Minimum Contract Term For Draftees

[LordLucifer]

The recent comments by Chris Fagan around the Josh Schache situation has some serious merit. Fagan suggested first round draftees should be given an initial minimum 3-year contract.

Clearly clubs are being screwed over when drafting first round players only for them 18-months later they are getting huge offers to switch clubs.

Clubs down the bottom of the ladder will always struggle to build a competitive list if this practice continues.

I think it should be like this :

1st Round draftees - 4-years
2nd Round draftees - 3-years
3rd Round draftees - 2-years
4th Round draftees - 1-year

 

[FUS_RO_DAH]

I'm surprised more draftees don't just do a Wingard and say "Look I'm not keen on leaving so if you draft me I'll probably just request a trade in three years time anyway."

Would save a bit of mucking around surely? I understand the players from pick 30 up won't want to ruin their chances of being drafted, but those expected to go in the top 20 would be fairly safe.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

AFLPA won't let it happen so it's irrelevant.

 

[M Malice]

IMO 4 years is too long, 3 would be a good compromise.

1st round- 3 years.
The rest- 2 years with a club option to extend 1 more year.

I also agree with FUS_RO_DAH , just let the potential recruits be honest in interviews without recriminations.

The Josh Schache situation is not one of these didn't want to come here things though. He was keen to come but maybe the life of playing interstate away from family was a lot harder than he envisioned.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

AFLPA won't let it happen so it's irrelevant.

Exactly, the players want more freedom to move, not less. This is just going to get worse

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Exactly, the players want more freedom to move, not less. This is just going to get worse

I agree with you i just don't see it changing while the AFLPA has a lot of power.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

I agree with you i just don't see it changing while the AFLPA has a lot of power.

It's here to stay

 

[briztoon]

I'm surprised more draftees don't just do a Wingard and say "Look I'm not keen on leaving so if you draft me I'll probably just request a trade in three years time anyway."

Would save a bit of mucking around surely? I understand the players from pick 30 up won't want to ruin their chances of being drafted, but those expected to go in the top 20 would be fairly safe.

If you listened to the latest Cal Twomey podcast, a few did last year.

 

[JG22]

Fix the isolated issues at Brisbane, don't completely change the system

 

[OB11]

It's all in the art of the negotiation.

If 1st rd draft picks were paid 100% more in their initial contracts, with extra incentives for games played, for agreeing to extend 2 year contracts out to 3 years then there may be a reason for the players to agree to it.

If you are just going to lock kids on league minimum contracts for 3-4 years the AFLPA would be crazy to even entertain it as it would be limiting the young players earning capacity

 

[IanW]

As the Tom Boyd example shows, if a club wants a player enough, deals will get done.

The solution is carrots, not sticks - clubs should offer their good young players more than two years ASAP.

 

[Bazza97]

Yep I like the idea of a minimum 3 year contract for those picked in the first round of the draft especially for clubs that have picked a player from interstate. I think sometimes it takes 3 years for players drafted interstate or not to really settle into the club that drafted them. It would help though if prospective draftees were more honest with club recruiters from interstate telling them they're not interested in the move, would save a bit of time and money put into those players. As has been said in this thread already, the minimum 3 year contract to a first round draftee wouldn't happen though.

 

[briztoon]

It's all in the art of the negotiation.

If 1st rd draft picks were paid 100% more in their initial contracts, with extra incentives for games played, for agreeing to extend 2 year contracts out to 3 years then there may be a reason for the players to agree to it.

If you are just going to lock kids on league minimum contracts for 3-4 years the AFLPA would be crazy to even entertain it as it would be limiting the young players earning capacity

You look at other sports that have drafts, first round picks are NOT locked in to minimum salary contracts.

NBA minimum salary for a rookie is $700k. First pick in the draft gets $5+mil.

 

[Snookers]

Fix the isolated issues at Brisbane, don't completely change the system

It's not just Brisbane...

 

[bmaurizio]

Let's stop the tampering, the system is too regulated as it is.
If a youngster is so obviously talented and sought after to warrant bigger offers he has every right to seek the most lucrative and best opportunity, at any point of his career.
Many factors come into play remuneration, location, history , culture momentum of prospective club.

 

[JG22]

It's not just Brisbane...

Where else?

 

[jakethesnake24]

Make the draft age 21 so we're not drafting sooks out of high school

 

[Snookers]

Where else?

Not sure if serious...

 

[JG22]

Not sure if serious...

Geelong?

 

[Snookers]

Geelong?

Stop wasting my time.

 

[JG22]

Stop wasting my time.

I don't think the Giants have been on the same page as the Lions

 

[Coops93]

I think the NFL has first rounders at 4 years with a 5th year club option. The career of an NFL player is significantly shorter, with a full career being drafted at 22-23 and retiring at 32 or so. Almost half a career from the rookie deal in most cases.

Yet AFL players drafted at 18 are suggesting that even a 3 year initial deal is too long. The Players association have been taking the piss a bit recently and clubs (mostly northern) are getting bent over as a result. Clubs invest a crapload into these players, how about looking after them?

 

[Turbocat]

One must remember that kids are getting taken and put into clubs they had no choice over... can you imagine a system with no draft at all. Kids coming out of TAC could sign with who ever they wanted... then the Brisbane of the time ( bottom side) would have a whole different issue.

If a player is drafted on a 4 year contracted what level of pay os he getting for Y3 and Y4?

Take Schache for example... The offers that he apparently is getting would greatly exceed any structured Y3 amount. Its worth money to him to change clubs... so why would the AFLPA agree to more restraint of trade.


What if the club finds they are rubbish and want to cut them? Does the club have to pay them out? At what rate?

 

[dlanod]

One must remember that kids are getting taken and put into clubs they had no choice over... can you imagine a system with no draft at all. Kids coming out of TAC could sign with who ever they wanted... then the Brisbane of the time ( bottom side) would have a whole different issue.

You'd get the guys who won't leave home, not leaving home. You'd get the guys willing to leave home getting godfather offers from interstate clubs, like Ponga in the NRL. Honestly even as a Brisbane fan I'd rather the NRL approach than this farce of a draft where a club puts a couple of years into developing a player only to have him walk out and get cents on the dollar back.

 

[Turbocat]

You'd get the guys who won't leave home, not leaving home. You'd get the guys willing to leave home getting godfather offers from interstate clubs, like Ponga in the NRL. Honestly even as a Brisbane fan I'd rather the NRL approach than this farce of a draft where a club puts a couple of years into developing a player only to have him walk out and get cents on the dollar back.

I do not know the NRL system at all. Explain it to me. I roughly think its zones?

My vision would be something like the American College system where all the clubs would be chasing kids in their last year of U18 getting them to sign.
Who went where? I think some of it would be as you say. A Geelong kid may well stay in Geelong if Geelongs offer is acceptable and Geelong wants him. However things are never static. Geelong is a reasonable option now , maybe not so 20 years ago ( a bit like the reverse Brisbane). Plenty of kids may well enjoy moving away if its their choice as long as they club is what they want , after all if there is a cap on spending one club may choose to spend more on kids than others.