Free Agency is a disaster for the competition and needs a huge rethink

Remove this Banner Ad

The Final Word said:
The problem (which as I said earlier appears to only be about a literal handful of players in Buddy, Lynch and Cameron) appears to be that lower ranked clubs don't appear to be able to get their hands on free agents. Don't you think putting a price on a free agents head might be a disincentive to head to a lower ranked team?
Click to expand...

Well, Carlton have apparently won the race for Williams - they've been out of the finals since 2013, last legitimately qualified for them in 2011, and finished the season in 11th. Do they qualify as a lower-ranked team?

Aiden Corr is off to North Melbourne - they finished second bottom.

Part of the free-agent landscape is seeing players traded ("pre-agents") in the year before their free agent year. Examples such as:
- Dylan Shiel (Essendon, finished 11th)
- Steven May (Melbourne, 5th)
- Chad Wingard (Hawthorn, 4th)
- Lachie Neale (Brisbane, 15th)

Seems to me that lower teams aren't having too many issues
 
derp de derp said:
It’s probably been said 100 times but I’ll reiterate, Hawthorn has lost the most FA’s since inception and gained 2 the most successful FA acquisition was James Frawley the other is never to spoken of ever again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Geez dude. Not a fan of Ricky Henderson? :)
 
The Final Word said:
From someone who remembers the 10 year effort to replace Gary Ablett Senior, it's pretty funny that Geelong is such an apparent destination club. We were basically on our hands and knees begging Jade Rawlings, Scott Lucas and Daniel Bradshaw to come to the club without any success.
Click to expand...
Geelongs been lucky with a great crop of players coming from the Geelong area, means you've been able to trade for alot of blokes because there's no competition.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

derp de derp said:
It’s probably been said 100 times but I’ll reiterate, Hawthorn has lost the most FA’s since inception and gained 2 the most successful FA acquisition was James Frawley the other is never to spoken of ever again.
Click to expand...

Vickery
Vickery
Vickery
Vickery

It just rolls off the tongue.
 
NZ_Tiger said:
I’d like to see free agency eligibility drop to 5 years. There would be far more players available it couldn’t just end up at the top clubs. Everyone would get a chance as the trough would be much deeper.
Click to expand...

Makes some sense. At 26-27 they're thinking about their football mortality and adding a flag to the CV.
 
nick1408 said:
On the surface this seems a good option but what it would lead to is the clubs at the bottom not wanting to part with pick 2 for a top tier free agent while the premier will be more than happy to part with pick 18 (which realistically will end up a lower pick than that after all the other bidding and concession picks are added in)
Click to expand...
I was thinking that maybe the rule apply to a top 8 team. The bottom 10 it could be a second round pick.
 
Bunk Moreland said:
It was a stupid, baseless statement. Teams “are happy to” sit at the bottom of the ladder for extended periods to rebuild. To suggest it’s a matter of attitude is laughable. Some clubs have zero choice but to rebuild via the draft.
Click to expand...

You introduced a randomly produced decade long stat to "prove" the comps getting more uneven because of free agency, but weirdly ignored when I pointed out that 8 of the last 10 flag teams haven't had any FAs, and the other 2 only a single one each.

Just perhaps there's other reasons at play?

But no "frEe AgenCy isNt fair"

:drunk:
 
amazingjoshy said:
You introduced a randomly produced decade long stat to "prove" the comps getting more uneven because of free agency, but weirdly ignored when I pointed out that 8 of the last 10 flag teams haven't had any FAs, and the other 2 only a single one each.

Just perhaps there's other reasons at play?

But no "frEe AgenCy isNt fair"

:drunk:
Click to expand...
Free agency has only being going since 2012.

Therefore, its 2/7 premierships.

Regardless who wins this Saturday, it will be 3/8 of premiership teams.

Likely, that the Cats, Tigers, Lions, or Port might win next year as well.
 
eastfreo75 said:
Free agency has only being going since 2012.

Therefore, its 2/7 premierships.

Regardless who wins this Saturday, it will be 3/8 of premiership teams.

Likely, that the Cats or Tigers might win next year as well.
Click to expand...

If you go back to my original reply i already pointed that out (about FA starting in 2012)

Old mates "stat" was about the last decade, so I included the last decade of flags.

As a side note, the decade before that we had two teams share 5 of the flags....
 
Bunk Moreland said:
A pathological urge? I said there’s a trend there and I think they’ll review it. Get your hand off it.

Yes, Geelong - they’ve got arguably the league’s best player, in his prime, via free agency. Without him no, I don’t think they’d have been able to compete at this level the past few years. And now they’re bringing an All Australian Coleman Medal winner.

And before you start with the “Dangerfield was a trade!” crap, it was a free agency move. Dangerfield just gamed it to get Adelaide a little more compensation, though still well less than his true worth.
Click to expand...

