AFL (non-Swans) off-season moves - 2022 edition

[DeadlyAkkuret]

I see Tanner Bruhn wants to go to Geelong - surprise, surprise! The team with the endless salary cap and a list full of players who are apparently happy to play for hundreds of thousands less than they can get elsewhere. I once lived in Geelong - its not that great!

It must be so frustrating for GWS to lose a relatively early draft pick player (12) after just two years.

In-demand Giants young gun keen on Geelong move - In-demand Giants young gun Tanner Bruhn keen on Geelong move

Someone mentioned to me that Bruhn is one of the three picks that the Giants received when they lost Cameron to Geelong. Now one of them is already on his way back to Geelong and will play along side Cameron.

You can’t make this up [emoji2359]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Aprilbr]

Good points Liz.
In the EPL and European soccer, they have the possibility to loan players who are under contract for up to a year, and sometimes with an option to then buy the player if they wish. During the loan period the loaned club pays the players salary. Could the AFL introduce such a system, or a variation? I don’t like the idea of contracted players switching clubs unless they are not given fair opportunities and can get games at a “lesser” club.

Generally, loaned players in soccer are developing players who are considered unlikely to get much first team game time at their current team. They are often loaned to teams in lower divisions or overseas for their development. If they are loaned to another team in the same division, then they are not permitted to play against the team they have come from. Some loan deals have a purchase option included at a set amount and others do not.

Personally, I cannot see how such a system would work in the AFL where there is only one major competition and a draft and salary cap system, and no player sales for $? Would Geelong loan a developing youngster to North on the basis that they get more senior game time there? North would want a sale option otherwise why would they bother investing in developing a player for another Club? They cannot acquire him unlike soccer as there is no mechanism to buy/sell players. Its good to think outside the square, Roadrunner, but I cannot see how it could work for our competition.

[Maltopia]

Generally, loaned players in soccer are developing players who are considered unlikely to get much first team game time at their current team. They are often loaned to teams in lower divisions or overseas for their development. If they are loaned to another team in the same division, then they are not permitted to play against the team they have come from. Some loan deals have a purchase option included at a set amount and others do not.

Personally, I cannot see how such a system would work in the AFL where there is only one major competition and a draft and salary cap system, and no player sales for $? Would Geelong loan a developing youngster to North on the basis that they get more senior game time there? North would want a sale option otherwise why would they bother investing in developing a player for another Club? They cannot acquire him unlike soccer as there is no mechanism to buy/sell players. Its good to think outside the square, Roadrunner, but I cannot see how it could work for our competition.

Also, who holds the can if eg., we had lent Stephens out earlier this year to a lower club and he got injured? Say an ACL? Our supporters would be spewing about that.

[707]

Also, who holds the can if eg., we had lent Stephens out earlier this year to a lower club and he got injured? Say an ACL? Our supporters would be spewing about that.

Wouldn't work, we have the VFL plus loaned players get all the game plan intel of a competitor.

[Ludwig]

Clubs seem to be putting up negligible resistance to player requests to be traded. Contract or no contract, it hardly seems to matter. Free agency is all but a joke now. Clubs are just accepting that their player gets to his destination and they will get the best deal they can. That's it.

This situation is extremely detrimental to non-Victorian clubs, especially GWS and GC. Lucky that the Swans have cultivated a destination club environment and a good alternative to get out of pressure cooker towns.

I reiterate that the AFL have to do something about this. The inequities are growing too large.

[Aprilbr]

Clubs seem to be putting up negligible resistance to player requests to be traded. Contract or no contract, it hardly seems to matter. Free agency is all but a joke now. Clubs are just accepting that their player gets to his destination and they will get the best deal they can. That's it.

This situation is extremely detrimental to non-Victorian clubs, especially GWS and GC. Lucky that the Swans have cultivated a destination club environment and a good alternative to get out of pressure cooker towns.

I reiterate that the AFL have to do something about this. The inequities are growing too large.

A lot of commentators are saying this now, Ludwig. For example, Cornes, King and Whateley. The problem is it disproportionately benefits the big Melbourne clubs to allow this inequity to continue and they have too much influence. The so-called independent Commission needs to show some courage and do what's best for the competition. A retention allowance is critical, especially for the newer teams. Also, properly police the Cap and outlaw these side deals for players that the big clubs use to circumvent the Cap.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Clubs seem to be putting up negligible resistance to player requests to be traded. Contract or no contract, it hardly seems to matter. Free agency is all but a joke now. Clubs are just accepting that their player gets to his destination and they will get the best deal they can. That's it.

