We have officially entered the AFL off-season. As the league battles for a full 12 months of media coverage, we will be treated to delights like trade week, the daft international rules concept and the AFL draft.
Accompanying these ‘events’ is the chatter from industry stakeholders that can get so ridiculous, it makes discussions on banning the burqa seem rational.
Trade week and free agency period is in full swing, and you can tell that the clubs just hate the concept, aggrieved over how some aspects of trade week and free agency have been conducted.
Paul Roos and Alan Richardson have declared the system an enemy of equalisation, saying that it only benefits the top clubs, while Jon Ralph in the Herald Sun declared with the fury of a tent preacher that some clubs will never win another premiership again because of free agency.
The silly season brings out the best in silly comments.
Paul Roos complained at the beginning of the week about how free agency was ruining the game, yet with a straight face admitted that he was putting in an offer for Adelaide’s Patrick Dangerfield using the rules he despises.
Free agency isn’t perfect, but its issues do not match up with the rhetoric espoused.
James Frawley’s long-winded tour of the nation in search of a club was gratuitous, considering that bigger free agent moves in Lance Franklin and Gary Ablett kept their courting a secret.
And I’ll admit big clubs have certainly used free agency to bolster their playing stocks at the expense of smaller sides. However, the hype and hyperbole about club-player relations in the future is plain absurd.
For starters, I cannot comprehend the idea that free agency will stop certain clubs from winning premierships.
St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs have only won one premiership each well before the concept of free agency was established, while Richmond, for all its cash, has struggled to be competitive in the last 30 years.
Meanwhile, North Melbourne in the 1990s operated on the smell of an oily rag yet still managed to create a culture of success that attracted and retained players.
Port Adelaide has the same group of players that finished near bottom in 2012 yet with cultural and management change, they are now considered a future premiership winner.
Money helps but it can’t buy a successful culture and an expectation of success, which will always attract the best players.
Speaking of money, the biggest movers on the free agency scene this year have been the clubs at the lower end of financial table.
James Frawley may have signed for Hawthorn but the smaller clubs are playing the game with the same intensity and vigour while also getting results.
North Melbourne in a week has secured two players through free agency, while Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs are actively hunting new players.
The larger financially endowed clubs will always be in the news when they make big player signings but that doesn’t preclude smaller clubs from making gains through free agency.
Finally, talk of the erosion of contracts and loyalty is hypocritical considering how brutal list management is.
In an era where the average AFL career is less than six years, players have to still jump through hoops to change clubs while club management can end careers with the stroke of a pen.
Paul Chapman and Brad Sewell are two of thousands of loyal clubmen who were cut by their clubs in the name of ‘list rejuvenation’.
I understand that the industry is demanding, and that clubs need to make tough calls to build long-term success, but if they have that freedom, surely players should be entitled to protect their long-term future.
Free agency isn’t perfect; areas need to be ironed out. However, the nonsense spouted about how free agency will split the competition in two is ridiculous.
Follow John on Twitter @johnhunt1992
Gyfox
Guest
Best thing about October is the releasing of the 2015 schedule. Then I can see when my team plays interstate & organise my travel schedule - & hopefully book some cheap fares with Virgin.
Aaron
Guest
the whingeing about equality for lower clubs is garbage, the power, roos and Freo arent 'big clubs', yet essendon and collingwood are 'big clubs' and they were mediocre this year
vocans
Guest
I agree but I'm not sure what to do about it. For example, the Crows get pick 10 but their next pick doesn't come for another 21 places. Surely this anomaly was foreseeable?
JW
Guest
My only problem with free agency is the compensation pick that is awarded penalises every club that was not involved in the deal, as all their draft picks slide down the order. This has greater consequence at the pointy end of the draft, as you can see now with Brisbane no longer having pick 4 in which to bargain for Dayne Beams. In my opinion, the best solution would be to make the club who picks up the free agent have one of their draft selections move down 10-20 places, or possibly give one up. They would then have an additional factor to weigh up when signing a free agent, as at the moment its a bit of a free hit for them. There could still possibly be some form of compensation for the club that loses the player, although I'm not sure what this should be. Perhaps switch a couple of the picks of the two clubs involved in the deal.
Paul D
Roar Guru
I'm not convinced a big splash for Dangerfield is money well spent. It seems not dissimilar to offering an obscene amount of money to buy a motorcar that you've seen the previous owners thrash around a circuit every weekend for the last 5 years. He's had a brutal amount of contact and collisions in his career thus far, you have to wonder how long his body will keep on going.
slane
Guest
We are focused on the Big Fish moving clubs and ignoring all the little fish moving to dud clubs. 4 years ago Richmond had the worst list in the AFL. They picked up Maric and Chaplin in free agency. Port brought over Matty White. Melbourne got Dawes and Clark. It is allowing weak clubs to ipgrade their lists
Ken Olah
Guest
Make that predictor error "not" into "enough" so it reads "probability of premiership success is enough to take Frawley away"
Ken Olah
Guest
Of course free agency favors clubs in their premiership window. The Demons will have to make a huge offer for Dangerfield if they are to have any hope of attracting him, while the probability of premiership success is not to take Frawley away. Players' wish to have choice and to experience finals is perfectly understandable but let's not pretend there won't be a significant cost to the game.
Gecko
Guest
Some interesting arguments but overall not a strong or clear defence of free agency. Sure free agency is not the only factor affecting a club's success but it is a factor. Everyone can see where the big fish are heading. Free agency is kicking clubs like Melbourne and the Saints. Richardson and Roos are perfectly justified in complaining about it. If free agency isn't repaired, we'll see plenty more one-sided games in 2015 and possibly some clubs collapsing financially at the end of next season, which makes you wonder whether the AFL has a hidden agenda.
Tony Tea
Guest
There is nothing wrong with Roos saying free agency is faulty then making a bid for Dangerfield. Just because you think a system is flawed does not mean you should abstain from working within the system.
Winston
Guest
Disagree. Free agency has only just come in so it's hard for us to tell the effects yet. It may well be that in the past there have been many loyal servants willing to get paid less in return for success. But when you start seeing and playing with guys like Ablett, Buddy, or even more so, the lesser players who get paid loads like Scully, I argue that it would bring out the inner demon of many players. We just saw Malceski leave the Swans despite the club being loyal to him to get through his 3 knee reconstructions. I think there will be many many more just like him coming up. Of course money matters! Anyone who disagrees on this point, just ask yourself, what does YOUR BOSS really care about? If bosses care only about money, why should employees care about anything else but money?
Michael
Roar Rookie
Spot on. Well written piece that hits the nail on the head with regard to the nonsense that gets spewed. I do cut the people who say these things a bit of slack though. With the industry the way it is, the only way to make any change at all is to make a tremendously huge splash and then hope one of the ripples will actually come into effect. It's the same reason Eddie and the boys made such a fuss about the COLA and why so many are complaining loudly about father/son and academy bidding now. Writing a calmly worded letter to the AFL titled "Suggestions to improve equalisation" is just not gonna get it done.
Avon River
Guest
A slightly confusing article that starts out somewhat negatively about the AFL off season calendar inc the trade week/free agency - and yet wraps up advocating it???? The intro seems borrowed from a aeparate article. At the heart of timings and motivations is less about media coverage and more about the post season window before the next seasons preseason begins. It's been that way for over 25 yrs. (the draft).