Because he did the opposite and went to a rubbish team?
Strategy Changes made to Free Agency
- Thread starter fallout11
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Because he did the opposite and went to a rubbish team?
- Thread starter
- #28
If I/you can find a list I would be more than happy...
- Sep 13, 2013
- 31,411
- 28,204
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Juventus
I was referring to the EPL...
Johnny Karate
Intolerant Left #DemonSniffit Clique 👀
- Apr 13, 2015
- 4,654
- 12,366
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Can we all just take a cold shower and examine some facts rather than falling into hysteria? This sort of hyperbole leaks into the mainstream media and nek minnut the AFL is coming up with the usual old lady who swallowed a fly rule changes.
Tom Lynch has served his time at Gold Coast, he has exercised his right as a free agent. James Frawley is the only other FA who springs to mind in terms of escaping a shithole club for a good one. Just about every other FA move has been to either a similarly placed club or one in a worse position.
GC have a retention problem, that sucks and does need to be looked at - let’s not introduce a whole new system because of one highly visible example.
Tom Lynch has served his time at Gold Coast, he has exercised his right as a free agent. James Frawley is the only other FA who springs to mind in terms of escaping a shithole club for a good one. Just about every other FA move has been to either a similarly placed club or one in a worse position.
GC have a retention problem, that sucks and does need to be looked at - let’s not introduce a whole new system because of one highly visible example.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #31
Lol...fair enough mate...showing some usual keyboard warrior manners...
00Stinger
100 - 7
where in the op does it state that?
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
I've said since it was implemented, that there should not be compensation awarded by the league (I'll address this below)
My free agency plan:
All players are unrestricted at 7 years as a senior listed player.
At 6 years, the club has the ability to trade the player against their will,which is where they get their compensation. Think of it this way. Dangerfield was pretty much out the door before his final yr is through. The dockers think they're close to a flag and throw an offer up that the crows take. Maybe danger sees flag success, or likes the lifestyle in Perth and stays, maybe he desides to move on. That's no different to a team bringing in a fringe player for a flag tilt before the windows shuts.
My free agency plan:
All players are unrestricted at 7 years as a senior listed player.
At 6 years, the club has the ability to trade the player against their will,which is where they get their compensation. Think of it this way. Dangerfield was pretty much out the door before his final yr is through. The dockers think they're close to a flag and throw an offer up that the crows take. Maybe danger sees flag success, or likes the lifestyle in Perth and stays, maybe he desides to move on. That's no different to a team bringing in a fringe player for a flag tilt before the windows shuts.
- Oct 6, 2013
- 9,139
- 6,331
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Sixers, Exers, GWS Womens
https://www.theroar.com.au/2018/07/...erfect-but-its-not-killing-the-league-either/
Players who had made an All Australian team before leaving due to FA.
- I've marked which players went to a club better or worse based on their clubs ladder position in the year they left.With less meaning they went to a less successful club and more to a more successful club. Added Lynch to this list.
Brendon Goddard left St Kilda to join Essendon - Less
Nick Dal Santo left St Kilda to join North Melbourne - More
Dale Thomas left Collingwood to join Carlton - Less
Lance Franklin left Hawthorn to join Sydney - Less
Nick Malceski left Sydney to join Gold Coast - Less
James Frawley left Melbourne to join Hawthorn - More
James Kelly left Geelong to join Essendon - Less
Tom Rockliff left Brisbane to join Port Adelaide as a restricted free agent - More
Tom Lynch left Gold Coast to join Richmond/Hawthorn/Collingwood - More
It’s not only the top sides receiving free agents, and it’s not only the bad sides losing them.
In terms of all Free Agents
There have been 66 free agents change clubs since it became legal in 2012, and this is how each club has fared, from most to least:
6: Essendon
5: Collingwood, Carlton, Melbourne, North Melbourne, Port Adelaide
4: Gold Coast, Hawthorn, Richmond, Western Bulldogs
3: Brisbane, Geelong, GWS, St Kilda, Sydney
2: Fremantle
1: Adelaide, West Coast
Of those 66 free agents who have moved, 33 – exactly half – were delisted by their original club.
