Past Jordan "I don’t think Sydney fans should be nervous at all" Dawson: Grand Theft Completed, traded 2021 to Adelaide

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

No we didn't. COLA was applied after the contract. If you signed a 1 year, $500k deal for example, you just got the extra 9% on top of that

You are right on the details but I disagree with your conclusion. I appreciate that makes me an outlier and at odds with club, but I find it difficult to escape the conclusion I have come to.

The cost of living was no doubt higher in Sydney (and is higher still today), and compensation was warranted. But a blanket 9% extra for each contract was not always proportional to the extra costs.

Sure for someone on $100k the 9% was needed, but someone on $500k did not have living expenses $50k per year higher than someone in another city. This meant swans could retain those players for a base salary of less than $500k. Those savings could then go to star players (noting those star players would also be willing to accept a lower base salary than they otherwise would have accepted). Money is fungible, players don’t care where it comes from so long as it goes into their bank account.

We didn’t rort the system, but the system was not well designed. It should have been a fixed amount per player per year. The new system better represents the right structure (although I would argue the amounts are too low, especially after the inevitable squeeze on academy picks comes).

 

[Millky95]

You are right on the details but I disagree with your conclusion. I appreciate that makes me an outlier and at odds with club, but I find it difficult to escape the conclusion I have come to.

The cost of living was no doubt higher in Sydney (and is higher still today), and compensation was warranted. But a blanket 9% extra for each contract was not always proportional to the extra costs.

Sure for someone on $100k the 9% was needed, but someone on $500k did not have living expenses $50k per year higher than someone in another city. This meant swans could retain those players for a base salary of less than $500k. Those savings could then go to star players (noting those star players would also be willing to accept a lower base salary than they otherwise would have accepted). Money is fungible, players don’t care where it comes from so long as it goes into their bank account.

We didn’t rort the system, but the system was not well designed. It should have been a fixed amount per player per year. The new system better represents the right structure (although I would argue the amounts are too low, especially after the inevitable squeeze on academy picks comes).

Yeah, nah. Managers would have gone "hey if we can get $550k instead of $500 you'll get even more when COLA is applied" when doing negotiations with Sydney.

10 years got Franklin over the line. Same money was offered at GWS (and Hawks iirc) but we offered the length which got him. Him going to us not GWS pissed the AFL and taking COLA was the easiest thing to do and doing it the way they did it gave us the trade ban. All for following the rules.

COLA didn't get us Franklin. Really sick of the narrative that it did.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

sydney have been widely despised for years ("AFL's love child" etc) mostly related to a series of occurrences that were within the rules ...
i don't hate adelaide, but the fact that "point" thing is still being brought up as if sydney conspired to cheat the crows (and not just by crows fans) is really aggravating

Fair enough. Dislike of vic-centric / anti-Sydney media is fine by me. It’s a disgrace.

Although on the Adelaide point issue, I just enjoy that they can’t get passed it. Especially after Sydney more or less conceded it was a mistake. I thought horse was quite gracious about it at the time, as too was Nicks from memory, to his credit.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

Yeah, nah. Managers would have gone "hey if we can get $550k instead of $500 you'll get even more when COLA is applied" when doing negotiations with Sydney.

10 years got Franklin over the line. Same money was offered at GWS (and Hawks iirc) but we offered the length which got him. Him going to us not GWS pissed the AFL and taking COLA was the easiest thing to do and doing it the way they did it gave us the trade ban. All for following the rules.

COLA didn't get us Franklin. Really sick of the narrative that it did.

I’m not suggesting that swans paid 9% less each time. If I had to guess (and if it was even measurable) I’d estimate we operated at about a 5% discount for players over $300k and 2% for players under that. This wouldn’t cover all of Buddy’s contract (we did have to shed some players), but we were able to retain a stacked list. Our 2014 team was quite incredible, until the GF at least…

I suspect a mod will call me out for being too far off topic if I continue any further - and appreciate not many will disagree with me, so probably best to leave it here.

 

[dosser]

You are right on the details but I disagree with your conclusion. I appreciate that makes me an outlier and at odds with club, but I find it difficult to escape the conclusion I have come to.

The cost of living was no doubt higher in Sydney (and is higher still today), and compensation was warranted. But a blanket 9% extra for each contract was not always proportional to the extra costs.

Sure for someone on $100k the 9% was needed, but someone on $500k did not have living expenses $50k per year higher than someone in another city. This meant swans could retain those players for a base salary of less than $500k. Those savings could then go to star players (noting those star players would also be willing to accept a lower base salary than they otherwise would have accepted). Money is fungible, players don’t care where it comes from so long as it goes into their bank account.

We didn’t rort the system, but the system was not well designed. It should have been a fixed amount per player per year. The new system better represents the right structure (although I would argue the amounts are too low, especially after the inevitable squeeze on academy picks comes).