This situation is extremely detrimental to non-Victorian clubs, especially GWS and GC. Lucky that the Swans have cultivated a destination club environment and a good alternative to get out of pressure cooker towns.

I reiterate that the AFL have to do something about this. The inequities are growing too large.

Very true. I think it's notable that there is coverage in the papers today suggesting if Logue leaves, Freo won't let Lobb leave. We'll see if it is posturing or for real, but it suggests they know losing too many talls at once leaves their list unbalanced. I personally think Lobb is overrated and a mercenary who's been amazingly overpaid during his career, but would love to see the Dogs denied a preferred target. So, go Freo.

[Roadrunner]

Generally, loaned players in soccer are developing players who are considered unlikely to get much first team game time at their current team. They are often loaned to teams in lower divisions or overseas for their development. If they are loaned to another team in the same division, then they are not permitted to play against the team they have come from. Some loan deals have a purchase option included at a set amount and others do not.

Personally, I cannot see how such a system would work in the AFL where there is only one major competition and a draft and salary cap system, and no player sales for $? Would Geelong loan a developing youngster to North on the basis that they get more senior game time there? North would want a sale option otherwise why would they bother investing in developing a player for another Club? They cannot acquire him unlike soccer as there is no mechanism to buy/sell players. Its good to think outside the square, Roadrunner, but I cannot see how it could work for our competition.

True, April. I guess I’m just looking at possibilities as I really don’t like the current situation. Something needs to be done to rectify it and give the newer clubs a proper chance. Maybe force contracts to be honoured and also give first option for the club regarding draftees for a further 2 years?

[Ruck'n'Roll]

This situation is extremely detrimental to non-Victorian clubs, especially GWS and GC. Lucky that the Swans have cultivated a destination club environment and a good alternative to get out of pressure cooker towns.

I reiterate that the AFL have to do something about this. The inequities are growing too large.

I'm not convinced that this situation has been engineered. But one wonders whether a good proportion of the powers that be aren't extremely keen for for this situation to become the long term status quo. In exactly the same way as the country zone rotation stopped in VFL days - with the best zones surprisingly in the hands of the powerful clubs for perpetuity.

Good points Liz.
In the EPL and European soccer, they have the possibility to loan players who are under contract for up to a year, and sometimes with an option to then buy the player if they wish. During the loan period the loaned club pays the players salary. Could the AFL introduce such a system, or a variation? I don’t like the idea of contracted players switching clubs unless they are not given fair opportunities and can get games at a “lesser” club.

Actually the VFL did have such a system, and the Swans made use of it. We loaned Mathew Scarlett's father from Geelong on the eve of the finals, and then I think we "purchased" him outright the next year.

[Aprilbr]

True, April. I guess I’m just looking at possibilities as I really don’t like the current situation. Something needs to be done to rectify it and give the newer clubs a proper chance. Maybe force contracts to be honoured and also give first option for the club regarding draftees for a further 2 years?

Agreed, RR, that the current situation is far from ideal. Too much power is now with the players, and some seem to want to move even when they are still under contract eg Lobb. Players leaving newish clubs just two years after being drafted to go to big Melbourne clubs is very disappointing and undermines the eveness of our competition.

This used to happen to us when we were a struggling club. From the early to late-90s, we lost early draft pick players of the calibre of Darren Gasper, Anthony Rocca, Shannon Grant and Adam Hueskes.The latter three were all in our squad when we managed to make the Grand Final in 1996 and their loss meant that the remaining squad never got back to the big game again. In most cases, they went to clubs from their home state and went onto good career elsewhere. Grant played over 300 games and won a Norm Smith medal in the 1999 GF for North. Rocco had a great career at Collingwood playing over 200 games and winning their goal-kicking four times.

By 2005, the vast majority of those guys had long since departed apart from Micky O, Maxfield etc. That 1996 team is below for interest. It should have won a flag but was gutted by departures and subsequent retirements.

