Buddy the Game Changer

[dimelb]

I'm surprised no-one picked this up.

Buddy the game changer (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/buddy-the-game-changer-20131018-2vsha.html)

A mixture of solid reportage and comment with inane bias and wild speculation. I dare say if Richmond had done what the Swans did she would hail it as a masterstroke.

[GongSwan]

Inflammatory rubbish, or, just the usual from Caro

[Primmy]

There is another dose of it today from Caro. Ignorant twitt. We stole Buddy from GWS because we hate them. Que??. The woman is a nightmare.

As I 'commented' - Buddy comes to Sydney Swans (we are top of the ladder), or Buddy goes to GWS (they are bottom of the ladder). Decisions decisions decisions.

Idiot woman

[ScottH]

I'm surprised no-one picked this up.

Buddy the game changer (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/buddy-the-game-changer-20131018-2vsha.html)

A mixture of solid reportage and comment with inane bias and wild speculation. I dare say if Richmond had done what the Swans did she would hail it as a masterstroke.

Probably the reason I stop reading after the first few paragraphs.

I was looking for who she thinks should be sacked.

[CureTheSane]

I read it all.
More about pride and loyalty than wrongdoing.
Interesting that so many here applaud the Swans for being fair, when Caro does have a point.
What we did was legal, but is widely, and perhaps appropriately, being viewed as unfair and taking advantage of a flawed system.
I'm not complaining, I love what we have done.
Maybe the Swans don't like GWS or want them around, but by default, they have created a pretty big rivalry.
Add Shaw vs Shaw and it gets better. Good for football, good for Sydney, Good for GWS.

I may have missed it - has Kevin Sheedy commented on all the Buddy being snatched from them stuff.?

Would love to see this discussed on Footy Classified.
I'd suggest that Garry would be in the middle "seeing both sides, Caro would be calling for blood, Lloydy would be sticking up for the Swans and Hutchison really could go either way, but would be unlikely to put himself in the middle.

[bodgie]

I was pretty much laughing by the time I got to the end of that article.

[Legs Akimbo]

It's not really journalism is it? Speculation, opinion, pot stirring. She is a very bitter and negative person. Actually, not sure how
She keeps her position at Fairfax. Having said that, all for critical and well researched journalism. But that is not what she does.

[royboy42]

I feel Free Agency has changed the face of the game forever. The Swans administration, more than any club , or the A.L.P.A.,or the leadership of the AFL, realised the changes about to be wrought, and acted on them.
Even the Tippett move indicated that we scented the forthcoming changes.
Except for when North went out under Barassi and bought a team, I don't believe we've had a year where so many pretty good players went to other clubs (and more to come).
It will only be a couple of years till AFL is to become like baseball in the US.
The current generation of players wishing to be one club members will disappear as commercial realities overtake tribal feelings within clubs.
Players wanting to 'go home' or not to be drafted to clubs they don't like will be swamped by those same commercial issues.
Players will become products, and I fear for the future nature of Aussie rules.
Any thoughts?

[Matimbo]

Absolutely bizarre. Full of contradictions.

She criticises Buddy for approaching the Swans straight after the 2012 GF and in the same article says we only went after him to damage GWS?? He approached us first!

Also, what on earth does this line mean?? ... "No club can be expected to match an offer when that offer is not real in the first place". How was the Swans offer to Buddy not real when it resulted in a signed contract, closely scrutinised and approved by the AFL - the facts of which she mentions in the same article???

She is not a journalist, just a mouthpiece for the establishment Melb clubs.

[Bloods05]

I'm still mystified about what we have supposedly done wrong. This piece of opinionated, emotional garbage doesn't help me.

[Bloodthirsty]

Yep. Don't ask me what I think should happen to Caroline Wilson, a worthless degenerate puppet.

We have a long way to go before we are anything like the US. Check out this news article. Is Buddy close to being on the ASX? Don't think so.

Houston Texans Running Back Arian Foster Is Going Public - Businessweek (http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-17/houston-texans-running-back-arian-foster-is-going-public)

[royboy42]

Yep. Don't ask me what I think should happen to Caroline Wilson, a worthless degenerate puppet.

We have a long way to go before we are anything like the US. Check out this news article. Is Buddy close to being on the ASX? Don't think so.

Houston Texans Running Back Arian Foster Is Going Public - Businessweek (http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-17/houston-texans-running-back-arian-foster-is-going-public)

The difference between us and the US is how much we pay guys, and that's only a reflection of the size of markets We're heading the same way in everything else.

