Buddy's contract killing Sydney's depth?

[momentbymoment]

Its called hard work.
Ive been in the work force for 7 years. Earned various qualifications and have negatively geared housing investments, some on my own, and some with others.
Put it this way, if he buys a house he gets something for his money.
If he rents he has nothing at the end, whether that be in 1 year or 15 years.

You can't get much for $500k in Sydney ...

 

[Sttew]

Exactly ...
It is an issue of list management.

Geelong feels they are a better team without Ablett.
The Hawks feel they are a better team without Buddy.
The Swans feel that they are a better team with Buddy.

Also - how do you say no to him when he turns up unannounced on your doorstep??

in his girlfriend's smashed up car too!

 

[DangerSloane]

He is doing his job surprisingly well.

As I said - it is about list management. If you have Buddy and Tippett up forward you need a budget crew down back. Richards, Grundy, Rampe and Laidler are probably the most cost effective defence in the league. And one of the best.

Otherwise we would be completely stuffed ....

Yeah see thats why I dont understand when teams spend a mint on backmen.

All you really need is 1 absolute quality key backman (which you managed to get at a bargain basement price (Richards). Then you need servicable role players to fill the remaining spots.

Although I'm sure going forward Nick Smith will be asking for some more coin, given he's finally starting to get noticed in Victoria.

 

[DangerSloane]

You can't get much for $500k in Sydney ...

But if you buy a house you can sell it again later.
The money doenst just disappear...but when you rent, thats exactly what it does.

 

[momentbymoment]

But if you buy a house you can sell it again later.
The money doenst just disappear...but when you rent, thats exactly what it does.

Trust me - this is all anybody has talked about in Sydney for over 20 years.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Its called hard work.
Ive been in the work force for 7 years. Earned various qualifications and have negatively geared housing investments, some on my own, and some with others.
Put it this way, if he buys a house he gets something for his money.
If he rents he has nothing at the end, whether that be in 1 year or 15 years.

......and made 8.5k Bigfooty comments. So much for hard work.

There are costs in buying and costs in selling. And there are interest rates. The net capital growth in the time of ownership needs to at least fund the stamp duty costs, agent costs, and interest rate/rent differential over the period to make purchasing a preferred option. And you need at least 5 years, probably more, to have any comfort that the capital growth will achieve that. How many players are on 5 year contracts?

But maybe I can see how you might have made some dough, you do try on the bullshit. And that can be a lucrative game.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

But if you buy a house you can sell it again later.
The money doenst just disappear...but when you rent, thats exactly what it does.

What do you call interest on a loan?

 

[momentbymoment]

in his girlfriend's smashed up car too!

Yes ...
Who wouldn't want to help the guy out?

 

[Kickin_Goals]

You're making an impassioned case here for the continuing validity of the dictionary in society, which is very admirable, but the bottom line is that if you think a pissy 9.8% made the difference between signing or not signing Tippett and Franklin, you know nothing about the business and I'm surprised you even know how to look up words in the dictionary.

And clearly you can't read the Main Board posting rules.

You can't make a decent argument so you make ad hominem garbage jabs.
All you're about is emotional pleas.
The argument of repetition Sydney fans keep making is just as much as a joke as your pretentious nonsense.
Sadly thinking you are superior doesn't make it the case.

Oh yes having 9.8% more money in players pockets doesn't help you get players, believe me because I'll say your stupid if you don't think so.
What an amazing argument, you have swayed me.

What would those main board rules be? because you are breaking them and that's almost every single one of the guidelines you've broken with your reply.
All I'm breaking in this post here is not reporting you.
Here you go http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...es-includes-mod-list-updated-10-3-14.1051872/
You brought them up, I don't even have to say what that means but many of your posts here don't pass the guidelines, not so much that I care whether you do or not, just that you hypocritically introduced them.

Sydney says the COLA doesn't help retain players yet removing it will give them more trouble retaining players.
Us folk that can't read the dictionary can at least join those dots.
Sydney admin has been childish as of late and it seems like there is a trickle down effect here.

Wow, what an aggressive response to what was quite a simple and factual post. You must be so proud. Travel to Sydney. If you can't be bothered doing that, get on to realestate.com.au and have a browse of the rental costs of homes within an hour's drive of the Swans facility.

Why would anyone look at realestate.com for anything affordable, I'd look through my large network of contacts, properties and facilities as a Sydney football club.
You think I'd go jump on this site for anywhere I go to rent? I would sooner ask someone in another country with a community here.

