Free Agency

[bricon]

In this article http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/foo...E20322,00.html from today?s Herald-Sun, Rob Kerr from the AFLPA has indicated that some form of free agency is back on the agenda for the next round of negotiations between the Players Association and the AFL.

[penga]

amen to the idea of free agency, this imo is the way to go... i know a lot of people will disagree with me here but i think the afl should be closer to the nfl system, as compared to the one we have now... the club gets way too much bargaining power in this current arrangement. for instance at the end of this season if we had an nfl-style trading type arrangement we could pick up acker for nothing as he has come OUT OF CONTRACT WITH THE CLUB, therefore this would mean he could go anywhere he likes. brisbane would have to sign him and then trade him to get anything for him rather than us giving up a couple of players and draft picks or whatever. i may have the current system confused but it is very confusing and the idea of having a 6 (or whatever it is) day trading period is a joke, there should be a lot more time for trades to be done... anyways, this is my opinion

[robbieando]

I agree with Penga, the current set up is wrong and also unlawful. Freedom of trade issues are involved here and many player managers would love to challenge the AFL in court over this issue. The trade period should stay as is and only involve players still under contract and should go for a week. Free Agency should then start a week after the trade period and run for 6 weeks until the draft. I don't like the idea of giving up players and draft picks for an out of contract player like we had to this year for Nick Davis.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by penga
amen to the idea of free agency, this imo is the way to go... i know a lot of people will disagree with me here but i think the afl should be closer to the nfl system, as compared to the one we have now... the club gets way too much bargaining power in this current arrangement. for instance at the end of this season if we had an nfl-style trading type arrangement we could pick up acker for nothing as he has come OUT OF CONTRACT WITH THE CLUB, therefore this would mean he could go anywhere he likes. brisbane would have to sign him and then trade him to get anything for him rather than us giving up a couple of players and draft picks or whatever. i may have the current system confused but it is very confusing and the idea of having a 6 (or whatever it is) day trading period is a joke, there should be a lot more time for trades to be done... anyways, this is my opinion

Nothing personal Penga... but this post is kinda silly. Of course we'd be able to pick up Acker. But so could everybody else. And come to think of, they could all pick up Tadhg or Goodes when they come out of contract too.

The salary cap and draft MUST NOT be tarnished. AT ALL. They're what saves the competition from being like the EPL. 3 contenders and 13 pretenders? No thanks. I'd like to stick to the thought of Sydney being competitive again in 2-3 years, rather than potentially being ravaged if our youngsters blossom.

The players have it pretty damn good if you ask me. Poor players aren't getting enough money. Well.... Damn! Ask 19.9million Aussies if they'd prefer Alastair Lynch's relatively moderate salary in footy terms (about $180,000) to their own. I know what the answer will generally be.

Trading period longer??? How stressful you want to make it? I think it should be 48 hours. Clubs then decide how much negotiating they want to do in that time. If they can't come to a deal in THAT sort of time frame, tough. But it makes it less uncomfortable for players and their families. Rich or not, I imagine having your career bartered over would be a very difficult time. Having the program going round-the-clock would be better for players.

Charlie

[robbieando]

Charlie the problem is the AFL has to act now because its only a matter of time before the AFL is taken to court on freedom of trade. In effect I rather have everything stay as is and introduce a free agency instead of going to court and the AFL having to change everthing because trust me if it gets to court they WILL lose

[Charlie]

Yeah. I know it would lose.

The AFL also has a choice. They don't necessarily HAVE to run the season, now do they? Sure. Bad for the game and all that. Having a competition with only 4 teams rich enough to win is worse.

The players' free agency doesn't mean squat if they can't play... now does it? No play, no pay. Sorry Mr Kerr, but we can't afford to pay players for nothing, can we?

[robbieando]

Charlie this issue has nothing to do with paying a player it has something to do with players who ARE out of contract not allowed to go where they want for nothing. Free agency won't mean a contracted player will leave for nothing but it will mean a player who doesn't won't to stay can go wherever they want.

Charlie playing hardball with the AFLPA won't help matters, remember the courts will change the entire system if they go to court and that will lead to a 3 team comp. Introduce free agency now without changing anything else will mean we keep the system we have now in tack.

[Charlie]

How do you propose to do that Robbie?? Your idea won't save the AFL, it will simply make it worse!!!!!!!!

If the AFL backs down on the draft system, the players will be even more bold in attacking the salary cap. Why share $6m when Essendon can afford to pay it's list $10m? Adelaide can offer me an extra quarter mil, who cares if the nightlife consists of cramped hotel spas?

