REDUCING the qualifying periods for free agency by a further two years would allow clubs to rebuild their lists more quickly than under the existing system, the AFL Players' Association believes.

Players first become eligible for restricted free agency, at a minimum, after eight years under the current system, while all players qualify for unrestricted free agency after 10 seasons.

The AFLPA is also keen to abolish compensation picks for the loss of unrestricted free agents and argues that qualification for free agency should be based on years of service, rather than years at the one club.

The methods used to determine whether a player is a restricted free agent are also likely to be a matter for discussion.

Clubs need more power, says Tigers coach Damien Hardwick

AFLPA CEO Paul Marsh told AFL.com.au that increasing the available pool of free agents would be of benefit to both clubs and players.

"Expanded free agency coupled with competitive balance measures designed to ensure clubs can spend 100 per cent of their salary cap will allow clubs, especially those with a longer-term list management strategy, to access free agents," Marsh said.

"These clubs will theoretically have more salary cap space to use, particularly with the ability to "bank" money due to now being able to average 100 per cent of the salary cap over three years, and will be able to use free agency to regenerate their lists more quickly than through traditional drafting and trading of players."

No trades without player consent: AFLPA

Under the current system, players who qualify for free agency late in their career have predominantly moved to clubs higher on the ladder. 

There is a suspicion that clubs at the bottom of the ladder are happy to let free agents go in return for compensation draft picks to embark on a slow rebuild, providing the club doesn't view that free agent as a likely key player when it next expects to contend. 

Both St Kilda and Melbourne have been well compensated for the loss of free agents in recent years, with the Demons getting pick No.3 in return for losing defender James Frawley to Hawthorn. 

Marsh said reducing the eligibility period for free agents would, in fact, reduce each individual free agent's power in the market as there would be more attractive free agents available to clubs.

The final argument: Nick Bowen and Peter Ryan have their say

"There were only a very small number of eligible free agents in the market, which naturally means that these players will be in a position of power with respect to choosing which club they play for and the salaries they can demand," Marsh said. 

The AFLPA has always argued that no compensation should be awarded to clubs losing free agents because it complicates the system and many clubs are of the view that compensation for losing unrestricted free agents should be abolished. 

In the Frawley scenario, scrapping the rule would have given the Demons more incentive to keep him, as under current rules, replacing him with another free agent would have affected the compensation they received for losing the key defender. 

Most observers considered the Demons won out in the circumstances over the long term and clubs who weren't party to the transaction were forced down the draft order.

Despite the hype, only four free agents switched clubs during last year's free agency period and most players have stayed with their existing club.

However the system, which gives players – who are subject to a salary cap and voluntarily enter the draft – freedom to move after serving their club for a specified period of time, has come under fierce criticism from many in the industry.