Going on what we rumour to pay players I took at stab at Hawthorn's list. Being, what I thought was conservative.

10.071 million for next year.

600k - Roughead, Lewis, Mitchell, Hodge
500k - Frawley, Burgoyne, Gibson, Birchall
400k - Rioli, Gunston, Isaac Smith, Breust, Lake
300k - McEvoy, Hale, Hill, Suckling, Shiels, Stratton
150k - Duryea, Spangher, Puopolo, Ceglar, Langford, Litherland, Schoenmakers, Simpkin

4 * 600 = 2.4
4 * 500 = 2
5 * 400 = 2
6 * 300 = 1.8
8 * 150 = 1.2
26 players for a cost of 9.4 million

To fit the remaining 18 players on the list in they'd have to pay them 33k a piece and that likely includes guys like Hallahan, Woodward, Anderson, Cheney and Whitecross!!! Even if Lake goes it still doesn't free up enough cap to pay the draft scale minimums.

I mean it has to be fair to ask who is getting paid what doesn't it? How is not one of those younger players forced out? Even if you count Lowden, Schoenmakers and Sewell retiring.

Something is amiss about the AFL salary cap and TPP and about how much top clubs pay players compared to bottom clubs. Either that or their is just straight forward cheating.

the problem is the minimum salary cap.

why should a team like us pay its players who are vastly inferior pretty much the same as the all conquering hawks players?

if we could pay them what they were actually worth (peanuts) then it wouldnt be a problem.

Surely you are not suggesting that some aspect of the AFL lacks a degree of transparency, are you?

You obviously don't know that they have (something along the lines of) integrity commissioners :-)))))

You know what the actual sad thing is?

We have so many B grade and below players on our list being paid the same and sometimes more money than some of their premiership players.

Edited October 2, 201411 yr by The Song Formerly Known As

You know what the actual sad thing is?

We have so many B grade and below players on our list being paid the same and sometimes more money than some of their premiership players.

Exactly Song. I have lamented this for some time. Hawthorn, geelong, swans all pay around the same amount as us to their players. Just look at the shite we get back. Hardly value for money!!! FMD

I never understood the paying a minimum of your salary cap rule. Its like telling any business you mist spend this much on staffing even if you don't need it.

There should be a minimum wage for players and the rest is by the free market. It will naturally adjust itself with competition between clubs for valuable players.

Looking at your above figures, isn't the minimum wag close of a $100k nowadays?

Exactly Song. I have lamented this for some time. Hawthorn, geelong, swans all pay around the same amount as us to their players. Just look at the shite we get back. Hardly value for money!!! FMD

Shhhhhhh don't say anything like that too loudly. Lynden Dunn might be watching.

You know what the actual sad thing is?

We have so many B grade and below players on our list being paid the same and sometimes more money than some of their premiership players.

Yep. I figure guys like Grimes, Watts, Trengove etc get paid 300k to do nothing whilst Isaac Smith, Hill, Shiels etc get the same.

But I'm probably more annoyed that in order to recruit them Dawes and Vince get pay rises. Frawley, Lake, Hale etc take pay cuts to go to Hawthorn.

Even more so guys like Lewis and Roughy take huge unders. I guess if you're earning half a mil per year you aren't too fussed.

In some regards it's why I'd like to see free agency opened up for any player post 6 years and turn it in to a proper meat market. At least that way the wages would rise across the board and maybe the superstars would spread themselves out a bit. In that way players being selfish would actually help equalise the comp.

I figure every club has to pay the bottom 20 players on rookie, drafts and basic contracts the same amount. It's the top 20 where the discretion goes. It should be that if you have 5 or so superstars then they take a lot of the money and the rest of your best 20 includes a few cheap guys. That's how the saints were when they were good. Now this Hawthorn 'culture' stuff is killing me.

They also do very well with veterans payments. And apparently some of their players even get AFL Tasmania ambassador payments. What a crock.

Yep. I figure guys like Grimes, Watts, Trengove etc get paid 300k to do nothing whilst Isaac Smith, Hill, Shiels etc get the same.

But I'm probably more annoyed that in order to recruit them Dawes and Vince get pay rises. Frawley, Lake, Hale etc take pay cuts to go to Hawthorn.

Even more so guys like Lewis and Roughy take huge unders. I guess if you're earning half a mil per year you aren't too fussed.

In some regards it's why I'd like to see free agency opened up for any player post 6 years and turn it in to a proper meat market. At least that way the wages would rise across the board and maybe the superstars would spread themselves out a bit. In that way players being selfish would actually help equalise the comp.

I figure every club has to pay the bottom 20 players on rookie, drafts and basic contracts the same amount. It's the top 20 where the discretion goes. It should be that if you have 5 or so superstars then they take a lot of the money and the rest of your best 20 includes a few cheap guys. That's how the saints were when they were good. Now this Hawthorn 'culture' stuff is killing me.

They also do very well with veterans payments. And apparently some of their players even get AFL Tasmania ambassador payments. What a crock.

I hope some of ours are getting NT ambassador payments if that is the case.

In some regards it's why I'd like to see free agency opened up for any player post 6 years and turn it in to a proper meat market. At least that way the wages would rise across the board and maybe the superstars would spread themselves out a bit. In that way players being selfish would actually help equalise the comp.

Why not just do it after 2 years? you do your 2 year draft contract at the club that drafts you, then you can go wherever you want.

have to get rid of the minimum salary cap payments though

Only ever known a couple of AFL players in my life. Both of them (one played for Hawthorn, coincidently, though 30 years ago, so I suppose the situation's changed) told me that they made more "unofficially" than they ever did officially.

Maybe the top clubs just have more cunning accountants.

Because of the unfortunate situation we find ourselves in, we will have to overpay players to keep them.

Hawthorn won't have that problem, with success comes the luxury of underpaying players - so both player/club remain successful.

Comparisons matters very little, because one club reigns supreme - and the other holds up the ladder.

This is why opposition supporters views on compensation is a joke, because Frawley is compared to Buddy.

The very sad thing is that the AFL is swayed by public opinion, and in our case - it is firmly against us.

This is why Paul Roos - being the smart man he is - directs public attention towards the inequality of FA.

We really do have a smooth operator in the chair, that much is obvious.

Why not just do it after 2 years? you do your 2 year draft contract at the club that drafts you, then you can go wherever you want.

have to get rid of the minimum salary cap payments though

It should be after the original draft contract. It's just that original contract should go for 4 or even 5 years (with option to terminate after 2). Ridiculous that drafting a player only gives you 2 years of them.

A lot of those players would be on a lot less than that.

They would be way under there market value to stay together for success.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YrQqrG67OVg shut up & just pay what you owe, chipper (pplayed by Pesci) collect from hillbilly played by (Hawthorn)