|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou would probably see the better current A-League players migrate towards the bigger clubs whilst the smaller clubs will rely more on NPL/Youth players (which would be better for our overall pool of players.) Why would that be better for our overall pool of players? Because the best are playing with the best and developing an understanding. This translates to when they play for the shokkazoos. That's the opposite of improving the overall pool of players and the best still aren't going to be playing here in the A-league. We have nothing in common with these leagues either. There is no international talent pool these leagues can recruit from for one, unlike Association Football. Melbourne City and a couple of other teams like Sydney, WSW, and MVFC could bring some top caliber players into the A League. The more that they spend, the better quality of the players they will entice and recruit. How that is a bad thing is beyond me. I think you quoted the wrong post. Anyway basketball is almost as huge as football and there is a massive international talent pool of players. Rugby League and Union also have international talent pools and have capped leagues. Ice Hockey is another. I've already asked why you think they'll get better (I assume international) players without a cap? They have a marquee rule already and this is who they have: Victory: Berisha, Bozanic City: Fornaroli, Colazo WSW: Martinez Sydney: Holosko, Bobo All perfectly decent players but are any of those that much better than some of the non-marquee visa players? Maybe Fornaroli and Berisha but they came here within the salary cap. Where it's damaging is that City and the others will take the good Australian players from the clubs with a smaller wage bill. A bunch of inexperienced kids and NPL players are going to have a tough time being "organised" enough to win anything. Let's be honest here. The above are not really Marquees because the FFA calls them so. Fornaroli for instance was a washout from the Greek Super League. he couldn't take a trick there and here is is all of a sudden a marquee, which in my opinion says a lot about the standard of our league. Sorry that's not how the marquee works though it's easy to make that mistake because that's how it was intended to be. Marquees can be anyone the club wants them to be, they're essentially just players whose wages aren't included in the cap. The only spot that FFA has any proper say over is the guest player which is the one that Tim Cahill is signed on. I agree, the standard of the league is mid-tier at best but it's quite entertaining and I love my Reds. However, the cap being removed isn't going to make even the richest teams FIFA Club World Cup contenders. It's going just going to lower competitiveness in our own league and related consequences.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mouflonrouge
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou would probably see the better current A-League players migrate towards the bigger clubs whilst the smaller clubs will rely more on NPL/Youth players (which would be better for our overall pool of players.) Why would that be better for our overall pool of players? Because the best are playing with the best and developing an understanding. This translates to when they play for the shokkazoos. That's the opposite of improving the overall pool of players and the best still aren't going to be playing here in the A-league. We have nothing in common with these leagues either. There is no international talent pool these leagues can recruit from for one, unlike Association Football. Melbourne City and a couple of other teams like Sydney, WSW, and MVFC could bring some top caliber players into the A League. The more that they spend, the better quality of the players they will entice and recruit. How that is a bad thing is beyond me. I think you quoted the wrong post. Anyway basketball is almost as huge as football and there is a massive international talent pool of players. Rugby League and Union also have international talent pools and have capped leagues. Ice Hockey is another. I've already asked why you think they'll get better (I assume international) players without a cap? They have a marquee rule already and this is who they have: Victory: Berisha, Bozanic City: Fornaroli, Colazo WSW: Martinez Sydney: Holosko, Bobo All perfectly decent players but are any of those that much better than some of the non-marquee visa players? Maybe Fornaroli and Berisha but they came here within the salary cap. Where it's damaging is that City and the others will take the good Australian players from the clubs with a smaller wage bill. A bunch of inexperienced kids and NPL players are going to have a tough time being "organised" enough to win anything. Let's be honest here. The above are not really Marquees because the FFA calls them so. Fornaroli for instance was a washout from the Greek Super League. he couldn't take a trick there and here is is all of a sudden a marquee, which in my opinion says a lot about the standard of our league. Sorry that's not how the marquee works though it's easy to make that mistake because that's how it was intended to be. Marquees can be anyone the club wants them to be, they're essentially just players whose wages aren't included in the cap. The only spot that FFA has any proper say over is the guest player which is the one that Tim Cahill is signed on. I agree, the standard of the league is mid-tier at best but it's quite entertaining and I love my Reds. However, the cap being removed isn't going to make even the richest teams FIFA Club World Cup contenders. It's going just going to lower competitiveness in our own league and related consequences. Well that just makes it worse. If we can't afford to buy some stars, just make a marquee out of anyone that you just want to retain. We need some players like David Villa, not make a marquee out of the Berisha's and Fornaroli's.
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest.
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou would probably see the better current A-League players migrate towards the bigger clubs whilst the smaller clubs will rely more on NPL/Youth players (which would be better for our overall pool of players.) Why would that be better for our overall pool of players? Because the best are playing with the best and developing an understanding. This translates to when they play for the shokkazoos. That's the opposite of improving the overall pool of players and the best still aren't going to be playing here in the A-league. We have nothing in common with these leagues either. There is no international talent pool these leagues can recruit from for one, unlike Association Football. Melbourne City and a couple of other teams like Sydney, WSW, and MVFC could bring some top caliber players into the A League. The more that they spend, the better quality of the players they will entice and recruit. How that is a bad thing is beyond me. I think you quoted the wrong post. Anyway basketball is almost as huge as football and there is a massive international talent pool of players. Rugby League and Union also have international talent pools and have capped leagues. Ice Hockey is another. I've already asked why you think they'll get better (I assume international) players without a cap? They have a marquee rule already and this is who they have: Victory: Berisha, Bozanic City: Fornaroli, Colazo WSW: Martinez Sydney: Holosko, Bobo All perfectly decent players but are any of those that much better than some of the non-marquee visa players? Maybe Fornaroli and Berisha but they came here within the salary cap. Where it's damaging is that City and the others will take the good Australian players from the clubs with a smaller wage bill. A bunch of inexperienced kids and NPL players are going to have a tough time being "organised" enough to win anything. Let's be honest here. The above are not really Marquees because the FFA calls them so. Fornaroli for instance was a washout from the Greek Super League. he couldn't take a trick there and here is is all of a sudden a marquee, which in my opinion says a lot about the standard of our league. Sorry that's not how the marquee works though it's easy to make that mistake because that's how it was intended to be. Marquees can be anyone the club wants them to be, they're essentially just players whose wages aren't included in the cap. The only spot that FFA has any proper say over is the guest player which is the one that Tim Cahill is signed on. I agree, the standard of the league is mid-tier at best but it's quite entertaining and I love my Reds. However, the cap being removed isn't going to make even the richest teams FIFA Club World Cup contenders. It's going just going to lower competitiveness in our own league and related consequences. Well that just makes it worse. If we can't afford to buy some stars, just make a marquee out of anyone that you just want to retain. So scoring 29 goals in 33 games is not worthy of marquee status?
