GEORGIE PARKER: Calls to scrap AFL’s northern academies ignore their role in growing the game

The AFL has always taken pride in its draft system — a mechanism designed to maintain parity across a national competition.

In theory, it ensures every club gets a fair shot at success, regardless of their location or financial muscle.

But when it comes to the northern states, particularly NSW and Queensland, the challenges run deeper than just draft picks — which is why the northern academies were created.

In Victoria, South Australia, and Western Australia, footy is religion. Kids grow up with a Sherrin in their hands, and the competition between codes is minimal.

But in rugby league heartlands like Sydney and Brisbane, AFL is still the challenger. This is why the northern academies are not just useful — they’re essential.

Take it from All-Australian Sydney Swan Isaac Heeney: “If it wasn’t for the academy, I would not have been playing AFL, and I would have given NRL a crack… If you want to lose players to other codes, we can abolish it, but I think it’s super important for those northern clubs.”

That’s the point. The northern academies aren’t there to give Sydney or Brisbane an unfair edge — they exist to level the playing field in regions where AFL isn’t the dominant sport.

They engage young talent who may otherwise slip through the cracks into rival codes like rugby league or union. They build the game where it needs building.

Alongside the northern academies run the Next Generation Academies, aimed at Indigenous and multicultural talent and divided into catchment zones — and don’t clubs love fighting about those zones.

Ironically, critics of the northern academies often come from the most powerful and well-resourced clubs in the competition — clubs with strong recruiting pull, packed MCG fixtures, full Adelaide Oval and Optus Stadium crowds, and the allure of family legacy.

The father-son rule, for example, is a beautiful part of the game’s heritage. Imagine Gary Ablett Jr. not wearing the same hoops as his dad, or Nick Daicos not donning number 35 for Collingwood. The romance of lineage is something we rightly treasure.

But it also comes with an inherent bias. Victorian clubs, especially the large ones, often benefit from having generations of talent funnel through their doors — sometimes with discounted draft picks.

These big clubs stay quiet when it works for them, so the outrage over a player developed in Queensland or NSW staying at a northern club feels a little hollow. It’s a classic case of: “Fine if it benefits us, but if it doesn’t, then we don’t want it.”

Ultimately, draft night is a gamble anyway. You’re hoping a kid is going to live up to the expectations you place on them — with no guarantee of return.

An insanely clear modern example of this came in 2020, when Adelaide held the number one pick, only for it to be snapped up by the Western Bulldogs via the Next Generation Academy.

The Crows were “forced” to settle for pick two. As it turns out, that worked out just fine. The number one pick, Jamarra Ugle-Hagan, hasn’t seen a football field in 2025.

Meanwhile, remember who the number two pick was? Riley Thilthorpe — arguably the best forward in the competition right now. So yes, draft integrity is important, but it’s still a roll of the dice.

Drafting an 18-year-old is one thing. But the real race is won — or lost — in list management and the recruitment of established A-graders.

If we want fairness, let’s grow the game where it’s weak. That’s what the academies are doing — and it’s exactly why they need to stay.