• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

AFL (Aussie Rules) 2013 |OT| See the Bombers Shoot Up, Up

Y

Yagharek

Member
Rezbit said:
?? Talking about free agency compensation Vince
Click to expand...

What about it? I realise Essendon is a big beneficiary of it. Doesn't mean it's fair, but when teams like Sydney poach from teams like Adelaide after winning a flag just reeks of a stacked deck.

There's dodgy stuff everywhere though, such as Judd at visy.
 
R

Rezbit

Member
Just wondering why you are bringing up old compensation stuff and the new clubs. FA compensation is different obviously.
 
R

Rezbit

Member
Can you guys remind me where the advantage was for the Swans? Cost of living right, that allowance we have to pay to anyone involved with the Club?
 
Y

Yagharek

Member
Rezbit said:
Can you guys remind me where the advantage was for the Swans? Cost of living right, that allowance we have to pay to anyone involved with the Club?
Click to expand...

Perth is pretty damn expensive, not just Sydney and Brisbane which are the only cities getting bonuses.
 
A

AxeMan

Member
Not sure I follow you Rezbit. I assume you mean the 9.8% extra they get (as well as GWS) for their salary cap.

I don't agree with it

Edit - Yagharek, I don't believe Brisbane get extra anymore. GC don't get any extra either from memory
 
Y

Yagharek

Member
AxeMan said:
Not sure I follow you Rezbit. I assume you mean the 9.8% extra they get (as well as GWS) for their salary cap.

I don't agree with it

Edit - Yagharek, I don't believe Brisbane get extra anymore. GC don't get any extra either from memory
Click to expand...

Ok, I stand corrected on Brisbane. Still Sydney cant claim poor. 10% extra is farcical.
 
R

Rezbit

Member
You're the one who said we got the backing of the afl. Was wondering how and presumed it was the cost of living thing.

Fact is it is quite a bit more expensive in Sydney and everyone gets it. It's not able to be manipulated in the cap.
 
A

AxeMan

Member
Brisbane, I'm 90% sure, did during their premiership run. But it was on a sliding scale, decreased each year and I'm pretty sure ran out just as their run ended.

Sydney's allowance is just incredulous. I have no other word for it

Rezbit - I don't understand how you can say any of that with a straight face. Melbourne is more expensive than Adelaide, Brisbane and, I'm pretty sure, Perth. How come clubs in Melbourne don't get an allowance?

Fact is that any player on more than $200,000 isn't going to notice any difference on how far his cash takes him in Sydney compared to Melbourne.

Extended the COLA to Canberra if they had a team. It's more expensive there and have the highest average wage in the country. Do you think any players based in a Canberra team should get more money than one based in another city?
 
R

Rezbit

Member
AxeMan said:
Brisbane, I'm 90% sure, did during their premiership run. But it was on a sliding scale, decreased each year and I'm pretty sure ran out just as their run ended.

Sydney's allowance is just incredulous. I have no other word for it

Rezbit - I don't understand how you can say any of that with a straight face. Melbourne is more expensive than Adelaide, Brisbane and, I'm pretty sure, Perth. How come clubs in Melbourne don't get an allowance?

Fact is that any player on more than $200,000 isn't going to notice any difference on how far his cash takes him in Sydney compared to Melbourne.

Extended the COLA to Canberra if they had a team. It's more expensive there and have the highest average wage in the country. Do you think any players based in a Canberra team should get more money than one based in another city?
Click to expand...

Sydney is the most expensive city in Australia. The Swans players aren't going to be living in the boonies of Sydney. It's a cost of living allowance. Every player at the Swans gets it. A rookie who needs to live in Canterbury gets it. How is that an advantage in terms of on-field?
 
Y

Yagharek

Member
Rezbit said:
Sydney is the most expensive city in Australia. The Swans players aren't going to be living in the boonies of Sydney. It's a cost of living allowance. Every player at the Swans gets it. A rookie who needs to live in Canterbury gets it. How is that an advantage in terms of on-field?
Click to expand...

