Free Agency

[baldandbroke]

Had an idea for free agency ...

What if it worked a bit like father-son.

So you have to take the next pick after the lowest pick offered for the player - and that pick went straight to the club the player was leaving from.

So Frawley for instance - Crows offer pick 8, Frawley picks Hawks - Hawks have to pass pick 18 to Melbourne.

It would work well the other way round too - ie benefit the lower ranked clubs

If a player wanted to move to Adelaide, and hawks offered their first round pick - we would only have to give up our second rounder.

Thoughts?

 

[smoovy]

Line up all the free agents on a stage with lights.

Each club coach starting with the lowest rank club takes turns in trying to convince the free agents to come to their club by showing videos, power point presentations or even singing.

As the coach works through the presentation the players either leave their lights on to hear more or turn off to opt out.

If a light is left on at the end of the presentation then the coach gets to take that free agent back to the club.

They also win a trip to the Aegean sea and a pair of fashion shoes.

 

[mattymac]

it kind of takes the player's free agency away doesn't it?

 

[Smithalicious]

Had an idea for free agency ...

What if it worked a bit like father-son.

So you have to take the next pick after the lowest pick offered for the player - and that pick went straight to the club the player was leaving from.

So Frawley for instance - Crows offer pick 8, Frawley picks Hawks - Hawks have to pass pick 18 to Melbourne.

It would work well the other way round too - ie benefit the lower ranked clubs

If a player wanted to move to Adelaide, and hawks offered their first round pick - we would only have to give up our second rounder.

Thoughts?

Wouldn't every team just "say" they'll take him with their first pick forcing the team to pay their first round pick, if they don't then what happens to the player?? He goes to the other team....... like the draft?

Kinda takes the Free Agency away.

 

[billy fragos]

How is that free agency the player doesn't get to choose where he ends up....!!!!

 

[little graham]

What if it worked a bit like father-son.

?

When someone was lined up to come here,the AFL will change the rules so he goes to Carlton. Thats exactly how it will work.

 

[jackster83]

Get rid of the compo picks altogether. Why should other clubs go down a position in the draft?

No one should feel sorry for Melbourne, particularly as we were the ones punished for their rabid tanking.

 

[DoubleBlue2]

Free agency was screwed when clubs didn't insist that it go both ways and players under contract could be traded against their will like in baseball.

 

[Geoffa32]

I have nothing against Free Agency and how it works here. Although I do think it should come after ten years of service to a club.

But am against the players who have not served their FA period want to be traded and then nominate a club. Personally I think that once a player has asked to be traded, they go to whatever club that their current club can do a trade with. Guys with two or threes years in the system have not earnt the right to burn the club that drafted them and nurturing them before they hit their prime years.

 

[baldandbroke]

How is that free agency the player doesn't get to choose where he ends up....!!!!

Wouldn't every team just "say" they'll take him with their first pick forcing the team to pay their first round pick, if they don't then what happens to the player?? He goes to the other team....... like the draft?

Kinda takes the Free Agency away.

The Free Agency bit is about being able to choose to move a club of choice.

This wouldn't change that.

The player still chooses where they go but the club receiving the player is forced to pay the going rate.

 

[knobby]

I think I understand what you are saying OutofTownCrow but I reckon it would work better if the FA nominates first.

That way the current club can also decide if they want to keep him by simply nominating a pick.

What would make it more interesting is if the rule is the amended so that the destination club has to use a pick which is no more than 10 picks after what the pick bid was. i.e. (ignore the numbers its just a demonstration)

Frawley to Hawthorn, bidding opens
Lets say the Bulldogs bid Pick 5 on him.
Hawthorn have to use a pick 15 or better to secure him, so Hawthorn will have to trade in a higher ranked pick. That pick then goes to the Melbourne.
Bidding club still has to match salary.

Pros
- seems fairer to the clubs especially those in bottom 6,
- player seeking free agency may need to seek more than one suitor (on the quiet),
- market forces would determine adequate compensation.
- Would create some interesting trading by the higher ranked teams.

Cons
- removes the "free" element of movement from the player.
- I haven't come up with a solution to what happens if the club cannot get a pick within 10 spots, although the free agent can control this by having other suitors lined up.
- Clubs may be loathe to get involved in free trading, but under this situation it stops the higher ranked clubs pillaging the bottom 6.
- Clubs may be loathe to trade with the nominated club to allow them a pick for the free agent

Think for a moment;
Franklin nominates Sydney

GWS bid pick 1, Sydney need to trade to get pick 11 or better, this pick then goes to Hawthorn.
Hawthorn would have gotten fairly decent compensation.
Sydney would have been made to make a decision as to whether or not to pursue Franklin, i.e. would they be prepared to trade player(s) to get required pick to get Franklin.