[Bloodthirsty]

The difference between us and the US is how much we pay guys, and that's only a reflection of the size of markets We're heading the same way in everything else.

I know, but the financial fanaticism will therefore never reach those heights.

On the market - it's a real shame that we have fragmented football codes here in an already small market. If we could get rid of NRL, union and soccer, it would be quite amazing.

NRL will die at the grass-roots (pun?) level because parents don't want their children smashed by polynesians 10 times their size, union is too corporate but somehow hangs around, and the 'growth' of soccer is attributable to a pretty obvious reason that has almost nothing to do with winning over genuine fans from another code. Surely AFL will continue to grow it's market share. The AFL are doing a pretty good job. But do better, Vlad!

[Bloody Hell]

I personally think everyone is overthinking this.

1. Buddy came to the Swans and said he wanted to play in Sydney.

2. The Swans looked at what they could achieve in terms of an offer considering the current state of their list

3. Swans put offer to Buddy

4. Buddy accepted

There isn't a club in the land that if Buddy Franklin came to them and said "I want to play for you" they wouldn't make him an offer... even if it was peanuts. It's up to Buddy to decide.

What were the Swans to say - "Sorry Buddy, we think it's fundamentally unfair to the league, but particularly GWS if you were to play for us." ....yeah right. What planet do these people live on?

[Ruck'n'Roll]

One of the things that I found most distasteful about the whole Bombers supplements scandal, was the behaviour of the one-eyed Essendon "faithful".

Their blind unthinking support of their club simply made them look stupid, their determination to "shoot the messenger" (in some cases literally) was insane. The personal vitriol directed at Caroline Wilson in particular was shameful.

At the time I thought how lucky I was I didn't support such a club, that the supporters of the Swans were far more intelligent, balanced and simply better people than the fanatics that supported Essendon. Swans supporters I was absolutely certain, could never ever behave in such a manner . . . . . . . . .

[Ludwig]

I personally think everyone is overthinking this.

1. Buddy came to the Swans and said he wanted to play in Sydney.

2. The Swans looked at what they could achieve in terms of an offer considering the current state of their list

3. Swans put offer to Buddy

4. Buddy accepted

There isn't a club in the land that if Buddy Franklin came to them and said "I want to play for you" they wouldn't make him an offer... even if it was peanuts. It's up to Buddy to decide.

What were the Swans to say - "Sorry Buddy, we think it's fundamentally unfair to the league, but particularly GWS if you were to play for us." ....yeah right. What planet do these people live on?

Exactly right! What other outcome could there be. We did everything we could to make it work. Any club would.

[Bloody Hell]

One of the things that I found most distasteful about the whole Bombers supplements scandal, was the behaviour of the one-eyed Essendon "faithful".

Their blind unthinking support of their club simply made them look stupid, their determination to "shoot the messenger" (in some cases literally) was insane. The personal vitriol directed at Caroline Wilson in particular was shameful.

At the time I thought how lucky I was I didn't support such a club, that the supporters of the Swans were far more intelligent, balanced and simply better people than the fanatics that supported Essendon. Swans supporters I was absolutely certain, could never ever behave in such a manner . . . . . . . . .
Goodness me...bit of an overreaction there.

The article is garbage - but I'm more interested in why you would compare getting Buddy to the Bombers supplement scandal - certainly not balanced or intelligent.

[Bloodthirsty]

One of the things that I found most distasteful about the whole Bombers supplements scandal, was the behaviour of the one-eyed Essendon "faithful".

Their blind unthinking support of their club simply made them look stupid, their determination to "shoot the messenger" (in some cases literally) was insane. The personal vitriol directed at Caroline Wilson in particular was shameful.

At the time I thought how lucky I was I didn't support such a club, that the supporters of the Swans were far more intelligent, balanced and simply better people than the fanatics that supported Essendon. Swans supporters I was absolutely certain, could never ever behave in such a manner . . . . . . . . .

Intelligent people can't stand by and let that CW peice of 'writing' be accepted as the standard, let alone defend the author.

[bloodsbigot]

After the swans won in 2012... Hawk fans screamed 'COLA' until they were blue in the face.

Explanations or reasoning didn't matter to them. You could explain all day that our premiership was legit seeing as our team were mostly made up of rejects and recycled players from other teams, it didn't matter. They wouldn't listen.

