Minimum 3 year contracts for drafted players

Given the willingness of clubs to throw guys on the scrap heap after two years (and sometimes even one) the whole idea is kind of laughable.

Not sure who is supposed to benefit out of this plan. The player? No he is stuck at a club he doesn’t want to be at for longer. The Club? No he’ll still leave and the risk is greater on new recruits. Brisbane & GWS? Fark them. They need to create a culture where kids want to stay.

I’m against it.

Mandatory 3 yr contracts would make clubs even more conservative & risk averse in their drafting than they already are (if such a thing is possible)

You’d see even less indigenous, didadvantaged, short but talented, and otherwise marginal kids get picked while every club would double down on upper middle class whitebread private schoolkids.

And as we’ve seen with judas, it’s not as if length of contract actually means anything when a player decides they want out, after all.

Imagine an Aish or an Ebert wanting to play for a SA club.

Who would have thought it.

lions are ■■■■■■■ idiots for drafting someone who was always going to leave

It’s too simplistic. It suits the crap clubs who come last and get good picks, who will struggle to develop them into good footy players (Jack Watts), and then lose them after 3 years instead of 2. Who would want to be a top draft pick in that situation? It’s already bad enough being top draft pick, but now your sentencing them for 3 years? No wonder draftee’s fake injuries…(lol, Heppel).

And I totally agree with HM regarding this policy forcing clubs to be even more risk averse.

Plenty of teams pass on guys because they’re not sure they’ll stay. ie I know Wingard basically told GWS to go and get stuffed, he wanted to end up back in SA. Are Brisbane just arrogant & don’t believe the kids?

I will say though I don’t like guys moving after only 1 or 2 years. The original club never gets rewarded and it basically allows Hawthorn etc to subvert the draft.
I wouldn’t mind a team option arrangement.

‘Hutchy’ should take into account that these ‘employees’ would need to actually be paid for 3 years work. Ridiculous idea from that shitbag.

Plenty of teams pass on guys because they're not sure they'll stay. ie I know Wingard basically told GWS to go and get stuffed, he wanted to end up back in SA. Are Brisbane just arrogant & don't believe the kids?

I will say though I don’t like guys moving after only 1 or 2 years. The original club never gets rewarded and it basically allows Hawthorn etc to subvert the draft.
I wouldn’t mind a team option arrangement.

As much as I hate the Hawks, if I take the EFC goggles of for half a second its pretty easy to see they are a successful club, heaps of members and have been top 4 or flag winners for the past 6 years or something.

As a footy player they would be a good club to play for, it’s the drafted players’ decision to leave the club that drafted them, you can’t blame the Hawks or whoever for the kids decision, and that’s where the salary cap should hold back the Hawks from poaching kids.

The draft is a restraint of trade on the players, disadvantaging the better clubs, I’m against anyone subverting it if they can. If some kid said he’d only play for EFC and wouldn’t interview for other clubs, I’d say we’d done a good job getting his committment.

Also how often does has a 1st pick draftee gone to the best team in the comp after 2 years? Looking at the below Scully and Boyd left to clubs that weren’t in the eight, and the only other 2 that aren’t at their original club came to us(!) as free agents.

2000 Riewoldt
2001 Hodge
2002 Goddard
2003 Cooney
2004 Deledio
2005 MUrphy
2006 Gibbs
2007 Kreuzer
2008 Watts
2009 Scully
2010 Swallow
2011 Patton
2012 Whitfield
2013 Boyd
2014 McCartin

True dat.
Poaching is the issue. Yet another one that the AFL tried to manage rather than enforce.
I guess if you employ over a hundred PR staff it doesn’t leave much left for other things.

Plenty of teams pass on guys because they're not sure they'll stay. ie I know Wingard basically told GWS to go and get stuffed, he wanted to end up back in SA. Are Brisbane just arrogant & don't believe the kids?

I will say though I don’t like guys moving after only 1 or 2 years. The original club never gets rewarded and it basically allows Hawthorn etc to subvert the draft.
I wouldn’t mind a team option arrangement.

But if Brisbane didn’t draft any kids that didn’t want to go there, they wouldn’t draft anybody.

If Aish goes, that’s 5 first round picks gone in two years. That’s ridiculously difficult to rebuild with.

In fact, this article from last year States that ‘10 of Brisbane’s last 19 first round draft picks, have gone home.

It’s a real issue, although I think it’s an issue with Brisbane specifically, rather than the system in general.

Plenty of teams pass on guys because they're not sure they'll stay. ie I know Wingard basically told GWS to go and get stuffed, he wanted to end up back in SA. Are Brisbane just arrogant & don't believe the kids?

I will say though I don’t like guys moving after only 1 or 2 years. The original club never gets rewarded and it basically allows Hawthorn etc to subvert the draft.
I wouldn’t mind a team option arrangement.

But if Brisbane didn’t draft any kids that didn’t want to go there, they wouldn’t draft anybody.

If Aish goes, that’s 5 first round picks gone in two years. That’s ridiculously difficult to rebuild with.

In fact, this article from last year States that ‘10 of Brisbane’s last 19 first round draft picks, have gone home.

It’s a real issue, although I think it’s an issue with Brisbane specifically, rather than the system in general.

It’s only an issue if they didn’t get fair compensation for them.