 

[Bosley]

Line up all the free agents on a stage with lights.

Each club coach starting with the lowest rank club takes turns in trying to convince the free agents to come to their club by showing videos, power point presentations or even singing.

As the coach works through the presentation the players either leave their lights on to hear more or turn off to opt out.

If a light is left on at the end of the presentation then the coach gets to take that free agent back to the club.

They also win a trip to the Aegean sea and a pair of fashion shoes.

In tribute to this idea, Adelaide should present this year's draftees to the thumping beats of ... CAN YOU FEEL IT?!!!

Hey hey, U u!!!

 

[Crowked]

Had an idea for free agency ...

What if it worked a bit like father-son.

So you have to take the next pick after the lowest pick offered for the player - and that pick went straight to the club the player was leaving from.

So Frawley for instance - Crows offer pick 8, Frawley picks Hawks - Hawks have to pass pick 18 to Melbourne.

It would work well the other way round too - ie benefit the lower ranked clubs

If a player wanted to move to Adelaide, and hawks offered their first round pick - we would only have to give up our second rounder.

Thoughts?

I like it.

Coincidently pick 18 is about the true value of Frawley.

Pick 3. Yeh, righto.

 

[AFC979810]

Free agency was screwed when clubs didn't insist that it go both ways and players under contract could be traded against their will like in baseball.

No. We don't want to go the baseball system. There is no bigger 'feeder' system than MLB.

Also - the lack of salary cap is also a completely different system.

 

[King Elvis]

Free agency is ****ed.

 

[cmndstab]

Here's an idea. The AFL scraps free agency and tells the players to enjoy their career as a plumber or mechanic if they don't like it.

 

[Sanders]

Had an idea for free agency ...

What if it worked a bit like father-son.

So you have to take the next pick after the lowest pick offered for the player - and that pick went straight to the club the player was leaving from.

So Frawley for instance - Crows offer pick 8, Frawley picks Hawks - Hawks have to pass pick 18 to Melbourne.

It would work well the other way round too - ie benefit the lower ranked clubs

If a player wanted to move to Adelaide, and hawks offered their first round pick - we would only have to give up our second rounder.

Thoughts?

Free agency is about the players not about the clubs

When you start assigning cost to the opportunity you prejudice the interests of the players

 

[Sanders]

Here's an idea. The AFL scraps free agency and tells the players to enjoy their career as a plumber or mechanic if they don't like it.

You just made some lawyers very very happy

You'll get more christmas cars from the Bar association than James Hird this year

 

[FR0GGY]

christmas cars

Sleighs?

 

[baldandbroke]

I see the problems pointed out with any system trying to handle this ...

What if the restricted free agency had some rules like those people are suggesting - and unrestricted didn't come in until 10 years of service at a single club.

One thing I hate about free agency is that it actually encourages nicking a player that has been developed elsewhere because the chances of them hitting free agency at your club are minimised when they come at age 23+.

I reckon restricted should be 7 years on an AFL list - unrestricted 10 years at a single club.

 

[baldandbroke]

Funny, this article shows under the tag line "AFL fires back after coaches slam free-agency" on the home page of the AFL:

Free agency 'the greatest de-equalisation policy in 100 years', says Paul Roos
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-10-02/roos-richo-slam-free-agency

 

[Malibu#27]

Had an idea for free agency ...

What if it worked a bit like father-son.

So you have to take the next pick after the lowest pick offered for the player - and that pick went straight to the club the player was leaving from.

So Frawley for instance - Crows offer pick 8, Frawley picks Hawks - Hawks have to pass pick 18 to Melbourne.

It would work well the other way round too - ie benefit the lower ranked clubs

If a player wanted to move to Adelaide, and hawks offered their first round pick - we would only have to give up our second rounder.

Thoughts?

I suggested similar last year but got howled down by people suggesting the 'free' in free agency was about club's getting players for free rather than players being free to move.

My thinking was the afl still allocate player value based on contract value length and age but that once value was allocated the club gaining the player would be required to give up next pick. Either that of the afl determined both the pick gained and the pick given up.

Just like expansion compo its not true player value so clubs would still get players on the cheap but it would prevent clubs grabbing multiple FAs for nothing.

 

[adelcrows]

I said this on the

The Free Agency bit is about being able to choose to move a club of choice.

This wouldn't change that.

The player still chooses where they go but the club receiving the player is forced to pay the going rate.

main board in a similar way and also got shot down but 100 percent agree, player can choose his club, club has to be willing to take the player, not just for nothing like it is now. They should have to give up their pick so no new picks enter the draft.

 

[Bacon8]

There should be little to no compensation on UFA's. If they aren't in your Top 10 players, then losing them shouldn't break the club.

 

[dogs105]

Worked OK for Betts