operating for around a decade now, and certainly hasn't produced enough talent to feed an entire squad, even if you factor in the Giants players too (since there was only one team in Sydney back then). But give it another decade and the picture might look quite different.

Thanks Liz for articulating as I realised my wording of us avoiding the draft pool could've been easily misconstrued (apologies MattW).

Your point of us possibly relying 100% on the Academy in a decade's time instead of the draft is a good one, which also gets overlooked due to the shortsightedness of the detractors. If our Academy eventually produces a high number of yearly talented players, they will spill over into the main draft pool simply because there'll be too many of them for us to take! In this way the success of Academies should be encouraged and not feared as it will improve the draft quality in the longer term.

[Thunder Shaker]

Maybe a club like Geelong who can have players like Issac Smith, Jeremy Cameron and Shaun Higgins desperate to play for them should be grateful of their own advantages and be happy for talent to be nurtured nation wide.

It's rather interesting how nobody's looking Geelong's way. They are the only club that hasn't finished in the bottom 25% of the ladder for over 40 years. The last time they finished near the bottom of the ladder (11th out of 12), North Melbourne hadn't won a premiership yet (they won their first a few weeks later).

The AFL should be taking a very close look at Geelong, to see how they're gaming the system. They're recruiting an awful lot of players form other clubs lately, so a two-year ban on recruiting more players from other clubs is warranted.

[liz]

Thanks Liz for articulating as I realised my wording of us avoiding the draft pool could've been easily misconstrued (apologies MattW).

Your point of us possibly relying 100% on the Academy in a decade's time instead of the draft is a good one, which also gets overlooked due to the shortsightedness of the detractors. If our Academy eventually produces a high number of yearly talented players, they will spill over into the main draft pool simply because there'll be too many of them for us to take! In this way the success of Academies should be encouraged and not feared as it will improve the draft quality in the longer term.

Alternatively, it might pave the way to a return to zoning, of some description, for all clubs once similar levels of top end talent are emerging right across the country. And then all states might be able to hang onto more of their home-grown talent.