The swans board shrugged their shoulders, saying, "well, they think we're buying our premierships anyway, so what's the point of being respected or well-liked?" Then we got Tippett. Then Franklin came to us.

Then they all collectively started crying.

WAAAA WAAA WAAAA. Victorian footy fans (Emphasis on Hawks) are nothing but spoilt, self-entitled turds. They don't give a damn about us, so why should we give a damn about them?

Screw you Caroline Wilson and screw you other teams.

[Legs Akimbo]

One of the things that I found most distasteful about the whole Bombers supplements scandal, was the behaviour of the one-eyed Essendon "faithful".

Their blind unthinking support of their club simply made them look stupid, their determination to "shoot the messenger" (in some cases literally) was insane. The personal vitriol directed at Caroline Wilson in particular was shameful.

At the time I thought how lucky I was I didn't support such a club, that the supporters of the Swans were far more intelligent, balanced and simply better people than the fanatics that supported Essendon. Swans supporters I was absolutely certain, could never ever behave in such a manner . . . . . . . . .

I made a point of saying in my post that well reasoned and quality critical journalism is always welcomed. I personally have quite a degree of disquiet about the whole Franklin signing, but I found this article extremely irritating on a number of levels. The article' is simultaneously incoherent and unreasonably slanted.

There are many good sports and footy writers and journos around. Caroline Wilson is not one of them.

[ShockOfHair]

I don't see much criticism of the Swans in that column, though she makes some scathing remarks about GWS and the AFL's management of them. She does
wonder if having two highly-paid superstars will mesh with the Swans culture - fair enough but she might have pointed out that the McVeigh could have vetoed on behalf of the playing group. She says no Swan administrator or coach will be around at the end of BUddy's contract - probably true but a bit of a cheap shot. It's true relations are poor between GWS and the Swans but that's because the GWS feel humiliated - their problem, not ours. Personally I think that's not bad for the game. It also explains why we got such a low pick for Mumford.

Anyway, Caro's excellent value as far I'm concerned. She covers the stuff that most footy hacks can't understand, or because they are busy reporting on Supercoach or spruiking ridiculous rumours from the Collingwood dressing room. She does overstate her case a bit but I don't mind that - it's good to have your biases challenged. It's telling that there are entire threads on BF personally attacking her, usually on some idiotic sexist ground like 'she doesn't really love the game', a quantum more than any male media figure. She had Hird's number in the supplement saga from early on and she was right. He was the ego that wouldn't budge. Her reporting on Eugene Rocca's departure from the Kangaroos 18 months ago was spot on too . The board was so toxic it took more than six months to find a replacement CEO - an ex-player, if I recall.

Still waiting for someone to write a piece about the ridiculous and uninformed over-reaction to the Buddy deal.

[Bloody Hell]

It also explains why we got such a low pick for Mumford.



A bit off to the side, but I don't think that pick is as bad as it could have been. The reality is GWS have picks 1, 2, 20 and 21 - they are unlikely to use 35. If they were to use it we would have gotten a lower pick, no doubt. Swans had absolutely no bargaining power in that deal.

I feel for Mummy. I remember him speaking about picking No. 41 when he came to the club - how there were no names on the locker and how he wanted to change that...

[Bloodthirsty]

Seriously, I couldn't even decipher what CW's point was in writing that article. Rambling cr@p, blatant lies, aspersions, assumptions, contradictory statements - and once I had finished reading it, I was like, "what's your point? You hate the Swans but you can't find a legitimate reason, let alone elucidate it in a way that suggests an IQ in the double figures?"

[DamY]

Sorry, I'm with ShockofHair on the topic. She has backed the Swans on numerous occasions, and has defended the COLA on Footy Classified. She writes about how the other clubs are seething about the Buddy deal - that's a fact. Just look around us, everyone is pissed. She's just reiterating that. She has an ability to write the story behind the headline, what I mean is that she writes about why things happen, not just *what* happens. Whether it's true or not, no-one will ever know but she saw the Hird/Bombers saga coming from a mile away. Most of the points she makes are valid, GWS and Sydney hate each other, the other 17 clubs are pissed Buddy is at Sydney and not GWS. I'm not sure about the whole cutting the nose off to spite the face bit, that I think is reading a bit much into it, but the rest of it I think is pretty spot on.

