No one should have their compo diluted if they lose a FA and bring in another-that's the part that makes FA unfair to "feeder " clubs, it flies in the face of fairness and sets up a market that is only for the strong to benefit from.

Abolish that and FA is sorted.

The AFL should have something set up where teams that are in the bottom 8 for x amount of years get an bigger salary cap then the more successful teams above them.

Instead of calling it COLA allowance we can call it a crapa allowance.

or CRAPOLA allowance.

I have just been on the AFL app and participated in the voting on what Frawley is worth. Although i voted pick 3, 82% voted that he was only worth a second or third round pick..I hope that the AFL doesn't take heed of the results on their own App [or let us hope that Demonlanders get onboard and vote enmasse in favour of pick 3.]!

Thats because no one supports the dees lol.

def worth pick 3, he's the best full back in the game - rarely beaten.

A player that can shut down any key forward is very handy, they don't grow on trees.

And apart from that, he's one of our best players and we need pick 3 lol.

I have just been on the AFL app and participated in the voting on what Frawley is worth. Although i voted pick 3, 82% voted that he was only worth a second or third round pick..I hope that the AFL doesn't take heed of the results on their own App [or let us hope that Demonlanders get onboard and vote enmasse in favour of pick 3.]!

The question should be is Frawley worth a Tier 1 rating. The fact it would be pick 3 has nothing to do with him. If we finished in the top 4 we would only be receiving a pick in the mid-teens, and I don't think anyone would be questioning it, but it would still be under Tier 1!

I don't know if this is right but there are suggestions of interesting figures being bandied about suggesting that Frawley's package with Hawthorn is less than those offered by other clubs. If that's the case and there have been some intangible incentives offered to make up for this then they should be investigated before our compensation is determined.

In any event, if we don't get band 1 for Frawley and/or adequate compensation for Mitch Clark then we should be back at the AFL's doorstep appealing against the no draft assistance decision which was partly based on us getting adequate compensation for Frawley and Clark. This never sat comfortably with me and if we get shafted again over the Frawley compo I would expect PJ to be on the front foot about it.

I hope we get pick 3 for the trade value it offers us. I expect we will get end of first round and that is the compensation that Frawley is worth. Anyone that thinks we're getting shafted are kidding themselves and need to stop whining and hoping for handouts to push us up the ladder. As we have seen from our failures smart decisions and development get you there not hand outs.

I hope we get pick 3 for the trade value it offers us. I expect we will get end of first round and that is the compensation that Frawley is worth. Anyone that thinks we're getting shafted are kidding themselves and need to stop whining and hoping for handouts to push us up the ladder. As we have seen from our failures smart decisions and development get you there not hand outs.

If the formula says pick 3 and we don't get it, then we are being shafted.............again!

I hope we get pick 3 for the trade value it offers us. I expect we will get end of first round and that is the compensation that Frawley is worth. Anyone that thinks we're getting shafted are kidding themselves and need to stop whining and hoping for handouts to push us up the ladder. As we have seen from our failures smart decisions and development get you there not hand outs.

The only handouts here are going to the top teams.

We are being compensated for a loss of investment.

How about the most succesful person in your suburb gets to take your house under "free agency". A house that you've just spent years renovating and improving having also spent time and money in the analysis in choosing it in the first place.

Is it a handout that that you get compensation that doesn't even replace what you had but only allows you some opportunity to start from the beginning all over again? Reanalyzing, hoping to choose correctly and then renovating and developing. We are being given nothing other than some cockamamey reduced opportunity to try to somehow replace what we already had, a lot of which will be at our own time and expense.

Seriously mate, I'm all for digging in and and doing the hard yards but to say handout? Seriously!

Edited October 2, 201410 yr by Melbman2

The talk is $450k a year for four.

That could barely be band 2 unfortunately, and is up to $200-250k less than offers from us, Cats and Freo.

I find extraordinary if he's truly accepted that - remembering that he originally was chasing a seven year deal.

I fear we are about to get completely bent over.

The talk is $450k a year for four.

That could barely be band 2 unfortunately, and is up to $200-250k less than offers from us, Cats and Freo.

I find extraordinary if he's truly accepted that - remembering that he originally was chasing a seven year deal.

I fear we are about to get completely bent over.

Yeah but chasing and realistically expecting a seven year deal. How many deals of that length have there been in history? I don't know but I'm guessing not to many. Freo although a top 4 club need to offer contracts like that of a lower based club. Ross Lyons game plan has brought teams close but not close enough.

The only handouts here are going to the top teams.

We are being compensated for a loss of investment.

