Free agency will tear our great game apart

Redb Splitting hairs I think. History is one thing but the almighty dollar is another. I am sure the NFL has as much 'club' history pre 'franchise' days that they could draw on in manufacturing the illusion to their consumers - which is what happens here in all elite footy codes. I would not be too complacent Red. Look how corporate our game has become in just the last couple of decades. It is semantics to make the analogy with the 'franchise' system in the States when the foundations of all that history you like to think makes our game special, counts for little since the AFL no longer espouse those virtues of loyalty, tribalism and community. As already stated, these are simply manufactured whether that be under the banner of brands as new as the GC - or as old as that of the Bombers, it makes no difference, since players and their organisations are businesses above all else, with the bottom line the almighty dollar, which is NOT compatible with such sporting virtues. Cheers.

Repub, I agree we don't need to blindly follow everything the NFL does. These two comps (AFL & NFL) are unique compared to other football codes and their competitions with player movement, however there are significant cultural differences in a sporting sense between the two countries. AFL club culture in Melbourne is closer to the established clubs in the EPL (history, fan lock, not salary cap or draft), AFL clubs in the main are not franchise teams (expansion clubs aside) created to represent cities - this is more like the A League model. Most AFL clubs in Melbourne have been around for over 120 years, this is generational support and the most likely to be disenfranchised by a full free agency model. So we will see some loss in loyalty factor with what is planned for 2012, but as Dylan says above, not as much as other codes and this is better for the Melb club loyalty factor. The conference set up the AFL is considering is again modelled on the NFL experience. I heard Gillion McLachlan on SEN talk about it again earlier this week. Conferences could do serious damage to the strucrure of the competiton and the rivalries which are essential in many of the contests really meaning something to fans )no matter where theya re on the ladder). You could end up with a Victorian conference and an 'Interstate' conference which would be Ok for keeping rivalries intact, but diltue the national feel of the competition and rob fans in other states of playing the established brands in the AFL, Collingwood, Essendon,etc. Anyway I digress.

The collapse of the salary cap and draft in a closed market like the AFL operates in would not be healthy for a number of clubs or the game as a whole. Hunt and Folau are exceptions, one offs, you do not make rules around 2 players out of 700.

None of this is a revelation surely. I have been on my soap box about the almighty dollar 'tearing our great game' and others apart for yonks but still no one really seems to get it. This has been taking place over many years and the free agency evolution is simply another destructive layer on top of what exists already. Loyalty, community and tribalism went long ago despite the analogy our American mate makes with us and the U.S. Sure, it may be even more mercenary in the Staes but what we have here is nothing to be too pious about. You read most posts here defending what is simply another step towards the 'American Way' so we simply will get what we desreve I believe.

hey britt, i think you needed to consider a few things before constructing a view on free agency..first of all lebron was UNrestricted compared to the AFLs supposed restricted as well as if you look at the detailed plan where players in pay brackets (eg top 10% salary ) the club then has a bit more power in trying to keep that player. I think the most imprtant point is that the afl still has a salary cap which will make it hard to move to a well placed team such as geelong..yes loyalty will slowly die in the game but i think it will be pretty good in comparison to most codes

I think you would find the number of players in the 2nd category who would move solely for money is actually a significant %. I wouldn't say over 50 or even put a number on it but it would certainly be much more than zero %. that doesn't mean those players wouldn't put in 100% effort for whatever club did meet their demands though, look at the league guys they choose their club for next year in July and finish the season out. They still put in each week because for players I think it's more about the team than the club.