[Bloodthirsty]

Sorry, I'm with ShockofHair on the topic. She has backed the Swans on numerous occasions, and has defended the COLA on Footy Classified. She writes about how the other clubs are seething about the Buddy deal - that's a fact. Just look around us, everyone is pissed. She's just reiterating that. She has an ability to write the story behind the headline, what I mean is that she writes about why things happen, not just *what* happens. Whether it's true or not, no-one will ever know but she saw the Hird/Bombers saga coming from a mile away. Most of the points she makes are valid, GWS and Sydney hate each other, the other 17 clubs are pissed Buddy is at Sydney and not GWS. I'm not sure about the whole cutting the nose off to spite the face bit, that I think is reading a bit much into it, but the rest of it I think is pretty spot on.

She wrote biased garbage with no point. You don't have to be a genius to see that.

Swans and GWS HATE each other? Turn it up. The AFL wishes.

She also stated that the Swans 'made a mockery' of free agency....and if I have to point out everything that's wrong with that article to you then I can't really bring myself to pay too much attention to what you're saying on this topic.

[DamY]

She wrote biased garbage with no point. You don't have to be a genius to see that.

Swans and GWS HATE each other? Turn it up. The AFL wishes.

She also stated that the Swans 'made a mockery' of free agency....and if I have to point out everything that's wrong with that article to you then I can't really bring myself to pay too much attention to what you're saying on this topic.

And all I have to say to that is to each their own ;)
I didn't say there was no hyperbole, there is some OTT-ness to it. But it's in The Age. It's pandering to the VIC market to an extent. The Swans and the Giants DO hate each other. The Swans have on the record stated that they don't believe that there is a need for a second NSW-based team when the first NSW-based team can't even crack 40k members. The Giants have been trying to gain traction with their "Battle of the Bridge" malarky but the Swans still call it the Sydney Derby because the "Bridge" implies it's east sydney v west sydney and the Swans disagree with that assessment. The Giants HAVE been supremely embarrassed by the Swans trumping them by Buddy.

To be fair, Buddy HAS thumbed his nose at the Indigenous All Stars team. He hasn't trained with the rest of them, which is pretty slack. He's lost the captaincy which was mooted prior to the international rules series.

Caro mentions that the offer "isn't real". We all know that the 9 years was to blow the other clubs out of the water. That was why it was hush-hush. No-one could know that the Swans were making a play and also the terms of the agreement. That is why the AFL have forced the Swans to hold Buddy's allocation of funds aside regardless of whether he retires or plays the full term. That is in fairness to the other clubs and to stop other clubs from doing the same in the future saying "Well I'll take Gary Ablett for 15 years!!" etc.

You can agree to disagree, but I see different points in the article stated. And I'm sorry that you can't "bring yourself to pay too much attention" to what I have to say on the topic because it's not what you want to hear.

Note that I did not denigrate your point of view when you made yours, as that is what forums and debates are all about.

[annew]

Who cares if Buddy has thumbed his nose at it it's a Mickey Mouse game.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Goodness me...bit of an overreaction there.

The article is garbage - but I'm more interested in why you would compare getting Buddy to the Bombers supplement scandal - certainly not balanced or intelligent.
I was not comparing getting buddy to the bombers supplements scandal, I was however comparing the tone and language used i. some of the comments in this thread to those of the contemptible Bombers faithful's.
And no, I dont think I overreacted, I do not see: "Ignorant twit" "The woman is a nightmare." "worthless degenerate puppet." and especially "##### you Caroline Wilson and ##### you other teams." as being worthwhile additions to any discussion.
Such comments don't refute her argument, they just demonstrate ones own limitations. I also suspect that if those comments had been directed at another RWOer they would probably have been deleted by the moderators under rule 6 "Play the ball, not the man".


Intelligent people can't stand by and let that CW peice of 'writing' be accepted as the standard, let alone defend the author.
Regardless of your evaluation of my intelligence, I have no hesitation in 'defending' the author herself from comments such as your intial post.
I am not however, defending what she wrote (I have criticised her writing on several previous occasions in this very forum), I simply suggest you refute her argument, identify factual errors in the article, etc. etc. It's so much more convincing to people reading your post than intemperate personal comments.

[Bloods05]

This is exactly how I see it. I cannot for the life of me see how anyone can accuse us of impropriety of any kind. We have taken a big risk with the length and size of the contract, a risk that other clubs could have taken but chose not to take, so we have to live with the consequences of that choice and they don't. I truly believe that the real problem commentators like Wilson have with this deal is that we got him and their team didn't, and that it shouldn't be possible because we're already strong. But it is possible, purely because of good management and our preparedness to take a risk.

