Page 12 of 267 FirstFirst ... 289101112131415162262112 ... LastLast
Results 133 to 144 of 3194

Thread: 2017 trading, drafting, list management

  1. #133
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    Not even just 3rd party deals. It somewhere got lost that the cost of living is significantly higher in Sydney than in other cities in Australia. Perth came close at the height of the mining boom but has now receded somewhat. For the highest paid players, the impact might be trivial but even earning up to $300k or so, it does make a difference. And that's not saying that you can't live comfortably in Sydney on a significantly lower salary. Just that a higher proportion of your salary does go on the basics and when the Swans were competing with other clubs to attract and maintain players, the COLA helped to address the differential.

    And of course, COLA wasn't abolished. Those towards the lower end of the salary range still get a rental allowance to recognise the higher cost of living - particularly property - in Sydney.
    Yes basically COLA lite.

    I honestly never ever believed it wasn't for the cost of living but to be able to keep players as they could earn a lot more in Melbourne, a retention allowance but the AFL had already abolished Brisbanes retention allowance so couldn't use that name so went with COLA. On the cost of living in Sydney it shows how hypocritical people are. When Eddie moved to Sydney n started work in Sydney he came out in favour of COLA but as soon as he got shown the door his mind changed instantly. Also on his tv show one question was "what is the most expensive city to live in?" Answer Sydney. Hypocrite!! I actually think he came to Sydney thinking he'd wiggle his way into the club in some way.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    Of course the AFL put the squeeze on us by taking away the COLA even though these high priced players were contracted under a COLA regime. We had to work our way out of this conundrum by letting go of some players.

    Half the pundits are saying we're playing poorly because we lost Mitchell and the other half are saying we're playing poorly because our midfield is too slow. I wonder which one it is?

    It seems a done deal the new CBA will raise the salary cap by 20% or thereabouts which will get us through this salary cap squeeze. After 2018 Tippett will get a sizable pay cut or even more likely, cut from the team. That should get us past loss of COLA crisis.

    Given the number of high quality players that Adelaide have lost over the past 5 years, plus the death of their coach last year, it would be easy to see them languishing at the bottom of the ladder and everyone could demonstrate why this had happened. After the effects are seen, the causes are created.

    I think the club has done a great job in rejuvenating the list during this period. We have drafted or signed at least 3 AFL quality players capable of playing more than 150 games every year for the past 5 years. A fair number are A grade players who should have long careers. We may be in a slump atm, but it should be only short term as just the weight of numbers of quality players brings us back to the top 4.
    Well said. Exactly my thoughts

  2. #134
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve View Post
    With all the talk re: Tippett's contract, I wonder if it's actually accurate to to say we'd have a lot more room in our salary cap now if we hadn't signed him.

    Had we not, we would very likely had recruited another player at the end of 2012 - albeit perhaps on half the money.

    But the big one is the Franklin contract - without Tippett, I think you'd find we would have probably offered the same amount on a p.a. basis (if not more), over a shorter period. In the end we offered $10m for 9 years, without Tippett's salary we wouldn't have needed to stretch it across 9 years and might have offered $8m for 6 years.

    I think that's conservative - which would mean the more money to Franklin, plus another mid-range recruit (or perhaps upgrading Mumford's contract to stay) would have taken up a lot (if not most) of what Tippett is earning. Which still means losing Mitchell, and our current cap still being very tight.



    I was borderline with King until now, but he's lost all credibility now with that comment - absolute ignorance and careless analysis.

    I guess they're never going to embarrass one of their own panelists directly, but it would have been nice for Healy or Brown to challenge King and say something like "but is it a gold mine year-in, year-out - who were Sydney's academy recruits before Heeney and Mills, and who did they pick last year...".
    I think Brown was about to go at him pretty hard n realised he can't destroy the boys club culture or he won't have a job n pulled back n started talking about his F/S experience. If you watch it again you can see it again in his body language n hear it in his tone of voice. At first when brown started on King I think King legitimately had excrement in his pants.

  3. #135
    Brown took up a 1Mil of his teams Salary Cap 10 yrs ago..... find it funny he keeps having an opinion on highly paid players and disunity within the list

  4. #136
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    Not even just 3rd party deals. It somewhere got lost that the cost of living is significantly higher in Sydney than in other cities in Australia. Perth came close at the height of the mining boom but has now receded somewhat. For the highest paid players, the impact might be trivial but even earning up to $300k or so, it does make a difference. And that's not saying that you can't live comfortably in Sydney on a significantly lower salary. Just that a higher proportion of your salary does go on the basics and when the Swans were competing with other clubs to attract and maintain players, the COLA helped to address the differential.

    And of course, COLA wasn't abolished. Those towards the lower end of the salary range still get a rental allowance to recognise the higher cost of living - particularly property - in Sydney.
    I think COLA served its purpose but isn't at all appropriate for us anymore.

