Free Agency

[bubblegoose]

Free Agency.

There's been a few calls from your expected media types & some disgruntled club people such as Eddie McChins (who's actually changed his mind on free agency after the Ballz up) who couldn't get deals done coz they weren't prepared to offer up anything of real value.

Anyway the media is bandying 'Free Agency' around & I thought I'd raise it for discussion.

How do you think this would affect us - with the Gold Coast & the new priority club comes into the league, if they have the money do they get all the cream of the crop players ? - in addition to all their picks. Or if a club has a rich benefactor, do all the A grade players become ambassadors for cardboard companies?

Could we just end up with a handful of real life Dreamteams?

Or the case of pre salary cap where big clubs get the big names?

Would there still be a 'trade week' if a player can just walk out on their club? How would a club be compensated for everything they'd invested in the player?

How will this change the game as we know it?

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Free Agency.

There's been a few calls from your expected media types & some disgruntled club people such as Eddie McChins (who's actually changed his mind on free agency after the Ballz up) who couldn't get deals done coz they weren't prepared to offer up anything of real value.

Anyway the media is bandying 'Free Agency' around & I thought I'd raise it for discussion.

How do you think this would affect us - with the Gold Coast & the new priority club comes into the league, if they have the money do they get all the cream of the crop players ? - in addition to all their picks. Or if a club has a rich benefactor, do all the A grade players become ambassadors for cardboard companies?

Could we just end up with a handful of real life Dreamteams?

Or the case of pre salary cap where big clubs get the big names?

Would there still be a 'trade week' if a player can just walk out on their club? How would a club be compensated for everything they'd invested in the player?

How will this change the game as we know it?

That's the big question in my mind. And, if you couldn't lock a player like Blake McGrath in for a game or two, who would bother with spending the time developing rookies like this, knowing that if they do come good you will either have to pay them an arm and leg or lose them.

So to me the losers will be those players who may be a risky thing.
Howard, Eljay, Blake , Haretuku , Rossy T would be lucky to get a look in.
The clubs would only be interested in players who could contribute something now.

I could see that this would mean that you might see more development and recruiting done from VFL, WAFL etc level, rather than snatching up all the 17, 18 year olds. But at the same time you may see potentially talented players going out of the sport, ( or not reaching their potential ) because it's not the main thing in their life.

AFL is able to enforce the current draft system, because if you end up outside the AFL system you are basically unemployed. I would think that in a game like Soccer there would be so many different National and International bodies, that they could not enforce a non-free agency system.

 

[Look2Me4Guidance]

As we are currently it would help us as many players would love to come to St.Kilda as we are in the midst of some reasonably successful years. However if you were a cellar dweller of a club, it would be pretty hard to entice guys to come and play.

 

[StFly]

You would think the clubs would end up being the big losers out of such an attempt, so unless there is a form of compensation (monetary, concessions or otherwise) there would also need to be a shake up for the way drafting is conducted as a preliminary 2 year contract to all draftees could see draftees come to club X, serve two years apprenticeships and then walk to Club Y making drafting a pointless exercise.

As such if introduced (and no doubt it will inevitably) there will probably be age restrictions / time restrictions for one whereby if players from Club X are bwteen 24 and 30 they can choose to walk or if they've played 100-150 games they can choose to walk otherwise the club would receive renumeration for the loss.

Otherwise, they would probably need to hold over draft picks, distribute worth for players walking before distributing to the clubs for the season or likewise scenarios. Because simply allowing players the freedom to walk on clubs willy nilly will end up pissing everyone off and creating superior imbalance as everyone would then want to come to the Doggies, the Cats and us because we were the three who dominated finals and the competition this year, where conversely no one would want to go to Freo, Richmond or Melbourne because they didn't despite how their future might look a few seasons down the line. Todays heroes looking for today and "oh hey tomorrow that club looks pretty nifty...."

Before you know it, Stewie Dew has played for all 16 clubs and gotten 47 Premiership medals. Mind you have only played 47 games during that time...

 

[SaintsSeptember]

You would think the clubs would end up being the big losers out of such an attempt, so unless there is a form of compensation (monetary, concessions or otherwise) there would also need to be a shake up for the way drafting is conducted as a preliminary 2 year contract to all draftees could see draftees come to club X, serve two years apprenticeships and then walk to Club Y making drafting a pointless exercise.

As such if introduced (and no doubt it will inevitably) there will probably be age restrictions / time restrictions for one whereby if players from Club X are bwteen 24 and 30 they can choose to walk or if they've played 100-150 games they can choose to walk otherwise the club would receive renumeration for the loss.

Otherwise, they would probably need to hold over draft picks, distribute worth for players walking before distributing to the clubs for the season or likewise scenarios. Because simply allowing players the freedom to walk on clubs willy nilly will end up pissing everyone off and creating superior imbalance as everyone would then want to come to the Doggies, the Cats and us because we were the three who dominated finals and the competition this year, where conversely no one would want to go to Freo, Richmond or Melbourne because they didn't despite how their future might look a few seasons down the line. Todays heroes looking for today and "oh hey tomorrow that club looks pretty nifty...."