[spiffy-dude]

Victorians have a warped view on most things, but this issue they have with the swans buying a superstar that came to us intially and all above board is just one of the most bizarre and childish things i have witnessed.

After you peel all the layers, the behaviour to us signing buddy has been immature and the conversations and hurt is something i would have heard and expected from 5th graders in the playground.

[erica]

Victorians have a warped view on most things, but this issue they have with the swans buying a superstar that came to us intially and all above board is just one of the most bizarre and childish things i have witnessed.

After you peel all the layers, the behaviour to us signing buddy has been immature and the conversations and hurt is something i would have heard and expected from 5th graders in the playground.

There may also be a bit of "why didn't we think of that first" from some clubs. IMO, our club should never have to apologise for being excellent list managers.

[barry]

Does buddy qualify as a veteran after 7 years?. So the last 2 years we get cap relief?

[Primmy]

The childish and manipulative squarkings are coming from only a few areas of Victoria. Malthouse, Eddy and Caro, slightly seasoned by a bit of GWS. Noone else seems all that fussed.

[dimelb]

I know people are critical of Caro for writing about football politics rather than football, but she does know a bit about the game. And while the article is, imho, written in highly coloured prose and shows a failure to understand the nature of the bid for Buddy, I think the main thing bothering her is that the game has gone further down the corporatisation track. It took some smooth and practised business heads, especially Andrew Ireland, to put the deal together and think through the possible consequences. It is a high risk step that offers high gains - a bit like borrowing to invest - and we could come unstuck, but I trust the club on this one to foresee what needs to happen so that we make the most of our opportunity.

On Marx's view that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce, here's Jake Niall's take on the situation, though I think he is dealing with the same issues as Caro, i.e. corporatisation:

Sydney's Buddy big problem (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/sydneys-buddy-big-problem-20131019-2vtvf.html)

[On-Baller]

This club goes on about two cities one team but the vitriol directed at ALL Victorian supporters in this thread is shameful. Do those of you labelling us all warped etc ever stop to think about those of us who love the swans but happen to be from Melbourne? Whether you like it or not the club loves its Melbourne heritage and its Vic supporters. Hate to think a great of South would ever read rubbish like some of the above and think its a true indication of what the club and its fans think of its South Melbourne heritage.

Alot of us speak about the bloods culture well sorry to inform those who think nothing worth praising happens outside of NSW but the players went back and embraced once being South Melbourne and have shown great respect for their clubs history. I get the hate of the melbourne media and some supporters but alot of the comments in here are just so broad seemingly everyone who loves footy in Melbourne is tarnished with the same brush.

Just on the media as well yes they are shocking down here but it goes both ways ever heard channel 9 do a Storm game? The vitriol and bias is astounding, and it happens in the print media as well, so its not mutually exclusive to melbourne journos.

[ugg]

I know people are critical of Caro for writing about football politics rather than football, but she does know a bit about the game. And while the article is, imho, written in highly coloured prose and shows a failure to understand the nature of the bid for Buddy, I think the main thing bothering her is that the game has gone further down the corporatisation track. It took some smooth and practised business heads, especially Andrew Ireland, to put the deal together and think through the possible consequences. It is a high risk step that offers high gains - a bit like borrowing to invest - and we could come unstuck, but I trust the club on this one to foresee what needs to happen so that we make the most of our opportunity.

On Marx's view that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce, here's Jake Niall's take on the situation, though I think he is dealing with the same issues as Caro, i.e. corporatisation:

Sydney's Buddy big problem (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/sydneys-buddy-big-problem-20131019-2vtvf.html)

That's one of the more enjoyable Swans articles I've read in a while. The mind boggles at the thought of Malcolm Turnbull as the prez

[Auntie.Gerald]

hmmm...........interesting

i sum it up in my mind like thus

you are either a non paid sport or you are a paid sport - that is the equation.

