I have a hypothetical for you:
Say you're a decent Victorian player with a young family looking to get into the housing market.
Sydney come to you and offer you $400k/yr to move away from home for 3 seasons plus the standard $40k COLA.
Geelong also approach you and offer you $410k/yr for 3 seasons.
The median house price in Geelong is $450k. The price of the same sized house in a similar proximity in Sydney is $1.1 million. Assuming an interest rate of 5%, on which offer will you be financially better off at the end of your contract?
Don't worry, Im not expecting an answer anytime soon.
So since the housing price isn't identical in Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, Geelong and Adelaide why is it that only the Sydney teams got a different salary cap?
And if you're on a footballers wage buying a house in Sydney is a financial advantage compared to Geelong because the value of houses in Sydney is increasing faster and you don't have to pay capital gains tax on the family home