Cost of Living Allowance

[stellation]

I think it's fair to say that, even if it's all done through superb list management and being an attractive location, the potential addition of Lance Franklin just one year after the addition of Kurt Tippett has raised one or two politely raised eyebrows around the country. I thought I'd divert some of the chit chat out of other threads into its own as it's probably going to be one of the biggest issues we've faced as a club in a while.

What are your thoughts on the Cost of Living Allowance? Do you think it creates an uneven competition? How could it be improved? Most importantly: what arguments can we use to justify this to our friends so we don't hear that every victory is "tainted" for the next 9 years?

[Big Al]

Should be increased to 150% in line with the fact a cubby house in Sydney now sells for half a billion.

[mcs]

I have no issue with it to be honest, but then I think to remove all the whining from everyone else, it should be applied across all cities. Starting at 100% of the salary cap for Melbourne clubs, and indexing costs against what it costs in Melbourne. The Melbourne clubs will whine, but they get so many other advantages that interstate clubs don't and hence the COLA can help make up for some of them. From there, it should be set according to some sort of cost of living index/measurement from say the ABS statistics (an independent source). if any other town (Adelaide is the one I'm thinking of) works out cheaper than Melbourne, then they still get 100% of the salary cap. End result I'd guess would be it would be Melbourne/Adelaide clubs on 100%, Brisbane/Gold Coast next, then Sydney and Perth at the top.

I frankly think its a storm in a teacup. It doesn't create an uneven competition - if players were so desperate for an extra 10%, we'd have a team full of Harlem globetrotters all chasing the $$$$. Clearly this is not the case. Buddy is not coming to Sydney because of the COLA, and Tippett did not come to Sydney because of the COLA, no matter what the media frenzy wants you to believe.

[Reggi]

I think you need to start with where it comes from. IIRC in 1992 none of our draftees came to Sydney, probably not worth their while financially. We lost many of our 93 and 94 draftees quickly, gaspar, rocca, grant etc. The dillemma is most new recruits move interstate you can't be competitive paying your senior players enough and pay young recruits enough to cover the cost difference. This was introduced to make us competitive. My understanding is the Afl is proposing they will manage the cola and make the payments direct to younger players

On everything else I think victorian clubs are bleating as they are embarrassed at how badly they are managing this

[Triple B]

Buddy is not coming to Sydney because of the COLA, and Tippett did not come to Sydney because of the COLA, no matter what the media frenzy wants you to believe.

Clearly correct, BUT, if not for the COLA, could we have fit them in the salary cap? That is the thing that has the other clubs upset.

When the COLA was first introduced, there was a clear case that teams like Sydney and Brisbane were having trouble attracting players and retaining players and a big part, certainly in Sydney's case was the COL. Things have changed however to the point that players WANT to come to Sydney, not for the extra 9.8% on their contract, but because they are now so highly respected and they want to be part of the culture and also play in a perennially competitive team.

IMO, Melbourne didn't deserve another priority pick because their current position is a by product of poor management, poor recruiting and poor culture.

If Sydney loses the COLA because they have recruited brilliantly and have developed a culture that players all over the country envy and many want to be a part of, well that would be plain wrong. Unfortunately may well happen.

[aardvark]

Bulldogs President Peter Gordon on SEN this morning said the real problem is the poorer Melb clubs cannot afford to pay 100% of the salary cap like Sydney and the richer Melb clubs. Where the real equalization needs to occur is the AFL should make sure everyone has the financial footing to pay 100% of the salary cap each year.
Having established an equal base line for everyone would then make cost of living adjustment more acceptable.

[erica]

Bulldogs President Peter Gordon on SEN this morning said the real problem is the poorer Melb clubs cannot afford to pay 100% of the salary cap like Sydney and the richer Melb clubs. Where the real equalization needs to occur is the AFL should make sure everyone has the financial footing to pay 100% of the salary cap each year.
Having established an equal base line for everyone would then make cost of living adjustment more acceptable.

One of the problems is that the AFL competition includes Melbourne clubs that are not financially sustainable. If the AFL chooses to subsidise them, fine but, if it doesn't, then those clubs should face financial reality and become extinct.

[DK_]

Bulldogs President Peter Gordon on SEN this morning said the real problem is the poorer Melb clubs cannot afford to pay 100% of the salary cap like Sydney and the richer Melb clubs. Where the real equalization needs to occur is the AFL should make sure everyone has the financial footing to pay 100% of the salary cap each year.
Having established an equal base line for everyone would then make cost of living adjustment more acceptable.

