Free Agency Compensation must be abolished

Remove this Banner Ad

Mat Mann said:
it's pretty easy

band 1 is directly after your original round 1 pick
band 2 is the end of round 1
band 3 is directly after your original round 2 pick
band 4 is the end of round 2

and so on
www.afl.com.au

Free Agency - AFL.com.au

Australian Football League. All the latest AFL news, video, results and information
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au
Click to expand...

Yeah I read that. Doesn’t say anywhere that compensation picks are directly after a clubs draft pick but i guess it appears that way.
 
Mat Mann said:
it's pretty easy

band 1 is directly after your original round 1 pick
band 2 is the end of round 1
band 3 is directly after your original round 2 pick
band 4 is the end of round 2

and so on
www.afl.com.au

Free Agency - AFL.com.au

Australian Football League. All the latest AFL news, video, results and information
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au
Click to expand...
Simple change then. Band 1 is now officially band 2. Remove the first bracket and slide everything down.

3 highest paid free agents give picks 19,20,21 to the clubs that lose them.

Then it gets into band 2/3 and so on

Perryman could have been paid more than battle, but GWS get a worse pick because they were more successful? If say Toby Greene signed a 7 year 13 mill contract with the pies, battle would still give more compensation to the saints and on half the salary!. Doesn’t make any sense.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

dmac_55 said:
Simple change then. Band 1 is now officially band 2. Remove the first bracket and slide everything down.

3 highest paid free agents give picks 19,20,21 to the clubs that lose them.

Then it gets into band 2/3 and so on

Perryman could have been paid more than battle, but GWS get a worse pick because they were more successful? If say Toby Greene signed a 7 year 13 mill contract with the pies, battle would still give more compensation to the saints and on half the salary!. Doesn’t make any sense.
Click to expand...
doesn't make sense that Brisbane will get the no.1 pick for cheap straight after winning the flag, which includes at best pick 18 onwards, 2 years after Daicos who again was probably the best kid in the draft goes for a combination of pick less that the value of pick 4, after Pies traded out of the draft to skirt the cost
or the GCS picked up 4 players in the top 25 after trading out 1 pick into the following year and using 2nd 3rd and 4th round picks to pay for them all

I don't see a thread whinging about that, but St Kilda, must whinge about them getting something
 
HairyO said:
I dont mind some compensation for some things. A pure draft every year will mean that the poor teams will never rise up.
Click to expand...
A pure draft and a salary cap gives clubs equal chance of rising up, if a club is well run

It's the fs, academy, compensation and priority picks that compromise this

Free agency shouldn't, as clubs all have to work under the same cap (reality is it will have some affect).
 
Mat Mann said:
doesn't make sense that Brisbane will get the no.1 pick for cheap straight after winning the flag, which includes at best pick 18 onwards, 2 years after Daicos who again was probably the best kid in the draft goes for a combination of pick less that the value of pick 4, after Pies traded out of the draft to skirt the cost
or the GCS picked up 4 players in the top 25 after trading out 1 pick into the following year and using 2nd 3rd and 4th round picks to pay for them all

I don't see a thread whinging about that, but St Kilda, must whinge about them getting something
Click to expand...
I have no issue with Lions getting a fs - but they should have to give up their first round for him.

The fact they are premiers is just lucky, and wouldn't happen often.

I'll say it again, abolish points, clubs have to use next available pick (or 1 directly above) on a fs/acad - and you can't trade out/down.

Nominations / bids are done / locked in pre-draft.

This way no club is ever moved down the draft order because of a fs or academy pick
 
iameviljez said:
Hold players, yes. And they should do that more often.

Trade without consent, hell to the no. What about the players' kids and partner? There's a reason this shit only goes on in the USA, where even ordinary players are paid millions, and workers' rights are an afterthought.
Click to expand...
Ordinary player's already are getting paid millions in our game.
When the average salary is $450k I see no issue with it. Ordinary people move their family across country for much much less.
 
oak79 said:
I have no issue with Lions getting a fs - but they should have to give up their first round for him.

The fact they are premiers is just lucky, and wouldn't happen often.

I'll say it again, abolish points, clubs have to use next available pick (or 1 directly above) on a fs/acad - and you can't trade out/down.

Nominations / bids are done / locked in pre-draft.

This way no club is ever moved down the draft order because of a fs or academy pick
Click to expand...
Not the thread for it, but this is a terrible idea. This would essentially mean pick 1 and pick 18 are of equal value when it comes to matching a bid on a father-son or academy player. It would allow the reigning premier to use pick 18 to match for the best player in the draft, while forcing the wooden-spooner to use their pick 1 on a player likely to go late first-round (or more likely just risk losing the player).

The fix is to simply to abolish the discount and get the points distribution right, so the clubs accessing father-sons/academies pay the actual market value. Your proposal would allow Brisbane to pay even less for Ashcroft than they're about to: it would make an already bad situation worse.
 
Outtatym said:
Ordinary player's already are getting paid millions in our game.
When the average salary is $450k I see no issue with it. Ordinary people move their family across country for much much less.
Click to expand...
It’s only the top ten or so who get a million a year.

Trading without consent has the potential to rip families apart. My own wife’s job is highly specific, it has state based registration and she could not just move.

If clubs want more power, grow the balls to hold players to contract.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Josh Battle is a pick 8?
GAGF.

Why should clubs be compensated for their poor list management ?
 
FreoRicci said:
Josh Battle is a pick 8?
GAGF.

Why should clubs be compensated for their poor list management ?
Click to expand...
What would you pay for Josh Battle in a trade if your club wanted the player? What do you think the selling club would accept?

Battle's management insisted on the length of his last contract extension.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Free Agency Compensation must be abolished

Similar threads

kreuze_missile
It’s time to abolish restricted free agency compensation
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
293
Views
11K
Soggy2112
Soggy2112
Holden Hillbilly
Free agency compo under review, and why the formula isn't public
Replies
13
Views
911
Grand Uncle Horace
Grand Uncle Horace
Spiral_Out
AFL Must Suspend Steven May
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
135
Views
5K
matthew_s
matthew_s
L
Are umpires informed of the free kick count during games?
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
Cmarsh
Cmarsh
CrazyJoeFevola
Roast Mid season draft compensation
Replies
6
Views
716
kaiserchief13
K
J
Umpire signals must change
Replies
0
Views
468
joe444
J
biaseddustyfan
  • Poll
Rules Should the stand rule be abolished?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
136
Views
5K
My Tilly
My Tilly

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top