Opinion Matthew Nicks: Adelaide's Coach

[Sanders]

Amazing to think he thought that was a post criticising his wife.

Isn’t it just?

Just weird

 

[Sanders]

The issue isn’t as straight forward as “McAdam’s a best 22 IF fit therefore we must extend him”. I see it more like “we have an overflow of forward talent so we need someone with trade currency to fill out our weak links” (eg. ruck/midfield). As a follow-on effect, Cook and Gollant would get more opportunities, both I would like to see more of at AFL level.

Then there’s past injuries and the age factor, in which “IF fit” becomes a bigger question mark more than the youngsters. So the length of contract extension becomes a bigger risk the more years you negotiate.

Speaking of weird

We were/are trying to retain him. What part of this simple fact do you find most confusing?

 

[Sanders]

Not arguing he’s best 22 currently IF fit.

Asinine. What player is getting selected if they’re not fit?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Good News .....will result in another head being added to footy depts (min)

 

[1970crow]

Good News .....will result in another head being added to footy depts (min)

View attachment 1843904

have to wonder why they've decided 1/5th of senior coach salary should be excluded. Seems a bit random.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

have to wonder why they've decided 1/5th of senior coach salary should be excluded. Seems a bit random.

You know the AFL is never straight forward .....it's a controlling mechanism, I can't see the reason for it though

 

[George Kramer]

have to wonder why they've decided 1/5th of senior coach salary should be excluded. Seems a bit random.

So the clubs who pay their senior coaches a bucketload can do so outside the cap. Helps handout clubs like North and Gold Coast.

 

[GreyCrow]

So the clubs who pay their senior coaches a bucketload can do so outside the cap. Helps handout clubs like North and Gold Coast.

I can't remember who is coaching them. Hmm nah couldn't be the reason

 

[Scorpus]

Good News .....will result in another head being added to footy depts (min)

View attachment 1843904

Interesting that it's a percentage not a fixed amount

An easy soft cap cheat would be to pay the head coach the entire soft cap and have him personally employ everyone else. The soft cap is $7.3 million, pay him $9 million with 20% ($1.8 million) outside the cap, that's an additional $1.8 million on staff

 

[PeterSalt]

have to wonder why they've decided 1/5th of senior coach salary should be excluded. Seems a bit random.

Clarkson at North, and to a lesser degree Viney were taking up a massive amount of the soft cap. Clarkson even took a bit of haircut because they couldn't bring in the people he wanted

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Good News .....will result in another head being added to footy depts (min)

View attachment 1843904

Not sure it's great news for us though.

This most benefits the clubs paying the most for their senior coach.

Another leg up for North & Gold Coast.

Nicks wouldn't be anywhere near the top of the list.

However, now no decent excuse to bring in a decent assistant replacement.

 

[GreyCrow]

Clarkson at North, and to a lesser degree Viney were taking up a massive amount of the soft cap. Clarkson even took a bit of haircut because they couldn't bring in the people he wanted

So the AFL have to pay for the haircut? Find assistants you can afford

 

[El Doederino]

So the AFL have to pay for the haircut? Find assistants you can afford

Nicks won’t have to worry about that

 

[PeterSalt]

So the AFL have to pay for the haircut? Find assistants you can afford

I agree, it's absurd.

I think you'd find the soft cap at GC is under similar pressure.

The reality is that North goes ahead and signs Clarkson on a massive deal. 12 months later they realise there is not enough money left in the kitty to employ the staff they need to help develop such a young list

Viney as the football boss was also reported to be on big money. It was alluded too early on that Ratten, though he was initially only employed (part time) 3 days per week, was forced out because they couldn't afford to offer him more.

Though in regard to Ratten it's since come out he was looking for a slight change in career direction. Though both could be true.

Then you look at someone like Craig McRae who chose to take on a smaller contract in order to be able to afford the assistants he wanted.

 

[Soggy2112]

Clarkson at North, and to a lesser degree Viney were taking up a massive amount of the soft cap. Clarkson even took a bit of haircut because they couldn't bring in the people he wanted

So frustrating.

At the time I said that North were making the wrong call putting all their eggs in the Clarko basket because they wouldn’t be able to afford to put the right people around him.

Then a couple years later here comes a rule change that directly benefits them. It gives Gold Coast a leg up as well.

Yet again clubs are being rewarded for poor management.

Our rebuild is going to get ****ed over because we tried to not be so s**t.

 

[El Doederino]

I thought one of the biggest issues was that after COVID, head coaches salaries returned to usual levels but assistants were getting screwed over?

Now the head coach gets an extra 20%?

 

[Soggy2112]

I thought one of the biggest issues was that after COVID, head coaches salaries returned to usual levels but assistants were getting screwed over?

Now the head coach gets an extra 20%?

Have a think about who the two highest paid coaches would be, then which clubs they belong to, and the AFL’s motive becomes very clear.

 

[PeterSalt]

I thought one of the biggest issues was that after COVID, head coaches salaries returned to usual levels but assistants were getting screwed over?

Now the head coach gets an extra 20%?

No .. he gets 20% of his salary paid outside of the soft cap

Depending on how you look at it, on the surface it appears clubs with the highest paid senior coaches get the greatest benefit

In a simple way of looking at it, a club with a coach on $1M per year gets $200K of his salary paid outside the cap. As opposed to a club with a coach on $500K getting $100K paid outside the cap.

In essense, some clubs could employ additional staff. Some may choose to give pay rises to staff already employed

 

[George Kramer]

No .. he gets 20% of his salary paid outside of the soft cap

Depending on how you look at it, on the surface it appears clubs with the highest paid senior coaches get the greatest benefit

In a simple way of looking at it, a club with a coach on $1M per year gets $200K of his salary paid outside the cap. As opposed to a club with a coach on $500K getting $100K paid outside the cap.

In essense, some clubs could employ additional staff. Some may choose to give pay rises to staff already employed

It’s a friggin joke

 

[PeterSalt]

It’s a friggin joke

Just another manipulation

 

[cm_perfect]

It’s a friggin joke

Why wouldn’t the AFL just increase the soft cap so all clubs benefit equally.

Apologies, that was a stupid question!

 

[El Doederino]

No .. he gets 20% of his salary paid outside of the soft cap

Depending on how you look at it, on the surface it appears clubs with the highest paid senior coaches get the greatest benefit

In a simple way of looking at it, a club with a coach on $1M per year gets $200K of his salary paid outside the cap. As opposed to a club with a coach on $500K getting $100K paid outside the cap.

In essense, some clubs could employ additional staff. Some may choose to give pay rises to staff already employed

Nah. Head coaches and their managers will be increasing their asking price

Trickle down economics doesn’t work

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

It’s a friggin joke

Surely they should just have increased the total soft cap for coaches so it is fair to all clubs.

 

[George Kramer]

Surely they should just have increased the total soft cap for coaches so it is fair to all clubs.

This is when the other clubs like ours need to be publicly vocal and call it out for what it is, a rort to help some clubs

 

[1970crow]

Why wouldn’t the AFL just increase the soft cap so all clubs benefit equally.

Apologies, that was a stupid question!

I don't really mind it. The league is less for having multi-year basket cases. My preferred solution is soft cap relief for extra identified roles, ie development, culture. Throwing extra draft picks at clubs full of and bleeding high picks is stupidity. But doing it the way they've done it is typical AFL. Solve a problem, create another.