Opinion What unpopular AFL opinions do you have? - Part 2

[fidstar]

Nic Nat would be close

Maybe Shep a little lower

But what we saw was both were replaceable

Nic Nat is comfortably in our Top 10. Most likely Top 5.

Sheppard is definitely Top 10. Somewhere between 6 and 10.

Who cares if they are replaceable? That wasn't what I question. Everyone is replaceable.

Hawks won premierships after Franklin left. Geelong won a premiership after Ablett left. Does that make them spuds?

 

[dave123]

Nic Nat is comfortably in our Top 10. Probably Top 5.

Sheppard is definitely Top 10. Somewhere between 6 and 10.

Who cares if they are replaceable? That wasn't what I question. Everyone is replaceable.

Hawks won premierships after Franklin left. Geelong won a premiership after Ablett left. Does that make them spuds?

all good mate

 

[mcgarnacle]

I’d take it further. contracted players should only be able to move to a bottom 4 club.

that's an unpopular opinion....with me at least.

bottom 4 clubs are bottom 4 clubs because their football strategy and ops have been ineffective. They need to get their whole s**t together, not have players paraded to them on a platter.

 

[fidstar]

that's an unpopular opinion....with me at least.

bottom 4 clubs are bottom 4 clubs because their football strategy and ops have been ineffective. They need to get their whole s**t together, not have players paraded to them on a platter.

You could imagine it would make tanking worse as well. Imagine being the 5th bottom club with 4 rounds to play.

 

[Billy ray]

that's an unpopular opinion....with me at least.

bottom 4 clubs are bottom 4 clubs because their football strategy and ops have been ineffective. They need to get their whole s**t together, not have players paraded to them on a platter.

if you are contracted, see out your contract with your 'better club' with 'better strategy' and 'ops'.
but if you want out and have a year or more left on your contract, then roll the dice and go to a bottom 4.

 

[DazzaTys]

A player can break a contract and choose a club, why then can’t a club choose to trade whatever player they want.

 

[fidstar]

A player can break a contract and choose a club, why then can’t a club choose to trade whatever player they want.

A club can tell a player "tough s**t" if they really want.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

A player can break a contract and choose a club, why then can’t a club choose to trade whatever player they want.

I've thought about this a lot and when comparing to US Sports, I just don't think they get paid enough to uproot their whole life to live elsewhere. If the minimum was 500k then oh s**t yeah, free meat market I say.

 

[DazzaTys]

I've thought about this a lot and when comparing to US Sports, I just don't think they get paid enough to uproot their whole life to live elsewhere. If the minimum was 500k then oh s**t yeah, free meat market I say.

I do agree with what you’re saying. I just don’t like how a player can commit to a contract, then yet choose to break it so quickly.

 

[big_e]

A player can break a contract and choose a club, why then can’t a club choose to trade whatever player they want.

They actually can't just break the contract, though. In all of these cases, the club is agreeing to let them go. And I dare say a club wouldn't want to have a player who doesn't want to be there.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

I've thought about this a lot and when comparing to US Sports, I just don't think they get paid enough to uproot their whole life to live elsewhere. If the minimum was 500k then oh s**t yeah, free meat market I say.

The average salary is in the 3-400k range, and most players who are moving in these situations would be in the above average salary range. (Or at least their new contracts would be).

For most players cost shouldnt be an issue.
A simple solution would be to add a relocation payment to players being forced to move interstate (either all, or just players earning under 2 or 300k).

There's also an extremely simple solution if a player doesn't want to face being traded against their will:
Dont sign a long term contract if you can't commit for that length of time.
If you want the freedom to leave whenever you want - then stick to 12 month contracts.
If you want security of a 3-5 year deal, then you must make a commitment to that club for those 3-5 years. You cant change your mind a year in because you have a better offer from elsewhere.

 

[jatz14]

A player can break a contract and choose a club, why then can’t a club choose to trade whatever player they want.

The contracted player can only move if the club agrees, and if they get a half decent vdeal, agreeing to the deal is usually better than keeping an unhappy player.

Likewise, a club can trade a contracted player, if the player is agreeable to it.

So what you are suggesting is what is actually occurring now.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[jatz14]

A player can break a contract and choose a club, why then can’t a club choose to trade whatever player they want.

As an example, the Judd Kennedy trade. Kennedy was contracted and not looking to leave, but agreed to be part of the deal. Judd moved because he wanted to, Kennedy moved because the club wanted him to.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Hard Ball Get]

Trading future picks advantages big clubs like Hawthorn more than free agency.

Hate that clubs can do it.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Trading future picks advantages big clubs like Hawthorn more than free agency.

Hate that clubs can do it.

It advantages smart clubs

 

[The Falcon Strike]

I do agree with what you’re saying. I just don’t like how a player can commit to a contract, then yet choose to break it so quickly.

How is that different to what hawthorn have done with Burton?

The phenomenon of players treating contracts with disdain came long after clubs did the same

Players and clubs owe no more loyalty than what thier contract requires - if either party is unhappy with a contract - it’s not unreasonable to request a change in terms. It’s then up to the other party to agree or not

 

[Stratton_Gun]

Freo have made the right call r.e Hogan
.Melbourne want a lot for a guy that apparently trying to get rid of
. For a guy who Melbourne want as a backman, he wants 8 MIL over 8 years. If your current club wants to turn you into a backman, then you're not a million dollar a year forward
. Freos list is not great. 5 years ago sure take a risk and maybe snag a flag but even if he turned into a 60 goal a year forward (unlikely) they would be mid table at best.

