We are in the midst of two weeks of mayhem as the AFL free agency and trading periods hurtle along. Normally the rumour, innuendo and speculation outweighs the actual transactions by a ratio of 50 to 1 – but this year there has been plenty of action.
Love – trading of future draft picks
Until this year, a club’s ability to be imaginative in regards to trading was limited to its current draft picks which made for inflexibility and lots of talk but not much action. Now that clubs can trade future draft picks, those who can see a small opening can act on that by trading future picks.
The concept works very well in American sports, and the controls put in place by the AFL Commission (clubs can only trade one year in the future, and clubs must make at least two first round selections over a four-year period) ensure that teams cannot make a mockery of this right.
Hate – underhanded tactics
I get that this is now a business, but some of the reported actions that have taken place this week leave a lot to be desired. Take the story floating around about Adam Treloar allegedly having surgery at the request of both Collingwood and his management. If Treloar played for Collingwood, then this isn’t even a story but the fact remains that he is still under contract at Greater Western Sydney.
No-one knows if the Treloar story is true, but it is interesting to note that Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley was quick to throw a barb at opposition teams as to how they are dragging their feet in moving deals along.
Some clubs might be doing things slowly, but they are at least acting with some integrity.
Love – the concept of free agency
The AFL has gotten plenty wrong, but free agency is something it has nailed. The topic of compensation needs some reviewing but take a look at the players who have left via free agency thus far: Matt Suckling, Scott Selwood, Matthew Leuenberger and Dawson Simpson. One is a three-time premiership player wanting a new challenge, one is a former club champion who has struggled with injury and the pace of the game, one is a highly rated ruckman who has been overtaken and one has gradually slipped further down the food chain at his club.
All four get a chance to start again – in the case of Selwood and Leuenberger, as restricted free agents and highly-paid players their former clubs chose not to match the offers tabled by Geelong and Essendon respectively but they were given the chance. As for Suckling and Simpson, both had limited futures so chose to move on and probably did so on good terms.
The system just works, apart from the compensation…
Hate – free-agent compensation
Of all the rules the AFL has in place, this is probably the nonsensical. When considering whether to let a player walk as a free agent, clubs can ask the AFL for an indication of the compensation they would receive but the AFL make clear that this is not definitive. Alarm bells are ringing already!
The AFL has declared that its compensation is based on a formula. Seems fair enough, but would it be reasonable to expect that this formula be fully transparent? Would have thought so, but it’s not. The size and length of the contract and age of the players are key determining factors within this ‘formula’, but those are an example of how short-sighted the whole process is.
Suckling, Leuenberger and Selwood were all deemed worthy of an end-of-Round 2 compensation selection. Suckling is 27 years old and has played 102 games; Leuenberger is 27 and has played 108, and Selwood is 25 and has played 135 games. Not far from similar players based purely on some components of this magical formula. But rewind 12 months and James Frawley was 26 years old and had played 139 games. Sounds like the three who have moved this year, so an end of second round pick would seem fair.
Hang on, what? The Demons were compensated with pick 3?
Love – trading done right
Now, Crows fans might want to stop reading here but the trade of Patrick Dangerfield is an example of trading done the right way. The chances are Dangerfield had decided he was moving well before it was announced. But credit to him, it never impacted his play and he won a best and fairest as he played his best ever year, dealing with the tragedy of Phil Walsh as well as anyone possibly could have done. His performances on-field made him arguably the second-best player in the competition for season 2015.
He leaves Adelaide with a heavy heart but universally admired, and moves onto an interesting new challenge with a Geelong team that seems in a state of uncertainty.
The Crows were never going to get value for a top 5 player, but that won’t stop the AFL world from dissecting the deal. They managed to get one first round draft pick as well as a second round pick, and young utility Dean Gore who has rose to prominence and to some will play with a stigma hanging over his head. Perhaps he is distantly related to former US presidential candidate Al Gore or NFL running back Frank Gore, but the fact remains he has played as many AFL games as both those guys and all eyes are on Gore in 2016.
Both Adelaide and Dangerfield handled a terribly tough season as well as they possibly could have done, and that has carried over into this trade. Credit where it is due, the AFL definitely is a business but this was business done the right way.
Hate – current market rates
I get that the players put on the show and that they should get every dollar they possibly can out of a short career. But 2015 is definitely the time to be an AFL player. Cam McCarthy has played one good season and there are reports of the Fremantle Dockers being willing to pay up to $500k/year for him.
Jeremy Howe has mastered the art of taking a big mark, but has done very little to prove he is a bona-fide AFL player. That is not stopping Gold Coast, North Melbourne and Collingwood fighting over him and driving his price up by the minute.
Finally, James Aish has had one good season of footy followed by one terrible season and yet he has clubs climbing over themselves to sign him up. As a former top 10 draft pick, Aish will likely be a productive player throughout his career but clubs only need to take a look at players like Cale Morton, Mitch Thorp and Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls before selling the house on potential.
