Salary Cap Article On NAFC Official Website

[Ronnie]

I wouldn't call it an admission of guilt. More than anything it seems to be an arguement for raising the salary cap.
A well written article and some interesting points made, no doubt valid.
But to me it misses the whole point, and which is why the salary cap got into the paper in the first place.
The reason it's news is that the salary cap is being rorted and the league has to police it.
That's what the current problem is all about, and the article presumably was written to dispel the rumours about North.
Whether it has done that or not is up to the reader to determine.

[sus]

Call me a cynic. But I reckon this is all just propaganda and pure rhetoric - mirrors and smokescreens to mask reality.

[doggies4eva]

Call me a cynic. But I reckon this is all just propaganda and pure rhetoric - mirrors and smokescreens to mask reality.

I agree. If there are well under the cap why would they want it raised?

And the comments about players coming to clubs for reasons other than money (paid directly from the club(my addition)) seems to be an admission that they get set up with cushy jobs through other avenues - ie flout the cap.

[Wedgie]

They couldn't really win either way.
If they didn't say anything the paranoid would proclaim they're remaining silent as they're guilty.
If they refute the claims the paranoid would proclaim its to mask the guilt.

One thing we can all agree on is North are certainly getting their fair share of talks around all types of media, now we just need the other 8 clubs to help promote the SANFL!

[topsywaldron]

The subtext of a lot of the arguments from North and some of their supporters about the salary cap is somewhat disingenuous. To imply that North recruit only for the betterment of the competition, "without an adequate amount of profile players " their exact words, are weasel words at best and a deliberate attempt to deflect attention at worst. So anyone that questions their motives or ability to stay under the cap is not only attacking North but the whole SANFL as well.

North should remember that no football club is an island and that without other clubs to play against they wouldn't have a competition. Sure we can lift the salary cap as North obviously want and but that will inevitably end with a number of clubs folding. So when people question North, Centrals or South and their wages bill they are not attacking the integrity of the SANFL they are defending it.

[blueandwhite]

I wouldnt think the salary cap issue would even rate a mention at the NAFC. After all the sanfl's "elliot ness" on this issue is a well known and VERY RESPECTED figure at Prospect.

[Punk Rooster]

In all seriousness, why hasn't the cap been adjusted for inflationary purposes? I know if I was on the same money for 5-10 yrs straight, I wouldn't be happy with that. All clubs have to use the rules to their benefit. Pay all your players within the cap, make sure they all have good full time jobs at the award rate, it's within the rules. My sales budget at work went up 20K (well over inflation, @ 4.165%), & will go up next year, by a similar figure. Imo, the cap should increase by 10K annually- not much to spread around 20-30 footballers, is it.

[JK]

I think the whole article was a very interesting read, and there were some very good points raised with regard to the status we attempt to claim for our competition, and the type of players (and subsequent salaries) it will require to reach those levels!

I guess the only thing it didn't cover is a sustainability factor ... Sure clubs like North and Central can afford it, and currently Norwood and Sturt couldn't, but other clubs will need to keep an eye on this also as costs will continue to increase markedly as a result of increased player payments in the AFL and the competitive recruiting nature of the league ... How healthy for the competition would it be to have 3 teams competing every season and 5 others showing up as fodder, would have to have a negative affect on crowds and should this happen then the SANFL pretty much becomes purely a breeding ground, meaning AFL 1 - SANFL 0

[doggies4eva]

They couldn't really win either way.
If they didn't say anything the paranoid would proclaim they're remaining silent as they're guilty.
If they refute the claims the paranoid would proclaim its to mask the guilt.

One thing we can all agree on is North are certainly getting their fair share of talks around all types of media, now we just need the other 8 clubs to help promote the SANFL!

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me .

[doggies4eva]

How healthy for the competition would it be to have 3 teams competing every season and 5 others showing up as fodder, would have to have a negative affect on crowds and should this happen then the SANFL pretty much becomes purely a breeding ground, meaning AFL 1 - SANFL 0

Isn't that the current situation?

