All clubs had met the minimum requirement of one fully-qualified, full-time player development manager by the end of 2013 but there were concerns a cap on football department spending might cause some clubs to review their expenditure in that area.
However AFL.com.au understands recent meetings between the AFL and the AFLPA have seen preliminary agreement that such positions should be exempt.
The player development role is an important plank of the Players' Association aimks to create first class sporting workplaces and restore work-life balance, and there is growing awareness that successful clubs have strong programs in place to support players' off-field development.
Wednesday's meeting is the first opportunity for all clubs to gather since they agreed to 10 guiding principles on competitive balance at a pre-season meeting in March, although an equalisation sub-committee consisting of club, AFL and player representatives met in early May.
There has been debate in the past month over what items might be exempt from a non-player spending cap in football departments and how such a cap would be audited.
There have been suggestions clubs might have to pay for an auditing process and suggestions of peer reviewing of club expenditure.
There has also been concern about how to include costs many clubs incur in funding their own state league teams.
Football operations manager Mark Evans told AFL.com.au a fortnight ago that working through the detail was important but complex.
"We're assessing things from all the clubs and state to state [to determine] what is actually fair," he said.
Clubs have expressed concern at the prospect of culling costs, and the presence of clubs at international scouting camps that turn up prospects such as North Melbourne's Eric Wallace and recent Collingwood signing Mason Cox may be at risk.
Players are expected to receive a rise in total player payments only marginally over the three per cent mandated in the collective bargaining agreement.
AFL.com.au understands total player payments will exceed r0 million per club per year for the first time.
It's also expected that the cost of living allowance (COLA) will be revised and the veterans allowance phased out.
Most of the focus at club level will be on shared revenue measures. A compromise reached during the meeting in Adelaide means the amount of revenue that wealthy clubs hand over will be capped.
The expansion clubs, Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney, will not be beneficiaries of any shared revenue.
However gate levies and shared beverage deals will continue to see funds generated by wealthier clubs flow to less wealthy clubs.
The luxury tax on football department spending is not expected to generate significant shared revenue but it will act as a control on costs.
The AFL has long been concerned about the inflationary effect the arms race was having on costs within football departments, particularly with the wages of coaches and support staff spiking in recent years.
The AFLPA had also said in recent years it was not prepared to accept constraints on pay through the salary cap if equalisation was not addressed.
Melbourne coach Paul Roos said quality not quantity was still the biggest determinant of success, but he conceded there was a point where wealthier clubs were at an advantage over less wealthy clubs.
"I guess there are a lot of inequities in all different facets of the game at the moment," he said.
Chris Dawes, now at Melbourne after playing in a premiership at Collingwood, said the Magpies were able to put substantial amounts of money into areas that may provide just a one or two per cent advantage, but at the elite level that could be the difference between winning and losing.
"Having said that, at Melbourne, whilst we don't have the money and facilities that some of the big clubs have we still have got professional standards," Dawes said.
"The most valuable resources are personnel, and in terms of coaching staff and quality of coaching staff goes we would be at the top of the pile there anyway, so I can't complain."
