List Mgmt. The unchecked power of player managers

[Bunk Moreland]

Saw this one raised multiple times yesterday, the strong inference being that player management groups are driving trade and list management outcomes under the thinly-veiled threat of future trouble if the club doesn't comply.

Ie - "Do this trade and get our player where he wants to go, or you won't be getting our players in future - we'll push them elsewhere."

It's yet another factor clubs are having to take into account when list building - I can't delist or trade that player, or refuse to do this trade, because it'll piss his management off and impact us in future.

Some of these groups like TLA and Connors Sports have become huge and represent a large percentage of the player pool. They're now using that power in much the way a union does, to put pressure on.

But the AFL players already have a union...?

It sounds like they're ripe for being pruned with a cap on how many players you can represent. That'll never happen because they're part of the inner circle of the AFL, but surely this is a big problem for clubs who can't even make their own independent list decisions.

 

[Chief]

Do you think it affected any trades this year?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Storm in a teacup imo.

Players that needed to move ended up moving. Players that wanted to move only did so if the deal suited both transacting clubs.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Do you think it affected any trades this year?

Don’t know, but it was spoken about regarding the Houston and Caleb Daniel trades.

 

[ash_1050]

Player managers campaign on behalf of their clients.

Where's the controversy?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Player managers campaign on behalf of their clients.

Where's the controversy?

Theoretical example -

One of your players wants to leave and the trade being offered is gross unders.

His player manager calls and says “do the trade, I also manage Harley Reid, he’s coming to Melbourne next year and I will ensure he doesn’t consider you guys unless you do this deal”

That’s what’s basically being alleged. You really think that’s ok?

 

[Dogflogger]

Theoretical example -

One of your players wants to leave and the trade being offered is gross unders.

His player manager calls and says “do the trade, I also manage Harley Reid, he’s coming to Melbourne next year and I will ensure he doesn’t consider you guys unless you do this deal”

That’s what’s basically being alleged. You really think that’s ok?

His job is to get the best results for his clients.
He would be too professional to have any bias for certain teams so it all evens out in the long run.
Am I doing it right?

 

[Chief]

His player manager calls and says “do the trade, I also manage Harley Reid, he’s coming to Melbourne next year and I will ensure he doesn’t consider you guys unless you do this deal”

That’s what’s basically being alleged. You really think that’s ok?

Did the club call [player] and let them know that their manager is limiting their future options for the manager's own benefit?

 

[Jane Doe]

Don’t know, but it was spoken about regarding the Houston and Caleb Daniel trades.

It definitely had an effect on the Stringer trade. GWS walked away from it till Conners got involved.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Theoretical example -

One of your players wants to leave and the trade being offered is gross unders.

His player manager calls and says “do the trade, I also manage Harley Reid, he’s coming to Melbourne next year and I will ensure he doesn’t consider you guys unless you do this deal”

That’s what’s basically being alleged. You really think that’s ok?

Do any of these allegations have any basis or simply more pathetic rumour mongering that originates from this site?

 

[Vindicater]

It definitely had an effect on the Stringer trade. GWS walked away from it till Conners got involved.

I reckon that was a play by GWS to ensure it only paid the 53.

 

[ash_1050]

Theoretical example -

One of your players wants to leave and the trade being offered is gross unders.

His player manager calls and says “do the trade, I also manage Harley Reid, he’s coming to Melbourne next year and I will ensure he doesn’t consider you guys unless you do this deal”

That’s what’s basically being alleged. You really think that’s ok?

That's how the world works, it's politicking.

It's what goes on every day in Parliament (e.g. crossbencher support), it's what happens in business (e.g. supermarkets with suppliers), and sport is no exemption.

For example Essendon accepted the Stringer deal because they didn't want to offer him two years, he's made some questionable choices in terms of acquaintances, and they don't want to be seen as a club who refused to let someone lock in two years elsewhere and instead held him hostage for one. It works best for everyone if Essendon lose slightly there but keep their reputation than to play hardball and lock him in for slightly more draft equity.

 

[Rob]

That's how the world works, it's politicking.

It's what goes on every day in Parliament (e.g. crossbencher support), it's what happens in business (e.g. supermarkets with suppliers), and sport is no exemption.