[sus]

A bit a side issue but the article says...

A typical SANFL player is now committed to up to five training sessions per week whilst still maintaining his employment and /or studies. Typical match payments are from $50.00 per Reserves Match and $200 per Senior game, certainly not an extravagant recompense for the level of commitment.

Crap they are luxury conditions. Football clubs and footballers at this level can be so insular and up themselves sometimes. Comparatively speaking, for their committment to their chosen sport they are extremely well compensated and magnificently looked after. For example consider some of the athletes in other sports who compete nationally or internationally who have to pay out of their own pockets for the privilege (and they work/study). They have no infra-structure, little access to medical and other support services unless they pay for it (nowhere near the SANFL anyway), etc, etc. For example there are thousands of athletes all over Australia who train twice as hard and twice as long as SANFL footballers who compete internationally at a junior or senior level and they get paid didly-sh!t - in fact it costs them. How often do you think top tri-athletes or track and field athletes or swimmers train for? Its 10+ times a week (b4 work in the morning and after work at night) and they're lucky if the govt gives them a few thousand dollars for travel OS or the like.

Wake up!!!!![/quote]

[redandblack]

Key word - "from" $200.

topsy had it spot on, disingenuous.

[Ronnie]

well, the salary cap is here to stay, highly unlikely to be scrapped
A case of at what level it should be set and a few other issues, one of which is compliance.
i'm a bit concerned by a couple of things i have heard, i just wonder if the SANFL is really geared up to ensure compliance is happening.
The ill feeling between clubs that this is generating is quite strong, replacing the normal competitive but respectul relationships.
No good for anyone really, the only way forward is to clear the air with thorough investigations.
But as I said, my mail is this is not really happening.

[doggies4eva]

well, the salary cap is here to stay, highly unlikely to be scrapped
A case of at what level it should be set and a few other issues, one of which is compliance.
i'm a bit concerned by a couple of things i have heard, i just wonder if the SANFL is really geared up to ensure compliance is happening.
The ill feeling between clubs that this is generating is quite strong, replacing the normal competitive but respectul relationships.
No good for anyone really, the only way forward is to clear the air with thorough investigations.
But as I said, my mail is this is not really happening.

In theory the cap is a good idea. Sporting clubs seem to have a tendency to bid player salaries up until the weaker ones go broke. The issue is and always has been compliance. I'm probably starting to sound like a scratched record, but the compliance issue is probably beyond the resouces of the AFL let alone the SANFL. Without someone spilling the beans or someone making a mistake it is probably impossible to force compliance. Deep down we all know this - hence all of the speculation and innuendo.

[topsywaldron]

but the compliance issue is probably beyond the resouces of the AFL l

Ask Carlton about that.

If the AFL can administer a $7 million cap then the SANFL should be able to handle a $305 000 cap. If they want to that is and isn't that the million dollar question. Or the $305 000 question for that matter.

[rod_rooster]

A bit a side issue but the article says...

A typical SANFL player is now committed to up to five training sessions per week whilst still maintaining his employment and /or studies. Typical match payments are from $50.00 per Reserves Match and $200 per Senior game, certainly not an extravagant recompense for the level of commitment.

Crap they are luxury conditions. Football clubs and footballers at this level can be so insular and up themselves sometimes. Comparatively speaking, for their committment to their chosen sport they are extremely well compensated and magnificently looked after. For example consider some of the athletes in other sports who compete nationally or internationally who have to pay out of their own pockets for the privilege (and they work/study). They have no infra-structure, little access to medical and other support services unless they pay for it (nowhere near the SANFL anyway), etc, etc. For example there are thousands of athletes all over Australia who train twice as hard and twice as long as SANFL footballers who compete internationally at a junior or senior level and they get paid didly-sh!t - in fact it costs them. How often do you think top tri-athletes or track and field athletes or swimmers train for? Its 10+ times a week (b4 work in the morning and after work at night) and they're lucky if the govt gives them a few thousand dollars for travel OS or the like.

