THE CLUBS have spoken. 

When the Next Generation Academies were introduced to the game in 2016, the AFL's intention was to increase the number of Indigenous and multicultural players at the top level through a broader participation rate in junior ranks. 

Instead of the League running it and investing, they gave that job to the clubs, with the view that the appeal of club branding would attract more junior players to the game, as is seen to be the case with the Sydney Academy being club-run instead of being facilitated by the competition. The incentive to doing a good job was to get first call on players at the draft. It was well intentioned but set up with gaps the clubs naturally looked to expose. 

Now, as the AFL looks set for its most compromised draft ever due to the explosion of northern Academy, NGA and father-son prospects, the League has some big calls to make on how it handles the Next Gen future. 

The history of the NGAs has been inconsistent. The rules on access have changed multiple times and are now back where they started – clubs can match a bid on a draftee from pick No.1 onwards. 

Loopholes have existed. James Borlase's father was a Port Adelaide Magpies great but had his son when he was in Egypt for work, meaning Borlase counted as an NGA product for Adelaide, where he is now a part of the Crows' backline. There are many other examples.

There have been complex rulings made on eligibility. North Melbourne waited on an answer on Ryley Sanders' NGA eligibility for years before a decision was made two months before the draft that he was tied to the Roos but, under the rules then, he was no chance to get to pick No.40 for them to truly have any draft hold on him.

The Hawks this year were knocked back on their application to have potential top-20 pick in the 2025 pool, Ollie Greeves, who is of Indigenous descent and in their Eastern Ranges zone. That was believed to be around the registration point for Greeves, who is a grand nephew of Geelong great Carji.

Then there is the current application from Port Adelaide to have Dougie Cochrane, younger brother of current Power forward Tom and son of former Port and North defender Stuart, be a part of the club's NGA. Dougie is viewed as a strong No.1 pick candidate for next year's draft, with Stuart exploring his Indigenous heritage. 

These are the high-profile cases but there has been many more similarly debated within the grey of the NGA system.

But now the AFL has its best chance to iron out the kinks. As it does that, the AFL, importantly, will find the balance between the focus of the NGA being a talent-driven program for clubs, a game-broadening concept for the code while also maintaining the integrity of the draft. This year there may be around 40 per cent of the pool with ties to clubs.  

Tasmania's proposed entrance into the AFL in 2028 has meant that North Melbourne will lose its Tasmanian NGA zone, from which it secured top-10 pick Tarryn Thomas in 2018. Because of that, North needs a new zone, with the AFL undertaking a wide scale review of the zones, eligibility, criteria and processes of the NGA program.

Clubs had until early February to pitch for the zones they wanted to keep and zones they wanted to obtain, plus any other feedback around accessing talent as well as community outcomes.

AFL.com.au revealed each club's feedback on Tuesday after canvassing all clubs outside of the northern Academy states, with only Richmond not participating.  

There are different angles each are taking – Carlton is the only club without a regional zone and wants that changed, Adelaide and Port Adelaide want the big area of South Australia currently unallocated to be split between them, while Melbourne and St Kilda both want all of Dandenong rather than to share it. 

North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs are looking at Wyndham, while Collingwood wants a bigger patch of turf beyond Melbourne's inner east. The Kangaroos are keen on areas in the north of Melbourne and Victoria as a preference, knowing that will bite into other clubs' regions. 

The Tigers will be privately questioning their zone – they are the only Melbourne-based club without a metropolitan area and have produced only one NGA product since it started. But what became clear from the clubs was that they wanted three things from the NGA system: equity, consistency and clarity. They are in line with the AFL's goals for its review, too. 

The clubs want the review to show statistically where Indigenous and multicultural populations are and for those areas to be divided up as equally as possible. 

They want consistency on access to the prospects and for it to be on par with the access northern clubs have with their Academy players over pre-seasons, particularly with full draft access again available. 

And they want clarity on the eligibility process – who is eligible for who, when cut-off periods are and how much work clubs have done with the players to earn the draft hold over them. The Demons suggested proof of bringing the player to the game as a key component of having draft access to them down the track, while the Roos have long advocated that if a player is father-son eligible, they shouldn't also be able to be selected by a club as an NGA or northern Academy player. 

What did become clear in the feedback, though, was that the clubs are keen to be part of the solution to raising the numbers of Indigenous and multicultural players in the AFL. 

Many have proposed adding more Category B rookie spots so they can list players who may not be quite ready, while the Dogs were among the clubs to suggest ongoing access for NGA players into their 20s, so the late developers can remain engaged and in sight of the dream.

Likewise, lots of clubs put forward aligning AFLW NGA access with the men's competition in the hope they can reap a draft benefit from their work at lower levels. It is also obvious clubs see the off-field benefit of a fruitful system in terms of community buy-in, membership, fan support and tapping into the emerging 'growth corridors' of cities. 

The NGA system has been under perpetual review in recent years; some have been minor tweaks and some significant alterations like the rule shift that saw Essendon have access to Isaac Kako at last year's draft.

The next steps shape as crucial for the future of NGAs – and the draft itself.