Roar Rookie
Joined October 2014
159
Views
1
Published
3
Comments
Uni student studying journalism. Based in WA. #GoFreo
Published
Comments
Although it's copping a bit of stick, no case can be made to get rid of free agency in the AFL. We've already seen…
Name a better method where equalisation can be achieved without including every single club?
The pushing down the order is a small price to pay for clubs if we achieve equalisation.
We have had three years of free agency now, so it is too early to tell if this is causing de-equalisation.
Yes Frawley went to Hawthorn, but the Dee’s got pick three?
I dispute the claim that clubs can keep players based purely on success.
Malceski has enjoyed huge success at a strong swans team- gone. Ablett is one of the best players to have played the game in a team that continued sustained success at Geelong- left.
In 2012, the Sanits just missed the finals after qualifying for two grand finals in the years before. Goddard wasn’t persuaded by the success of the Bombers. They finished 12th and were still reeling after a poor period under Matthew Knights.
Money makes the world go round for players, bugger success.
Free agency will work, if given the chance!
Free agency here to stay
The Hawks didn’t get a player for nothing. Frawley still falls under the salary cap and from the figures being thrown around, they payed a lot more than what he is worth. I’d be worried if Frawley was a world beater. But he isn’t, like I said.
I’d argue no smaller clubs miss/will miss players that have left via free agency so far (apart from the Saints, but their recruiting has been hit and miss).
Clubs that lose these big stars (maybe Dangerfield next year?) will be fairly compensated according to the age of the player and the contract offered. It’ll free up a considerable chunk within the cap and then maybe they go hard during free agency and trade periods?
Players get what they want. Media gets what they want and the clubs get to window shop for what they need.
Free agency here to stay
Then what claim did you make that I have missed?
You said “Any compensation for struggling teams isn’t created out of thin air. All the other clubs who didn’t lose anyone or didn’t gain anyone are expected to contribute to the compensation by getting pushed down the draft order.”
Then I said “The pushing down the order is a small price to pay for clubs if we achieve equalisation.”
Seems addressed to me?
Then you said “It’s much easier for successful clubs to convince players not to take higher offers from elsewhere: the salary cap alone is not an effective tool for equalisation.”
And I then provided examples of players who have rejected success in favour of big money, showing its not easier for successful clubs to keep a hold of players who are offered big money by lesser clubs.
What am I missing?
Free agency here to stay