[Aprilbr]

I'm not convinced that this situation has been engineered. But one wonders whether a good proportion of the powers that be aren't extremely keen for for this situation to become the long term status quo. In exactly the same way as the country zone rotation stopped in VFL days - with the best zones surprisingly in the hands of the powerful clubs for perpetuity.


Actually the VFL did have such a system, and the Swans made use of it. We loaned Mathew Scarlett's father from Geelong on the eve of the finals, and then I think we "purchased" him outright the next year.

Good example on Scarlett Snr., RR. However, in those days it was pre the National Draft so players could be bought and sold for transfer fees much like soccer today. Thankfully, that is no longer allowed.

Someone recently asked me why a Club would happily take a player on a short-term loan in soccer when they might not even have a buy option. I gave the example of the promotion/relegation system in soccer which we thankfully also do not have.

Relegation in soccer is financially and psychologically devastating for Clubs so they will do anything to avoid the drop zone including bringing in a loan player to provide a short-term squad boost!

Our system is so different to soccer - no player trading for $, National Draft and Salary Cap, no promotion/relegation - that a move to a loan system would not work in my view. If I had my way, I would reinstate a retention allowance for Northern states with a bigger figure for newer clubs and make new draftees play for 3 years before having the capacity to change clubs.

[707]

Clubs seem to be putting up negligible resistance to player requests to be traded. Contract or no contract, it hardly seems to matter. Free agency is all but a joke now. Clubs are just accepting that their player gets to his destination and they will get the best deal they can. That's it.

This situation is extremely detrimental to non-Victorian clubs, especially GWS and GC. Lucky that the Swans have cultivated a destination club environment and a good alternative to get out of pressure cooker towns.

I reiterate that the AFL have to do something about this. The inequities are growing too large.

The VFL will do nothing about it, it suits them to have the big Malbourne clubs strong. I just wish they'd take a closer look at their salary caps, some seem bottomless

Also, the AFLPA is the tail that wags the dog to some extent and they want free movement of players which as we know hurts non traditional footy states and minnow Vic clubs.

[Aprilbr]

The VFL will do nothing about it, it suits them to have the big Malbourne clubs strong. I just wish they'd take a closer look at their salary caps, some seem bottomless

Also, the AFLPA is the tail that wags the dog to some extent and they want free movement of players which as we know hurts non traditional footy states and minnow Vic clubs.

Good points, Ludwig. Another constraint to consider is that the AFL is vulnerable to a restraint of trade legal action being taken by a disaffected player or the players association if it restricts movement too much. This was one of the rationales given for the introduction of free agency several years back despite a lot of Clubs opposing it at the time.

Our system of draft, salary cap etc has been loosely crafted on that found in the NFL which is arguably the most successful professional football competition globally. The last thing we want to see is the total dismantling of our equalisation measures, as imperfect as they appear to be. Imagine the AFL without these measures? The competition would be dominated by a few clubs and some would potentially become insolvent. We saw it almost get to this stage in the mid-1980s.

A cautionary tale would be to look at the world of soccer. The Bundesliga, Germany's main league, has had just two clubs, Bayer Munich and Dortmund, win all but three of the titles in the past 25 years with Bayern winning the past 10! The Scottish Premier League has been won by either Celtic or Rangers every season since 1985! I could go on. It would be an absolute disaster for us if the Cap/Draft mechanisms for AFL were to be overturned in our Courts!

[Nico]

Aprilbr: the biggest blunder by Eade was starting Kickett on the bench. We couldn't believe it because he was in top form going into the game. He brought him on late in the 2nd quarter, but alas it was too late. My self and the group that we went to the footy with dropped off Eade quick smart. He was too smart for his own good. If Derek had started they wouldn't have seen us for dust.

[Blood Fever]

Aprilbr: the biggest blunder by Eade was starting Kickett on the bench. We couldn't believe it because he was in top form going into the game. He brought him on late in the 2nd quarter, but alas it was too late. My self and the group that we went to the footy with dropped off Eade quick smart. He was too smart for his own good. If Derek had started they wouldn't have seen us for dust.

My memory of it was that Kickett was on his last legs and had been struggling in the finals. We should have been in front by even more than we were but we let them back in late in the second quarter and then got overwhelmed by a better team. Eade put in a phenomenal performance with flooding and slingshot football to get us into the GF. Way ahead of his time. He has an abrasive nature that wore down the players by the early 2000s. His first 3 years as coach were really good.