I just heard disturbing news about the Brisbane Lions, a club which is successful, being given PERMISSION to breach the salary cap. Has the AFL gone madder than usual? So let me get this right: If Melbourne clubs act in this manner it's wrong, but for an interstate club it is not only accepted it is encouraged!!!!! Bonkers, just ****ing Bonkers..
P.S. Go Collingwood!
P.P.S. Bracks and his cronies better save Waverley Park (as they promised), or there will be a resurgence in Liberal votes next election. As well as riots in the streets, hopefully!! Ha HA HA.
Benefits 4 Briso
Moderator: bbmods
-
Mich@el
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 1999 8:01 pm
- Location: Ferenginar
- Contact:
-
Pugsville
Brisbane have been allowed an until now (there where given AFL go approval some months ago ) secret $400,000 beyond the salary cap to induce players to stay at brisbane. The Bears petitioned the AFL on the basis seeing there were so few home grown players they should have a an salary cap allowance of $440,000 to be able to use $$$ to stop the go home factor of in keeping players at brisbane. Brisbane gave some sort of undertaking that they would not use these bonsus in the salary cap to lure players to brisbane. Though have they sepearte the extra money from the normal money in any particular player payments remains a mystery.
Sydney also have a 10% salary cap allowance for the higher living costs in sydney.
I think it's blantant, these teams are in important TV markets they need to do well, therefore whatever it takes.
I mean the costs of living is cheaper in adeliade compared to melbourne more than it is more expensive in sydney, by the AFL's logic Adeliade and Port should have %10 off their salary cap! (I'd like to see that!)
It's worse the brisbane as they keep it secret as, and now is fait accomplie. It shows they thought the clubs would rit if they did it openly.
They call it an level playing field with a secret 10% to brisbane.
Sydney and Birsbane have retained players better than freo. Surely the various advangates and disadvanges of team location should be let be, brisbane and sydney have much bigger markets and no competition from other AFL teams for sponsorship and are ganretueed much better TV coverage. So it's harder to keep some players. Well that's how things are if your in brisbane or sydney. If that logic's in, why not highre AFL dividend to melbourne clubs due to diffacultly competeing for the same sponsors dollar?
Brisbane and Sydney are doing well on the field and good enough finiacially, (brisbane have already feasted on the still warm corpse of one melbourne club) The writing is pretty much up there that another melbounrne club possibely two are facing merger, translocation or existinction. They (the AFL) will show no mecry, or favours to those clubs, in fact will emerge from the pack to get a few kicks in. But if some interstate club cries over anything, secert deals are done. What do you what money? players? Coach? draft picks? salary cap? Over the years brisbane and sydney have had it all. Fitzroy was exterminated for much much less.
pugs.
Sydney also have a 10% salary cap allowance for the higher living costs in sydney.
I think it's blantant, these teams are in important TV markets they need to do well, therefore whatever it takes.
I mean the costs of living is cheaper in adeliade compared to melbourne more than it is more expensive in sydney, by the AFL's logic Adeliade and Port should have %10 off their salary cap! (I'd like to see that!)
It's worse the brisbane as they keep it secret as, and now is fait accomplie. It shows they thought the clubs would rit if they did it openly.
They call it an level playing field with a secret 10% to brisbane.
Sydney and Birsbane have retained players better than freo. Surely the various advangates and disadvanges of team location should be let be, brisbane and sydney have much bigger markets and no competition from other AFL teams for sponsorship and are ganretueed much better TV coverage. So it's harder to keep some players. Well that's how things are if your in brisbane or sydney. If that logic's in, why not highre AFL dividend to melbourne clubs due to diffacultly competeing for the same sponsors dollar?
Brisbane and Sydney are doing well on the field and good enough finiacially, (brisbane have already feasted on the still warm corpse of one melbourne club) The writing is pretty much up there that another melbounrne club possibely two are facing merger, translocation or existinction. They (the AFL) will show no mecry, or favours to those clubs, in fact will emerge from the pack to get a few kicks in. But if some interstate club cries over anything, secert deals are done. What do you what money? players? Coach? draft picks? salary cap? Over the years brisbane and sydney have had it all. Fitzroy was exterminated for much much less.
pugs.