Finally Kingy Talks Sense - Free Agency is a Disaster

[rjay 24,917]

Have to agree with him on this one. The AFL are so hell bent on following US sport and this is one of many moves that just doesn't suit.

Trading future draft picks which has been floated recently is another disaster waiting to happen.

It will be interesting to see what the equalisation model is when it's presented.

[What 18,810]

the AFL wants to be like American sport so badly

its disgusting

Free agency is the end of Aussie Rules, what a stupid idea to bring that in

[stuie 7,374]

Got a link or something there?

[SaberFang 7,151]

He said it on 360. Outlined what Free Agency was intended to do (help skilled players who can't get into their club's best 22 go to other clubs where they could play), and how it's been abused and turned into a money milking exercise by the game's best players.

[Whispering_Jack 30,019]

He said it on 360. Outlined what Free Agency was intended to do (help skilled players who can't get into their club's best 22 go to other clubs where they could play), and how it's been abused and turned into a money milking exercise by the game's best players.

And a player milking enterprise by the AFL's strongest clubs as we've seen with Sydney over Buddy Franklin.

The strongest clubs rule the competition and the powers that be give lip service to equalisation while pandering to the wealthy and the strong.

[Chook 15,012]

America is not evil.

[Allen Jakovich 516]

It was never the afl that was pushing for free agency, it was the players association.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,046]

It was never the afl that was pushing for free agency, it was the players association.

Exactly what I was going to say. The AFL held out on the free agency issue for a long time and then when they finally conceded they put as many restrictions on it as possible to try to protect the weaker clubs. This is one thing you really can't blame on them.

[rjay 24,917]

Exactly what I was going to say. The AFL held out on the free agency issue for a long time and then when they finally conceded they put as many restrictions on it as possible to try to protect the weaker clubs. This is one thing you really can't blame on them.

So what were the many restrictions they put on it to protect the weaker clubs?

I don't think they get away scott free on this one.

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

As soon as $cully was poached by the AFL the rules changed.

We just have to get smarter. There is no alternative.

[Pennant St Dee 13,171]

the AFL wants to be like American sport so badly

its disgusting

Free agency is the end of Aussie Rules, what a stupid idea to bring that in

Except when it comes to cheaper entry and cheaper food the AFL don't want a bar of heading down that road

The AFL is killing the goose which laid the golden egg, it is happening slowly but it is happening.

I know we have the record tv rights deal but the ordinary fan is struggling to get to games regularly and they are pandering to tv time slots at the fans expense. It will come back to bite eventually

[Little Goffy 14,521]

Free Agency in it's current form will cripple the AFL if allowed to run in the long term.

I've been working on an article exploring and elaborating the problems the current system creates, what is shocking is that when you go through it systematically from a few different perspectives, especially in terms of 'formal economy vs informal economy', the issues are completely obvious.

The AFL doesn't get let off the hook at all for their responsibility on this - part of their management culture of pushing things through with as little meaningful assessment as they can get, making decisions first and then commissioning reports to reach the right conclusions, and generally doing things in a short-sighted rush.

If I ever actually complete the article, I'll be sure to post it here, but the main point I want to make now is - it took a genuine dereliction of oversight and governance to fail to observe and anticipate the problems free agency creates.

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

Crowds are down in melbourne...

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,654]

King has talked a lot of sense about Melbourne for the last few years, it is just that the truth was so hard for us to take that we preferred to attack the messenger

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

Etihad Stadium being privately owned has done so much damage to AFL Clubs in this city.

What a huge con it is.

Last time i went Cameron Bruce had his shoulder rearranged.

I despise the joint.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

Trading for future picks could work and hurt us at the same time. We don't have any stocks to trade apart from draft picks. Who wants our players? We could get a trade deal done because everyone expects us to finish in the bottom 4-6 for the next few years. This could encourage other clubs to trade a player to us for our future first round pick. Great for us in a way but that pick could be a pick 1-6. Stronger clubs could afford to lose a player to us and load up with top 10 picks whilst finishing in the top 4 every year. Hawthorn have been the best in my opinion at trading/drafting over the last 7 years. It does help that nearly every free agent wants to play for them but could you imagine Hawthorn having our first round pick this year?

[Guest]

I remember at the start of the '90's we were all told suburban grounds were outdated, relics of the past and anyone playing at one was on the road to financial oblivion. Big, 80K mega stadiums which were sold out every week: those were the way to go! We yet again had to follow the American model and 'grow' the code to survive.

