COLA not quite dead and buried for Swans...

[dazbroncos]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-16/swans-contracts-on-hold

COLA deal not yet finalised and now holding up contracts?

So the Swans might only get 1/2 a handout instead of the full deal. And how would the AFL monitor exactly how much goes to the lower half of players on the roster with relation to their contracts and payment…

Sounds like a cluster @$!$.

Should just be gone for mine..

GO Catters

 

[vide0n]

My understanding was the COLA is gone and as of 2015 Sydney is to pay the same to its players as other established clubs, open and shut case.

Not sure where confusion enters into this.

 

[treefingers]

My understanding was the COLA is gone and as of 2015 Sydney is to pay the same to its players as other established clubs, open and shut case.

Not sure where confusion enters into this.

Apparently not according to this.


"Despite initial suggestions that the Swans' COLA might be scrapped altogether from 2015, AFL.com.au understands it will be cut back so that only players on the bottom half of the Swans' wages scale will receive an extra allowance for living expenses.

It is believed the AFL will announce its revamped COLA rules and wider equalisation policy ahead of the Australian Hall of Fame function on June 4, the night before outgoing CEO Andrew Demetriou's final day at the League.

Moore said the Swans believed that the existing allowance should be retained, but fully expected it to be scaled back.

"It's 9.8 per cent at the moment, so if it's cut to 5 per cent, we will have 4.8 per cent less to work with, which is going to impact on the players," Moore said."

 

[The Falcon Strike]

My understanding is the AFL were to pay the COLA direct - rather than from the club.

So the way it works is Sydney's salary cap is the same as everyone else. However should a player receive say $150k per year - the AFL will supplement that direct with a further $7.5k.

However the likes of Buddy and Tippett get diddly squat.

 

[Ultimatt]

Hopefully they use some common sense here. They should keep it for rookies and players earning under $150k/yr but I don't mind them abolishing it for any of the higher paid players.

 

[Dazb86]

My understanding is the AFL were to pay the COLA direct - rather than from the club.

So the way it works is Sydney's salary cap is the same as everyone else. However should a player receive say $150k per year - the AFL will supplement that direct with a further $7.5k.

However the likes of Buddy and Tippett get diddly squat.

That makes a lot more sense. Even still I don't care where in Australia you live... $150k per year you are not on struggle street.

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

Apparently not according to this.

Cue Bigfooty meltdown.

 

[LosBeatles]

That makes a lot more sense. Even still I don't care where in Australia you live... $150k per year you are not on struggle street.

$150k plus all the free stuff, discounts and perks. An AFL player earning $150k is the equivalent of a regular person earning $300k

 

[master bate]

I think the issue is GWS.

If you cut off the swans the pressure turns to GWS' COLA/Equalisation and naturally the league want them to have every possible dollar.

Extra money for rookies/draftees/those under 200k does make sense in some regards but where do you draw the line indexing it between cities? Sydney might be the most expensive but Perth and Melbourne are expensive as well. The smarter move might be to increase rookie and draft salaries across the board to a 70k minimum and then it's not like anyone is going broke.

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

I could live with a cut in the COLA to 5% and then means tested so only players earning under a certain amount are eligible to receive it. But having said that, a player earning $100,000 a year plus is more than capable of supporting themselves without COLA, as does many hard working people who live in Sydney.

 

[base615]

That makes a lot more sense. Even still I don't care where in Australia you live... $150k per year you are not on struggle street.

True for most careers but you've got to take into account that these guys only play for a few years and very few of them would reach the Tippett / Buddy type salaries. They then need to find another job with no further education and minimal skills which would transfer to the real world.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

That makes a lot more sense. Even still I don't care where in Australia you live... $150k per year you are not on struggle street.

It isn't about being on struggle street - it is about a bloke who is on less than average AFL wages in Sydney having the same spending power as someone in Melbourne.

I think the easiest way was to give every member on the senior list say an addition $8k flat and every rookie and additional $12k flat.

That still works out to say an additional $400-$450k - however every player is helped with the cost of living - ie buying bread, rent etc.

As it stood every player got an additional 9.8% which meant those on the biggest wage got the biggest share - meaning the lower paid players got less of the pie.

I'm a fan of cost of living adjustment - however it should be set to say Melbourne and any state more expensive gets a relative payment appropriate set by the AFL each year

 

[Ironmonger]

I think the easiest way was to give every member on the senior list say an addition $8k flat and every rookie and additional $12k flat.

