Million dollard here, anothe million dollars there - G Lyon is right

[Pessimistic]

Correct - but now we're talking facilities, and that's a whole new kettle of fish.

The issue is accountability.
For clubs who (over a long period) struggled to make the books balance, why are we throwing more & more money hoping that will make the problem go away?

Just slapping your superior attitude mate, hardly surprising though

FWIW its the richer successful clubs, along with the AFL who are doing most of the gouging

Hawthorn very much one of them

 

[Slattery_20]

I'm not so fanciful to see that such as the new TV rights comas at a cost, and at the end of the day, you and I are paying for it

Of course there's costs. Plenty of compromises have to be made, and the biggerit gets the more compromises.
Take out the TV money basically we're back to 1995.
I still don't see your point.

Just look at the cost of finals tickets - standard is the last few rows on the top deck of "The peoples ground" - thats just one example - the 'cheap options' are dissapearing, token or non existent

And?

Should they make all games free to go to?

EDIT: Are you seriously suggesting that there's a link between how (say) Essendon spends, or doesn't spend, it's money; and AFL finals ticket prices?

What about young people today?
What about that damned inflation?

 

[Pessimistic]

Did you look at the seating plans - they proudly say prices have only increased marginally - yet huge areas of level 1 are now 'premium' whereas before they were lower cost.

its cycnicism on a level with phone and power companies

And no I dont expect free tickets - What a stupid statement

 

[Slattery_20]

Yes, they did make some extra coin, no doubt they'll use the justification of the attendances (in reality more closely linked to 3 of the big 4 being back in finals).

I'm just not sure I see it as an issue in the real world. If you had a problem with money becoming more & more important you should've sold out when it went to commercial TV.

 

[mjr_42]

um Gaz.... you sacked your coach this season.... didn't Bailey receive some sort of payout from that debacle, maybe take a look in your own backyard before taking the high road

There's a substantial difference between paying out three months of Bailey's contract - which would have been at the very lowest end of senior coach salaries - and paying out Mark Williams or Mark Harvey, both of whom were reportedly on more than $500k.

By the end of next year, both Port and Freo will have paid out salaries to Williams and Harvey for a year while simultaneously employing a full-time replacement. Mark Neeld and Bailey's tenures have overlapped by all of five weeks.

Hardly the same thing.

 

[Pessimistic]

Moneys not important - why is everyone and his dog bleating about a crbon tax then - its just a couple of extra dollars

I'm just highlighting that AFL gouging odf its fans is going on at an alarming rate.

and saying that hardly suprising when instead of saying "seeya later" when a coach or player moves on, they now get a fat payout or some cushy job somewhere

All these hangers on add nothing to the game as entertainment, but we are being gouged to pay for it


I was just using such as Bomber as a high profile example, not the sole reason. Theres probabaly an army of drones at AFL house too

 

[Slattery_20]

Moneys not important - why is everyone and his dog bleating about a crbon tax then - its just a couple of extra dollars

I don't know, personally I don't think it's much of an issue at all, compared to half a dozen other political issues that will (or have) actually affected me or friends/family.

I'm just highlighting that AFL gouging odf its fans is going on at an alarming rate.

and saying that hardly suprising when instead of saying "seeya later" when a coach or player moves on, they now get a fat payout or some cushy job somewhere

I'm not actually alarmed, though.
All the money in football has gone up ten-fold over the last 20 years. Players ,coaches, assistants, etc etc.

Tickets have gone up (maybe) double?
Much like the carbon tax: 'meh'

All these hangers on add nothing to the game as entertainment, but we are being gouged to pay for it

Very, very, very indirectly.

 

[Underdog]

Moneys not important - why is everyone and his dog bleating about a crbon tax then - its just a couple of extra dollars

For starters, paying to go to the footy is not forcibly imposed on people...

