AFL TEAMS TO HAVE UNDER 18 TEAMS
Could the AFL be A 3 teir level organisation with senior, development and underage "teams"?
The top underage kids can play some development if they're good enough and the top development players can move up to seniors if they're good enough - much like local footy does.
Each team has it's own coach/s and fitness staff but all 3 levels work together on the long term development of each player, especially the underage players and the bottom aged development players, to ensure continuity in their own personal development.
English soccer teams have acadamy's everywhere from under 5's up to Premier league and they are all taught their own teams specific way of playing so they seemlessley transiton from 1 level to the other as they shift up.
Under 5 acadamy's are pure madness but the rest of it makes great sense.
The NAB league would then be the AFL Under 18's league and there would be a national development leage too with each club having a team.
This would stretch resources for sure but we can maybe start at this point and work backwards or forwards from it.
I know there's holes in this but again I'm just throwing stuff up here.
TOO MUCH JUNIOR FOOTY
The best underage kids have footy coming out their wazoo's.
They play NAB, they play for their school (which actually takes precedcnece over NAB as the school is paying their private tuition fees) coupled with team training, the National Championships, the many, many combine and testing days that are held and then whatever they choose to do in their own time.
This results in these same kids simply displaying what they already have, they're not getting fitter, faster or stronger as there is nowhere near enough quality training, nor recovery, to allow adaptation to take place.
Slowing down the process will mean more thoroughly structured developemental programs can be used and all the time required is provided for the players training to deliver the adaptation the player needs and is looking for.
Footy all over has this "how much can we do" mantra and it's been around for years but it needs to end.
The best team wins, not the team that does "the most" - for instance losing teams more often have higher running loads then the winning team from chasing arse all day, so it clearly isn't the best way to do things.
Quality over quantity, especially for development ages which is pretty much everyone under the AFL.
Do not mistake activity for acheivement.
NAB TEAM STAFF
Any strength and conditioning job under AFL level is bloody tough.
You're getting paid part time hours (sometimes you're asked to volunteer!) for a more then full time job meaning you need to some how fit another daytime gig in there somewhere to pay the bills.
All to get "in the pathway".
I have a mate who did TAC fitness for years doing exactly this, he must have been bloody exhausted, but couldn't even get a look in at an AFL club, who regularly switch fitness coach guru's among teams (what's that all about?).
He eventually landed a gig at the AFL but there would not be many who could stick it out as long as he did.
Who has the time and resources to volunteer for a job, well not really a job because thatmeans you should be getting paid but a position, requiring skills others get paid for, for 35+ hours a week?
Um...not me.
On top of this the NAB staff have maybe 25% of the resources an AFL club would have but make do with other as effective but more time consuming methods, to prepare the players for the multi million dollar AFL.
We're seeing a little bit about how the AFL treat these feeder competitions right now with the VFL having not even heard from the AFL since they suspended their season 3 months or so ago.
The pressure that these NAB team fitness staff members are under means they may simply end up doing what the AFL and their recruiters want them to do, and that's to simply prep the top 5 kids out of the 120 they initially start with, to be drafted later that year.
Zero attention then gets paid to all the others, where plenty of late developers are waiting in the wings.
NAB teams don't help either basing the successfullness of their team on the amount of kids drafted to the AFL - they've totally lost sight of that they're there to do and that's to develop every player in their ranks.
Whether they can actually do that or is a totally seperate issue but as Paul Roos said - it is not elite...not by a long way.
AVERAGE PLAYER CAREER LIFESPAN
There is an arguement out there that average player makes about $380k/season and plays for 4 - 6 years so by increasing the draft age you could be limiting how much they can make out of football.
Well that's the case everyday of the week - you could do an ACL at training tomorrow and that could effectively end your career (Alex Woodward).
VFL/AFL legends Michael Tuck and Craig Bradley both played close to 100 reserves games before playing 400 senior games each.
Did the extra development time in the reserves prepare them physically and pyschologically, for senior football more so then coming straight in as 18yr olds?
Did this increase their earning potential over their career by extending how long they played for?