I reckon that Free agency will only affect three types of people. 1. Homesick, family reason's, etc. players. The player is moving for reason's outside both football, the club, and the Salary cap/ money. Say a player who leads his team to the premiership, he's had his time in the sun, become a club legend etc. He wants to move back to Victoris (or SA, or WA or wherever) and would prefer not to remain at his club. As long as the club he will move to has room in its salary cap, and the club he is moving from is not willing to match the Clubs offer, I think this is perfectly reasonable, and the club will be offered compensation (I believe). Eg. Probably chris Judd, some may think he's in the 2nd category, but I honestly believed his main goal was to get back to melbourne. 2. Money grabbers. those who'ld take the money and run in any career they'ld be in. Clubs generally wouldn't want this type of player, and once again, compensation is nessecary. Can't think of any real examples, 3. The mutual agreement player. This is really where we will see a lot of movement I believe. The 3rd and/or 4th ruckman, the 8th and 9th Midfielders, the 9th and 10th forwards and defenders etc. These will all be players who believe they can get a lot more gametime, and more opportunities in another club, or feel the atmosphere at club x, will be better suited to them than their origonal club. Mark Seaby is the best example of this. He had spent 8 years at West Coast. He was number 2 ruckman in 2009, but Niatanui's development meant he would be relegated to Number 3. The Swans, having lost Darren Jolly and needing another 2, offered Seaby a good contarct with guarenteed gametime, unless massively out of form, or injured. I don't see why anyone wouldn't take that offer.

All depends I guess if we are talking of the top 25% being excluded as purely the starting point to get it into play - with a determination that it be further loosened further down the track. In AFL circles - we see presently that GWS and GCFC are given a bit of freedom to effectively lure anyone who is willing to move just for the money - - - - we're yet to know of anyone and for all we know they may have half a dozen high profile guys ready to go. There has been a 'one team' notion esp around being seen as 'club legends' etc that seems to encourage guys to stay at the one club perhaps even more so these days. Perhaps a more open free agency would diminish that,.....or, perhaps the return of SoO to allow for 'state legends' to allow guys to chop clubs more often might diminish it. I guess - - for players from the 'big' established clubs with historys stretching back to 1860s etc - - then, being a 'club legend' might be more important........however, the shining example in recent times of loyalty to a new 'manufactured' club is Matthew Pavlich who has been offered everything to return 'home' to Adelaide and has not - - - his examples develops the culture. Compare his attitude and approach to one Nathan Buckley up at Brisbane and it's chalk and cheese. So long as their's different people playing the game then there will be different motivations. HOpefully money alone won't often be the biggest hitter - - because, seriously, for MOST people, there's a whole bunch of other factors that are as or more important.

another good perspective the Maldini name at AC Milan is another good example, but a rarity in the modern age (in football)

I was joking in the main - - thus the emoticon, however, re 'free movement'........we used to have relatively free movement with the usual 'transfers' and the June deadline etc, that's still a 'regulated' process of sorts, heck, even FIFA have pre-determined 'transfer windows' and the like. I guess the old days saw clubs effectively selling players to make money on the transfer fees and it created this whole economy of it's own,.....now, I don't know about you, but, if you take up a new job shovelling dung with Company X, do they have to pay Company Y a 'transfer fee' to 'lure' you across? probably not - - - so, we ain't talking 'real world' scenarios anyway - - - - and what we then deal with are the rules of the competition. AFL rules have perhaps gone too far one way - - and need to 'correct' a tad. No argument from me on that front.

"more sinister scenario"??? Like what? Freedom of personal choice and the ability of a club and player to freely negotiate with each other? AFL players are slaves chained to the AFL's rules and regulations. Sooner or later they will wake up and break free. What Australian football needs is its own Super League to. Or maybe Folau and Hunt can attend a few AFLPA meetings and give the lads a dose of reality and a wake up.

Thanks for your insight. The problem the AFL have is the AFL Players Assoc (AFLPA) agrees to the salary cap via a collective bargaining agreement . This is what holds the whole shebang together, if the AFL does not allow some flexibility re free agnecy then a far more sinister scenario could ensue.

