Opinion Top 4 sides should not be able to access free agents.

[Snarls Barkley]

Imagine if someone like Tom Lynch wasn’t allowed to join Melbourne because they finished top four and then they finished 17th the next year.

Don’t think it’s a great look that the best side of the previous two years is able to sign the best key forward under 27 but not sure there is much you can do about it. Got to give them some credit, it’s just good use of the salary cap.

 

[Monkey King]

No issue with the Tigers getting Lynch. Only issue I have is they didn’t have to part with any recruiting currency, yet everyone got bumped down the order to compensate GC. It just throws the system out of balance.

Free agency could be like academy players, market sets the rate for FA’s with bids (at the beginning of the season) and the destination club pays points discount to compensate the club being left. It’s so logical, straightforward and transparent ... so of course, the AFL will never do it.

 

[HTT]

Defeats the purpose of ‘free’ agency, and the salary cap prevents it from getting too far out of hand. Big clubs that play finals will hold the upper hand but it’s not like it’s holding well managed teams down.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

If a top 4 team has the cap space, then good luck to them. I don't see a problem with it

It's not a 'top 4' problem per se.

It's a 'big club' problem. Only Richmond, Essendon, Collingwood, Melbourne and Hawthorn are fixtured 'big games' on the MCG.

And funnily enough, surprise surprise....these are the clubs that the 'big fish' choose.

And each time, the reason they cite is the big games.

They forego money - just to play in blockbusters.


So the big clubs get better, due to an advantage only they get.


Not sure of the solution, aside from making the fixture even. But if that happened, overall revenue would fall and the cash handouts would dry up.


But it's definitely a problem.

 

[thecotch]

Big players should be on the big stage. Not rotting away with cellar dwellers.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Big players should be on the big stage. Not rotting away with cellar dwellers.

Two things:

Why is the big stage reserved for certain clubs only?

And wiuld the cellar dwellars be cellar dwellers if they were allowed access to the big stage?

 

[PerthBoy86]

Good thing we finished 5th then.

 

[StonesThrow]

It's like the free market theory. Only the strong survive or until the AFL subsidises you.

 

[Cripptonite]

Firstly well done Richmond for using the system to their advantage but it’s massively flawed.

In terms of quality free agents of note, it’s steal from the poor and give to the rich. This is what happens when we give the players too much power.

Wait until Brandon Ellis goes to Gold Coast this year on very similar coin to Lynch. Richmond will get pick 19 compo.

Thanks AFL, what a world we live in.

 

[Kwality]

Tom Lynch was too good a player to be wasted at the Suns. He gave 8 years to that club, why shouldn't he be able to move to a club in the window?

I'd suggest the OP wants more FIX in the way the competition is run, e.g the FIX includes the GF the G - understand you benefiited from the Lynch deal so dont see anything wrong.

 

[threesixpio]

Agreed. The two premierships without him helped but still..

 

[Coach_Required]

Strange thread, I thought I read earlier this year Lynch was going to ruin Richmond and had the turning circle of a truck. Keep the tears coming sooks.

On SM-T385 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Free Agents going to top 4 teams

2012
Quinten Lynch (COL)
Clinton Young (COL)
Jonathan Simpkin (HAW) *Premiership

2013
Colin Sylvia (FRE)
Lance Franklin (SYD)
Jeremy Laidler (SYD)
Tom Derickx (RIC)

2014
James Frawley (HAW)
Jarrad Waite (NM)
Shaun Higgins (NM)

2017
Lachlan Keeffe (GWS)

2018
Tom Lynch (RIC)

Top 4 teams haven't really done much in this space anyway. Franklin, Higgins and Lynch are the only big pickups.

Simpson was delisted. He became a DFA.

Not sure he fits with the rest.

 

[QuietB]

It's not a good look and you wouldn't find my team doing it.

At least not more than two years in a row

It will catch with them. He is getting paid a bomb which will eventually hit their cap and force them to trade away depth.

 

[Kwality]

No issue with the Tigers getting Lynch. Only issue I have is they didn’t have to part with any recruiting currency, yet everyone got bumped down the order to compensate GC. It just throws the system out of balance.

Free agency could be like academy players, market sets the rate for FA’s with bids (at the beginning of the season) and the destination club pays points discount to compensate the club being left. It’s so logical, straightforward and transparent ... so of course, the AFL will never do it.

Free agency is logical, like it or not, its an acknowledgement that the draft is a big imposition.

Cant see anything logical in what you are suggesting, its a FIX to fiddle with playing lists is it not?

 

[threesixpio]

Team supporters who whinge about FA need to look at Brissie. Players don’t just go to “successful teams” - they go where the culture is good. Add Fagan and Hodge to Brissie and it goes from team exodus central to a destination club.

