Having listened to a few people lately, is it likely that mid season transfers will happen in the AFL in the future? ie EPL
Just have a trade deadline at the midway point of the season, trades only being over a 1 week period is idiotic.
Hate this idea. Hate most of the EPL NBA NBL NFL ideas. Stop faffing around with the game. Have no idea why anyone went to America to research equalisation…haven’t heard one ■■■■■■ word about equalisation since they returned.
OK uninformed rant over…continue 
Just have a trade deadline at the midway point of the season, trades only being over a 1 week period is idiotic.
I agree. Just let trades be done from mid October or whatever until 30 June. Can't see why it couldn't work.
Full bye after R11 with a mid season trade week and State Draft where clubs can take 1 6 month contract player with the option to senior list or trade at the end of the season…
(Actually don’t want anything to change)
No.
Maybe let clubs hold one or two list spots open, and have a small mid-season draft; but being able to clear players tampers with the whole integrity of the season. Not a fan at all.
Imagine having a jumper with a number, after round 12 he’s playing for Carlton. Wrong.
Well that would be a fundamental shift in the culture of the game that would finally get rid of me. Not interested in the slightest. Would be one cultural shift to many for me.
Have a midseason rookie spot. Can’t get rid of players, can’t get players from other clubs, can fill any voids in case you have 3 ruckmen go down.
Have a midseason rookie spot. Can't get rid of players, can't get players from other clubs, can fill any voids in case you have 3 ruckmen go down.
Agreed. This is the only option. Anything else and I'm with Reboot.
Have seconds sides that you can elevate 1-2 players to the senior rookie slot. One of the great things about the AFL is the player loyalty to their clubs.
The AFL need to stop trying to destroy what make our footy great.
What YT and Nocturnal said.
Have a midseason rookie spot. Can't get rid of players, can't get players from other clubs, can fill any voids in case you have 3 ruckmen go down.
I'm even against that.
If you decide to go into a season with only 3 ruckmen (or only 3 tall backs, or whatever), then it's your own stupid fault and you should sack your list manager instead of whining about how the rules should be changed. You made your own bed, now you can lie in it.
All it does is screw over state league teams who've done well, recruited some good players, and then have their list and finals hopes ■■■■■■ over when some nuffie AFL side waltzes in and pinches their stars - and in the VFL, they'll probably end up playing against their previous best player the next frigging week.
Rewards mediocrity and the taking of stupid risks by list managers. Screws over lower league clubs (yet again) for the benefit of AFL clubs. No thanks.
I'm even against that.
If you decide to go into a season with only 3 ruckmen (or only 3 tall backs, or whatever), then it's your own stupid fault and you should sack your list manager instead of whining about how the rules should be changed. You made your own bed, now you can lie in it.
All it does is screw over state league teams who've done well, recruited some good players, and then have their list and finals hopes ****** over when some nuffie AFL side waltzes in and pinches their stars - and in the VFL, they'll probably end up playing against their previous best player the next frigging week.
Rewards mediocrity and the taking of stupid risks by list managers. Screws over lower league clubs (yet again) for the benefit of AFL clubs. No thanks.
That is extremely well reasoned and you've changed my mind. Thread should be closed now!
And what if they get $25k straight off the bat plus the rest of the guy's contract?I'm even against that.
If you decide to go into a season with only 3 ruckmen (or only 3 tall backs, or whatever), then it's your own stupid fault and you should sack your list manager instead of whining about how the rules should be changed. You made your own bed, now you can lie in it.
All it does is screw over state league teams who've done well, recruited some good players, and then have their list and finals hopes ****** over when some nuffie AFL side waltzes in and pinches their stars - and in the VFL, they'll probably end up playing against their previous best player the next frigging week.
Rewards mediocrity and the taking of stupid risks by list managers. Screws over lower league clubs (yet again) for the benefit of AFL clubs. No thanks.
The AFL could make it work.
And what if they get $25k straight off the bat plus the rest of the guy's contract?
The AFL could make it work.
Even with the $25k they're still screwed that season unless they can poach a replacement off someone else, which only kicks the can down the road. Gives lower league clubs money in exchange for giving up flag chances, and encourages them to contract draftables rather than the better (but perhaps unfashionably shorter) footballers. State league sides would become a sort of TAC Cup, where genuinely good players don't get a go because the region manager wanted to get more tall fast clueless athletes in to wow the AFL scouts at testing. I'd hate to see the slightly smaller/slowers/less-tall-building-jumping-over blokes get even less of a chance than they do now to run around in a high standard league.
Also, with modern footy being what it is, does anyone really expect a mid-season draftee to be able to step in and just play straight awayat the top level? AFL fitness requirements are hugely above those of any state league, and it takes months of repetition and practice to get a gameplan embedded in your skull so you know where to run and know where your teammates are going to run. A blow-in from the VFL or whatever, with no preseason and no idea of the gameplan would just be a liability. He's leave huge gaps in the defensive setup, woldn't be able to predict his teammates decisions or know their games. It'd be a disaster.
Have a trade deadline instead of a week. Restricted free agency is fine.
Nothing more extreme than that. Unrestricted free agency would go out of control like it does here and you'll rarely, if ever, see one club career players again.
Even with the $25k they're still screwed that season unless they can poach a replacement off someone else, which only kicks the can down the road. Gives lower league clubs money in exchange for giving up flag chances, and encourages them to contract draftables rather than the better (but perhaps unfashionably shorter) footballers. State league sides would become a sort of TAC Cup, where genuinely good players don't get a go because the region manager wanted to get more tall fast clueless athletes in to wow the AFL scouts at testing. I'd hate to see the slightly smaller/slowers/less-tall-building-jumping-over blokes get even less of a chance than they do now to run around in a high standard league.
Also, with modern footy being what it is, does anyone really expect a mid-season draftee to be able to step in and just play straight awayat the top level? AFL fitness requirements are hugely above those of any state league, and it takes months of repetition and practice to get a gameplan embedded in your skull so you know where to run and know where your teammates are going to run. A blow-in from the VFL or whatever, with no preseason and no idea of the gameplan would just be a liability. He's leave huge gaps in the defensive setup, woldn't be able to predict his teammates decisions or know their games. It'd be a disaster.
I don't really think 18 maximum possible recruits, across the 3 separate reasonable-level state leagues, is going to be game-changing in terms of recruitment policy for the state league clubs. I might be underestimating that effect, but I can't see everyone raiding one VFL side, to the tune of writing off a year.
And your 2nd point would be part of the disincentive. Very much a 'break glass in case of fire...' scenario.
I've thought for a fair while, I think there should be more list spots/rookies allowed - with no higher cap.
If Geelong or Hawthorn want to pay 40 higher-quality players the same amount that Melbourne or GWS* pay 48, go mental. The small lists is a bit artificial IMHO, hurts the crap clubs more than the more settled ones.
And having 1 open slot only goes along the same lines. They'll have to pay fewer match payments, presumably to a higher-end player or 3 - if they have their main guys fit all year, no extra rookie. Natural handbrake.
(*yes, yes I know, limitless buckets of money etc)
As to the second point, the clubs might have to have slightly less involved game plans, or at the least swallow some of the more technical & tactical requirements for some roles, in the short term. Which I assume they'd have to do occasionally anyway, on a smaller scale - when they have to use a make-shift forward or back or ruck with only a week or two's notice.