|
|
|
|
|
bigpoppa
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xyou would probably see the better current A-League players migrate towards the bigger clubs whilst the smaller clubs will rely more on NPL/Youth players (which would be better for our overall pool of players.) Why would that be better for our overall pool of players? Because the best are playing with the best and developing an understanding. This translates to when they play for the shokkazoos. That's the opposite of improving the overall pool of players and the best still aren't going to be playing here in the A-league. We have nothing in common with these leagues either. There is no international talent pool these leagues can recruit from for one, unlike Association Football. Melbourne City and a couple of other teams like Sydney, WSW, and MVFC could bring some top caliber players into the A League. The more that they spend, the better quality of the players they will entice and recruit. How that is a bad thing is beyond me. I think you quoted the wrong post. Anyway basketball is almost as huge as football and there is a massive international talent pool of players. Rugby League and Union also have international talent pools and have capped leagues. Ice Hockey is another. I've already asked why you think they'll get better (I assume international) players without a cap? They have a marquee rule already and this is who they have: Victory: Berisha, Bozanic City: Fornaroli, Colazo WSW: Martinez Sydney: Holosko, Bobo All perfectly decent players but are any of those that much better than some of the non-marquee visa players? Maybe Fornaroli and Berisha but they came here within the salary cap. Where it's damaging is that City and the others will take the good Australian players from the clubs with a smaller wage bill. A bunch of inexperienced kids and NPL players are going to have a tough time being "organised" enough to win anything. This is where my comment on growing the overall talent pool comes from. They may not win anything but they gain experience and are given an opportunity sooner that may not have came about with a salary cap. At the moment you have younger player stuck on the bench because a salary cap is spreads the talent evenly. Remove the salary cap and you will end up with the bigger clubs buying the more experience and 'proven' player from the smaller clubs which in turn pushes out the younger player from the bigger clubs who go looking for game time at the smaller clubs. Throw in transfer fees(which you would assume goes hand in hand with removing the cap) and it becomes more beneficial for the smaller clubs to play their own products as opposed to signing the journeyman that we see float from club to club each transfer period.
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xyou would probably see the better current A-League players migrate towards the bigger clubs whilst the smaller clubs will rely more on NPL/Youth players (which would be better for our overall pool of players.) Why would that be better for our overall pool of players? Because the best are playing with the best and developing an understanding. This translates to when they play for the shokkazoos. That's the opposite of improving the overall pool of players and the best still aren't going to be playing here in the A-league. We have nothing in common with these leagues either. There is no international talent pool these leagues can recruit from for one, unlike Association Football. Melbourne City and a couple of other teams like Sydney, WSW, and MVFC could bring some top caliber players into the A League. The more that they spend, the better quality of the players they will entice and recruit. How that is a bad thing is beyond me. I think you quoted the wrong post. Anyway basketball is almost as huge as football and there is a massive international talent pool of players. Rugby League and Union also have international talent pools and have capped leagues. Ice Hockey is another. I've already asked why you think they'll get better (I assume international) players without a cap? They have a marquee rule already and this is who they have: Victory: Berisha, Bozanic City: Fornaroli, Colazo WSW: Martinez Sydney: Holosko, Bobo All perfectly decent players but are any of those that much better than some of the non-marquee visa players? Maybe Fornaroli and Berisha but they came here within the salary cap. Where it's damaging is that City and the others will take the good Australian players from the clubs with a smaller wage bill. A bunch of inexperienced kids and NPL players are going to have a tough time being "organised" enough to win anything. This.
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest. None of the leagues i mentioned have a salary cap. And has it stopped fans watching the league? Has it brought the doomsday scenario that youre spruiking? No it hasnt. Id go with reality.... in the real world....over your speculation and fear mongering.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou would probably see the better current A-League players migrate towards the bigger clubs whilst the smaller clubs will rely more on NPL/Youth players (which would be better for our overall pool of players.) Why would that be better for our overall pool of players? Because the best are playing with the best and developing an understanding. This translates to when they play for the shokkazoos. That's the opposite of improving the overall pool of players and the best still aren't going to be playing here in the A-league. We have nothing in common with these leagues either. There is no international talent pool these leagues can recruit from for one, unlike Association Football. Melbourne City and a couple of other teams like Sydney, WSW, and MVFC could bring some top caliber players into the A League. The more that they spend, the better quality of the players they will entice and recruit. How that is a bad thing is beyond me. I think you quoted the wrong post. Anyway basketball is almost as huge as football and there is a massive international talent pool of players. Rugby League and Union also have international talent pools and have capped leagues. Ice Hockey is another. I've already asked why you think they'll get better (I assume international) players without a cap? They have a marquee rule already and this is who they have: Victory: Berisha, Bozanic City: Fornaroli, Colazo WSW: Martinez Sydney: Holosko, Bobo All perfectly decent players but are any of those that much better than some of the non-marquee visa players? Maybe Fornaroli and Berisha but they came here within the salary cap. Where it's damaging is that City and the others will take the good Australian players from the clubs with a smaller wage bill. A bunch of inexperienced kids and NPL players are going to have a tough time being "organised" enough to win anything. This is where my comment on growing the overall talent pool comes from. They may not win anything but they gain experience and are given an opportunity sooner that may not have came about with a salary cap. At the moment you have younger player stuck on the bench because a salary cap is spreads the talent evenly. Remove the salary cap and you will end up with the bigger clubs buying the more experience and 'proven' player from the smaller clubs which in turn pushes out the younger player from the bigger clubs who go looking for game time at the smaller clubs. Throw in transfer fees(which you would assume goes hand in hand with removing the cap) and it becomes more beneficial for the smaller clubs to play their own products as opposed to signing the journeyman that we see float from club to club each transfer period. Right now we get our best youth playing regularly in good sides learning off experienced players. We've had teams that were loaded with youth players already when owners have cracked the shits. They finished bottom and very few of those players kicked on.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest. None of the leagues i mentioned have a salary cap. And has it stopped fans watching the league? Has it brought the doomsday scenario that youre spruiking? No it hasnt. Id go with reality.... in the real world....over your speculation and fear mongering. I was talking about leagues which only have one team that can win the title so you missed my point.
|
|
|
|
|
Gruen
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIf the salary cap is removed are all the owners going to stay around when the price of owning a competitive team suddenly sky rockets? Will they stump up more of their own money to keep clubs a float? Will they be able to raise more money due to the increase in the quality of the top of the league that is able to buy better players? The salary cap certainly does punish success, both on and off the field, that is part of what it is designed to do. The salary cap also rewards clubs in the short term who are able to recruit well, find talent on the cheap. It can reward teams that can develop young talent. However without the salary cap it might force those without the financial resources to get even better at recruiting and developing talent, provided the clubs still exist. I am too stupid to fully understand the ramifications of removing the salary cap on the survival of less financially well off clubs but removing the cap without being sure the competition does not lose clubs would be a huge mistake. You seem to imply that club owners will not somehow find a way to survive in the league. This is more fear mongering and as you can see from dozens of leagues around the world that do not have a salary cap, the sky has not caved in. On the contrary, the other teams remain competitive and survive. Abolition of salary cap will just mean that about 4 to 5 teams will be dominant but it will not necessarily translate to trophies as it is unlikely that teams like Melbourne City or Melbourne Victory will just open the purse strings without engaging proper business cost evaluation processes. No team or business person will just throw away their money. It could however help the league to recruit proper real Football Stars rather than a few has beens. Imagine the draw card and the media interest for one, and the other teams would be eager to play against them on the same field. It's inspiring and the quality of our game will inevitably rise and our young players will improve too. It's a win for every single club and the league in its entirety. Far more important than the CCM winning the league which they could still do provided they recruit well and play as a cohesive unit with great team play and chemistry. I am not implying anything and I am not trying to argue for a salary cap.
