Nut... different back then. Far more volatile now. 

Has some merit... probably more a Trojan horse of disaster for the weaker clubs.

Proceed with extreme caution 

9 hours ago, SaberFang said:

How does this work in other sports? What exactly can clubs trade? Draft picks for later in the year?

The issue with most sports is that players can't block trades made by their team.

NBA players get shipped all over the place up to the trade deadline, which is a couple of months out from the playoffs. They can literally play for New York one night, be on a plane, and be suiting up in LA a couple of days later.

European football, for example, has transfer windows where there is a specific period in which players can be transferred, whether pre and early season or mid season. 

The common denominator with these other sports is that clubs effectively own the right to manage their players and the players can't stop those rights being bought and sold.

40 minutes ago, nutbean said:

For those of us old enough to remember  - we have had a midseason draft before.

Very little need for panic - very few players left clubs for other clubs. The ones that did were players that were "trash and treasure"  - ( one clubs trash is another clubs treasure). What did transpire is players from the then VFA got drafted in to fill holes caused by injuries. You may see a parting of the ways with a Cloke, if the Pies have no intention of keeping him. 

If it is obvious that we are devoid of say leg speed and we have spotted a Casey boy that we think could make a difference then why not ? The other issue is that it could only really be VFL as they would be the only players fit enough and possibly be able to work out a game plan. The game is much more sophisticated than the "old days". What it could mean though is if we think a VFL player could make it with us long term then maybe you get him in on the list mid year with a view to him being gold in the following seasons. 

There is a problem with the fixed list size. Do you delist a player mid season  and how would that work as they would be contracted.

 

The degree of my panic is proportional to what is intended.  If it is just a glorified way of bringing in some extra rookies and promoting some from the VFL or trading AFL-listed  players who haven't had a game for say 50 weeks, then my panic meter would be on low.  If it is we lose N Jones mid-season and get a first round draft pick or even an AA player in exchange, then I won't panic. I'll just lose all interest in AFL.

It's a Pandora's Box.  .. now

The rich would get richer...the poor poorer

Strong , stronger and the weak would  inherit the dearth 

Top 4 sides should be prohibited from taking players from bottom 4 sides at any time. 

Top up/mid season draft players salaries to be doubled for salary cap calculations for 2 years. Except VFL-SANFL etc. (2nd tier) players.

Can only delist the same number of players as drafted mid season. Maximum 2 

 

-I don't like it but if it is going to happen we must restrict the powerful clubs from raping the poor clubs.

The only way it would work is if there are rules round it so that your best players cannot leave for more money/flags

i would have no problem if Grimes wanted mid season to move to another club that would play him. I'd like to see him play.  I'm sure a team with injuries or poor at the back would play him.

not sure what the rules would be...  played less than 20% games for the 1s. not top 10 highest paid, not younger than 25?  and include VFL players

As a general football fan I love the idea of players moving around, reshuffling the race for a premiership late in the season. Means its all alot less predictable.

As a club fan I hate it. No way any team outside the top 10 could attract a player of any caliber why would you move to a club with no hope of success?. Who is going to say yes to throwing their year away? It just wont work, AFL players have too much power. It would work if players were shuffled at club disgression, but a Prestia to a North type trade at this point in the year? there is no way that would ever result in a fair outcome to the GC, Great for north and maybe even for flag competition but not for equalisation.

Gil had this to say: the way fans feel about mid-season trading would play a big part in whether the move proceeded.  

This strikes me as a standard public softening process. They'll get the market research in next and twist the results in favour of the outcome they desire. Much as when it seemed the MFC members were all for the crowded Schwab branding.

I personally think this is a horrible horrible idea. Unnecessary and against the spirit of the competition in so many regards. I could at most accept a mid-season delisting and mini-draft period over a blanket bye week but a half-point trade period and the media response would be ugly in the utmost - and, while the ramifications are unknown, it would not in application be a case of just covering for injuries as it's being currently framed.

