Lucifers Hero

Players are paid monthly so had already been paid in full for at least 6 months from Oct 2019 to March 2020. So it was 50% of the remaining (4 to 6) months. That aside I agree, the speed at which expenditure was reduced was quite impressive. Sadly most of that was in the football and admin departments which meant cutting peoples' livelihoods.

That is a very good question. Apparently the Hubs cost just $60m - half to a third of what was originally estimated. The AFL had a cash holding of $187m at end of 2019, received about $200m from broadcasters (see article below), other income from sponsors, some income from gate revenues and payments from Qld gov't for hosting the GF. And it drastically cut expenditure across the board. I have a sense that it used but a small proportion of the $500m line of credit. This article provides a good run down of where the AFL finances are at the-afl-season-is-over-let-the-financials-begin! Have to agree with its summary: "...the forthcoming AGM and annual report will provide interest to many." The issue for me is if the AFL didn't need to use much of the $500m did the cut of 30% in Football Department soft cap need to be so drastic and similarly the sal cap for player payments which forced many clubs into back-ending revised contracts.

It could be what they asked for and being GF'ists requests get granted. And in a way it doesn't matter when they play there they will win. Just like Richmond had a long run of games at the G in the latter rounds in recent years. Being GF or premiers helps persuade the AFL on numerous fixture benefits. On the positve side for us, seven of our first 9 games are in Melbourne (6 at the G, of which 5 are Home games, and 1 is at Marvel). I'm guessing lots of early Melbourne games is what the club asked for to get fans attending games (gate revenue) and to sell memberships in the early rounds. That early revenue will be important to us.

I was thinking that it is unlikely there will be walk up GA tickets available because of covid capacity constraints. So if fans want to see game at the G such as Carlton, Rich, Hawks, Geelong, Collingwood (and an offset game for Alice probably vs Hawks) it is best to buy a membership . Good value I reckon.

A good fixture for memberships: Generally, quality opponents for our Home games at the G incl our two blockbusters vs Richmond and Collingwood. Every chance there will be capacity restrictions at the G so time to buy memberships folks.

Can we merge this with the 2021 Fixture Thread. Similar posts in both threads.

No back to back interstate games. Only two long-haul flights (Perth and Alice). Good break between Alice and the next game then the bye. Only two top 8 sides: Cats, Bulldogs. Overall this is a good fixture in terms of difficulty and fatigue issues. No excuses next year.

Happy to be playing the Lions in Alice. Should have the majority of fans for us rather than the usual WA or SA clubs. Significant 'Home' ground advantage for us. No bye after this game but we play Coll on QB so it would give us at least an 8 day break for recovery.

Double ups: Hawks, Giants, Crows, Geelong, Bulldogs. Geelong and Bulldogs are the only 2020 finalists we play twice. This is a kind fixture.

Coll vs WBD: Friday Night, FTA - AFL and broadcasters wanting to 'cash in' on the Treloar trade debacle. As an aside, not expecting much prime time, FTA exposure. With last year's top 8 teams to accommodate plus the AFL perpetual need to give Carlton and Ess maximum exposure we will be well down the pecking order. We will be in the bottom 8 in the tv stakes at least for the early rounds of the 'moving fixture'. Hopefully we start winning and earn better exposure as each fixture block is date/time scheduled

Their youngsters: Top 10 draft picks: Billings, Clark, King, Coffield. Top 10- 20 draft pick: Gresham, Later picks come good: Steele, Lonie And a variety of promising young players. They compare fairly well with our equivalents. And they have probably done better than us on the mature age recruits. On balance their list looks not too different to ours.

LATEST LIST HERE: 19 November 2021 Update for the Petty and Fritsch contract extensions. The Petty extension is until 2025 when he will be an RFA. At the end of Fritsch's contract in 2026 he will be an FA. No change to our list or draft position since the last update. This has been an amazingly small list turnover, almost all 'forced' changes: Jones and Jetta retired, Vandenberg going on to a new career, Nietschke had a long term injury, Bradtke (I think) had no more years left as a rookie. So only true delisting were one from the senior list (Hore) and two from the rookie list (Lockhart and Declase). A very stable list, one which just won a Premiership!

I don't think their playing stocks are better than ours but their list isn't really bad. Its better than the Hawks. And Pies facilities, financial strength, continuity and stability of sponsors, and membership are so superior to ours it isn't funny.

They are both right. It depends which version of the Coll contract is believed. One version had it at $900/$950 per year for 5 years so the HS is more correct. Another version is $750 in some years and $950 in other years over 5 years so The Age is more correct. I trust The Age to be (a little) less prone to hyperbole for click bait.

He can go with love-child, Buckley whose contract expires next year. No way they will make finals. Coll power brokers can start working on getting Clarkson to the pies. Of all the clubs that might be looking for a new coach next year Coll would be a juicy prospect.

That is really, really poor. I've not been a fan but he deserves public and resounding acknowledgement for his commitment to the club and praise for the professionalism in his work. Hopefully, it was an oversight and it is remedied at the AGM.

Not yet. Subject discussed in this thread.

Found it! From The Age: "In the week before Christmas clubs can nominate a maximum of six players being considered for the SSP to train with them from January 6 when club's senior players return". afl/the-afl-to-have-one-mid-season-rookie-draft

Thanks for noticing. Correct table: This paints quite a different picture - we won't be caught out by a lot of long - term contacts with 28 players (excl rookies) coming out of contract in the next two years. It goes a long way to reducing our player contract risk. While it gives us less leverage over players who may want a trade it also protects us against the TMac scenario where his sal package was to big a hurdle for other clubs to take on.

No order. It is by invitation to train. Player can say aye or nay. Then the club can offer a rookie spot.

Oh, my! Great pick up. Will post a corrected table asap!

Not sure. I'm still trying to find the PSS guidelines again.

A great by-product of this is that AFLW will no longer have the farcical conference system and will go back to a single ladder.

Yes. Just waiting for the dust to settle on the drafting and will start a new '2021 List' thread with all the updated info.

I'm not entirely sure whether it is one or two as there is some confusion about the mix allowed to get to a total of 44 players. There are AFL releases with conflicting info. So we have at least 1 'A' rookie. Could be 2 depending on interpretation of the rules.