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest. None of the leagues i mentioned have a salary cap. And has it stopped fans watching the league? Has it brought the doomsday scenario that youre spruiking? No it hasnt. Id go with reality.... in the real world....over your speculation and fear mongering. I was talking about leagues which only have one team that can win the title so you missed my point. So have fans stopped watching spl now have they? Youre creating a point out of thin air to suit your narrative. And What is your point exactly? That if we remove tge salary cap then we will become spl, who havent failed anyway, instead of becoming any of the other 200 odd leagues in the world that dont have a salary cap. Thats the extent of your argument.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
|
Gruen
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIf the salary cap is removed are all the owners going to stay around when the price of owning a competitive team suddenly sky rockets? Will they stump up more of their own money to keep clubs a float? Will they be able to raise more money due to the increase in the quality of the top of the league that is able to buy better players? The salary cap certainly does punish success, both on and off the field, that is part of what it is designed to do. The salary cap also rewards clubs in the short term who are able to recruit well, find talent on the cheap. It can reward teams that can develop young talent. However without the salary cap it might force those without the financial resources to get even better at recruiting and developing talent, provided the clubs still exist. I am too stupid to fully understand the ramifications of removing the salary cap on the survival of less financially well off clubs but removing the cap without being sure the competition does not lose clubs would be a huge mistake. You just need to look at the rammifications of having the salary cap. You dont need to look at the "rammifications", as it were, of removing a rule that didn't belong there in the first place. Changing a rule, any rule, without looking at what effect that change will have is beyond stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest. None of the leagues i mentioned have a salary cap. And has it stopped fans watching the league? Has it brought the doomsday scenario that youre spruiking? No it hasnt. Id go with reality.... in the real world....over your speculation and fear mongering. I was talking about leagues which only have one team that can win the title so you missed my point. So have fans stopped watching spl now have they? Youre creating a point out of thin air to suit your narrative. And What is your point exactly? That if we remove tge salary cap then we will become spl, who havent failed anyway, instead of becoming any of the other 200 odd leagues in the world that dont have a salary cap. Thats the extent of your argument. My argument is that the league becomes boring like the SPL as one team (Melbourne City) would win the title every year as they can outspend everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
mouflonrouge
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou would probably see the better current A-League players migrate towards the bigger clubs whilst the smaller clubs will rely more on NPL/Youth players (which would be better for our overall pool of players.) Why would that be better for our overall pool of players? Because the best are playing with the best and developing an understanding. This translates to when they play for the shokkazoos. That's the opposite of improving the overall pool of players and the best still aren't going to be playing here in the A-league. We have nothing in common with these leagues either. There is no international talent pool these leagues can recruit from for one, unlike Association Football. Melbourne City and a couple of other teams like Sydney, WSW, and MVFC could bring some top caliber players into the A League. The more that they spend, the better quality of the players they will entice and recruit. How that is a bad thing is beyond me. I think you quoted the wrong post. Anyway basketball is almost as huge as football and there is a massive international talent pool of players. Rugby League and Union also have international talent pools and have capped leagues. Ice Hockey is another. I've already asked why you think they'll get better (I assume international) players without a cap? They have a marquee rule already and this is who they have: Victory: Berisha, Bozanic City: Fornaroli, Colazo WSW: Martinez Sydney: Holosko, Bobo All perfectly decent players but are any of those that much better than some of the non-marquee visa players? Maybe Fornaroli and Berisha but they came here within the salary cap. Where it's damaging is that City and the others will take the good Australian players from the clubs with a smaller wage bill. A bunch of inexperienced kids and NPL players are going to have a tough time being "organised" enough to win anything. Let's be honest here. The above are not really Marquees because the FFA calls them so. Fornaroli for instance was a washout from the Greek Super League. he couldn't take a trick there and here is is all of a sudden a marquee, which in my opinion says a lot about the standard of our league. Sorry that's not how the marquee works though it's easy to make that mistake because that's how it was intended to be. Marquees can be anyone the club wants them to be, they're essentially just players whose wages aren't included in the cap. The only spot that FFA has any proper say over is the guest player which is the one that Tim Cahill is signed on. I agree, the standard of the league is mid-tier at best but it's quite entertaining and I love my Reds. However, the cap being removed isn't going to make even the richest teams FIFA Club World Cup contenders. It's going just going to lower competitiveness in our own league and related consequences. Well that just makes it worse. If we can't afford to buy some stars, just make a marquee out of anyone that you just want to retain. So scoring 29 goals in 33 games is not worthy of marquee status? Probably in the A league, which is the problem. In the Greek Super League he didn't even get a lot of time on the field let alone score goals, and he was dropped. This to me indicates we need to raise our standards.
|
|
|
|
|
mouflonrouge
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest. None of the leagues i mentioned have a salary cap. And has it stopped fans watching the league? Has it brought the doomsday scenario that youre spruiking? No it hasnt. Id go with reality.... in the real world....over your speculation and fear mongering. I was talking about leagues which only have one team that can win the title so you missed my point. So have fans stopped watching spl now have they? Youre creating a point out of thin air to suit your narrative. And What is your point exactly? That if we remove tge salary cap then we will become spl, who havent failed anyway, instead of becoming any of the other 200 odd leagues in the world that dont have a salary cap. Thats the extent of your argument. My argument is that the league becomes boring like the SPL as one team (Melbourne City) would win the title every year as they can outspend everyone. I don't believe that is the case. MVFC, Sydney, and WSW would also be in it and will likely spend as much as city.
|
|
|
|
|
Gruen
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2K,
Visits: 0
|
Is there any football league in the world that has gone from being a salary capped league to being a non salary capped league?
It is obvious there are a large number leagues that exist successfully without a salary cap and probably the A-league could be one as well, but the transition would need to be done carefully so that clubs don't fall over. I have no idea how likely it is that clubs would fall over but it needs to be determined. Are Griffin and co or Sage or even the City group going to view the changed circumstances and possible higher costs of a club and decide that perhaps they do not want to be involved?
