The AFL is set to examine potential changes to its free agency system, with chief executive Andrew Dillon confirming the league will open discussions with the players' association about reforms aimed at protecting competitive balance across all 18 clubs.

Dillon made the announcement during grand final week, acknowledging that the free agency system — in place for roughly 12 to 14 years — has begun producing the kind of competitive distortions that were originally feared when it was introduced but did not initially materialise.

What's Driving the Push for Free Agency Reform?

The AFL's concerns centre on a pattern that has become increasingly difficult to ignore: the most sought-after free agents are overwhelmingly choosing clubs that are already in premiership contention, rather than those struggling at the bottom of the ladder.

High-profile moves that illustrate this trend include Lance Franklin to Sydney, Patrick Dangerfield to Geelong, Tom Lynch to Richmond, Jeremy Cameron to Geelong, and Joe Daniher to Brisbane. This season, veteran stars Lachie Neale and Toby Greene are joining Collingwood and Geelong respectively as unrestricted free agents — again, clubs near the top of the competition.

Brisbane's recent dominance has brought fresh scrutiny to the issue. The Lions, who reached their fourth consecutive grand final and claimed a third consecutive premiership, attracted Sam Draper from Essendon and Oscar Allen from West Coast as free agents during their rise.

"Competitive balance is really important," Dillon said, pointing to the significant work already done around the draft, salary cap and soft cap to keep the competition on an even footing. He confirmed the league would look at free agency changes "with the agreement [with the players], just to make sure that the competitive balance isn't distorted."

Compensation Picks and the High-Stakes Deals Under the Microscope

Adding to the urgency is a controversy over compensation picks for clubs losing star players to free agency. The AFL had sought to remove compensation picks inside the top 10 at the end of last year, arguing such picks undermine the draft's role in helping struggling clubs rebuild. The AFL Players Association blocked that move, leaving the existing arrangements intact.

As a result, Port Adelaide stands to receive pick No. 5 as compensation for Zak Butters, and Gold Coast is in line for pick No. 7 after Ben King's move to Hawthorn — outcomes that give those clubs arguably better returns than they might achieve through a conventional trade.

The AFL is closely monitoring the side deals being negotiated between Port Adelaide and the Western Bulldogs, and between Hawthorn and Gold Coast, to ensure they reflect genuine market value and are considered commercially sound.

A Possible Solution: Top Teams Paying Extra for Free Agents

One reform being canvassed would require clubs finishing in the top four, top six, or top eight to surrender their own first draft pick when signing a high-value free agent. Under this model, a club like Hawthorn — as a top-four finisher — would hand over their first-round selection to land a player like Ben King, rather than benefiting from the current compensation structure alone.

This kind of rule would introduce a meaningful cost for contending clubs pursuing free agents, potentially levelling the playing field for clubs lower on the ladder.

Players' Union Flags Importance of Choice

Any changes to free agency must be negotiated with the AFL Players Association, as the system is enshrined in the collective bargaining agreement between the league and its players.

AFLPA chief executive James Gallagher defended the current framework, noting that only a small number of players access free agency each year, making it a highly competitive process. He emphasised that the ability to choose a club matters deeply to players who have little say over where their careers begin and whose playing windows are relatively short.

Opinion among clubs on the ideal structure varies considerably — some push for fewer restrictions, while others argue the system disproportionately rewards clubs already in contention, a tension the AFL will need to navigate carefully as it seeks a path forward.