Free Agency Compensation must be abolished

[Obeanie1]

This is actually a fallacy. Most teams have lost free agents and most teams have gained free agents. It’s not just players leaving small/shit clubs to big/good clubs.

Grading the 49 AFL free agents who have moved clubs in the last 10 years

We've gone through the 49 players who have moved via free agency in the last decade and given them a grade.

www.sen.com.au

Nice deflection.

Let's talk in the broadest terms possible.

Gun free agents move for success and stronger clubs. It's why Franklin chose Swans not GWS and pissed off the AFL. And the sooks hit Swans with a trade ban.

Average free agents move for money and don't care where they go. Hunt from the Dees was on the delist pile. Moved West to extend his earnings not for success.

All free agents are not equal.

Just like not all clubs are equal when it comes to who they can attract.

 

[Obeanie1]

Because every other club is disadvantaged by the pick you gain.

The pick is regularly worth more than the player you lost.

Barass would possibly be pick 3 compo if he was a free agent, but because he is contracted the eagles will be lucky to get a mid teens pick.

As a free agent hawthorn would get him for free, as a contracted player they have to pay.

The system is broken.

The compensation for losing a player is the chance for you to get a player. That should be it. Everyone has the same salary cap - use that money to recruit someone else.

To prevent top teams getting all the free agents, Restricted free agents should only be available to bottom 8 teams (they can go to top teams via a trade)

Problem is gun FAs walk to strong teams and the North's get nothing?

Please explain to us how North 'just use that money to recruit someone else'?

They have been trying that for 10 years and noone wanted to go there.

 

[iameviljez]

Problem is gun FAs walk to strong teams and the North's get nothing?

Please explain to us how North 'just use that money to recruit someone else'?

They have been trying that for 10 years and noone wanted to go there.

Yeah, exactly. This isn't an American league where the salary cap is so tight relative to the star player salaries that Godfather money can shift star players.

 

[The Tilt]

If you want a compromise, a club must use their top pick in this scenerio AND combine points from lower picks to make up the value - but they can't trade out their top pick, it must be used on the FS

Yes - this is the fix to the problem of the first round being compromised by pick-sliding. A simple rule that says if a club trades out of the first round, they're no longer able to match a bid on a player in the first round. That way Brisbane is forced to use pick 18 on Ashcroft, but they'll also need to pay whole lot more than that, actually paying something close to his value.

The trouble with pre-matching is not just that already strong clubs get elite talent on the cheap. It also disadvantages lower finishing clubs who are forced to use (for example) pick 3 to match a bid on a player who is rated at 14 to 18.

 

[oak79]

Problem is gun FAs walk to strong teams and the North's get nothing?

Please explain to us how North 'just use that money to recruit someone else'?

They have been trying that for 10 years and noone wanted to go there.

I literally did explain that... Restricted free agents shouldn't be available to top teams (except via trade)

 

[oak79]

Yes - this is the fix to the problem of the first round being compromised by pick-sliding. A simple rule that says if a club trades out of the first round, they're no longer able to match a bid on a player in the first round. That way Brisbane is forced to use pick 18 on Ashcroft, but they'll also need to pay whole lot more than that, actually paying something close to his value.

The trouble with pre-matching is not just that already strong clubs get elite talent on the cheap. It also disadvantages lower finishing clubs who are forced to use (for example) pick 3 to match a bid on a player who is rated at 14 to 18.

If you have pick 3, and a bid is at pick 14, you shouldn't have to use pick 3 under my suggestion - you would use next pick (ie 21).

You would only have to use pick 3 if a bid is at 1, 2 or 4.