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest. None of the leagues i mentioned have a salary cap. And has it stopped fans watching the league? Has it brought the doomsday scenario that youre spruiking? No it hasnt. Id go with reality.... in the real world....over your speculation and fear mongering. I was talking about leagues which only have one team that can win the title so you missed my point. So have fans stopped watching spl now have they? Youre creating a point out of thin air to suit your narrative. And What is your point exactly? That if we remove tge salary cap then we will become spl, who havent failed anyway, instead of becoming any of the other 200 odd leagues in the world that dont have a salary cap. Thats the extent of your argument. My argument is that the league becomes boring like the SPL as one team (Melbourne City) would win the title every year as they can outspend everyone. A rigged comp is boring. So, two teams can out spend everyone in most leagues in the world. And it hasnt killed the leagues or fanbases or become boring. Youre clinging to this one team will dominate theory. (Which isnt true. There is no way it wouldn't spur on mvfc to secure more investment and continue to dominate the comp...or to be bought out by mufc for that matter the same way heart were bought out) but lets entertain your horror story anyway ..... city bring Ronaldo and messi here next season... you think this is bad for football? Engaging 100% of the participants is a bad thing? Getting the entire country salivating and enaged in the game with media going completely bonkers in an orgasmic frenzy will hurt the game? Fkn lol. Im a mv fan and i welcome the competition. If mv are the proverbial mufc and city are the proverbial man city... then bring it on noisy neighbors...football is a competitive beast where there darwinian principle of survival applies. Thats life. Besides how does your out-spending theory apply to Leicester city? Stop. With. The. Fear. Mongering.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIs there any football league in the world that has gone from being a salary capped league to being a non salary capped league?It is obvious there are a large number leagues that exist successfully without a salary cap and probably the A-league could be one as well, but the transition would need to be done carefully so that clubs don't fall over. I have no idea how likely it is that clubs would fall over but it needs to be determined. Are Griffin and co or Sage or even the City group going to view the changed circumstances and possible higher costs of a club and decide that perhaps they do not want to be involved? No. And think about what youre saying.... clubs will have their shackles removed and they wont be happy about it?
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou would probably see the better current A-League players migrate towards the bigger clubs whilst the smaller clubs will rely more on NPL/Youth players (which would be better for our overall pool of players.) Why would that be better for our overall pool of players? Because the best are playing with the best and developing an understanding. This translates to when they play for the shokkazoos. That's the opposite of improving the overall pool of players and the best still aren't going to be playing here in the A-league. We have nothing in common with these leagues either. There is no international talent pool these leagues can recruit from for one, unlike Association Football. Melbourne City and a couple of other teams like Sydney, WSW, and MVFC could bring some top caliber players into the A League. The more that they spend, the better quality of the players they will entice and recruit. How that is a bad thing is beyond me. I think you quoted the wrong post. Anyway basketball is almost as huge as football and there is a massive international talent pool of players. Rugby League and Union also have international talent pools and have capped leagues. Ice Hockey is another. I've already asked why you think they'll get better (I assume international) players without a cap? They have a marquee rule already and this is who they have: Victory: Berisha, Bozanic City: Fornaroli, Colazo WSW: Martinez Sydney: Holosko, Bobo All perfectly decent players but are any of those that much better than some of the non-marquee visa players? Maybe Fornaroli and Berisha but they came here within the salary cap. Where it's damaging is that City and the others will take the good Australian players from the clubs with a smaller wage bill. A bunch of inexperienced kids and NPL players are going to have a tough time being "organised" enough to win anything. Let's be honest here. The above are not really Marquees because the FFA calls them so. Fornaroli for instance was a washout from the Greek Super League. he couldn't take a trick there and here is is all of a sudden a marquee, which in my opinion says a lot about the standard of our league. Sorry that's not how the marquee works though it's easy to make that mistake because that's how it was intended to be. Marquees can be anyone the club wants them to be, they're essentially just players whose wages aren't included in the cap. The only spot that FFA has any proper say over is the guest player which is the one that Tim Cahill is signed on. I agree, the standard of the league is mid-tier at best but it's quite entertaining and I love my Reds. However, the cap being removed isn't going to make even the richest teams FIFA Club World Cup contenders. It's going just going to lower competitiveness in our own league and related consequences. Well that just makes it worse. If we can't afford to buy some stars, just make a marquee out of anyone that you just want to retain. So scoring 29 goals in 33 games is not worthy of marquee status? Probably in the A league, which is the problem. In the Greek Super League he didn't even get a lot of time on the field let alone score goals, and he was dropped. This to me indicates we need to raise our standards. Makes me wonder about kiwi messi... i wasnt initially gung-ho on bringing him back - especially instead of signing diamanti... How he can dissappear into obscurity in europe...and how he kills it in the hal...makes me a little skeptical about how our non existent defenses stack up against european defenses tbh and the true mark of his abilities. One things for sure. He does kill it in the hal.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest. None of the leagues i mentioned have a salary cap. And has it stopped fans watching the league? Has it brought the doomsday scenario that youre spruiking? No it hasnt. Id go with reality.... in the real world....over your speculation and fear mongering. I was talking about leagues which only have one team that can win the title so you missed my point. So have fans stopped watching spl now have they? Youre creating a point out of thin air to suit your narrative. And What is your point exactly? That if we remove tge salary cap then we will become spl, who havent failed anyway, instead of becoming any of the other 200 odd leagues in the world that dont have a salary cap. Thats the extent of your argument. My argument is that the league becomes boring like the SPL as one team (Melbourne City) would win the title every year as they can outspend everyone. A rigged comp is boring. So, two teams can out spend everyone in most leagues in the world. And it hasnt killed the leagues or fanbases or become boring. Youre clinging to this one team will dominate theory. (Which isnt true. There is no way it wouldn't spur on mvfc to secure more investment and continue to dominate the comp...or to be bought out by mufc for that matter the same way heart were bought out) but lets entertain your horror story anyway ..... city bring Ronaldo and messi here next season... you think this is bad for football? Engaging 100% of the participants is a bad thing? Getting the entire country salivating and enaged in the game with media going completely bonkers in an orgasmic frenzy will hurt the game? Fkn lol. Im a mv fan and i welcome the competition. If mv are the proverbial mufc and city are the proverbial man city... then bring it on noisy neighbors...football is a competitive beast where there darwinian principle of survival applies. Thats life. Besides how does your out-spending theory apply to Leicester city? Stop. With. The. Fear. Mongering. So having a comp where any team can beat anyone is boring? You also mention that other teams will spend more. Getting clubs to spend more money than what they have is a recipe for disaster. Look where that got Leeds, Portsmouth and Valencia. The only hope for clubs to compete with City is that they get purchased my mega rich investors. City buying Messi and Ronaldo is a bad example as that will never happen. Leicester is also a bad example as a side like them winning the titlewill only happen once in a few decades.