In summary; if the people of this board are against the idea, I think they should strongly let their voices be heard. We are the fans. We're the ones who put the money in to prop up the individual clubs. If we can reach a significant Demonland consensus then perhaps we should forward a submission to the AFL on behalf of the forum.

Pitch over.

It's an awful idea that destroys any notion of Equalization, players from lower clubs will be lining up at the door to get to the top sides. 

A mid season draft however could work, allowing sides to delist players and add in unsigned from state leagues or anyone delisted in that time.

45 minutes ago, Abe said:

It's an awful idea that destroys any notion of Equalization, players from lower clubs will be lining up at the door to get to the top sides. 

A mid season draft however could work, allowing sides to delist players and add in unsigned from state leagues or anyone delisted in that time.

I think that mid-draft has more merit than trade, but how do contracts work? I'd happily delist a Terlich but he is contracted for full seasons not half seasons. Do we start having half season contracts? 

Do we have a midseason rookie draft where you pick up to 2 players from state leagues in the form of mid-year rookies and then they can be elevated the same way as normal rookies? Would work for major injuries but not so much for teams just lacking a puzzle piece. 

56 minutes ago, Abe said:

It's an awful idea that destroys any notion of Equalization, players from lower clubs will be lining up at the door to get to the top sides. 

A mid season draft however could work, allowing sides to delist players and add in unsigned from state leagues or anyone delisted in that time.

agree with your first para.

On your second para, i don't like the idea of mid season delisting. Players should have some certainty at least from season to season, delisting mid season would be unfair and just way to mercenary. It may have the effect that clubs would be less diligent in assessing performance at the end/beginning of the season if they think they can chop heads mid season and bring in replacement players.

Is the theory that it would be a loan for the second half of the season or a permanent trade?

Imagine a top four team lose their ruckman, or even their back-up ruckman and they look at a lower team like Melbourne has been and decide to chase Spenser. I think Spenser could be a number one ruck in an AFL side just not ours because of Gawn.

They get in Spenser's ear and all of a sudden he has dreams of playing in finals when he hasn't even played in an AFL game all season. Of course he'd want to go. But more to the point he'd be mighty [censored] off if Melbourne turned around and said no.

The potential for de-stabilising a team that is already struggling to build team culture would be devestating.

All the years of developing a ruckman like Spenser, 25 and just starting to put it together is lost.

And then Gawny has an injury and we're left without our back up ruckman that we've spent years developing because a team that didn't have the foresight to develop their own back-up's pinches them.

I'm using Spenser as an example coz I now our list well but I'm sure every lower team has a similar player.

Rotten idea, it's a no from me, for what it's worth.

I don't like the idea of mid-season trading, but am fine with a mid-season recruiting from the lower leagues.

So you can top up one or two players from the WAFL or whatever for your needs due to injuries without impinging upon another AFL team's season.

30 minutes ago, Choke said:

I don't like the idea of mid-season trading, but am fine with a mid-season recruiting from the lower leagues.

So you can top up one or two players from the WAFL or whatever for your needs due to injuries without impinging upon another AFL team's season.

Yep...No to trading...Yes to a draft.

According to 7 news, Gill is hosting the Vic Based coaches to dinner tonight.  Part of the agenda will be sounding them ut on the Mid-Season trading notion. 

I hate the idea, if they insist on bringing this in I hope that it's player loans only, with the loaning club able to recall the loaned player at any point in time.

On 6/23/2016 at 8:25 PM, dazzledavey36 said:

Il bet you a thousand bucks we won't be classed as a 'Lower placed club' next year...

We will be a destination club very soon.

Oh yeah, those A-graders flocked to us after our grand final year in 2000, what a dynasty we created, taking it up to the Lions every year after.

59 minutes ago, johndemons said:

Oh yeah, those A-graders flocked to us after our grand final year in 2000, what a dynasty we created, taking it up to the Lions every year after.

What the [censored] are you talking about? Im talking about 2017 when we are pushing for finals not something that happened 16 years ago. Completely irrelevant..

Get with the times old fella.

What about mid season trades that aren't realized until after the season? 