Because they skim off the top of the allowance to pay for tippett for starters.
 
A

AxeMan

Member
Think about the competition and not just Sydney or GWS.

What make Sydney (the clubs) so special that they deserve more than all other teams?

What make Melbourne (the city) so special that it's used as the benchmark for player payments?

Why don't Adelaide teams have a smaller salary cap compared to Melbourne teams because it's cheaper to live in Adelaide?

Why can't the players that play for Sydney clubs live 'in the boonies' as you put it?

Seriously, the average wage of a listed AFL player is over $200,000. If you can't live comfortably on that in any city in the world then you have issues far beyond which city you play football in
 
L

legend166

Member
Why did no one care that Hawthorn went and picked up Lake? And Burgoyne before that? And Hale? And so on.

Vince, watching you whinge about free agency in relation to Sydney is hilarious. We've never even picked up a free agent! The biggest free agency signing last year was Goddard to Essendon!

Anyway, the COLA should be changed to a rentention allowance, just how it used to be. Clubs with a certain percentage of players of their list from out of state should get extra in the cap to retain those players. That fixes the major imbalance of list management.
 
R

Rezbit

Member
That's just ridiculous Vince. How would it even be possible?

Axe, definitely see what you're saying there, you raise a good point that's hard for me to argue against. I guess it's difficult to equalize a competition across 18 clubs and 5 states. Do we go the whole hog and try and balance it between clubs? Do we give shit clubs a chop out? Or do we just go fuck it, you have X, and that's it.

Probably not the time for me to be trying to be rational, I'm still all emotional....*sniff*
 
L

legend166

Member
Man, it sucks when your team gets knocked out and the season is over.

Oh well, at least I can console myself by reading how screwed Essendon are going to get over the summer.
 
A

AxeMan

Member
Rezbit, you said it right here, 'equalize'.

You can do that a few ways

You either do it by giving no teams any extra, all teams get the same or
It's a sliding scale across all teams.

At the moment it is both. Sydney clubs get extra and the rest around the country are on the same level.
That is why it's un-equal.


Sydney clubs (especially the Swans) do not need a chop out (as you wrote). They are far from a poor club.
Does it surprise you that they have made enquires to Franklin? How do they fit him into their cap? You can't tell me that the extra cap allowance they have doesn't give them the ability to do that.


And to legend166, I don't know if you're being serious or facetious with your comment
 
R

Rezbit

Member
You're seriously overstating how comfortable the Swans are. We're not some rich mega club like the big 4 in Victoria. So do we give Melbourne, Bulldogs, etc, a chop out. That's all I was asking. I wasn't commenting on the Swans situation specifically.

If you can give me a reliable source for the Swans "enquiring" about Franklin I would be very interested, because that seems like the biggest pile of bullshit I've ever heard. Also how does it give them the ability when every player gets it? It's not like we can magically remove Dane Rampe's pay, c'mon.
 
A

AxeMan

Member
I'll reply in two parts as I'll forget otherwise

I didn't mean 'poor' as in cash assets. I meant 'poor' as you did as in a crap team (giving teams a 'chop out').

Cash means nothing, or extremely little, in terms of a successful club. The salary cap sees to that. So the Swans having no cash doesn't matter.

North didn't have any cash in the mid 90's and we're successful.
Dogs were successful (minus premierships) in the mid to late 2010's as they have no cash.
Saints have never been a rich club and have done well.

The salary cap helps clubs that haven't been successful on the field be successful. They still need to recruit and develop well but the examples I gave above prove it happens.
But for all clubs to be successful, in their time, things need to be equal in terms of how much they can pay their players
That helps retain and recruit players.

I'll see if I can dig up some source for the Franklin comment
 
L

legend166

Member
AxeMan said:
Rezbit, you said it right here, 'equalize'.

You can do that a few ways

You either do it by giving no teams any extra, all teams get the same or
It's a sliding scale across all teams.

At the moment it is both. Sydney clubs get extra and the rest around the country are on the same level.
That is why it's un-equal.