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xThe cap doesn't punish success, poor recruitment does It does punish success When a team wins, the value of its best players go up. The team can't afford to keep the players under the cap so they have to cut
You cant have watched much of the A League if you haven't seen this It also punishes progress. There is often a correlation between the quality (perceived or otherwise) of a player and the amount of money they get. Maybe the FFA should have a salary cap. $50k for a CEO, $35k for an accountant. Lets test their "creativity" and "innovation" and see what they can come up with And its not as if the metrics are good. Its not like we are choosing between a league with P/R / no salary cap, or a league with a $600m-$700m TV deal with games rating 300k-400k. Doing things the Australian way for a game built on conformity and all inclusiveness has given us no advantage than had we simply built a competitive football league The best A-League players either go to Europe or the J League or K League regardless of where a team finishes. I'm not talking about the best players. I'm talking about players that the A League can afford. If a team loses a $500k player to an overseas club, they can then offer that $500k to another A League player MV did it to Brisbane. Wellington did it to MV There's no science behind the salary cap. Its just something we have because we're Australian and that's what Australian's do. And the figure chosen is ambiguous. As mentioned above, the AFL can afford to have a salary cap because they have all the players. A salary cap stops players from wondering because there is no incentive to do so It doesn't work in the A League. Despite having a salary cap the amount of club whores in the league is ridiculous. I think one player is up to 7 clubs. We also have international interest to contend with Not only that but because the "punish the top teams" happens via the draft in the AFL, clubs can stay at top for 3-4 years. In the A League there is only 1 instance in 12 seasons of back to back titles (regardless of which one you value the most). There is just no chance for a team to go back to back There is no question as to the detrimental impact a salary cap has on the top teams. The "opinion" part of the topic is whether such a system can be vindicated Even 12 years on the A League still has "normal games" around the 8k-10k mark. Ratings at the 60k mark. Clubs haven't moved much from attendances in the first few seasons. This notion that fans are only interested in a balanced league is full of shit As for balance: If the team that won the season before is at a disadvantage, is that balance? Is concessions for WSW balance? Is Cahill for City balance? Is a 20 point gap in the top half of the table balance? The salary cap is not giving our league a level of support we couldn't get in an uncapped league. It also doesn't provide balance The only thing it does is crush the teams at the top so another team inevitably wins it, and over a long period of time titles are distributed across more teams
This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership.Is that really the goal of the A League first and foremost when we only have 9 Australian professional teams and all our national teams are struggling? No one is really in financial trouble at the moment.
There is nothing about the A League that we can look at and say "that's why we need a salary cap" The cap keeps the competition even and interesting. People aren't going to want to watch a league where only Melbourne City will win the league every year because they have the most money, especially since they are a small club. This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership. That's just an extreme doomsday rant that has no ground in reality Out of all the leagues in the world, why is it only Australia and Scotland will end up like Scotland? The Australian sports market is different. Investment is sport and the marketplace is fierce and competitive. There is just no way one team will dominate and everybody else will be left in their wake We have 3 major metropolitan areas (and 2 secondary). The major areas have (will have) multiple teams. There is more than one foreign investor. Plenty of local investors with money. The 4+1 rule means Aussie talent determines league winners (not just buying in talent) As for "people wont watch the league if its not interesting". This is also a poor argument with no grounding in reality There have been no crowds of 0. CCM in their worst year got a better attendance than the season before. As mentioned, Aussies love sport. Even when CCM are performing poorly they still have WSW home games, or visiting marquees Our league is built on the notion that the majority of people only want to watch their team win but its a complete load of shit. You are describing a handful of glory hunting casuals who only watch 1-2 games a year, and aren't watching the 9 seasons when it isn't their team's turn to win And its a loss for the club, not for the league. The loss of one set of glory hunting fans is replaced by another as somebody's gotta win it The Australian sports market has proven that teams cannot dominate for decades at a time. Usually its 4-5 years at most - with or without a salary cap. Even in the women's game where there is no cap and only two major academies developing talent we have seen 2-3 shifts of power And as mentioned attendances and ratings are not at a level where we can conclusively say fans are captivated by the salary cap The reasons against a salary cap are factual. The reasons for it are speculative
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI support abolition of the salary cap as well. basically, let the times that can afford to spend big, do it and recruit some real stars which will raise the standards of Football in this country.
That's what the marquee and guest player rule is for.I support one of the teams that can't afford to spend big. But i don't subscribe to the theory that the big spenders will win the championship because they have one or 2 stars in their line-up. So Chelsea and Man City were winning and competing for silverware before they were bought by Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour?
It would however peak interest into the A league, raise standards and be a bigger spectacle which I can only support as a person who places the quality of Football over and beyond the team I support. That is what everyone would be doing. we should be looking at ways to grow the sport in this country. No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title.
I also support promotion and relegation as well as a second tier competition. No. the marquees are one of the anomalies that i was talking about. You think its smart for one player to be paid more than the entire league if ffa say its ok but not by world standards where there is no cap. Youre contradicting yourself. " No it won't. People aren't going to watch a league where only one team can win the title."Says who? How the fk would you know? We are in uncchareted territory, with only the mls as a guide, and youre professsing to know the future. Well Every football league in the world begs to differ with you. No one cares about the Scottish Premiership because Celtic win the title by a big margin every year.Youre just speculating and fear mongering. Bahahaha. Spl... we have bundesliga, la liga, epl, eridivise, serie a......not to mention all the sth american leagues... and let alone our own confed jleague etc......... and you choose spl as your go-to. How convenient. And ridiculous. And indicative of the small bubble you live in, in terms of football. The Bundesliga and La Liga and Eredivise have three teams that can win the title not one. I don't know much about South American leagues so I can't comment about them. The J-League seems to be a competitive league because there isn't one club way richer than the rest. None of the leagues i mentioned have a salary cap. And has it stopped fans watching the league? Has it brought the doomsday scenario that youre spruiking? No it hasnt. Id go with reality.... in the real world....over your speculation and fear mongering. I was talking about leagues which only have one team that can win the title so you missed my point. So have fans stopped watching spl now have they? Youre creating a point out of thin air to suit your narrative. And What is your point exactly? That if we remove tge salary cap then we will become spl, who havent failed anyway, instead of becoming any of the other 200 odd leagues in the world that dont have a salary cap. Thats the extent of your argument. My argument is that the league becomes boring like the SPL as one team (Melbourne City) would win the title every year as they can outspend everyone. A rigged comp is boring. So, two teams can out spend everyone in most leagues in the world. And it hasnt killed the leagues or fanbases or become boring. Youre clinging to this one team will dominate theory. (Which isnt true. There is no way it wouldn't spur on mvfc to secure more investment and continue to dominate the comp...or to be bought out by mufc for that matter the same way heart were bought out) but lets entertain your horror story anyway ..... city bring Ronaldo and messi here next season... you think this is bad for football? Engaging 100% of the participants is a bad thing? Getting the entire country salivating and enaged in the game with media going completely bonkers in an orgasmic frenzy will hurt the game? Fkn lol. Im a mv fan and i welcome the competition. If mv are the proverbial mufc and city are the proverbial man city... then bring it on noisy neighbors...football is a competitive beast where there darwinian principle of survival applies. Thats life. Besides how does your out-spending theory apply to Leicester city? Stop. With. The. Fear. Mongering. So having a comp where any team can beat anyone is boring? You also mention that other teams will spend more. Getting clubs to spend more money than what they have is a recipe for disaster. Look where that got Leeds, Portsmouth and Valencia. The only hope for clubs to compete with City is that they get purchased my mega rich investors. City buying Messi and Ronaldo is a bad example as that will never happen. Leicester is also a bad example as a side like them winning the titlewill only happen once in a few decades. Can ccm beat anyone can they? Can wellington? Yeah and Bad examples when i make them....but your selective examples arent bad? Bad examples when they debunk your weak speculation and fear mongering. Look where that got Leeds, Portsmouth and Valencia. So they didnt know how to run a tight ship. They domt belong if they dont have good business acumen... heres a secret.. business that run badly fail. It doesnt mean that we outlaw competition because one or two clubs are shit at business. And look where it got reql madrid, barca, man city, man utd, bayern, juve AND leciester....and the million other success stories of world football... youre trolling with your worst possible case scenario bs. The only hope for clubs to compete with City is that they get purchased my mega rich investors.Welcome to reality. Welcome to a competitive market. And you think that the entire league being paid out of a central pool..with a % of that money being selectively aimed at one club...and having marquees whose wage bill is bigger than that of the entire league is the answer? Delusional. " City buying Messi and Ronaldo is a bad example as that will never happen."Wait you just said they can outspend everyone... make up your fuckinh mind. And youre deflecting my point on that. Weak as piss.. The real question here is though.... Which multi are you ? Ill go with draups.., hes the usual resident troll.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIs there any football league in the world that has gone from being a salary capped league to being a non salary capped league? It is obvious there are a large number leagues that exist successfully without a salary cap and probably the A-league could be one as well, but the transition would need to be done carefully so that clubs don't fall over. I have no idea how likely it is that clubs would fall over but it needs to be determined. Are Griffin and co or Sage or even the City group going to view the changed circumstances and possible higher costs of a club and decide that perhaps they do not want to be involved? Not that I'm aware of but it's a great question. We know our owners are supportive of a cap and aren't that happy with the continuous relaxing of the cap that's only helping the 4 big city teams. Perhaps one or two club owners who think they can benefit from it in terms of on-field success might like the idea of scrapping the cap. I wouldn't be surprised if none are that enthusiastic about scrapping it entirely. There's a reason why we have the league model we have at the moment and that's that it maximises revenues for the whole league. This hasn't gone unnoticed in Europe either and this super league that the big clubs want is basically a copy of the American league models. As long as the cap is set within reasonable bounds, not too high and not too low, we're really not losing much by having it and we're gaining a lot in other ways.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xThe cap doesn't punish success, poor recruitment does It does punish success When a team wins, the value of its best players go up. The team can't afford to keep the players under the cap so they have to cut
You cant have watched much of the A League if you haven't seen this It also punishes progress. There is often a correlation between the quality (perceived or otherwise) of a player and the amount of money they get. Maybe the FFA should have a salary cap. $50k for a CEO, $35k for an accountant. Lets test their "creativity" and "innovation" and see what they can come up with And its not as if the metrics are good. Its not like we are choosing between a league with P/R / no salary cap, or a league with a $600m-$700m TV deal with games rating 300k-400k. Doing things the Australian way for a game built on conformity and all inclusiveness has given us no advantage than had we simply built a competitive football league The best A-League players either go to Europe or the J League or K League regardless of where a team finishes. I'm not talking about the best players. I'm talking about players that the A League can afford. If a team loses a $500k player to an overseas club, they can then offer that $500k to another A League player MV did it to Brisbane. Wellington did it to MV There's no science behind the salary cap. Its just something we have because we're Australian and that's what Australian's do. And the figure chosen is ambiguous. As mentioned above, the AFL can afford to have a salary cap because they have all the players. A salary cap stops players from wondering because there is no incentive to do so It doesn't work in the A League. Despite having a salary cap the amount of club whores in the league is ridiculous. I think one player is up to 7 clubs. We also have international interest to contend with Not only that but because the "punish the top teams" happens via the draft in the AFL, clubs can stay at top for 3-4 years. In the A League there is only 1 instance in 12 seasons of back to back titles (regardless of which one you value the most). There is just no chance for a team to go back to back There is no question as to the detrimental impact a salary cap has on the top teams. The "opinion" part of the topic is whether such a system can be vindicated Even 12 years on the A League still has "normal games" around the 8k-10k mark. Ratings at the 60k mark. Clubs haven't moved much from attendances in the first few seasons. This notion that fans are only interested in a balanced league is full of shit As for balance: If the team that won the season before is at a disadvantage, is that balance? Is concessions for WSW balance? Is Cahill for City balance? Is a 20 point gap in the top half of the table balance? The salary cap is not giving our league a level of support we couldn't get in an uncapped league. It also doesn't provide balance The only thing it does is crush the teams at the top so another team inevitably wins it, and over a long period of time titles are distributed across more teams
This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership.Is that really the goal of the A League first and foremost when we only have 9 Australian professional teams and all our national teams are struggling? No one is really in financial trouble at the moment.
There is nothing about the A League that we can look at and say "that's why we need a salary cap" The cap keeps the competition even and interesting. People aren't going to want to watch a league where only Melbourne City will win the league every year because they have the most money, especially since they are a small club. This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership. That's just an extreme doomsday rant that has no ground in reality Out of all the leagues in the world, why is it only Australia and Scotland will end up like Scotland? The Australian sports market is different. Investment is sport and the marketplace is fierce and competitive. There is just no way one team will dominate and everybody else will be left in their wake We have 3 major metropolitan areas (and 2 secondary). The major areas have (will have) multiple teams. There is more than one foreign investor. Plenty of local investors with money. The 4+1 rule means Aussie talent determines league winners (not just buying in talent) As for "people wont watch the league if its not interesting". This is also a poor argument with no grounding in reality There have been no crowds of 0. CCM in their worst year got a better attendance than the season before. As mentioned, Aussies love sport. Even when CCM are performing poorly they still have WSW home games, or visiting marquees Our league is built on the notion that the majority of people only want to watch their team win but its a complete load of shit. You are describing a handful of glory hunting casuals who only watch 1-2 games a year, and aren't watching the 9 seasons when it isn't their team's turn to win And its a loss for the club, not for the league. The loss of one set of glory hunting fans is replaced by another as somebody's gotta win it The Australian sports market has proven that teams cannot dominate for decades at a time. Usually its 4-5 years at most - with or without a salary cap. Even in the women's game where there is no cap and only two major academies developing talent we have seen 2-3 shifts of power The reasons against a salary cap are factual. The reasons against it are speculative I used Scotland as an example as Celtic spend way more than the other clubs and win the title every year. In the A-League we have Melbourne City who have way more money than the other clubs. If the cap goes they can spend as much as they want to win the league and go far into the ACL. You also say that crowds won't change much. That is incorrect. I'm an Adelaide fan and when we play like shit our crowds drop off. For example at the start of the season we were getting 14,000 to games. For the last two games against Victory and City we have got 10000. I think I heard that the crowd we got against Victory was the lowest we have ever got against them. Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all. The W-League also has a salary cap so that comment is wrong.as well
