The Go Home Factor: Weak AFL Players

[Demonic Ascent]

OK. So how does that go on to affect what else I have posted?

Huh? It undermines the whole basis of your argument.

 

[Sultan]

That was not my view at all.

I actually pointed out that they expect MORE rights than the average Joe.

That is subjective.

There are others who will happily play for the dollars on offer.

No doubt - but are they as good? Unlikely.

 

[Sultan]

Huh? It undermines the whole basis of your argument.

How so?

 

[TheGhostOfJohnBelushi]

What AFL players currently do, is the equivalent of me telling my employer that yes, I want that higher paid role, but I will tell YOU where I am working. It's complete bullshit IMO.

No it's not. They're going to work for another employer under more attractive job conditions.

AFL is the industry, not the employer.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

You can take the boy out of Geelong but you can't... well you know the rest

He'll fit right in with the Selwood brothers.

 

[SterlingArcher]

Would be very surprised if a lot of these cases were related to 'going home because sad and weak' like the OP says.

McCarthy almost certainly offered massive deal by Freo. Longer saw no hope of getting a game for years. Aish didn't even go home. Beams would have got a massive deal from Brisbane no matter whether he had family or not.

 

[Jade]

No it's not. They're going to work for another employer under more attractive job conditions.

AFL is the industry, not the employer.

As I've already pointed out in this thread, that is incorrect - players are employees of the AFL.

 

[Purple Suit]

And AFL players are free to quit playing AFL and go play SANFL, if they wish.

But no, they want to maintain their existing employment (as an AFL footballer) and simply dictate the where and how of that employment.

In my industry for example, I can take the highest paid role if I choose to do so, but it might involve an interstate move, or even international. Or I could choose to not take that role and work for less at home (my VFL).

What AFL players currently do, is the equivalent of me telling my employer that yes, I want that higher paid role, but I will tell YOU where I am working. It's complete bullshit IMO.

In your scenario though, you can make the decision on where you end up. You weigh up the pros and cons and make your decision. If you are straight out of uni and do really well, you can consider all offers and maybe take your pick.

This isn't the case for AFL players when they first start. They can work hard and become the most talented youngster and they don't get the choice on where they end up. It's no wonder some want to leave, clubs need to do their research better rather than always take "best available". Externally people might think they stuffed up but internally they might lose less players.

Northern Academies are already trying to bring more home grown talent to these clubs to reduce the go home factor.

 

[Jade]

In your scenario though, you can make the decision on where you end up. You weigh up the pros and cons and make your decision. If you are straight out of uni and do really well, you can consider all offers and maybe take your pick.

This isn't the case for AFL players when they first start. They can work hard and become the most talented youngster and they don't get the choice on where they end up. It's no wonder some want to leave, clubs need to do their research better rather than always take "best available". Externally people might think they stuffed up but internally they might lose less players.

Northern Academies are already trying to bring more home grown talent to these clubs to reduce the go home factor.

And I completely agree with the academy system (though I believe it needs to be periodically reviewed).

And I also agree that first time draftees have zero choice of club. They can however elect to not play AFL.

 

[quotemokc]

It's been said many times but the player should only be allowed to nominate the state they want to play in not the team. Imagine how many teams would of been trying to get Treloar if he hadn't nominated Collingwood.

3 years minimum is not enough imo, especially when many players take longer than that to develop.

 

[mike123]

They have a choice, to not be employed by the AFL.

Its not much of a choice then

 

[telsor]

Could just ban Brisbane from the Draft, there goes 90% of the issue...

Pretty much.

Of course, players leaving Brisbane has nothing to do with the club being a wreck on and off field for an extended period (as happened at clubs like Melbourne and Carlton)...No it's all to do with the 'go home factor'

 

[Bardo State]

I think as long as we're moving towards a more American system then you should be able to trade players without their consent. Doubt it will happen as the AFLPA would fight it to the death unless they got some sort of massive concession.

 

[iBeng]

Pretty much.

Of course, players leaving Brisbane has nothing to do with the club being a wreck on and off field for an extended period (as happened at clubs like Melbourne and Carlton)...No it's all to do with the 'go home factor'

Put the claws away mate it was a joke.

Turn your focus to winning a final for once and leave us "lesser clubs" alone.

 

[Crankyhawk]

That is subjective.

No doubt - but are they as good? Unlikely.

