'Destination clubs' - Fallout the AFL didn't see coming?

[Simon_Says]

Left out Lever. I've heard Melbourne called lots of things but never a destination club.

Not sure why he moved. It wasn't money, success or opportunity. Maybe just to be in Melbourne.

Despite the fact that last year Jordan Lewis did exactly that, called the Dees a "Destination Club"

 

[Acinath]

Isn't he getting like 800k as a 22 year old 2nd tall defender?

3rd tall defender. Might have to be 2nd this year, might be in trouble.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

You offered Motlop 100k more than Port but he chose Port. Definitely money is a factor but not here. He chose success over money. Tell Tex.

I hope not, but Motlop's choice may have conceivably been as much a subtle F you to Geelong out the door as him specifically choosing Port over Adelaide.

The Cats would have had an end of first round compensation with a more lucrative offer from Adelaide, now it looks like being a second rounder. Adelaide's compensation to Geelong would have been a very handy trading chip for players like Jack Watts, who now seems set to play for...Port.

As for destination clubs, lowering the floor of the salary cap to say 85-90% would certainly help and I don't see the downside, as end of year profit doesn't end up in the pockets of a team owner, like in overseas sports. That, and removing the heavy front/backloading of contracts would make things interesting and much more difficult for top teams to make a competitive offer to a free agent.

 

[marty36]

I hope not, but Motlop's choice may have conceivably been as much a subtle F you to Geelong out the door as him specifically choosing Port over Adelaide.

The Cats would have had an end of first round compensation with a more lucrative offer from Adelaide, now it looks like being a second rounder. Adelaide's compensation to Geelong would have been a very handy trading chip for players like Jack Watts, who now seems set to play for...Port.

As for destination clubs, lowering the floor of the salary cap to say 85-90% would certainly help and I don't see the downside, as end of year profit doesn't end up in the pockets of a team owner, like in overseas sports. That, and removing the heavy front/backloading of contracts would make things interesting and much more difficult for top teams to make a competitive offer to a free agent.

That offer from Adelaide as what Kane Cornes advised

Kane Cornes = fake news


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[marty36]

I hope not, but Motlop's choice may have conceivably been as much a subtle F you to Geelong out the door as him specifically choosing Port over Adelaide.

The Cats would have had an end of first round compensation with a more lucrative offer from Adelaide, now it looks like being a second rounder. Adelaide's compensation to Geelong would have been a very handy trading chip for players like Jack Watts, who now seems set to play for...Port.

As for destination clubs, lowering the floor of the salary cap to say 85-90% would certainly help and I don't see the downside, as end of year profit doesn't end up in the pockets of a team owner, like in overseas sports. That, and removing the heavy front/backloading of contracts would make things interesting and much more difficult for top teams to make a competitive offer to a free agent.

How would lowering the salary cap help with retaining profits didn't thirteen clubs make a loss and then the others if you make more money have to give it to the s**t clubs anyway


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[PowerForGood]

1. Fremantle is the same, they are also a new club, so there’s no differentiation between them for WA players wanting to return West (and for the WA sides it is usually WA players wanting home).

2. There’s less puppet strings between the WAFL and the WA clubs then the SANFL and Adelaide. Adelaide now officially has their own license, but it’s still the same SANFL / Crows old boys network. This is incredibly toxic and nepotistic.

3. Adelaide are a business, not a club. There aren’t club rooms fans can watch away matches at, or interact with players, current and past for the Crows. Fan engagement is a tightly controlled exercise of star / fans (/customers). Adelaide fans can support them, but never truly be a part of the club, like most clubs, where fans can really feel a part of the club. It’s anathema to Port fans that separation, but they don’t even think about. It’s anathema to how almost every player has experienced football, as a junior and at other clubs. It leads to players feeling they are interchangeable commodities (take the latest example of Adelaide saying they’ve turned Levers original pick, into two first round picks, by investing three years in him, like he was a mutual fund, not a human being). Their inability to relate to players as more than just staff is well known at this point across the league. Most players want a good pay day, but with relatively even salaries, having a workplace that doesn’t treat you as a soulless machine turns a lot off.

Of course there’ll be the usual retorts that this is all crap and it was just money / coincidence that Adelaide has done worse then other clubs. That’s fine with me, as a Port supporter I’m more then happy for them to keep their heads stuck in the sand. It means we’ll keep getting the players we want, whilst they keep losing theirs.

