- Mar 14, 2011
- 13,906
- 74,494
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Leeds united, Chicago Bulls
I understood you point and thought it to be abit rich that another club who time and time again benefits from lower clubs letting good players go in an effort to rejuvenate whinges about the system.No. I am not "upset"... Why would I be "upset" about St Kilda receiving pick 5? That doesn't effect Hawthorn. The Saints clearly need to get some talent on their list, so half their luck if they can finagle their way to an extra top 5 pick. Charity cases like North Melbourne and Gold Coast have been sticking their hand out for years and receiving top 5 draft picks. So why shouldn't other clubs get their lick of the ice cream?
The point of my post was quite clear... I reckon anyone with an IQ above 90 could understand where I'm coming from.
The AFL's FA compo rules seem to be predicated on the idea that the money offered to a free agent is a fair representation of his value when clearly it isn't. The market value can be inflated. Just because a club (or clubs) offer someone a multi-million dollar contract, it doesn't mean they are actually worth that. It could be that there's a bidding war between 2 clubs on a serviceable ruckman or key defender (e.g. McKay) ... Or it could be that a club with tons of salary cap space (e.g. Hawthorn) is prepared to pay massive overs in the short term to marginally improve their list.
Either way... the AFL have created a system where the "reward" for a club losing their free agent is too great. Lowly clubs weaken their list by letting go of the few decent players they have and replacing them with top-end Under 18's.
Is that the desired outcome of free agency and free agency compensation? I would think not.
Apologies in advance that you were triggered and upset by my posting on this subject. I was just hoping for some discussion. I am not operating under the delusion (shared by many on this forum) that anything people post here is going to have any effect.
The fact is that the players want greater movement. But clubs are not allowed to move a player on without their consent in return.
So, for Hawthorn - the value in Battle is that he is a free agent. He has no asset cost aside from your own cap space. There has to be an incentive for clubs like mine in this instance to allow its facilitation. Otherwise your club never gets better talent to continue pushing up the ladder and mine may never get enough talent to turn it all around whilst the northern clubs keep on having massive wins from their academies.