Jump to content

Featured Replies

Posted

The Herald Sun is running an article today around who the highest paid players in the AFL are.  They are looking at the players from 51-100 at the moment.  

Here is where some of the Melbourne players are:

86 - Angus Brayshaw.  Estimated salary between $600,000 - $650,000

66 - Christian Petracca.  Estimated salary between $650,000 - $700,000

59 - Tom McDonald.  Estimated salary between $675,000 - $725,000

56 - Jack Viney.  Estimated salary between $675,000 - $725,000

Thoughts everyone?

Happy to share info on other clubs if you want it.

 
  • Author

As a follow up - you could easily argue that Trac is underpaid, while at the moment Gus and Tom McDonald (who signed their deals in 2018) are being over paid.  I'd say Viney right now is pretty spot on.

May, Lever, Gawn and even Oliver may be in the next article of the Top 50 players.

Edit - and before we complain about over paying players, Mitch McGovern is at #51 on an estimated $675,000 - $725,000.  

Edited by Wiseblood

 

Is this the wage they received last year ?  or does it take into account front and back loaded deals ?  or just the average over the deal ?

 

 
  • Author
3 minutes ago, markc said:

 

Is this the wage they received last year ?  or does it take into account front and back loaded deals ?  or just the average over the deal ?

 

Great question - it is what they are being paid this year.  This is what they said in the article:

And when the Herald Sun tasked a reporting team of Glenn McFarlane, Jon Ralph and Jay Clark with building a list of footy’s top 100 paid players this year, two themes became apparent.

3 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Great question - it is what they are being paid this year.  This is what they said in the article:

And when the Herald Sun tasked a reporting team of Glenn McFarlane, Jon Ralph and Jay Clark with building a list of footy’s top 100 paid players this year, two themes became apparent.

interesting then , so these are the reduced wages ? didn't players take some wage cut ?? , time to have a coffee and do some research .... 

and we still have room in our salary cap , to chase another player , so they must have been front loaded to start off with. 

Edited by markc


  • Author
9 minutes ago, markc said:

interesting then , so these are the reduced wages ? didn't players take some wage cut ?? , time to have a coffee and do some research .... 

and we still have room in our salary cap , to chase another player , so they must have been front loaded to start off with. 

They did take cuts - that is in the article as well.  So the above wages are what they would have been on without the affected season.

This figures are guess-timates. I’ve seen about 80-90 contracts in my work capacity in the past 10 years. The contracts are formed on the criteria of 

- Base salary. ie. If you get injured and play zero games , you still get this amount 
- match payments (AFL, VFL)
- number of matches played in season  . Example: if you play more than 10 games, if you play more than 20 games  

- performance based. Club best and fairest 
- awards based.  

A play like Brayshaw would be on base $250k then around $15000 a match. If he played 20 matches and finished say 8-10th in B&F, he would probably earn around $600k. 

8 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

This figures are guess-timates. I’ve seen about 80-90 contracts in my work capacity in the past 10 years. The contracts are formed on the criteria of 

- Base salary. ie. If you get injured and play zero games , you still get this amount 
- match payments (AFL, VFL)
- number of matches played in season  . Example: if you play more than 10 games, if you play more than 20 games  

- performance based. Club best and fairest 
- awards based.  

A play like Brayshaw would be on base $250k then around $15000 a match. If he played 20 matches and finished say 8-10th in B&F, he would probably earn around $600k. 

good info norm

what generally happens with player payments when they are injured?

is there a difference between playing/training injuries vs free time injuries/illnesses?

 
31 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

good info norm

what generally happens with player payments when they are injured?

is there a difference between playing/training injuries vs free time injuries/illnesses?

I’ve read a few times lots of injuries to older established players can blow out a club’s player payments, that being cited as a factor sometimes when clubs have financial losses or lower surpluses.

That would mean the older players tend to be on higher base, but lower match payments.

Because if the older players were on higher match payments, it would cost less match payments if they got injured and younger players played in their place.

It makes sense as the older players are the better ones, otherwise they don’t get to be older players, and have more power when negotiating contracts because there would probably be other clubs interested, so they go for higher guaranteed, lower incentive deals.

47 minutes ago, Lampers said:

I’ve read a few times lots of injuries to older established players can blow out a club’s player payments, that being cited as a factor sometimes when clubs have financial losses or lower surpluses.

That would mean the older players tend to be on higher base, but lower match payments.

Because if the older players were on higher match payments, it would cost less match payments if they got injured and younger players played in their place.

It makes sense as the older players are the better ones, otherwise they don’t get to be older players, and have more power when negotiating contracts because there would probably be other clubs interested, so they go for higher guaranteed, lower incentive deals.

yes, of course it depends on how contracts are structured and hi-end players can more easily negotiate "safer" contracts.
but your reply seems to indicate that injured players don't get match payments or some sort of equivalent?

i would have thought that if players were injured in club activities (at least) they should receive some sort of match payment equivalent

 


3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

yes, of course it depends on how contracts are structured and hi-end players can more easily negotiate "safer" contracts.
but your reply seems to indicate that injured players don't get match payments or some sort of equivalent?

i would have thought that if players were injured in club activities (at least) they should receive some sort of match payment equivalent

 

Unfortunately I don’t know how it works in reality, just reverse engineering what must be going on to some degree based on the finances aspect with some guess work.

Clearly the club covers the medical costs of injury, but I suspect an injured player would get nothing for games they don’t play if they don’t play, or are medically unable to play. Just their base payments. Not sure how omitted due to “Managed” would work if the player wants to play, there’s no clear injury, but due to loads they are rested (unless of course “Managed” is code for a genuine injury that is being kept quiet).

Maybe spirit can bring an actual (name sanitised) example of how it works.

Edited by Lampers
Typo corrected

53 minutes ago, Lampers said:

Unfortunately I don’t know how it works in reality, just reverse engineering what must be going on to some degree based on the finances aspect with some guess work.

Clearly the club covers the medical costs of injury, but I suspect an injured player would get nothing for games they don’t play if they don’t play, or are medically unable to play. Just their base payments. Not sure how omitted due to “Managed” would work if the player wants to play, there’s no clear injury, but due to loads they are rested (unless of course “Managed” is code for a genuine injury that is being kept quiet).

Maybe spirit can bring an actual (name sanitised) example of how it works.

let's hope norm has an answer

maybe insurance plays a part?

i'd be filthy if my income was reduced due to an injury while on the job

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2020-salary-cap-total-player-payments-ordinary-players-paid-too-much-jordan-lewis-leigh-montagna-fox-footy-podcast/news-story/df7bc15b771eee365f016ea1711dc29a

 

Clubs should pay their top eight players – those that win or lose the game for you every week and play all the time – as much as they deserve. They are your stars. They deserve top dollar,” Montagna continued.

“You then need to pay your next five or six young players – the ones that are going to be stars – because you need to keep them at your footy club.

“Anyone in between, I know it sounds harsh, should be hard-balled.”

Lewis added: “More clubs need to go down that path. Make it disproportionate.

“Pay your top-end high and your bottom-end low. And if they want to leave, well so be it.”

This article argues that fringe players especially those outside best 22 are overpaid. Brutal but worth a think

 

6 hours ago, daisycutter said:

let's hope norm has an answer

maybe insurance plays a part?

i'd be filthy if my income was reduced due to an injury while on the job

A professional sportsperson in a contact sport isn’t really like a normal job though.

I can’t think of too many other jobs where injury is inevitable, and serious injury reasonably likely, so the players would go out there with a very different attitude than your average office worker.

The players have their union and I suspect that body has input into acceptable contract structures with regard to handling impacts of injury. At the very least they would have had a big input into contract structure for draftees as they all get standard contracts when they first get drafted with amount and length based on where in the draft they were taken. At one point interstate rookie draft draftees had an additional year compared to locals which would have been driven by the union, not sure if that’s still the case.

I’m sure players could take out personal injury insurance  or income protection insurance if they chose, but given the high risk of serious injury the premiums would be huge.

The clubs would have insurance to hedge the cost of surgeries should they have a particularly unlucky run with injuries requiring surgery, maybe they also insure against potential player payment blow outs due to high rates of injury?

21 hours ago, Lampers said:

I’ve read a few times lots of injuries to older established players can blow out a club’s player payments, that being cited as a factor sometimes when clubs have financial losses or lower surpluses.

That would mean the older players tend to be on higher base, but lower match payments.

Because if the older players were on higher match payments, it would cost less match payments if they got injured and younger players played in their place.

It makes sense as the older players are the better ones, otherwise they don’t get to be older players, and have more power when negotiating contracts because there would probably be other clubs interested, so they go for higher guaranteed, lower incentive deals.

You are correct re the blowout of costs impacting on financial results.  I recall at last year's fan forum Mahoney or Pert mentioned it as a reason for our loss.  We had a lot of senior players out injured and paying their (fixed) contract amounts and paying the replacement's match fees.

Not sure if it is only older players that have fixed contracts being paid regardless of games played.  The better players and those enticed from other clubs would be on fixed base contracts with bonuses eg B&F, Brownlow, AA and other award results.


i'd still like for someone with contract experience to explain how injury payments (or not) are generally handled

15 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i'd still like for someone with contract experience to explain how injury payments (or not) are generally handled

Maybe tweet Mahoney or any similar person at another club and see if they give a general response?

Edited by Lampers
Typo

7 minutes ago, Lampers said:

Maybe tweet Mahoney or any similar person at another club and see if they give a general response?

i'll see if spirit of norm smith replies, he's at least seen real contracts

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • PREVIEW: Carlton

    Good evening, Demon fans and welcome back to the Demonland Podcast ... it’s time to discuss this week’s game against the Blues. Will the Demons celebrate Clayton Oliver’s 200th game with a victory? We have a number of callers waiting on line … Leopold Bloom: Carlton and Melbourne are both out of finals contention with six wins and eleven losses, and are undoubtedly the two most underwhelming and disappointing teams of 2025. Both had high expectations at the start of participating and advancing deep into the finals, but instead, they have consistently underperformed and disappointed themselves and their supporters throughout the year. However, I am inclined to give the Demons the benefit of the doubt, as they have made some progress in addressing their issues after a disastrous start. In contrast, the Blues are struggling across the board and do not appear to be making any notable improvements. They are regressing, and a significant loss is looming on Saturday night. Max Gawn in the ruck will be huge and the Demon midfield have a point to prove after lowering their colours in so many close calls.

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 0 replies
  • REPORT: North Melbourne

    I suppose that I should apologise for the title of this piece, but the temptation to go with it was far too great. The memory of how North Melbourne tore Melbourne apart at the seams earlier in the season and the way in which it set the scene for the club’s demise so early in the piece has been weighing heavily upon all of us. This game was a must-win from the club’s perspective, and the team’s response was overwhelming. The 36 point win over Alastair Clarkson’s Kangaroos at the MCG on Sunday was indeed — roovenge of the highest order!

      • Love
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 4 replies
  • CASEY: Werribee

    The Casey Demons remain in contention for a VFL finals berth following a comprehensive 76-point victory over the Werribee Tigers at Whitten Oval last night. The caveat to the performance is that the once mighty Tigers have been raided of many key players and are now a shadow of the premiership-winning team from last season. The team suffered a blow before the game when veteran Tom McDonald was withdrawn for senior duty to cover for Steven May who is ill.  However, after conceding the first goal of the game, Casey was dominant from ten minutes in until the very end and despite some early errors and inaccuracy, they managed to warm to the task of dismantling the Tigers with precision, particularly after half time when the nominally home side provided them with minimal resistance.

      • Thanks
    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Carlton

    The Demons return to the MCG as the the visiting team on Saturday night to take on the Blues who are under siege after 4 straight losses. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 222 replies
  • PODCAST: North Melbourne

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 14th July @ 8:00pm. Join Binman & I as we dissect the Dees glorious win over the Kangaroos at the MCG.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 29 replies
  • POSTGAME: North Melbourne

    The Demons are finally back at the MCG and finally back on the winners list as they continually chipped away at a spirited Kangaroos side eventually breaking their backs and opening the floodgates to run out winners by 6 goals.

      • Haha
      • Love
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 253 replies