Why did the AFL introduce free agency without trades that do not require player consent?

[flamethrower]

The biggest problem with the current AFL free agency system is that the players have all of the power and the clubs have none. The only way to even this up is to allow clubs to trade players whenever they like. The smart players can then include no-trade clauses in their contracts to veto trades to certain teams without their permission, as the players in the States do.

Free agency was first introduced in Major League Baseball, and later in the NFL, NBA and the NHL, because at the time the owners had all the power and the players had none. The owners made millions out of the players, and the players were paid a pittance, as the players were the property of the team until traded or released. Free agency gave some of the power back to the players once they had played a pre-determined number of seasons, allowing them to have some say in where they wanted to play.

The owners still make their millions (or billions) and the in-demand players make their millions too - the only real losers are the fans who have seen ticket prices go through the roof.

 

[james Dean]

We don't have the same labour laws as the states.
Doubt the AFL could bring in forced trading even if the AFLPA agreed.

It’s a reasonable clause given the circumstances to include in the players’ contracts that a trade could occur. Legally I don’t think this would be a roadblock

 

[Teen Wolf]

And this will stop contracted players requesting trades... how?

 

[Gralin]

It’s a reasonable clause given the circumstances to include in the players’ contracts that a trade could occur. Legally I don’t think this would be a roadblock

NRL don't have a drafting because they lost a restraint of trade court case
AFL have to keep the AFLPA inside or same thing could happen.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

The issue I have is that players can demand a trade and a club before they are even free agents, whether under contract or not. If you’re a contracted player or not a free agent yet and you want to suddenly be traded to another club, you should have no say whatso ever what club you get traded too.

The original club should have enough power to get the best deal for themselves.

Also a big fan of clubs being able to trade players. It’s a national comp and you’re earning hundreds of thousands of dollars. If you don’t like the idea of moving states then don’t play a national game. The players are on big money either side of the picture and if it’s a choice of being traded by the club or not playing regular AFL footy the following season, then surely the players would prefer to go to another club too.

 

[PP34]

And this will stop contracted players requesting trades... how?

It won't, but at least teams will be able to get more value for a player if they want out. Instead of being forced to trade them to a club, the team will benefit from more of a bidding war than there is currently.

 

[Topkent]

Because they are humans and deserve to have a choice where they live and which club they spend their time on earth at.

Imagine players traded to crap teams with deep pockets

Piss off, they can play state league footy if they are desperate to play in their home state or else pack ya bags and play wherever the * you want.

This is really easily solved in the US and Canada, when they offer a bloke x amount over 5 years say 10million, the manager will come back to them with an offer of million over 5 years with a no trade agreement which means they can't be traded without them accepting.

No reason the AFL couldn't implement the same system.

 

[pab neruda]

It's stuffed and it's not actually helping equalization either. That Tom Lynch is likely to be moving from Gold Coast to Richmond (where he'll earn less money than he could've at the Gold Coast) shows just how stuffed it is.

Yeah, but having free agency isn't necessarily about making more money. It's about having the power to choose.

In the US, Kevin Durant sacrificed money to play in a more successful team in a bigger city/market.
The limiting factor for Tom Lynch's earning capacity is probably market size more than contract size. Players like Lynch are probably the most likely to give up money in contract negotiations. Lower rated players are more reliant on their contractual earnings.

The money he will make as the spearhead of the biggest club in the country is not comparable to the money he will make wasting away in a region which hasn't shown a great interest in professional sports in general.

 

[40porpoise]

Completely agree. The current system screws clubs. I’d love to see this introduced, and sooner rather than later

 

[james Dean]

NRL don't have a drafting because they lost a restraint of trade court case
AFL have to keep the AFLPA inside or same thing could happen.

It would have to be agreed upon with the AFLPA and put into the next CBA. I doubt it would be considered an unreasonable addition.

 

[Boxhead_31]

NRL don't have a drafting because they lost a restraint of trade court case
AFL have to keep the AFLPA inside or same thing could happen.

How do the NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB get around that?

 

[The Passenger]

If AFL wages ever get to the point where numerous players are earning $10M+ a season and draftees are coming on $500K+ then things like trading with player consent will probably be on the cards.

As it is now they do get paid very well, but not even half of them are on money that can set them up for life, unlike the big US leagues where probably 80% can set themselves up for life just on their first full time contract.

The AFL would also be s**t scared of the whole system falling apart if challenged.

Whilst the draft, salary cap and trading systems are (mostly) good for a healthy competition, I can't imagine any of it would withstand a serious challenge in court. If it were to fall apart the competition would become incredibly one sided to the larger clubs, whilst player salaries at the top end would go through the roof leaving clubs (particularly smaller clubs) under huge strain to continue competing and the bottom players losing out on a chunk of the pie.