Before you know it, Stewie Dew has played for all 16 clubs and gotten 47 Premiership medals. Mind you have only played 47 games during that time...

But draft picks would be far less valuable, given that the player would be able to move on around about the time they start to look good.
Instead of drafting for the future ( a-la melbourne 2009 ) they will all be trying to fill their list with players who can play now.
Older players will be forced out sooner, as moving from club to club they will be less likely to conform to the requirements for a veterins list ( unless they change the rules ), and younger players coming into their prime will put pressure on the Salary caps.

 

[StFly]

But draft picks would be far less valuable, given that the player would be able to move on around about the time they start to look good.
Instead of drafting for the future ( a-la melbourne 2009 ) they will all be trying to fill their list with players who can play now.
Older players will be forced out sooner, as moving from club to club they will be less likely to conform to the requirements for a veterins list ( unless they change the rules ), and younger players coming into their prime will put pressure on the Salary caps.

That's where the Age / Game thing comes into it.

List dynamics being what it is the Rookie system could be overhauled to a "project" system and elongated with either prefix to determine a rookie or a project player, these players couldn't then walk out on a club. The only walking could be done by players on the actual list (thus clubs could draft for the future or current quota and maintain security)

Project players inevitably get upgraded to rookies and rookies to the main list or delisted and re-rookied but yeah, there are ways to circumnavigate a base Free Agency system to not entirely screw over clubs as well as give players the opportunity to leave on their own terms. Just a matter of what Herr Demetriou and the Super Secret Force of Anderson end up deciding over their annual eclair meet.

 

[HoldenMCaulfield]

If a competent court in Australia was to allow free agancy due to breaches of the players' free choice of employment (similar to the "Bosman" verdict in European soccer), other features of the current AFL, including in particular the salary cap and the drafting system, would probably also be considered a restriction of free trade.

This would change the AFL as we now know it (there are hardly any one team players in European soccer nowadays and having played for five or more team during a career is not that uncommon) and would mainly be of benefit for the top players who can stage open bidding every say two years and demand huge signing bonuses as well as the rich teams who can afford those signing bonuses and huge salaries. The rich teams will absolutely dominate - for example, Real Madrid / CF Barcelona have won 21 of the last 25 championships in Spain, Juventus / Inter / Milan have won 19 of the last 25 in Italy, ManU / Chelsea / Arsenal have won 18 of the last 25 in England (including the last 14) and Munich / Dortmund have won 17 of the last 25 in Germany.

Small teams would suffer unless they manage to trade (sell) their players while they are still under contract and thus are forced to take risks by signing youngsters for long contract periods. Once they develop a top player, he is likely to be bought by one of the big clubs (if just to avoid competition - there are several examples of top youngsters disappearing after signing with a top club). The lower third of the players group would also suffer as they would probably only be offered one year contracts and may be forced to look for a new team every year. There will be exceptions of a small team winning the big one (e.g. Wolfsburg in Germany this year - note, however, that they are funded by Volkswagen, money is not really an issue for them).

The AFL will probably come under pressure again (with the pressure being applied by the rich clubs and the players association who typically look after the interests of the top players a lot more than of those who make up the numbers) and, in order to not risk a scenario as we see it in European soccer, may soon feel forced to suggest and apply limited free agency rules (as most of the US competitions do who also use tools like drafting and salary caps).

Personally, I would suggest something along the following lines :

A. Veterans (ten or more years of service for that club on the seniors list and at least 30 years old)and unrestricted free agents (i.e. players thast have been delisted) may transfer to another club without restriction once their contracts have expired.

B. Class 1 restricted free agents (seven or more years of service for that club on the seniors list and at least 27 years old) may transfer to another club subject to a fixed draft pick compensation based on the salary offered by the new club.

C. Class 2 restricted free agents (four or more years of service for that club on the seniors list and at least 24 years old) may transfer to another club subject to a fixed draft pick compensation based on the salary offered by the new club, provided that the current club has not matched the salary offer (right of last refusal).

D. Class 3 restricted free agents (all other players) may not transfer to another club without the consent of the current club, provided that if such consent is not given, such player may nominate for the national draft and / or pre season draft.

 

[Banger724]

Can't be 100% certain, but from what I can gather and have read, the form of Free Agency that the Players Association have been pushing only really enables players who have given x amount of service to move clubs under the free agency banner - IE 150 games or 7-8 years or something along those lines. Therefore, still worthwhile developing kids as you'll get at least that much out of them before they can walk away free. On this basis, trade week and PSD would still exist, as free agency won't help those that are contracted, and players who haven't met that level of service would still have to be traded or go into the drafts and take the risk there.

 

[Look2Me4Guidance]

The trading of future draft picks would also help the process as well. As long as the salary cap remains, there will be no domination of teams like Man U, Arsenal, etc in the AFL, because money will not rule.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

If we are talking senior players it could work.
The rules for Veterins may need to change accordingly, otherwise said players could end up with shorter Careers.
The motivation for keeping an old guy on the list is higher if only half the salary goes under the cap. ( Then again it hasn't really shortened Kingy's career ).