COLA to be replaced by rent subsidy

[Reggi]

Mark Evans seems really hopeless

[Matt80]

I believe it is 95%.

That rule has to change. Why should weak clubs be paying their players so much money. They need the flexibility to be able to pay their mediocre teams far less. These mediocre teams are now paying okay players twice what they get at powerful clubs and not giving themselves room to move when good players are available.

If you want equalisation, allow the cap to move down to 70% and stop mediocre players getting huge salaries. Tom Scully is worth $350,000 at a powerful club, but the Giants pay him $1 million. That's $650,000 you don't have available to get a Mega Star.

[R-1]

I think the ASA total is actually $963,000 in 2014. It has increased a lot over the last three years as a result of the last collective bargaining agreement made with the AFL players association.

Ahh. Well then, that's easy. I was just projecting forward from the previous CBA.

[Matt80]

That rule has to change. Why should weak clubs be paying their players so much money. They need the flexibility to be able to pay their mediocre teams far less. These mediocre teams are now paying okay players twice what they get at powerful clubs and not giving themselves room to move when good players are available.

If you want equalisation, allow the cap to move down to 70% and stop mediocre players getting huge salaries. Tom Scully is worth $350,000 at a powerful club, but the Giants pay him $1 million. That's $650,000 you don't have available to get a Mega Star.

I'm still feeling in proposal mode.

- Minimum of 70% of the salary cap to be used.
- Allow the missing % of salary cap to be spend in future years. This can be done in one season or split up over coming seasons.

This would allow the weaker clubs mediocre players to be kept in salary check and allow the weaker club more money to get "franchise players".

[dimelb]

From Andrew Pridham's blast: ?It has to raise questions about the voracity of the equalisation process,? Pridham said.

I assume there's something lost in translation here, and that Pridham actually said "veracity" (truthfulness).
"Voracity" (greed) might well apply to some other people, but I wouldn't think it is one of our problems.

[bodgie]

Isn't the COLA being phased out anyway? 2 more years to run? If so we're arguing about not much. Just perceptions and anger about Tippet and Franklin. The position will be much clearer in a year or two with a bunch of high level retirements.

[ernie koala]

Footscrays coach must be so happy that his president has called the Swans cheats. Considering footballers have long memories and they've yet to play the Swans.... Mmmmmmm

Wonder if Carlton players will turn up against us for the same reasons ( not that I think it will make any difference)...Andrew Ireland came off the long run at them.

[Melbournehammer]

sometimes it is better to understand the context of matters such as salary caps etc before posting. i encourage any of you who are interested to read any of the sports economics texts (for example stefan szymanski has written some excellent texts on this stuff).

Suffice it to say the following:

1. salary caps generally involve restraints of trade as do provisions which prevent a player from being traded or drafted to the club of their choice. restraints of trade are prima facie unlawful (and so they should be - what other occupation in Australia requires you as an 18 year old to pack up and leave to go to another part of the country to play for a team that you hate in a city that you have no links with)
2. if you believe in the concept of competitive equality and the league is determined to implement such a policy, then such restraints can be lawful but only to the extent that is necessary;
3. a salary cap which allowed one club to pay its players 70% would be at risk of violating such principles;
4. most of the clubs including believe it or not the swans rely on the equalisation fund from time to time, I think there is a bit of hubris amongst the swans supporter base on here at the moment - I continue to believe that the sydney crowds are fickle and that we are two-three seasons away from crowds of 20,000 - which based on membership figures and the melbourne membership base is probably our core sydney support;
5. the nature of sporting leagues require mechanisms to operate as a league collectively not as a group of clubs individually who come together to play and then go their serparate ways - this means that there needs to be a balancing mechanism or a relegation promotion mechanism - how interesting would it be to have gws play the swans every week ? who would keep coming ?
6. in the US context this involves taxing rich clubs and giving to the poor. In Australia it involves the AFL holding part of the TV revenues back and dishing it out where it sees fit (which is the very reason why you have an independent commission);
7. i am a massive supporter of the equalisation process and not letting clubs die on the vine (my son plays for fitzroy juniors and every time they win and sing the song my heart breaks a little)
8. i believe that the salary cap benefits the swans received and the lions before that were and remains misleading - there should be a retention allowance for players in non home states - but the allowance should be worked out (mathematically if need be) to each club based on the number of players who do not come from their home state. The league relies on TV revenues to survive. TV revenues will only increase if there are viable presences in the northern state markets. This is the reason for the introduction of GCS and GWS - to diversify the AFLs risk
9. the retention allowance should be appropriately weighted to reflect the cost of living in each australian capital city.