Therein lies the manifest hypocrisy of Eddie's argument. There is no level playing field. Half of Collingwood's home games have 20,000 opposition supporters turn up and give them revenue. They don't need to send their team and support staff interstate every second week. They get the bonanza of the Anzac Day match every year regardless of performance or merit. Collingwood attract players with world class facilities and training camps in the US. All paid for by revenue which Sydney can't get.

If Collingwood want a level playing field, they should agree to a significant proportion of all gate takings being divided equally amongst clubs. They should agree on big matches being shared amongst teams on merit. Anzac Day should be a grand final replay IMO.

Strangely, Eddie isn't so keen on those ideas. He wants equalisation as long as Collingwood gets to be more equal.

I'm a supporter of the idea of managing the COLA better to remove any idea of an unfair advantage. There's been good ideas floated by others on here - a set figure per player, means testing, control by the AFL. They're all good ideas. But any change needs to be matched by better sharing of revenue and equalisation of costs like travel.

[liz]

COL clearly is an issue for younger or lesser paid players. The simplest way is probably a flat dollar allowance applicable to all players (and paid directly by the AFL if that's the way they want to go). Make it equal on a marginal post tax basis, so the gross amount would be a little higher for anyone in the $180k pa range or higher. Could be means tested so that it is removed once a player hits some salary level but that is probably an unnecessary complication. It will just become such an insignificant amount at higher salaries that no-one will claim it influences where a player wants to play.

[aardvark]

Morton has his say on COLA.

Audioboo / Mitch Morton on Gillette Trade Radio

- - - Updated - - -

Morton has his say on COLA.

https://audioboo.fm/boos/1634453-mitch-morton-on-gillette-trade-radio?utm_campaign=detailpage&utm_content=retweet&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebookshare#t=0m35s

[ernie koala]

Good on ya Mitch....Lets make it 20%, I love it.....A true Blood....a Premiership Blood

- - - Updated - - -

Therein lies the manifest hypocrisy of Eddie's argument. There is no level playing field. Half of Collingwood's home games have 20,000 opposition supporters turn up and give them revenue. They don't need to send their team and support staff interstate every second week. They get the bonanza of the Anzac Day match every year regardless of performance or merit. Collingwood attract players with world class facilities and training camps in the US. All paid for by revenue which Sydney can't get.

If Collingwood want a level playing field, they should agree to a significant proportion of all gate takings being divided equally amongst clubs. They should agree on big matches being shared amongst teams on merit. Anzac Day should be a grand final replay IMO.

Strangely, Eddie isn't so keen on those ideas. He wants equalisation as long as Collingwood gets to be more equal.

I'm a supporter of the idea of managing the COLA better to remove any idea of an unfair advantage. There's been good ideas floated by others on here - a set figure per player, means testing, control by the AFL. They're all good ideas. But any change needs to be matched by better sharing of revenue and equalisation of costs like travel.

Great post DK...Totally agree.

[Dosser]

As I said in another thread, a good player based in Melbourne, Adelaide or Perth gets a lot of income from opportunities outside of football (ie media, endorsements, etc) however in Sydney and maybe Brisbane, League players get that money. This means that, even with a 9.8% COLA, Sydney and Brisbane players are POTENTIALLY worse off financially than the others.

[Melbournehammer]

One of the problems is that the AFL competition includes Melbourne clubs that are not financially sustainable. If the AFL chooses to subsidise them, fine but, if it doesn't, then those clubs should face financial reality and become extinct.

I hope no club ever ever ever becomes extinct. It is heartbreaking. Have a watch of some of the youtbe clips about fitzroy.

There is more than enough wealth to be shared around. North to their great credit pioneered friday night games and now cant get one for love or money and their stadium deals at etihad shaft the clubs badly.

The actual problem is not enough equalisation not too much. Clubs like footscray, north and some others should get a full crack at blockbuster games at the mcg and not be shuffled off to twilight on sunday night on fox footy. this just perpetuates the unfairness of the system.

[Doctor]

I would potentially consider an arrangement where the COLA only applied up to a certain salary level. Other than that, I think it is, and remains to be, perfectly reasonable. Supreme list management should not be mistaken for cheating. As any American sports fan knows, a successful team begins and ends with the front office.

[MightyBloods]

[QUOTE=ernie koala;626417]Good on ya Mitch....Lets make it 20%, I love it.....A true Blood....a Premiership Blood

- - - Updated - - -

I listened to Mitch's interview with trepidation as he can be bluntly honest. You could tell that the journo was trying to find holes in our COLA payments. I was rapt when Mitch said it should be 20%. It shut the journo right up!
Is the timing right to ask the AFL for an increase?!