|
|
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe cap doesn't punish success, poor recruitment does It does punish success When a team wins, the value of its best players go up. The team can't afford to keep the players under the cap so they have to cut
You cant have watched much of the A League if you haven't seen this It also punishes progress. There is often a correlation between the quality (perceived or otherwise) of a player and the amount of money they get. Maybe the FFA should have a salary cap. $50k for a CEO, $35k for an accountant. Lets test their "creativity" and "innovation" and see what they can come up with And its not as if the metrics are good. Its not like we are choosing between a league with P/R / no salary cap, or a league with a $600m-$700m TV deal with games rating 300k-400k. Doing things the Australian way for a game built on conformity and all inclusiveness has given us no advantage than had we simply built a competitive football league The best A-League players either go to Europe or the J League or K League regardless of where a team finishes. I'm not talking about the best players. I'm talking about players that the A League can afford. If a team loses a $500k player to an overseas club, they can then offer that $500k to another A League player MV did it to Brisbane. Wellington did it to MV There's no science behind the salary cap. Its just something we have because we're Australian and that's what Australian's do. And the figure chosen is ambiguous. As mentioned above, the AFL can afford to have a salary cap because they have all the players. A salary cap stops players from wondering because there is no incentive to do so It doesn't work in the A League. Despite having a salary cap the amount of club whores in the league is ridiculous. I think one player is up to 7 clubs. We also have international interest to contend with Not only that but because the "punish the top teams" happens via the draft in the AFL, clubs can stay at top for 3-4 years. In the A League there is only 1 instance in 12 seasons of back to back titles (regardless of which one you value the most). There is just no chance for a team to go back to back There is no question as to the detrimental impact a salary cap has on the top teams. The "opinion" part of the topic is whether such a system can be vindicated Even 12 years on the A League still has "normal games" around the 8k-10k mark. Ratings at the 60k mark. Clubs haven't moved much from attendances in the first few seasons. This notion that fans are only interested in a balanced league is full of shit As for balance: If the team that won the season before is at a disadvantage, is that balance? Is concessions for WSW balance? Is Cahill for City balance? Is a 20 point gap in the top half of the table balance? The salary cap is not giving our league a level of support we couldn't get in an uncapped league. It also doesn't provide balance The only thing it does is crush the teams at the top so another team inevitably wins it, and over a long period of time titles are distributed across more teams
This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership.Is that really the goal of the A League first and foremost when we only have 9 Australian professional teams and all our national teams are struggling? No one is really in financial trouble at the moment.
There is nothing about the A League that we can look at and say "that's why we need a salary cap" The cap keeps the competition even and interesting. People aren't going to want to watch a league where only Melbourne City will win the league every year because they have the most money, especially since they are a small club. This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership. That's just an extreme doomsday rant that has no ground in reality Out of all the leagues in the world, why is it only Australia and Scotland will end up like Scotland? The Australian sports market is different. Investment is sport and the marketplace is fierce and competitive. There is just no way one team will dominate and everybody else will be left in their wake We have 3 major metropolitan areas (and 2 secondary). The major areas have (will have) multiple teams. There is more than one foreign investor. Plenty of local investors with money. The 4+1 rule means Aussie talent determines league winners (not just buying in talent) As for "people wont watch the league if its not interesting". This is also a poor argument with no grounding in reality There have been no crowds of 0. CCM in their worst year got a better attendance than the season before. As mentioned, Aussies love sport. Even when CCM are performing poorly they still have WSW home games, or visiting marquees Our league is built on the notion that the majority of people only want to watch their team win but its a complete load of shit. You are describing a handful of glory hunting casuals who only watch 1-2 games a year, and aren't watching the 9 seasons when it isn't their team's turn to win And its a loss for the club, not for the league. The loss of one set of glory hunting fans is replaced by another as somebody's gotta win it The Australian sports market has proven that teams cannot dominate for decades at a time. Usually its 4-5 years at most - with or without a salary cap. Even in the women's game where there is no cap and only two major academies developing talent we have seen 2-3 shifts of power The reasons against a salary cap are factual. The reasons against it are speculative I used Scotland as an example as Celtic spend way more than the other clubs and win the title every year. In the A-League we have Melbourne City who have way more money than the other clubs. If the cap goes they can spend as much as they want to win the league and go far into the ACL. You also say that crowds won't change much. That is incorrect. I'm an Adelaide fan and when we play like shit our crowds drop off. For example at the start of the season we were getting 14,000 to games. For the last two games against Victory and City we have got 10000. I think I heard that the crowd we got against Victory was the lowest we have ever got against them. Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all. The W-League also has a salary cap so that comment is wrong.as well Pretty funny when he calls his side of the argument factual when it in fact contains errors and is full of speculation.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe cap doesn't punish success, poor recruitment does It does punish success When a team wins, the value of its best players go up. The team can't afford to keep the players under the cap so they have to cut
You cant have watched much of the A League if you haven't seen this It also punishes progress. There is often a correlation between the quality (perceived or otherwise) of a player and the amount of money they get. Maybe the FFA should have a salary cap. $50k for a CEO, $35k for an accountant. Lets test their "creativity" and "innovation" and see what they can come up with And its not as if the metrics are good. Its not like we are choosing between a league with P/R / no salary cap, or a league with a $600m-$700m TV deal with games rating 300k-400k. Doing things the Australian way for a game built on conformity and all inclusiveness has given us no advantage than had we simply built a competitive football league The best A-League players either go to Europe or the J League or K League regardless of where a team finishes. I'm not talking about the best players. I'm talking about players that the A League can afford. If a team loses a $500k player to an overseas club, they can then offer that $500k to another A League player MV did it to Brisbane. Wellington did it to MV There's no science behind the salary cap. Its just something we have because we're Australian and that's what Australian's do. And the figure chosen is ambiguous. As mentioned above, the AFL can afford to have a salary cap because they have all the players. A salary cap stops players from wondering because there is no incentive to do so It doesn't work in the A League. Despite having a salary cap the amount of club whores in the league is ridiculous. I think one player is up to 7 clubs. We also have international interest to contend with Not only that but because the "punish the top teams" happens via the draft in the AFL, clubs can stay at top for 3-4 years. In the A League there is only 1 instance in 12 seasons of back to back titles (regardless of which one you value the most). There is just no chance for a team to go back to back There is no question as to the detrimental impact a salary cap has on the top teams. The "opinion" part of the topic is whether such a system can be vindicated Even 12 years on the A League still has "normal games" around the 8k-10k mark. Ratings at the 60k mark. Clubs haven't moved much from attendances in the first few seasons. This notion that fans are only interested in a balanced league is full of shit As for balance: If the team that won the season before is at a disadvantage, is that balance? Is concessions for WSW balance? Is Cahill for City balance? Is a 20 point gap in the top half of the table balance? The salary cap is not giving our league a level of support we couldn't get in an uncapped league. It also doesn't provide balance The only thing it does is crush the teams at the top so another team inevitably wins it, and over a long period of time titles are distributed across more teams
This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership.Is that really the goal of the A League first and foremost when we only have 9 Australian professional teams and all our national teams are struggling? No one is really in financial trouble at the moment.
