Eddie Changes His Tune

Remove this Banner Ad

Feb 28, 2007
54,238
71,678
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Paul Roos grills Eddie McGuire

COLLINGWOOD president Eddie McGuire was once one of the Swans' biggest critics until he learnt what life was really like in the fast lane moving to Sydney to run Channel Nine. Swans coach Paul Roos speaks to Eddie Everywhere about the Swans and Pies rivalry and what it's like to be boss of the most hated AFL club in the country.

Paul Roos: With your time in NSW when you were living in Sydney, what did you learn about football that you probably didn't realise when you were president at Collingwood and based in Melbourne?

Eddie McGuire: I think the biggest thing you notice is the competition for the hearts and minds of the parents and children in Sydney.

In Melbourne, you grow up, you play football in winter. In NSW, there is a strong school system as far as rugby union is concerned. There is the obviously entrenched tradition of rugby league. Soccer has been able to come in and engage those who don't play rugby so much.

And then there's Australian rules football, which for years was derided. Now it is far more accepted, but it's still seen as the fourth code.

Add in to that, of course, the other things that happen in Sydney with the beaches, and other sporting activities, it's a very tight market. What is a rite of passage in Melbourne is an alternative in Sydney.

From that point of view though, part of the thing I enjoyed about living in Sydney for the two years I was there, especially for my kids, was having all the different alternatives to do. That's a positive, it's such a wonderful lifestyle.

PR: When you were here were you also surprised at not so much how little people knew about the Swans necessarily, but Collingwood, or Carlton, or just AFL in general?

EM: My best story on this is a couple of people we met, who were Sydney born and bred and had fallen in love with AFL, the Sydney Swans, Auskick, the whole lot.

They told me at great length about this wonderful experience they have going to the SCG to watch the Swans, where people who don't even know each other sit in the crowd and talk to each other every year and they've built up a great camaraderie and friendships from people whose names they don't even know.

They share cake and pies and things and build it up. Later that year I invited them to come as my guest to Collingwood and Sydney at the MCG and they just laughed. They realised that this is the AFL culture.

PR: In terms of the cost of living, you were quoted before you were here and after you were here - have you changed your mind on that? Did that open your eyes to some of the issues that the Swans have faced over the years?

EM: There's no doubt about that. I also noticed how much they were making on capital gains when they sold their house at the end of their tenure in Sydney.

PR: No, good point. What about the blokes who can't afford a house?

EM: Get a kick. No, as you know, I've been very strong in supporting the cost of living. It's very easy for people to say, "Well go out and live in the suburbs", but people don't realise how hard it is to move around and even the social phenomena of no one from the North Shore ever planning to visit the Eastern Suburbs and vice versa.

I had a wonderful period of time living in Sydney. It was great from the point of view of understanding the Sydney market as far as the Swans are concerned. It was also great to understand that the Sydney Swans have done an amazing job not only becoming a major part of the sporting fabric of Sydney, but to build the Swans into a club where those recruited to the club have no qualms in going to live in Sydney now.

PR: How do you describe what Collingwood represents?

EM: You don't need topsoil on your training and home ground because more ashes are spilt after funerals than you could ever put on there yourself. You have harder questions at the annual general meeting than BHP and Telstra put together. You have an average crowd of just under 70,000 people and a membership of nearly 50,000 people. When you are the biggest restaurant every fortnight at home games and when you basically run 11 Rolling Stones concerts each year. Where people live and die by the fortunes of a football game each week and that is just those with a casual interest.

PR: What is the best thing about being the Collingwood president?

EM: The best thing is being able to sit at a full MCG for an Anzac game or a final, or this weekend at ANZ Stadium. I get great pride at ANZ Stadium against the Swans, seeing the red and white in the crowd against the black and white of Collingwood. It is mind-blowing to be part of something that is just such a massive culture phenomenon.

PR: And the toughest?

EM: The hard things you have to do in business, there is nothing worse at the end of the year when there is a minimum of five players as a requirement from the AFL that you have to tell them that their dream is over.

PR: What is the biggest challenge facing our game?

EM: To make sure the clubs are strong. The code is strong. Everyone in the game is being well paid.

We have to make sure our clubs not only survive but they are strong. In the downtimes, particularly those clubs in the non-Victorian markets, I am very strong on this, that is when we have to be in there helping them and they have to be supported.

PR: I have no doubt Saturday night's blockbuster against Collingwood helped us win the premiership, it was a real important for the players, especially the younger ones, to play in front of big crowds and this fixture was that for us. There is no doubt as a coach that we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to Collingwood because it is really such a big game, but you guys play in big games all the time, how does this compare?

EM: This is one of the big ones for us, there is no doubt about that and there is a fair bit in it for us as well.

It captures the imagination of the AFL world and in Sydney, probably more hearts and minds than any other game. We know we are on display back in the Victorian heartland, we know it gets all the focus because it is the split round.

Since this blockbuster inception, the Sydney Swans have been the benchmark. So for us to be able to go up and play well against Sydney sets us up to where we are going.

Of all the games that have been played between the two sides, this is probably the one that has had the most on the line for both teams as far as lining up for the finals.

PR: It has always been played in good spirit this game, hasn't it?

EM: It is as hard as you can get, as skilful as you can play in the context of being under constant pressure, and there is a tremendous respect between the two clubs. Usually rivalries are built up because of controversies that have happened, but between our two clubs it is because the games are just strong and physical, they are the games that you would want AFL games to be like every week.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25657294-5001023,00.html

------------------------------------------------------

Its nice to see Eddie change his opinion on the Swans in regards to our salary cap concessions.
 