(i wont use the words amateur or professional as they just dont sound right anymore) :)

so you take the bells and whistles like the AFL or you dont and stage yourself locally

Collingwood have lead the charge hard for many years and now the other clubs are trying to catch up as the divide will only grow between the rich clubs and the poorer clubs....The AFL is so aware of what direction everything is heading and it is highly unlikely that they will be able to maintain a status quo .......with their research studies of the NFL, BASEBALL, Soccer they are fully aware that the Melbourne team and many others in the comp will not be able to compete.......the AFL is making a last ditch effort on the Demons by bringing Roo's but i honestly dont think it will work and we will see the richer clubs simply level jumping again again

its the sport of kings.........where ever there is significant money to be made in marketing / broadcast etc clubs will want more then their fair share

[Ludwig]

IMO, the AFL made a bit mistake expanding to 18 teams instead of consolidating 2 of the Melbourne clubs. The supporters of relocated clubs would have recovered, just like South Melbourne fans have. Now the AFL will have a massive ongoing headache not only getting the expansion clubs up and going, but also supporting the weaker Melbourne clubs. It doesn't do the competition any good for its revenue stream to have basket cases, like the Demons, popping up every few years.

Franklin coming to the Swans on a big contract would not have elicited the Melbourne hysteria that it has, had the Melbourne foundation clubs been stronger as a group. And the expansion clubs would have had the seeds of their Melbourne supporter base to kick start them on their precarious journey in rugbyland.

[aardvark]

Main board on Big Footy doesn't have one "Buddy" thread atm. Yesterdays news!

[Swansongster]

hmmm...........interesting

i sum it up in my mind like thus

you are either a non paid sport or you are a paid sport - that is the equation.

(i wont use the words amateur or professional as they just dont sound right anymore) :)

so you take the bells and whistles like the AFL or you dont and stage yourself locally

Collingwood have lead the charge hard for many years and now the other clubs are trying to catch up as the divide will only grow between the rich clubs and the poorer clubs....The AFL is so aware of what direction everything is heading and it is highly unlikely that they will be able to maintain a status quo .......with their research studies of the NFL, BASEBALL, Soccer they are fully aware that the Melbourne team and many others in the comp will not be able to compete.......the AFL is making a last ditch effort on the Demons by bringing Roo's but i honestly dont think it will work and we will see the richer clubs simply level jumping again again

its the sport of kings.........where ever there is significant money to be made in marketing / broadcast etc clubs will want more then their fair share

The NFL and NBA do a great job of equalisation in the US through a combination of salary caps, drafting systems and TV rights redistribution. Baseball is different. It is pure capitalism, so the financially stronger organisations dominate over time. When it comes to equalisation, the AFL seems to be some type of hybrid which talks the talk but allows politically powerful clubs to walk at a quicker pace.

[wolftone57]

The difference between us and the US is how much we pay guys, and that's only a reflection of the size of markets We're heading the same way in everything else.

Yes we are Royboy but at least we have the salary cap and draft. The cap, unless some smart bastard recruiter from a club takes the AFL to court for restraint of trade, will at least limit the number of elite players at each club.

On the article, I don't think Caro really looked at the facts.

1. Buddy approached us

2. Buddy was very firm in that he did NOT wish to join GWS or any other bottom side

3. We did NOT approach him

4. Our senior management approached a player representative, our co-captain, Jared McVeigh, to ascertain if there would be trouble within the playing group.

5. Senior management confirmed that if there was any indication the players would be upset with the deal it was gone

6. The deal, while unusual, may still carry on after Buddy has retired. He could be working for the club in the capacity of Forward Coach after he retires, his salary unfortunately within our salary cap. A very big risk to sign a 26 year old for 10 years, especially on his money. The only compensation is the cap rises every two years.

7. If one of the Melbourne clubs pulled this off, say Bullies or Wretchmond Caro would be hailing it as a huge win and a master stroke.

8. How has it damaged our relationship with GWS? Firstly, I didn't think there was one in place. I went to a GWS pre-match function and Sheeds wasn't at all nice about the Swans. The attitude was wait until we are on top and you are a bottom side and then we will kick you in the guts so hard you will never recover. I don't think there was ever a relationship and it has from the start been seen from the GWS point of view as a rivalry.

9. If the rules allow this sort of transaction then so be it and laud the assholes who made it. But if there is a problem with the spirit of the agreement then change the rules to suit.

I personally don't feel that having 20% of the salary cap in the hands of two players is necessarily a good thing either. I think we may have put all our eggs in the TWO BASKETS. What happens when all the young talent that we have been developing and who are now playing super roles in our team come up for contract renewal and find there isn't any money in the coffers for them? What do we do then? Do we say like we just did to Mummy and Jesse, BYE BYE?

- - - Updated - - -


hmmm...........interesting

i sum it up in my mind like thus

you are either a non paid sport or you are a paid sport - that is the equation.

