Unpopular AFL Opinions

Remove this Banner Ad

PhatBoy

Hall of Famer
May 5, 2016
32,923
35,849
AFL Club
Geelong
This time last year everyone was potting Hardwick because he made the statement that perhaps we should consider a midyear trade period to complement the midyear draft. Twelve months later Dangerfield states the same thing and the media sit up and take notice and say "could be a good idea Patrick".

It does seem a tad unfair that some clubs can have more coaches "on their list" than others. At least with the playing group all clubs are restricted to 38 on their main roster. And longer-serving senior coaches should be eligible for a higher salary based on experience and performance.

But I'll just wait and see what Patrick Dangerfield thinks before I properly establish my opinion.


Imagine the head of the Player’s Association having a voice. It boggles the mind
 

pz5151

Debutant
Aug 15, 2021
148
154
AFL Club
Collingwood
The point of a soft cap is to equalise teams. Either Hardwick is legitimately a better coach than the lesser paid ones and that should offset the difference in assistant coaches OR he's not that much better and he doesn't deserve to be paid twice what other coaches are getting paid.

Having said that, I don't like the soft cap. The big clubs are big because they ran themselves well for the last century. They didn't start off as rich clubs (otherwise it would be clubs from rich socio-economic backgrounds like Melbourne and Hawthorn who would have the biggest supporter bases), but rather became that way through hard work. It's the only way they can build an advantage so I don't see why it should be punished.
 

Falcon3518

Club Legend
Mar 13, 2022
1,444
834
AFL Club
Richmond
It has nothing to do with who he suppprts.

It’s the fact that every thread he posts in has to relate back to Dustin Martin.

Nope I’m comparing Fyfe to every great finals player. Great finals performances separate people like Fyfe, Danger, Nick Riewoldt and Neale from players like Hodge, Dusty, McLeod and Judd.

I guarantee you if Dusty didn’t win any norms everybody above would be considered better than him and that’s a fact. That’s how big a deal it is. The latter players don’t choke in big games and often have their best performances in them. Fyfe has yet to prove he’s capable of this, until he does he is a tier below these players.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Thetrader15

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 16, 2015
23,283
28,944
AFL Club
Adelaide
This time last year everyone was potting Hardwick because he made the statement that perhaps we should consider a midyear trade period to complement the midyear draft. Twelve months later Dangerfield states the same thing and the media sit up and take notice and say "could be a good idea Patrick".

It does seem a tad unfair that some clubs can have more coaches "on their list" than others. At least with the playing group all clubs are restricted to 38 on their main roster. And longer-serving senior coaches should be eligible for a higher salary based on experience and performance.

But I'll just wait and see what Patrick Dangerfield thinks before I properly establish my opinion.
Clubs have the same amount of money to spend, it's up to them how they spend it. Maybe if a club with an experienced coach wants to have more coaches, just pay their senior coach less or go for a less experienced coach.

Good teams can have fewer players on their list as it's not a strict 38, it's 36 - 38. Do you think that longer serving players or successful players should also have some of their salary outside the cap too?

If that's the case, just remove the cap completely and let the rich clubs get more successful and the smaller clubs disappear.
 

Thetrader15

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 16, 2015
23,283
28,944
AFL Club
Adelaide
That's not what he said at all :rolleyes:

It was that the experienced senior coaches are paid more, and rightly so, than the 1st, 2nd and 3rd year coaches yet still have the same bucket to pay the rest of their assistants with what's left over. In any workplace the more knowledge and experience you have the better compensated you usually are (or at least should be), it's just not usually at the cost of pay cuts for your colleagues.

I don't think you can have the whole senior coaches wage outside of the cap but a percentage maybe.
It's the same as the players salaries too.

In any case, if all clubs can remove part of the coach's salary outside of the cap, even the less experienced coaches will do that too and then just employ another coach with that extra money?
 

tiger_tough

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 24, 2008
5,139
13,741
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
It's the same as the players salaries too.

