This is outrageous....they have won two premierships in the last ten years.

What if they get Tippett and win another one next year.....it has to stop.

Can't see what all the fuss is about. Most of their list is made up of nuts and bolts type players. Well paid for sure but I don't think the extra pay is a huge incentive. Our players earn slightly less but are commiting highway robbery in comparison IMO considering their output.

Edited October 5, 201213 yr by america de cali

Article in fin review today? About richards and pyke working at citi one of swans sponsors. They are not paid but are learning the ropes of the trading floor for after footy occupation .

2 things , world oldest work experience staff:)

Despite no pay there is a cost to citi to train them , there is value to players to have knowledge gained. They would not be in position without sydney, citi connection. . Not like judd visy deal but there is invisible value for all parties

I always thought that the extra cap was not about the cost of living, but more to do with helping Sydney attract players. Í think that Sydney have always struggled to get players to move there.

Three things;

1. To those saying that the cap doesn't make a difference the results show 5 of the past 12 Flags won by teams with extra cap, also bear in mind that both these teams played in extra GF's so thats 7 of the past 12 years a team with extra cap has made the GF. Considering how hard it is to get to a Grand final and how infrequently clear lines can be drawn between grand final teams this pretty damning in my opinion. (throw in our GF in 2000 and Carltons Premiership and it becomes increasingly obvious how salary cap can influence results, maybe have a talk to Melbourne Storm if you still think its irrelevant).

2. The cost of living between cities also depends on the pay bracket you exist in. In the property market there may be a large difference in what you can get for 300-400k but very little difference over that, etc. Also there may be a difference in groceries at Coles but not at higher cost farmer's markets etc. It is a very difficult thing to prove. In general at the moment Melbourne and Sydney are very close and it is possible to live well in both cities for around the same cost, certainly 23k a year is exorbitant.

3. How heavily do the AFL follow this/ police it. If they are looking at all first year contracts and rookie listings and making sure this extra allowance is paid as a percentage across every contract then it is almost fair. However if Sydney can implement it however they want then they may just pay their list the same as everywhere else and use the extra money to lure players / take risks on NQR recycled players, which is clearly a completely unfair advantage.

Three things;

1. To those saying that the cap doesn't make a difference the results show 5 of the past 12 Flags won by teams with extra cap, also bear in mind that both these teams played in extra GF's so thats 7 of the past 12 years a team with extra cap has made the GF. Considering how hard it is to get to a Grand final and how infrequently clear lines can be drawn between grand final teams this pretty damning in my opinion. (throw in our GF in 2000 and Carltons Premiership and it becomes increasingly obvious how salary cap can influence results, maybe have a talk to Melbourne Storm if you still think its irrelevant).

2. The cost of living between cities also depends on the pay bracket you exist in. In the property market there may be a large difference in what you can get for 300-400k but very little difference over that, etc. Also there may be a difference in groceries at Coles but not at higher cost farmer's markets etc. It is a very difficult thing to prove. In general at the moment Melbourne and Sydney are very close and it is possible to live well in both cities for around the same cost, certainly 23k a year is exorbitant.

3. How heavily do the AFL follow this/ police it. If they are looking at all first year contracts and rookie listings and making sure this extra allowance is paid as a percentage across every contract then it is almost fair. However if Sydney can implement it however they want then they may just pay their list the same as everywhere else and use the extra money to lure players / take risks on NQR recycled players, which is clearly a completely unfair advantage.

This is the point, if it's for extra cost of living then it can't go into the consolidated salary cap figure, it must be kept separate and paid across the board as you say.

If it is about the Sydney market and the go home factor then the AFL need to be clear about it and not hide behind the cost of living BS.

I always thought that the extra cap was not about the cost of living, but more to do with helping Sydney attract players. Í think that Sydney have always struggled to get players to move there.

Gerald Healy, Greg Williams, Tony Locket, Peter Everett and Barry Hall disagree.

I love the Swans attitude and culture but every year after the Grand FInal the story revolving around the teams involved is about how do they afford to keep the group together. Geelong players took less money to stay as a group and got flags out of it. This year the Swans look set to sign the best available tall in the game. Can't see how thats fair after winning a flag with an extra mil to spend.