How about the most succesful person in your suburb gets to take your house under "free agency". A house that you've just spent years renovating and improving having also spent time and money in the analysis in choosing it in the first place.

Is it a handout that that you get compensation that doesn't even replace what you had but only allows you some opportunity to start from the beginning all over again? Reanalyzing, hoping to choose correctly and then renovating and developing. We are being given nothing other than some cockamamey reduced opportunity to try to somehow replace what we already had, a lot of which will be at our own time and expense.

Seriously mate, I'm all for digging in and and doing the hard yards but to say handout? Seriously!

That's actually the best analogy I've heard on this subject so far.

I don't know if this is right but there are suggestions of interesting figures being bandied about suggesting that Frawley's package with Hawthorn is less than those offered by other clubs. If that's the case and there have been some intangible incentives offered to make up for this then they should be investigated before our compensation is determined.

In any event, if we don't get band 1 for Frawley and/or adequate compensation for Mitch Clark then we should be back at the AFL's doorstep appealing against the no draft assistance decision which was partly based on us getting adequate compensation for Frawley and Clark. This never sat comfortably with me and if we get shafted again over the Frawley compo I would expect PJ to be on the front foot about it.

WJ, a sick little part of me hopes it happens. I want to see PJ fight, I want to see this club fight. Too long we've copped anything that's come our way.

We want to be a powerhouse of the AFL, we need to start acting like one.

If this club can show some direction, there'll be a lot more than 35,000 follow.

The band we receive is calculated based on the deal the player gets. It should be taken into account the value of a possible flag. If you go to a side in the top four add $250k pa. Surely the chance to win a flag is part of "the deal".

This raises an interesting point. I understand that the Teir 1/2/3 calculation is based on a number of aspects including the $ value and length of time of the Contract Offered by the club the free agent is moving to.

Why isn't it based on the $value and length of time of the contract offered by the existing club?

The compensation should be based on what the player is worth to the existing club not the new club. If we've offered James 5 years at $600k, that is what the compensation should be based on. As that is what he's worth to us.

It seems arse about when you think about it.

The only handouts here are going to the top teams.

We are being compensated for a loss of investment.

How about the most succesful person in your suburb gets to take your house under "free agency". A house that you've just spent years renovating and improving having also spent time and money in the analysis in choosing it in the first place.

Is it a handout that that you get compensation that doesn't even replace what you had but only allows you some opportunity to start from the beginning all over again? Reanalyzing, hoping to choose correctly and then renovating and developing. We are being given nothing other than some cockamamey reduced opportunity to try to somehow replace what we already had, a lot of which will be at our own time and expense.

Seriously mate, I'm all for digging in and and doing the hard yards but to say handout? Seriously!

Well done. Great post.

Edited October 2, 201410 yr by Kureemy

We will be getting pick 3 as compensation 100% One of the reasons we were denied draft assistance is due to the fact the AFL knew we were getting compensation for Frawley after our pick 2.

We have nothing to worry.

To quote Alred E Neuman - What, Me Worry?

How to fix free agency. Top 4 teams can't take free agents (DFA excluded).

Bottom 4 teams don't have their compensation diluted if they lose a free agent then bring in another.

There must be incentive to improve.

Its called restriction of trade!

(Posted this in other FA thread but also very relevant here).

A major flaw with FA is that the receiving team does not ‘pay’ anything. Consider:

• Would Hawthorn, Geelong etc take Frawley if they had to give up their 1^st round pick?
• What would Sydney have needed for Buddy: Their 1^st & 2^nd and a raft of players!! Two 1^st round picks maybe? Unlikely he would have got there!
• What pick(s) would Carlton, Ess, North have to use for Thomas, Goddard, Del Santo?

They get their player and keep their precious picks!!! The player is a ‘free’ to the receiving team. If clubs had to pay they would think twice about taking an FA. The AFL could still decide the ‘value’ of a player and the receiving club gives that pick(s) to the losing club.

Then the AFL can drop compo picks which disadvantage all clubs after the compo. The FA can still go to club of choice it just means receiving club has to pay losing club, just like a trade.

Free Agency should mean a player is free to move but it should not mean he is free to the receiving club. If a club want a player let them pay with picks.

I don't know if this is right but there are suggestions of interesting figures being bandied about suggesting that Frawley's package with Hawthorn is less than those offered by other clubs. If that's the case and there have been some intangible incentives offered to make up for this then they should be investigated before our compensation is determined.

In any event, if we don't get band 1 for Frawley and/or adequate compensation for Mitch Clark then we should be back at the AFL's doorstep appealing against the no draft assistance decision which was partly based on us getting adequate compensation for Frawley and Clark. This never sat comfortably with me and if we get shafted again over the Frawley compo I would expect PJ to be on the front foot about it.

