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

[Lore]

What would happen if we put free agency as say, 100 games? Would that be a reasonable trade off in negotiating with the AFLPA for caps on contract size/length?

 

[Elixuh]

And replace it with what?

Why does it need to be replaced, other than if you love continental tyres trade radio

 

[Lore]

Why does it need to be replaced, other than if you love continental tyres trade radio

Because it's in the CBA and CBA negotiations are always a trade off unfortunately. Some of Snuffaluphagus's ideas from page 1 might be a good trade off option though, or perhaps my 100 games suggestion above

 

[Bletch]

Why does it need to be replaced, other than if you love continental tyres trade radio

AFLPA lobbied for years to get Free Agency. Won't give it up now. It's broken though.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Because it's in the CBA and CBA negotiations are always a trade off unfortunately. Some of Snuffaluphagus's ideas from page 1 might be a good trade off option though, or perhaps my 100 games suggestion above

Additional suggestion, and I bring this up in the off chance someone who actually has some kind of knowledge on Australian labour laws but trading players against their will... This would be the biggest bargaining chip of all in bringing player share closer to 50% of revenue. You'd make sure it only applies to say $1m per year earners but it would enough power back with clubs to even things out IMO.

I keep seeing the odd person say the AFL is one lawsuit away from the whole player movement thing blowing up (restraint of trade blah blah blah) but I have to imagine that's horseshit and there is some law applicable to sports.

 

[Elixuh]

Because it's in the CBA and CBA negotiations are always a trade off unfortunately. Some of Snuffaluphagus's ideas from page 1 might be a good trade off option though, or perhaps my 100 games suggestion above

Yes they’ll never revert it, it’s why I said in my initial post that it was absolutely daft that the AFL didn’t negotiate other mechanisms at the same time that they agreed to FA. That was the time to do it.

I don’t know why the AFLPA would agree to a watered down version as it is working well for the players just not the league and fans.

Well I mean it’s worked well for the Lions, but doesn’t mean I don’t think it’s dumb.

 

[Lore]

Additional suggestion, and I bring this up in the off chance someone who actually has some kind of knowledge on Australian labour laws but trading players against their will... This would be the biggest bargaining chip of all in bringing player share closer to 50% of revenue. You'd make sure it only applies to say $1m per year earners but it would enough power back with clubs to even things out IMO.

I keep seeing the odd person say the AFL is one lawsuit away from the whole player movement thing blowing up (restraint of trade blah blah blah) but I have to imagine that's horseshit and there is some law applicable to sports.

I think that would only work if the players were employed directly by the AFL and the clubs were treated as different locations of the same company, but it's still a bit iffy.

Restraint of trade only makes sense if they are being altogether prevented from making their money from football (their chosen profession). Restraint of trade has nothing to do with choosing who your employer is, and as long as the pre-season draft exists they always have a way to get a contract to play football if they're worthy of one. Conceptually RoT would probably be more applicable if the players who were excluded from AFL football due to their vaccine stance a couple of years ago pursued the AFL for it, but I believe they were paid to sit out so that also kinda negates it.

 

[JayJ20]

What would happen if we put free agency as say, 100 games? Would that be a reasonable trade off in negotiating with the AFLPA for caps on contract size/length?

I wouldn't say it solves the inequalities the FA model brings.

I do however think it's beneficial. We discovered Draper, spent so much time developing him to be AFL standard as a rookie from a soccer background and spending our resources to help him manage his many major injuries throughout his career only for Brisbane to capitalise on the peak of his career without the benefits of receiving future F/S and having no say in his compensation. Or any visibility on how compensation is calculated and what factors trigger band 1 compensation for Draper prior to letting him go. Granted he is an UFA, but still.

Draper isn't a world beater, but he is a good example of why FA is a failed model without added equalisation measures for bottom teams.

 

[Cyclops]

Do you want a good league, a fair league, or a big league? Pick one.

The AFL admin picks a big league.

Free agency is a bone chucked to the ones who actually play the sport.

 

[Elixuh]

I think the other thing that works against FA is the comp doesn’t have enough talent to spread across 18 teams (let alone 19) as it is and so if some talent can be cherry picked away for nothing the impact of that can be much more than perhaps in other sports.