Love – Ross Lyon’s boldness
Some would say giving up a couple of middling draft picks for one of the more naturally talented players in today’s game is a no-brainer and an absolute steal. But when the player is Harley Bennell and the club is Fremantle, then you take a closer look.
Michael Johnson has been suspended for possession of cocaine. Ryan Crowley tested positive to a banned substance and was suspended for 12 months. This is a club that has been the epitome of mediocrity, and is coached by a man who has made a very successful coaching career in defensive dominance.
That has worked when the stakes are low but fail dismally once the heat goes on. He has realised that he cannot win a flag with the current list and has taken on a player who has a reputation for coasting, skipping training session, allegedly inhaling an illicit drug and being involved in numerous drunken altercations. If Lyon can get through to Bennell, he has a player who could lead Fremantle to their first premiership.
If he can’t, then it might become the most intriguing train wreck of the modern era.
Lyon may be staking his coaching career on the riskiest move he has made, and for that he deserves all the credit in the world.
Hate – hyperbole surrounding players
Lachie Henderson is not a versatile star, he is a tall guy who has played a handful of elite games.
Jeremy Howe is not a high-flying superstar, he has a freakish ability to jump high.
Cam McCarthy has significant potential, but if he moves to Fremantle the weight of expectation will sit squarely on his shoulders.
As an industry the AFL should sit back and take a deep breath from time to time, but not until the trading period is over!
Casper
Guest
Clubs like Brisbane need their drafts locked in for 3 years to allow for the go home factor, if the pick wants out early, the Lions should get a discount for a Qlderqld born or bred player in return. They are still suffering from Eddie's spite at getting flogged two years in succes
Ken
Guest
They have been exactly that historically - in the last few years they have come good, fair enough. One thing for sure though when that 'premiership window' is closed you won't see Lyon for dust
George
Roar Rookie
Here's what will happen with no salary cap: 1. The cashed up clubs like Hawthorn, Collingwood and West Coast could buy any player they wanted, they could outbid all the other teams for the best free agents. 2. Teams like Melbourne, NM, Dogs, Geelong, Saints, Brisbane, Sydney, GWS, Gold Coast etc. would quickly find themselves either haemorrhaging money trying to keep up, or having to concede the ability to ever compete with clubs that could pay double or triple the wages they could. 3. After a few years of bleeding money and/or realising they stand no chance on such an uneven field, teams would begin to fold (or leave the league). 4. At the next TV rights deal, with only half the teams left in the league, the money just isn't there any more, the product is not worth the billion dollar deals any more. Watching the same 3 teams win flags and the rest eliminated from realistic contention years before the first bounce, the fans just don't show up or tune in any more. 5. With less TV money and sponsors deserting in droves, those former mid-tier clubs that have been scratching and clawing to hang on, can no longer do so. 6. The AFL is down to 3 or 4 teams now with little to no TV coverage. Players are forced to get 2nd jobs because even the formally rich clubs won't pay them big dollars any more. 7. Tens of thousands of former footballers, broadcasters, support staff, medicos, hospitality, etc. are out of work.
Don Freo
Guest
That's not the point you were making. Those players are not losses to Hawthorn. Franklin was. The Dawson comment is ridiculous. If he left Freo, they are realistic enough to not expect any compensation. He's been a great and quirky servant but he will not be a great loss if he left. We'd just bring in a better kid. Hawthorn will just buy someone else's kid.
deanM
Guest
Nice how you left out Franklin. Just about all those players were in the Hawks best 22 at the time they left. Suckling is still a good player and would get a game at just about any club. All of them were better than that bum Zac Dawson you love so much. Most of them would not make Hawks current best 22 however they could probably all get a game at Freo.
Docker@Dubai
Guest
Fremantle have been in the top four for the last three years. The only other teams to have done so are Hawthorn and Sydney. If that is the epitome of mediocrity - what do call the other 15 teams who did not make the top four for the last three years straight? The only epitome of mediocrity is what this mediocre writer has written.
Don Freo
Guest
Be fair. Suckling, Young, Ellis & Murphy left but not one of them is a loss. I suppose they are losses to Box Hill. Getting Frawley has been a bit of a loss...when you consider Melbourne got Brayshaw in return. Best you get real.
Kevin K
Guest
The way the AFL have gone about free agency is stupid. Offering compensation picks based on some magical fomula is just ridiculous as well as having restricted free agency where the players current club can match an offer. If a player wants to leave after a certain number of years then let them leave and their existing club can either trade in other players or go to the draft to replace them.
deanM
Guest
Who have the Hawks scooped up? Hawks have lost Franklin, Suckling and 4 others to free agency. Only picked up 1 free agent in Frawley. Tall poppy syndrome is not a valid excuse for having no idea.
deanM
Guest
How could you possibly be a guru when you believe that the Hawks have picked the eyes out of free agency. Best you relinquish that guru title as you surely are not. Hawks lost to free agency. Franklin Suckling Young Ellis Murphy and possibly whitecross Hawks gained through free agency just 1 Frawley. Perhaps Geelong have done well but not the Hawks. Best you get educated.
