List Mgmt. Contracts/Trade/Draft Thread - 2025 Edition

[Keys]

Quick links

• Player contract status
• Draft prospect video highlights (thanks to noobermensch)

Players out of Contract 2025 (12)

Spoiler

• Oscar Allen (19/3/99) - Signed a 3 year extension (2023-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2022 in May 2021
• Campbell Chesser (27/4/03) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2023 in May 2022
• Tom Cole (28/5/97) - Signed a 3 year extension (2023-25) in May 2022
• Rhett Bazzo (17/10/03) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) on an existing contract due to expire 2023 in September 2022
• Jayden Hunt (3/4/95) - Signed a 3 year contract (2023-25) in October 2022
• Callum Jamieson (31/7/00) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in March 2023
• Jamie Cripps (23/4/92) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in August 2023
• Jack Petruccelle (12/4/99) - Signed a 2 year extension (2024-25) in August 2023
• (R) Loch Rawlinson (1/6/05) - Signed a 1 year extension (2025) in September 2024
• (R-B) Coen Livingstone (25/5/05) - Signed a 1 year extension (2025) in September 2024
• (R-B) Malakai Champion (17/5/06) - Automatic 1 year contract (2025) when added as a Cat B Rookie in November 2024
• (R) Jacob Newton (20/3/06/) - Automatic 6 month contract (2025) when drafted in May 2025

Provisional 2025 Draft order

Spoiler

 

[WCE777]

the next aaron naughton (scatter gun forward who should be a backman)

next generation ruck who is athletic, TDK type but a bit taller, he kicks for goal like a ruckman

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Has anyone cracked the Harry Edwards Code sports article yet? I didn't know he was close to being traded to the Dees.

Was talked about back then. Demons offered him a 4 year deal compared to our 2. We upped our deal to 4 and he stayed

 

[Keys]

Was talked about back then. Demons offered him a 4 year deal compared to our 2. We upped our deal to 4 and he stayed

* Three years

Contracted to 2027

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

Maynard re-signing at the Pies helps to protect our R2 pick, which unfortunately is likely to again have a 3 in front of it. I was expecting a band 2 compo if he went to Arden St.

 

[Grahame]

Same as what has been previously reported. Vic clubs believe he is stay for 2026 but he could still change his mind….

Breaking News: EXCLUSIVE - Harley might go, Harley might stay!

 

[Grahame]

The way the AvFL works against us in the west, and the croweaters, means we really should be working in conjunction with Freo to make WA footy, or non-Vic / Nepo Baby clubs, as strong as possible.

Both WA clubs at the top end of the table should be the aim.

Given, that by accident or design, the cards are so heavily stacked against nonVic clubs, and especially the WA clubs this makes perfect sense.

We want the best result for the Eagles and we know the vAFL will only reluctantly level the playing field. (For example, the fairest outcome to compensate for Gather Round would have been one Vic club giving up a home game every five years, instead NM has to sell a home game thus reducing the games their supporters can attend.)

So if that means dealing with our pretend enemy (Freo) to overcome the disadvantages caused by our real enemy (vAFL) then I say yes.

Obviously, we can’t be seen to be ‘colluding’ with Freo but I’m sure there must be ‘creative’ (aka Geelong) ways we can help each other with players.

 

[Deplorable trumpster]

I don't know why the AFL isn't stopping clubs from offering mega deals. Given the nature of AFL and the relatively short career relative to other sports (plus the concussion issue prompting sudden retirements) there should be no contracts over 5 years. You are going to end up with situations where clubs are anchored to the bottom of the ladder for 5 - 8 year periods because the have away a few mega deals and 3 or 4 of them went bad.

 

[Deplorable trumpster]

speaking of reckless, simmo on whatley this morning was painting himself as very reckless when it comes to list management.

I'm para-phasing here but, as they discussed the merits of the pickett deal, simmo said he didnt care what a player was paid or what it cost to get them in. He just wanted that puzzle piece. When GW insisted that Pickett now has a responsibility to be a consistent top 3 player at melbourne for the next 10 years, Simmo disagreed saying he just had to play his role.

Was always a fan of simmo, but not hard to see why our list got to where it was and players becoming complacent.

