Unpopular AFL Opinions
- Thread starter Carbine Chaos
- Start date
- Tagged users None
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.
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
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 13, 2022
- 5,350
- 3,235
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #1,353
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.
Yeah, you need to read up on history.
- Oct 16, 2015
- 24,279
- 30,558
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
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.
- Oct 16, 2015
- 24,279
- 30,558
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
It's the same as the players salaries too.That's not what he said at all
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
- Mar 2, 2007
- 43,125
- 61,311
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Cowboys, Packers, Scorchers
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.
- Mar 2, 2007
- 43,125
- 61,311
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Cowboys, Packers, Scorchers
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.
- Mar 24, 2012
- 1,366
- 3,770
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Eye ball test is still way better than stats
PhatBoy v Falcon3518 , one for the ages.
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.
- Banned
- #1,370
so then why you sooking about richmond
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,334
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.
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
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 13, 2022
- 5,350
- 3,235
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #1,373
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.
Lol
- accused of relating everything back to Dusty
- responds by..... relating back to Dusty
Falcon3518
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 13, 2022
- 5,350
- 3,235
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #1,375
Lol you didn’t even go back to the right post
I only referenced Dusty after PB responded. I wasn’t even talking to him in the first place. Cats supporters are unreal.