I also hate, as an example, that Essendon has put all this work into Draper and will likely never seen any of the benefit. It’s stupid and I wonder is it really what fans want?

 

[Chism]

I wouldn't say it solves the inequalities the FA model brings.

I do however think it's beneficial. We discovered Draper, spent so much time developing him to be AFL standard as a rookie from a soccer background and spending our resources to help him manage his many major injuries throughout his career only for Brisbane to capitalise on the peak of his career without the benefits of receiving future F/S and having no say in his compensation. Or any visibility on how compensation is calculated and what factors trigger band 1 compensation for Draper prior to letting him go. Granted he is an UFA, but still.

Draper isn't a world beater, but he is a good example of why FA is a failed model without added equalisation measures for bottom teams.

Same as us with TDK.

 

[Elixuh]

Do you want a good league, a fair league, or a big league? Pick one.

The AFL admin picks a big league.

Free agency is a bone chucked to the ones who actually play the sport.

Answer to this depends on which team you support. Pies fans would be happy with a big league. North fans probably less so.

 

[Scotland]

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’s 8-year deal).
• 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.

Just looking at most of the OP key points, FA isn't really to blame.

Players signing contracts then wanting out is a function of the league being the bitches of the AFPLA. Players just want long term security without risk or consequence.

If you look at some of the deals currently Mac Andrew, Hayden Young, Harry Sheezel, Nick Daicos etc. are contracted years into the future and have never got close to free agency. As soon as you finish your initial 2/3 year contract you can basically sign any deal you want. 2 + 9 years for Harley Red two years into his rookie deal? That should not be a thing.

FA doesn't work because there is no real restricted free agency and there is no real salary cap. Brisbane are tying to sign Allen and Draper. Hawthorn are into Merrett with no intention of trading players out. This stuff is 100% above board but doesn't pass the pub test.

 

[Lore]

I wouldn't say it solves the inequalities the FA model brings.

I do however think it's beneficial. We discovered Draper, spent so much time developing him to be AFL standard as a rookie from a soccer background and spending our resources to help him manage his many major injuries throughout his career only for Brisbane to capitalise on the peak of his career without the benefits of receiving future F/S and having no say in his compensation. Or any visibility on how compensation is calculated and what factors trigger band 1 compensation for Draper prior to letting him go. Granted he is an UFA, but still.

Draper isn't a world beater, but he is a good example of why FA is a failed model without added equalisation measures for bottom teams.

It would mean the red hot midfielders who hit their straps in their first or second year after drafting would hit FA after 4-5 years. They'd get big deals earlier in their careers, potentially, but that would also have the capacity to become the great leveller, as it makes it much more competitive and forces the salary cap to come into play earlier for more clubs. And if you do give them a big pre-agent contract, you at least get their prime out of them for a few years before they retire through injury or become a millstone around the neck of a club that can't afford to off-load them.

 

[JayJ20]

It would mean the red hot midfielders who hit their straps in their first or second year after drafting would hit FA after 4-5 years. They'd get big deals earlier in their careers, potentially, but that would also have the capacity to become the great leveller, as it makes it much more competitive and forces the salary cap to come into play earlier for more clubs. And if you do give them a big pre-agent contract, you at least get their prime out of them for a few years before they retire through injury or become a millstone around the neck of a club that can't afford to off-load them.

Oh sorry I totally misread that. I thought you meant they wouldn't be eligible for FA until they both hit the years required under the current system and 100 games.

Your suggestion is a really good idea.

 

[Lore]

Oh sorry I totally misread that. I thought you meant they wouldn't be eligible for FA until they both hit the years required under the current system and 100 games.

Your suggestion is a really good idea.

they can go unrestricted at 200 games that's 8 years for a midfielder and diddly for most KPPs

 

[Sheepey]

The AFL PA have had way too much control over the last 10-15 years and free agency is just one example of that.

 

[VDS66]

If bottom / lower team loses a star to FA, then make the buyer cough up their equal pick. If it's a band 1 contract, then the buyer gives them their first round pick. Then give the club a compo pick after the first round. Maybe.