It just goes to show that you should never just accept prevailing wisdom for the sake of it. The one Victorian club who got to keep their home ground, Geelong, makes a poltus out of it because when they play smaller Melbourne clubs or interstate clubs, they don't take it in the rear by playing at Etihad or the 'G. How much do they make from a 25k crowd at Skilled? Some might say they were always going to stay there but don't be sure. The AFL were trying to get them to move to the 'G or Etihad in 1999.
I find it ironic that I'm saying this as our home ground is the 'G but seeing the death of suburban grounds and being able to go to only two stadiums in Melbourne has been a bit of a downer.

[whatwhat say what 22,740]

What was most disappointing was that Whateley and Robbo just sat there and didn't agree nor disagree.

I've been saying it since before it came in - it's a disaster for clubs such as ours. We will be a breeding ground for the rich clubs to poach from to top up their lists.

The only way free agency can work is if players have NO SAY in their trading - effectively reducing them to commodities to exchange. That's how it works in American sports - the player doesn't really have a say in where they play unless they've been a free agent acquisition.

Instead it's a half-measure in the afl.

I absolutely hate it.

[DeeZee 7,378]

It has made our sport similar to the premier league, where four or five top clubs stay successful over long periods of time bleeding talent from the bottom clubs.

They have made it so its almost a no brainer to leave your club if they dont have success.

Moloney, Rivers,Sylvia......Frawley will be next.

[praha 11,240]

Free agency brought Melbourne Clark, Vince, Cross, Dawes to name a few.

I think it's a hyperventilation to suggest it will turn the league into the Premier League. In the PL there is no cap and the player pool is global, not to mention teams sign players when they're 10 years old.

The market is far more important than the club. I know that in some cases a player wants to win a flag, but a player that wants to either return home, or play in a big market like Sydney or Melbourne will go to a club that can offer him the most money.

The only thing stopping Melbourne from signing free agents is good management.

IMO Melbourne has benefited more than most from free agency. The club has signed some real gems in recent years. I know it hasn't translated on the field yet but most of those who signed would easily make the 22 in a top 4 side. What more could you want?

Lots of hyperventilation going on here. Rather than say "WHAT ABOUT US" why don't we start putting the pressure on the club to start performing so that it doesn't get the short end of the stick? You're all only saying this now because the team is struggling. Not every single free agent of caliber can end up at a "big" club. The cap won't allow.

It has made our sport similar to the premier league, where four or five top clubs stay successful over long periods of time bleeding talent from the bottom clubs.
They have made it so its almost a no brainer to leave your club if they dont have success.
Moloney, Rivers,Sylvia......Frawley will be next.

Moloney, Rivers and Sylvia have been replaced by the players I mentioned above. Those three were around during 2 wooden spoons' and 2012, 2013, so I don't see how their loss has made the team any worse than what it already way. Had they stayed, would we have ended up with Vince, Dawes, etc.?

Frawley will leave, but why? Is it because of more money or because he wants to go to a "big" club? He wants success. Whose fault is that? Free agency or the club's? He could get more money at Hawthorn but hypothetically if Melbourne was a fringe side pushing for a top-8 spot with lots of promise, do you think he would leave and jump ship for an extra few K when he could be pushing for a flag in 2-3 years with a team he's helped build?

Players are leaving because they need a fresh start. If Frawley leaves, I'll understand. That's the nature of it. If the club were in a better position he'd have signed ages ago. This is a system that really punishes mediocrity. That's not the AFL's fault, nor the league's players' fault.

Edited April 2, 2014 by Cudi_420

[s-t-i-n-g-a 439]

Free agency brought Melbourne Clark, Vince, Cross, Dawes to name a few.

No, trading brought us Clark, Vince and Dawes. Only Cross came to us as a delisted free agent. Edited April 2, 2014 by s-t-i-n-g-a

[Little Richard 6,262]

I haven't really done much deep thinking on free agency however, does anyone think it could it work with some sort of mini salary cap component? For example, the higher a team finishes on the ladder, the smaller the amount they are capped on spending on free agent players each season?

ie. Hawthorn can spend no more than $250K next free agency period assuming they win the flag, and it cascades down the ladder until perhaps the bottom four are uncapped.

Third party deals may make this system pointless though.

Edited April 2, 2014 by Django

[ickey_11 145]

No, trading brought us Clark, Vince and Dawes. Only Cross came to us as a delisted free agent.

Don't forget Byrnes. Apparently he is a good "club man".

[whatwhat say what 22,740]

You can't Cross either - he was delisted. Think of him as a PSD pick.

[John Crow Batty 8,863]

Would be better if all players were technically employees of the AFL rather than their clubs and we would not have this mess. Then it would be easier to control player movements. All player payments paid by primary employer. AFL keeps TV money to pay the salary caps.