The evidence doesn't really provide much to back up your argument. Its a pretty even distribution.
And theres plenty more reasons why players want to move. Some include
1. Money (no explanation needed)
2. Location (e.g Location of family or business)
3. Club Culture (e.g not being Gold Coast)
4. Club Staff (e.g Hawks attracting injured players due to medical staff)
Last edited:
How about each trade period EVERY player is up for grabs, IPL/Fantasy Footy style? Would make for great ratings.
Do it Gil!
Do it Gil!
- Sep 29, 2016
- 9,776
- 16,367
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Bayern Munich
I think the answer to free agency could be relatively simple. Have a salary cap loading for contracts over a certain amount.
If we want to stop bottom teams getting raided, just make it so the cap hit of big contracts is loaded depending on the size of the contracts.
For example, make the threshold 400k, then add a 25% cap hit for the value for the value over 400k***. So if Richmond for example offers and pays Lynch $1m (for easy maths). The value over 400k is 600k, so while the amount paid to Lynch is $1m, the amount on Richmonds salary cap would be $1.15m
(25% of 600k is 150k).
*** 400k is just an example, 350 is about average AFL wage i believe so i rounded up***
This would theoretically lower the amount a new club would offer because of the cap difficulties, while the home club can offer more without the additional cap hit. Making them in effect more competitive in the market place.
Using the above example, GCS could offer $1.15m withoutnany additional cap hit over the amount. Whereas Richnond could offer 1m and hit would cost them the same $1.15 cap hit. Over the course of 5-6 years, thats almost an extra $1m for Lynch, making it hard to pass up.
From the players perspective there is nothing stopping them from moving, just they might be offered less to leave, which means they might be inclined to stay.
Free agency was touted as a way that fringe or struggling players could move freely because of the difficulty of trading. That is why the threshold is 400k, if you sign a contract less than that, there is no cap loading.
You want to pry a superstar away though, you pay a premium.
Bare in mind, this is just RFA and UFA players. Delisted FA and trades do NOT have this free agency loading.
If we want to stop bottom teams getting raided, just make it so the cap hit of big contracts is loaded depending on the size of the contracts.
For example, make the threshold 400k, then add a 25% cap hit for the value for the value over 400k***. So if Richmond for example offers and pays Lynch $1m (for easy maths). The value over 400k is 600k, so while the amount paid to Lynch is $1m, the amount on Richmonds salary cap would be $1.15m
(25% of 600k is 150k).
*** 400k is just an example, 350 is about average AFL wage i believe so i rounded up***
This would theoretically lower the amount a new club would offer because of the cap difficulties, while the home club can offer more without the additional cap hit. Making them in effect more competitive in the market place.
Using the above example, GCS could offer $1.15m withoutnany additional cap hit over the amount. Whereas Richnond could offer 1m and hit would cost them the same $1.15 cap hit. Over the course of 5-6 years, thats almost an extra $1m for Lynch, making it hard to pass up.
From the players perspective there is nothing stopping them from moving, just they might be offered less to leave, which means they might be inclined to stay.
Free agency was touted as a way that fringe or struggling players could move freely because of the difficulty of trading. That is why the threshold is 400k, if you sign a contract less than that, there is no cap loading.
You want to pry a superstar away though, you pay a premium.
Bare in mind, this is just RFA and UFA players. Delisted FA and trades do NOT have this free agency loading.
Some lottery for the players, the best goes to the poorest performing club (usually both off & off field). Free agency is a tool for the players to offset the early years where they are shunted wherever the draft sends them.
All draftees locked in for fixed price 4 year deals. This allows teams to get fair value out of their draft picks. Contracts can only be extended after the 2nd year and 3rd year is locked in for cost.
1st round picks - 4 years guaranteed
2nd round picks - 3 years
3rd+ - 2 years
Lists shrunk to 35 players who are guaranteed contracts in November.
15 players Supplementary List of non guaranteed players. 3 of these can be converted to main list players by 28 February. 5 are cut at the end of Feb to go do something else. The other 7 are kept as Supp List players for the year. Minimum main list salary is 120k, maximum Supp list salary is 80k plus AFL match fees.
At the end of 4 or 5 years players are restricted free agents.