I do like this new idea of actually speaking honestly about players that want to leave. No more 'well we will do everything we can to keep him ‘BS’.

Boyd, Ryder, Beams and probably some others all forced their clubs hands this preseason whilst notionally under contract.

The only change needed to the system is to outlaw Paul Connors.

Plenty of teams pass on guys because they're not sure they'll stay. ie I know Wingard basically told GWS to go and get stuffed, he wanted to end up back in SA. Are Brisbane just arrogant & don't believe the kids?

I will say though I don’t like guys moving after only 1 or 2 years. The original club never gets rewarded and it basically allows Hawthorn etc to subvert the draft.
I wouldn’t mind a team option arrangement.

But if Brisbane didn’t draft any kids that didn’t want to go there, they wouldn’t draft anybody.

If Aish goes, that’s 5 first round picks gone in two years. That’s ridiculously difficult to rebuild with.

In fact, this article from last year States that ‘10 of Brisbane’s last 19 first round draft picks, have gone home.

It’s a real issue, although I think it’s an issue with Brisbane specifically, rather than the system in general.

It’s only an issue if they didn’t get fair compensation for them.

They didn’t.

As we know all too well, when players handpick which club they go to, you don’t get fair compensation.

Plenty of teams pass on guys because they're not sure they'll stay. ie I know Wingard basically told GWS to go and get stuffed, he wanted to end up back in SA. Are Brisbane just arrogant & don't believe the kids?

I will say though I don’t like guys moving after only 1 or 2 years. The original club never gets rewarded and it basically allows Hawthorn etc to subvert the draft.
I wouldn’t mind a team option arrangement.

But if Brisbane didn’t draft any kids that didn’t want to go there, they wouldn’t draft anybody.

If Aish goes, that’s 5 first round picks gone in two years. That’s ridiculously difficult to rebuild with.

In fact, this article from last year States that ‘10 of Brisbane’s last 19 first round draft picks, have gone home.

It’s a real issue, although I think it’s an issue with Brisbane specifically, rather than the system in general.

It’s only an issue if they didn’t get fair compensation for them.

It’s a worry that they want to go home after two years though. The AFLs solution is to give them a bigger salary cap but from what you hear, the facilities there are a disgrace.

This isn’t happening to every other club.

So why should we change the rules just so Brisbane stop whinging?

This isn't happening to every other club.

So why should we change the rules just so Brisbane stop whinging?

It’s happening at Collingwood, HA!

This isn't happening to every other club.

So why should we change the rules just so Brisbane stop whinging?

It’s happening at Collingwood, HA!

LOLlingwood are still considered a team, Ross?

Plenty of teams pass on guys because they're not sure they'll stay. ie I know Wingard basically told GWS to go and get stuffed, he wanted to end up back in SA. Are Brisbane just arrogant & don't believe the kids?

I will say though I don’t like guys moving after only 1 or 2 years. The original club never gets rewarded and it basically allows Hawthorn etc to subvert the draft.
I wouldn’t mind a team option arrangement.

But if Brisbane didn’t draft any kids that didn’t want to go there, they wouldn’t draft anybody.

If Aish goes, that’s 5 first round picks gone in two years. That’s ridiculously difficult to rebuild with.

In fact, this article from last year States that ‘10 of Brisbane’s last 19 first round draft picks, have gone home.

It’s a real issue, although I think it’s an issue with Brisbane specifically, rather than the system in general.

It's become a self fulfilling prophecy now. "Joe Blow that I got drafted with left, he was my closest mate at the club, what's keeping me here now?". And IMHO it was somewhat kicked off by Crazy Vosso trading Henderson and Bradshaw (and Rischitelli, a leader at the club) for magic beans back in the day.

I’m not sure what the exact issue is, much less a solution, but I am sure that Brisbane aren’t the smartest club. A few years ago they sold off the rights to the concessions (food & bevvies) at the GABBA for a million or two. Which gave them a nice profit for one year - and consigned them to losses ever since. Then cried poor to the AFL because they can’t possibly make money: idiots.
They’ve now been allowed an academy which basically allows them to pick the eyes out of half the state before anyone else has had a chance. Queensland’s producing some players now, so that should be a handy little advantage for them.

Whatever the issue, we can be sure the AFL’s response will be illogical, over the top, unfairly penalise other clubs, and not actually fix the problem at hand. Probably re-instate the COLA… for Sydney.

Which is nice.

How about clubs have option to offer 2 or 3 year deals for first round players. Same as players have option to accept a 3 year deal or request 2 years, its more security for them but ultimately their choice. Then its not mandatory. clubs get a choice. Ie Hawks with pick 18 may not want to risk a 3 year contract on a first year player who they are questionable at drafting, and have great depth. whereas saints would love to lock in pick 2 on 2nd best player in the land for a 3 year deal.

Imagine how ■■■■■■ hawks would be if they had 3 year contract with garlett, less chance those types picked up…also older mature age recruits less chance as well if need to risk 3 year contract.

And the AFL love creating more rules, so this one will probably be a new one.

would we offer langford and laverde 3 year deals…maybe, but i would still prefer 2 years, we can sell efc to them, and they ahve opportunity to stand out. Zach merrett is a lot better now than we he was first drafted. 2 years is a long time in footy.
Imagine Heeney after 2 years.

Clubs can offer more than two year deals - A few draftees sign 3 year contracts - JD signed a five year contract.