UTS dropped in strength or just not up to it?

[Tom Wills]

In 2007 and 2008 I thought UTS were a very impressive side. Their side last year less impressive even though they won the flag. Did I see UTS on their good days or have they dropped as a team over the last couple of years. Or are they just that far behind being a strong premier team. What are your thoughts!

[Boss Hogg]

They are simply that far behind. The gap between prem and Div 1 is significant.

[Pekay]

They are simply that far behind. The gap between prem and Div 1 is significant.

We all saw it with the Lions, although they weren't as dominant in the old SFA as UTS were. It's a massive step up. Sydney Uni took a few years to become the force they are in Prems now. They'll steadily improve, although the Lions were probably their best chance for a win you'd think.

[Monty Burns2]

My opinion is that the only way they will become competitive is if they drop their "No Player Payments at the Bats" policy, as outlined in their 2010 Annual Report. I think this is naive if they think they can be competive with teams who are paying players up to $1000 a game.

[DLH]

My opinion is that the only way they will become competitive is if they drop their "No Player Payments at the Bats" policy, as outlined in their 2010 Annual Report. I think this is naive if they think they can be competive with teams who are paying players up to $1000 a game.

All well and good Monty but this requires significant cash.

You're looking at budgeting for 10k a year for one good player (assuming you pay him $500 per game), I wouldn't know the going rate, I'm only guessing.

What then about everyone else on your list, do you pay them as well?

I guess on the other side of the coin, you don't put your hand up to play with the big boys unless you know that you have the resources to compete.

I tend to agree, I'm not sure you can compete at that level in the long term unless you have a reasonable player budget.

[Mug Punter]

All well and good Monty but this requires significant cash.

You're looking at budgeting for 10k a year for one good player (assuming you pay him $500 per game), I wouldn't know the going rate, I'm only guessing.

What then about everyone else on your list, do you pay them as well?

I guess on the other side of the coin, you don't put your hand up to play with the big boys unless you know that you have the resources to compete.

I tend to agree, I'm not sure you can compete at that level in the long term unless you have a reasonable player budget.

I think you need some form of financial incentive that rewards your better players but it doesn't have to be exhorbitant.

Sydney Uni are able to selectively target players via their scholarship system, maybe UTS could go down that track. I don't think their affiliation with the Uni is as strong as the other Unis.

I believe that Penno used to award four cash payments a week based on a 3-2-1 votes basis and a player's player award. If you had $100 per vote plus $200 for players player then that's $18,000 over a season. Not a minor sum granted but probably about what you need to be competitive. A star player who get 6 BOGs and 6 player's player awards would pocket $3000 which could be enough to keep your stars.

[Pekay]

Bully has set up a payment scheme for us, certainly not in the realm of a Prems team, but handy to get a collect nonetheless.

For a win, we have a $500 pool, BOG gets $250, 2nd $125, 3rd $75, 4th/5th $50 each.

Half that for a loss, and erase it for a loss of more than 10 goals. Can get your rego fees back in a game really, and we present it at RGs after the game, so it tends to go over the bar at some stage. Works pretty well for our guys. We budget for it and it comes up roses.

[Mug Punter]

Bully has set up a payment scheme for us, certainly not in the realm of a Prems team, but handy to get a collect nonetheless.

For a win, we have a $500 pool, BOG gets $250, 2nd $125, 3rd $75, 4th/5th $50 each.

Half that for a loss, and erase it for a loss of more than 10 goals. Can get your rego fees back in a game really, and we present it at RGs after the game, so it tends to go over the bar at some stage. Works pretty well for our guys. We budget for it and it comes up roses.

Sounds like a great system. Unless you've got plenty of cash to throw around a fully transparent incentive system like that works the best IMO. Stops petty backstabbing about who's getting what etc.....

[ShortHalfHead]

Sounds like a great system. Unless you've got plenty of cash to throw around a fully transparent incentive system like that works the best IMO. Stops petty backstabbing about who's getting what etc.....

Of course, the treasurer is gunning for a loss. Probably would slip $50 to his fullback in the last quarter if they are 6 goals down as well to let a few more slip through.

[Matty]

In 2007 and 2008 I thought UTS were a very impressive side. Their side last year less impressive even though they won the flag. Did I see UTS on their good days or have they dropped as a team over the last couple of years. Or are they just that far behind being a strong premier team. What are your thoughts!

Surely people did not seriously expect them to be very competitive in prem div? Yes they were dominant against other teams reserve grade sides but most prem div teams are lucky to have 6-8 good players, 6-8 average players and then the level drops of dramatically form there. They continually boast about having such a great culture and amazing social scene down there (and from a far it looks as though they do) that surely it could not be hard to drum up some sponsors with the 90+ players they have.
Perhaps a PJ O'Brien's or Scruffy Murphy's??

[Monty Burns2]

All well and good Monty but this requires significant cash.

You're looking at budgeting for 10k a year for one good player (assuming you pay him $500 per game), I wouldn't know the going rate, I'm only guessing.

What then about everyone else on your list, do you pay them as well?

I wasn't commenting on whether or not it was viable for the Bats. I was merely stating that, in my opinion, they won't be competitive unless they start paying players.

