- Aug 31, 2014
- 14,581
- 25,890
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
My change-up to the Trade & Free-agency period.
1. Picks can be traded for salary-cap space.
The way it could be administered :
Pick 1 : $2mil over 3 years (breakdown anyway you want)
Pick 2 : $1.5 mil over 3 years
Let’s act like last year’s trade period didn’t happen. Everyone has their picks.
Collingwood need to re-sign De GOEY,Moore, Grundy and Elliot.
Collingwood finish 10th. Collingwood trade pick 10 to Swans for salary-cap space.
Swans get a pick in the top 10. Pay a set amount towards Collingwoods salary cap for a set period.
Beneficial since Swans shouldn’t have too many players on high salaries anyways (looking at you Buddy).
The AFL could administer it and have set monetary requirements for each pick.
Benefits :
Allows clubs in a premiership window to retain their players.
Ie. Pies get extra cap space to try and retain De Goey, Moore, Grundy & Stephenson
However, they invest for the now, and will probably struggle in the future. No elite talents etc
Allows clubs rebuilding to receive draft picks without having to trade out senior players. Ie Sydney Swans instead of trading out Luke Parker (or some other senior player) to receive a pick in the first round. They trade their salary cap space to a club like Collingwood for a first round pick. They have him at the club to mentor the young minds coming through.
2. Players who are within a contract and ask for a trade have to choose a state and can’t choose a club.
Not everyone is going to like this, but it gives the clubs a bit more leverage when trading.
The player agent can say “we expect a deal of $$$ over 3 years or match our current deal” (probably the amount they have been offered by the highest bidder) and see which clubs are interested. Maybe, you’ll get 10 clubs interested or 1 club interested.Maybe none.
It also ensures that club losing a player is fairly compensated.
This also allows the smaller clubs an opportunity to recruit a star.
Won’t be as effective in other states than Victoria. However, you never know which clubs might be interested.
Ie. Tim Kelly(last year): I want to move to W.A. Fremantle can match Kelly $$$ and might have more picks/players that Geelong want.
If a player isn’t receiving the offers he likes(while within contract), he sticks with the original club or his player agent changes his asking price for a one-year deal elsewhere.
This also lessens the impact when a player is “home-sick”. The club losing the player doesn’t get below their value.
Clubs may be eager to trade away a player who’s openly asked for a trade back to a state.
3. Players who sign a one-year deal with any club (no matter their age) will become a Unrestricted Free-Agent the following year.
The age aspect is important as it shouldn’t allow players who are in their 3rd/4th year of AFL to be stuck behind a more senior campaigner waiting several years for them to retire. Ie. Reily O’Brien, Nankervis. Gives them an option to explore other clubs earlier in their career.
Tim Kelly signs a one-year deal this year so he doesn’t have to deal with the drama of asking for a trade. He also will get to choose (as a UFA) where he goes next year rather than Geelong holding all the cards. He could also get injured next year, and not be as valuable.
If your current team as a contract in front of you, you can’t become a DFA.
Players have always wanted more freedom to move.
Benefits :
We will see a lot more player movement.
Players will back themselves more and take the 1-year deal, which forces clubs to offer players more than a 1-year deal.
This also allows players who are in and out of the team (Sier,Langford, Bolton) a chance to start their career elsewhere. Ie. Sier signs with the Pies for 1 year but isn’t happy that he isn’t getting a regular gig, leaves as a FA to another club. Collingwood either offer him a 2 year contract or play him more regularly on his one-year deal. Even then he might choose to leave.
Or a club signs a player up for one more year, and realise he’s no good, and are okay with him leaving.
One-year deals can either be great or horrible for both player or club.
Downfalls:
Players back themselves with a one-year deal and get injured.
4. No compensation for losing a Restricted Free-Agent.
There’s no such thing as a fair compensation. Plus if you’ve had a bloke at your club for 7 years, and he doesn’t want to stay and if you can’t match the money offered, you shouldn’t be compensated.
If you can match the money, a trade should get done. Same rules as now.
Clubs will need to push get important players signed a lot earlier.
Overall:
This allows lower clubs to rebuild quicker without losing senior players who are needed to mentor players
Allows more player movement.
Players back themselves more; and may be more driven to perform.
Allows players who aren’t getting a gig at one club an opportunity at another.
Clubs losing a contracted player have some bargaining power.
Clubs losing a Restricted Free-Agent don’t get compensated when they can’t match the opposing clubs deal.