Sydney clubs (especially the Swans) do not need a chop out (as you wrote). They are far from a poor club.
Does it surprise you that they have made enquires to Franklin? How do they fit him into their cap? You can't tell me that the extra cap allowance they have doesn't give them the ability to do that.


And to legend166, I don't know if you're being serious or facetious with your comment
Click to expand...

What comment?

The retention allowance has merit. There are inherent imbalances in the AFL competition that favour Victorian based teams. Less travel, a talent base that is mainly located in one state, the majority of the media being based in Victoria (meaning the vast majority of media opportunities are in Victoria - no one seems to care that after signing with Collingwood, Cloke gets a nice healthy contract from Channel 9), the Grand Final always being played on the home ground of several Melbourne teams, etc.

All these things make list management and player retention more difficult for the expansion clubs. And with free agency coming in, that's only going to increase. So that's the problem, this idea that doing nothing = equality is silly, because the entire structure of the competition has inherent disadvantages.

The smaller Melbourne clubs feel it too - they have to try and increase their exposure and their fanbase (which means more money, which means more money in the football department), but they never get any high drawing fixtures.
 
R

Rezbit

Member
Yagharek said:
Another useless football comment from you. Enjoy the off season.
Click to expand...

He actually makes many other well considered comments though. If you're calling people out on useless comments yours wishing injury on players isn't that flash either. C'mon mate.
 
G

General Patton

Banned
PhantomZone said:
Fremantle may have backed up well on Geelong's home turf, but the MCG is a different kettle of fish. Their game plan will not stand up at the MCG against the Hawks.
Click to expand...

What rubbish.

The brilliant thing about Lyon's gameplan is it's effectiveness regardless of venue. It worked even better against Geelong because of the smaller ground, and it works on the big grounds. Subiaco is as big as the G.

They murdered us last night. I'm glad we pulled back the scoreboard a bit, even if it was junk-time stuff.
 
A

AxeMan

Member
legend166 said:
What comment?

The retention allowance has merit. There are inherent imbalances in the AFL competition that favour Victorian based teams. Less travel, a talent base that is mainly located in one state, the majority of the media being based in Victoria (meaning the vast majority of media opportunities are in Victoria - no one seems to care that after signing with Collingwood, Cloke gets a nice healthy contract from Channel 9), the Grand Final always being played on the home ground of several Melbourne teams, etc.

All these things make list management and player retention more difficult for the expansion clubs. And with free agency coming in, that's only going to increase. So that's the problem, this idea that doing nothing = equality is silly, because the entire structure of the competition has inherent disadvantages.

The smaller Melbourne clubs feel it too - they have to try and increase their exposure and their fanbase (which means more money, which means more money in the football department), but they never get any high drawing fixtures.
Click to expand...

Sydney is not a hole of a city that players want to escape as soon as possible. Who has Sydney lost due to homesickness? Honest question, I can't think of any.

Anyone would think we're forcing youngster to travel halfway around the world away from their home state to play.

Some clubs will always have more money than other clubs. It's up to all clubs to maximise their revenue as they see fit. That's why it's important to have a strong board.

What the AFL should be doing is getting every club on an even footing. That means the same salary cap. That means the same draw.

I'm a big believer in a rolling draw. You play all teams and then start again at the beginning this time vice versa for home and away.
Over the course of a season and a bit you play all teams home and away.

The AFL have got themselves in a knot because of trying to get equalisation but then on the other hand give hands up all over the place.

Anyway, good on Sydney for having the allowance. If it was my club I'd be for it as well but I don't believe I'd be deluded into thinking it was making things fair

Rezbit said:
If you can give me a reliable source for the Swans "enquiring" about Franklin I would be very interested, because that seems like the biggest pile of bullshit I've ever heard.
Click to expand...

I don't have anything publically available. Could be scuttlebutt, might not be.
It fits into my CoLA theory though so I say it's true :)
 
P

PhantomZone

Member
General Patton said:
What rubbish.