Rodger King
Guest
Thanks George but the free market system isn't my idea. It's been around for quite awhile now. Would it mean some clubs would disappear, possibly but even today businesses fold and employees are left without work. It's called life. I'm not too fussed how much an individual earns, the top 1% normally earn the most. You have raised a couple of interesting questions. Why do you think some of the clubs would go into bankruptcy? Can't the sport support itself without the media money if not then the sport already is in trouble. Part of the problem we are witnessing currently is some players just want to go home and play closer to home. So logic suggests this is a problem so why not eliminate the problem by letting the young kids play where they want to? Limit the number of players under a certain age per club. So Hawthorn or an Adelaide can only have five 18yo, etc etc. You may find this in the long term may help the competition.
deanM
Guest
Freo have not been mediocre for many years it's their game plan that is mediocre. Paul Roos passed it onto Ross Lyon the "murder the game for viewers defensive style." It doesn't work when it matters most. Feel would have probably won a premiership with a different style. Don't forget the Saints were arguably the best team in the h&a season for a couple years but couldn't get the job done when it mattered most.
George
Roar Rookie
Both of those teams could also rightly argue that without their home grown and developed core of players the ones who they brought in may not have wanted in.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
Nick Nack It's a good point. The two teams which have won seven of the last nine premierships have managed to pick the eyes out of the free agents available. Their supporters might argue that they have done so because they have been willing to deal, and there might be some truth to that. Conversely, both would argue that in the last four years or so, they each lost the best players in the league (in their respective positions), and appeared to carry on without missing a beat.
George
Roar Rookie
The problem is the AFL has tried to adopt only half of the American free agency system and on top of that cripple the half they borrowed with asinine compensation picks. The half they haven't brought in is what makes the American system balanced. This AFL version of (non)free agency will never achieve what it was intended to.
George
Roar Rookie
If you think its bad now, your idea of a free system would be even worse. Only the richest of the clubs would even exist after a few years. What an exciting league that would be. Maybe 6 teams left. The TV money would dry up and then even those few remaining clubs would go bankrupt, or cease to exist simply because there was not enough other teams to bother playing. On top of that all those poor young kids 'forced' to make due on 6 figure salaries at 18-20 years old would now be unemployed.
chadly
Guest
thank you R KING - it had me completely confused - to me it appeared to be an AFL tactic to keep the AFL news in the forefront for ever and ever and it is very boring - ,but how would the AFL fanatics cope without a daily dose of AFL
Michael Huston
Guest
Agree Don. I don't consider them the epitomy of mediocrity. That's a label fitting for Melbourne, or Western Bulldogs, or Richmond etc
Nick Nack
Guest
Interesting how the two clubs who have won the most flags in the past decade have just scooped up the best talent, AGAIN. Pretty ridiculous system we have, we may as well go back to the free market system and let the true value of players dictate where players chose to go.
R King
Guest
Not being an AFL fan [but living in Adelaide it is stuffed down our throats] the idea of free Agency and the trading of players has to be explained to me. I was once told that the idea is to ensure that the lower or lesser clubs get a fair chance at some of the talent that becomes available. To prevent the rich getting richer and stronger. To ensure that all clubs get a crack at a Premiership. That Free Agency means that players get a chance to play where they want to play [or work where they want to work] get closer to home and families, to maybe even get a crack at a Premiership medal. Reality is, from my perspective, there will be only about 6 genuine teams who can win the AFL flag next year and chances are they will be allowed to pick up some of the cream of AFL footballers. From an outsider, it appears a total failure. Young men are forced to enter into an agreement, where they won't fight in court an totally unjust and restrictive employment opportunity and then once they have completed a certain amount of years with a employer, who they didn't or might not have wanted to work for in the first place, they are given a points value to be traded, much like a stock on the ASX. With only a slim chance [if the employers can't agree] of the employee going to work for his employer of choice. The only thing that isn't regulated, at the moment, [I think] is the amount of money a player can earn, but even that's not totally true, after all the clubs are governed by a complex salary cap. No player, at the moment, can earn in a week what an average employee can earn in a year, I'm sure that will happen in time if the media deals keep getting bigger and bigger. [Thank you uncle Rupert] I think the AFL were truly worried about the European way of doing footballing business, where the biggest and riches clubs have a monopoly in their leagues and have decided to go down the American way. Which is best suited to the Australian way? I'm not sure only time will tell but a free market may lead to a more exciting competition.