Will AFL increase concessions if Brisbane lose?

[Gunder]

Seems only fair

 

[Gunder]

At the very least we need to increase Sydneys because the cost of living is stopping them from making a grand final

 

[R00StaR]

Yes it does seem fair, except: as has been displayed, a winning team has no problem keeping players from leaving. So id say if they finish bottom 4 they should get 100% of the allowance, top 4 they get zero. This allows Brisbane to retain players during tough times and also face the same difficulties as others in keep a quality list together……….perfectly fair imo.

 

[Eggzoi]

********, after all the crap you've been posting, I hope they double Brisbane's concessions.

 

[MarkT]

Given Sydney aren't using it yet are competitive and retaining players at least as well as anyone else they clearly don't need what they have. Of course if they get their act together and start needing it to retain a super squad look out world. This off season Port and Adelaide look like losing players back to WA. It happens, it’s part of the system and there is a draft and trade to deal with it. Brisbane did quite well out of Headland.

Retention is an issue for a poorly run club which is what Brisbane and Sydney have been over the years. Now they are well run.

Let’s just change the name and call it what it is:

SUCESS PUSH MARKETING.

 

[Murray]

Collingwood should get concessions because both Freo and WC finished above Collingwood and it costs more to live in Melbourne than it does in Perth.

 

[SpInNeR]

.....no

 

[Fullarton Power]

Will the AFL even more roll over like a dead dog and allow the MCc to bend them over the table re: the Finals Contract if the Grand Final is between Port Adelaide and Brisbane????????

 

[Cap]

Will gunder get over the weird obsession he/she/it seems to have with Brisbane

Will Gunder ever look at Collingwood failure as say – we were just crap ( I know I have come to grips with the crows poor season)

Will Gunder convince other Collingwood supporters that this continued obsession with Brisbane is becoming comical in the extreme (to everyone else) and any valid points they may make are overshadowed by the ridiculousness of there campaign? And the laughable amount of posts and threads they have created.

 

[LegalEagle]

sore loser board

 

[Karbassiyoon]

if they lose they definately won't be taking them away.
as for sydney who knows.

 

[Former]

I wonder whether Caroline Wilson is against the concessions?

Let's take one of her balanced, unbiased articles as an indicator:


Pies ask for cap equality

By Caroline Wilson
September 13, 2004

"Collingwood president Eddie McGuire and his chief executive, Greg Swann, have accepted that it is now too late to remove the Lions' advantage for 2005... "

Full article:
http://realfooty.theage.com.au/articles/2004/09/12/1094927440056.html?oneclick=true

That people like this call themselves "journalists" is a bit of a stretch. Commentary? Yes. Opinion? Yes. Journalism? Not in the strictest sense. Not in any sense really.

 

[LegalEagle]

Agreed, its pretty dodgy that she didn't mention that the new rules were agreed to by EVERYONE only a few months ago.

I dont know why these whingers are tring to negotiate it AGAIN.

 

[hbk]

I'm sick and tired of hearing people complain about Brisbane's salary cap concessions. Name one player Brisbane has on its list due to big money being paid.

All of Brisbane's players on its list are due to astute recruiting and player development.

Eddie's poor old magpies have 2 players i can think of possibly 3 that are on collingwoods list due to big money being paid out. Buckley, A Rocca, Woewodin (what a joke).

If it was such an issue why wasn't this talked about when it was first introduced?

I hope brisbane win 4 in a row and then 5, to really give eddie something to whinge about.

Brisbane beat them in 2 grand finals because they run straight lines, unlike some very scared little magpies.

All the money in the world wont change that result.

 

[Khan]

Yes it does seem fair, except: as has been displayed, a winning team has no problem keeping players from leaving. So id say if they finish bottom 4 they should get 100% of the allowance, top 4 they get zero. This allows Brisbane to retain players during tough times and also face the same difficulties as others in keep a quality list together……….perfectly fair imo.

That actually doesn't sound that bad but I would put on it the same sort of thing that belongs on the priority pick system, substainbed positioning. The longer in one "spot" the more it affects


Khan

 

[LegalEagle]

Yes it does seem fair, except: as has been displayed, a winning team has no problem keeping players from leaving. So id say if they finish bottom 4 they should get 100% of the allowance, top 4 they get zero. This allows Brisbane to retain players during tough times and also face the same difficulties as others in keep a quality list together……….perfectly fair imo.

that sounds like a good idea, but the like concessions, this "Punishment for being good" should be applicable to all clubs, and so perhaps geelong and stkilda should give up 10% of their tpp next year.