Richard Colless was on record at an AFL function with other presidents offering the Swans books to anyone who wanted to do an audit. He stated that the COMBINED COLA allowance that was given to Tippett and Franklin in their first year together was a mere $35k. Combined.

The deals were structured in such a way that a lot of money was coming from the marketing budget and therefore was not eligible for COLA. If you think that the extra $17,500 each for these players was what got them over the line then I don't know what to say to you. Remember, Hawthorn could have matched what we offered Buddy (even with the extra $17,500 COLA allowance on top!) but it was the LENGTH of the contract, not the annual $ value that they baulked at.

The whole COLA thing was a beat-up by the Vic clubs and media because we pulled one over them and they wanted to punish us.

But this is going over old ground - I'm just surprised that you weren't aware of these things.

 

[dosser]

Richard Colless was on record at an AFL function with other presidents offering the Swans books to anyone who wanted to do an audit. He stated that the COMBINED COLA allowance that was given to Tippett and Franklin in their first year together was a mere $35k. Combined.

The deals were structured in such a way that a lot of money was coming from the marketing budget and therefore was not eligible for COLA. If you think that the extra $17,500 each for these players was what got them over the line then I don't know what to say to you. Remember, Hawthorn could have matched what we offered Buddy (even with the extra $17,500 COLA allowance on top!) but it was the LENGTH of the contract, not the annual $ value that they baulked at.

The whole COLA thing was a beat-up by the Vic clubs and media because we pulled one over them and they wanted to punish us.

But this is going over old ground - I'm just surprised that you weren't aware of these things.

And if I have reacted strongly then it is because I was at my local footy club last night and another bloke was telling me we are keeping Gulden, etc only because we get COLA. I couldn't believe there are people who still think this! Aaaaargh!

 

[tombomb]

Every swans fan is entitled to dislike dawson (not as a person, as an opponent), as when you boil it down sport is about tribalism, and if someone leaves and weakens your tribe, well they can go and get stuffed.

I find the anger towards Adelaide unusual though. They had been stuffed trade after trade, then had a chance to use preseason draft to their advantage, and they did. Why wouldn’t they? We don’t need to welcome it, but I don’t see it as controversial either.

We used cola to get Buddy under the AFL’s nose. Nothing wrong with that, we were able to recruit / retain our existing list for a smaller percentage of our cap, and then could use the savings to help pay for Buddy’s contract. It was within the rules. And Fitzpatrick can get stuffed as he played outside the rules to punish us.

We did a double pick swap with West Coast Eagles to game the draft. Nothing wrong with that. It was within the rules.

We took JJ for free when Melbourne only dumped and rookied him to make it through Covid. Again, nothing wrong with that. Melbourne could have thought ahead, and they could have made him want to stay, but they overlooked his potential.

If swans fans want to be angry with anyone for the low compensation for Dawson, it should be Dawson. He nominated only one Adelaide club and he very easily could have told the Crows he would only move across if Sydney’s compensation was fair, and Crows would have accepted. Instead he left his Sydney in the lurch.

Should I hold it against him forever as a person? Don’t think so - we have all taken the easy path out at some stage or another. Can I hold it against him as a player? You bet ya, I wish him all the free September’s in the world until he retires

Man, I wish I could get a pay raise, a promotion, a cheaper house, free childcare (grandparents) and 4 weeks extra leave per year. Where can I sign up? Oh what’s that you say? I’d have to live in Adelaide? Well maybe not then!

My issue with Dawson isn't that they ripped us off or that he left, it is that Adelaide and their supporters and the media acted like we were being unreasonable in wanting a fair deal.

How many times did we hear during that period how Dawson 'had only had one good year' or was 'just a half back flanker'?! We were being difficult because we wouldn't just accept the dogs pick 17 that they wanted to rip us off with.

As I said in a previous post, Adelaide knew what he was worth, we knew what he was worth. There was a clear precedent set for players of Dawson's age and quality and it was a selection in the 5-10 range. They had that selection to give, and chose not to.

That is fair play to them, they should exploit the system as much as they can. But don't gaslight us with BS about how you are offering a fair deal.

 

[sataris]

The issue with Dawson isn't that they ripped us off, it is that Adelaide and their supporters and the media acted like we were being unreasonable in wanting a fair deal.

How many times did we hear during that period how Dawson 'had only had one good year' or was 'just a half back flanker'?! We were being difficult because we wouldn't just accept the dogs pick 17 that they wanted to rip us off with.

As I said in a previous post, Adelaide knew what he was worth, we knew what he was worth. There was a clear precedent set for players of Dawson's age and quality and it was a selection in the 5-10 range. They had that selection to give, and chose not to.

That is fair play to them, they should exploit the system as much as they can. But don't gaslight us with BS about how you are offering a fair deal.

Wouldn't get a start in our current side.

 

[tombomb]

Wouldn't get a start in our current side.

