fyi,
Revealed: AFL players rake in record salaries
Twelve AFL players were paid seven-figure salaries last year - a new competition record - as wages across the league grew to greater levels than ever before.
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 9
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 8 Winner: bearweger
Living away from Home allowance
- Thread starter The Hobo
- Start date
- Tagged users None
fyi,
- Thread starter
- #27
Of course not - but it helps. It's not always a binary decision, some players are on the fence and may lean one way or another. An extra 10-15% carrot may sway them enough.
Like I said, doesn't solve them all, but I feel it would see a reduction in the 'go home' factor.
- Thread starter
- #28
Yup - which is why this solution makes it harder to abuse. It's linked to the player directly.
Yes, you could underpay him and use the 10-15% to "top up", but then he's likely to leave. You wouldn't get much benefit from it either overall, given it's only for interstate draftees in their first 5 years and not your entire playing list.
- Thread starter
- #29
How is offering an incentive penalising them?
- Mar 16, 2022
- 5,163
- 7,499
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
This isn’t a big deal.
People living closer to their families is more important than a game.
People living closer to their families is more important than a game.
L_W_P
@peteplatinum on Instagram
Doesn't this just open the door for COLA again though?
The Swans would argue that, given the insane real estate costs in Sydney, keeping their non NSW players is a bigger burden than what the Crows or Power face.
Ultimately though, money isn't the lure for most players.
It's success. Or at least playing for a big club with big crowds.
The Saints, Roos and Dogs might have to load up an extra 10-20% to get a player across the line but (in VIC anyway) it's the intangibles that most players are attracted to. There's a reason the Tigers got BOTH Taranto and Hopper. Tom Lynch and Steve May didn't pick their clubs because of money. Ben King isn't being linked to the Pies because they are offering him more cash than the Suns and Saints.
The Swans would argue that, given the insane real estate costs in Sydney, keeping their non NSW players is a bigger burden than what the Crows or Power face.
Ultimately though, money isn't the lure for most players.
It's success. Or at least playing for a big club with big crowds.
The Saints, Roos and Dogs might have to load up an extra 10-20% to get a player across the line but (in VIC anyway) it's the intangibles that most players are attracted to. There's a reason the Tigers got BOTH Taranto and Hopper. Tom Lynch and Steve May didn't pick their clubs because of money. Ben King isn't being linked to the Pies because they are offering him more cash than the Suns and Saints.
- Sep 10, 2006
- 19,829
- 19,752
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Liverpool FC
I agree but even for the ones who still go home, at least they can be more easily replaced by another interstate player with an extra 10% carrot.
Was one of the stranger moves I had ever seen.
I think 90% of us were sure he was going to GWS and then from out of the blue, Sydney it was.
Not for everyone .... absence makes the heart grow stronger.
& he chose not to go home.
- Thread starter
- #40
It's not the be all and end all, but it helps. Money plays a factor in bringing players home. Judd saw a significant bump to his $$ when he went home. Jordan Dawson, JHF etc. - all had a significant monetary bump on top of going home.
Yes, that may have been to match the original clubs offer, but it shows that it really does matter.
- Thread starter
- #41
How does this differ?
The Eagles were not given an opportunity to match, aka the AFL wanted the Blues to be successful & both were addressed by the deal struck.
Engimal v3
**** m**nl*nd*rs
Agreed. Maybe like a X% bonus paid by the AFL if a draftee stays at their club for 5 years.
L_W_P
@peteplatinum on Instagram
Judd was a different kettle of fish altogether. No doubt the Dees, Hawks & Saints could have paid him but almost all the talk was Collingwood and Carlton because they would not only pay him, but set up his profile so that he could be just as successful off the field.
Dawson & JHF (and any non Vic kid) are going home to two team towns. Makes it much easier to negotiate because you only have to beat one opponent.
Any half decent player is going to take a pay cut for success.
Imagine if Harley Reid is picked by the Eagles and wants to "come home" in 2 years.
Could the Saints, Dogs & Roos really offer him that much more money than the other VIC clubs?
If these clubs aren't in a spot to contend then would he really wanna toil away there for an extra 200-300k on top of something close to a million anyway?
He'd probably be compared to Judd actually.
"You don't want to have to carry a s**t team like Juddy. Far better being paid a little less and playing for a great team."
L_W_P
@peteplatinum on Instagram
Call it a "retirement bonus"
For every year you play for a club you accrue a figure and then it grows exponentially the longer you stay.
If you move clubs then it starts again.
It wouldn't be a life changing figure but enough that loyal servants are rewarded for their time.
- Apr 5, 2016
- 7,421
- 16,690
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Boston Celtics
This will never happen because the AFL clearly enjoys player movement, but this is what I'd do if it were a problem they were actively asking me to address (also it's a bit long soz):
Players get a % of their overall contract paid to them in their next contract. So the player receives a % increase in the second year (and every year beyond) of their contract, year 1 you receive what ever the base is, year 2 you receive the base + one years worth of increase etc. This % is attached to you and is goes up at the end of each season and is added to your next contract.
I did look at how the players would benefit if the % increase was added on at the end of each year and paid in the following year deal, regardless of their contract length. I am not sure which way I prefer and what impact this would have on contract negotiations (I assume we'd see a lot of 2 year contracts), but ultimately in the scenario below, it resulted in JHF being paid $136,000 more over the duration of the 7 years.
There would be rules behind it.
- Players are only able to gain this percentage from a team that drafts them. Meaning if they are traded, or leave via free agency they are not allowed to gain this loyalty bonus from their new club. It does mean that a player is eligible to accumulate the increases should they be picked up as a delisted free agent, or is drafted as part of the mid-season draft. The % isn't continuous though, so an example here, Oskar Baker was a delisted free agent after completing 4 years at the Dees. He doesn't start at 20% at the Dogs, it would reset and he would be entitled to 5% at the completion of his first season.
- The % is outside of the salary cap but is monitored by the AFL. The reason it must be outside the salary cap is, in theory, so players receive their value and clubs aren't underpaying because their contracts would be propped up by the percentage increase.
- Player contracts must be a minimum of 2 years.
| Contract Year | North Melbourne | Port Adelaide |
1 | $ 105,000 | N/A |
2 | $ 120,000 | $ 120,000 |
(New contract) 3 | $ 715,000 (Ports contract + 10%) | $ 650,000 |
4 | $ 715,000 (Ports contract + 10%) | $ 650,000 |
(New contract) 5 | $ 780,000 (Ports contract + 20%) | $ 650,000 |
6 | $ 780,000 (Ports contract + 20%) | $ 650,000 |
7 | $ 780,000 (Ports contract + 20%) | $ 650,000 |
| Total: | $ 3,890,000 | $ 3,370,000 |
Same happened with Lockett he was almost picked in the Richmond team then ends up at Swans, the AFL gets what it wants unfortunately, its been a long tiime since this was a balanced or fair comp.
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
I agree with COLA and incentivising but I don't like punishing
"The proposal here is that if you draft a player out of their home state, the AFL would kick in an extra 10-15% (or whatever that number may be) for the first 5 years of that players contract (or extensions up to 5 years). If they end up being traded back home at any point in the first 5 years, they forfeit that benefit."
Pay people extra whilst they are there but don't penalise or be vindictive
Big Papa Ted
Team Captain
- May 26, 2018
- 583
- 796
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Banned
- #50
This 1000%
