SWANSBEST
24th March 2003, 03:12 PM
PATRICK SMITH
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Victorian heavyweights spare Sydney knockout punch
March 22, 2003
SYDNEY, their corporate revenue squeezed tight by a World Cup rugby tackle, have found succor in the most unlikeliest of places.
Victorian heavyweights Essendon and Collingwood have some sympathy for the Swans' predicament. At first reading that is astonishing because Essendon and Collingwood have led the fight to strip Sydney and Brisbane of their draft concessions and are now leading the battle to the clubs stripped of their salary cap concessions.
The rivalry has been so intense Swans chairman Richard Colless infamously gave Eddie McGuire the bird on national television last year. In an interview about the state of AFL football for ABC's Four Corners, Colless playfully lifted his finger, looked down the barrel of the cameras and said hello to the Collingwood president.
Do that on a football field and you would cop a $5000 fine. While Colless's gesture was in jest, it did indicate the battle between the AFL's northern and southern clubs had developed a sharp and cutting edge.
McGuire and Essendon's president Graeme McMahon have signalled to the AFL commission that until the Swans and the Brisbane Lions lose their cap concessions of 15 and 10 per cent respectively, the AFL playing field will remain about as even as the Himalayas. Both Victorian presidents have said they will settle the matter in court if necessary.
Colless told The Australian on Thursday the Swans, who recorded a loss of more than $1 million last season, did not have the money to fund another substantial loss this year. Colless said the club planned to make a presentation to the AFL seeking assistance.
It was presumed this move would have been seen as another tool to artificially prop up the Swans, who have failed to build a secure financial footing since relocating from Melbourne in 1982.
The Victorian clubs are not without heart. Collingwood chief executive Greg Swann said yesterday he had some sympathy for the Swans' plight, recognising how the World Cup had drawn much of the Swans' middle-rung corporate support.
McMahon said the AFL had in place a strategy to help clubs that found themselves in exceptional financial circumstances. If Sydney could demonstrate that they were suffering because of a unique financial environment then they should take their case to the AFL commission.
The support from the two clubs was not, however, unconditional. McMahon said his club would not support any financial assistance if Sydney's plight was due to mismanagement. And Swann noted at Thursday's meeting between club administrations and the AFL it was documented that Sydney spent more on their football department than any other club.
Sydney's football department cost just under $1m more than the next biggest spending club who were Carlton, though recent history would suggest the Blues' figure maybe more than a little rubbery.
The Swans forked out $12.4m on players, coaches and whatever else it takes to run the football side of a club. Carlton's spend was $11.5m, followed by Brisbane and Essendon, both around $11m.
As stark proof that money does not necessarily buy excellence or success, for their $12.4m the Swans had to replace coach Rodney Eade halfway through the year, won just nine matches and finished 11th.
In fact, the four highest spending clubs won fewer matches than the four clubs (Port Adelaide, Hawthorn, Bulldogs and St Kilda) who spent the least amount of money putting together their football teams.
Sydney, Carlton, Brisbane and Essendon collectively won 41 games while Port, Hawthorn, St Kilda and the Bulldogs won 43. While the top four clubs produced the premiership winner in Brisbane, they also contained the wooden spoon. The bottom four produced a preliminary finalist.
Just to underline the concern among the AFL administration about how teams spend their money, the 16 clubs collectively budgeted for an $8m profit last year but produced a $9m loss. A whopping miscalculation of $17m.
And while clubs are beginning to level off their football costs, AFL chief executive Wayne Jackson did warn the club chief executives and presidents on Thursday to be more prudent and cautious with their budget estimates.
Sydney are trimming their costs and they must for at $12.4m they sit atop the wrong ladder. This year they will pay their players around 103 per cent of the salary cap when they could pay up to 115 per cent because of retention and cost-of-living relief. That's a start.
