I'd say the AFL are getting increasingly nervous about Hawthorn's domination.

No other team can get close to them and free agency will only make it easier for the dominant teams to stay that way.

Credit to Hawthorn.

Would love a Hawks v Port GF next year.

That would make things interesting.

Talking equalisation watching the NRL final, they seem to have got something right. That was a nail biter right to the end, unlike our last 3 grannies. I don't particularly like NRL but that final was riveting, unlike our final.

Talking equalisation watching the NRL final, they seem to have got something right. That was a nail biter right to the end, unlike our last 3 grannies. I don't particularly like NRL but that final was riveting, unlike our final.

The NRL Grand Final tonight was everything we wanted to have in yesterday's AFL grand final game, but didn't get.

The NRL Grand Final tonight was everything we wanted to have in yesterday's AFL grand final game, but didn't get.

And the year before... and the year before that...

I long for the days of 10 point margins!

The way you've described it has probably always been the case but such is the transparency of how things are now, there does seem to be a formula that needs to be adhered to. Just about every position on a list will need to have a purpose - a club can't afford to have too many "hope for the best" types - it's just too risky.

Our situation was always going to be a time related fix and we're still at least 2 off-seasons away from becoming a regular 10-12+ win club. To be better than that will require a number of factors to be in our favour - including luck.

The FD has a different strategy to building the list than what we've seen previously and we'll see that strategy again in the trade and drafting period. Our list building has become far more creative.

I'd still like the club to become more active with regards to free agency. I see free agency as a real way of bridging the gap - I don't expect anything to come our way in this off-season but next year should be a different matter.

I'm sure that's the plan too, mate.

Hope used to be year to year.

I hope if my club plays well next year they can win it all.

Now its so far into the future.

I hope if my club draft well for 3 years we can make finals.

This isnthe problem

I'd say the AFL are getting increasingly nervous about Hawthorn's domination.

No other team can get close to them and free agency will only make it easier for the dominant teams to stay that way.

Gill's expression as Hodge was giving his speech says it all I think. He knows things need to change.

Hope used to be year to year.

I hope if my club plays well next year they can win it all.

Now its so far into the future.

I hope if my club draft well for 3 years we can make finals.

This isnthe problem

They tell us they'll make finals next season. Do we believe them?

They tell us they'll make finals next season. Do we believe them?

Making finals is irrelevant. They've set up a top 8 to con us that 5,6,7,8 mean something and to make money. Those positions mean nothing. Only the top 4 have ever had a real chance at a premiership. Making the top 8 one year is also no guarantee of success the next year. See Geelong and Port Adelaide. It's not an automatic continuous climb.

Edited October 4, 20159 yr by Diamond

The AFL have done a shocking job of equalisation in recent years. Every one of their equalisation measures is failing, and failing badly for the most part. Clearly we improved this year, but we are as far away from challenging the top sides, particularly Hawthorn, as we have ever been.

1. Salary cap - Forcing poor clubs to pay a minimum amount of the salary cap each year makes it difficult for them to free up salary cap space to bring in highly paid players. Instead you have mediocre players such as Dawes being paid exorbitant salaries, or teams speculating over unproven talent such as Tom Boyd. It also results in clubs front and back loading contracts, as we did with Frawley, which inadvertantly brings players into the free agency net.

2. Draft - All the draft does is give poor sides preferential access to one top prospect a year. After the first few picks all clubs basically have an equal look at the remaining player pool. But given that drafting teenagers remains an imperfect science, the chances of the stronger clubs being able to using their greater resources sift through the available players and find hidden gems is much greater. Plus, the northern academies are giving a massive leg up to the NSW/Queensland team and further reducing the ability of other struggling clubs to access the best young talent. Other concessions, such as the father son rules, actually favour the stronger sides by forcing them to pay less for players than the lower ranked sides.

3. Free agency - Whoever is responsible for this travesty should be shot. For the current system to be successful it basically assumes that all players are motivated solely by money and will happily move to the club that can pay them the most. Whereas the reality is clear that these are professional sports people, who are already extremely well paid, and who are will happily change clubs for less money in order to be in a successful environment. Furthermore, the ability of teams such as Geelong to keep their premiership teams together on reduced salaries in order to prolong their success is in direct contrast to the struggles faced by teams such as Melbourne to retain their young talent.