A little bit harsh as the Crows have softened a little bit over the years (certainly Eddie Betts has had a bit to do with that) but it seems to have not had the effect it should have.

 

[MarcusP2]

You offered Motlop 100k more than Port but he chose Port. Definitely money is a factor but not here. He chose success over money. Tell Tex.

Didn't Port offer a four year deal? If Adelaide only offered three, then that's less money.

 

[JackFlash]

For the one billionth time.....

The AFL have ALWAYS played there finals between two Victorian clubs at the MCG. They have never played them at KP. Even as early as last year, Geelong played Hawthorn at the MCG despite finishing ahead of them on the ladder.

There was no fuss made whatsoever. None. Why is that? Why now whinge because it was Richmond and not Hawthorn?

With a combined membership of over 120,000 people, why would you only allow 34,000 to see the game live? Ridiculous.

The grand final is always going to be played at the MCG. If you cannot win there then you better design a team and game style that suits the ground because unless you do, you'll never win a flag. It is that obvious. Everyone knows this. Instead of complaining about the way things are, just go out and fix your own team's issues to overcome this hurdle because it will always be there.

Simple.

The AFL were wrong in doing so. The AFL receive $2.5 billion for TV rights, buy a TV set in future because you're gonna need it! Finals will be played at KP if Geelong qualify higher no matter who they play, it's only a matter of time. That was BS this year and you know it, the live crowd must be taken out of it nowadays. It's the TV audience the AFL are getting paid for in finals! My advice to the Tigers and the big clubs in future is to qualify higher! Gil can't have it both ways. Geelong are no longer a destination club, we can't attract flies to a dustbin this trade period. finals losses do make a difference and it will be increasingly difficult to recover as players seek out the destination clubs! Perhaps the AFL should just bite the bullet and kick out 6 Melbourne based clubs and go to a 12 team competition? 8 Interstate teams and 4 Victorian teams! There you go Tigers, Bombers, Blues and Pies and stuff the rest? I can see that working

 

[gungho]

Why people want to play at certain clubs is fairly complicated I reckon and not balck and white.
Freo have had the following people over the last 2 years nominate that they want to join their club: Hamling, Kerston, McCarthy, Wilson, Brad Hill and (Matera?)
Hilly I can kind of understand - given that he's a brother of Stephen. It pains me to say this being a passionate supporter, but, for a variety of reasons, I reckon Freo is about as far away from a destination club as you can get. Why did these players not choose West Coast, or, why don't they just stay at the clubs they're at?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

The AFL were wrong in doing so. The AFL receive $2.5 billion for TV rights, buy a TV set in future because you're gonna need it! Finals will be played at KP if Geelong qualify higher no matter who they play, it's only a matter of time. That was BS this year and you know it, the live crowd must be taken out of it nowadays. It's the TV audience the AFL are getting paid for in finals! My advice to the Tigers and the big clubs in future is to qualify higher! Gil can't have it both ways. Geelong are no longer a destination club, we can't attract flies to a dustbin this trade period. finals losses do make a difference and it will be increasingly difficult to recover as players seek out the destination clubs! Perhaps the AFL should just bite the bullet and kick out 6 Melbourne based clubs and go to a 12 team competition? 8 Interstate teams and 4 Victorian teams! There you go Tigers, Bombers, Blues and Pies and stuff the rest? I can see that working

You obviously are one eyed. You cannot see the fact you get a tremendous home ground advantage that gives you the ability in the H&A season to finish higher than clubs that play at more neutral grounds. Despite that advantage you ONLY finished half a game ahead of of us. But then again you can't see this.

 

[JackFlash]

You obviously are one eyed. You cannot see the fact you get a tremendous home ground advantage that gives you the ability in the H&A season to finish higher than clubs that play at more neutral grounds. Despite that advantage you ONLY finished half a game ahead of of us. But then again you can't see this.

I have one eye open at all times, enough to see that 7 home games compared to Adelaide and Richmond who played 14 times at home in 2017 including two and three finals is a huge advantage! No wonder they played off! Man oh man do i love silly footy fans, it's a laugh a minute. Geelong played half the number of home games than any other team in the top 4 and i'm the one who is blind?