(i wont use the words amateur or professional as they just dont sound right anymore) :)

so you take the bells and whistles like the AFL or you dont and stage yourself locally

Collingwood have lead the charge hard for many years and now the other clubs are trying to catch up as the divide will only grow between the rich clubs and the poorer clubs....The AFL is so aware of what direction everything is heading and it is highly unlikely that they will be able to maintain a status quo .......with their research studies of the NFL, BASEBALL, Soccer they are fully aware that the Melbourne team and many others in the comp will not be able to compete.......the AFL is making a last ditch effort on the Demons by bringing Roo's but i honestly dont think it will work and we will see the richer clubs simply level jumping again again

its the sport of kings.........where ever there is significant money to be made in marketing / broadcast etc clubs will want more then their fair share

The derivation of the word 'amateur is french meaning 'lover of'. Not until the English decided there was a difference between taking money and not taking money for a pastime did amateur come to denote non-paid. In fact it doesn't even mean non-paid just 'lover of'.

[Meg]

I personally don't feel that having 20% of the salary cap in the hands of two players is necessarily a good thing either. I think we may have put all our eggs in the TWO BASKETS. What happens when all the young talent that we have been developing and who are now playing super roles in our team come up for contract renewal and find there isn't any money in the coffers for them? What do we do then? Do we say like we just did to Mummy and Jesse, BYE BYE?

Wolftones, I like most of the points you make in your post. But re your concern about the amount of the salary cap committed to two players: first as you have said, the salary cap will continue to rise (inflation + hopefully revenue growth) while the Franklin & Tippett contracts are set; second there are some older players whom we know must be on high salaries who will be retiring in the next couple of years, probably to be replaced by good but younger, less experienced and therefore lower paid players; third, we know from what the Club has said that a significant part of Franklin's contract is composed of a marketing agreement (or ASA) which is paid out of a separate pool of money While the total ASA amount that can be paid by a club is capped (currently $613,000) it is not part of the salary cap (currently $9,130,000). So Franklin + Tippett will not be 20% of salary cap as we move into the later years of their contracts.

[wolftone57]

Wolftones, I like most of the points you make in your post. But re your concern about the amount of the salary cap committed to two players: first as you have said, the salary cap will continue to rise (inflation + hopefully revenue growth) while the Franklin & Tippett contracts are set; second there are some older players whom we know must be on high salaries who will be retiring in the next couple of years, probably to be replaced by good but younger, less experienced and therefore lower paid players; third, we know from what the Club has said that a significant part of Franklin's contract is composed of a marketing agreement (or ASA) which is paid out of a separate pool of money While the total ASA amount that can be paid by a club is capped (currently $613,000) it is not part of the salary cap (currently $9,130,000). So Franklin + Tippett will not be 20% of salary cap as we move into the later years of their contracts.

Meg yes some players on high payments will retire; ROK & Goodsie both of whom get their salaries offset by the 50% Veterans allowance against the salary cap at this time. But we will wish to retain these players and if we have success they will certainly want more money; joey, Hannas, Parker, Mitchell, Reid, Jetts, AJ, Smithy, Rohan, Kizza, Mal & Macca. Add to this the up & comers like Lambchop, Rampe & BJ then we have a conumdrum. The salary cap will not increase quickly enough to pay everyone if they all want increases after success. Please refer to 2005/6/7.

[Jewels]

Meg yes some players on high payments will retire; ROK & Goodsie both of whom get their salaries offset by the 50% Veterans allowance against the salary cap at this time. But we will wish to retain these players and if we have success they will certainly want more money; joey, Hannas, Parker, Mitchell, Reid, Jetts, AJ, Smithy, Rohan, Kizza, Mal & Macca. Add to this the up & comers like Lambchop, Rampe & BJ then we have a conumdrum. The salary cap will not increase quickly enough to pay everyone if they all want increases after success. Please refer to 2005/6/7.

So you don't think Ireland and co took all that into account? You think they just said "well Buddy and Tipps you want a mill plus a year, let's give it to you and be damned with the future"! That may be the way you do business but history shows that our list managers and money men are far more in control then that.

You should get a job in the Melbourne media.

