It’s time to abolish restricted free agency compensation

[Elmer_Hauser]

Thats nice in theory but it still makes the other clubs pay a penalty in the draft order.

Just boot all compo for good and be done with the skullduggery that goes with it.

There will be far less player movement in the trade/fa period if they got rid of free agency compo, and that is not want the AFL and esp croc media wants, so I don't think it will be abolished any time soon.

I think they need to modify the band 1 compo to protect rebuilding clubs from having their own pick diluted myself..

 

[Soggy2112]

Thats nice in theory but it still makes the other clubs pay a penalty in the draft order.

Just boot all compo for good and be done with the skullduggery that goes with it.

That would be my preferred scenario.

Was suggesting that as an option if the AFL was insistent on keeping compensation.

 

[go_the_dockers]

The lack of available players in the market, limits the advantages of having salary cap space.

To abolish compensation, you would need more players in the market so if you lost someone, there are other players available. This is especially an issue for non Vic clubs.

 

[Soggy2112]

The level of interconnectedness between free agency compensation and the other mechanisms in the draft is so significant that there is no way to just fix free agency compensation.

if you wanted to fix it you would need to fix

• Father Sons
• Northern academies (including addressing the "go home factor" that created them)
• Next Gen Academies
• Picks/points and paying for elite kids with junk picks
• Grass roots pathways into to game because these feed the need of some of the above.

I'd go so far as to say we even need to fix the language on the way draft rounds are spoken about. The draft rounds should not be something that can expand.

round 1 - picks 1-18
round 2 - picks 19 -36 and so on.

this year we are looking at a first round that is 22 picks long currently with a heavy likelihood of 6 or so picks being added to it (GC academy & F/S & compo)

the first round of the draft will go to pick 28? its nuts. Pick 28 is not a first round draft pick, its a mid second.

I get why this in unpalatable, the AFL simply would not want the volume of clubs that would need to be taking their first pick in the second round because of the current compromises.

My solution for F/S or academy bidding would be to scrap the points system.

Instead I would make it so that you have to have a pick in whatever round of the draft that player is selected.

As an example:

Player A qualifies for F/S for club A. Club A’s first pick in the first round is 15.

If Club B selects said player at pick 8, club A is allowed to then use pick 15 to select that player. The draft then continues as normal, each “round” will remain at 18 selections.

If club A does not have a pick in whatever round player A is selected, then they do not get to pick them.

If a club has multiple F/S or academy qualified players predicted to be selected in the same round then it is their responsibility to ensure they have multiple selections in that round.

This solution prevents any round of the draft from being more than 18 selections (unless the AFL offers a priority pick, which I would also not be doing).

From there you can look at academies and who qualifies and whether you can or can’t take academy players in the first or second round.

After that, scrap free agency compensation.

There will be far less player movement in the trade/fa period if they got rid of free agency compo, and that is not want the AFL and esp croc media wants, so I don't think it will be abolished any time soon.

I think they need to modify the band 1 compo to protect rebuilding clubs from having their own pick diluted myself..

Why would scrapping free agency compo lead to less player movement?

 

[Soggy2112]

The lack of available players in the market, limits the advantages of having salary cap space.

To abolish compensation, you would need more players in the market so if you lost someone, there are other players available. This is especially an issue for non Vic clubs.

If it were up to me, I would extend the length of a draftees initial contract, and make every single out of contract player an unrestricted free agent. Would lead to much more available players on the market.

 

[Only Forwards]

Instead I would make it so that you have to have a pick in whatever round of the draft that player is selected.

This is similar to how it used to be, the the next available pick being used.

It still creates a situation where some teams would get significant discounts. For instance Brisbane in 2022 would have had pick (15?) And they would have paid that for a kid taken at pick 2?

What happens when the F/S is selected in the last pick of that round? Do you limit it to needing a pick within a certain range after the bid comes?

While it is different clubs would look to still pay for players with as late a picks as possible. If a club landed in the bottom 4 they would be looking to get to the end of the first round as Gold coast have done this year for the same reasons.


this system would likely make for a lot more live pick trading and also likely creates other loopholes that can't be see until embedded and pulled apart.

it also only looks to solve a single aspect to a really complex system. Would these rules then apply to Northern Academies and NGA? if so you've only marginally moved the dial on the dilution.

 

[big_e]

This is similar to how it used to be, the the next available pick being used.

It still creates a situation where some teams would get significant discounts. For instance Brisbane in 2022 would have had pick (15?) And they would have paid that for a kid taken at pick 2?

What happens when the F/S is selected in the last pick of that round? Do you limit it to needing a pick within a certain range after the bid comes?

While it is different clubs would look to still pay for players with as late a picks as possible. If a club landed in the bottom 4 they would be looking to get to the end of the first round as Gold coast have done this year for the same reasons.


this system would likely make for a lot more live pick trading and also likely creates other loopholes that can't be see until embedded and pulled apart.

it also only looks to solve a single aspect to a really complex system. Would these rules then apply to Northern Academies and NGA? if so you've only marginally moved the dial on the dilution.

The only true solution is to scrap father-sons completely, IMO. It's an archaic hangover from what was a small, semi-professional, suburban competition when we are now in a modern, national, fully professional league.

If players still want to play for their dad's team, they are welcome to seek a trade.

 

[Only Forwards]

The only true solution is to scrap father-sons completely, IMO. It's an archaic hangover from what was a small, semi-professional, suburban competition when we are now in a modern, national, fully professional league.

If players still want to play for their dad's team, they are welcome to seek a trade.

the only true solution is to fix all of the issues as I listed a non exhaustive list to before or accept that the AFL system is flawed because it is a cobbled together solution to multiple problems where the solutions have arisen individually.


