Should AFL clubs be able to trade contracted players?

Long-term contracts are beginning to prove wildly ineffective in the AFL.

Over a week before the 2025 trade period kicks off, the competition has already seen a number of players on long-term deals express their desire to shift clubs, with five players potentially seeking a move away from their respective clubs despite having multiple years remaining on their current contract.

While the long-term deal has substantiated its value by holding wantaway stars to their commitments, the extensive contracts have only proven effective in providing the club with extra bargaining power.

Over recent trade periods, the commitment and loyalty of signing a long-term deal appears to have significantly lost its meaning.

In 2025 (so far), Zach Merrett, Charlie Curnow, Jy Simpkin, Jordan Ridley and Christian Petracca have all expressed a desire to change colours ahead of 2026 despite having several years remaining on a previously signed long-term commitment.

And yet we remain almost a week away from the official opening of trade period.

Evidently, this presents as an issue. Do players and player managers hold too much power? In the case of Zach Merrett, the Bombers have become relatively hopeless to the fact that their captain will leave the club, with relationships torn too far apart for the star to consider donning the sash in the future. This, despite the midfielder remaining under contract at the club until the end of 2027.

So how can the AFL - both in the interest of players, clubs and the league in general - mend the ineffective nature of long-term deals?

Garry Lyon, Tim Watson, Nathan Buckley and Gerard Whateley have all had their say on SEN.

“Brad Scott, when we had him on (Fox Footy) last week, said we’re getting situations where managers are saying, ‘just sign the long-term contract – I’ll get you out’,” Lyon told SEN Breakfast.

“No! There has got to come a time where you go hey, that’s not going to happen. You’re not getting out.”

Watson: “Do you think there should be a power shift in some way regarding signing a long-term deal?

“I said this the other day, and I hadn’t given it a lot of thought – but if you do sign a long-term deal, maybe in the first four years of a deal that goes beyond four years, you can’t be traded.

“But, beyond that time, it switches to the power that goes to the club. Wherever that contract goes, it follows you, so whatever club picks you up they’ve got to pay that amount, but the club then gets the opportunity to shop you around and send you somewhere else.

“Therefore, you have to really think hard before you sit down and sign a long-term deal with the club.”

Former Collingwood player and coach Buckley chimed in.

“This whole of concept of players on long-term (deals), still with three or four years to run… and mind you, clubs that change their mind on players that still have three or four years to run – it’s problematic, isn’t it?” Buckley told SEN Whateley.

“And the dance that both club and player – with managers in between – need to do… what Essendon have said about Zach Merrett at the end of last week, we will not trade him under any circumstances – it’s nearly like that’s the dance that you have to go through.

“What if the club came out and said, ‘we understand that Zach wants to move, and we will explore those options for him. He’s our captain and he’s a professional footballer. If we can’t get suitable recompense, then we will redeem Zach in his role and expect him to fulfil his contractual obligations’.

“Underneath that, I don’t think you need to communicate it, but you say ‘he won’t be captain next year, because he can’t lead this football club given the behaviours and actions that we have seen’.

“Zach could come out and say something – ‘I love the Essendon Football Club; I’ve committed my life to it I’ve been passionate about it for the majority of my football career. My career is finite, and I would love to have a look at other options to explore experiencing another environment and potentially greater success during this trade period’.

“Would we think that that would be any different to what is actually happening?

“The AFL need to look at these parameters. Boards need to look at these parameters. I know that different boards have different ideas of when they need to get involved for financial discipline.

“If it’s above X amount of dollars, if it’s above a certain percent of the TTP, or over a certain tenure, then the board need to get involved. The board a still a motive about those things as well, but surely if you’re looking at it now, ‘we’re going to lock this player in, we don’t want him to go’.

“Well even if you do, he might still want to go. In the end, you’re robbing Peter to pay Paul. I think the AFL needs to step in to put the cheques and balances in place for the 18 clubs, and to be able to control what has got out of hand.”

“It’s just too casual now,” Gerard Whateley added.

“I am a believer that we do about a third of what player movement actually looks like internationally, and we run this protection racquet around compensation and all sorts of stuff that I think if you are going to step into player movement, which is what happened when free agency came, you need to do the whole lot. And the whole lot does include trading without consent.

“You are guaranteed tenure, you are guaranteed finance, you are not guaranteed location. You’re signing a nine-year contract, it doesn’t mean you’ll serve nine years at the one club, it guarantees you that this is what your life in football will look like.

“There’s an incredible naivety with our player movement. I think our managers are taking the mickey.

“'I’ll get you a long-term contract, we’ll put the club over a barrel, and then if it turns sour, we’ll just blast you out of there.'”

Buckley: “It just hedges you financially.

“This is a fair element; you can’t discount this – this is a finite existence. You are not a player for a long period in your career.

“If you do really well, it’s 15 years, and that is a very small part of your earning years of your life in this caper. So, you should make hay while the sun shines, and the money is going exponential for the players, but at the moment, they are getting without giving anything.

“The balance is warped. I don’t think setting yourself up financially and having that financial guarantee in terms of a contractual element over a long period of time; I can see the attraction of that as a player.

“Having said that, not every person is going to find their very best football when they’re safe like that. Some players need to be on the hook, and some players need to be stretching for that next contract.

“They contribute more, they find better, but some sacrifice that for security and safety which means they’re a lesser product. The clubs need to consider that as well.”