In any case, if all clubs can remove part of the coach's salary outside of the cap, even the less experienced coaches will do that too and then just employ another coach with that extra money?
Yeah but list sizes are all the same (within 1 or 2 players). There is no minimum or maximum coaching staff.

Fair point the second one but you only need so many assistants.
 

GhostofJimJess

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 14, 2002
10,699
9,267
...
AFL Club
Richmond
Imagine the head of the Player’s Association having a voice. It boggles the mind
You've totally missed my point. I have no problem with what Patrick said, or with him using his position to voice his opinion. I like Dangerfield, and have shown my appreciation for his work on and off the field many times on this forum.

My issue was with the hypocrisy of the media who condemn one bloke's suggestion (because potting Hardwick has become a team sport in the last 2-3 years), whilst applauding and entertaining the same idea of another bloke (who seemingly does not represent low hanging fruit) twelve months later, as if it's something novel and unique.
 

adammania9

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 18, 2013
11,702
24,345
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
University
Fyfe would make an outstanding defender. He’d be waaaaay better than he is up forward. But the Dockers back line looks very settled so it’s hard to make room for him
 

PhatBoy

Hall of Famer
May 5, 2016
32,923
35,849
AFL Club
Geelong
You've totally missed my point. I have no problem with what Patrick said, or with him using his position to voice his opinion. I like Dangerfield, and have shown my appreciation for his work on and off the field many times on this forum.

My issue was with the hypocrisy of the media who condemn one bloke's suggestion (because potting Hardwick has become a team sport in the last 2-3 years), whilst applauding and entertaining the same idea of another bloke (who seemingly does not represent low hanging fruit) twelve months later, as if it's something novel and unique.

Well for starters, when the coach of a club says that, the immediate reaction is going to be ‘he’s only saying that for his own club’s benefit.’ That’s not to say he WAS, but that’s the first angle many pundits will go with and they will criticise the person in question.

When someone speaking on behalf of all players at all clubs says it, it has to have come from a place of equality and in the best interests of everyone so it may get received differently
 

Forever North

Club Legend
Apr 24, 2011
1,692
4,240
Greek Islands
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Eventually every round will be a ‘theme round’ where the actual football will take a back seat to whatever flavour of the month social cause the AFL gets into bed with.
 

GhostofJimJess

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 14, 2002
10,699
9,267
...
AFL Club
Richmond
Well for starters, when the coach of a club says that, the immediate reaction is going to be ‘he’s only saying that for his own club’s benefit.’ That’s not to say he WAS, but that’s the first angle many pundits will go with and they will criticise the person in question.

When someone speaking on behalf of all players at all clubs says it, it has to have come from a place of equality and in the best interests of everyone so it may get received differently
Fair enough. It's still the media attacking the man and not the ball. Does that mean nothing a coach ever suggests can be taken seriously?
 

PhatBoy

Hall of Famer
May 5, 2016
32,923
35,849
AFL Club
Geelong
Fair enough. It's still the media attacking the man and not the ball. Does that mean nothing a coach ever suggests can be taken seriously?

Think about who you’re talking to.

Just to give two examples out of dozens, our coach gave a quote where he basically acknowledged that we got belted but also said there were a few things we needed to find out about ourselves so from that perspective it was mission accomplished.

Seasons later and it still gets bandied about as though he was trying to say it was a great triumph.

He was smashed for weeks on end at the start of this season for saying openly that nothing would have changed our prelim result but our campaign was hampered by an illness. Where did that lead exactly?

I’m well versed in coach’s comments being taken out of context or the wrong way altogether that’s for sure
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

estibador

purple haze
Mar 2, 2007
41,617
55,051
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Liverpool, Cowboys, Peel, Packers
Although I think it’s a little unfair on Fyfe because he was 21 at the time from memory, he missed some very regulation shots which ultimately cost them, his goal kicking hasn’t improved from then either.