Hand on heart, I love father sons. I think they add an intangible point of difference to other sports. But I also accept that the system is flawed as sh*t and some times you win, (pick 3 for McKay) and sometimes you lose (not being able to take Jed Walter at pick 2).

 

[JackFlash]

There is no doubt the Ben McKay

32

Ben Mckay

Age

27

Ht

202cm

Wt

104kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

7.5

2star

K

3.7

1star

HB

3.8

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

1.7

4star

MG

77.2

1star

D

7.5

2star

K

4.5

2star

HB

3.0

2star

M

2.5

3star

T

1.5

2star

MG

88.5

2star

D

7.0

2star

K

3.4

2star

HB

3.6

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.0

4star

MG

67.8

1star

compensation was absurd beyond belief...all Essendon has done is trade in more average players, but the real winner is North Melbourne. This nonsense must end.
Father and Son should never change, but the rules should. If anything it should return to 50 or at least 75 games.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

My solution for F/S or academy bidding would be to scrap the points system.

Instead I would make it so that you have to have a pick in whatever round of the draft that player is selected.

As an example:

Player A qualifies for F/S for club A. Club A’s first pick in the first round is 15.

If Club B selects said player at pick 8, club A is allowed to then use pick 15 to select that player. The draft then continues as normal, each “round” will remain at 18 selections.

If club A does not have a pick in whatever round player A is selected, then they do not get to pick them.

If a club has multiple F/S or academy qualified players predicted to be selected in the same round then it is their responsibility to ensure they have multiple selections in that round.

This solution prevents any round of the draft from being more than 18 selections (unless the AFL offers a priority pick, which I would also not be doing).

From there you can look at academies and who qualifies and whether you can or can’t take academy players in the first or second round.

After that, scrap free agency compensation.



Why would scrapping free agency compo lead to less player movement?

There has been a lot more players change clubs since F/A compo was introduced imo

If they made band 1 compo not affect say the first top 10 picks of any national draft, I don't think it would be much of an issue/controversy tbh

Unfortunately i cannot see the AFL modifying the compo criteria, esp with Tassie entering the comp in a few years time

 

[Soggy2112]

It still creates a situation where some teams would get significant discounts. For instance Brisbane in 2022 would have had pick (15?) And they would have paid that for a kid taken at pick 2?

I’m okay with that. The current system isn’t any fairer, and it’s super messy.

Clubs are always going to get discounts under any F/S system, only way to avoid that is not have it.

For the record I’m pro father son picks.

What happens when the F/S is selected in the last pick of that round? Do you limit it to needing a pick within a certain range after the bid comes?

Nope, that’s bad luck. The club gambled they would still be there in round two, and they lost. So be it.

While it is different clubs would look to still pay for players with as late a picks as possible. If a club landed in the bottom 4 they would be looking to get to the end of the first round as Gold coast have done this year for the same reasons.

I’m okay with that. The advantage of this system is that only clubs with early picks are able to do this. In a way it acts as a form of equalisation even within the F/S system, giving bottom clubs an advantage that top clubs don’t get.

it also only looks to solve a single aspect to a really complex system. Would these rules then apply to Northern Academies and NGA? if so you've only marginally moved the dial on the dilution.

Why would academy players be any different to F/S?

You could make a rule about no academy in the first round or something like that, but whatever you choose to do it can be the same system.

The difference here is that each round is 18 picks.

 

[peetoo]

The only true solution is to scrap father-sons completely, IMO. It's an archaic hangover from what was a small, semi-professional, suburban competition when we are now in a modern, national, fully professional league.

If players still want to play for their dad's team, they are welcome to seek a trade.

Should be a trading discount only, like academy kids from the same state. Based on more open trading

 

[Freomaniac]

Restricted free agency compensation is a poorly thought out concept unlike anything else in professional sport.

There’s no logical reason to reward clubs who choose not to match market value contracts. NONE.

The AFL’s mysterious compensation further adds to the stupidity of the system.

Prime example right now is Ben McKay.

North Melbourne are essentially being incentivised by the AFL to not retain a best 22 player.

If the AFL wants equalisation don’t reward clubs for choosing to get worse.

I guess Josh Battle to the hawks doesnt help the cause either.

 

[juss]

I've argued against the compo from the beginning. Every other club not involved is inadvertently disadvantaged and pushed down the draft order.

 

[WeeBlake]

This is a such a valid point - every deal done in free agency ultimately punishes the 16 clubs that aren't involved.

Once you factor in FA compensation, father sons and "special assistance packages", each club's draft hand gets so diluted that rebuilding through the draft might not even be a viable path to prosperity anymore.

Free agency means the player is free to choose where they play. It doesn’t mean that club has to get them for free.

The main equalisation problem with free agency isn’t the compo picks, it’s that the club getting the player pays nothing for them.

Keep the compo picks, but make the club getting the player pay for it (in draft points or whatever).

 

[Daka]

How a top team like GWS can get first-round draft picks for losing average role-players is absolutely disgusting.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

How a top team like GWS can get first-round draft picks for losing average role-players is absolutely disgusting.

To be fair Collingwood must have really overpaid.

 

[chickenonachain]

To be fair it’s cost Collingwood and hawthorn nothing to get those players

 

[Soggy2112]

I've argued against the compo from the beginning. Every other club not involved is inadvertently disadvantaged and pushed down the draft order.

100%. If you’ve got eight years out of a player then you’ve got value for that draft pick. If as a club you can’t keep enough of your talent around to be successful then that’s on you.