Equalisation isn’t being served by compo picks though — it’s being distorted. We’ve already got compromised drafts with academies, NGA concessions, father-son rules, northern academies, etc. That’s before you even get to priority assistance.
Do you think North Melbourne’s outlook wouldn’t improve if they had Nick Daicos on their list instead of Collingwood? Or that Sydney would be as consistently good without Heeney, Gulden, Blakey, Campbell coming through their academy? Would Brisbane have gone back-to-back without Harris Andrews, the Ashcrofts, Fletcher and Hipwood?
I’d argue if those players were spread across the competition we’d actually have a much more equal league. Instead, the current setup just entrenches advantages and then pretends to “fix” things with handouts.
Where did I say bottom teams getting less compensation helps equalisation? That’s not the point I made. My point was an uncompromised draft would do more for equalisation than all these bandaid compo handouts.
On top of that, free agency compensation has become another distortion. You’ve literally got West Coast reportedly not offering their captain a contract because they’d rather pocket the compo pick. How is that a healthy system?
And as for players leaving bad teams for good ones — that’s not unique to the AFL, it happens in every professional sport. The difference is the draft, salary cap and trade rules are meant to balance that out. At the moment it’s the opposite — some clubs get pipelines of elite talent, others get extra picks when they mismanage, while others are told to just suck it up.
I’d argue the top teams getting a conveyor belt of elite talent through academies, father-sons and NGAs is far more harmful to equalisation than bottom clubs missing out on compo picks.
And if free agency compensation didn’t exist, clubs would actually be forced to manage their lists properly — trade players before they walk for nothing. Port could cash in on Butters right now if they knew they wouldn’t get a magical compensation pick for letting him go.
And excluding Northern Academies, what conveyor belt? And the Northern Academies are not designed to help equalisation, everyone knows they’re there for other reasons and hurt it.
That’s kind of my point though — when I say uncompromised draft, that includes scrapping NGAs and club run northern academies altogether. I’ve previously advocated for the AFL to fully fund and run the development pathways in those regions directly, without giving certain clubs free runs at elite talent.
Would equalisation really be better served by Essendon getting an end of first round pick for Sam Draper, or by Brisbane not having exclusive access to the Ashcrofts, Harris Andrews, Hipwood and Fletcher? Same goes for Collingwood and the Daicos brothers. Which scenario actually creates a more even competition?
And sure, sure, you can’t move a player without consent, but clubs have ways of forcing the issue. Look at Melbourne and Oliver. If compensation didn’t exist, clubs would be forced to be more proactive rather than sitting back waiting for the AFL to bail them out.
Let’s be clear here. A fully clean, equal draft would be a disaster for bottom clubs. Getting pick #1 and #19 versus Brisbane #18 would not fill the gap when they can just go out and get free agent’s, and trades cheap.
Equalisation was fine with FS when clubs got them for third round picks. The reason was bad clubs got top 6 draft picks to boost them. Now they get nothing.
I didn’t realise this was a discussion about what will happen or an opinion about what should happen…
Because if we’re talking about what is happening, then yeah — the system’s completely broken. Bottom clubs rely on AFL handouts because the draft isn’t actually equal anymore. But if we’re talking about what should happen, then a truly uncompromised draft — no academies, no father-sons, no compensation — is the only real equalisation mechanism that doesn’t rely on the AFL playing god every offseason.