Rubbish, where is Franklin if Sydney don't have the cash, GWS or Hawthorn ? Do you think Goddard would be at Essendon if they could only offer 450 instead of 750.
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 9
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 8 Winner: bearweger
AFLPA pushing for Mid-Season FA Signings
- Thread starter Upgrayedd
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Franklin is at Sydney b/c they made the best offer. Best offer's are different things for each player. For Buddy it was money AND length of contract.
I suspect w/o Sydney Buddy is at GWS making pretty much the same amount just for 6 years not 9.
Bluelegs
Celebrating what we're good at
Are you serious? Contracts are a thing, plauers should not be able to break contract without consequence. Furthermore the nature of the game makes open movement unhealthy. Whats to stop any decent player in a lower to midrange club chase the premiership mid year by jumping to a top four team. This kind of move would put the nail in the coffin of equalisation.
Essendonia
Soldier of Fortune
- Aug 2, 2010
- 2,809
- 1,794
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Obviously, it's a case by case issue. Franklin has had success and wants cash, so he's not relevant.
As I already stated, there are a number of factors. Players aren't always going to go to the highest bidder. Perhaps mostly, but not always.
Messenger
No, I’m just disappointed
They should be careful what they wish for.
There are objective performance indicators in some contracts now; pay triggers for B&F placings, games played in a season, etc. Setting more details indicators to avoid penalty for individuals are inevitably statistical and may not entirely be in the control of the player.
Bluelegs
Celebrating what we're good at
The AFLPA has stated that their goal is to have every player have an equal oppurtunity to win the flag. This proposal though only further divides the players. There will be good teams with average players winning flags and then poor teams where decent players leave from to go and get flags. But with mid season free agency. The good teams could then push out the average players and give better players their chance to win flags.
Their goal makes no sense in the first place. Only the best can win, to say your goal is for equal opportunity to win a flag defies the very notions of Free agency. If anything they should be fighting to make players movement more restricted so that every team can maintain an equal level of talent
Their goal makes no sense in the first place. Only the best can win, to say your goal is for equal opportunity to win a flag defies the very notions of Free agency. If anything they should be fighting to make players movement more restricted so that every team can maintain an equal level of talent
New rules = new ways to exploit them.
Take the mandatory minimum salary cap at 95% as an example.
Sure it's great that a fixed high percentage of the money is spent on players. But soon bottom teams might just get around that by instead of overpaying all their signings that they actually want they might take a salary cap dump from a top team to get to their 95% and let the top team sign another player. That's what happens in the NBA. For instance if Carlton got really close to a flag all of a sudden but were still paying Daisy 700k a year to play in the VFL they might move him to St Kilda who will have him contracted for 1 year before he retires. Carlton can then buy another free agent and St Kilda makes the minimum without overpaying players. Carlton maybe send a second round pick to St Kilda for the privilege of using a list space and salary cap space. No young players have benefitted from that, just older guys who can sign as free agents.
Obviously we aren't at that stage yet but whatever new rules come in to place will be exploited and might not do players or fans any good.
Take the mandatory minimum salary cap at 95% as an example.
Sure it's great that a fixed high percentage of the money is spent on players. But soon bottom teams might just get around that by instead of overpaying all their signings that they actually want they might take a salary cap dump from a top team to get to their 95% and let the top team sign another player. That's what happens in the NBA. For instance if Carlton got really close to a flag all of a sudden but were still paying Daisy 700k a year to play in the VFL they might move him to St Kilda who will have him contracted for 1 year before he retires. Carlton can then buy another free agent and St Kilda makes the minimum without overpaying players. Carlton maybe send a second round pick to St Kilda for the privilege of using a list space and salary cap space. No young players have benefitted from that, just older guys who can sign as free agents.
Obviously we aren't at that stage yet but whatever new rules come in to place will be exploited and might not do players or fans any good.
It just means bad clubs will stay bad, and good clubs will stay good. Its not that simplistic of course, but it would not surprise me in the least if teams like Hawthorn and Geelong and Sydney are able to continue their sustained success with free agency. Swans are already benefiting it in a big way of course, and already we are seeing rumours of Frawley potentally going to Cats, Dangerfield considering a move east, etc etc.