Wake up!!!!!

[/quote]

Big difference being that less people care about athletics. How often do you see 2000 + people at an Athletics meet? The footballers are providing a service that produces a far greater interest than what an athletics meet etc. will ever do. Sure you get the once in 4 year events that generate interest but other that that what have you got. Week in week out people go to see the footballers. I do not for a second suggest that there are not athletes that put in more effort or make more sacrifices than SANFL footballers but the entertainment they provide just doesn't appeal to enough people compared to what football does. I have the ultimate respect for some of these athletes who make incredible sacrifices for their sports but i'm not going to pay to see someone throw a javelin or jump over a stick. I will pay to see a good game of footy though. Not all people will agree with me but i bet there is a majority that will. Proof is the wages that elite athletes get compared to elite footballers (in Australia).

[Ian]

Big difference being that less people care about athletics. How often do you see 2000 + people at an Athletics meet? The footballers are providing a service that produces a far greater interest than what an athletics meet etc. will ever do. Sure you get the once in 4 year events that generate interest but other that that what have you got. Week in week out people go to see the footballers. I do not for a second suggest that there are not athletes that put in more effort or make more sacrifices than SANFL footballers but the entertainment they provide just doesn't appeal to enough people compared to what football does. I have the ultimate respect for some of these athletes who make incredible sacrifices for their sports but i'm not going to pay to see someone throw a javelin or jump over a stick. I will pay to see a good game of footy though. Not all people will agree with me but i bet there is a majority that will. Proof is the wages that elite athletes get compared to elite footballers (in Australia).

Spot on. Unless you are invoved with athletics, would you really go to a meet and pay to watch?

[doggies4eva]

Its a chicken and egg thing. The crowds bring the sponsors and the sponsors attract the media and the media builds the crowds. The mony comes from the media and sponsors. Gate income is usually a minor part of any clubs budget. Then this money is used to pay the players. Of course I'm talking about AFL cause in the SANFL most money comes from fundraising.

[sus]

Big difference being that less people care about athletics. How often do you see 2000 + people at an Athletics meet? The footballers are providing a service that produces a far greater interest than what an athletics meet etc. will ever do. Sure you get the once in 4 year events that generate interest but other that that what have you got. Week in week out people go to see the footballers. I do not for a second suggest that there are not athletes that put in more effort or make more sacrifices than SANFL footballers but the entertainment they provide just doesn't appeal to enough people compared to what football does. I have the ultimate respect for some of these athletes who make incredible sacrifices for their sports but i'm not going to pay to see someone throw a javelin or jump over a stick. I will pay to see a good game of footy though. Not all people will agree with me but i bet there is a majority that will. Proof is the wages that elite athletes get compared to elite footballers (in Australia).

I totally agree RR. But the original article didnt relate the player rewards to the entertainment output or spectator demand - it related it to player COMMITTMENT. Read it again RR. Wrong slant on it - I agree with you but disagree with the article.

[doggies4eva]

Big difference being that less people care about athletics. How often do you see 2000 + people at an Athletics meet? The footballers are providing a service that produces a far greater interest than what an athletics meet etc. will ever do. Sure you get the once in 4 year events that generate interest but other that that what have you got. Week in week out people go to see the footballers. I do not for a second suggest that there are not athletes that put in more effort or make more sacrifices than SANFL footballers but the entertainment they provide just doesn't appeal to enough people compared to what football does. I have the ultimate respect for some of these athletes who make incredible sacrifices for their sports but i'm not going to pay to see someone throw a javelin or jump over a stick. I will pay to see a good game of footy though. Not all people will agree with me but i bet there is a majority that will. Proof is the wages that elite athletes get compared to elite footballers (in Australia).

I totally agree RR. But the original article didnt relate the player rewards to the entertainment output or spectator demand - it related it to player COMMITTMENT. Read it again RR. Wrong slant on it - I agree with you but disagree with the article.

Sus - my take on the original article was that the commitment deserves greater financial reward, hence a need to raise the salary cap.