I have probably forgotten about something, so will make changes if necessary.
1. Picks can be traded for salary-cap space.
The way it could be administered :
Pick 1 : $2mil over 3 years (breakdown anyway you want)
Pick 2 : $1.5 mil over 3 years
Let’s act like last year’s trade period didn’t happen. Everyone has their picks.
Collingwood need to re-sign De GOEY,Moore, Grundy and Elliot.
Collingwood finish 10th. Collingwood trade pick 10 to Swans for salary-cap space.
Swans get a pick in the top 10. Pay a set amount towards Collingwoods salary cap for a set period.
Beneficial since Swans shouldn’t have too many players on high salaries anyways (looking at you Buddy).
The AFL could administer it and have set monetary requirements for each pick.
Benefits :
Allows clubs in a premiership window to retain their players.
Ie. Pies get extra cap space to try and retain De Goey, Moore, Grundy & Stephenson
However, they invest for the now, and will probably struggle in the future. No elite talents etc
Allows clubs rebuilding to receive draft picks without having to trade out senior players. Ie Sydney Swans instead of trading out Luke Parker (or some other senior player) to receive a pick in the first round. They trade their salary cap space to a club like Collingwood for a first round pick. They have him at the club to mentor the young minds coming through.
2. Players who are within a contract and ask for a trade have to choose a state and can’t choose a club.
Not everyone is going to like this, but it gives the clubs a bit more leverage when trading.
The player agent can say “we expect a deal of $$$ over 3 years or match our current deal” (probably the amount they have been offered by the highest bidder) and see which clubs are interested. Maybe, you’ll get 10 clubs interested or 1 club interested.Maybe none.
It also ensures that club losing a player is fairly compensated.
This also allows the smaller clubs an opportunity to recruit a star.
Won’t be as effective in other states than Victoria. However, you never know which clubs might be interested.
Ie. Tim Kelly(last year): I want to move to W.A. Fremantle can match Kelly $$$ and might have more picks/players that Geelong want.
If a player isn’t receiving the offers he likes(while within contract), he sticks with the original club or his player agent changes his asking price for a one-year deal elsewhere.
This also lessens the impact when a player is “home-sick”. The club losing the player doesn’t get below their value.
Clubs may be eager to trade away a player who’s openly asked for a trade back to a state.
3. Players who sign a one-year deal with any club (no matter their age) will become a Unrestricted Free-Agent the following year.
The age aspect is important as it shouldn’t allow players who are in their 3rd/4th year of AFL to be stuck behind a more senior campaigner waiting several years for them to retire. Ie. Reily O’Brien, Nankervis. Gives them an option to explore other clubs earlier in their career.
Tim Kelly signs a one-year deal this year so he doesn’t have to deal with the drama of asking for a trade. He also will get to choose (as a UFA) where he goes next year rather than Geelong holding all the cards. He could also get injured next year, and not be as valuable.
If your current team as a contract in front of you, you can’t become a DFA.
Players have always wanted more freedom to move.
Benefits :
We will see a lot more player movement.
Players will back themselves more and take the 1-year deal, which forces clubs to offer players more than a 1-year deal.
This also allows players who are in and out of the team (Sier,Langford, Bolton) a chance to start their career elsewhere. Ie. Sier signs with the Pies for 1 year but isn’t happy that he isn’t getting a regular gig, leaves as a FA to another club. Collingwood either offer him a 2 year contract or play him more regularly on his one-year deal. Even then he might choose to leave.
Or a club signs a player up for one more year, and realise he’s no good, and are okay with him leaving.
One-year deals can either be great or horrible for both player or club.
Downfalls:
Players back themselves with a one-year deal and get injured.
4. No compensation for losing a Restricted Free-Agent.
There’s no such thing as a fair compensation. Plus if you’ve had a bloke at your club for 7 years, and he doesn’t want to stay and if you can’t match the money offered, you shouldn’t be compensated.
If you can match the money, a trade should get done. Same rules as now.
Clubs will need to push get important players signed a lot earlier.
Overall:
This allows lower clubs to rebuild quicker without losing senior players who are needed to mentor players
Allows more player movement.
Players back themselves more; and may be more driven to perform.
Allows players who aren’t getting a gig at one club an opportunity at another.
Clubs losing a contracted player have some bargaining power.
Clubs losing a Restricted Free-Agent don’t get compensated when they can’t match the opposing clubs deal.
I have probably forgotten about something, so will make changes if necessary.