 

[Hawk_francais]

Trading future picks advantages big clubs like Hawthorn more than free agency.

Hate that clubs can do it.

....because we get more future picks than other teams?

It suits our recruiting style based on where out list is at. That doesn't make it an advantage.

 

[col44]

Unpopular opinion..
Essendon Collingwood Richmond Hawthorn Geelong and Carlton to make up the 6 clubs in Victoria.

Na just stirring.

I would actually like to see a 2 tiered system similar to the EPL. Perhaps a 12 team comp and a 12 team comp below that with promotions and relegations for top and bottom 2. Means you play everyone twice H&A. Prelims in bottom tier would be as big as the GF. And there would be no sign of tanking in the top tier with the prospect of going down.
(There would also be a need to get 2 more teams to start in lower comp.. maybe there's our opportunity for Tas and Canberra)
I guess player movements would be twice as tough/crazy with promotion teams and relegation teams needing to be supplemented somehow.

 

[jatz14]

Unpopular opinion..
Essendon Collingwood Richmond Hawthorn Geelong and Carlton to make up the 6 clubs in Victoria.

Na just stirring.

I would actually like to see a 2 tiered system similar to the EPL. Perhaps a 12 team comp and a 12 team comp below that with promotions and relegations for top and bottom 2. Means you play everyone twice H&A. Prelims in bottom tier would be as big as the GF. And there would be no sign of tanking in the top tier with the prospect of going down.
(There would also be a need to get 2 more teams to start in lower comp.. maybe there's our opportunity for Tas and Canberra)
I guess player movements would be twice as tough/crazy with promotion teams and relegation teams needing to be supplemented somehow.

Will not work for the same reason it will not work for the A league, and does not work for EPL. The financial gap between the 2 divisions is to great. Teams coming up, with little money and 1 off season to prepare, do little more than fight tooth and nail not to get demoted again. The teams going down immediately go into financial purgatory. You end up with 2 divisions in the top division. Those teams that never go down, and are always in the top half, and those teams that yo yo between top division and bottom.

The bottom teams in the EPL contribute very little to it, fortunately for them, the EPL is so wealthy, it doesn't matter. Can you imagine Carlton and Collingwood, or Essendon and Richmond spending several years in division 2, replaced by Tasmania and the NT?

If Collingwood are in the lower division, can they, should they, retain their star players. Can the AFL afford to have high draw players sitting in the lower division. How do clubs recover if being demoted means not just a loss of cash, but players?

The EPL works in spite of pro/rel, not because of it.

 

[col44]

Will not work for the same reason it will not work for the A league, and does not work for EPL. The financial gap between the 2 divisions is to great. Teams coming up, with little money and 1 off season to prepare, do little more than fight tooth and nail not to get demoted again. The teams going down immediately go into financial purgatory. You end up with 2 divisions in the top division. Those teams that never go down, and are always in the top half, and those teams that yo yo between top division and bottom.

The bottom teams in the EPL contribute very little to it, fortunately for them, the EPL is so wealthy, it doesn't matter. Can you imagine Carlton and Collingwood, or Essendon and Richmond spending several years in division 2, replaced by Tasmania and the NT?

If Collingwood are in the lower division, can they, should they, retain their star players. Can the AFL afford to have high draw players sitting in the lower division. How do clubs recover if being demoted means not just a loss of cash, but players?

The EPL works in spite of pro/rel, not because of it.

Yeah. Not sure on how players or salary cap may be different for top and bottom which is what I mentioned. I agree it could be tricky but adds a different layer of interest. Both tiers would get televised but prime time slots may be reserved for Tier 1. I do concede you are right on many points and it could ultimately see supporters leave the game and it may not work. Just seems like a better feasibility study than the viability of a team in the NT.
And geez if teams knew it was 2 years away there would be a scramble to get your club to a point where they are well inside the top 12.

 

[Luv_our_club]

Excluding clubs from having AFLW teams is completely unfair... even if the number of teams needs to be limited.

The clubs that are excluded should be compensated in some manner - not sure exactly what form of compo.

But it is total bullshit that some teams got licenses and others didn't... and it's supposed to be just bad luck.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

....because we get more future picks than other teams?

It suits our recruiting style based on where out list is at. That doesn't make it an advantage.

I think your style is a given considering where the club was at when it was introduced. It sure does help. I respect the Hawks highly, it's not a crack at the club.

It advantages smart clubs

This isn't primary school. There are no smart clubs and dumb clubs. There are effective and ineffective people at every club.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

I think your style is a given considering where the club was at when it was introduced. It sure does help. I respect the Hawks highly, it's not a crack at the club.


This isn't primary school. There are no smart clubs and dumb clubs. There are effective and ineffective people at every club.

smart clubs, are the ones with smart and effective people, that know how to take advantage of the situations. Pretty simple. Cheers

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Excluding clubs from having AFLW teams is completely unfair... even if the number of teams needs to be limited.

The clubs that are excluded should be compensated in some manner - not sure exactly what form of compo.

But it is total bullshit that some teams got licenses and others didn't... and it's supposed to be just bad luck.

AFLW shot itself in the foot. They should have been different clubs, now they are going to be spread wayyyyyy to thin talent wise.