The "Oakley Rule" and the future of the game

[djpaulydemon]

Actually surprisingly well explained, and so very very depressing at the same time.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I always assumed you'd just front load contracts to get to the minimum.

Leaves more on later years for those out of contract and attracting others.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I'd be surprised if Vince, Tyson, Byrnes etc. weren't on a fair bit more than they'd get elsewhere. The only reasons you would sign for Melbourne now are opportunity and money.

Agree that it's ridiculous that $9.13m is spent on Hawthorn's list and $8.67m is spent on Melbourne's, but if you remove/lower the salary cap floor you run the risk of the lower clubs getting stuck in the cycle that Melbourne seem to already be in.

Isn't a lot of the salary cap met by the AFL? So if you have a team of complete spuds, pay spud rates then grab all the free agents on front loaded contracts. Rinse and repeat and you can have a decent side... But you can't do this if the spuds have to be paid 95% (leave little war chest for FA)

 

[Kwality]

Isn't a lot of the salary cap met by the AFL? So if you have a team of complete spuds, pay spud rates then grab all the free agents on front loaded contracts. Rinse and repeat and you can have a decent side... But you can't do this if the spuds have to be paid 95% (leave little war chest for FA)

The AFLPA drive the minimum payable not the AFL, not Ross Oakley.

 

[Crankyhawk]

What is the penalty for not meeting the minimum?

Good question. As any club in this situation would already be struggling I'd doubt there would be draft penalties. Maybe a fine which is then returned via afl special dividend