Analysis The go home factor, equalisation, draftees requesting trades

[HTPunter]

On the flip side the Pies have forced Treloar and Grundy out because they regretted signing them to bad deals. Yes the player still has to agree but so does the club when trading out a contracted player. It goes both ways, if clubs want to scream bloody murder about draftees exiting then they need to hang tough when they sign mid to late 20s guys on long term deals.

I think the concessions afforded to the NSW and QLD clubs are more than capable of (and necessary) equalling the playing field. These are a long term project for competing against the rugbys obviously but they are working, lots of academy players in the clubs plus elsewhere too.

 

[Catsace]

What about henry ? Probably lives closer to his mum than the mcg and still pulls home sickness.

What about perking and bailey Smith threatening non Victorian teams In pre draft interviews that they will leave if they are taken.

Yes they do have problems when their biggest equalisation tool is being manipulated

The Ollie Henry situation is actually a culmination of a long journey by the Geelong Football Club to become a professional, successful and desirable club in the AFL. Up to just under 20 years ago, it would have been absolutely fatuous to imagine a club like Geelong having any gravitas to draw players toward it from other teams....Yes Geelong recruited and drafted players over the years and held onto most of them. But in 1999-2000 we lost our captain Leigh Colbert to a big offer from North (the success club of the 90's arguably), and our desire for a key forward to take over the massive shoes of Gary Sr yielded players of usually suspect fitness (Jason Mooney, Brett Spinks, Mitchell White), plus an assortment of odds and sods like your Simon Arnott types.

But getting Costa, Cook and Bomber in saw some improvement off-field, and Brad Ottens after the 2004 season became the big fish we were seeking. But bear in mind, at the same time Ben Graham left at 30 y/o to become an NFL punter. Even after the successes of the late '00's, we lost Gary Ablett Jr to the Suns, an offer he couldn't refuse. And also Tim Kelly wanted home too..well at least his wife did, also part of the reason Clark went to Freo. But one of the blokes we drafted with his pick was Cam Guthrie. And we managed to parlay those picks into the ransom needed to recruit Jeremy Cameron.

Fast forward another 10 years though, the continued finals appearances, the growth in the 'lifestyle' factor such as living near Torquay or on acreage, and perhaps just the stronger family bonds now has reversed the situation that Geelong had endured for at least 30-40 years from the 70's onwards. If anything now Geelong has it's own little aura of destination, and also a bit of a situation where if Geelong pick a player who has a sibling elsewhere (either playing beforehand or after), there can be a bit of a 'reunification' aspect of the brothers as well.

So in summary, what Geelong has now is basically a triumph or a spoil of victory as a result of hard work and success on and off-field for close to 20 years. It's created it's own little centre of gravity, something the powerful Melbourne clubs have had for aeons already. But as with Gary Jr, Tim Kelly and Jordan Clark it's still not all one way.

 

[citizen-erased]

We were discussing this at work the other day and came up with the following:

All rookie contracts are three years long with first round draft picks having a club option of a fourth year

If a player is contracted and wants to move they can nominate the State they want to go to but not the team so their existing club can get the best deal for them that they can.

If a player is OOC they can nominate a club of their choice

All clubs get to nominate one OOC player per season as a franchise player and must pay them the average of top 5 players at their position for one year and then player becomes a UFA. A club that is in contention gets player for another year, player gets well compensated for that year and gets to move if they wish to whatever club they wish if so inclined without impediment

JHF isn't(edit) uncontracted. Bruhn and Henry a little different admittedly.
I think the issue is whether an 18yo can be expected to leave their family & support network and remain outside it for 2+ years. Most do, but the ones who struggle need some slack cut.

2 options I see as being viable here

Either raise the draft age to 20 or change the draft to allow state nomination & bid matching with a form of luxury tax. i.e. JHF nominates he wants to stay in SA. North rate him #1. So they bid. Crows match with draft collateral they have (as per NGA or F/S). Being a #1 pick, his salary comes with a loading in Crows cap to come out (whether that goes to JHF or comes off their cap space...whatever)

Another case study. Dons have cap space to burn. We take our pick 4. There's a kid we like who's picked at 5. We bid. Match with later picks & salary loading comes out of our cap. If the club that drafts him likes him more, they bid additional picks towards him (and said salary loading becomes their issue)

Introduces the salary cap and pick bidding for non-aligned players and ideally avoids this sort of hullaballoo (whether its JHF, Rankine, Perkins, Smith, Dunkley, etc)

 

[Engimal v3]

JHF is uncontracted. Bruhn and Henry a little different admittedly.

He isn't

 

[citizen-erased]

He isn't

lack of sleep. that was meant to say isn't. hence the difference.
Extended contract doesn't change this scenario. Kid was clearly unhappy early on and it's only his first year
2, 3 or 4 year contract = same result imo.