I think they'd be good enough. All the fans really care about is if their team wins or not. Country leagues are still entertaining (as long as it's not a massive talent imbalance). And what are the sooky players going to do that will pay as well for the same effort? I think the last footballer of note whose non footy job paid more was Chris Langford in the late 90s

 

[Jade]

Its not much of a choice then

Sure it is. You can play football in any number of leagues and be paid for it. No doubt at all that if you have the skill, the AFL pays substantially higher, but there are sacrifices that need to be made if you want to pursue that - it really is very simple IMO.

 

[Jade]

I think as long as we're moving towards a more American system then you should be able to trade players without their consent. Doubt it will happen as the AFLPA would fight it to the death unless they got some sort of massive concession.

I'd like to see contracted players traded without consent, but I didn't list that in the OP because I don't think it really helps (much) with the idea of a go home factor.

 

[mike123]

Sure it is. You can play football in any number of leagues and be paid for it. No doubt at all that if you have the skill, the AFL pays substantially higher, but there are sacrifices that need to be made if you want to pursue that - it really is very simple IMO.

No its sacrifices that keyboard warriors like yourself want them to make without having an idea or perspective of what its like.

 

[Jade]

No its sacrifices that keyboard warriors like yourself want them to make without having an idea or perspective of what its like.

Okay two things:

1) No need for the 'keyboard warrior' crap. I've had a couple posters disagree with me and have done so without being a complete twat about it.
-and-
2) I actually do have some idea or perspective; I was offered a substantial payrise to accept a role working in the Netherlands which I declined due to the fact I didn't want to leave the country.

 

[Bardo State]

I'd like to see contracted players traded without consent, but I didn't list that in the OP because I don't think it really helps (much) with the idea of a go home factor.

I think at the end of the day there's not much you can do with it. People are always going to have a preferred place to live. With Free Agency there's really not much you can do about it other than giving clubs greater flexibility in list management (banking the cap, future picks, trading w/o consent).

A 19 year old draft age and 3 year contract don't sound bad. But then a club has to have drafted players, most of which are duds on the list, or at least in the cap until they're 22. That's a bit too long. Maybe a system where the base contract is two years and a club has the option of triggering a third if they wish? That would help early player retention without being a burden on list/cap management.

 

[Jade]

I think at the end of the day there's not much you can do with it. People are always going to have a preferred place to live. With Free Agency there's really not much you can do about it other than giving clubs greater flexibility in list management (banking the cap, future picks, trading w/o consent).

A 19 year old draft age and 3 year contract don't sound bad. But then a club has to have drafted players, most of which are duds on the list, or at least in the cap until they're 22. That's a bit too long. Maybe a system where the base contract is two years and a club has the option of triggering a third if they wish? That would help early player retention without being a burden on list/cap management.

Yeah I don't mind that idea.

Effectively, much of my angst at the current system comes by virtue of the fact that the AFL had a golden opportunity to offer balance by tightening player movement at one end of the scale at the same time as introducing Free Agency. It is a failure to manage IMO.

 

[mike123]

Okay two things:

1) No need for the 'keyboard warrior' crap. I've had a couple posters disagree with me and have done so without being a complete twat about it.
-and-
2) I actually do have some idea or perspective; I was offered a substantial payrise to accept a role working in the Netherlands which I declined due to the fact I didn't want to leave the country.

1) No need for the 'weak AFL Players' crap.

2) Players don't know where they are going, they just sign up and hope for the best, if two years later they get a better offer in a better place, they are entitled to take it.

 

[Crows4Eva]

I admit, when you consider professional athletes in the US or Europe who have to move hundreds, sometimes thousands of miles away from home to play the game they love, it does make AFL players look pretty soft using homesickness as an excuse to leave when you're never more than a few hours on a plane away from home. But the fact is that the AFL has set up the system in such a way that players have all the power when it comes to being traded and if they want to go home, there's little that can be done about it.

The argument is that players should have the right to chose where they work/live but in the real world people have to move away for work all the time, and in many cases, if you want to work in a specific industry, you get little choice as to where you work/who you work for because jobs are limited and you take what you can get from who's willing to give it to you so I don't completely buy that argument.

I don't have a huge problem with the whole 'go home' thing, you just learn to accept it, but it is rather soft when you think about it.

 

[quotemokc]

Australia is one of the few countries in the world where moving away from home is not the norm.

Think about the US and colleges, there are hundreds all over the country, kids move away from home to go to them because they don't all live in major cities. Whilst in Australia the majority of people will go to university in the city they live in.

 

[MarcusP2]

Clubs could show some balls and refuse to trade contracted players. That would be a start.