https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/free-agency-a-disaster-of-the-afl-s-making-20201019-p566lc.html

Makes some good points and highlights a fundamental problem confronting the AFL - and the Dees unless we improve. 

The AFLPA have seen what happens in the NBA with super teams and the same teams (generally) finishing top 4 or 6 in the EPL, and want it here. Actually it is pretty much already happening.

It is interesting the media is starting to call this out. They are normally pretty silent on these types of things,  which fuels it.

I think if you put a group of 13 year olds in a room and talked them thrugh free agency and asked them to come up with likely outcomes they would have told you exactly what would happen re poweful clubs as destinations. I would be interested to know if MFC has any strategic thinking/plans  around how and what might make them a destination Club and what might not. I would start with Goschs paddock as a negative. In honesty I cannot think of a positive other than $$$ and length of contract offered. Happy to listen.

Was always going to happen and no shock that we're (the competition) in this situation.

It was never going to work for two main reasons. One because we're not the USA. Here not many players will move to poor clubs for a pay day, they'd rather play in a successful team as long as they get a reasonable paycheck. And two in the USA in sports like the NBA the players salaries are known, so anyone and I mean anyone can tell if there's dodgy deals going on. Also means you can tell if your or any club can realistically afford a certain free agent.

Fact is the cats out of the bag now and there's no getting rid of free agency. I think the best we could hope for would be options such as 1) All Preliminary Finalists are banned from signing free agents for that off season 2) Any club that signs a free agent has to pay the compensation pick the the club through points from the father/son draft index which obviously effects their picks for the upcoming draft. Or 3) All players salaries are made public. Puts greater emphasis on the clubs and players so the public know when dodgy deals are getting done.

1 hour ago, Clintosaurus said:

The AFLPA have seen what happens in the NBA with super teams and the same teams (generally) finishing top 4 or 6 in the EPL, and want it here. Actually it is pretty much already happening.

yes and no; one of the things i've heard said is that the afl measures competitiveness by the variety of teams that make prelims

carlton (1999) and essendon (2001) have the longest gaps since prelim appearances, while of course gc17 have never even had a 'winning' season, let alone made prelims - every other club has made appearances at least once in the last decade, i think

i loathe free agency fwiw

MADASHELL

You on the money with your free agency restrictions.

How the master minds in the AFL couldn't see this was necessary is unbelievable. 

The AFLPA wanted this for the players to have more choice and power over their career and where they play. This makes sense, their role is to look after the players. 

why the AFL brought this in with no conditions (such as top 4 are excluded from FA) is mind boogling. It undermines all other equalisation measures

The only thing stopping this from being a disaster is that there are so few free agents.

Statistically the number of players getting to free agency status are less than one in ten and half of those while good players don't attract mega interest (think Nathan Jones).

The AFLPA have been arguing that unlimited free agency should be available much earlier in a players career (3-5 years).

 

The choice to pick your employer is almost a human right, the AFL did very well to get the restrictions they have in place. Top 4 bans and stuff like that are nonsense. Would never happen.

The issue is the initial free agency was meant to be a stop gap solution for a proper expanded system and its never happened. 
 

Expand restricted free agency back to 5-6 (or even 4) years and then unrestricted free agency after that and the salary cap would be more of an equaliser. 
 

GWS will match and force a trade I’m fairly certain. But if they didn’t match and just signed Cameron then other teams should be able to swoop in and poach a lot of Geelong’s lesser players and hammer their depth. As it stands teams don’t want to do that because they have to give up draft picks. 

the only way that free agency will work is if players have no control over trades

so pies should be able to ship treloar to gc17, if they so choose to do so, as long as the monetary value of his contract is honoured

the issue is that players can 'block' trades (a la howe to gw$ a few years back) unlike in the nba, nfl, mlb, etc., or any other sporting organisation that has a free agency clause after a set period of times (be it 5, 6, or 7 years either at the one club or across the course of a career)

22 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The choice to pick your employer is almost a human right, the AFL did very well to get the restrictions they have in place. Top 4 bans and stuff like that are nonsense. Would never happen.

The issue is the initial free agency was meant to be a stop gap solution for a proper expanded system and its never happened. 
 

Expand restricted free agency back to 5-6 (or even 4) years and then unrestricted free agency after that and the salary cap would be more of an equaliser. 
 

GWS will match and force a trade I’m fairly certain. But if they didn’t match and just signed Cameron then other teams should be able to swoop in and poach a lot of Geelong’s lesser players and hammer their depth. As it stands teams don’t want to do that because they have to give up draft picks. 

This is the key. With the system set up so that only a relatively small number of players make free agency at a time, there's no big batch of players that pop out the back end. In Geelong's case, for example, someone like Esava might take this opportunity to bail but he can't, and other teams can't get him without giving up valuable picks. So he's stuck now behind Hawkins and Cameron, but can't do anything about it for like 4 years

25 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The choice to pick your employer is almost a human right, the AFL did very well to get the restrictions they have in place. Top 4 bans and stuff like that are nonsense. Would never happen.

