Why should a team be compensated for their inability to keep their players?
Let's say.... Carlton scout the next two drafts exceptionally well after having a great draft last year and the kids from the year before finally catch on (as many anticipate that they will).
In four years time you have....
Vets list (still good $$$ but only $100k removed from cap): Andrew Walker, Michael Jamison, Eddie Betts
Prime (max $$$ even if some are on the vets list): Marc Murphy, Bryce Gibbs, Matthew Kreuzer, Jeff Garlett, Jeremy Laidler, Lachlan Henderson, Chris Yarran, Kane Lucas, 2013 free agent signing, 2014/5 free agent signing
Capable vets (good $$$): Shaun Hampson, David Ellard, Simon White, Mitch Robinson, Ed Curnow, Zach Tuohy, Andrew McInnes, a free agent signing
Role players (reasonable, not outstanding but not poverty line, $$$): Jaryd Cachia, Levi Casboult, Luke Mitchell, Pat McCarthy, Nicholas Graham
Early prime (not quite max $$$ but getting there): Matthew Watson, Josh Bootsma, Dylan Buckley, Troy Menzel, 2013 1st round pick, 2014 1st round pick, perhaps a second round pick that is a steal of the draft
The rest of the list on low salaries
And you're
NOT Collingwood (you're not able to find "hidden" sources to pay players within the "salary cap)".
Do you not believe that we'd deserve compensation having recruited well, developed the list to its maximum potential and are bursting at the seams salary wise to keep everyone satisfied financially? You'd be happy to lose players invaluable to our premiership runs without compensation? You'd be happy to force then-older players such as Walker, Jamison or Betts to an earlier than desired retirement?
In reality, if we continue developing the list and draft well, which I consider to be an art rather than "luck", this is a very real prospect.
I know that I would not be happy facing the prospect of losing important players for nada.