Restricted free agency works on either (or both) of 2 systems:
The NBA method: 1. Teams can match any deal a player signs and then either trade or keep them
The NFL: 2. Players are offered a contract where the wage dictates the draft cost for another team to sign them. Ie. a 3 year deal at 500k = 3rd round pick, a 5 year deal at 800k = first round pick with equivalent points to pick 10
Franchise players: 2 players per team can be kept on franchise year deals for their 5th or 6th season. These are 1 year contracts worth 800k. Players can only be franchised once.
Once a player has finished their 6th year of service across the AFL (not just 1 club) and is out of contract they are an unrestricted free agent.
Any delisted player, player over 22 who has entered in a previous draft or Supps List player is a free agent. They stick by the 3rd year wage if they are under 21/haven't done 3 years in the system, otherwise they are free to sign with whichever team pays them what they want.
Teams can sign other teams Supp list players to fill their main list come the end of Feb cut down day. The AFL will pay a relocation fee for any Supp list player moving interstate (not back to their home) for a main list job. This fee of say 15k is openly an incentive for players to move but also a way to protect the non football states from losing or being unable to attract fringe players.
Compensation for unrestricted free agents comes with an end of 3rd round draft pick. Doesn't matter if you lose Buddy Franklin or Joe Bloggs. You get 1 pick per player lost so you can replenish through the draft and that's it.
The salary cap restrictions that force bottom sides to pay a set high percentage of the cap is lowered and averaged over a 4 year interval. So a team can pay 70% for 2 years and then pay 98% for the next two (or 105% as allowed currently) and come out having paid a good portion over 4 years.
Trading overpaid veterans to a younger rebuilding team is encouraged. That way those teams don't fall away. They might even get draft picks to take on the contracts.
The philosophies are this:
- Shrink list sizes so top teams can't keep depth of talent
- Encourage players to move frequently for main list contracts
- Let the lesser teams poach fringe players or state league stars by offering money they can't currently offer.
- Make teams pay up by trades for young guys after 4/5 years entering their primes but not for the older guys who have done 6+
- Make players choose after 4/5 years if they want to commit long term or if they want short term deals to bail after year 6
- Give struggling teams a chance to trade a young player when they have the upper hand with the ability to keep them in restricted free agency or franchise them.
1st round picks - 4 years guaranteed
2nd round picks - 3 years
3rd+ - 2 years
Lists shrunk to 35 players who are guaranteed contracts in November.
15 players Supplementary List of non guaranteed players. 3 of these can be converted to main list players by 28 February. 5 are cut at the end of Feb to go do something else. The other 7 are kept as Supp List players for the year. Minimum main list salary is 120k, maximum Supp list salary is 80k plus AFL match fees.
At the end of 4 or 5 years players are restricted free agents.
Restricted free agency works on either (or both) of 2 systems:
The NBA method: 1. Teams can match any deal a player signs and then either trade or keep them
The NFL: 2. Players are offered a contract where the wage dictates the draft cost for another team to sign them. Ie. a 3 year deal at 500k = 3rd round pick, a 5 year deal at 800k = first round pick with equivalent points to pick 10
Franchise players: 2 players per team can be kept on franchise year deals for their 5th or 6th season. These are 1 year contracts worth 800k. Players can only be franchised once.
Once a player has finished their 6th year of service across the AFL (not just 1 club) and is out of contract they are an unrestricted free agent.
Any delisted player, player over 22 who has entered in a previous draft or Supps List player is a free agent. They stick by the 3rd year wage if they are under 21/haven't done 3 years in the system, otherwise they are free to sign with whichever team pays them what they want.
Teams can sign other teams Supp list players to fill their main list come the end of Feb cut down day. The AFL will pay a relocation fee for any Supp list player moving interstate (not back to their home) for a main list job. This fee of say 15k is openly an incentive for players to move but also a way to protect the non football states from losing or being unable to attract fringe players.
Compensation for unrestricted free agents comes with an end of 3rd round draft pick. Doesn't matter if you lose Buddy Franklin or Joe Bloggs. You get 1 pick per player lost so you can replenish through the draft and that's it.