But reading the rest of your post it appears we are in agreeance.

I like the Jets system and also like the tiered approach (eg. Top tiered players who receive most payments are those that have AFL experience, 2nd tiered - WAFL, SANFL, VFL experience, 3rd tier - maybe Sydney rep if not fitting in above etc etc). Both approaches are pretty hard to argue with from a player's point of view, I would imagine.

[DLH]

I wasn't commenting on whether or not it was viable for the Bats. I was merely stating that, in my opinion, they won't be competitive unless they start paying players.

But reading the rest of your post it appears we are in agreeance.

I like the Jets system and also like the tiered approach (eg. Top tiered players who receive most payments are those that have AFL experience, 2nd tiered - WAFL, SANFL, VFL experience, 3rd tier - maybe Sydney rep if not fitting in above etc etc). Both approaches are pretty hard to argue with from a player's point of view, I would imagine.

Understood, was more trying to promote some general discussion as I reckon it's a pretty interesting topic, but yes, agree with the jist of your point.

Seems to me that there's some sort of agreement that transparency is best rather than an ad hoc method where blokes get whatever they can, and presumably there would be some that would get next to nothing, which does nothing to promote harmony.

The Jets system suggests a budget of about 10 grand, and MP has calculated his at about 18k, and you'd think that this would be pretty affordable for a club at a level that could justify player payment.

[I_Heart_Abbott]

I agree with the tiered payment structure for clubs and agree that there is a current heavy reliance on club's within this competition to be able to pay players to be competitive.

This is not new, and occurs in every competition in Australia, but our competition feels like it has a disproportionately high level of inter-league transfers (poaching) to that of other competitions due to big budgets and lazy recruiters not wanting to leave the state which puts all clubs and the league in a dangerous position.

Our competition, being city-based (players not restricted to one club by proximity) and within a high potential of $$ available to clubs from time to time due to the economic climate of Sydney and the potential for wealthy supporters or sources of corporate support, builds a situation where if let to run its course by the league over the next few years could see the Premier Division Competition become a simple equation of the most cash = the most success. I'd reckon there would be a few people out there who would argue this is already the case.

This type of 'competition' encourages a focus for all players to be more worried about their own 'market value' instead of 'dedication' or 'loyalty' to their existing club. Players who seek match payments and play for the highest price, will be bought by clubs who are financially capable, and these players are rewarded by playing with other players of a high 'market value' and subsequently rewarded by playing in a strong, potential premiership side. This eventually transipres into a transient club with players seeking individual success and cash, with little care for the overall club's future or history.

The flipside to this is the players who have grown up in less financially strong clubs who have remained loyal and dedicated, but play every week with other non-payed players whose ability dictates they do not receive dollars, as opposed to their ability.

The overall result of this evolution being the emerging trend that premierships are won by players who play for a price, not for a jumper.

Many would see this as being a non-issue and a natural part of football in this day and age, but if it continues, it will jeopardise a few of the powerful values that footy has traditionally taught guys within this league of dedication, persistence and prioritising the greater good of a club before yourself. These lessons would be replaced by lessons on how to negotiate your highest possible price in the market.

To personify this example (without judgement), compare Pete Dugmore to Dec Donahue. Both guys are decent fellas but one has followed the dollars and market opportunities, the other has remained loyal to the Dragons.

I'd argue that overall, loyalty and dedication to one club will continue to decrease as a priority to players. In-turn killing clubs who cannot afford to buy their players.

I reckon one way to safeguard against this is to introduce a compulsory transfer fee for any player that changes clubs within the Sydney AFL Competition.

The transfer fee could be weighted towards the division played for the club, as in a PD player is worth say $1,000 as opposed to a a Div 1 player who may be $500. This policy would not extinguish inter-league transfers, but would require clubs to me more selective and add greater scrutiny in justifying the cash to buy another clubs player.

I reckon a simple solution like this could safeguard against the whole competition being a race to the bank in future years to see who can buy their flag for that year.

[wise one]

We all saw it with the Lions, although they weren't as dominant in the old SFA as UTS were. It's a massive step up. Sydney Uni took a few years to become the force they are in Prems now. They'll steadily improve, although the Lions were probably their best chance for a win you'd think.

I think the gaps between each grade is significant and more so between the 1st div and premier division, you have to remember that in the main UTS were playing against mostly reserve grade teams(last year)and anyone expecting them to win many games this year are kidding themselves, it seems that the back end of each game finds the newly promoted premier sides and it takes them the best part of the season to adjust to the speed of the game and conditioning required to be competitive.

From memory, this was the same when Syd Uni were promoted as well, started to become competitive in the last few games of their initial season and may have won a few.

UTS results this season form 1st 3 games after halftime.

Opposition : 18 goals 29 to UTS 7 goals 4, not scoring in the 2nd half against Illawarra.

Newly promoted premiers from last season, UTS, Sth Power(probably should have gone up previous year, Moorebank & Auburn, combined for 11 games to date with 3 wins between them.

[shearer]

great post I Heart Abbot, one of the best ive read on here for a long time. There are only two teams who can win this years comp(ECE & Sydney Uni) & while Balmain are doing there best to catch up to them they are a long way off those two.