PR: I have no doubt Saturday night's blockbuster against Collingwood helped us win the premiership, it was a real important for the players, especially the younger ones, to play in front of big crowds and this fixture was that for us. There is no doubt as a coach that we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to Collingwood because it is really such a big game

So Collingwood helped the Swans in 05? that makes me feel all warm inside :thumbsdown:
 
As a Collingwood supporter, I have always been against the "cost of living"/"player retention" allowance for Brisbane, and in favour of it for Sydney. There is no doubt that the cost of living in Sydney is higher, having an allowance in the salary cap for them makes logical sense.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

As a Collingwood supporter, I have always been against the "cost of living"/"player retention" allowance for Brisbane, and in favour of it for Sydney. There is no doubt that the cost of living in Sydney is higher, having an allowance in the salary cap for them makes logical sense.

That is the biggest load of xxxx that I have heard. It is a hand out to help them be successful and that is all. If it was truly cost of living related, then the Melbourne clubs should get 40% higher caps than the Adelaide clubs. The cost of housing is so much more expensive in Melbourne than in Adelaide. It should also be 25% higher than Brisbane and maybe 5% higher than Perth (debatable).

The AFL is definitely NOT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD!
 
Well yes, it's certainly arguable that that is what the allowance is for, in light of the fact that it was given to Brisbane, and doesn't apply to other cities in the inverse. That's why I called it a "cost of living"/"player retention" allowance. Which part of my post do you consider to be a "load of xxxx"?
 
The point Roos was making about playing Collingwood in big games made them ready to win the flag in 05 was that we can handle the big games and you couldn't. Not sure if Eddie saw that.
 
Well yes, it's certainly arguable that that is what the allowance is for, in light of the fact that it was given to Brisbane, and doesn't apply to other cities in the inverse. That's why I called it a "cost of living"/"player retention" allowance. Which part of my post do you consider to be a "load of xxxx"?

The cost of living AND the player retention part. Why highlight one portion anyway. Didn't you mean the first part too?

As for player retention, the Melbourne clubs frequently get players from WA, SA, NT and even NSW! Why can't they get the same player retention treatment as Sydney or Brisbane. It is a national competition. If you are drafted you know you can go anywhere. That is the deal. Apart from Judd (who truly left for 'team culture' problems) there haven't been many elite players dumping their club for the missing home reason.

So if you truly believe that the extra money IS NOT just to give Sydney and Brisbane an advantage to be more likely to have success, then you are possibly deluded. Of course this is just my opinion and not fact (how can it be as the AFL would never admit to it).
 
How are the Swans struggling when they are the highest drawing sporting club in NSW? I can remember the days of 3,000 crowds at the SCG. Now there's 29,000 at games and it's a problem. I just don't get it.
 
So if you truly believe that the extra money IS NOT just to give Sydney and Brisbane an advantage to be more likely to have success, then you are possibly deluded. Of course this is just my opinion and not fact (how can it be as the AFL would never admit to it).
Where did you get this idea from? I've clearly said that it's an unfair allowance where it applies to Brisbane. :confused: A legitimate argument can be made for Sydney, but not for Brisbane, so as the allowance was given to both it clearly wasn't legitimate.

The idea of a player retention allowance is to allow these two clubs to keep their better players from being poached as the salaries they can command increases. If you don't think this is an advantage, take a look at the 2000 Essendon side; they won the flag and lost Hardwick, Caracella and Blumfield. The Lions won 2001-2003 and really only lost Caracella (Headland left, but merely to return to WA).

This allowance is to keep two strategically crucial clubs competitive in what the AFL sees as growing markets.
 
How are the Swans struggling when they are the highest drawing sporting club in NSW? I can remember the days of 3,000 crowds at the SCG. Now there's 29,000 at games and it's a problem. I just don't get it.

Its called escalating costs.

That 29 000 used to be more when things were cheaper to run too.
 
I'd hate to interupt The Royal Sampler mid-crusade, but Brisbane never had a "cost-of-living" allowance.

Our allowance was to make up for the fact that Brisbane, by the nature of player demographics had more interstate players on its list than other clubs.

The fact that we lost 2 top 10 draft picks (including a number 1 pick) and also had a potential father-son selection and genuine number 1 draft pick turn us down for purely geographic reasons justifies that.

I'll also point out that Brisbane hasn't had any cap concessions since 2004. Some people speak as if we still have them.

Royal Sampler lumped the concessions together as "Cost of Living/Player Retention" as if they were the same thing. Sydney had both. Brisbane only had the latter.
 
I'd hate to interupt The Royal Sampler mid-crusade, but Brisbane never had a "cost-of-living" allowance.

Our allowance was to make up for the fact that Brisbane, by the nature of player demographics had more interstate players on its list than other clubs.

The fact that we lost 2 top 10 draft picks (including a number 1 pick) and also had a potential father-son selection and genuine number 1 draft pick turn us down for purely geographic reasons justifies that.

I'll also point out that Brisbane hasn't had any cap concessions since 2004. Some people speak as if we still have them.

Royal Sampler lumped the concessions together as "Cost of Living/Player Retention" as if they were the same thing. Sydney had both. Brisbane only had the latter.

No need to waste reasonable logic or facts here mate.
Sydney haven't beaten Collingwood in a Grand Final so their concessions are fair game:thumbsu:
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Remove this Banner Ad

Eddie Changes His Tune

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top