We are going well, but Dawson wouldn't have an issue finding a spot.

 

[Millky95]

Wouldn't get a start in our current side.

Dawson would be in over Roberts, Campbell and dare I even say it: McInerney

 

[Jewelsbon]

Dawson would be in over Roberts, Campbell and dare I even say it: McInerney

I'm thinking it was joke....

 

[Millky95]

I'm thinking it was joke....

It's 4pm on a Friday and I just had a one on one meeting with my boss. I would miss the most obvious of things right now

 

[JackHiscoxWasFast]

Who would Dawson and Serong replace if they were playing for us now, and we had Mills and Parker available ? Would they get a start

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Who would Dawson and Serong replace if they were playing for us now, and we had Mills and Parker available ? Would they get a start

Dawson - Roberts/Campbell
Serong - Adams/Parker

 

[tombomb]

Who would Dawson and Serong replace if they were playing for us now, and we had Mills and Parker available ? Would they get a start

Literally any non key position player other than Heeney, Gulden, and Warner.

 

[JackHiscoxWasFast]

Literally any non key position player other than Heeney, Gulden, and Warner.

So Rowie, Tay Tay, Jmac, Air Jordon ?

 

[Kiama Chris]

Who would Dawson and Serong replace if they were playing for us now, and we had Mills and Parker available ? Would they get a start

Dawson yes, Roberts and possibly Florent.
Serong we might not have taken Adams and if not, Adams.

 

[tombomb]

So Rowie, Tay Tay, Jmac, Air Jordon ?

Yeah and a number of others.

 

[sataris]

It's 4pm on a Friday and I just had a one on one meeting with my boss. I would miss the most obvious of things right now

What kind of psychopath holds meetings on a friday?

 

[JackHiscoxWasFast]

What kind of psychopath holds meetings on a friday?

Chris Fagan or maybe Ross Lyon?

 

[Millky95]

What kind of psychopath holds meetings on a friday?

One that just put in their notice apparently

 

[the hypnotoad]

Dawson would be in over Roberts, Campbell and dare I even say it: McInerney

first two, yes ... no chance on mcinerney

 

[Wheresbuddy]

My issue with Dawson isn't that they ripped us off or that he left, it is that Adelaide and their supporters and the media acted like we were being unreasonable in wanting a fair deal.

How many times did we hear during that period how Dawson 'had only had one good year' or was 'just a half back flanker'?! We were being difficult because we wouldn't just accept the dogs pick 17 that they wanted to rip us off with.

As I said in a previous post, Adelaide knew what he was worth, we knew what he was worth. There was a clear precedent set for players of Dawson's age and quality and it was a selection in the 5-10 range. They had that selection to give, and chose not to.

That is fair play to them, they should exploit the system as much as they can. But don't gaslight us with BS about how you are offering a fair deal.

Cast your mind back to 2021. As good as Dawson was back them (finished 3rd in our B&F no less), I doubt the club or most the supporters thought he could become a star of the competition and one of the most inspirational captains. If we seriously thought he had it him to be as good as he is now, there is no way we would've let him go for Melbourne's 2022 first. I wonder if Adelaide even knew how important he would be to the club? If so, well played to their recruiting team.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

Richard Colless was on record at an AFL function with other presidents offering the Swans books to anyone who wanted to do an audit. He stated that the COMBINED COLA allowance that was given to Tippett and Franklin in their first year together was a mere $35k. Combined.

The deals were structured in such a way that a lot of money was coming from the marketing budget and therefore was not eligible for COLA. If you think that the extra $17,500 each for these players was what got them over the line then I don't know what to say to you. Remember, Hawthorn could have matched what we offered Buddy (even with the extra $17,500 COLA allowance on top!) but it was the LENGTH of the contract, not the annual $ value that they baulked at.

The whole COLA thing was a beat-up by the Vic clubs and media because we pulled one over them and they wanted to punish us.

But this is going over old ground - I'm just surprised that you weren't aware of these things.

My point is that cola enabled us to pay lower base salaries / marketing budgets to our other players, freeing up space for the stars.

 

[tombomb]

Cast your mind back to 2021. As good as Dawson was back them (finished 3rd in our B&F no less), I doubt the club or most the supporters thought he could become a star of the competition and one of the most inspirational captains. If we seriously thought he had it him to be as good as he is now, there is no way we would've let him go for Melbourne's 2022 first. I wonder if Adelaide even knew how important he would be to the club? If so, well played to their recruiting team.

If we thought he was going to be as good as he is now, he would have been worth two top 10 picks.

At the end of 2021, his value was a pick in the 5-10 range. Saad, Hill, Cerra, all were similar and all got picks in that range. There was no ambiguity over Dawson's value in a trade.

And we had no option to accept what we accepted as he was uncontracted and Adelaide could take him in the preseason draft for nothing.