    A lot is heard about how expensive Sydney is but it really is property prices and there is a earnings and wealth threshold where is effectively negligible and that is when you are in the property market without a mortgage, at that stage earnings are the key.

    I do think it is important that the lower paid players in Sydney get rental assistance and I am glad they do. As for the others, it isn't often I agree with Kochie but his view is that the Swans are a gold plated club in a huge market and that any off field opportunities will mean that salary assistance was just not required. So, really the player managers in particular need to start doing their job and I am sure there is a legal way the club can help facilitate off field deals

  5. #137
    Okay, I know there's a fair bit of interest going around for Sam Reid this season, but what's the mail in Zak Jones? I know North are keeping an eye on him. So what is the situation, currently? He is out of contract at season's end and as I understand it, he isn't a free agent. So does that put us in a good position to keep him? ie he accepts an offer presented or risks the draft, where he can't control his destination.

    What are your thoughts on keeping Zak? IMO, he is a gun and will be an integral part of the team moving forward.

  6. #138
    I'd much prefer to keep Zak than Sam but both would be nice. Zak is coming into his prime and offers so much run and hardness. I would imagine if he was to leave, we would be looking to get a decent 1st round pick in return.

  7. #139
    Goodesgoodesgoodesgoodes! Industrial Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Doughnuts don't wear alligator shoes
    Posts
    3,266
    The best thing about Jones, is that he looks really coachable. Still has that look about him that suggests he might glass someone at any moment, but has really tempered the stupid stuff he was doing in his first 10-15 games.

    Still has that hard edge but doesn't tend to stray over the line. The Lions game was full of niggle and Jones was at the centre of pretty well every spot fire sticking up for his team mates.

    Footy wise he seems to make good decisions as well - not much talk about his disposal these days.

    He's gone from (at least in my books) whipping boy to a must retain.

    Happy to be wrong on him that's for sure.

  8. #140
    I reckon we'll keep both. Perhaps the players are holding off until the new CBA and TPP is finalised to strengthen their bargaining position. Meanwhile they can work on their form to increase their value too.

  9. #141
    Quote Originally Posted by Industrial Fan View Post
    The best thing about Jones, is that he looks really coachable. Still has that look about him that suggests he might glass someone at any moment, but has really tempered the stupid stuff he was doing in his first 10-15 games.

    Still has that hard edge but doesn't tend to stray over the line. The Lions game was full of niggle and Jones was at the centre of pretty well every spot fire sticking up for his team mates.

    Footy wise he seems to make good decisions as well - not much talk about his disposal these days.

    He's gone from (at least in my books) whipping boy to a must retain.

    Happy to be wrong on him that's for sure.
    I agree. I don't think Zak was ever a whipping boy - except for his hotheaded brainfades. But now he is a feisty, fiery player who I would compare (in a good way) with Heath Shaw. I think Heater also plays with a lot of passion and sometimes rashly oversteps in the heat of the moment but is a great player. Whereas I would contrast both of them with Toby Greene, who, although undoubtedly a brilliant player, is repugnant and nasty in a bad way and I wouldn't want a bar of. That said, even Greene could possibly come good and redeem himself as he matures and if he gets good guidance.

  10. #142
    We have to keep Zak jones. And I'd like to see them play Rohan in a similar role.

  11. #143
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodspirit View Post
    I reckon we'll keep both. Perhaps the players are holding off until the new CBA and TPP is finalised to strengthen their bargaining position. Meanwhile they can work on their form to increase their value too.
    With Tippett coming off the wages bill at the end of next year and Buddy's salary becoming the norm for Franchise Players (hate that term...) I cannot see any reason why we won't keep both but I suspect our form over the rest of the season may have an impact. I also hope we have tucked away a bit more than some other clubs but that is probably wishful thinking.

    I'll still be very worried if they are still unsigned by the end of June but at the moment we do have the mitigating factor of the TPP to be agreed so I hope it is just this holding up proceeding. Problem is I can just see them both being very highly sought after.

    If we do lose them both, and let's not kid ourselves that this is not a possibility, then we will be into serious rebuild territory but going in with strength. Jones we'd want the Dees' first rounder for and I'd expect Pick 19 at the least for Reid so we'd be looking at four top 25 picks this draft plus an early 40s. Add that to this years crop and Mills, Heeney etc and we'll have one of the best young lists in the game

  12. #144
    On the veteran's list
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Swans Heartland
    Posts
    2,228
    Mick Warner saying on OTC tonight that the Melbourne clubs are circling Zac Jones. David King saying Richmond and St Kilda have the space to get him. Healy says he's a required player at the Swans but King says their cap is too tight. (Obviously King is privy to each club's TPP documents!!!)
    Those who have the greatest power to hurt us are those we love.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO