Opinion "Why free agency has become an unmitigated disaster as a player movement mechanism"

[Lore]

Came across an interesting article by Jon Ralph for the Herald Sun. It's an opinion piece, and whatever you think of the man's reporting, he might just have a point that you agree with this time round.

I think the following quote summarises his point effectively:

Free agency forces clubs to make binding decisions on the form of players 6-8 years into the future, aware the only other alternative is to lose them to rivals who will pay them.

Players deserve every dollar they can get because they put on the show and their careers can be over at any minute.

But these past free seasons have also been full of prosperity.

Players will enjoy a 37 per cent pay rise from 2023-2027 that far exceeds the meagre pay rises — if any — across the community.

They are shielded by policies like the Illicit drugs code which protects their identities if they transgress where many in the community might lose their jobs in similar circumstances.

They sign vast long-term deals that do not require them to pay back money if they underperform.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/wreck-it-ralph-why-free-agency-has-become-an-unmitigated-disaster-as-a-player-movement-mechanism/news-story/822e0430215ca2feabe9fabf964e1ecc?amp

And an AI generated summary via CoPilot:

---

Main Argument​

The AFL’s free agency system, introduced in 2012 to give players more flexibility, has devolved into a chaotic and flawed mechanism that disproportionately benefits players while burdening clubs.

---

Key Points​

• Player Leverage & Long-Term Deals:
  • Players like Jordan Ridley, Charlie Curnow, and Zach Merrett are now stuck in long-term contracts they willingly signed, chasing security and money. These deals have made them wealthy but unhappy, and now they want out.
• “Pre-agency” Pressure:
  • Clubs are pressured to offer massive extensions years before free agency to avoid losing players, leading to inflated contracts (e.g., Aaron Naughton
    33

    Aaron Naughton

    Age

    26

    Ht

    196cm

    Wt

    92kg

    Pos.

    Fwd

    Career

    Season

    Last 5

    D

    10.7

    3star

    K

    7.0

    3star

    HB

    3.7

    3star

    M

    4.9

    5star

    T

    1.8

    4star

    G

    0.8

    4star

    D

    6.3

    1star

    K

    4.0

    1star

    HB

    2.3

    2star

    M

    2.5

    3star

    T

    0.8

    1star

    G

    0.5

    4star

    D

    12.8

    4star

    K

    8.8

    4star

    HB

    4.0

    3star

    M

    4.8

    5star

    T

    1.2

    3star

    G

    0.0

    1star

    ’s 8-year deal).
• Unbalanced Outcomes:
  • Clubs like Geelong and Brisbane have benefited from free agency, while others like North Melbourne have gained little.
  • Players with modest achievements (e.g., Jack Silvagni
    1

    Jack Silvagni

    Age

    27

    Ht

    194cm

    Wt

    92kg

    Pos.

    D/F

    Career

    Season

    Last 5

    D

    11.0

    3star

    K

    7.1

    3star

    HB

    3.8

    3star

    M

    3.8

    4star

    T

    2.9

    4star

    MG

    176.9

    3star

    D

    5.3

    1star

    K

    4.0

    1star

    HB

    1.3

    1star

    M

    1.7

    2star

    T

    0.7

    1star

    MG

    91.0

    2star

    D

    9.2

    3star

    K

    6.2

    3star

    HB

    3.0

    3star

    M

    3.4

    4star

    T

    2.8

    5star

    MG

    131.4

    3star

    , Sam Draper) are landing multi-million dollar deals due to market inflation.
• Essendon’s Dilemma:
  • Merrett and Ridley both re-signed multiple times, believing in the club’s future, but now want to leave due to lack of success.
  • Essendon may hold them to their contracts, despite their dissatisfaction.
• Carlton & Curnow:
  • Curnow signed a six-year deal due to injury concerns but now wants out. Carlton may resist unless a strong trade offer emerges.
• Melbourne’s Example:
  • Similar issues with Christian Petracca and Clayton Oliver, who signed long-term deals and later regretted them.
• Club Risks vs. Player Security:
  • Clubs are forced to make long-term bets on players’ futures.
  • Players enjoy rising salaries, job security, and protections (e.g., illicit drug policy), but clubs can’t reduce pay for underperformance.