This is why you need a strong list manager and footy manager and also need to not have an overly matey and back slapping relationship between them and the coach. Coaches are motivated by their own self interest (as most people are). They are always going to want the Now to be prioritised over the Future. If what they want and what makes their life easier now might cause problems for the club in 3 - 5 years time they don't care because they might not be at the club then. Thats what Simpson is admitting to and most coaches behave the same way. In retrospect we probably did have an overly cozy dynamic between club leaders at the club post 2018 and Simpson's wish for all players to be retained should have been challenged internally.

 

[Farang83150]

Darcey back for the dogs tonight will be interesting to watch.
Dogs to get up, really hope it's a close one but not holding my breath!
Re Pickett, don't blame melb for going the big offer, contracts are ripped up constantly in the afl so who knows how long he's there, happy freo missed out on him and will LMAO if Jackson goes back east.

 

[Doashuey]

I don't know why the AFL isn't stopping clubs from offering mega deals. Given the nature of AFL and the relatively short career relative to other sports (plus the concussion issue prompting sudden retirements) there should be no contracts over 5 years. You are going to end up with situations where clubs are anchored to the bottom of the ladder for 5 - 8 year periods because the have away a few mega deals and 3 or 4 of them went bad.

Restriction of trade laws would prevent any such move I'd imagine.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

He Inherited most of the players from wooshas time that got the premiership and then proceeded to **** the place up royally with these attitudes and ideas about list management.

Exactly half of the 2018 premiership side joined the club after Worsfold left,
- Ryan, Rioli, Barrass, Cole, Venables, Duggan, Vardy, Sheed, Yeo, Redden, Jetta.

 

[Obeanie1]

Restriction of trade laws would prevent any such move I'd imagine.

More price fixing than restraint of trade.

A group of buyers (clubs) get together with the governong body (AFL) and agree to fix prices and contract lengths.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

More price fixing than restraint of trade.

A group of buyers (clubs) get together with the governong body (AFL) and agree to fix prices and contract lengths.

It’s restraint of trade, but if the AFLPA agrees to it it’s probably going to hold up.

I think the AFL would struggle to get them to agree to limit their players’ earning potential in that way, though.

 

[Farang83150]

Jacob Farrow getting wraps on gettable, Jordan Dawson

12

Jordan Dawson

Age

28

Ht

190cm

Wt

91kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

11.4

4star

HB

5.7

4star

M

4.8

5star

T

2.8

4star

CL

0.6

3star

D

15.7

4star

K

10.9

4star

HB

4.9

3star

M

2.9

3star

T

2.0

3star

CL

0.4

3star

D

11.8

3star

K

7.8

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

5.0

5star

T

3.0

5star

CL

0.6

3star

type!

 

[Grahame]

It’s restraint of trade, but if the AFLPA agrees to it it’s probably going to hold up.

I think the AFL would struggle to get them to agree to limit their players’ earning potential in that way, though.

The other question is what is a ‘contract’ anyway? It used to mean something watertight and binding.

 

[Dom sheed pocket]

I don't know why the AFL isn't stopping clubs from offering mega deals. Given the nature of AFL and the relatively short career relative to other sports (plus the concussion issue prompting sudden retirements) there should be no contracts over 5 years. You are going to end up with situations where clubs are anchored to the bottom of the ladder for 5 - 8 year periods because the have away a few mega deals and 3 or 4 of them went bad.

Becuase we infantilise the clubs enough as it is.

Let them work out what list management strategy and what salary cap structure fits their club best.

as pointed out, having a limit on contract length would probably be a restraint of trade that would be difficult to justify the necessity of.

 

[Keys]

The other question is what is a ‘contract’ anyway? It used to mean something watertight and binding.

Player contracts in the AFL are very much a one way street, especially the long term deals

The player gets security and a guaranteed income with no real downside. If his form drops or has an injury he still gets paid and the club gets all the criticism for signing him up to a stupidly long deal.

If he improves beyond expectations and/or is at the back end of a front loaded contract he can suddenly get homesick and ask for a trade. Either gets traded to a new club on a better contract or renegotiates the deal at his existing club

Clubs have no such protection. All they have is the ability not to trade a player who wants out and don’t even have the power to offload the player to the club that provides the best trade offer without the player’s consent

 

[Dom sheed pocket]

Player contracts in the AFL are very much a one way street, especially the long term deals

The player gets security and a guaranteed income with no real downside. If his form drops or has an injury he still gets paid and the club gets all the criticism for signing him up to a stupidly long deal.

If he improves beyond expectations and/or is at the back end of a front loaded contract he can suddenly get homesick and ask for a trade. Either gets traded to a new club on a better contract or renegotiates the deal at his existing club

Clubs have no such protection. All they have is the ability not to trade a player who wants out and don’t even have the power to offload the player to the club that provides the best trade offer without the player’s consent

Agree with the general gist of this.

The obvious fix is to allow trading without consent. The only way the AFLPa would allow it, is if it was a concession for a very big pay rise and only applied to the highest paid players in the comp. Might be able to exchange trading without consent for the top 10% earners, in exchange for a big rise in the next deal for example.

 

[garlic munchers]

Given, that by accident or design, the cards are so heavily stacked against nonVic clubs, and especially the WA clubs this makes perfect sense.

We want the best result for the Eagles and we know the vAFL will only reluctantly level the playing field. (For example, the fairest outcome to compensate for Gather Round would have been one Vic club giving up a home game every five years, instead NM has to sell a home game thus reducing the games their supporters can attend.)

So if that means dealing with our pretend enemy (Freo) to overcome the disadvantages caused by our real enemy (vAFL) then I say yes.

Obviously, we can’t be seen to be ‘colluding’ with Freo but I’m sure there must be ‘creative’ (aka Geelong) ways we can help each other with players.

Pre being shite, I would have roundly rejected working with the Purps.

Now, bring it on.......... at least till we are on our feet then f them.

Presumably they would feel the same (no upside to helping a cripple, if he's going to mug you as soon as he can run).

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

The other question is what is a ‘contract’ anyway? It used to mean something watertight and binding.

Webster’s dictionary defines it as an agreement under the law which is unbreakable. Which is unbreakable.

Excuse me, I have to use the restroom.

 

[Altum Volantes]

Five former top-10 picks among young mids who could move

Cal Twomey says Elijah Tsatas is among a host of midfielders likely to seek a move at the end of the season

www.afl.com.au

More accurately, 'Young mids who are either out of contract or have a year left, that aren't playing regular AFL footy - ft. some top picks that might just be busts!'

That said, if we are keen on any of those coming out of contract in 2025, the club simply has to walk them to the PSD. Don't make it a stand off, just make the intention clear for all parties and use the mechanism available to get ahead the player.

So Erasmus, Sheldrick, Phillips or Robertson.

I think it would be Sheldrick or Phillips in reality.

 

[Donkers]

Agree with the general gist of this.

The obvious fix is to allow trading without consent. The only way the AFLPa would allow it, is if it was a concession for a very big pay rise and only applied to the highest paid players in the comp. Might be able to exchange trading without consent for the top 10% earners, in exchange for a big rise in the next deal for example.

Players just aren't paid enough for trading without consent. If the salary cap was 100m then I could see it happening but it would still just likely lead to stronger vic clubs. There just isn't the money in the industry.

A limit could be placed on contract lengths. But it would be very hard to get passed. The only way I think it could be even remotely legal is that if the AFL (who distributes funds and effectively pays the players) would have to say to clubs, for a club to receive fund distribution they can't offer more than a 5 year deal. Now in theory it's not a restraint of trade as a club (if rich enough, none are) could in theory offer a deal above 5 years but knowing they wouldn't receive any afl funds for the period the contract is above 5 years.

 

[Big_Birdy]

Restriction of trade laws would prevent any such move I'd imagine.

The draft already breaches those laws. Until someone challenges it (as happened to the NRL) then it won't matter.

The AFL would probably go begging to the Federal Government to change the legislation and exempt professional sport anyway if a court challenge happened (as is the case in the US IIRC).

 

[Obeanie1]

It’s restraint of trade, but if the AFLPA agrees to it it’s probably going to hold up.

I think the AFL would struggle to get them to agree to limit their players’ earning potential in that way, though.

How are players being restrained from moving and plying their trade elsewhere?

They are free to change employers or even change competitions.

Employers agreeing to fix wages etc isn't restraint of trade from my non legal background and limitedunderstanding after 5 min on Google.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

The draft already breaches those laws. Until someone challenges it (as happened to the NRL) then it won't matter.

Maybe it does and maybe it doesn’t. Because of the nature of elite sport they’re allowed to have restraints that are reasonable to maintain an even competition.

Whether or not the draft is a reasonable restraint of trade would make an interesting court case.