I'm not sure if Michael Tuck's 70kg frame could have stood up to 1970's VFL football at the time to be honest.
MATURE AGED RECRUITS
Sam Mitchell.
Dane Rampe.
Tim Kelly.
Tom Stewart.
Dane Zorko.
Issac Smith.
Dale Morris.
All premiership or All-Australian AFL players including 4 club captains.
All played multiple years in 2nd teir football leagues before getting their chance and having almost immediate impacts at AFL level.
The extra development they required they got but what they also attained in spades is all sorts of psychological benefits on how to deal with pressure of footy and life on and off the feild - something 18yr old kids lack immensley at the best of times.
2-WAY CONTRACTS (NBA)
The NBA has a thing called 2-way contratcs which enables developmental players to be promoted to the senior list if form warrants it or injuries require it.
They can play "x" amount of games before the team then has to make a decision to keep them in the senior squad and pay them accordingly or drop them back to developmental.
These decisions are often made from a financial point of view so as not to go over the salary cap but it allows you to bring developmental talent in "for a taste" and see how their development is really going, if they are dominating the developomental league.
It also gives clubs a look at their own developmental model to see if it transfers to AFL or if they're simply making great developmental players but not many AFL players.
UNDERAGE FOOTY REVAMP
As mentioned earlier the best under 18 kids play both NAB and for their schools, with a lot of high draftees being private school based these days.
So you've got the best players trying to split their time between so called "elite" leagues at the same time?
Huh?
Who does that?
US sports have the school system that moves into the college system then into the pro's but we don't have that.
One of these options needs to go or these players will end up playing for 1 or the other and like the NBA/ABA of 1970's in America, one of them eventually gets swallowed up.
Or the powers that be could just make that decision on their own.
In my opinion the private school comp has to go as it feeds an elitism pathway, leaving plenty of low socio-econimic talent untouched, undeveloped and lost to the game, negatively affecting the AFL and the game as whole.
THE US SYSTEM
Again as mentioned earlier we can't quite follow the US system of high school to college to the top level as university sports is non-existent over here.
Do we make university teams the 2nd teir pathway?
How can we tie in the 2nd teir league with education and or work?
More on that in a sec.
TOO MANY COMBINES
At any levels of football there are way too many combines, again trying to follow the US model.
Can you jump high?
Great - how does that translate getting the perfect spin on a drop punt?
Can you ace the Yo-Yo test?
Super - where should a quarterback position half back player stand at a stoppage on the wing?
Why don't we combine test basic footy skills instead of physical traits that you can clearly see when they train or play?
Isn't testing suppossed to give us information we don't have, now back up information we already have?
A lot more could done with this model in my opinion.
MY VERY BASIC MODEL
Step #1 - Get drafted by an AFL team this year and sign a 3 year developmental contract with senior team incentives if you get a gig to play there during the contract.
Step #2 - The next year play in a top level local/amateur league "affiliated" with your team so coaches/fitness staff work together to develop that player on what they need to shift up a level next year.
You'll get a part time wage from your AFL team, match payments from your local club and be required to work or attend further education.
Step #3 - In the 2nd year you move up to the developmental/reserves competition with senior experience under your belt and a steady stream of near elite training practices for the last 12 months.
You would get increased payments from your AFL club (75% ish of a full time starting wage) but still be required to continue working/education in some shape or form.
Step #4 - Hopefully by the start of the 3rd year of your developmental contract, you've played 12 months of senior footy to teach you how to play against more physically ready players plus a year in the development team playing against more technically and tactically sound players - now you're ready to put your best foot forward in your third year.
You'll receive the same 75% wage and work/education requirments as year 3.
Players stay with the AFL developmental clubs for all 3 years - maybe there's no trading of these players or you can only trade them for another player in the same year as development, or simply another developmental player.
Step #5 - This is my "not sure" step where depending on your last 3 years you might now get offered a senior contract on full time wage like draftees get now.
The 2 way contracts might come into effect here.
You might do another year of development on the 75% wage.
This might be individual to the player who now has the choice to stay at the club or move on.
He can sign with an opposition developmental or senior club if given the opportunity to do so.
What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment