|
huddo
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Alou was signed to Stuttgart on a free transfer. I believe there were training fees given to CCM and GVS, and a finacial gift was also added to the deal in the 6 figures to CCM.
Kind of hard to believe what can be achieved when you give a poor club some money. Kind of proves the point of what could happen with some of the NPL teams given an oppotunity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now.....
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
As much criticism there has been on the A-league clubs taking you kids form NPL clubs on a free, the NPL clubs have been doing the same thing to their fellow NPL clubs.
What have your Bentleighs, avondales, oakleighs paid for the players they have poached from interstate clubs over the years??
Everyone has benefited in one way or another with his free agency model.
|
|
|
|
|
patjennings
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem..
|
|
|
|
|
huddo
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+xAs much criticism there has been on the A-league clubs taking you kids form NPL clubs on a free, the NPL clubs have been doing the same thing to their fellow NPL clubs. What have your Bentleighs, avondales, oakleighs paid for the players they have poached from interstate clubs over the years?? Everyone has benefited in one way or another with his free agency model. Dont worry, South are guilty of exactly the same thing. I agree with you.... This will hopefully stop now that clubs can see a way to retain and develop players, sign them to senior contracts and pass them up the foodchain for a decent reward.....
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level.....
|
|
|
|
|
Gyfox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. Agree Gyfox.... thats what makes their reluctance to adopt it so baffling.
|
|
|
|
|
Ds98
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. Agree Gyfox.... thats what makes their reluctance to adopt it so baffling. Agreed.
|
|
|
|
|
SWandP
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. Agree Gyfox.... thats what makes their reluctance to adopt it so baffling. Agreed. +x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. PFA won't allow it without removal of the cap. I don't see that they really connect. If the two are locked together, then the owners will get stiffed in the "lag" time between new income streams and the immediate necessary recruiting cost increases. You'd think there could be a middle ground where there is a transition period. Maybe increase cap by increments (say 25% pa) and allow them a couple of years to get it sorted. Open it up after 3 years or earlier if all parties agree.
|
|
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. Agree Gyfox.... thats what makes their reluctance to adopt it so baffling. Agreed. +x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. PFA won't allow it without removal of the cap. I don't see that they really connect. If the two are locked together, then the owners will get stiffed in the "lag" time between new income streams and the immediate necessary recruiting cost increases. You'd think there could be a middle ground where there is a transition period. Maybe increase cap by increments (say 25% pa) and allow them a couple of years to get it sorted. Open it up after 3 years or earlier if all parties agree. Prefer the APL and PFA get to a timeline and when they can introduce a transfer system at least, if it means removal of the salary cap then so be it but staying silent on the idea won't go far.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. Agree Gyfox.... thats what makes their reluctance to adopt it so baffling. Agreed. +x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. PFA won't allow it without removal of the cap. I don't see that they really connect. If the two are locked together, then the owners will get stiffed in the "lag" time between new income streams and the immediate necessary recruiting cost increases. You'd think there could be a middle ground where there is a transition period. Maybe increase cap by increments (say 25% pa) and allow them a couple of years to get it sorted. Open it up after 3 years or earlier if all parties agree. Doesn't the salary cap only relate to player wages though?? I don't understand why PFA's take that it has to be one way or the another.... I mean I don't understand why the APL has a salary cap anyway, but why is it stopping them from paying and receiving transfer fees?.
|
|
|
|
|
Footballking55
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.2K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. Agree Gyfox.... thats what makes their reluctance to adopt it so baffling. Agreed. +x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. PFA won't allow it without removal of the cap. I don't see that they really connect. If the two are locked together, then the owners will get stiffed in the "lag" time between new income streams and the immediate necessary recruiting cost increases. You'd think there could be a middle ground where there is a transition period. Maybe increase cap by increments (say 25% pa) and allow them a couple of years to get it sorted. Open it up after 3 years or earlier if all parties agree. Doesn't the salary cap only relate to player wages though?? I don't understand why PFA's take that it has to be one way or the another.... I mean I don't understand why the APL has a salary cap anyway, but why is it stopping them from paying and receiving transfer fees?. As far as I'm aware, transfer fees are included in the salary cap. Another of the silly rules to get rid of.
|
|
|
|
|
AyyLeague
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 423,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xCan't see it happening in the Aleague, how else are the big clubs going to gouge the smaller clubs of their developed players. This will just add another road block to NPL players proceeding to the ALeague, if this exists, and the Aleagues don't come in to the fold, what is the incentive on teams like the Mariners? Pay a shit load of money to an NPL club, then have SFC take him for free once proven what a load of shit. Honestly so close to walking away. What are you talking about? This is one of the most positive things to have happened in football recently. This is about forming a stronger system in grassroots football overall. Offering teams an incentive to develop players.
If the mariners do pay a fee to an NPL Club it is their prerogative to offer what they think they are worth. And length of contract would be one of those factors. Even now the mariners can just offer player x a contract for what they think they are worth. That’s not Sydney’s fault. Clubs should be more pro-active in tying down their good/promising players. So let's say the Mariners find a decent player and then put them on a small contract after organising a transfer fee. The Mariners outlay the money, the mariners take 100% of the risk. Along comes, one of the big clubs and says they'll pay the Former NPL Player triple, one year in to a 2 year contract. The Mariner now have a choice, a disgruntled player if they restrict the movement, or they can get no reimbursement if they want to recoup the risk and money outlayed. And this is a good thing? I have nothing against NPL clubs attempting to ensure they make money from their contracted players I'm just saying that it's going to shaft the small Aleague clubs, and if it shafts them to much, expect a reduction in number of NPL Players being scouted. I want a DTS more than anyone but this will now squeeze the small clubs from both direction, it will be at the detriment of Australian Players, and Developmental Clubs. You arent wrong mate, but its the AL clubs who have declined to implement the DTS, the NPL clubs shouldn't be picking up the tab because the AL clubs decided they wanted to fight to keep the status quo of getting players for next to nothing. Your issue is fixed immediately if the AL clubs just implemented the DTS as well. The resistance from the AL teams according to what Danny Townsend said is "Why would an AL club pay for a talented NPL player when its cheaper to use a player who is almost as good from their academy". So in the interim we have a scenario where more youth players are given a chance because it becomes cheaper (and more profitable if they are sold O/S). The NPL clubs would be able to either sell players to the 2 Div clubs or amongst themselves, if a div 2 is implemented these players would still be in the professional environment. There is also the issue of the Players association saying they want DTS or Salary Cap and not both because it restricts what players can earn which is something the AL teams also need to overcome. Do you know when and where he said this? It doesn't surprise me that the APL think like this.
|
|
|
|
|
Stenson
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 215,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xCan't see it happening in the Aleague, how else are the big clubs going to gouge the smaller clubs of their developed players. This will just add another road block to NPL players proceeding to the ALeague, if this exists, and the Aleagues don't come in to the fold, what is the incentive on teams like the Mariners? Pay a shit load of money to an NPL club, then have SFC take him for free once proven what a load of shit. Honestly so close to walking away. What are you talking about? This is one of the most positive things to have happened in football recently. This is about forming a stronger system in grassroots football overall. Offering teams an incentive to develop players.
If the mariners do pay a fee to an NPL Club it is their prerogative to offer what they think they are worth. And length of contract would be one of those factors. Even now the mariners can just offer player x a contract for what they think they are worth. That’s not Sydney’s fault. Clubs should be more pro-active in tying down their good/promising players. So let's say the Mariners find a decent player and then put them on a small contract after organising a transfer fee. The Mariners outlay the money, the mariners take 100% of the risk. Along comes, one of the big clubs and says they'll pay the Former NPL Player triple, one year in to a 2 year contract. The Mariner now have a choice, a disgruntled player if they restrict the movement, or they can get no reimbursement if they want to recoup the risk and money outlayed. And this is a good thing? I have nothing against NPL clubs attempting to ensure they make money from their contracted players I'm just saying that it's going to shaft the small Aleague clubs, and if it shafts them to much, expect a reduction in number of NPL Players being scouted. I want a DTS more than anyone but this will now squeeze the small clubs from both direction, it will be at the detriment of Australian Players, and Developmental Clubs. You arent wrong mate, but its the AL clubs who have declined to implement the DTS, the NPL clubs shouldn't be picking up the tab because the AL clubs decided they wanted to fight to keep the status quo of getting players for next to nothing. Your issue is fixed immediately if the AL clubs just implemented the DTS as well. The resistance from the AL teams according to what Danny Townsend said is "Why would an AL club pay for a talented NPL player when its cheaper to use a player who is almost as good from their academy". So in the interim we have a scenario where more youth players are given a chance because it becomes cheaper (and more profitable if they are sold O/S). The NPL clubs would be able to either sell players to the 2 Div clubs or amongst themselves, if a div 2 is implemented these players would still be in the professional environment. There is also the issue of the Players association saying they want DTS or Salary Cap and not both because it restricts what players can earn which is something the AL teams also need to overcome. Do you know when and where he said this? It doesn't surprise me that the APL think like this. I heard Townsend in interviews on multiple podcasts on this. It's a long time ago so, I think one was on aleague podcast with Danny Garb and Rob Cornthwaite, another could of been Box2Box Towsend is a lowlife. He does not reflect the general opinion of the football landscape in Australia. As I've said, restructure the competitions and let those that want you go, to piss off! Those that want to stay, to stay.
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
hes a white collar guy nowadays and its all about the model and money. As an ex player you'd think he'd have the experience from way back then but not this bloke.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+xhes a white collar guy nowadays and its all about the model and money. As an ex player you'd think he'd have the experience from way back then but not this bloke. Pffft he was shit, ex player? hahahahah he had 6 appearances with Sydney Croatia 
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. Agree Gyfox.... thats what makes their reluctance to adopt it so baffling. Agreed. +x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI'm sorry but there's just no argument against a DTS that stacks up. It's the way football works the world over, every single country has a DTS except Australia. Take an example, If the Mariners pay 30k+ 20% of future fee for a youngster, then after a couple of season the players gets poached to another Australian club for 150k+ 25% future fee, then after another couple of seasons an O/S club purchases said player for 800k. The NPL club ends up with 60k going back into its kitty, the mariners get 350k and the final AL club gets 600k+ whatever future fee that play might accrue. This scenario of course requires aleague transfer fees, which is mandatory, big clubs can not be allowed to rob poorer ones any longer. If the player went straight overseas from the mariners for 500k rather than joining another aleague club, the NPL club would earn $130k, the Mariners 370k+ whatever future fee. Everyone's still smiling. Yes some transfers will end up as money poured down the sink, that's football. The aim is to earn more in transfer fees received than you spend on transfers. If clubs start paying more domestically and establishing a certain value flow this will help raise the value of all aleague transfers. currently nearly all aleague transfers are appallingly weighted towards the buying club, we get robbed blind. Look at the McGree > Charlotte transfer scenario. And yes aleague clubs can afford it. If the Mariners invested their $ from Kuol's departure in another 6 players and they hope at least 1 of these new players generates a similar fee and the process keeps rolling. Half the league are owned by millionaires, this is just a new playground for them to flex - the new objective of Australian football, which club can set the records for highest transfer fee received. If clubs don't want ot pay for NPL players they use their own academies and develop internally like other clubs in development leagues do. Agree with the premise - just not the example in the case of the Mariners. I think that the Mariners are cherry-picking youngsters before they sign a professional contract. In this case the NPL and other clubs would get training compensation. I believe that was the case for Alou Kuol from talking to his coach at the time and would certainly be true of Garang and Teng. With the NSD and NPL clubs also heavily scouting for players to develop because there is money in it Mariners might find it hard to work that way in future. Maybe - but if does it means younger players are getting paid as professionals. Good for them!! If not the Mariners have a history of promoting young players and will still remain attractive. But if the Aleague academy players moving into aleague squads and subsequently move onto other Aleagueclubs are not currently allowed a transfer fee, some of these youngsters the Mariners (and other Aleague academies) have been cherrypicking would maybe not go there.... In the Kuols brothers case, better for them to sign senior contracts at GV Suns in NPL THEN get transferred to Aleague..... as it stands now..... As I said - good for them!! I think a DTS - across the board - is a good thing and would only benefit the Mariners. This half asrsed attempt with no feess within the A League is the problem.. +1. It's what I've been saying for the last week. Half a DTS, is not beneficial to the Mariners, and if that's the case, it won't be beneficial to the NPL. Sorry mate, I disagree. Yes a half DTS is not beneficial to the Mariners but it IS for all clubs below the Aleague level..... Half a DTS will be beneficial for the A-League clubs in that it will still generate upward movement of better developed young players for the clubs to consider signing. The issue that half a DTS brings is it limits the options that the A-League clubs have to be recompensed for the work they have put in to players within their club and in that the clubs are hurting themselves. PFA won't allow it without removal of the cap. I don't see that they really connect. If the two are locked together, then the owners will get stiffed in the "lag" time between new income streams and the immediate necessary recruiting cost increases. You'd think there could be a middle ground where there is a transition period. Maybe increase cap by increments (say 25% pa) and allow them a couple of years to get it sorted. Open it up after 3 years or earlier if all parties agree. Doesn't the salary cap only relate to player wages though?? I don't understand why PFA's take that it has to be one way or the another.... I mean I don't understand why the APL has a salary cap anyway, but why is it stopping them from paying and receiving transfer fees?. As far as I'm aware, transfer fees are included in the salary cap. Another of the silly rules to get rid of. I'm pretty sure they are not included. I think the PFA is just looking for an angle to scrap the cap.
|
|
|
|
|
AyyLeague
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 423,
Visits: 0
|
+xI heard Townsend in interviews on multiple podcasts on this. It's a long time ago so, I think one was on aleague podcast with Danny Garb and Rob Cornthwaite, another could of been Box2Box
Towsend is a lowlife. He does not reflect the general opinion of the football landscape in Australia.
As I've said, restructure the competitions and let those that want you go, to piss off!
Those that want to stay, to stay.
+xhes a white collar guy nowadays and its all about the model and money.
As an ex player you'd think he'd have the experience from way back then but not this bloke.
He's the face of the new management, and represents what they want for their financiers football.
+xPffft he was shit, ex player? hahahahah he had 6 appearances with Sydney Croatia
Wasn't that in Sydney United's Premiership season? Not that it matters since the 'champion' gets all the credit anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI heard Townsend in interviews on multiple podcasts on this. It's a long time ago so, I think one was on aleague podcast with Danny Garb and Rob Cornthwaite, another could of been Box2Box
Towsend is a lowlife. He does not reflect the general opinion of the football landscape in Australia.
As I've said, restructure the competitions and let those that want you go, to piss off!
Those that want to stay, to stay.
+xhes a white collar guy nowadays and its all about the model and money.
As an ex player you'd think he'd have the experience from way back then but not this bloke.
He's the face of the new management, and represents what they want for their financiers football.
+xPffft he was shit, ex player? hahahahah he had 6 appearances with Sydney Croatia
Wasn't that in Sydney United's Premiership season? Not that it matters since the 'champion' gets all the credit anyway.
And what a champion it was that year..... :)
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI heard Townsend in interviews on multiple podcasts on this. It's a long time ago so, I think one was on aleague podcast with Danny Garb and Rob Cornthwaite, another could of been Box2Box
Towsend is a lowlife. He does not reflect the general opinion of the football landscape in Australia.
As I've said, restructure the competitions and let those that want you go, to piss off!
Those that want to stay, to stay.
+xhes a white collar guy nowadays and its all about the model and money.
As an ex player you'd think he'd have the experience from way back then but not this bloke.
He's the face of the new management, and represents what they want for their financiers football.
+xPffft he was shit, ex player? hahahahah he had 6 appearances with Sydney Croatia
Wasn't that in Sydney United's Premiership season? Not that it matters since the 'champion' gets all the credit anyway.
BA BOOM ! yep yep and yep........exactely why I posted originally about him, its all about the metric$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$'$
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI heard Townsend in interviews on multiple podcasts on this. It's a long time ago so, I think one was on aleague podcast with Danny Garb and Rob Cornthwaite, another could of been Box2Box
Towsend is a lowlife. He does not reflect the general opinion of the football landscape in Australia.
As I've said, restructure the competitions and let those that want you go, to piss off!
Those that want to stay, to stay.
+xhes a white collar guy nowadays and its all about the model and money.