 

[Pessimistic]

For starters, paying to go to the footy is not forcibly imposed on people...

didnt really want to go off topic but the carbon tax isn't imposed on people directly

 

[Underdog]

didnt really want to go off topic but the carbon tax isn't imposed on people directly

But it will be indirectly... going to the footy isn't imposed on people at all.

 

[Papa G]

There's a substantial difference between paying out three months of Bailey's contract - which would have been at the very lowest end of senior coach salaries - and paying out Mark Williams or Mark Harvey, both of whom were reportedly on more than $500k.

By the end of next year, both Port and Freo will have paid out salaries to Williams and Harvey for a year while simultaneously employing a full-time replacement. Mark Neeld and Bailey's tenures have overlapped by all of five weeks.

Hardly the same thing.

Garry Lyon has half a foot in the door at the most dysfunctional football club in the league lurking in the shadows taking no responsibility for the goings on in the place whilst still seeming to have influence. He played a key role in hiring Bailey. He played a key role in firing Bailey. Garry need s to put up or shut up. He is finally taking some responsibility for the club he professes to love and is already, perhaps due to being totally blindsided by not getting close to luring Malthouse or Ross Lyon to the club as well as not being able to talk Scully around feeling the pressure of what it is to be the one in charge and all it's repercussions.

Someone said it before, look in your own back yard Garry, geez you'd hope the no name you've picked up as coach for you works this time mate, or we might see old Gaz grab Caro in a sleeper hold when she asks him a couple of tough questions on a Monday night in 2012.

 

[ziad]

didnt really want to go off topic but the carbon tax isn't imposed on people directly

Unless you use electricity in your private life.

Or your job uses electricty - in which case you will be less competative in a global market - ie shift your job OS.

How direct do you want it.

 

[Slattery_20]

Someone said it before, look in your own back yard Garry

Exactly.

Funny, I don't remember Lyon having hands anywhere near this good as a player.

 

[ziad]

Garry Lyon has half a foot in the door at the most dysfunctional football club in the league lurking in the shadows taking no responsibility for the goings on in the place whilst still seeming to have influence.

GL suffers for a Melbourne mindset.

The Dockers and a few other wealthy clubs dont need to sweat a mil to get a better coach.

Port, well I will leave that to port. But you have to invest to succeed.

 

[stewie griffen]

There's a substantial difference between paying out three months of Bailey's contract - which would have been at the very lowest end of senior coach salaries - and paying out Mark Williams or Mark Harvey, both of whom were reportedly on more than $500k.

By the end of next year, both Port and Freo will have paid out salaries to Williams and Harvey for a year while simultaneously employing a full-time replacement. Mark Neeld and Bailey's tenures have overlapped by all of five weeks.

Hardly the same thing.

every club has sacked a coach at some stage sparking a payout (apart from the newbies), to highlight these 3 instances as indicative of poor management serves no real purpose when you have been guilty, albeit to a lesser extent, of it yourself in the past. i guess thats more the point i was trying to make, mind you with the way our 2 clubs have been run lately.....

 

[Final Siren]

Port Adelaide's behaviour was absolutely disgraceful, not comparable at all to Essendon and Melbourne.

Port extended Williams' contract in farcical circumstances, went begging to the AFL for financial assistance, then, one month after receiving $1 million in special assistance, sacked Williams and paid him out that contract. Now they continue to guzzle $3 million a year.

Say what you like about Richmond, but we've worn our mistakes. Port Adelaide though is making the rest of the competition pay for its administrative blunders.

I don't care if a club sacks its coach, but it should have to wear the cost.

 

[Slattery_20]

To be fair to Port Choc was basically on minimum wage on his last deal, it was a pretty insulting deal.
In short, they couldn't afford anyone else.

 

[Pessimistic]

GL suffers for a Melbourne mindset.

The Dockers and a few other wealthy clubs dont need to sweat a mil to get a better coach.

Port, well I will leave that to port. But you have to invest to succeed.

By definition only one or two clubs can succeed each year - so 15/17 of all the investment is wasted

 

[madmug]

the AFL raises a large amount (not all) of the money the clubs use to fund everything from salary cap to player development, and coaches.