Lol. So we should scrap the draft too?

we need restrictions on FA or the Cats will be on top forever

expanding FA will result in quality players leaving lower clubs more often for top teams

9 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

the only way that free agency will work is if players have no control over trades

so pies should be able to ship treloar to gc17, if they so choose to do so, as long as the monetary value of his contract is honoured

the issue is that players can 'block' trades (a la howe to gw$ a few years back) unlike in the nba, nfl, mlb, etc., or any other sporting organisation that has a free agency clause after a set period of times (be it 5, 6, or 7 years either at the one club or across the course of a career)

Free agency is actually having control over where you go. It's working for the players.

Clearly, however, it's certainly not working for the competition.

 

3 hours ago, deanox said:

It is interesting the media is starting to call this out. They are normally pretty silent on these types of things,  which fuels it.

Everyone's had enough of it, Geelong, Collingwood and Hawthorn were the biggest advocates of this because they knew it would benefit them and keep them from bottoming out.

 

Strange that the AFLPA is about the only union in the country that has so much power these days.

Just now, sue said:

Strange that the AFLPA is about the only union in the country that has so much power these days.

they are under pressure in the current negotiations.

The lack of clarity on the new salary cap and list sizes is worrying

The AFLPA has three distinct groups that it represents...

• draftees and under 3 years
• 3-7 year okay players
• the stars

They are hopelessly conflicted as an organisation

(throw in ex players as well)

Free Agency is here to stay for the foreseeable future.  The only way out of it for us (the MFC) in the immediate future (1-5 years) is to have a collective of players that are determined to change the club.  We need to shake that "only Melbourne" tag that we rightly deserve after games like the Freo and Swans games this year.  Why would better players want to come to a laughing stock?

  

4 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

The AFLPA have seen what happens in the NBA with super teams and the same teams (generally) finishing top 4 or 6 in the EPL, and want it here. Actually it is pretty much already happening.

I don't understand why the AFLPA would want this. How does it help the players, given around 60-70% of them would be in the 12-14 teams that won't be regularly finishing in the top 4?

I understand why free agency exists for the players. I understand the concept of the team which loses the free agent receiving some sort of compensation. What I don't understand is why the clubs who benefit from receiving a free agent aren't required to give up something in return, such as an automatic drop down the draft order. For example, and using Cameron to Geelong as an example, why shouldn't Geelong's first draft pick be moved down (say) 18 spots? 

Edited October 20, 20204 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia
typo

15 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Lol. So we should scrap the draft too?

we need restrictions on FA or the Cats will be on top forever

expanding FA will result in quality players leaving lower clubs more often for top teams

See this is what annoys me, the top teams can maintain their status through free agency and also being on top - certain playing groups are happy to sacrifice some $ to maintain success in the chase for a flag. The lower clubs often need to pay overs in terms of picks and $$ to players to try catch up, which often backfires and this doesn't help either.

 

46 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The choice to pick your employer is almost a human right, the AFL did very well to get the restrictions they have in place. Top 4 bans and stuff like that are nonsense. Would never happen.

The issue is the initial free agency was meant to be a stop gap solution for a proper expanded system and its never happened. 
 

Expand restricted free agency back to 5-6 (or even 4) years and then unrestricted free agency after that and the salary cap would be more of an equaliser. 
 

GWS will match and force a trade I’m fairly certain. But if they didn’t match and just signed Cameron then other teams should be able to swoop in and poach a lot of Geelong’s lesser players and hammer their depth. As it stands teams don’t want to do that because they have to give up draft picks. 

Completely disagree. There is no such thing as unrestricted right to pick your employer in the AFL. The draft & salary cap are there to try & make a more level playing field.

Free agency has helped Hawks, Cats & Tigers to top up their lists.

Makes good sense to bar preliminary finalists from free agency.

Ma

 

Another way to "penalise" clubs who receive free agents would be to add a loading to the free agent's salary for cap calculation purposes. For example, a free agent's salary might be included in the club's cap at 125% of its true value.  

26 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Lol. So we should scrap the draft too?

we need restrictions on FA or the Cats will be on top forever

expanding FA will result in quality players leaving lower clubs more often for top teams

No the initial contracts should be expanded to up to 4 years. Draftees should do their time just like Uni students, apprentices, young doctors or people joining the army.

But once you’ve done your service to the league you should have the right to play where you want to play. 
 

The key is proper restricted free agency that make it so clubs can match, trade or let guys go. 

One easy step is to get the recipient club to provide the compensatory pick (no adding points etc)

That forces them to trade a player so it comes with some pain

 

5 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Another way to "penalise" clubs who receive free agents would be to add a loading to the free agent's salary for cap calculation purposes. For example, a free agent's salary might be included in the club's cap at 125% of its true value.  

Then it would be taxed agency, not free agency