Tweet
This morning at work, my boss brought up the swans salary cap concessions . It wasn't until I saw the herald sun that I understood why. There's a big article about it, and it basically says those concessions are the major reason we are able to recruit players like Mummy, Jason Ball, Seaby, Spangher, Kennedy Mcglynn etc. It's a bit puzzling considering most of these players weren't regular senior players at their former clubs. It's not as though we waved a million dollars a season at a top line player from another club. It also ignores the part our much lauded culture would have played on both recruiting these players and helping them turn into the players they are today. And now every Victorian footy fan is going to be yapping on about how it's unfair and we're cheats etc . Sigh.
-
-
I have been copping it about the swans salary cap concessions for years. At the Essendon game that is all I heard about and how the AFL looks after us. -
I just take heart in the knowledge that whenever anyone gripes about it, it's because it's their team that is getting their butts kicked and deep down, they know full well it's because the better side beat the lesser side, not a salary cap concession.
They readily overlook the huge financial windfall Victorian clubs get from their member bases and gate takings.Captain, I am detecting large quantities of win in this sectorComment
-
When we persuaded Mumford to join, there was grumbling that the Swans had been able to attract him by offering him a massive payrise. He was on a rookie salary and reports were that the Swans offered him something like $1m over 4 years. Yes, it might have been a massive increase, but if you look at how he has performed since he joined, does c$250k a year for a fringe-AA standard ruckman not seem like underpaying? For comparison, I suspect Jolly (who Mumford replaced) would have been on something close to $500k a year. Doesn't that just demonstrate astute awareness of the ability of a player and still pay him relative bargain rates? Sure it might seem unfair to Geelong that they couldn't afford to retain him on a similar wage, but that is exactly what the salary cap is intended to do - prevent the best team remaining the best team for ever?
Yes, we do have a separate COL allowance, but if we are abusing it by attracting more than our fair share of highly paid superstars, why is our list so often dismissed as lacking star power (Goodes aside)?Comment
-
Who'd a thunk itAnd now every Victorian footy fan is going to be yapping on...
The Swans and salary cap concessions go together like North and a lack of members, West Coast and players on drugs, Collingwood and lack of teeth.
It is just the thing that the media falls back on when they are too lazy to think of something new to say. Oh look - the swan's are on top of the ladder, lets go ask Eddie what he thinks about salary cap concessions. That'll get a few more bogans to subscribe to our new paywalled footy websites. And so a few more bogans get this message reinforced.
You could try and rationalise it on the cost of living argument, or you can just say "look at the ladder" and gloat away.
And besides, if I recall correctly, the thing that actually allowed us to achieve the so called 2009 super draft was tanking the last round of 2008. Tell that to your boss and see if you can get him to explode.Comment
-
If you want to read the story you can do so here http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226422963489 & a follow up here http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226422957507
For me the key figures are, (and these are from the above article)
WEST Coast Eagles chiefs have argued for a cost of living allowance, similar to the $862,000 annual bonus enjoyed by the two Sydney clubs, because of spiralling Perth property prices.
Unless I am mistaken, Sydney currently has 39 players on its list so this works out to be about $22,102.56 extra for each player, hardly a huge bonus for moving to Sydney. Given that (again this is from the article) to buy a house in Sydney, you will easily be spending way more than $22 000 (more like +$300 000 minimum) its not difficult to see why this is not the reason why we are able to get players to the club.
All the players in question were either not wanted by their club or targeted when they were junior players (like Mumford on the Rookie list)on lower wages and were offered a better contract at Sydney.Comment
-
It is my belief that the Swans in the past have only just met the 93-point-something % minimum cap spend in the past. We're definitely not a club that spends all of its salary cap on players; I think we tend to have a very high football department budget for facilities, technology, support personnel ect. Cost of living is a real and pronounced variable for the Swans though. After all, the club and most of the players are situated in the Eastern suburbs of Sydney so you'd imagine rookie or base salary players might find it a difficult lifestyle to afford.
Anyway according to Victorians any other day, we are a club full of rejects and all sorts. It's not like we are overpaying our developing players and neither have we made very many big purchases over the last few years. Non-issue that's only brought up because people can't understand why we are on the top of the ladder.Comment
-
Perth may have an argument, however Sydney is still clearly the most expensive city to live in, plus we don't produce many home-grown players, so the COL allowance is still very much relevant here. I don't think it's an unfair advantage to us, but every opposition club has supporters who moan - regarding the Swans, if its not about this, its that the umpires favour us, or that the SCG is an unfair advantage, or yada yada yada...
I didn't think much of the article anyway - with quotes like :
"The clubs were less thrilled when the terms they had effectively endorsed saw cashed-up expansion clubs steal the likes of Gary Ablett from Geelong and Tom Scully from Melbourne"
Players are hardly stolen from other clubs - this was an AFL-endorsed policy to help ensure the success of the new clubs, and the affected clubs were given draft concessions in return. Hardly theft of a player.
The article also quotes the case of Jason Ball - I'm sure we gave him a sweet deal (which worked very nicely for us thanks to Jason's quality play while he was with us). However as far as I remember he is now doing quite well as a stockbroker here and that sort of opportunity post-footy would not have been lost on a smart guy like him.
We havent spent huge $$$'s to lure a mega-star here since Big Bad Barry approx 10 years ago, so I'm not sure what the issue is here anyway?Comment
-
I've been arguing this point with a few flogs, elsewhere, so I looked it up, as you do, we get a 7% COL allowance, the COL in Sydney is 8% higher, as of a few says ago, than Melbourne, the lady I'm going out with now is from Perth, and can't wait to get back there, because, she says, it's too expensive to live in Wollongong, never mind Sydney, which is why I left Sydney to move down here, everything, well, mostly, is less expensive here, especially property and rents. Anyone arguing about our precious gifts should be referred to Eddie McGuire, who lived in Sydney while running channel 9 and stated, in no uncertain terms, that it is much more expensive to live in Sydney than Melbourne, and this is the man who "went to war" on our concessions, I'm not even certain we paid Hall all that much, given he was desperate to get away from St KildaYou can't argue with a sick mind - Joe WalshComment
-
Maybe Liz does work in the media, but just needs to use RWO as an outlet for well-considered, thoughtful and insightful comments before reverting to spewing forth whatever rubbish the media outlets demand.....Comment
-
If we believe what we are told about the TV rights and the impact that Australia's largest city has on the commercial interests of the AFL - then maybe we should ask for a greater share of the $ Million's extra Sydney being in the comp generates - West Coast have for years looked after their players off the field as we know - as for the Victorian sides they still have small town syndrome supports and dream of the VFL, pie nights and dodgy characters - not many of their supporters live in the "suburbs" that their team represents - nothing story generated by a dodgy journalist - i feel better nowComment
-
They also forget how much money the AFL puts into propping them all up all the time. North, Bullies, Melbourne, Carlton, Saints, Tigers and even the Cats have had to get bail out packages from the AFL. Yes I know years ago so did we but they sent us up here and basically said sink or swim with absolutely no infrastructure at all. Unlike the other clubs that constantly hold their hands out for a cheque every year. They also get a far higher percentage of the 'Grass Roots Footy' dollar, especially in Victoria.Comment
Comment