---

Conclusion​

While free agency has empowered players financially and contractually, it has created instability and inequity in the AFL. Clubs are left with little leverage, and the system now seems to favor player power at the expense of competitive balance and long-term planning.

 

[Elixuh]

It’s a stupid rule when you have 10 teams, over half the comp, in one city.

Additionally, when they brought it in, they did so on its own with no other negotiations re other mechanisms. It was stupidly done.

I’d get rid of FA altogether or have a cap on the number you can bring in every 3-5 years.

Getting rid of compensation for any team outside the bottom 4 is the most obvious and immediate need.

 

[Chism]

Mick Malthouse also said the same thing in 2014 and google it! He has been 100% right 11 years on now and he called it.

 

[go_the_dockers]

It has been a great way of strengthening the strong Vic clubs, plus Brisbane and Sydney and for sake the rest of the clubs.

Malthouse was very accurate with his assessment.

I am surprised salary cap is not working at all , but I guess players just pay for a lot less at the good clubs. An example of this is Geelong having room for Marshall from St Kilda.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I wonder if free agency is fixed if similar conditions to the US are brought in, mainly

• Players should be closer to 50% of the games income, not the 37% (or whatever it is) at the moment.
• Introduce max contracts to avoid someone paying Harley Reid 50 bajillion dollars. This includes limited slots for a max contracted player
• Only max contract players can get band 1 compo, or, maybe some leniency with a bottom 4 team.

Too convoluted? The whole system is definitely not working together, 100% agree there

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Interesting from Wreck it Ralph.

Jared Rivers
Sam Blease

Sam Blease

Age

34

Ht

184cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.1

3star

K

7.6

3star

HB

3.5

3star

M

2.1

2star

T

1.6

4star

CL

0.7

3star

No current season stats available

D

14.8

4star

K

9.6

4star

HB

5.2

4star

M

2.0

3star

T

1.0

3star

CL

0.6

3star

Scott Selwood

Scott Selwood

Age

35

Ht

186cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.1

5star

K

8.8

3star

HB

10.3

5star

M

3.5

4star

T

5.8

5star

CL

3.7

5star

No current season stats available

D

12.0

3star

K

5.2

2star

HB

6.8

5star

M

2.8

3star

T

1.2

3star

Luke Dahlhaus

40

Luke Dahlhaus

Age

33

Ht

179cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

20.8

5star

K

9.2

4star

HB

11.6

5star

M

3.0

3star

T

4.4

5star

G

0.7

4star

D

13.0

3star

K

5.1

2star

HB

7.9

4star

M

2.9

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

0.6

4star

D

14.2

4star

K

6.6

3star

HB

7.6

5star

M

1.6

2star

T

3.8

5star

G

0.8

4star

Isaac Smith

7

Isaac Smith

Age

36

Ht

188cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.3

5star

K

13.0

5star

HB

8.4

5star

M

5.5

5star

T

2.9

4star

CL

1.7

4star

D

19.4

4star

K

11.1

4star

HB

8.3

4star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.5

3star

CL

1.3

4star

D

19.2

5star

K

10.6

4star

HB

8.6

5star

M

7.6

5star

T

2.0

4star

CL

0.6

3star

Tyson Stengle

18

Tyson Stengle

Age

27

Ht

175cm

Wt

71kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.3

2star

K

5.8

2star

HB

3.5

3star

M

1.8

2star

T

2.4

4star

G

1.1

4star

D

10.3

3star

K

5.3

2star

HB

5.0

3star

M

1.3

1star

T

2.0

3star

G

0.5

4star

D

8.8

3star

K

5.6

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

1.8

2star

T

2.6

4star

G

1.6

5star

(DFA)
Jack Martin

19

Jack Martin

Age

30

Ht

186cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.2

4star

K

10.0

4star

HB

6.3

4star

M

4.9

5star

T

3.7

5star

G

0.9

4star

D

14.9

4star

K

7.9

3star

HB

7.0

4star

M

4.3

4star

T

3.6

4star

G

1.1

5star

D

8.2

2star

K

4.6

2star

HB

3.6

3star

M

1.8

2star

T

2.0

4star

G

0.6

3star

(DFA)

From the non discarded bunch Smith would be a success, and Rivers played some good footy, but hardly the poster child for his point I'd have thought.