4. Fixturing vs Cash - What is worth more to clubs - the charity payments made by the AFL annually to keep them viable, or access to marquee matches and time slots that allow them to attract members and sponsors? Long term it is obviously the latter, but clearly the smaller clubs are harshly treated in this respect.

The answers are not so easy to find, but clearly all clubs need to be given equal fixturing rights and equal access to the draft. The ability of the top teams to access free agency has to be reduced, and incentives perhaps need to be provided to make weaker clubs more attractive to the Dangerfield's of the world.

1 Top 4 sides cannot take players from bottom 4 sides.

2 Bottom 4 sides get extra salary cap to lure player from top 8 side, this extra salary cap lasts 2 years.

or can have an extra player on the list.

3 No minimum salary cap.

4 Mid season top up draft from 2nd tier competitions. VFL SANFL etc. 1 per side

1 Top 4 sides cannot take players from bottom 4 sides.

2 Bottom 4 sides get extra salary cap to lure player from top 8 side, this extra salary cap lasts 2 years.

or can have an extra player on the list.

3 No minimum salary cap.

4 Mid season top up draft from 2nd tier competitions. VFL SANFL etc. 1 per side

You can guarantee these measures will come in as soon as we are pushing top 8/4 and not before.

No, Hawthorn traded Croad to Fremantle in exchange for pick 1.

Franklin and Roughead were the draft with the priority pick. Your point is still valid, it's all about drafting and it just shows the difference in quality between drafts when one year we get Sylvia and McLean and they get Roughead and Franklin.

On top of this Hodge, Lewis, Mitchell and Rioli were all high picks that they have built this team around. Amazingly, Hawthorn have blown a few high picks along the way and probably would have won six premierships in a row now had they not stuffed those up.

Wasn't he pick 36ish?

The AFL have done a shocking job of equalisation in recent years. Every one of their equalisation measures is failing, and failing badly for the most part. Clearly we improved this year, but we are as far away from challenging the top sides, particularly Hawthorn, as we have ever been.

1. Salary cap - Forcing poor clubs to pay a minimum amount of the salary cap each year makes it difficult for them to free up salary cap space to bring in highly paid players. Instead you have mediocre players such as Dawes being paid exorbitant salaries, or teams speculating over unproven talent such as Tom Boyd. It also results in clubs front and back loading contracts, as we did with Frawley, which inadvertantly brings players into the free agency net.

2. Draft - All the draft does is give poor sides preferential access to one top prospect a year. After the first few picks all clubs basically have an equal look at the remaining player pool. But given that drafting teenagers remains an imperfect science, the chances of the stronger clubs being able to using their greater resources sift through the available players and find hidden gems is much greater. Plus, the northern academies are giving a massive leg up to the NSW/Queensland team and further reducing the ability of other struggling clubs to access the best young talent. Other concessions, such as the father son rules, actually favour the stronger sides by forcing them to pay less for players than the lower ranked sides.

3. Free agency - Whoever is responsible for this travesty should be shot. For the current system to be successful it basically assumes that all players are motivated solely by money and will happily move to the club that can pay them the most. Whereas the reality is clear that these are professional sports people, who are already extremely well paid, and who are will happily change clubs for less money in order to be in a successful environment. Furthermore, the ability of teams such as Geelong to keep their premiership teams together on reduced salaries in order to prolong their success is in direct contrast to the struggles faced by teams such as Melbourne to retain their young talent.

4. Fixturing vs Cash - What is worth more to clubs - the charity payments made by the AFL annually to keep them viable, or access to marquee matches and time slots that allow them to attract members and sponsors? Long term it is obviously the latter, but clearly the smaller clubs are harshly treated in this respect.

The answers are not so easy to find, but clearly all clubs need to be given equal fixturing rights and equal access to the draft. The ability of the top teams to access free agency has to be reduced, and incentives perhaps need to be provided to make weaker clubs more attractive to the Dangerfield's of the world.

An excellent summary.

Equalisation is a joke.