 

[Freoforever86]

Players should be able to be traded anywhere the club wants before they’re eligible for their first free agency.

 

[Duskfire]

Does free agency really screw over clubs as much as some claim? Has anyone left a club and that club gone to s**t afterwards? People keep bringing up Lynch, but Gold Coast were terrible with him. This way they get some picks and grab a fresh young player or two.

Everyone loses but everyone also wins. Everyone has access to free agency. It’s up to the clubs to provide a reason for said player to stay.

 

[james Dean]

How do the NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB get around that?

All those leagues have very long drawn out bargaining agreements between owners and players associations. They are often very ugly and lead to player strikes, resulting in seasons being missed.

 

[quotemokc]

I feel like AFL players are very entitled.

Compare this to the US where players are often very humble and will play anywhere when they get the chance.

 

[Teen Wolf]

It won't, but at least teams will be able to get more value for a player if they want out. Instead of being forced to trade them to a club, the team will benefit from more of a bidding war than there is currently.

AFL clubs can't be forced to trade contracted players. They do it because it's preferable to having somebody on the team who doesn't want to be there.

 

[10571z]

The system is fine. If players constantly want out of your club then look in your own backyard.

Don’t sook because players want out.

Also when was the last time a club got ripped off because they player only elected one club?

Beams got us a great fair deal.

 

[Pessimistic]

Because the AFL is gutless. The amount of power the players have is simply absurd.

Find it hilarious and sad how so many players refuse to leave the bubble they grew up in. Complete opposite to overseas sportsmen where most are simply happy to be well paid pro athletes.

All the power is in the hands of the player basically. If a player wants out and wants to go to a certain club, you’re at the mercy of what they can offer. What a complete crock of s**t. Should be able to shop around the player for the best offer.

There’s a staggering difference in pay scales between these leagues and everyone knows it. Even thoug AFL is high in the spectator numbers in world terms

 

[Topkent]

The system is fine. If players constantly want out of your club then look in your own backyard.

Don’t sook because players want out.

Also when was the last time a club got ripped off because they player only elected one club?

Beams got us a great fair deal.

Buddy for pick 19, Danger for one first round pick and some change, lions got completely raped over Yeo Docherty and Polec.

 

[deck]

Because the AFL is gutless. The amount of power the players have is simply absurd.

Find it hilarious and sad how so many players refuse to leave the bubble they grew up in. Complete opposite to overseas sportsmen where most are simply happy to be well paid pro athletes.

To be fair most players in the US come grew up in places that don't have a team. Our situation is a little unique in the fact a majority of the population grow up in one of the 5 major cities.

 

[10571z]

Buddy for pick 19, Danger for one first round pick and some change, lions got completely raped over Yeo Docherty and Polec.

Buddy and danger were free agents were they not?

 

[SterlingArcher]

Never seen a league where fans go so batshit crazy sooking about the player movement rules.

But but in America!! `Cúck` thinking!! Players are sooks! No other league! Buckley talked to Lynch!

 

[KermitJagger]

Just because the USA does it doesn’t make it good.

Trading players without consent is horrible.

End of the day any side can turn it around in Afl with smart trading and strong footy programs. Look at the dogs, Richmond breaking long droughts.

People can sook all they like about players wanting to move but how many wanted out of Richmond this year?

Bulldogs are a flash in the pan but Richmond are the most supported club in the country. They probably have a 30-40% share of draftee supportership, and that goes a little bit towards attracting and retaining talent.

Buddy and danger were free agents were they not?

They were, Danger was traded however as Adelaide indicated that they would match.

A few more instances were clubs were ripped off;

Luke Ball - St Kilda to Collingwood (Ross's fault really, but nevertheless)
Cam McCarthy - GWS to Freo (Even though it doesn't seem like much of a rip-off now)
Aish, Yeo, Docherty, Polec - Brisbane (In all cases got less of a return than they had initially paid)

There are others, but they happen.

 

[Kwality]

Honestly at first I thought it would be a good idea, but as time goes on I’m beginning to think it has been half arsed in its implementation and the AFL hasn’t thought things through properly.

How is it fair that a player can screw you around for several years refusing to re-sign a new contract but not asking to leave, only to then leave once he’s a free agent. If they don’t want to recommit you should be able to trade them instead of wasting your time with them.

The compensation system is just garbage too.

What club would be silly enough to take a player under these terms, taking someone who doesnt want to be there.

Take the Ryan O'Keefe example as executed by mature heads in the player camp & at the Swans .... a very professional approach, not one sook in sight.