Again a non-argument requiring someone else to jump on a tangent that shouldn't apply to a well organized club which we all know Sydney Swans are.
What's that you didn't get a fledgling swans rent info? Yet I should jump on a plane to Sydney, interesting.

Not like among all of the swans fans you couldn't spot a struggling first year swans player and ask them about their accommodation I'm sure one of you could of done this in all this time but no, nothing. An interviewer should have the Swans should be able to get such information yet no which is suspicious.
We keep hearing about rent cost but we see no actual evidence they even have had to pay rent.

Not that anyone cares at this point, I am fed up with what Sydney folk frame as an argument and continually peddle.
You all bring nothing new to an argument that's already been lost.

Why can't you lot just recognize your club got an advantage and used it, plenty of clubs have exploited situations and failed to win anything.
Claiming this is why specific things happen just helps people feel better about their club or it's admin.
Whether they have used their extra allowance to bring in certain players we don't know but that they have the extra available which they can exploit is the argument Sydney have already lost.

Adelaide's admin is not something worth defending nor is a bloke that can't get on the field.

 

[DangerSloane]

What do you call interest on a loan?

Yeh, compare that to paying what $700 a week for rent?
I know Id rather pay the interest and own a house...rather than go through my career and then at the end have no assets.

Dont know, maybe you're renting? Going to rent your whole life?

 

[replicant]

Considering a cap of $9m and 40 player lists....quite a few.
The average is $220k.

You seem like a clever guy, so you know how averages work, right?

There are 240 players on 300 000 plus. Knowing the total league player payments is 181.5 million, you can work out the average for lower paid players. I've used estimates from this article:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...alary-now-265179/story-fni5f22o-1226834339957

It turns out the average for the bottom paid 489 listed players is $139 059. That's the average for 489 guys. There would be many, many players on sub $100k salaries.

 

[legend166]

Its called hard work.
Ive been in the work force for 7 years. Earned various qualifications and have negatively geared housing investments, some on my own, and some with others.
Put it this way, if he buys a house he gets something for his money.
If he rents he has nothing at the end, whether that be in 1 year or 15 years.

The old 'dead money' argument?

And you say you're in finance?

Professional footballers are the perfect example of people who should rent.

 

[Swansujelly]

Its called hard work.
Ive been in the work force for 7 years. Earned various qualifications and have negatively geared housing investments, some on my own, and some with others.
Put it this way, if he buys a house he gets something for his money.
If he rents he has nothing at the end, whether that be in 1 year or 15 years.

ah yes, negative gearing, way to push those prices up mate.

 

[QuietB]

Exactly ...
It is an issue of list management.

Geelong feels they are a better team without Ablett.
The Hawks feel they are a better team without Buddy.
The Swans feel that they are a better team with Buddy.

Also - how do you say no to him when he turns up unannounced on your doorstep??

Not sure if serious.

There is no chance anyone from Geelong or Hawthorn feel they are better off without Ablett or Buddy. Reality is neither could compete with the offers being made because of the effect it would have on the rest of their respective lists.

Sydney can afford to take that risk because they have got an extra $1m to play with to attract new players and retain existing players.

Hawthorn and Geelong simply do not have that extra money and therefore do not have that luxury.

 

[QuietB]

The old 'dead money' argument?

And you say you're in finance?

Professional footballers are the perfect example of people who should rent.

Footballers are the perfect examples of people that should be investing in assets - high income earning at a young age, much higher than they need to live. It does not have to be in property but might as well be given the tax incentives (capital gains, negative gearing, etc.)

 

[Indie_]

Considering a cap of $9m and 40 player lists....quite a few.
The average is $220k.

My mistake, I meant less than 100k.

Tim Membrey, Harry Cunningham, Zak Jones, Jeremy Laidler, Toby Nankervis, Jordan Lockyer, Tom Derickx, Dean Towers, Matthew Dick, George Hewett, Harry Marsh, Allir Allir, Jake Lloyd.

That's 1/3 of the players on a list who I'd say are earning either well below half the average of 220k and or just above it.

Which one of these players can afford to buy a house in Sydney?

 

[DangerSloane]

The old 'dead money' argument?

And you say you're in finance?

Professional footballers are the perfect example of people who should rent.

I prefaced it with players earning over 150k.

 

[momentbymoment]

Not sure if serious.