I agree with this post that the AFL definitely have something special in that they have a professional competition that hasn’t completely sold out yet. It’s not perfect and there is plenty to critique but they have so many players that spend their whole career at one club coupled with the membership culture and lack of private ownership that it does help create that special bond. I’ve seen it disappear in Rugby League and Football so am somewhat jealous that AFL still have that. The exceptions in football and league are excellent (Giggs at ManU, Hindmarsh and Lockyer in league etc etc) but AFL has that at every club. Once your drafted theirs a very good chance you don’t play AFL football for any other club. Your free to talk with passion about your club and rivals, and as a rule you don’t see AFL players talking like Izzy Folau “can never rule anything out” blah blah keeping your options open player manager speak. That said while the new expansion teams mean the next two years free agency will be an issue, I really don’t think the new rules will hurt that bond between player, fan and club. Their quite modest changes and look to be very clever from the AFL’s perspective at giving free agency to the players union while not really giving them “free” agency.

one of the most incisive posts I have ever read on the roar sometimes it takes an external voice to help you see things clearly

As an American who plays footy, I keep telling my Aussie friends that free agency will kill footy culture. That and if you let Nike/adidas get a really strong foothold in the sport. What happens is that one value starts to trump everything else--money. Not that Demetriou isn't trying to add to the coffer every chance he gets and that the AFL isn't a big-time sport. But it still seems like AFL players are playing for wins, pride, and their club and community rather than just trying to add zeroes onto the paycheck. If Gary Ablett starts referring to himself as a "brand" or Nike starts creating an ad campaign that elevates him into demi-god status at the expense of his club and teammates, then you'll know that a club-based culture is on the way out. Fast. A salary cap is probably not a solution. The NBA has a salary cap, but general managers have become very adept at working the numbers. The Miami Heat cleared out nearly their entire roster to get the cap space to land LeBron, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh. At one point they only had two players under contract to make the numbers work. Of course, it's a lot easier to work the numbers when you only have 12 contracts to mess around with. Now they have to fill in with cheap role players and veterans that will play for the league minimum. I'm all for the players getting their due but the situation can get absurd really quickly when ego and greed replace club culture and pride. Case in point: this article refers to Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert getting "slugged with a 1000 dollar fine." Check those figures, it's actually 100,000 dollars. One hundred thousand dollars for venting your frustration to your fan base. I can't imagine writing a memo that's going to cost me 100,000 dollars. It's almost quaint reading about AFL players' fines. Anyway, being an AFL fan makes me less cynical as a sports fan. Expansion, free agency, and truckloads of money aren't worth the sea change that they'll bring to your sport and the culture it tenuously exists in.

What's up? The story is talking about unrestricted movement between clubs. You know, how every other part of Australian employment and business works. You cheer for free movement when it comes to offering a motza to players from other codes, but you can't cope with the idea working within the AFL clubs itself. About time your code arrived in the 21st century.

where did Brittany say anything about messers Folau and Hunt?? 'democracy' you ask about?? what about you putting words in someone's mouth?? where's the democracy in that???? :-)

One of the key differences between LeBron and subsequently that extraordinary letter written by the Cavaliers majority owner, is that Ablett has already helped Geelong win two titles. Ablett wil also not carry on like LeBron announcing that he is taking his "talents" to another club. Most Geelong fans I talk to accept the money is too good to refuse' "who could blame him?" Ablett has given them a lot of joy and their first flag in 44 years, they wont be dancing in the streets but the majority will understand and then duly hate Gold Coast for the rest of their natural life. :-) Free agency is some form was inevitable, the draft still serves a purpsoe but the AFL opened the door with the two new teams to clubs looking at other recruitment options. The AFLPA wanted some form of free agency. I think it will work well as long as trades are down at the end of the year, not mid season. Clubs will mostly still be able to hang onto to the star players which the fans love, but trade players to improve their list balance, allow more flexibility for the plaeyrs to choose their club if they wish. The Ablett situation is a one off (maybe one more with GWS).

Salary cap will prevent instances like "the decision".. although good idea for Ablett to stay at Geelong.. Tell Channel 7 that he wants $1M for a 1 hour special on what he intends to do. Run it live at 7.30 pm on a Sunday night prime time.. the decision? He will stay at Geelong.. Bang easy million..

That's right AndyRoo its certainly not open slather. I think its the top 25% with players serving 8+ years only eligible. Gold Coast will do more 'tearing' in the short term when they announce the signing of uncontracted players from a host of clubs, not including Ablett.