Dew is a massive improvement for GC but they need more. They tried to nab Burgoyne and failed. There’s a loss right there. Get a wise head, leader and all round good guy to a club and you’re already half way there.

Port, Freo, GC, Crows - basket case cultures and if you turn this around FAs will come your way.

 

[quotemokc]

AFL free agency is flawed because there is not enough free agents year to year

 

[RudyBlue]

AFL free agency is flawed because there is not enough free agents year to year

And salary floor too high

I wouldn’t mind 6 year RFA and a lower salary floor

 

[wizzard400]

The AFLPA have fought tooth and nail for years to bring in free agency, and even then players have to wait 8 years or whatever to become unrestricted unless they're delisted, which already limits their options.

I doubt they would agree to another restrictive change. If top 4 teams have the cap space then they can do whatever they like.

 

[go you pups]

Free Agents going to top 4 teams

2012
Quinten Lynch (COL)
Clinton Young (COL)
Jonathan Simpkin (HAW) *Premiership

2013
Colin Sylvia (FRE)
Lance Franklin (SYD)
Jeremy Laidler (SYD)
Tom Derickx (RIC)

2014
James Frawley (HAW)
Jarrad Waite (NM)
Shaun Higgins (NM)

2017
Lachlan Keeffe (GWS)

2018
Tom Lynch (RIC)

Top 4 teams haven't really done much in this space anyway. Franklin, Higgins and Lynch are the only big pickups.

Frawley was easily in Melbourne's best handful of players and Waite was decent at Carlton, yet frustrating, hence his nickname on this forum being "Potential"

They were miles ahead of Higgins in terms of fish at the time they all moved, Higgins was largely injury prone at the Dogs and a somewhat unfulfilled talent.

He turned into a star at North in 2017 when they moved him into midfield full time. His first two years had him playing mainly as a serviceable half forward (a similar role he had at the Dogs for most of his time there).

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Why an arbitrary "top four", not top top three, or top 14?

What I would like to see is the cap floor reduced, so the tems near the bottom can have more space to go after free agents. As it is, you have to pay so close to the cap that you either have to let your better players go

Also, remove "banking", and allowances for bonuses, etc, which can take a side over the cap within the rules. Every player payment should be within the cap, with harsh penalties for payment breaches (as opposed to administrative issues such late lodgment of documents, etc).

Without a substantial cap increase the AFLPA won't allow it. There is no way the minimum player payment will be reduced, only the minimum percentage of cap. If GC were paying 85% of the cap because of the quality of the list, they would have much more space to immediately improve the team and increase salary of the players they wish to keep. And once winning the "go home" factor reduces, just look next door at the Lions.

Everybody would be playing under the same rules. Premiers could go after free agents. But, its harder, as more successful clubs on field should be nearer the cap. (Rich clubs would still have an advantage though, as players can earn so much more through media and other things outside the club - even with third party restrictions being the #5 player at Collingwood is worth more in endorsement and media deals than being the #1 player at North).

 

[Monkey King]

Free agency is logical, like it or not, its an acknowledgement that the draft is a big imposition.

Cant see anything logical in what you are suggesting, its a FIX to fiddle with playing lists is it not?

Free agency is about a player‘s right to self determine; a perfectly reasonable idea.

The recruiting economy is balanced by salary cap and draft/player currency, and the free agency system still falls under the influence of both. You can’t recruit a player outside the salary cap and a players loss will be compensated for with draft currency. Seems logical so far.

Where it falls down for me is you’d expect the destination club to be picking up the tab, but they only pick up half; the salary cap expense. The draft/trade currency cost is shared by every other club bumping their picks down the order. This doesn’t seem very logical to me.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

Free agency is about a player‘s right to self determine; a perfectly reasonable idea.

The recruiting economy is balanced by salary cap and draft/player currency, and the free agency system still falls under the influence of both. You can’t recruit a player outside the salary cap and a players loss will be compensated for with draft currency. Seems logical so far.

Where it falls down for me is you’d expect the destination club to be picking up the tab, but they only pick up half; the salary cap expense. The draft/trade currency cost is shared by every other club bumping their picks down the order. This doesn’t seem very logical to me.

Yep, the AFL has a 'system' to determine what the club losing the player gets, so the AFL should be telling the receiving club to pony up that pick (or equivalent points) to get that player.

 

[Sir_Loin]

It’s called free agency for a reason. If he’s not free to go to the club of his choice call it something else.

Didn’t see port sooking it up when they got Tom Rockliff lol

 

[Heisenberg_]

At least not more than two years in a row

It will catch with them. He is getting paid a bomb which will eventually hit their cap and force them to trade away depth.

If we win next week it’s already worth it, we had to trade away depth last season but have just improved it with first year players who’ve come in and done it better anyway.