Whether it's a politician whose point has been refuted or a one eyed footy fan who has been definitively proven insane, they will immediately shift to the next talking point that in their mad mind backs up their side, not even skipping a beat. Forget the facts, the facts don't enter into it. They keep fighting to defend their position even after it is factually shown to be untrue. What's really weird is that process of sticking to your guns even after you've been proven definitively wrong is apparently the entire reason humans invented arguing. 14 home home games to 7...where exactly is this tremendous home ground advantage? How wrong is that? What am i not seeing here?

The Internet has introduced a golden age of ill-informed arguments. On Big Footy everyone is a pundit and the very wiring of our brains ensures that all these lively debates only make us dumber and more narrow-minded. Logic and reason mean little to footy fans, it does not compute. Reasoning doesn't have this function of helping us to get better beliefss and make better decisions, it's purely a social phenomenon. It evolved to help us convince others and to be careful when others try to convince us, truth and accuracy were beside the point.
"We won and you lost" is the only argument a footy fan can comprehend, everything else is irrelevant to the conversation. It's all okay really, you're from a long line of people who finally got to the winner's circle again and by ignoring facts in favor of advancing your side... the argument falls flat very quickly. I understand that.
Playing 14 home games a year is one hell of an attraction for a player wishing to move clubs. Now that brings probability into play. Our brains are great for doing a lot of things. Calculating probability is not one of them.
In real life Our brains are not meant to instinctively understand any equation more complex than this:

Huge Croc on river bed = Run Away

In football terms that means : 14 games at home = Good bloody chance of playing finals! Player managers calculate that probability.

 

[master bate]

Free agency was never going to favour the small or lower down the ladder clubs. That's a myth.

However if the salary cap and draft are enforced well clubs will cycle through more and it won't be as hard for others to rise up.

I don't agree with the compensation system but at least it is weighted in favour of the lower down the ladder clubs.

Port's current signing spree is surely linked to the 20% jump in salary cap. And they are most likely giving up 5 depth players - Impey, Trengove, Young, Lobbe, Ah Chee - to make it happen.

They should finish close to the top 4 over the next few years but after that Boak, Ebert, Grey, Ryder, Hartlett and Dixon will be 30+ and the new signings will be closing in on that range, so it might cost them down the track. They'll fall down the ladder and another team will have a go.

They are being rewarded for having a well regarded coach, a well regarded fitness team and spending money.

 

[The Donners]

"Destination club" is a bullshit throw away buzz word utilised by "AFL commentators" that can't be bothered to do any proper research (i.e. 98% of them)

It is not a quantifiable concept.

/thread.

There are very few commentators that are journalists or all that educated for that matter. Like most in the AFL media, they provide little other than cookie cutter-PC drivel.

End of rant.

Lol

 

[Shezza]

This having to use 95% of the cap is an absolute joke and makes it impossible for clubs like Carlton, Brisbane, gold coast and north to get out of the bottom 4.

We have to pay crap players way overs just to stay within the cap. Based on his output Rockliff was getting way more than he should have been and was able to hold the club to ransom. Daniel Rich is on over 600k.

This continuing cycle means that we are now offering Charlie Cameron double what the crows are paying him.

If we didn't have to use the entire cap we could lure gun players on bigger contracts. Instead the only players we can only lure average spuds (Bell, Bastinac and now (Cameron, Whitecross and Hartung) on substancially higher deals than they would get elsewhere, just so we can stay within the 95% cap floor. It's a farce

Get creative - front load contracts etc

 

[Scotland]

LOL destination clubs.

According to 2017 it's destination Port Adelaide.

 

[schmuttt]

Im sure richmond wasnt a destination club for the 37 years prior to this year.
We literally had nathan brown sign and thats it.

If smaller clubs built a culture and performed, they too would be considered a destination club - ala sydney.

Would they rather win in front of 30k at etihad or lose in front of 60k at the g?

I think there is a whole other side to it too. What about the preassure and scrutiny the player is under at a club like richmond or collingwood? Ty Vickery was broken by it.

Exactly. I mean Goddard and Prestia aside Essendon and Richmond over the last 10 years haven’t attracted big names at all, and now Essendon finally pull their finger out at the trade table there is an imbalance? Ridiculous.

 

[schmuttt]

Lol this is the first time in so long that a quality player nominated us

Yep. Even Garlett chose a horrid 2014 Melbourne side over the finalist in Essendon.

 

[Pessimistic]

I do credit the recent AFL management for their efforts to 'even up' the comp.

However the free agency thing I think is backfiring.