 

[Altum Volantes]

JHF is just bad drafting. He was a known flight risk and they made a poor call taking him at #1.

If anything, clubs need to stop over rating their own ability to retain out of state players, especially during a rebuild.

Can’t keep your players? Draft local - at the very least it removes the ‘go home’ factor.

Where you can’t always draft locally (ie the ‘Northern’ clubs) - penalise clubs who poach players within 5 years of them being drafted - ie Tanner Bruhn is off to Geelong - trade completed this year but next years 1st slides 5 spots and he has a 1.5 loading on his contract for salary cap space (purely plucking random numbers there). Clubs who want to poach from these clubs will have to factor in the ‘penalties’ when recruiting - may help reduce the instances of this happening.

 

[Saab NLAW]

Jeezuz. Years of this (wave of Vic kids going back to Vic) = crickets, then a couple of young S.A. boys and a W.A. guy wanna come home and the drama starts.

This league is a corrupt joke.

Didn't see any Crows fans complain when Scott Thompson wanted to go home all those years ago

What's really a joke is the short memory some people have

 

[citizen-erased]

JHF is just bad drafting. He was a known flight risk and they made a poor call taking him at #1.

If anything, clubs need to stop over rating their own ability to retain out of state players, especially during a rebuild.

Can’t keep your players? Draft local - at the very least it removes the ‘go home’ factor.

Where you can’t always draft locally (ie the ‘Northern’ clubs) - penalise clubs who poach players within 5 years of them being drafted - ie Tanner Bruhn is off to Geelong - trade completed this year but next years 1st slides 5 spots and he has a 1.5 loading on his contract for salary cap space (purely plucking random numbers there). Clubs who want to poach from these clubs will have to factor in the ‘penalties’ when recruiting - may help reduce the instances of this happening.

I think the AFL is going this way anyway
And clubs may cotton on that their pick may not be worth the value it holds if they can't get a player that will stay at it, or a kid that meets that height

Should North have traded 1 for the Crows offer? perhaps. they took a punt and backed themselves
West Coast could look at 2 this year and wonder if the vic kids who make up the top 5 are worth the risk? and if not, trade 2 and focus on WA talent (though bad example, Eagles seem to do ok with the vic kids).

In this era, you need to draft well, and be less stubborn on the optics of trading pick 1 or whatever it is

 

[Boxhead_31]

lack of sleep. that was meant to say isn't. hence the difference.
Extended contract doesn't change this scenario. Kid was clearly unhappy early on and it's only his first year
2, 3 or 4 year contract = same result imo.

Under my proposal he can still leave he just doesn’t get to nominate a club. Roos get to find the deal between the two clubs in the State to get the best return they can for a player wanting to go home.

 

[citizen-erased]

Under my proposal he can still leave he just doesn’t get to nominate a club. Roos get to find the deal between the two clubs in the State to get the best return they can for a player wanting to go home.

also works, though not ideal this year when you consider Crows will be dealing for Rankine.
so really only leaves Port or an unders deal to Adelaide.
bit harder in the 2 team states.

could be a rule for Vic bound players. Bruhn an example - if GWS can get more from, say, Hawks for him, should be made to go there.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

No it’s professional sport. 99% of us could only dream of doing for a living.
The nba, nfl, mbl and nhl do it. Aren’t we trying to mimic American sports?

They can do it because of the wages the players get. Unless afl player wages get to that level (which the game cant afford) the aflpa will never allow no consent trades unfortunately.

 

[Scotty_222]

A South Australian that left for Queensland and a home grown Western Australian leaving for Victoria kind of contradicts the argument.

That’s generally for opportunity. They realised if they want to continue their afl dream it’s probably not going to be in their home state they are ok with it.

When you have Port chasing Horne-Frances they realise they can do the job they love at home

 

[Scotty_222]

They can do it because of the wages the players get. Unless afl player wages get to that level (which the game cant afford) the aflpa will never allow no consent trades unfortunately.

What 20 year old kid gets a wage close 800k - 1mill other then professional sport. It’s all relative

 

[Scotty_222]

I can’t speak for the others but the NHL sure as s**t don’t do it.

Edit: turns out the NHL do have that, but players are now putting no trade clauses into contracts.

And no I have no desire to mimic America. We don’t have the right to just send people across the country like that for entertainment for fifteen years. National draft at 18, sure, otherwise no.

No trade clauses have only slowly come in over the last couple of years and it’s generally the stars that have that in their contracts

 

[Superstar swan]

If contracted players can dictate to a club where they play and handicap their original team

Why can't the afl now allow contracted players who request a trade to be traded to any team his team wishes

 

[Diverbelow]

Scrap the draft and enforce a draft salary cap of say $800k. If a club wants the highest rating 18 year old kid then they bid for him. May have to pay $800k a year but that will be their only pick that year. Then make that a 3 year contract with no option to trade or the player to move.