[Meg]

Meg yes some players on high payments will retire; ROK & Goodsie both of whom get their salaries offset by the 50% Veterans allowance against the salary cap at this time. But we will wish to retain these players and if we have success they will certainly want more money; joey, Hannas, Parker, Mitchell, Reid, Jetts, AJ, Smithy, Rohan, Kizza, Mal & Macca. Add to this the up & comers like Lambchop, Rampe & BJ then we have a conumdrum. The salary cap will not increase quickly enough to pay everyone if they all want increases after success. Please refer to 2005/6/7.

You might be overstating the amount of Goodes' and O'Keefe's salaries that are outside the cap. New rules for veterans started on 1 November 2012 and I think both players probably come under them as they both signed new/extended contracts in 2013. Under the new rules as I interpret them only $112,320 can be paid as a veteran's allowance. But I do agree with your general point that our younger stars will want more money as their contracts come up for renewal, all the more so if we have further premiership success. I therefore agree that there will be demands on our salary cap (a good thing when it results from success) but I think it is not as drastic a scenario as you fear.

[Swansongster]

Meg's voice of reason, common-sense and insightful commentary is rising. Not quite at Liz status as yet but valued opinion all of the time. Thanks.

And that is not denigrate Wolfie's passion. :smile:

[Melbourne_Blood]

My issue is simply that we've recruited a player we didn't necessarily need ( was a key forward a glaring weakness in our side ?) , on an enormously length and lucrative salary. The two fold affect is we lose players ( Mummy the only one who is a definite best 22 player, but White on recent form would also be IMO) but it also rules us out of trying to recruit other mature players to fill any Glaring weaknesses or positions we are a little thin in personnel. How long it will limit our ability to go hard in the trade period remains to be seen. It's kind of frustrating watching us have to sit on our hands this trade period. Getting Buddy could be the best thing to happen to the swans since plugger. But it certainly a move fraught with risk and I think it is pretty reasonable for some to be feeling and expressing their reservations. Just because the swans have been an extremely well run and performed club for a long time, does not make them immune to making potentially poor decisions. Look at Brisbane for a fine example of how far one can fall with some poor decisions.

[dimelb]

My issue is simply that we've recruited a player we didn't necessarily need ( was a key forward a glaring weakness in our side ?) , on an enormously length and lucrative salary. The two fold affect is we lose players ( Mummy the only one who is a definite best 22 player, but White on recent form would also be IMO) but it also rules us out of trying to recruit other mature players to fill any Glaring weaknesses or positions we are a little thin in personnel. How long it will limit our ability to go hard in the trade period remains to be seen. It's kind of frustrating watching us have to sit on our hands this trade period. Getting Buddy could be the best thing to happen to the swans since plugger. But it certainly a move fraught with risk and I think it is pretty reasonable for some to be feeling and expressing their reservations. Just because the swans have been an extremely well run and performed club for a long time, does not make them immune to making potentially poor decisions. Look at Brisbane for a fine example of how far one can fall with some poor decisions.

Ah, but that's what happens when you want a Lance but get a Fev unfortunately.

[Meg]

The NFL and NBA do a great job of equalisation in the US through a combination of salary caps, drafting systems and TV rights redistribution. Baseball is different. It is pure capitalism, so the financially stronger organisations dominate over time. When it comes to equalisation, the AFL seems to be some type of hybrid which talks the talk but allows politically powerful clubs to walk at a quicker pace.

Those are very interesting comments. Given the small AFL working party trip to the USA to look at equalisation measures in the sports you refer to, it will be fascinating to see what they come up with.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Someone please tell me our latest recruit wasn't involved . . . . . Please!

International rules players pulled up after drunken night out (http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/international-rules-players-pulled-up-after-drunken-night-out-20131021-2vxcw.html)

[ScottH]

Someone please tell me our latest recruit wasn't involved . . . . . Please!

International rules players pulled up after drunken night out (http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/international-rules-players-pulled-up-after-drunken-night-out-20131021-2vxcw.html)

From the reports I heard on the radio, some of which was direct from Micky O, there was no alcohol involved and they were younger members of the squad.



The tourists had made a long bus trip from Cavan to Dromoland Castle in Ennis on Sunday.
This is a country where you can easily drive from one side to the other in less than a couple of hours. I'm sure the bus ride wasn't that long.

[spiffy-dude]

The grubby Melbourne journos are just itching to break a massive grubby story on Lance.

They have set an agenda and not backing out until they find Lance doing something wrong so they can de bunk the bloods culture that they, the stupid media, built up. Even Buddy j walking will see a story in Hun about how he broke the bloods ethos.

Massive trolls.