2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[707]

Rather than reduce list sizes, if you need to cut the salary cap by 10%, do it across the board at that %, Buddy gets cut $130k, a rookie gets cut, $6k.

Work out a mechanism/formula for those part way through back ended contracts.

I am really worried about second tier comps and the northern academies and how these comps feed into the AFL clubs. Smaller lists will impact clubs with long injury lists as we all know you can't just call up a player from a lower grade who knows nothing of your game plan, your players and has a lower fitness base. The AFL needs to tread carefully here, get this wrong and the comp will become very imbalanced.

Save money by putting a firmly policed HARD CAP of footy department spending and the AFL needs to stand up to Eddie and the wealthy clubs to implement this. Cut footy departments by $3mill per club, there's $54mill saving in an instant.

Save money by slashing all the wishy washy jobs in HQ, every failed coach is found a job in HQ, mickey mouse money wasters like AFLX, overseas camps for U18 squads, the Irish games, bloated ND with every boy and family flown and accommodated, Brownlow, AA, Hall of Fame, lots of savings there for stuff that isn't core AFL games.

[Mr Magoo]

Couldn't agree more.

I just went to look at who is currently on the board of the AFLPA. It does include a few players (like Ed Curnow, Jamie MacMillan) who quite possibly wouldn't have got a start in the AFL had lists been smaller when they were drafted. Hopefully their memories are in tact.

Leah Kaslar appointed to the AFLPA board - AFL Players

I'm really struggling to understand the arguments in favour of cutting list sizes - the practical footy reasons, not the how-do-we-distribute-less-money-while-making-sure-the-"stars"- don't-have-to-suffer reasons.

Each year, several clubs use close to their entire list in senior games. How do smaller lists work in that context?

As it is, young players are often thrown into senior football before they are ready for it. If we want to improve the standard, you could argue lists should be expanded so that clubs can continue to hold and develop younger players and only play them when they are ready.

I understand that there are financial pressures facing the competition but, as with the rest of the economy, those who currently make the most money out of the game are the best placed to take proportionately more of the hit.

Agree Liz . The issue of list sizes and the draft seem to so far have shown little innovation.

Needs to be more than :
1. Reduce list sizes so we the topliners can maintain their current salaries
2. Have a draft , no matter how little you have seen the draft candidates so we dont have to consider ideas like a better feeder competition or changes to the draft age (irrespective of the many sensible reasons for this).

Daniel Gorringe put out a great tweet on this where he said that dont let them pick another Daniel Gorringe - seeminlgy he was drafted for his "potential" off the back of being tall and having a couple of good games.

I really feel for the current draft crop - they played a few trial games at the start of the season and then have gone into hibernation . As 18 year olds it would be very hard to maintain your touch and fitness in isolation and now they may have to come out and have an at best shortened 18s season with little footballing preparation behind it.

For some it may help as they may get drafted almost on reputation alone but we continually hear how many prospects either thrive or fall away in their 18s year and for me it makes no sense if that is the underlying truth to then insist on a draft.

This is particularly the case if they are going to limit list sizes as there will be a real possibilty as liz says that almost the entire list is going to be called on at some stage to play so most clubs will limit their new prospects to maybe two or at best three. Consider on top of this that they have had little opportunity to see if their draftees from last year have developed and it really does create a structural problem.

Damian Barrett did a podcast where his only arguments against lifting the draft age seemed to be that some draftees were ready at 18 to play seniors (ie Sam Walsh was ready so we shouldnt wait a year to see him play) and that clubs may game the draft (by encouraging players to fake injury and ofeerring them jobs???) . Both seem to me to be pretty weak arguments but as he is podcasting on AFLs feed , I assume the propaganda machine of the AFL has asked him to start justifying their stupid decisions.

[Boddo]

On the list size cut I remember the reduced list size the WCE had when admitted to the VFL. It was a terrible situation where some games they barely had a side from their available players and played half fit players.

IMO it probably cost them a finals birth in their first season.

I’m with Liz and a few others in that you cut the salary cap and everybody gets a % paycut.

As an example if you cut list sizes does Kirk, Papley, Schneider etc ever get a game.

The killer with percentage cuts across the board is once this happens every single player has to agree or the contract is void or remains in place. Will a player like papley use this to get to Carlton?

[707]

AFL won't allow renegotiating of contracts to be used as a loophole to change clubs. All contracts are voided and new ones across the league at a lesser % replace them.

[Boddo]

AFL won't allow renegotiating of contracts to be used as a loophole to change clubs. All contracts are voided and new ones across the league at a lesser % replace them.

You can’t just say sorry boys all bets are off and this is what’s happening.

I understand the AFL wouldn’t allow it but lawfully they don’t get a say. By the letter of the law unless the player agrees to the cut the club are forced to pay that wage, if they don’t they’ve reneged on the contract thus open to being forced to pay a financial settlement. Thus the contract does not exist.

That’s why I said “will a player use it”. Yes I’d say unlikely but it was also unlikely that Silvio Foschini would walk out of Sydney and play for St Kilda the next week. Just like Brian Adamson who did the same thing before Foschini, he took West Perth to the Supreme Court to get to Norwood.

Australian Football - Brian Adamson - Player Bio

[Legs Akimbo]

Rather than reduce list sizes, if you need to cut the salary cap by 10%, do it across the board at that %, Buddy gets cut $130k, a rookie gets cut, $6k.p

But the value of money does not grow linearly. What is 10 percent to a billionaire versus someone on the dole? That's the definition of regressive and why tax rates increase with income.

[Markwebbos]

But the value of money does not grow linearly. What is 10 percent to a billionaire versus someone on the dole? That's the definition of regressive and why tax rates increase with income.