When Danger left for Geelong, Adelaide was a better team than the Cats.

The whole premise of this thread is that the top teams are getting all the FAs and it isn't fair.

The Cats were 10th and traded their top 10 pick in picking him up.

Isn't that the perfect example of a team in the bottom half using the FA rules to try and contend?
 
amazingjoshy said:
The whole premise of this thread is that the top teams are getting all the FAs and it isn't fair.

The Cats were 10th and traded their top 10 pick in picking him up.
Click to expand...
To be fair, the premise is that the best teams are getting the best FAs - the big fish, if you will.
While we didn’t have a great 2015, we had just made finals for eight straight years including two flags. But I agree that we weren’t a top side at the time. However, given the go-home factor and Geelong’s unique geographical case, Danger is perhaps a bit of a unique case.
 
Topkent said:
Geelongs been lucky with a great crop of players coming from the Geelong area, means you've been able to trade for alot of blokes because there's no competition.
Click to expand...
Hard to disagree when you look at Dangerfield, Dahlhaus, Rohan, Stevens, etc. But it's a bit interesting when you consider there are 9 teams in Melbourne with a population of 4.5 million, or about 500,000 per team's worth. And then you have Geelong with about 280,000 in the greater area (stretching to Lorne) and a further 120,000 odd from the edge of that boundary through to the SA border. It's not a significantly massive area population wise but there definitely seems to be a draw for a few to "come home".
 
The Final Word said:
Hard to disagree when you look at Dangerfield, Dahlhaus, Rohan, Stevens, etc. But it's a bit interesting when you consider there are 9 teams in Melbourne with a population of 4.5 million, or about 500,000 per team's worth. And then you have Geelong with about 280,000 in the greater area (stretching to Lorne) and a further 120,000 odd from the edge of that boundary through to the SA border. It's not a significantly massive area population wise but there definitely seems to be a draw for a few to "come home".
Click to expand...
Difference is though you have the go home factor in your favour from that perspective, danger for instance owning farms in moggs etc. Just means you can probably offer them a little less money because you ain't competing with the other 9 Melbourne clubs.

Is what it is though.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

master bate said:
The NBA model is far from flawless.

Young players get traded all over the place which stuffs their development, we shouldn't have players traded without their consent here, the players simply don't make enough to deserve that treatment.

As far as I know there's not a single player with a no trade clause. You have to be in the league for 8 years and 4 with the same team. There are guys with trade protections but they are guys on one year deals.

Bird rights allow teams to sign their own free agents but mainly that's about not going over the cap as it's a soft cap.

The restricted free agency system does seem to work well, that's the best part of the system and ensures most good young players stick with their current team. The biggest problem with it is the players have so much power as individuals that they have learnt to demand trades with years left of their deals.

It's entirely possible that the AFL crafts a better free agency system that forces top players to be traded for whilst opening up a free market for less valued players. It doesn't need the downfall of players traded against their will or other unsavory things to work.
Click to expand...
I'm just a big fan of it. Flawless was probably the wrong word to use as there will will always be the odd "unfair" deal.
I like that model because more often then not it enables the team to maximise their asset rather than be forced to take cents on the dollar.

I agree one of the main issues that this exact model wouldn't work for the AFL is the value of the contracts as naturally it would be a lot easier to stomach being traded to a team you don't want to be at if you're still getting paid 10-15m for the season rather than $150,000 - $200,000. There needs to be a level of compromise from the players.

Bird rights are great as it effectively encourages loyalty from the players as they can sign larger & longer contracts with a team they've been with for a while. This only works as there are max deals in the NBA where no such thing exists in the AFL now.

The other thing I think is a great idea is the 2x2 contacts rookies sign. First 2 years are guaranteed & the team has the option to extended the contract for an additional 2 years which takes the player to restricted free agency (unless an extensions is agreed upon by both parties). I don't see why this wouldn't work in the AFL - it would not only help avoid situations where players like Hately & Caldwell request a trade after GWS have put 2 years into their development but it could also influence clubs to think more astutely about WHO they draft & their likelihood of wanting to stay. Most clubs won't want to commit 4 years of development to a flight risk.

I understand all elements of the NBA model won't work in the AFL but it's no doubt somewhere they could pinch a few ideas from to even the playing field a bit.
 
amazingjoshy said:
You introduced a randomly produced decade long stat to "prove" the comps getting more uneven because of free agency, but weirdly ignored when I pointed out that 8 of the last 10 flag teams haven't had any FAs, and the other 2 only a single one each.

Just perhaps there's other reasons at play?

But no "frEe AgenCy isNt fair"

:drunk:
Click to expand...

I wasn't proving anything. Once again, there's a trend that less teams are winning flags. And once again, I think they'll look into the reasons why. It's fun repeating yourself over, and over, and over again for those who seemingly can't read. On free agency, I think you'd be able to mount a case that without Lynch and Dangerfield, the 2019 and 2020 flags may well have gone elsewhere. And Geelong also picking up Cameron obviously raises the question again.
 
