Since the inception of the AFL National Draft in 1986, there has rarely been a period of time that the draft process has remained unchanged.

New rules, concessions and sanctions have all contributed to compromising the AFL competition's premier recruiting activity – making it more difficult for clubs to develop consistent and long term strategies in the composition of their player lists.

The most significant change in the talent pathway around the AFL National Draft occurred in 1991 with the abolition of metropolitan zoning and the establishment of the TAC Cup competition in Victoria.

Until this time, VFL/AFL clubs had developed young players in designated metropolitan areas – retaining priority access to talent within their region. But the expansion of the national competition into South Australia resulted in these boundaries being removed – with teams being able to draft players from anywhere across the country for the first time.

The subsequent introduction or relocation of clubs such as Fremantle in 1995, Brisbane Lions & Port Adelaide in 1997, Gold Coast in 2011 and Greater Western Sydney in 2012 all involved major recruiting concessions that have further impacted on the overall draft process for nearly 20 of the draft's 28-year history.

Combine this with state-based academy programs, scholarship models, the father/son bidding system, free agency and various requirements of the CBA, and the draft has become a 'logistical minefield' that operates against a backdrop of increasing professionalism in the game.

But despite these ongoing changes and complications, the draft has still only gone part way to achieving the ideal model that the late Alan Schwab proposed when establishing the original system almost 30 years ago.

Sadly, his untimely death in 1993 resulted in an interruption to the natural evolution of the AFL National Draft – a system that he was committed to ensuring would become the leading draft model in the world of professional sport.

Having been involved with the VFL draft sub-committee in 1985 that researched the introduction of the draft to Australian football, I recall preparing a document for the AFL in 1995 titled "It's Time!” which addressed a number of the initiatives that Schwab had planned for the draft and trade periods over following years.

This report was presented to Ian Collins, the then AFL general manager of football operations during a meeting at the MCG late in 1995 where we discussed many of the issues confronting the draft system as the AFL made the transition towards a full-time professional competition.

While some of the initiatives raised in the document have since been introduced – such as the on-trading of previously acquired draft selections and the opportunity to trade draft picks for draft picks only – either a reluctance towards change or a lack of intimate knowledge of the original draft model has meant that various initiatives remain missing links in the picture proposed by the VFL draft sub-committee.

It's worth noting that the AFL has the most constrained player list parameters in professional sport with changes only being allowed via the trade period, free agency or draft over a seven-to-eight-week period at the end of each season.

Compare this to other sports where transfer windows exist at various intervals throughout the year or active and inactive player rosters operate in conjunction with a mid-season 'supplemental draft', and the importance of the AFL National Draft and Trade Periods become more obvious.

The AFL and AFLPA have tried to increase player movement via the introduction of Free Agency but further change is required to increase the flexibility for both clubs and players to better manage their player lists and individual careers.

Some of the initiatives proposed for the AFL draft system during the past 20+ years that are still to be introduced or maintained include:

The capacity for clubs to trade selections from drafts in future years. This particularly increases the ability for clubs to trade talented players where multiple draft picks are required to complete a deal – especially if they involve extra first round selections. Currently, other clubs are needed in such trades, which only complicates and compromises the likelihood of these deals being completed. When raised with the AFL in 1995, there was some intrepidation expressed around the possibility of a club "trading away their future" – hence, this was recommended to be initially limited to draft selections in the following year (with a view to maybe extending it to two years when clubs became more familiar with the process). This initiative would also increase the opportunity for clubs to expedite the re-development of their player lists by providing greater inventory for trade activities.

While the NFL allows clubs to on-trade players as the draft is being conducted, the AFL's reluctance for such activities has stalled one of the key planks in the original draft model. The draft was established on the preface that clubs should always be able to recruit their preferred players – even if only to strategically position themselves to attract an opposition player or draft selections from another club at a later date. For example, if a club was unable to convince a team to complete a particular deal during the trade period, by subsequently drafting a player that they knew would attract greater interest from the opposition club, they could then use that player as an incentive to facilitate the earlier trade. Such an opportunity would also provide teams with clearer transparency as to which player a specific pick would equate to in the draft rather than speculate whether a player may or may not still be available a certain selection (as is currently the case). The post-draft trade period could run in between the national and pre-season drafts and involve all listed or recently drafted players – based on a club's perceived satisfaction with their results in that year's draft and trade periods. The introduction of 'future trading' would further complement this initiative as it would provide increased collateral to complete trades post the preceding national draft.

The constraints limiting changes to player lists after December is a genuine concern to both the clubs and players alike – especially when considering that the season runs from March-September in each year and provides minimal opportunity to address collective injury concerns or a lack of team performance. A club's season can effectively be "over" (in a competitive sense) during the first half of the year, so the ability to add further players through a supplementary draft and/or 'top-up' players onto a list would provide benefit to all parties. Should such additions be made via a non-compulsory draft, clubs could follow the existing process of reverse ladder position or utilise the NFL's model of having teams nominate ('use') the draft selection by round number that they would be willing to use on a player in the proceeding national draft – similar to the current father/son bidding system. Either of these methods would essentially tie the player to that club beyond the current season while the alternative option of adding 'top-up' players mid-season could give draft prospects the chance to impress AFL clubs without binding them to any particular team (with the player still being eligible for the draft later in the same year).

While clubs can currently elevate a player from the rookie list to their primary list at the end of a season, they cannot do the reverse – even with the player's consent. The NFL system of providing active and inactive player lists provides greater flexibility to teams as it allows the easier transfer of players while putting the onus back onto clubs by only protecting active list players from opposition recruitment. AFL clubs should be permitted to move primary list players to the rookie list at the end of each year providing the nominated players voluntarily agree to the transfer. Such players are currently required to re-enter the rookie draft, which creates additional uncertainty and insecurity to both the clubs and players, especially when some players would prefer to continue with their existing team albeit in a rookie capacity. Similarly, the introduction of active and inactive lists in the AFL competition would create more opportunity for player transfers during the season – whether via a draft or 'top-up' process, as addressed in the previous topic.

By necessity, the AFL draft and trade systems are highly regulated forms of player recruitment involving a series of complex and complicated procedures. While these systems will naturally raise some controversy and debate about the application of relative processes, the need to develop the existing model remains paramount.

Professional sport requires effective management and the architect of the AFL National Draft, Alan Schwab had a vision that is still to be completed – nearly 30 years after his dream became reality.

A reality that involves some change … and change that involves some vision!