It would make sense for any pay cuts to be progressive not flat, so rookie salary stays the same and superstars take the biggest hit.

Unions are expert at negotiating away the wages and conditions of their members.

[bloodspirit]

Apart from the potential reduction in list sizes, there is talk about a very substantial reduction (perhaps 40%) in the soft cap. I think this refers to 2021 but perhaps the cuts will start sooner than that. It seems that this kind of reduction will be achieved by a combination (1) staff taking pay cuts; and (2) cutting staff.

Is anyone game to guess which staff will be cut? I'm not. But possibly I'm willing to approach it the other way round and try to assemble a list of positions/people we can't afford to lose:

CEO/Tom Harley
Head of Football/Charlie Gardiner
Head Coach/John Longmire
List manager/Kinnear Beatson
Head of Recruiting/Simon Dalrymple
Head of fitness (performance?)/Rob Spurrs
Head of Welfare/Dennis Carroll
Head Physio/Matt (?) Cameron
Club Doctor/Tom Cross
Psychologists/Currently Suzie Rhydderch and Grant Brecht are contracted to do this - I don't think they are 'employed' - rather the Swans are among their clients. Maybe their roles could be reduced.
Dietitian/Elise Anderson and Chef/Courtney Ralston (part-time)
Assistant coaches - but which ones?? Currently we have: John Blakey, Brett Kirk, Steve Johnson, Tadgh Kennelly, Dean Cox, Jarrod McVeigh, Jeremy Laidler, Lloyd Perris. Is that all of them? Can they all survive? Probably not. Which are the first cabs off the rank? This is perhaps the most fascinating personnel issue for mine.

I guess various of the more junior staff in every department will be among the first to be cut. We'll probably have to prune the number physios, trainers, recruiters, coaches, stats crunchers etc. etc.

Anyone willing to be braver than me and tip names that will be out the door? Or other comments?

[sprite]

If we are to reduce coaches my choices would be Kirk, Perris and Laidler. Have Macca and Tadgh run reserves.

[707]

Premiership hero Marty Mattner cut by Crows so hard cull starting at other clubs

[bloodspirit]

If we are to reduce coaches my choices would be Kirk, Perris and Laidler. Have Macca and Tadgh run reserves.

Thank you for being brave enough to name names.

That said, I have to ask, what is your assessment based on, particularly for Kirk? Kirk is relatively senior and experienced and he is part of the Bloods ethos and was a spritual talisman for the club during his playing days. He has high level coaching qualifications and has spent years training at a different club before returning to us. Potentially he is the kind of guy we want, who has ties to Sydney and who is deeply loyal to the club. I think a negative assessment must be based on (a) his association with Ross Lyon; and (b) the fact that he was transferred from coaching midfield to individual player development over the last off-season. Potentially this could indicate he didn't excel in his more strategic/tactical role but that is really an assumption with no firm basis. Also, I suspect (not meaning for you necessarily, sprite) it implies a devaluing of the development of individual players, which I think we are prone to doing - but should we?

I watched one of those sessions of Damien Barrett and Ross Lyon talking to each other on afl.com.au (I know, I know, neither are our favourite people). Lyon divided coaching into mechanical and dynamic aspects. "Mechanical" seemed to be about tactics and strategy; "dynamic" seemed to be more about team morale and cohesion and getting the most out of the personnel. On this forum and elsewhere I think there is a tendency to focus on the harder-edged 'mechanical' stuff and to devalue the 'dynamic' (for want of better labels). However, I think both are important and there is more growth and progress to be made in the softer 'dynamic' arts. I think Richmond are a team that have flourished on the dynamic side of things and that has been an important part of their recent success.

***

A completely different point that I wanted to make earlier too, and this applies both to playing lists and to other staff: we have to recognise that while we may fancy some of our own, there will be a great opportunity to pick up some really talented people that other clubs have cut loose because they, like us, can't keep everybody. So, maybe we will need to be prepared to cut someone good or promising because there is an opportunity to get someone even better! Also some people may be cut loose because they are on inflated wages and it may be possible to pick them up more cheaply. Some of these people may currently be working in entirely different industries that are even more heavily impacted by the pandemic than footy.

[Nico]

What if the assistant coaches take a pay cut in the short term to keep the team together.

[Velour&Ruffles]

Thank you for being brave enough to name names.

That said, I have to ask, what is your assessment based on, particularly for Kirk? Kirk is relatively senior and experienced and he is part of the Bloods ethos and was a spritual talisman for the club during his playing days. He has high level coaching qualifications and has spent years training at a different club before returning to us. Potentially he is the kind of guy we want, who has ties to Sydney and who is deeply loyal to the club. I think a negative assessment must be based on (a) his association with Ross Lyon; and (b) the fact that he was transferred from coaching midfield to individual player development over the last off-season. Potentially this could indicate he didn't excel in his more strategic/tactical role but that is really an assumption with no firm basis. Also, I suspect (not meaning for you necessarily, sprite) it implies a devaluing of the development of individual players, which I think we are prone to doing - but should we?

Kirk is the last one I would cut. He of all people knows what it takes to become an elite player despite being blessed with very mediocre talent. That's who I want coaching my players.

Also, responsible for perhaps the single most important coaching moment in the history of our football club.

Pretty well qualified in my view.

[Blood Fever]

Kirk is the last one I would cut. He of all people knows what it takes to become an elite player despite being blessed with very mediocre talent. That's who I want coaching my players.

Also, responsible for perhaps the single most important coaching moment in the history of our football club.

Pretty well qualified in my view.

Agree with this. People have short memories. Transcendent figure in the history of the club.

[dimelb]

Agree with both of the above. Kirk is the one mainly responsible for coming up with The Bloods. Enough said.