As silly as the comparisons are a salary cap loses its effectiveness when top end talent earn so much. Top end talent are easily able to set themselves up for life over multiple seasons and can then play for less money than other clubs are willing to pay for the chance of success. The problem is the players are people, not for profit companies, and hence money isn't the only objective when deciding which contract to sign.
It's not really fair to force players to go to the highest bidder but maybe players should be valued independently rather than using a dollar figure. This does however open up another can of worms entirely.
Contracts aren't made public so there is muchos speculation about who is paid how much and how each contract is structured. The biggest failing in the AFL salary cap system is front/back ending contracts. Every club pays 95-100% of the salary cap each year regardless of list quality. Any club can sign any player with creative accounting which goes against how the salary cap is supposed to work.
Free agency has made it slightly easier for players to move clubs but the AFL still has very restricted player movement. Fans also have unrealistic expectations of players. In the NRL or A-League or NBL if players are out of contract and want to join another team they just do. In the AFL people lose their **** because a guy that never chose to go to a particular club in the first place wants to go elsewhere after anywhere from 2-7 seasons.
JeanLucGoddard said based ON a city/town, not based IN a city/town. He is quite right. Hence my example of Juventus, which is based in Turin but not named after a city, town or even any location at all.
I'm 100% certain 17 other clubs are trying to get Cameron's signature. For mine, its lazy journalism when they do this whole "Geelong are in the race for Cameron's signature". You can say that about every club, and even if he doesn't go there doesn't mean you were wrong.
To your point about equalisation, Tom Lynch going to Richmond is more of a Durant move for mine.
Golden State 2016 = Richmond 2018: Both were the best team all year. Richmond had a historic MCG run of consecutive wins, Golden State broke the regular season win record, only for both clubs to fall short on the big stage. Both got taken out in emphatic fashion.
Durant = Lynch: Both moving from a small market seeking a larger market and took what they believed at the time to be the easiest possible path to a Premiership/Championship. A lot of people forget that Lynch had decided to go to Richmond PRIOR to Richmond getting knocked out by the Pies in the Prelim. They could have won a Premiership and he still would have gone there. The same situation with Durant, Golden State were poaching him all year while they were on the greatest regular season run of all time. They thought they were going to win the championship and were still happy to sign Durant.
Equalization is always going to have its issues, I think the draft and academies do a pretty good job. Sydney isn't exactly a flyover city like Oklahoma.
In the most even season in history (arguably) there's a question on the validity of the equalization process. Really? There are few competitions around the world that have equalization that match the AFL. Even given the blunt and open intent to throw endless amounts of money at their own manufactured teams in rl territory in an attempt to force success for them to garner local interest.
One look at the EPL would indicate the equalization measures in the AFL have more integrity, probably more than most.
To align Geelong's early season form with the dominance of GS - well I don't know because I don't follow basketball. However reading some of the posts it seems that the nba team are very dominant or have been in recent times.
When was the last time Geelong were dominant? Certainly not this year or even recently, 08 and 09 perhaps? How do you measure "dominance"?, well I wouldn't say they're "dominant" right now. The form team? Absolutely, but not dominant.
So how does one question the equalization measures when we're in arguably the most even season in history?
Geelong’s winning record after 2011 is approximately 69%. Very good, but hardly a dominant force. It’s actually astonishing that you’d think that you could include a period from a decade ago where they actually did dominate to boost numbers for your argument and not get picked up on it.