See I told you Tasmania should have a team. Most of the money to run it comes from just being in the competition via the AFL & gaining sponsors due to TV exposure, Instead of forking out millions for the Squarks & now for Norf, we should have our own team

 

[mjr_42]

Garry Lyon has half a foot in the door at the most dysfunctional football club in the league lurking in the shadows taking no responsibility for the goings on in the place whilst still seeming to have influence. He played a key role in hiring Bailey. He played a key role in firing Bailey. Garry need s to put up or shut up. He is finally taking some responsibility for the club he professes to love and is already, perhaps due to being totally blindsided by not getting close to luring Malthouse or Ross Lyon to the club as well as not being able to talk Scully around feeling the pressure of what it is to be the one in charge and all it's repercussions.

Someone said it before, look in your own back yard Garry, geez you'd hope the no name you've picked up as coach for you works this time mate, or we might see old Gaz grab Caro in a sleeper hold when she asks him a couple of tough questions on a Monday night in 2012.

Your personal issues with Melbourne and/or Garry Lyon are beside the point.

Any club who sacks a coach before end of his tenure is forced to make a payout of some size. My point was that three months of a modest senior coach's salary was not a fair comparison to 12 months of Mark Williams, Mark Harvey or Matthew Knights. Those three clubs then had to pay another coach for a full 12 months, while Melbourne is effectively overlapping by five weeks.

I agree to a point with the OP, particularly in the case of Port. Fremantle and Essendon are financially secure enough to decide what they do with their money. Time will tell if it's a wise investment or a waste of money.

 

[Papa G]

Port Adelaide's behaviour was absolutely disgraceful, not comparable at all to Essendon and Melbourne.

Port extended Williams' contract in farcical circumstances, went begging to the AFL for financial assistance, then, one month after receiving $1 million in special assistance, sacked Williams and paid him out that contract. Now they continue to guzzle $3 million a year.

Say what you like about Richmond, but we've worn our mistakes. Port Adelaide though is making the rest of the competition pay for its administrative blunders.

I don't care if a club sacks its coach, but it should have to wear the cost.

Mate you're being as hypocritical as Lyon. Jesus if Richmond were made to hand back all the AFL assistance they've had over the years in response to every poor decision they have made, well they'd still be paying. Yes port ****ed up by re hiring Choco, it needed to be rectified and it has. Yes Port need money, but you could argue another year of Choco leading us to a glorious 7 or 8 wins would have done us more long term harm. Just strikes me as strange that people from calamitous clubs like melbourne and Richmond who've had their hands out many times before now get indignant about paying out a coach who was doing your club and by extension the clubs finances harm.

 

[Slattery_20]

I was under the impression the only reason Choc got another contract is because Port didn't think they could get anyone else for the money they had available.

 

[Final Siren]

Mate you're being as hypocritical as Lyon. Jesus if Richmond were made to hand back all the AFL assistance they've had over the years in response to every poor decision they have made, well they'd still be paying. Yes port ****ed up by re hiring Choco, it needed to be rectified and it has. Yes Port need money, but you could argue another year of Choco leading us to a glorious 7 or 8 wins would have done us more long term harm. Just strikes me as strange that people from calamitous clubs like melbourne and Richmond who've had their hands out many times before now get indignant about paying out a coach who was doing your club and by extension the clubs finances harm.

No free kicks for Richmond as it rebuilds

Richmond have never gone to the AFL for special assistance

 

[Pessimistic]

and inter club bickering/rivalry is one of the reasons the AFL gets away with ripping us off more and more each year

 

[Power Raid]

Say what you like about Richmond, but we've worn our mistakes. Port Adelaide though is making the rest of the competition pay for its administrative blunders.

I don't care if a club sacks its coach, but it should have to wear the cost.

Yes PAFC is our club but PAFC does not have our board.

This is a SANFL board running our CLUB into the ground.


The sooner we have our own licence and board the better.