I think you will find this is the bAsis for PJ and Roosy's public pronouncements about assistance over the last month or so. The AFL has some discretions (apparently the PP was too politically hard) in relation to the band we receive for Chip etc. It may also involve commercial benefits such as the draw etc.

We have adults in charge for once. Lets wait and see what they come up with,.

I wonder if there was a way to somehow incorporate the contract that a players original club offered a player into awarding compensation. For example if Frawley has signed for a smaller deal, let's say 450k over 4, yet we offered 550k over 5, could the afl use that in terms of measuring a players worth to their original club?

The fact that star players will choose a team closer to the top than the bottom, in most scenarios, could mean they are playing for less.

The only handouts here are going to the top teams.

We are being compensated for a loss of investment.

How about the most succesful person in your suburb gets to take your house under "free agency". A house that you've just spent years renovating and improving having also spent time and money in the analysis in choosing it in the first place.

Is it a handout that that you get compensation that doesn't even replace what you had but only allows you some opportunity to start from the beginning all over again? Reanalyzing, hoping to choose correctly and then renovating and developing. We are being given nothing other than some cockamamey reduced opportunity to try to somehow replace what we already had, a lot of which will be at our own time and expense.

Seriously mate, I'm all for digging in and and doing the hard yards but to say handout? Seriously!

This.

This raises an interesting point. I understand that the Teir 1/2/3 calculation is based on a number of aspects including the $ value and length of time of the Contract Offered by the club the free agent is moving to.

Why isn't it based on the $value and length of time of the contract offered by the existing club?

The compensation should be based on what the player is worth to the existing club not the new club. If we've offered James 5 years at $600k, that is what the compensation should be based on. As that is what he's worth to us.

It seems arse about when you think about it.

When you get 3 pages in and come up with a good idea, post it, and read page 4 and someone already beat you...

Smart minds think alike!

Hang on folks!! Denham is reporting: '...a day after he finally confirmed he was leaving the Demons, Frawley is understood to have accepted a longstanding four-year deal worth about $2.5 million from the Hawks...' If reliable, this will get us pick 3!

Interesting that it is a 'longstanding' deal!!

One thing you can be reasonably confident about is that when a player says "I am putting contract negotiations off until the end of the year" they have pretty much agreed to terms with another club. When did Frawley put off negotiations?

Footy is lies.

I don't know if this is right but there are suggestions of interesting figures being bandied about suggesting that Frawley's package with Hawthorn is less than those offered by other clubs. If that's the case and there have been some intangible incentives offered to make up for this then they should be investigated before our compensation is determined.

In any event, if we don't get band 1 for Frawley and/or adequate compensation for Mitch Clark then we should be back at the AFL's doorstep appealing against the no draft assistance decision which was partly based on us getting adequate compensation for Frawley and Clark. This never sat comfortably with me and if we get shafted again over the Frawley compo I would expect PJ to be on the front foot about it.

If no draft assistance decision is based on us getting adequate compensation for Frawley and Clark then it is stinking incompetent corruption by the AFL at its best ( worst).

Compensation is not assistance. Compensation means you are losing something and getting something in return and we are losing two players. If this is the AFL's rationale then it is just plain wrong. We should have been given assistance and fair compensation for the two players.

grrrrrr

One thing you can be reasonably confident about is that when a player says "I am putting contract negotiations off until the end of the year" they have pretty much agreed to terms with another club. When did Frawley put off negotiations?

Footy is lies.

90% correct - I think it means that manager has said that there are enough good offers on the table that you can comfortably move on at the end of the year.

With free agency, as I have said previously, you would be mad to a UFA deal early as you have complete freedom to move. I do not believe for a second that a deal was done with Geelong. I believe that Frawley knew pretty early what they were prepared to offer.

I 90% believe Frawley when he said "he hadn't made up his mind ". What he actually meant was "I haven't made up my mind which club to go to".

The oddest thing about the current free agency compensation model is that Hawthorn pays LESS than every vlub between pick four and their pick. If Melbourne gets pick three then EVERY club after Melbourne gets shunted down the draft order, which means every club from pick four to Hawthorn's pay more than Hawthorn.

I mean, what draft change is worth more: pick 3 to pick 4, or pick 18 to pick 19?

No wonder clubs are complaining about Melbourne getting pick three.

And since the AFL allows self-interested clubs to dictate its decision making... draw your own conclusions.

Edited October 3, 201410 yr by Tony Tea