The two shots he missed were from 50 metres in howling wind and rain. People act like he went to water and missed half a dozen gimmies from 20m out straight in front.
 

estibador

purple haze
Mar 2, 2007
41,617
55,051
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Liverpool, Cowboys, Peel, Packers
Having said that, I don't like the soft cap. The big clubs are big because they ran themselves well for the last century. They didn't start off as rich clubs (otherwise it would be clubs from rich socio-economic backgrounds like Melbourne and Hawthorn who would have the biggest supporter bases), but rather became that way through hard work. It's the only way they can build an advantage so I don't see why it should be punished.

Sure, as long as we spread the prime time slots and blockbuster occasion games around the league evenly so everyone gets an equal chance to maximise the size of their club.

If the big clubs are truly the big clubs they should have nothing to fear from playing the late Sunday timeslot most weeks.
 

pz5151

Debutant
Aug 15, 2021
148
154
AFL Club
Collingwood
Sure, as long as we spread the prime time slots and blockbuster occasion games around the league evenly so everyone gets an equal chance to maximise the size of their club.

If the big clubs are truly the big clubs they should have nothing to fear from playing the late Sunday timeslot most weeks.

I have no issue with that either. The blockbusters are only blockbusters though because of who plays in them. There's a reason the Dogs and North only draw 30k something on their public holiday but Collingwood and Essendon regularly get close to 90k on ANZAC Day.

Everyone should play everyone twice (or once if that's not possible) and put the teams who are higher on the ladder in prime time positions.

It's not Collingwood and Richmond who are asking for these fixtures. The reason that those clubs play more away games in Victoria is because every small Victorian club puts in fixture requests to play a home game against them at the MCG to get extra gate revenue. Collingwood has for decades been especially good travelling so they're not concerned about playing interstate.
 

GhostofJimJess

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 14, 2002
10,699
9,267
...
AFL Club
Richmond
Think about who you’re talking to.

Just to give two examples out of dozens, our coach gave a quote where he basically acknowledged that we got belted but also said there were a few things we needed to find out about ourselves so from that perspective it was mission accomplished.

Seasons later and it still gets bandied about as though he was trying to say it was a great triumph.

He was smashed for weeks on end at the start of this season for saying openly that nothing would have changed our prelim result but our campaign was hampered by an illness. Where did that lead exactly?

I’m well versed in coach’s comments being taken out of context or the wrong way altogether that’s for sure
Yeah, no doubt that Chris Scott had his dramas with the media and AFL over the years. That did, however, decline somewhat when he suddenly had a direct conduit into AFL House in 2017.
 

The Passenger

Hasa Diga Eebowai
Mar 25, 2003
34,133
24,929
127.0.0.1
AFL Club
West Coast
Having said that, I don't like the soft cap. The big clubs are big because they ran themselves well for the last century. They didn't start off as rich clubs (otherwise it would be clubs from rich socio-economic backgrounds like Melbourne and Hawthorn who would have the biggest supporter bases), but rather became that way through hard work. It's the only way they can build an advantage so I don't see why it should be punished.
I had no problems with a soft/luxury tax but the starting point of 75% was ridiculously over the top. I can't find it now but I saw a table of calculations which was way to complicated.

MLB - 20% 1st year over, 30% 2nd year over, 50% 3rd+ year over. Simples.
 

PhatBoy

Hall of Famer
May 5, 2016
32,923
35,849
AFL Club
Geelong
so then why you sooking about richmond


I’m not - what is it about mustard seed sized intellects in this board? - I have an issue with the clown I was responding to trying to somehow name drop one particular player into every discussion he ever enters
 

Falcon3518

Club Legend
Mar 13, 2022
1,444
834
AFL Club
Richmond
I’m not - what is it about mustard seed sized intellects in this board? - I have an issue with the clown I was responding to trying to somehow name drop one particular player into every discussion he ever enters

Jesus Dusty is living in your head rent free, I was talking about finals in general and you straight away thought it was specifically about him, sad.
 

FreddyTwoShoes

Senior List
May 1, 2012
254
390
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
1654646240691.png


Lol

  • accused of relating everything back to Dusty
  • responds by..... relating back to Dusty
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad