- Thread starter
- #101
Yes but $$$ and contract length weren't the main factors, the removal of COLA is.
It was widely noted in the media that Sydney landing Buddy was a complete surprise to pretty much everybody in the industry and that GWS and the AFL were pissed off as they had been taken for a ride and essentially lied to throughout the year...they were convinced he was going to GWS.
After winning a premiership, Sydney landed Tippett and Franklin on huge deals in consecutive years.
VIC clubs had been complaining to the AFL about COLA for years, but the AFL resisted them. This brought an avalanche of public spotlight and complaints about COLA though, about how this team could land these players on huge contracts and that it was unfair. Even if Sydney defend that it's not how COLA works, it was pissing the general public off and people in high places.
The Buddy deal convinced the AFL to take action and i think was the catalyst for COLA being removed. That and the trade ban seemed like a bit of a 'FU' from the AFL to Sydney for lying to them, and they have hurt Sydney.
Solid point. Definitely something to think about