The salary cap restrictions that force bottom sides to pay a set high percentage of the cap is lowered and averaged over a 4 year interval. So a team can pay 70% for 2 years and then pay 98% for the next two (or 105% as allowed currently) and come out having paid a good portion over 4 years.
Trading overpaid veterans to a younger rebuilding team is encouraged. That way those teams don't fall away. They might even get draft picks to take on the contracts.
The philosophies are this:
- Shrink list sizes so top teams can't keep depth of talent
- Encourage players to move frequently for main list contracts
- Let the lesser teams poach fringe players or state league stars by offering money they can't currently offer.
- Make teams pay up by trades for young guys after 4/5 years entering their primes but not for the older guys who have done 6+
- Make players choose after 4/5 years if they want to commit long term or if they want short term deals to bail after year 6
- Give struggling teams a chance to trade a young player when they have the upper hand with the ability to keep them in restricted free agency or franchise them.
MagicGnome97
All Australian
- Sep 6, 2018
- 684
- 662
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Whoever mentioned the EPL. EPL has NO SALARY CAP + PROMOTION/RELEGATION. For me these two factors are way more important than just free agency. Because you have no salary cap, the richer clubs which are a lot more popular worldwide because of their success (or being rich, they both feed into each other) can afford to pay players much better wages. Therefore you end up with a situation where only 6 teams (7 at an absolute stretch) are even a realistic chance of winning the league in the next 5 years, maybe even the next decade. Nearly of the top talent in the premier league play for teams in the top 6. Leicester winning the league was easily the biggest underdog story you'll ever see. It is probably more likely for Carlton to do a three-peat in the next 3 seasons than that was haha.
The crazy thing is that the EPL is referred to as the most competitive football/soccer league in the world. And well, for the top leagues, it is. La Liga has had the same 2 teams win like 13 of the last 14 league titles or something like that. The Bundesliga had had Bayern win the league 6 years in a row or something like that, and Juventus has won like 7 Serie A titles in a row.
Yes there are the super rich owners (PSG, Chelsea and Man City), but for the most part the teams that dominate (and/or have dominated) are rich because they earned it through being successful.
Because of the lack of a salary cap and a promotion/relegation system, in european soccer the rich teams just keep getting richer. The money table (rankings of how rich clubs are) usually correlate pretty strongly with teams positions on the table/ladder.
Teams get way less revenue in the English/british second division (the championship) so its self explanatory why promotion and relegation is a massive deal in equalisation. Its not the most uncommon thing for teams to drop down a division in consecutive seasons.
The crazy thing is that the EPL is referred to as the most competitive football/soccer league in the world. And well, for the top leagues, it is. La Liga has had the same 2 teams win like 13 of the last 14 league titles or something like that. The Bundesliga had had Bayern win the league 6 years in a row or something like that, and Juventus has won like 7 Serie A titles in a row.
Yes there are the super rich owners (PSG, Chelsea and Man City), but for the most part the teams that dominate (and/or have dominated) are rich because they earned it through being successful.
Because of the lack of a salary cap and a promotion/relegation system, in european soccer the rich teams just keep getting richer. The money table (rankings of how rich clubs are) usually correlate pretty strongly with teams positions on the table/ladder.
Teams get way less revenue in the English/british second division (the championship) so its self explanatory why promotion and relegation is a massive deal in equalisation. Its not the most uncommon thing for teams to drop down a division in consecutive seasons.
Blackas87
Brownlow Medallist
AFL has a salary cap so it won’t turn out like the EPL
The problem is the draft, it creates long rebuilds as it takes years of staying down the bottom aquiring picks, players don’t want to sign at losing teams in rebuild mode.
The problem is the draft, it creates long rebuilds as it takes years of staying down the bottom aquiring picks, players don’t want to sign at losing teams in rebuild mode.
Its a replay of Buddy way back, only difference is the Swans were pilloried, but If you think its about the Tiges, hang in there.
Little bit tigercentric in your thinking, perhaps?
They changed the rushed behind rule because of hawthorn, if you recall.
- Oct 6, 2013
- 9,139
- 6,331
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Sixers, Exers, GWS Womens
Don't get me started on the rushed behind rule! Pathetic rule.