As an ex player you'd think he'd have the experience from way back then but not this bloke.
He's the face of the new management, and represents what they want for their financiers football.
+xPffft he was shit, ex player? hahahahah he had 6 appearances with Sydney Croatia
Wasn't that in Sydney United's Premiership season? Not that it matters since the 'champion' gets all the credit anyway.
BA BOOM ! yep yep and yep........exactely why I posted originally about him, its all about the metric$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$'$ It always was mate... Don't blame the guy, he is obviously on good coin with APL, but dont think for a second he isnt just a mouthpiece for the money bags behind him.... As an ex footballer of sorts he may well have some understanding of what sporting achievement is all about but his bills are paid by people who DON'T CARE about any of that. Asking APL owners to open up the league is like asking any rich SOB to share his wealth ... Aint gonna happen.
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
Bring ON the NSD....can't wait.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+xBring ON the NSD....can't wait. No news and its already June..... Starting to think it may not happen next year at this stage. Would have thought they would have at least announced the clubs involved by now...... ?
|
|
|
|
|
AyyLeague
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 423,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI heard Townsend in interviews on multiple podcasts on this. It's a long time ago so, I think one was on aleague podcast with Danny Garb and Rob Cornthwaite, another could of been Box2Box
Towsend is a lowlife. He does not reflect the general opinion of the football landscape in Australia.
As I've said, restructure the competitions and let those that want you go, to piss off!
Those that want to stay, to stay.
+xhes a white collar guy nowadays and its all about the model and money.
As an ex player you'd think he'd have the experience from way back then but not this bloke.
He's the face of the new management, and represents what they want for their financiers football.
+xPffft he was shit, ex player? hahahahah he had 6 appearances with Sydney Croatia
Wasn't that in Sydney United's Premiership season? Not that it matters since the 'champion' gets all the credit anyway.
And what a champion it was that year..... :) Not to have a dig at previous winners like SM and Wollongong but between that and the Perth Glory Premiership the following season is why I largely despise the finals series as a concept and how it's connected to the league (don't even mention the farce behind Victory's last GF win). I will give credit to the APL for this season's format in getting the balance right - the top 2 get the extra time to prepare and get 2-legs to play, whilst the winners get the same time to prepare for the final - but I wish it was treated as its own thing though, like what the NSL cup was initially.
|
|
|
|
|
AyyLeague
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 423,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xBring ON the NSD....can't wait. No news and its already June..... Starting to think it may not happen next year at this stage. Would have thought they would have at least announced the clubs involved by now...... ? Imo not starting next season would be a missed opportunity given all the football-related events that are set to happen next season.
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xBring ON the NSD....can't wait. No news and its already June..... Starting to think it may not happen next year at this stage. Would have thought they would have at least announced the clubs involved by now...... ? Imo not starting next season would be a missed opportunity given all the football-related events that are set to happen next season. It was mentioned by the JJ guru that is exactely what they wish to capitilise on due to the WWC. Yes MSC its been quiet but lets keep the faith at this stage.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
libelous
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 889,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xBring ON the NSD....can't wait. No news and its already June..... Starting to think it may not happen next year at this stage. Would have thought they would have at least announced the clubs involved by now...... ? Imo not starting next season would be a missed opportunity given all the football-related events that are set to happen next season. It was mentioned by the JJ guru that is exactely what they wish to capitilise on due to the WWC. Yes MSC its been quiet but lets keep the faith at this stage. With the rumoured expansion to 12 teams for the ALM with a true home and away schedule, the start of the 10 team NSD and the WWC next year will be BIG.
|
|
|
|
|
libelous
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 889,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xBring ON the NSD....can't wait. No news and its already June..... Starting to think it may not happen next year at this stage. Would have thought they would have at least announced the clubs involved by now...... ? Imo not starting next season would be a missed opportunity given all the football-related events that are set to happen next season. It was mentioned by the JJ guru that is exactely what they wish to capitilise on due to the WWC. Yes MSC its been quiet but lets keep the faith at this stage. With the rumoured expansion to 12 teams for the ALM with a true home and away schedule, the start of the 10 team NSD and the WWC next year will be BIG. Sorry that should read ‘rumoured expansion to 14 teams’.
|
|
|
|