AFL should offer one-day contracts

By Alfred Chan / Expert

Daniel Bradshaw’s recent retirement has prompted the need for AFL clubs to introduce one day contracts as a sign of respect and loyalty to their most decorated sons.

Youth policies are all the rage with clubs in rebuilding stages and this has forced many veterans capable of playing on, to find new clubs.

Over the more recent years, Bradshaw, Ben Cousins and Steven King have all retired at a club where they played only a small number of career games at, and all won premierships at their previous clubs.

Barry Hall and Cameron Bruce look set to face the same conundrum at the end of this year.

In a league where team loyalty means very little due to ridiculous amounts of player movement, NFL clubs often extend the olive branch of respect to players who have served most of their career at one club.

These players often leave because they are old and have greater opportunities playing elsewhere in a team not pushing youth. They usually last no more than two years before announcing their retirement.

Prior to announcing their retirement, the NFL player’s original club will offer a one day contract, worth no money, so that the player may retire at the team where he was most successful personally, and for the team.

Only players who are near certain to be inducted into the team’s hall of fame are offered these and players are extremely grateful to be able to retire at the team they love and gave their all for.

Loyalty in the AFL means more than it does in the NFL but no clubs offer one day contracts, despite an opportunity between the national draft and the preseason draft to do so.

A player could be delisted from their new club, nominate for the national draft, be drafted by their old club, retire, and then that club could replace the pick in the preseason draft or promote a rookie the following year.

Clubs would not lose anything doing this while showing the utmost respect to their greatest servants.

It demonstrates how important a certain player was to that club during their career. Daniel Bradshaw deserves to retire a Brisbane Lion (assuming he wants to) as a sign of respect from the Lions.

It would also prove to the world there are no hard feeling between Bradshaw and the Brisbane Lions.

With free agency to be introduced shortly, there will be even less disruption to the scouting/drafting process for one day contracts to prove logistically simple.

Whilst this appears to be wholly sentimental for the player himself, it would also give long time supporters a chance to say goodbye. Assuming Daniel Bradshaw had retired a Brisbane Lion, Bradshaw would be farewelled with a lap around the Gabba in front of the fans he entertained for so many years.

Whilst Cousins, Hall and the likes of Wayne Carey did not leave their home clubs on the best of terms, a one day contract would be the ultimate form of forgiveness while showing gratitude for everything they contributed to the club.

If he chooses to hang up the boots at the end of the year, Cameron Bruce is one who greatly deserves to retire at Melbourne and it would be disappointing for him not to.

However, I can’t imagine Jason Akermanis would ever have been considered for a one-day contract.

The Crowd Says:

2011-07-27T05:27:35+00:00

Lando

Guest


I don't see the point. Is there a rule against Bradshaw having a lap of honour at the Gabba without signing a one day contract?

2011-06-20T23:45:15+00:00

amazonfan

Roar Guru


I don't understand retiring playing numbers. By retiring a number because of one champion, you prevent other great players from coming along and honouring that number even more than if you retired it. Imagine if Kobe Bryant had Magic's number, or Paul Pierce had Bird's. It would be amazing. :D Anyway, personally, I think this is a brilliant idea. I remember reading up about Jerry Rice a while ago (whose ceremonial one-day contract with the San Francisco 49ers for $1,985,806.49 represented the year he was drafted, his number, the year he retired, and the 49ers) and thinking how lovely it was. "However, I can’t imagine Jason Akermanis would ever have been considered for a one-day contract." The sad thing is that he could have been, but then he constantly threw away any opportunity for reconciliation.

2011-06-20T02:52:16+00:00

John Alexander

Guest


This concept would be meaningless. The history books will still show where a player had their last games. Some of these players have achieved good things at their second clubs. Barry Hall had a great season last year, Steve King played in a grand final (losing, but still a rare opportunity) and Ben Cousins punched some sense into a young team mate. Dermott Brereton had two other clubs after Hawthorn, but he is rightfully remembered for where he played the majority of his football and he had since been involved with the club in various off-field roles. No need for a one day contract there. One day contracts should be placed in the bin with other American concepts of misguided sentimentality, such as retiring playing numbers. If you want to do something for retiring AFL players, help develop a better retirement plan for all of the sub-50 game players out there.

2011-06-20T01:41:15+00:00

Mattay

Guest


I don't get it.

2011-06-19T01:11:34+00:00

Richard

Roar Guru


Great idea. With free agency I guess we'll see much more player movement than in the past. It would be a great shame if we completely lost the historical player-club nexus as a result. I hope the AFL hears of your suggestion.

2011-06-18T23:00:06+00:00

Richard

Guest


This article is tongue in cheek right?

Read more at The Roar