 

[Chism]

I wonder if free agency is fixed if similar conditions to the US are brought in, mainly

• Players should be closer to 50% of the games income, not the 37% (or whatever it is) at the moment.
• Introduce max contracts to avoid someone paying Harley Reid 50 bajillion dollars. This includes limited slots for a max contracted player
• Only max contract players can get band 1 compo, or, maybe some leniency with a bottom 4 team.

Too convoluted? The whole system is definitely not working together, 100% agree there

AFL be like lets remove the father son rule instead!

 

[Bostonian]

It’s a stupid rule when you have 10 teams, over half the comp, in one city.

That's not a rule.

It's literally the VFL rebranded.

You exist because of the 12th one.

 

[MisterMarcus]

Interesting from Wreck it Ralph.

Jared Rivers
Sam Blease
Scott Selwood
Luke Dahlhaus
Isaac Smith
Tyson Stengle (DFA)
Jack Martin (DFA)

From the non discarded bunch Smith would be a success, and Rivers played some good footy, but hardly the poster child for his point I'd have thought.

Especially since he seems to carefully avoid mentioning his own team poaching Lynch from the then-struggling Suns.

Honestly reads like a typical biased nuffie supporter post - "I have no problem with top teams screwing over weak teams when it's my team doing it, but now we're on the bottom and other clubs are benefiting, then it's a huge unfair advantage!!"

Also, so much of the article has nothing to do with FA, and is about clubs signing stupid long-term deals they can't back out of, or players wanting a trade early.

 

[Bletch]

It also screws the draft. We've seen chat about changes to the F/S and Academy lately, but at least for these, the clubs have to pay a draft price. The Free Agency compo doesn't cost the purchasing club anything. And to my mind is way more damaging to the integrity of the draft than F/S and Academies.

 

[Chism]

Especially since he seems to carefully avoid mentioning his own team poaching Lynch from the then-struggling Suns.

Honestly reads like a typical biased nuffie supporter post - "I have no problem with top teams screwing over weak teams when it's my team doing it, but now we're on the bottom and other clubs are benefiting, then it's a huge unfair advantage!!"

Also, so much of the article has nothing to do with FA, and is about clubs signing stupid long-term deals they can't back out of, or players wanting a trade early.

Read what Malthouse said in 2014 and tell me he is wrong 11 yrs on.

He predicted what is happening exactly.

 

[Elixuh]

That's not a rule.

It's literally the VFL rebranded.

You exist because of the 12th one.

 

[HairyO]

It also screws the draft. We've seen chat about changes to the F/S and Academy lately, but at least for these, the clubs have to pay a draft price. The Free Agency compo doesn't cost the purchasing club anything. And to my mind is way more damaging to the integrity of the draft than F/S and Academies.

Ive long believed that the 1st round of the draft should not be influenced by any other rule. So F/S, Academy, FA compensation, Priority picks, etc.

And beyond that, I dont really care what the AFL does. Just keep the first round pure.

Of course, this will only happen once GCS has 20 x 1st round picks on their list.

 

[Lore]

Interesting from Wreck it Ralph.

Jared Rivers
Sam Blease
Scott Selwood
Luke Dahlhaus
Isaac Smith
Tyson Stengle (DFA)
Jack Martin (DFA)

From the non discarded bunch Smith would be a success, and Rivers played some good footy, but hardly the poster child for his point I'd have thought.

He mentioned some of those too, near the top of the article after the Silvagni picture. You should be able to read it:
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/wreck-it-ralph-why-free-agency-has-become-an-unmitigated-disaster-as-a-player-movement-mechanism/news-story/822e0430215ca2feabe9fabf964e1ecc?amp

 

[Bostonian]

I agree, that's how anyone would respond to...

"It's a stupid rule when you have 10 teams" like that's even a rule.

South Melbourne were the 11th team, Fitzroy the 12th.

 

[Lore]

Ive long believed that the 1st round of the draft should not be influenced by any other rule. So F/S, Academy, FA compensation, Priority picks, etc.