The brilliant thing about Lyon's gameplan is it's effectiveness regardless of venue. It worked even better against Geelong because of the smaller ground, and it works on the big grounds. Subiaco is as big as the G.

They murdered us last night. I'm glad we pulled back the scoreboard a bit, even if it was junk-time stuff.
Click to expand...

MCG has more space to run around, Hawthorn will test their game plan. Well i hope, fingers crossed lol :).
 
A

Andiie

Unconfirmed Member
Jables Swan said:
Who will win the Brownlow? I still think Ablett, but if he doesn't win I reckon Griffin or Mitchell will be dark horses.
Click to expand...

I don't know. I would love to see Selwood get up but not sure if he had enough good games. I think we all thought Ablett would win it but given he had such a lean last few rounds I sort of expect someone to run over the top of him. Someone like Swan, Mitchell or Selwood.
I'll actually get to watch it this year which I'm pumped about.
 
J

jambo

Member
General Patton said:
What rubbish.

The brilliant thing about Lyon's gameplan is it's effectiveness regardless of venue. It worked even better against Geelong because of the smaller ground, and it works on the big grounds. Subiaco is as big as the G.

They murdered us last night. I'm glad we pulled back the scoreboard a bit, even if it was junk-time stuff.
Click to expand...

The MCG is a hell of a lot wider than both Subi and Kardinia.
 
P

PhantomZone

Member
Worthintendo said:
So as someone in WA, how is the Eastern States sports media handling the Dockers being in the grand final?
Click to expand...

A lot of the media experts are on the bandwagon so to speak wanting to see a new team in the grand final and win it, a fairytale story of sorts. The coverage on the news last night was mostly about how the WA fans are happy and celebrating and working out how to make the trip to see the match.
 
W

Worthintendo

Member
PhantomZone said:
A lot of the media experts are on the bandwagon so to speak wanting to see a new team in the grand final and win it, a fairytale story of sorts. The coverage on the news last night was mostly about how the WA fans are happy and celebrating and working out how to make the trip to see the match.
Click to expand...
Cool, I guess I'm just used to see all press from over east trashing them, good to see things changing.
 
R

Rezbit

Member
More I think about the Brownlow the more I think Ablett might get pipped at the post. Will probably get 3 votes in all their 8 wins, but will that alone be enough? Can't really see Gold Coast players getting many votes in their losses.
 
J

Jables Swan

Member
I hope Gablett gets it. He's had a great year except for the last month or so. Don't think Selwood or Swan were consistent either but you never know. You only have to get a lot of 3 pointers.
 
A

Andiie

Unconfirmed Member
Well done Ablett. The right man won in the end.

So close Selwood, needed a vote in the Sydney game but didn't get one. Stevie J did outstanding as well.
 
A

AxeMan

Member
Just checking in letting you know that if my Hawks win on Saturday I'll be the guy off his nut trying to get on TV
and if you we lose again, well, I don't know. I guess I'll have my head buried in my hands like last year. TV always hones in on those guys
 
O

Oxirane

Member
Are we using this thread? or will there be a new thread (in Off-Topic) inviting international viewers to watch the game as well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Australian Rules Football (AFL) Thread |OT| Boy oh boy wowee!
|OT| Community 15 16 17 18 19
912
70K
MacReady13 replied
  • Locked
AFL (Aussie Rules) 2017 |OT| Big Trouble in Little China starring David Koch
6 7 8 9 10
486
46K
Marky Mark replied
  • Locked
AFL (Aussie Rules) 2016 |OT| Essendon moving to Egpyt, to be closer to supporter base
9 10 11 12 13
642
46K
jambo replied
  • Locked
AFL (Aussie Rules) 2015 |OT| Women's Round presented by Stephen Milne & Majak Daw
24 25 26 27 28
1K
79K
Yagharek replied
AFL (Aussie Rules) 2014 |OT| Haven't you Hird? Bomber's back!
7 8 9 10 11
532
30K
bomma_man replied
Top Bottom