We've been hit by a perfect storm - some of it of our own making, but most of it not. The driving force behind it is greed - bunch of spivs in bespoke suits have taken over a much-loved community game and squeezed the life out of it.

The salary cap should be averaged over 5 years. That way when a team bottoms out like Melbourne, we have room to land a big fish and not pay spuds $500k.

The AFL have done a shocking job of equalisation in recent years. Every one of their equalisation measures is failing, and failing badly for the most part. Clearly we improved this year, but we are as far away from challenging the top sides, particularly Hawthorn, as we have ever been.

1. Salary cap - Forcing poor clubs to pay a minimum amount of the salary cap each year makes it difficult for them to free up salary cap space to bring in highly paid players. Instead you have mediocre players such as Dawes being paid exorbitant salaries, or teams speculating over unproven talent such as Tom Boyd. It also results in clubs front and back loading contracts, as we did with Frawley, which inadvertantly brings players into the free agency net.

2. Draft - All the draft does is give poor sides preferential access to one top prospect a year. After the first few picks all clubs basically have an equal look at the remaining player pool. But given that drafting teenagers remains an imperfect science, the chances of the stronger clubs being able to using their greater resources sift through the available players and find hidden gems is much greater. Plus, the northern academies are giving a massive leg up to the NSW/Queensland team and further reducing the ability of other struggling clubs to access the best young talent. Other concessions, such as the father son rules, actually favour the stronger sides by forcing them to pay less for players than the lower ranked sides.

3. Free agency - Whoever is responsible for this travesty should be shot. For the current system to be successful it basically assumes that all players are motivated solely by money and will happily move to the club that can pay them the most. Whereas the reality is clear that these are professional sports people, who are already extremely well paid, and who are will happily change clubs for less money in order to be in a successful environment. Furthermore, the ability of teams such as Geelong to keep their premiership teams together on reduced salaries in order to prolong their success is in direct contrast to the struggles faced by teams such as Melbourne to retain their young talent.

4. Fixturing vs Cash - What is worth more to clubs - the charity payments made by the AFL annually to keep them viable, or access to marquee matches and time slots that allow them to attract members and sponsors? Long term it is obviously the latter, but clearly the smaller clubs are harshly treated in this respect.

The answers are not so easy to find, but clearly all clubs need to be given equal fixturing rights and equal access to the draft. The ability of the top teams to access free agency has to be reduced, and incentives perhaps need to be provided to make weaker clubs more attractive to the Dangerfield's of the world.

Pretty spot on... Though Hawks will say that they have operated under some conditions & lost Buddy with no compensation......

Issue is the afl & players association want it both ways..a draft & cap as equalisation & free agency & fixturing which rewards successful clubs ....can't have it both ways!

The salary cap should be averaged over 5 years. That way when a team bottoms out like Melbourne, we have room to land a big fish and not pay spuds $500k.

this point makes far too much sense!!

this point makes far too much sense!!

I think so!

Imagine if we now had massive salary cap room because we weren't forced to pay overs during the last 8 years..........

I think so!

Imagine if we now had massive salary cap room because we weren't forced to pay overs during the last 8 years..........

Far too logical.

Whoethorn have just delisted Lake and Hale.

Gotta be $800,000 cleared for another Free Angent.

Far too logical.

Whoethorn have just delisted Lake and Hale.

Gotta be $800,000 cleared for another Free Angent.

and maybe a big chunk of that is required for recent back-ended trades coming into effect next year

i wouldn't assume they have just got an 800k surplus unless you know their contract's statuses

Bottom 4 sides pick one player from each of the top 4 sides and return one reject. That's equalisation!

and maybe a big chunk of that is required for recent back-ended trades coming into effect next year

i wouldn't assume they have just got an 800k surplus unless you know their contract's statuses

with the oldest GF side ever i would think contracts are decreasing rather than increasing

Whorethorn will pick and choose who they want.

with the oldest GF side ever i would think contracts are decreasing rather than increasing

Whorethorn will pick and choose who they want.

was more thinking of players they have been bringing in recently

take frawley at 2.5m over 4 years. if that was backended to fit him in then his salary now starts to increase. there are probably others too

Nothing wrong with the current system, the introduction of GWS and Gold Coast upset things the most, bottom teams just need to draft better.