There is no chance anyone from Geelong or Hawthorn feel they are better off without Ablett or Buddy. Reality is neither could compete with the offers being made because of the effect it would have on the rest of their respective lists.

Sydney can afford to take that risk because they have got an extra $1m to play with to attract new players and retain existing players.

Hawthorn and Geelong simply do not have that extra money and therefore do not have that luxury.

Hawthorn bid more for Buddy than Sydney - just for a lesser time period. You could have had him but you chose not to.

Its called list management.
Sydney decided to take the risk. Hawthorn chose not to. Time will tell which club made the right choice.

 

[DangerSloane]

My mistake, I meant less than 100k.

Tim Membrey, Harry Cunningham, Zak Jones, Jeremy Laidler, Toby Nankervis, Jordan Lockyer, Tom Derickx, Dean Towers, Matthew Dick, George Hewett, Harry Marsh, Allir Allir, Jake Lloyd.

That's 1/3 of the players on a list who I'd say are earning either well below half the average of 220k and or just above it.

Which one of these players can afford to buy a house in Sydney?

God dont they teach reading in the eastern states?

I said for players earning over $150k.

Obviously for players earning sub 100k renting in groups may be the only option, as it is for anyone on that income.

Also you guys forget that these players get a lot of things for free. They dont exactly have the same cost of living that regular people do, given that they can often get free meals, transport, clothes etc from either the club or sponsors.

 

[DangerSloane]

You seem like a clever guy, so you know how averages work, right?

There are 240 players on 300 000 plus. Knowing the total league player payments is 181.5 million, you can work out the average for lower paid players. I've used estimates from this article:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...alary-now-265179/story-fni5f22o-1226834339957

It turns out the average for the bottom paid 489 listed players is $139 059. That's the average for 489 guys. There would be many, many players on sub $100k salaries.

I simply used an article I found from a google search.
Yes, there are low payed players. These are the ones that need a CoLA, not clowns earning 150k+

THIS IS EXACTLY MY POINT!

 

[momentbymoment]

Also you guys forget that these players get a lot of things for free. They dont exactly have the same cost of living that regular people do, given that they can often get free meals, transport, clothes etc from either the club or sponsors.

We are not talking about 3rd party payments are we??
We don't do those over here.

 

[Indie_]

God dont they teach reading in the eastern states?

I said for players earning over $150k.

Obviously for players earning sub 100k renting in groups may be the only option, as it is for anyone on that income.

Also you guys forget that these players get a lot of things for free. They dont exactly have the same cost of living that regular people do, given that they can often get free meals, transport, clothes etc from either the club or sponsors.

I prefaced it with players earning over 150k.

Don't see much prefacing here.

Put it this way, rent money gets you nowhere.
Youd be much smarter to buy if you can afford it, which 99% of AFL players can. FULL STOP.

 

[BombaMan]

Not sure if serious.

There is no chance anyone from Geelong or Hawthorn feel they are better off without Ablett or Buddy. Reality is neither could compete with the offers being made because of the effect it would have on the rest of their respective lists.

IMO Hawks fit and firing are just as good without Buddy, They haven't really had a chance to show if they are better though because of injuries but I think once you guys have your best 22 out there you will be better off without Buddy.

 

[momentbymoment]

IMO Hawks fit and firing are just as good without Buddy, They haven't really had a chance to show if they are better though because of injuries but I think once you guys have your best 22 out there you will be better off without Buddy.

Most Hawks agree ..
Win/win

 

[QuietB]

My mistake, I meant less than 100k.

Tim Membrey, Harry Cunningham, Zak Jones, Jeremy Laidler, Toby Nankervis, Jordan Lockyer, Tom Derickx, Dean Towers, Matthew Dick, George Hewett, Harry Marsh, Allir Allir, Jake Lloyd.

That's 1/3 of the players on a list who I'd say are earning either well below half the average of 220k and or just above it.

Which one of these players can afford to buy a house in Sydney?

The number of players Sydney have on low/minimum salary is a key pillar in how they do it, as well as how much they can get out of undervalued players they get from other clubs and the fact they run a smaller list than most. It is a high risk strategy but Sydney do seem to be able to pull it off.

But this strategy also accentuates the fact that Sydney are using the CoLA to attrack and retain top end talent.

We keep hearing from Swans fans that the cost of living is higher etc. fact is a massive percentage of CoLA, maybe over half is going to the Swans top 6-8 paid players.