 

[bmaurizio]

If contracted players can dictate to a club where they play and handicap their original team

Why can't the afl now allow contracted players who request a trade to be traded to any team his team wishes

What you suggest is both logical and practical , however the structures within which one navigates in and adheres to, aren’t always set up this way, unfortunately.
AFL is archaic and cumbersome in its support for the expansionary teams, it’s steadfast & intractable they will eventually realize thought , A grade talent will be mobile it gravitates to different ideals.

 

[dumb]

i hesitate to suggest but poaching 1st year draftees seems like the sort of thing that the afl might like to have minimum trade requirements written in blood somewhere. keeps teams and their destabilising influence out of the ears of boys unless they're genuine.
of course the unintended consequence is then teams trying to offload them.

 

[Northernsoul74]

Twomey calling the issue out on trade radio. Afl has issues.

 

[CrowFan77]

I think the issues with equalisation go beyond the obvious factors:

• father/son
• NGAs
• free agency, etc.

If you think about the NBA, the bottom team gets a top draft selection to (hopefully) fill a spot in their starting 5. i.e. fill 20% of their on field team.

The bottom AFL team gets the same, but it only fills about 5% of their on field team - that is far less help.

Perhaps the draft order should be:

18th picks 1,2
17th picks 3,4
16th picks 5,6
15th picks 7,8
..
..
..
2nd picks 33,34
1st picks 35,36

That way bottom teams could improve faster and top teams would have very little currency to get better.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Victorian clubs benefitting the most from the "go-home" factor is a myth perpetuated on here nearly every day.

Do more players get traded to Victorian clubs than any other single state? Yes, they do - but that's because there are 10 clubs in Victoria.

Do players really move because they are homesick? Not often, no. Most of the time players move because they have been offered a better contract (let's be honest, this is the majority), or a better role or a better chance at success. Players rarely move just to 'go home', otherwise they would be nominating a state and not a specific club that has lured them with the best contract.

For those that are just looking to move to a certain state, Victorian teams have 9 other clubs competing for the contract. Not only does this mean they have to pay more to get their man, but each individual club is not overly benefitted because the spoils are split 10 ways. Non Victorian clubs, when a player identifies they wish to go to WA, SA, etc - only have 1 other club they are competing with - and most of the time, one of the clubs is massively struggling (West Coast Now, Freo previously, Adelaide now, Port previously, Gold Coast now, GWS now, etc). IN other words, if a player wants to go to WA or SA, for example, the likes of Freo (WC up until the last season or 2) have a VERY high likelihood of getting that player (AND can offer less as their is only 1 struggling alternative). If a player wants to 'go home' to Victoria, you always have several other top 4 and top 8 clubs who can attract his signature just as easily. Look at North, how many big name recruits have they attracted over the years? Barely any.

This whole idea that non-Victorian clubs deserve advantages to compensate for the 'leg up' that Victorian teams get from the "go-home" factor is a myth. Non Victorian clubs are advantaged as much, if not more so, than their individual Victorian counterparts. Looking at the raw numbers of players traded back to their home state and dividing by the number of clubs in that state confirms that (without even factoring in that players typically move for reasons other than 'going home' anyway).

 

[Cornelius Roy]

Worst clubs with the top picks either not getting access to or unable to confidently take the best available talent.

Yeah, that's a problem for mine.

 

[banzai]

Considering its illegal and if challenged in court would fold, yes. They have problems.

Its not illegal as its collectively bargained for by the players and the league. Do you think a draft would survive this long in America if it was illegal?

 

[Andyy]

The go home factor will always be prominent in our game simply because most major states have professional teams and most players would be thinking 'why live interstate if I can secure a trade back home and play/live near my family'?

Equalisation should only be a factor to a degree and I'm not convinced that draft picks is the way to go. I have said elsewhere that I think increased TPP + non-player soft caps would be beneficial so that struggling teams can afford to pay for better players and more coaching/player support rather than just taking a punt on a teenager and hoping they'll stay/come good at AFL level.

Lastly it's incumbent on all clubs to ensure that they are successful businesses. Richmond is a good example of a club that ensured it was being well managed internally as a priority and then on-field success followed once the club was stable. Looking at North & Essendon you can see why players don't stay - they are so unstable and won't be successful on-field until they are successful off-field.

 

[iameviljez]

Its not illegal as its collectively bargained for by the players and the league. Do you think a draft would survive this long in America if it was illegal?

It does seem at odds with Murican notions of FREEDUM