If the Swans are to be given financial help they must demonstrate more stringent cost cutting than that. You fancy Essendon and Collingwood will demand it.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6164620%255E12270,00.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Victorian heavyweights spare Sydney knockout punch
March 22, 2003
SYDNEY, their corporate revenue squeezed tight by a World Cup rugby tackle, have found succor in the most unlikeliest of places.
Victorian heavyweights Essendon and Collingwood have some sympathy for the Swans' predicament. At first reading that is astonishing because Essendon and Collingwood have led the fight to strip Sydney and Brisbane of their draft concessions and are now leading the battle to the clubs stripped of their salary cap concessions.
The rivalry has been so intense Swans chairman Richard Colless infamously gave Eddie McGuire the bird on national television last year. In an interview about the state of AFL football for ABC's Four Corners, Colless playfully lifted his finger, looked down the barrel of the cameras and said hello to the Collingwood president.
Do that on a football field and you would cop a $5000 fine. While Colless's gesture was in jest, it did indicate the battle between the AFL's northern and southern clubs had developed a sharp and cutting edge.
McGuire and Essendon's president Graeme McMahon have signalled to the AFL commission that until the Swans and the Brisbane Lions lose their cap concessions of 15 and 10 per cent respectively, the AFL playing field will remain about as even as the Himalayas. Both Victorian presidents have said they will settle the matter in court if necessary.
Colless told The Australian on Thursday the Swans, who recorded a loss of more than $1 million last season, did not have the money to fund another substantial loss this year. Colless said the club planned to make a presentation to the AFL seeking assistance.
It was presumed this move would have been seen as another tool to artificially prop up the Swans, who have failed to build a secure financial footing since relocating from Melbourne in 1982.
The Victorian clubs are not without heart. Collingwood chief executive Greg Swann said yesterday he had some sympathy for the Swans' plight, recognising how the World Cup had drawn much of the Swans' middle-rung corporate support.
McMahon said the AFL had in place a strategy to help clubs that found themselves in exceptional financial circumstances. If Sydney could demonstrate that they were suffering because of a unique financial environment then they should take their case to the AFL commission.
The support from the two clubs was not, however, unconditional. McMahon said his club would not support any financial assistance if Sydney's plight was due to mismanagement. And Swann noted at Thursday's meeting between club administrations and the AFL it was documented that Sydney spent more on their football department than any other club.
Sydney's football department cost just under $1m more than the next biggest spending club who were Carlton, though recent history would suggest the Blues' figure maybe more than a little rubbery.
The Swans forked out $12.4m on players, coaches and whatever else it takes to run the football side of a club. Carlton's spend was $11.5m, followed by Brisbane and Essendon, both around $11m.
As stark proof that money does not necessarily buy excellence or success, for their $12.4m the Swans had to replace coach Rodney Eade halfway through the year, won just nine matches and finished 11th.
In fact, the four highest spending clubs won fewer matches than the four clubs (Port Adelaide, Hawthorn, Bulldogs and St Kilda) who spent the least amount of money putting together their football teams.
Sydney, Carlton, Brisbane and Essendon collectively won 41 games while Port, Hawthorn, St Kilda and the Bulldogs won 43. While the top four clubs produced the premiership winner in Brisbane, they also contained the wooden spoon. The bottom four produced a preliminary finalist.
Just to underline the concern among the AFL administration about how teams spend their money, the 16 clubs collectively budgeted for an $8m profit last year but produced a $9m loss. A whopping miscalculation of $17m.
And while clubs are beginning to level off their football costs, AFL chief executive Wayne Jackson did warn the club chief executives and presidents on Thursday to be more prudent and cautious with their budget estimates.
Sydney are trimming their costs and they must for at $12.4m they sit atop the wrong ladder. This year they will pay their players around 103 per cent of the salary cap when they could pay up to 115 per cent because of retention and cost-of-living relief. That's a start.
If the Swans are to be given financial help they must demonstrate more stringent cost cutting than that. You fancy Essendon and Collingwood will demand it.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6164620%255E12270,00.html