Aside from keeping the AFLPA happy, the intention and/or expectation was that combined with the salary cap, Free Agency would help the lower clubs improve faster.

The theory was that because they had a rubbish list, they'd have more salary cap space available to pinch these free agents from the top clubs that were bursting with talent.

However it seems to be doing the opposite.

In the past decade, plenty of guys leave for 'success', over money! Which is pretty much the precise opposite of what the AFL wanted and anticipated!

But I don't think that's the biggest issue. The new problem that the AFL faces, is the new concept of 'destination clubs'.

And the reason this is such an issue, is because it's been caused directly by the AFL's 'maximisation' policy.

By giving the Essendon's and Collingwood's handouts every year and 'maximising' the AFL's product by turning these clubs into mega-clubs - they've inadvertently made them destination clubs for players.

Players will take less money, to get to play on ANZAC Day.
Players will take less money to play in 'blockbuster' games on the MCG every second week.

Even this season, with the AFL playing the Semi Final in front of 95000 fans at Richmond's home ground - instead of in front of 30k in Geelong, the AFL are not only handing Richmond an advantage on game day, they're handing them a major advantage for future trade periods over smaller clubs by creating this 'destination club' culture.

If I was a player, and could choose to play on Sunday afternoon at Docklands in front of 30k people, or in a primetime slot at the G every week in front of 60k I know what I'd choose.

And it's becoming the new major factor in attracting talent to your club.


Unfortunately though, not all clubs are offered the same opportunity in this regard, due to the AFL's maximisation model.

How can smaller clubs expect to compete in this regard?


Discuss....

In the last decade

Geelong 3 flags Richmond 1. So Geelong are being disadvantaged?

 

[marty36]

LOL destination clubs.

According to 2017 it's destination Port Adelaide.

Although then we here the cats are getting a first for Motlop which means good coin is being paid

Destination = $$$$$$




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[WilloTree]

Lol this is the first time in so long that a quality player nominated us

I'm telling James Stewart you said that.. and Craig Bird. You're in trouble now.

 

[Cdog71]

The AFL were wrong in doing so. The AFL receive $2.5 billion for TV rights, buy a TV set in future because you're gonna need it! Finals will be played at KP if Geelong qualify higher no matter who they play, it's only a matter of time. That was BS this year and you know it, the live crowd must be taken out of it nowadays. It's the TV audience the AFL are getting paid for in finals! My advice to the Tigers and the big clubs in future is to qualify higher! Gil can't have it both ways. Geelong are no longer a destination club, we can't attract flies to a dustbin this trade period. finals losses do make a difference and it will be increasingly difficult to recover as players seek out the destination clubs! Perhaps the AFL should just bite the bullet and kick out 6 Melbourne based clubs and go to a 12 team competition? 8 Interstate teams and 4 Victorian teams! There you go Tigers, Bombers, Blues and Pies and stuff the rest? I can see that working

You've played one final at Kardinia park in 114 years.
Let it go

 

[WilloTree]

Go-home factor and travel far bigger issues than this so called 'destination club' idea.

Would you rather play 16-18 games at home and only travel across the country 1 or 2 times a year? Or fly across the Nullarbor every second week?

Until this is sorted the rest is gravy.

 

[Damon_3388]

I hope not, but Motlop's choice may have conceivably been as much a subtle F you to Geelong out the door as him specifically choosing Port over Adelaide.

The Cats would have had an end of first round compensation with a more lucrative offer from Adelaide, now it looks like being a second rounder. Adelaide's compensation to Geelong would have been a very handy trading chip for players like Jack Watts, who now seems set to play for...Port.

I would assume Port Adelaide's rich history with Indigenous players, and the fact that Motlop has had relatives play at the club, would be more of a factor than anything else.

As long as they departing player gets to where they want to go, why would or should they care what the club they're leaving gets in return?

It's only the stupid AFL system that has uncontacted players useable as trade currency. In most other professional sports, if your contract ends, you just sign with another team, and your former team just gets a roster spot and salary cap space/freed up money as "compensation", and they just re-load and go again. You know, logical.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Despite the fact that last year Jordan Lewis did exactly that, called the Dees a "Destination Club for the upper class "

EFA

 

[Chezz]

Get creative - front load contracts etc

Yeah that's a great idea and I'm sure the lions have tried that.

Only problem is no good players (except for Beams) have ever wanted to come to Brisbane.