For example Essendon accepted the Stringer deal because they didn't want to offer him two years, he's made some questionable choices in terms of acquaintances, and they don't want to be seen as a club who refused to let someone lock in two years elsewhere and instead held him hostage for one. It works best for everyone if Essendon lose slightly there but keep their reputation than to play hardball and lock him in for slightly more draft equity.

That's not the same. The allegation is that certain player managers threaten to mismanage other players as leverage.

In the example before, surely if Reid's manager refuses to negotiate with a particular club due to not getting his own way in relation to another player, then that's not acting in Reid's best interests? In which case, how is the AFLPA fine with that?

 

[Jimmy the Ghost]

I saw this today or yesterday but cant find the original link on Twitter

 

[Bunk Moreland]

That's how the world works, it's politicking.

It's what goes on every day in Parliament (e.g. crossbencher support), it's what happens in business (e.g. supermarkets with suppliers), and sport is no exemption.

For example Essendon accepted the Stringer deal because they didn't want to offer him two years, he's made some questionable choices in terms of acquaintances, and they don't want to be seen as a club who refused to let someone lock in two years elsewhere and instead held him hostage for one. It works best for everyone if Essendon lose slightly there but keep their reputation than to play hardball and lock him in for slightly more draft equity.

That’s not what I’m talking about - players and clubs can do what they like for whatever reason within the rules - it’s their transaction.

Player agents are a third party, the accusation here is they’re exerting influence and making threats to push outcomes that favour them ahead of the clubs’ own interests - it’s not reasonable to be involving yourself in a club’s internal decisions like that.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Managers are necessarily of course but there’s a pretty decent argument imo that the big agencies have got too big and thus have too much power - they perhaps need to be capped at a certain number of listed players.

 

[Del28562]

Storm in a teacup imo.

Players that needed to move ended up moving. Players that wanted to move only did so if the deal suited both transacting clubs.

That's crap, houston would have gone to.north or the dees. Connors didn't want to deal with the dees after petracca and he pushes players to the better clubs and not build. So port just had to.take it. I wonder if he manages butters too

 

[Del28562]

Managers are necessarily of course but there’s a pretty decent argument imo that the big agencies have got too big and thus have too much power - they perhaps need to be capped at a certain number of listed players.

If the afl let's clubs trade, managers have less say and we don't end up with a tiered club system. I can't see north, saints and gold coast ever again seriously contending for a flag, even essendon

 

[Tas]

I think they should step in, it is their job to look out for the best interest of the players they manage.

Had Port said Houston was a required player, contracted and we were not going to entertain any trade requests then I don't think the manager would have got involved. He signed the contract, your word means something.

It was at the point that Port were saying what they wanted for him that he had gone from required to leaving and that was Port's error imo. At that point he was leaving and it was just a matter of the price.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

They totally have a place but have become far too involved at trade time. Represent the players interests but it feels like too many are becoming wheelers and dealers. Using access to other players as a bargaining chip is too far… they are simply acting like a union then. They’re not a union - the AFL has a union.

 

[Toump Ass]

If Paul Conner won't deal with Melbourne his star player Brand Petraccas might be looking for another flog manager soon lmao

 

[Del28562]

If Paul Conner won't deal with Melbourne his star player Brand Petraccas might be looking for another flog manager soon lmao

You do realise Christians brother works with Paul and hence why we got the media links. He's gone after this season

 

[T2B_]

If I'm a player and want to go somewhere in particular and he's telling me no because of his dealings, then I'd be telling him to **** off and getting a new manager.

 

[Del28562]

They totally have a place but have become far too involved at trade time. Represent the players interests but it feels like too many are becoming wheelers and dealers. Using access to other players as a bargaining chip is too far… they are simply acting like a union then. They’re not a union - the AFL has a union.

Exactly we need club ability to trade players without their consent. It would stop managers monopolising the game and clubs just having to trade that's well unders to keep managers happy

 

[Del28562]

If I'm a player and want to go somewhere in particular and he's telling me no because of his dealings, then I'd be telling him to **** off and getting a new manager.

A player doesn't directly deal with the club. North's deal for him was far better for Port, but connors has the daicos boys and gets Nick to call him. Connors then goes to Port this is the best deal you'll get and they know that any of connors stable could leave them if they don't keep him happy and players won't go to Port as he'll say don't go there.