 

That way, a player who decides he wants to leave can go early, shutting down the speculation. Draft picks can change hands, and the player plays out the season. 

Mid season trades...nope.

Trade period is already boring AF, why put us through two of them?

Imagine how many teams would pay overs just to get players out of the top sides to get an advantage.

and where does it leave contracts? are players going to start signing for 2.5 years?

Think everyone is being a bit dramatic. It's not going to be Viney or Petracca leaving to go to Hawthorn because they want immediate success. If they did., they could move at year-end anyway. 

All players will be contracted, so it will need to be agreed by both club and player. Grimes is a perfect example. He's fit, experienced and could fill a hole somewhere. We wouldn't mind letting him go and he would probably want to go. Might be happy to send him to say Brisbane for their 4th round pick at year-end. The Spencer scenario is just as likely to happen end of the year as mid year. The club would say no as we need back up, and as he's contracted there's nothing he can do. If he was out of contract at the end of the year, and wanted to go anyway, then we might consider letting him go if the deal was right. It's the reason in Europe you see very few transfers in January window, unless they're out of contract the following summer, where they can leave for free. 

I don't really think it changes too much, just gives an opportunity for fringe players to move mid-year, as opposed to rotting in the 2's. I'd be very surprised if there was as much activity as everyone was saying. Yes it would be harder for teams down the bottom to attract players, but if we offered a young player say a 3 year contract and an opportunity to play in the 1's, as opposed to in the Hawk's 2nd's every week, it could happen. 

33 minutes ago, adsy said:

Think everyone is being a bit dramatic. It's not going to be Viney or Petracca leaving to go to Hawthorn because they want immediate success. If they did., they could move at year-end anyway. 

All players will be contracted, so it will need to be agreed by both club and player. Grimes is a perfect example. He's fit, experienced and could fill a hole somewhere. We wouldn't mind letting him go and he would probably want to go. Might be happy to send him to say Brisbane for their 4th round pick at year-end. The Spencer scenario is just as likely to happen end of the year as mid year. The club would say no as we need back up, and as he's contracted there's nothing he can do. If he was out of contract at the end of the year, and wanted to go anyway, then we might consider letting him go if the deal was right. It's the reason in Europe you see very few transfers in January window, unless they're out of contract the following summer, where they can leave for free. 

I don't really think it changes too much, just gives an opportunity for fringe players to move mid-year, as opposed to rotting in the 2's. I'd be very surprised if there was as much activity as everyone was saying. Yes it would be harder for teams down the bottom to attract players, but if we offered a young player say a 3 year contract and an opportunity to play in the 1's, as opposed to in the Hawk's 2nd's every week, it could happen. 

Spot on and a brilliant post. 

The overreaction on here over this is quite hilarious.

9 hours ago, adsy said:

Think everyone is being a bit dramatic. It's not going to be Viney or Petracca leaving to go to Hawthorn because they want immediate success. If they did., they could move at year-end anyway. 

All players will be contracted, so it will need to be agreed by both club and player. Grimes is a perfect example. He's fit, experienced and could fill a hole somewhere. We wouldn't mind letting him go and he would probably want to go. Might be happy to send him to say Brisbane for their 4th round pick at year-end. The Spencer scenario is just as likely to happen end of the year as mid year. The club would say no as we need back up, and as he's contracted there's nothing he can do. If he was out of contract at the end of the year, and wanted to go anyway, then we might consider letting him go if the deal was right. It's the reason in Europe you see very few transfers in January window, unless they're out of contract the following summer, where they can leave for free. 

I don't really think it changes too much, just gives an opportunity for fringe players to move mid-year, as opposed to rotting in the 2's. I'd be very surprised if there was as much activity as everyone was saying. Yes it would be harder for teams down the bottom to attract players, but if we offered a young player say a 3 year contract and an opportunity to play in the 1's, as opposed to in the Hawk's 2nd's every week, it could happen. 

That sounds like a recipe for loading weaker teams long term with players who by definition are worse than those in the top teams.   How can you be so relaxed about that?