The aim of free agency was for players at the fringes to get a game at another club if I understand it correctly. Perhaps loans would have been better.
Bluelegs
Celebrating what we're good at
Because all the other teams keep taking all our players.
TedDougChris
🏆 🦍
- Mar 10, 2007
- 52,545
- 98,134
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Charlton Athletic, Roys FFC
Exactly. Lose Rivers and Frawley to FA - get Byrnes in return... That seems 'fair'.. You haven't been disadvantaged at all.... And then people want to remove the compensation for it... Seriously, until Roos took over, which big name players were beating down Melbourne's door to play for them ? Or at Port when they were rebuilding, or the Dogs (Crameri was a trade before anyone pipes up) or Saints....
- Banned
- #62
AFLPA could not care less if we have a EPL style competition where basically only 4 clubs have had the chance to win every season since 1997. Great comp for players, crap for diversity of supporters.
- Nov 13, 2008
- 26,143
- 20,805
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Sydney Sweeney's Shaving Team...
why not have the 18 captains select a team each week from a pool of 700 players? .... we could have dangerfield playing for us one week and then he might be on the opposition team next week.
Bluelegs
Celebrating what we're good at
I don't think it does make it a good comp for the players. It's a good comp for the elite players, while the rest wallow in the scrapheap. Rather than having the talent spread across all teams and the cyclical rise and fall of teams that the competition has been in the past.
vide0n
Premiership Player
- Oct 7, 2012
- 3,931
- 4,578
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
It doesn't make sense for the players
association to want that though because even then you're only allowing a certain proportion of players to ditch their club and join the elite - that is the crop that can offer something the top clubs don't already have on their list
It does make more sense to me for the AFLPA to toe the line with equalisation so that every player at every club has a reasonable chance, but I guess they're trying to bump up the coin available
Let's face it. We've had secret mid season signings for years now. Tippett did the deal with Sydney during Adelaide's bye round in July 2012. Buddy was signed up part way through last year, probably the same with Betts and every other bloke that says "I haven't decided yet, I'll wait until the end of the season blah blah blah"
Admittedly, these are only concerning FA but still against "the rules"
Admittedly, these are only concerning FA but still against "the rules"
The AFLPA is basically pushing for the murder of the goose that laid the golden egg.
If they keep going down this road there will be a lopsided, boring league which no-one watches. Suddenly all this 'freedom' they want will mean that there's less money to go around and their own members will suffer.
If they keep going down this road there will be a lopsided, boring league which no-one watches. Suddenly all this 'freedom' they want will mean that there's less money to go around and their own members will suffer.
Not against this, it just offers the player a bit of job security.
If Buddy did his knee in round 22 last year would the Swans have still offered the same contract?
This way Buddy would have the swans offer on paper, and providing the Hawks didn't match it he would be a swans player even if he got injured.
If Buddy did his knee in round 22 last year would the Swans have still offered the same contract?
This way Buddy would have the swans offer on paper, and providing the Hawks didn't match it he would be a swans player even if he got injured.
I'd assume that players changing clubs mid-season is not what most supporters want to see. Dead set we need a strong supporters association to lobby against the AFLPA and remind the players their salaries are linked to our level of interest and we're not interested in seeing blokes change clubs left right and centre in pursuit of a few more bucks.
If players want their freedom to chose where they go that's fine but the clubs need some leeway too, they're hamstrung at the moment. I think the clubs need to push for the ability to trade a player to wherever they want.
For example, if player A is 2 years into a 3 year contract the club can trade him to any other club and the player has to go. Maybe it's a bit rough to trade him if he's just 1 year into a 3 year deal but the clubs are deadset over a barrel at the moment.
For example, if player A is 2 years into a 3 year contract the club can trade him to any other club and the player has to go. Maybe it's a bit rough to trade him if he's just 1 year into a 3 year deal but the clubs are deadset over a barrel at the moment.