The compensation is the problem as it’s effecting other clubs.
Really if there is compensation the the club receiving the free agent should be giving up the equivalent draft pick.
For example (it’s just an example Richmond supporters): Lynch goes to Richmond, suns get band one compo (pick 3) as that’s a first rounder Richmond lose their first rounder.
If a player was band 4 compo the club the player goes to loses their third rounder.
Yes other clubs get pushed back still but I’m sure they would be a lot more accepting of it when the club receiving the free agent loses something.
Really if there is compensation the the club receiving the free agent should be giving up the equivalent draft pick.
For example (it’s just an example Richmond supporters): Lynch goes to Richmond, suns get band one compo (pick 3) as that’s a first rounder Richmond lose their first rounder.
If a player was band 4 compo the club the player goes to loses their third rounder.
Yes other clubs get pushed back still but I’m sure they would be a lot more accepting of it when the club receiving the free agent loses something.
The problem isn't FA, its players taking unders for the chance of a flag, and it's not just the superstars either.
The true market value of a player needs to come out of a clubs cap, not what the chance of a flag can convince a player to accept.
The true market value of a player needs to come out of a clubs cap, not what the chance of a flag can convince a player to accept.
- Dec 3, 2017
- 17,127
- 55,724
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Well then the first thing you should do is come up with a new name for it as it is not "free agency" any more.
I like the topic but I feel the EPL is the wrong analogy, they don't have a CAP, no draft and they have transfer fees etc.... NBA is a better alignment, there is at least a CAP and a well regimented draft system(which is probably better than the AFL's). There is still a large discrepancy between viewership thus the dollar flow into the sport compared to the AFL but they have similar problems with the star congregating into only really a few teams, my guess is that's what you're concerned about with the current rules?
To solve the AFL issue GUMBLETRON mentioned it and I've heard it talked about before but the idea of the points value of the compensation pick given to the team losing the player is leaving being deducted from the team receiving the player makes sense to me and is only really a minor rule change. The problem is at the moment clubs not even remotely involved in the player move are being penalised, in the Lynch deal the Saints(currently Pick 3) who are not involved in any way slide back a spot based on the speculative comp pick the Suns are getting(along with everybody else), now that is less concerning for clubs with picks at the end of Rd1 but for a club with a high pick looking for top talent and/or specific types of players(or in a weak draft year) that could potentially be damaging. In this scenario taking the points value off the tigers would mean they give up a few picks, at least that softens the blow on the draft order as all the other teams would move up a slot or two in the ensuing rounds.
If they did do this it might have to be a fix %/points sliding scale as the Lynch move would probably mean the Tigers would have to give up their 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks which is probably a bit much, maybe cap it at 1400 points, meaning it would be the 1st and 2nd rounder for top of the table team.
- Aug 7, 2013
- 7,938
- 17,011
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Other Teams
- Rams, 76's, Brewers
It should be a blanket 10 years service then unrestricted - see ya later. Players would still be 28 and plenty of good footy left in them. If they want to leave early then orchestrate a trade or utilise the draft. It takes drafted kids 3-4 years to find their feet and clubs investing plenty into them. They need a better return.
FA has led to another issue with players requesting to leave despite having years to run on their contracts and not being close to FA.
It enables players to sign long contracts for their security, then a year or 2 later they magically have an issue and request to go home. They then nominate a club that they have to go to, not just the state.
Clubs are then left with the problem of having a player remain who doesn't want to be there or trade with their desired club of choice.
It's becoming more and more common and McGovern is the latest.
I think it was Leigh Matthews recently who said Free agency and a draft is like mixing water with oil. The AFLPA have far too much power.
FA has led to another issue with players requesting to leave despite having years to run on their contracts and not being close to FA.
It enables players to sign long contracts for their security, then a year or 2 later they magically have an issue and request to go home. They then nominate a club that they have to go to, not just the state.
Clubs are then left with the problem of having a player remain who doesn't want to be there or trade with their desired club of choice.
It's becoming more and more common and McGovern is the latest.
I think it was Leigh Matthews recently who said Free agency and a draft is like mixing water with oil. The AFLPA have far too much power.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Locked
- Sticky
