Free agency has become a farce. The AFL has lost control

OpinionSports reporterOctober 8, 2026 — 7:27pmHawthorn will get Ben King and the Bulldogs will land Zak Butters as very restricted free agents before the trade period ends.Gold Coast will be happy and Port Adelaide, to the extent they can be happy, will leave the period satisfied.Zak Butters had nominated the Western Bulldogs as his preferred destination in 2027. AFL PhotosGiven their pay packets and a return to their home state, we can only assume King and Butters will enjoy their Christmas lunches.But the wheeling and dealing which has occurred for the four clubs to reach that point has exposed the free agency, trade, drafting, bidding and points system as a free-for-all that has become so convoluted it is barely regulated at all.In technology circles, it’s known as the pacing problem where legal, ethical and regulatory mechanisms can’t keep up with technological advances in areas such as AI or cryptocurrency.This year free agency and the trade period have faced a pacing problem which has forced the clubs to find solutions which suited them and left the AFL (the regulators) watching on, as confidence evaporated that the system in place remained fit for purpose.That has led to the farcical reality of the four clubs involved in the King and Butters deals openly doing side deals that influenced their decisions to match or not match a free agency offer.The Gold Coast solution was simple. They would be prepared to accept compensation and not force a trade if they could land a player from the Hawks in a separate deal. Therefore, first year Hawk Aiden Schubert will be traded to the Suns after less than 11 months at the club, an 18-year-old South Australian living in a third state in 12 months. He is talented and has a good deal, but that’s not a system the AFL envisaged.Port Adelaide and the Bulldogs tried another avenue which the AFL blocked when it became clear that sending Todd Marshall and his wage to the Bulldogs for a couple of first round picks was not going to pass the pub test. Not even the AFL, who were aware of what was being planned, seemed aware of the rule until the reaction became clear.In the end the two clubs got another 84 clubs (in truth, closer to six) involved in a deal which sent players and picks in more directions than kids on an Easter egg hunt. The AFL will look at rule nine relating to exchanges and the fact all the clubs seem happy enough and sign off on the deal.Ben King will be a Hawk by the end of the week.AFL Photos via Getty ImagesThe reasons we have reached this situation, with the clubs running the show rather than the other way around, can be explained from a macro and micro sense.On one hand, the league in recent seasons focused too heavily on growth and commercialising aspects of the game (including the trade period) rather than keeping up with clubs who were frantically preparing for Tasmania’s entry into the competition and the associated impact on each club’s access to talent in 2028 and beyond.While they kept switching and swapping rules relating to access to academy and father-son graduates, tinkering with the points and bidding system, fingering clubs for compliance and granting assistance packages they lost a handle on what the game needed: a simpler system giving clubs autonomy to make decisions and assess value while achieving clearly defined objectives such as competitive balance.The most obvious example of this has come to light during this trade period.When the AFL changed rules allowing clubs to trade picks two years in advance and then made them pay a higher price for father-son picks or academy prospects, they failed to make any subsequent change to the system compensating clubs for losing a free agent.That’s not a knock on those clubs, but is free agency really free agency if the player involved has to consider which club can do the best deal before deciding which club he wants to join?And is a side deal not a side deal just because the AFL decides it can assess whether a deal made is fair or not, even if it happens to influence the decisions of clubs involved in free agency transactions?The truth is restricted free agency has not really been free agency this year.And side deals were allowed because it became obvious the clubs weren’t just going to cop what the system was capable of delivering.The system needs an overhaul, perhaps a simplification, with enough guardrails so rules are adhered to while leaving room for innovation, so smarter clubs can find an advantage.More:Trading and draftingAFL 2026AnalysisOpinionWestern BulldogsHawthorn HawksFrom our partners