What is being proposed will be the death of AFL if it happens. Remember, the reason that AFL socialism was brought in in the first place was that capitalism endangers the sport. In the mid-80's when the current system was installed, only Essendon, Carlton and Hawthorn were financially secure. South had already moved North. Bulldogs and Fitzroy were in big trouble; I vaguely remember Richmond were considering a move to Perth.

When it's more about winning than money for some clubs, money loses its value. Unless you don't have enough. By my count, AT LEAST 7 clubs, and probably 12, couldn't afford to be competitve.

The Canterbury Bulldogs would have won last year if they'd appealed the decision to strip its points. But they didn't, they sacrificed a premiership because they knew that challenging it in court would be bad for the NRL.

If the players go through with their latest stand-over tactic... stuff them all... I'll stick to watching the local comp. I'll have no pity when, 10 years from now, 450 players have lost their jobs... and the AFLPA says "we just don't understand how it happened. This is a disgrace. The AFL has ruined this competition."

Unionism... pah.

Charlie

[robbieando]

Charlie your got me wrong.

Introducing Free agency won't mean, we get rid of the salary cap or do away with the draft. I will mean that a player out of contract can't be traded by his club. The current system stays in place except free agency will come in meaning players out of contract can change club to whoever they like.

[desredandwhite]

I like the current system - the club is protected above all else. If free agency is introduced, you can pretty much count on a handful of rich clubs dominating forever.

[Charlie]

I know exactly what you mean Rob, and it's a dangerous precedent.

Next, rookies will claim the same right. Why should a 25 year be a free agent but not a 17 year old??? The draft will be challenged and found to be restraint of trade. What the hell is the point if the rich clubs can simply buy them in 2 years anyway?

And that establishes a beautiful precedent for scrapping the salary cap.

Essendon, Collingwood and Adelaide will rule the comp.

Rob, if you want this to happen, you are blind to what it means.

[robbieando]

Charlie waht I'm trying to say is the AFL should try and make an agreement with the AFLPA to say if we give you free agency you can't take us to court on the other issues. If you think free agency will lead to all hell braking loose I think you look at the NFL, which since introducing free agency, has introduced a salary cap which is policed better than the AFL does it, and continues to have a strong draft system. And you can't tell me that its the same clubs winning the superbowl each now can you?

Getting rid of the draft and the salary cap would be worse than introducing free agency.

[Charlie]

NFL and America are a totally different situation to AFL here in Australia.

-No competition! Nearly each NFL city has only one team, those that have two have millions of people.

-There isn't any other similar sporting codes. NFL doesn't need to compete with league, union and soccer at anywhere near the same level that AFL teams do.

-NFL teams are privately owned by NFL-mad billionaire capitalists. They think nothing of throwing $100million down the drain in pursuit of a Superbowl win, that would no doubt return that amount many times over. No membership required there to prop up rickety clubs. No rich and poor, just rich.

-The salary cap over there is somewhere round $50million... not quite as claustrophobic as our $5.6million.

[robbieando]

Originally posted by Charlie
NFL and America are a totally different situation to AFL here in Australia.

-No competition! Nearly each NFL city has only one team, those that have two have millions of people.

-There isn't any other similar sporting codes. NFL doesn't need to compete with league, union and soccer at anywhere near the same level that AFL teams do.

-NFL teams are privately owned by NFL-mad billionaire capitalists. They think nothing of throwing $100million down the drain in pursuit of a Superbowl win, that would no doubt return that amount many times over. No membership required there to prop up rickety clubs. No rich and poor, just rich.

-The salary cap over there is somewhere round $50million... not quite as claustrophobic as our $5.6million.

Charlie what I'm trying to say is that Free agency works in the NFL along with a draft and salary cap. Why wouldn't it work in the AFL?????? Charlie you forget that unlike the AFL the NFL has no rules on how much of the salary cap can be used and each team has about 80 players to pay for. Tampa Bay won this years superbowl without any big names and so did New England the year before - the big spending teams such as the Cowboys and the Giants got no where near the superbowl.

You keep forgeting soccer, doesn't have a draft system nor a salary cap - we do and free agency won't effect the game like you think it will because the salary cap stays the same so clubs can't just throw money about like you can in the EPL. How much does free agency effect the NRL???? Not much because they still have the salary cap in effect.

[Charlie]

YOU CONTINUALLY MISS THE POINT!!!!

If you back down on free agency, you have set a precedent!!!! The salary cap and draft were put in place for the same reasons as free agency was banned!! If we can live with free agency, then it would reasonably make sense to a judge that the cap and draft aren't needed either!!!

Come on Robbie, you've done a fair bit of studying the law. You UNDERSTAND this!!!!