Problem is that you are losing a known quantity for a draft pick lottery, which if you don't nail you're ****ed and even if you do nail it, you won't see a return for 2 or 3 years.

Stop double-dipping by the club buying. You can win the flag, get a band 1 FA and still go to the draft with pick 18. That's how the inequality compounds. Low club stays low, strong club gets stronger... and therefore attract more players.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Additional suggestion, and I bring this up in the off chance someone who actually has some kind of knowledge on Australian labour laws but trading players against their will... This would be the biggest bargaining chip of all in bringing player share closer to 50% of revenue. You'd make sure it only applies to say $1m per year earners but it would enough power back with clubs to even things out IMO.

I keep seeing the odd person say the AFL is one lawsuit away from the whole player movement thing blowing up (restraint of trade blah blah blah) but I have to imagine that's horseshit and there is some law applicable to sports.

I'd be focusing changes on the receiving club having to give up draft assets.
So the "compo" is taken from them rather than given to the club losing the player.
If it's worked out in points then picks are just taken off them like when matching bids in the draft.

The other aspect is perhaps contracts should have a "buy-out" clause.
So either the player or the club can choose to pay x dollars to close the contract at any time.
In the case of a player wanting to be traded, the buy-out could be paid by the club they are going to.
But a club also has the option to buy-out in the event of say injury or form or off-field issues. There may need to be provisions for the AFL to payout concussion retirees etc.

 

[VDS66]

I'd be focusing changes on the receiving club having to give up draft assets.
So the "compo" is taken from them rather than given to the club losing the player.
If it's worked out in points then picks are just taken off them like when matching bids in the draft.

The other aspect is perhaps contracts should have a "buy-out" clause.
So either the player or the club can choose to pay x dollars to close the contract at any time.
In the case of a player wanting to be traded, the buy-out could be paid by the club they are going to.
But a club also has the option to buy-out in the event of say injury or form or off-field issues. There may need to be provisions for the AFL to payout concussion retirees etc.

So in your scenario, Saints lose pick 7 because TDK is band 1. Where does the pick go? Or does everyone move up one spot? In my scenario you get 7 plus a 2nd as compo.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

So in your scenario, Saints lose pick 7 because TDK is band 1. Where does the pick go? Or does everyone move up one spot? In my scenario you get 7 plus a 2nd as compo.

Everyone moves up.
My idea would be aiming to
1) reduce the motivation for clubs to take "free" players (without restricting their movement as such)
2) remove the impact on the draft from comp picks.

Having said that the scale of picks and bands would probably need looking at. So pick 7 compo under the current system won't translate to a pick 7 cost under my changes.
You might be giving up a r2 for example.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

The solution is to get rid of the salary cap and instead have a luxury tax system. Free agency works well when a salary cap doesn’t exist. NBA being a great example

 

[swuzzlebubble]

The solution is to get rid of the salary cap and instead have a luxury tax system. Free agency works well when a salary cap doesn’t exist. NBA being a great example

Yes the AFL have been trialling this for Geelong over recent years

 

[stallon]

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.

Vic 7mil people 10 teams 700k per team
Wa 3 mil people 2 teams 1.5mil per team
Sa 2mil people 2 teams 1mil per team

Vic has too many teams bruh no matter what way you look at it

If young players from vic(mostly metro) knew they didnt have a greater than 50% chance to stay in their home state they'd be less likely to set themselves up for failure by getting their hopes up of staying home, like all the non vic kids(and a lot of the vic country kids) do.

 

[Bostonian]

Vic 7mil people 10 teams 700k per team
Wa 3 mil people 2 teams 1.5mil per team
Sa 2mil people 2 teams 1mil per team

Vic has too many teams bruh no matter what way you look at it

If young players from vic(mostly metro) knew they didnt have a greater than 50% chance to stay in their home state they'd be less likely to set themselves up for failure by getting their hopes up of staying home, like all the non vic kids(and a lot of the vic country kids) do.

Or a lot more will want to return back to Vic and make Vic teams even stronger because that talent is less diluted in that state.