And beyond that, I dont really care what the AFL does. Just keep the first round pure.

Of course, this will only happen once GCS has 20 x 1st round picks on their list.

Simultaneously? I think they would've come close multiple times already. Overall they definitely have.

 

[JayJ20]

The worst part of FA is the compensation model no doubt.

The AFL haven't done enough to introduce equalisation measures to offset the impact of contenders picking the best players from bottom clubs. Contenders are taking the best players from bottom teams and using their own picks to make first-round selections or in some cases matching highly talented academy or F/S players.

This has prolonged the success of teams like Geelong, Collingwood, Sydney and now Brisbane while rendering bottom clubs to become feeder clubs for these successful teams.

Without FA, the top teams needed to make a decision to either trade for the now or draft for the future. At the moment, they can do both.

On top of all of that, the compensation model is a secret so bottom teams don't even know if choosing not to match a bid will adversely affect their draft hand.

Either have FA and introduce equalisation measures by giving more draft capital to bottom teams or get rid of it.

 

[Elixuh]

I agree, that's how anyone would respond to...

"It's a stupid rule when you have 10 teams" like that's even a rule.

South Melbourne were the 11th team, Fitzroy the 12th.

I’ll dumb it down for you.

FA is a bad rule. FA is a bad rule because there are too many teams in one city for it to work properly. 10 teams in one city is too many teams for FA to work properly.

Am I getting through?

 

[Bostonian]

I’ll dumb it down for you.

FA is a bad rule. FA is a bad rule because there are too many teams in one city for it to work properly. 10 teams in one city is too many teams for FA to work properly.

Am I getting through?

No your point is still stupid.

10 teams is fine when the state produces the bulk of the talent.

10 teams dilutes the Vic pool.

Less teams means even if you get rid of 2 teams the other 8 get collectively stronger.

 

[JayJ20]

The worst part of FA is the compensation model no doubt.

The AFL haven't done enough to introduce equalisation measures to offset the impact of contenders picking the best players from bottom clubs. Contenders are taking the best players from bottom teams and using their own picks to make first-round selections or in some cases matching highly talented academy or F/S players.

This has prolonged the success of teams like Geelong, Collingwood, Sydney and now Brisbane while rendering bottom clubs to become feeder clubs for these successful teams.

Without FA, the top teams needed to make a decision to either trade for the now or draft for the future. At the moment, they can do both.

On top of all of that, the compensation model is a secret so bottom teams don't even know if choosing not to match a bid will adversely affect their draft hand.

Either have FA and introduce equalisation measures by giving more draft capital to bottom teams or get rid of it.

Further to this, some may argue that salary cap is the trade off, but an expanding salary cap and clever salary management has largely meant that this is a non-factor. We see players take pay cuts for team success. With the rise of social media, more exposure to big finals means more brand deals and building your individual brand. It's free marketing and offsets any pay cuts they may have taken.

What is the incentive to be playing at an unsuccessful club at the moment? Not much really.

 

[Elixuh]

No your point is still stupid.

10 teams is fine when the state produces the bulk of the talent.

10 teams dilutes the Vic pool.

Less teams means even if you get rid of 2 teams the other 8 get collectively stronger.

I’m not advocating for getting rid of teams, unless you want to get rid of 8 and keep 2. The advantage with FA will always be with Melbourne teams where the concentration of talent is.

 

[Bostonian]

I’m not advocating for getting rid of teams, unless you want to get rid of 8 and keep 2. The advantage with FA will always be with Melbourne teams where the concentration of talent is.

So then there's no solution.

Time to move on.

 

[Elixuh]

So then there's no solution.

Time to move on.

The solution is to get rid of FA, like I said in my original post

 

[Lore]

I’m not advocating for getting rid of teams, unless you want to get rid of 8 and keep 2. The advantage with FA will always be with Melbourne teams where the concentration of talent is.

It should be fair if the number of teams correlates with the size of the player pool wanting to play in that state... which is almost but not quite the case in WA, SA and Vic, but obviously completely out of whack in the North. Tasmania doesn't quite have a full quota for a team either, WA being under-represented with 3 quotas and two teams.

 

[Bostonian]

The solution is to get rid of FA, like I said in my original post

And replace it with what?