Topkent said:
Difference is though you have the go home factor in your favour from that perspective, danger for instance owning farms in moggs etc. Just means you can probably offer them a little less money because you ain't competing with the other 9 Melbourne clubs.

Is what it is though.
Click to expand...
It’s both a boon and a blessing. Means that we miss out on players who want to play regularly in front of big crowds and live in Melbourne.
 
Bunk Moreland said:
And before you start with the “Dangerfield was a trade!” crap, it was a free agency move. Dangerfield just gamed it to get Adelaide a little more compensation, though still well less than his true worth.
Click to expand...

Do you understand that there is a significant difference between Dangerfield going as a FA and him being traded? Namely, where the compensation came from (however inadequate you feel it was).

It wasn’t a “free agency move”. Danger exercised his right as a RFA after 7 years at the Crows.
The Crows matched the offer to get more. The Crows and Geelong worked out a trade to get the player to where he wanted to be. If the Crows had finished bottom that season and been offered pick 2 I doubt they’d have matched it in the same way Gold Coast didn’t match the Tigers offer to Lynch who landed them pick 3.
 
iameviljez said:
To be fair, the premise is that the best teams are getting the best FAs - the big fish, if you will.
While we didn’t have a great 2015, we had just made finals for eight straight years including two flags. But I agree that we weren’t a top side at the time. However, given the go-home factor and Geelong’s unique geographical case, Danger is perhaps a bit of a unique case.
Click to expand...

The general view at the time was that the Cats had their time and were about to fall off the cliff, and the Crows were a team on the up. Given the Crows 2017, Danger probably cost himself a flag by leaving. It's simply great list management by the Cats using the rules at their disposal.

Using Danger now as an example of FA only advantaging the teams at the top (as some posters on here are doing) is rewriting history.
 
amazingjoshy said:
When Danger left for Geelong, Adelaide was a better team than the Cats.

The whole premise of this thread is that the top teams are getting all the FAs and it isn't fair.

The Cats were 10th and traded their top 10 pick in picking him up.

Isn't that the perfect example of a team in the bottom half using the FA rules to try and contend?
Click to expand...
Geelong had one bad year. Not a team that was rebuilding.

Danger allowed the Cats to reload with mature age recruits.
 
Players should be allowed to be traded in contract, with the offset being no compensation for free agency.

A team that is sitting just off the pack may throw some picks to get the missing 0iece for a flag (effectively what hawthorn did for Brian Lake as he was out of contract a yr later anyway).
It's up to the new team to try and convince the player to stay, and would make things more interesting, and make the draft less compromised
 
eastfreo75 said:
Geelong had one bad year. Not a team that was rebuilding.

Danger allowed the Cats to reload with mature age recruits.
Click to expand...

They still finished 10th and had moved on a few aging stars. Danger left the Crows who were on the way up to go to a team who looked on the way down. It may very well have cost him a flag.

He isn't a very good example of teams at the top stealing FAs off the lower sides to make the comp unfair.
 
Forever North said:
compromised drafts, free agency, academy Picks, priority picks, multicultural academies, father/son picks, compensation picks, draft points system, future trading....the whole system is convoluted and open to rorts, just the way the AFL wants it in order to manufacture their desired outcomes.
Click to expand...


Their desired outcome? Their desired outcome would be Carlton, Essendon, Collingwood, Richmond, West Coast and Adelaide fighting out the competition every year from a financial standpoint.

How has the system helped these teams at all, beyond Lynch going to Richmond?
 
Buzzasto DaSilva said:
Totally disagree. The onus is on us to prove to a player like Jeremy Cameron that we are the right club for him going forward, and we failed to do that. That's on us, nobody else.
Click to expand...

Actually the onus is on GWS to maximise trade value over the next three years for your next premiership run
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Holden Hillbilly
Free agency compo under review, and why the formula isn't public
Replies
13
Views
827
Grand Uncle Horace
Grand Uncle Horace
Bunk Moreland
Roast We've got the season wrong and it needs to change now
2 3 4
Replies
80
Views
3K
HirdsTheWord
HirdsTheWord
kreuze_missile
It’s time to abolish restricted free agency compensation
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
286
Views
10K
peetoo
peetoo
Blue and Silver
National Seconds Competition
2 3
Replies
70
Views
2K
Howard Littlejohn
Howard Littlejohn
F
Coach Sam Mitchell on his players staging for free kicks
2 3 4
Replies
77
Views
2K
Back One Out
Back One Out
sthmelb_dimmies
Rd 6 and the Top 4 is locked in
Replies
24
Views
651
beerbandit
beerbandit
Carringbush2010
An alternative to the 'National' competition
2 3 4 5
Replies
124
Views
4K
Tigerlaird
Tigerlaird

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top