Anyway they are my rough thoughts on the matter.

[magic.merkin]

and thanks for them!

[Melbournehammer]

[jono2707]

The NRL tried a draft in the 90's but it was quickly challenged in court by a player and ditched by the league due to restraint of trade issues...

[Ludwig]

Money does matter in sport, but it's not everything by a long shot. If you take US Major League Baseball where there is no equalisation for a comparison,we find that there is a correlation between success and salary, but many mid level and even low salary teams do well. For example, last year the NY Yankees had the highest payroll of $US 228 mil and finished 15th out of 30 teams, while Tampa Bay had a payroll of only $57 mil, the 3rd lowest, and finished 9th.

Check the following websites for stats: http://www.stevetheump.com/Payrolls.htm and http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...tandings.shtml

The AFL is one of most 'equalised' competitions going around. The little bit of extra pretax salary that Swans players got due to the Cola was insignificant in their performance and ability to attract and retain players. Certainly the overall wealth of a club like Collingwood offers more player benefits than the COLA does in Australia's most expensive city.

The Bulldogs and the Saints have both been successful clubs in recent times despite their relative impoverishment.

I would suggest that it is the renown player environment and consistent success in recent years that attracted Tippett and Franklin to the club and not the COLA. I think we would have gotten them COLA or not. I recall Nathan Jones congratulating his brother on being drafted to what he called the AFL's best club to be at. I doubt that he was thinking 'how lucky is Zak living high on the hog with that massive COLA payment'.

It is the fault of the AFL and some of the Melbourne clubs that 2 of them didn't move to GC and GWS. That would have guaranteed plenty of money and player concessions. Like South Melbourne fans, most would have stuck with the club and would have reveled in the success of the their club instead of complaining about lack of equalisation. The AFL should have remained a 16 club competition. There are too many clubs in Melbourne, something that you never hear from the football establishment.

[dimelb]

Money does matter in sport, but it's not everything by a long shot. If you take US Major League Baseball where there is no equalisation for a comparison,we find that there is a correlation between success and salary, but many mid level and even low salary teams do well. For example, last year the NY Yankees had the highest payroll of $US 228 mil and finished 15th out of 30 teams, while Tampa Bay had a payroll of only $57 mil, the 3rd lowest, and finished 9th.

Check the following websites for stats: http://www.stevetheump.com/Payrolls.htm and http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...tandings.shtml

The AFL is one of most 'equalised' competitions going around. The little bit of extra pretax salary that Swans players got due to the Cola was insignificant in their performance and ability to attract and retain players. Certainly the overall wealth of a club like Collingwood offers more player benefits than the COLA does in Australia's most expensive city.

The Bulldogs and the Saints have both been successful clubs in recent times despite their relative impoverishment.

I would suggest that it is the renown player environment and consistent success in recent years that attracted Tippett and Franklin to the club and not the COLA. I think we would have gotten them COLA or not. I recall Nathan Jones congratulating his brother on being drafted to what he called the AFL's best club to be at. I doubt that he was thinking 'how lucky is Zak living high on the hog with that massive COLA payment'.

It is the fault of the AFL and some of the Melbourne clubs that 2 of them didn't move to GC and GWS. That would have guaranteed plenty of money and player concessions. Like South Melbourne fans, most would have stuck with the club and would have reveled in the success of the their club instead of complaining about lack of equalisation. The AFL should have remained a 16 club competition. There are too many clubs in Melbourne, something that you never hear from the football establishment.

I would endorse everything you've said here Ludwig, but especially the final paragraph. The AFL needed to (a) follow the South Melbourne/Sydney model, but with more support, when they moved on Brisbane, and (b) push harder to move any two of Footscray, North, Melbourne and St Kilda to interstate locations. Wisdom after the event, unfortunately, as with the equalisation processes (which I heartily endorse) it will be a long time before any of those achieves basket-case status.

[southsideswan]

Where do the swans players live? I'm sick to death of the Bondi Billionaires slogan. I saw a piece on the Swans web site last year about a Swans group home for new players at Matraville. It would be funny if none of the players actually lived at Bondi!!

[Beerman]

$15k is a measly subsidy, ignores the fact that housing is only small part of cost of living. Pretty sure this will get tweaked over time

To their credit. It does remove the sting from the argument that it is just used to attract 'stars'

Actually, Sydney is one of the cheapest places in Australia to live except for one factor...housing. $15k is $300/week rent, which goes pretty far for a young bloke, even in the Eastern suburbs.