Yeah, if a solution has to be found for cost of living expenses, that's the way to do it.

The original arrangement was just flat out ridiculous, but even the proposed arrangement is a bit wacky - effectively the Swans get a greater allowance for the cost of living of someone on $150,000 than a draftee on $70,000.

Just give players a small cost of living stipend and be done with it. It's still effectively extra cap money but at least it doesn't give the Swans the flexibility to use the extra percentage to poach players from other clubs.

 

[Tippett2Goal]

It isn't about being on struggle street - it is about a bloke who is on less than average AFL wages in Sydney having the same spending power as someone in Melbourne.

I think the easiest way was to give every member on the senior list say an addition $8k flat and every rookie and additional $12k flat.

Pretty much the most logical approach

 

[Rioli magic]

Just get rid of the rort and be done with it.

 

[Arwib]

So the Swans might only get 1/2 a handout instead of the full deal. And how would the AFL monitor exactly how much goes to the lower half of players on the roster with relation to their contracts and payment…

Uh, with basic mathemetics?

 

[RUNVS]

Someone else said it a few weeks ago but I think every club that has a player who is from a different state should be allowed to have an extra $30,000 in the cap. This would be applied to every club in the AFL and would be called something like an out of town concession.

 

[MadMac]

True for most careers but you've got to take into account that these guys only play for a few years and very few of them would reach the Tippett / Buddy type salaries. They then need to find another job with no further education and minimal skills which would transfer to the real world.

That's the career path they choose. Tom Swift quit footy to become a doctor and he obviously thinks he'll be better off long term. Besides, most footy clubs encourage players to continue their education in preparation for life after footy. I know Freo certainly does and most players on our list already have uni degrees or other qualifications, not to mention investments they made during their careers. Those that are on a struggle street after their careers are rare and largely due to their own stupidity and mismanagement

 

[Tas]

This is a nightmare waiting to happen once a player takes the AFL to court because they do not get a COLA when they are forced to move outside of their home state to somewhere which has a higher cost of living.

 

[Superstar swan]

I think the minimum afl salty should be increased to say 70k plus match payments. But the afl then takes say 20k out of the salary and puts aside in a trust for said player. That way if they are crap and get delisted after 2 years, they will have 40k owed to them , which they can spend on training/ education , mortgages etc.

 

[Davo23]

Just get rid of the rort and be done with it.

Did anyone think that COLA was actually dead?
Or that COLA is only for the lower part of the list?

With the ambassadorial payments and COLA, Sydney will continue to be strong for many years to come, and will be able to recruit top end players as they want.

 

[vonn]

True for most careers but you've got to take into account that these guys only play for a few years and very few of them would reach the Tippett / Buddy type salaries. They then need to find another job with no further education and minimal skills which would transfer to the real world.

Doesn't work like that, industries shouldn't overcompensate your salary because you aren't skilled enough to find work elsewhere. Plenty of players study part time and come out with ample opportunities post-football.

Ted Richards for example has completed a commerce degree, think post grad too, ditto Mike Pyke, and via Citibank sponsorship they have good full time careers waiting.

Think Leo Barry went to a major Sydney sponsor too - QBE - so I don't really follow your train of thought.

 

[CrowAboutIt]

Came into the thread to see if the OP signed off with "Go Catters".

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Doesn't work like that, industries shouldn't overcompensate your salary because you aren't skilled enough to find work elsewhere. Plenty of players study part time and come out with ample opportunities post-football.

Ted Richards for example has completed a commerce degree, think post grad too, ditto Mike Pyke, and via Citibank sponsorship they have good full time careers waiting.

Think Leo Barry went to a major Sydney sponsor too - QBE - so I don't really follow your train of thought.

While factual, your post vonn probably doesn't help the Swans' attempt to win the public argument that COLA is needed to help their younger players live in Sydney given that they could spend their time away from the club studying or gaining practical experience.

But the real question should be whether the AFL is adjusting for the debt tax, um, levy that footballers earning $180,000+ a season will have to pay from 1 July.

 

[Danny Cullen]

What AFL location has the cheapest cost of living? Adelaide??

Whatever it is that place starts at a zero base and all other clubs get a COLA based on the percentage increase in cost. I mean all, Melbourne clubs included.

That will sort this s**t out.