There is nothing about the A League that we can look at and say "that's why we need a salary cap" The cap keeps the competition even and interesting. People aren't going to want to watch a league where only Melbourne City will win the league every year because they have the most money, especially since they are a small club. This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership. That's just an extreme doomsday rant that has no ground in reality Out of all the leagues in the world, why is it only Australia and Scotland will end up like Scotland? The Australian sports market is different. Investment is sport and the marketplace is fierce and competitive. There is just no way one team will dominate and everybody else will be left in their wake We have 3 major metropolitan areas (and 2 secondary). The major areas have (will have) multiple teams. There is more than one foreign investor. Plenty of local investors with money. The 4+1 rule means Aussie talent determines league winners (not just buying in talent) As for "people wont watch the league if its not interesting". This is also a poor argument with no grounding in reality There have been no crowds of 0. CCM in their worst year got a better attendance than the season before. As mentioned, Aussies love sport. Even when CCM are performing poorly they still have WSW home games, or visiting marquees Our league is built on the notion that the majority of people only want to watch their team win but its a complete load of shit. You are describing a handful of glory hunting casuals who only watch 1-2 games a year, and aren't watching the 9 seasons when it isn't their team's turn to win And its a loss for the club, not for the league. The loss of one set of glory hunting fans is replaced by another as somebody's gotta win it The Australian sports market has proven that teams cannot dominate for decades at a time. Usually its 4-5 years at most - with or without a salary cap. Even in the women's game where there is no cap and only two major academies developing talent we have seen 2-3 shifts of power The reasons against a salary cap are factual. The reasons against it are speculative I used Scotland as an example as Celtic spend way more than the other clubs and win the title every year. In the A-League we have Melbourne City who have way more money than the other clubs. If the cap goes they can spend as much as they want to win the league and go far into the ACL. You also say that crowds won't change much. That is incorrect. I'm an Adelaide fan and when we play like shit our crowds drop off. For example at the start of the season we were getting 14,000 to games. For the last two games against Victory and City we have got 10000. I think I heard that the crowd we got against Victory was the lowest we have ever got against them. Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all. The W-League also has a salary cap so that comment is wrong.as well Pretty funny when he calls his side of the argument factual when it in fact contains errors and is full of speculation. Are you referring to me or bluebird?
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe cap doesn't punish success, poor recruitment does It does punish success When a team wins, the value of its best players go up. The team can't afford to keep the players under the cap so they have to cut
You cant have watched much of the A League if you haven't seen this It also punishes progress. There is often a correlation between the quality (perceived or otherwise) of a player and the amount of money they get. Maybe the FFA should have a salary cap. $50k for a CEO, $35k for an accountant. Lets test their "creativity" and "innovation" and see what they can come up with And its not as if the metrics are good. Its not like we are choosing between a league with P/R / no salary cap, or a league with a $600m-$700m TV deal with games rating 300k-400k. Doing things the Australian way for a game built on conformity and all inclusiveness has given us no advantage than had we simply built a competitive football league The best A-League players either go to Europe or the J League or K League regardless of where a team finishes. I'm not talking about the best players. I'm talking about players that the A League can afford. If a team loses a $500k player to an overseas club, they can then offer that $500k to another A League player MV did it to Brisbane. Wellington did it to MV There's no science behind the salary cap. Its just something we have because we're Australian and that's what Australian's do. And the figure chosen is ambiguous. As mentioned above, the AFL can afford to have a salary cap because they have all the players. A salary cap stops players from wondering because there is no incentive to do so It doesn't work in the A League. Despite having a salary cap the amount of club whores in the league is ridiculous. I think one player is up to 7 clubs. We also have international interest to contend with Not only that but because the "punish the top teams" happens via the draft in the AFL, clubs can stay at top for 3-4 years. In the A League there is only 1 instance in 12 seasons of back to back titles (regardless of which one you value the most). There is just no chance for a team to go back to back There is no question as to the detrimental impact a salary cap has on the top teams. The "opinion" part of the topic is whether such a system can be vindicated Even 12 years on the A League still has "normal games" around the 8k-10k mark. Ratings at the 60k mark. Clubs haven't moved much from attendances in the first few seasons. This notion that fans are only interested in a balanced league is full of shit As for balance: If the team that won the season before is at a disadvantage, is that balance? Is concessions for WSW balance? Is Cahill for City balance? Is a 20 point gap in the top half of the table balance? The salary cap is not giving our league a level of support we couldn't get in an uncapped league. It also doesn't provide balance The only thing it does is crush the teams at the top so another team inevitably wins it, and over a long period of time titles are distributed across more teams
This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership.Is that really the goal of the A League first and foremost when we only have 9 Australian professional teams and all our national teams are struggling? No one is really in financial trouble at the moment.
There is nothing about the A League that we can look at and say "that's why we need a salary cap" The cap keeps the competition even and interesting. People aren't going to want to watch a league where only Melbourne City will win the league every year because they have the most money, especially since they are a small club. This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership. That's just an extreme doomsday rant that has no ground in reality Out of all the leagues in the world, why is it only Australia and Scotland will end up like Scotland? The Australian sports market is different. Investment is sport and the marketplace is fierce and competitive. There is just no way one team will dominate and everybody else will be left in their wake We have 3 major metropolitan areas (and 2 secondary). The major areas have (will have) multiple teams. There is more than one foreign investor. Plenty of local investors with money. The 4+1 rule means Aussie talent determines league winners (not just buying in talent) As for "people wont watch the league if its not interesting". This is also a poor argument with no grounding in reality There have been no crowds of 0. CCM in their worst year got a better attendance than the season before. As mentioned, Aussies love sport. Even when CCM are performing poorly they still have WSW home games, or visiting marquees Our league is built on the notion that the majority of people only want to watch their team win but its a complete load of shit. You are describing a handful of glory hunting casuals who only watch 1-2 games a year, and aren't watching the 9 seasons when it isn't their team's turn to win And its a loss for the club, not for the league. The loss of one set of glory hunting fans is replaced by another as somebody's gotta win it The Australian sports market has proven that teams cannot dominate for decades at a time. Usually its 4-5 years at most - with or without a salary cap. Even in the women's game where there is no cap and only two major academies developing talent we have seen 2-3 shifts of power The reasons against a salary cap are factual. The reasons against it are speculative I used Scotland as an example as Celtic spend way more than the other clubs and win the title every year. In the A-League we have Melbourne City who have way more money than the other clubs. If the cap goes they can spend as much as they want to win the league and go far into the ACL. You also say that crowds won't change much. That is incorrect. I'm an Adelaide fan and when we play like shit our crowds drop off. For example at the start of the season we were getting 14,000 to games. For the last two games against Victory and City we have got 10000. I think I heard that the crowd we got against Victory was the lowest we have ever got against them. Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all. The W-League also has a salary cap so that comment is wrong.as well If your fans are fickle then that your problem. Domt hold back growth of the game because you have fairweather fans. "Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all." Piss off draups.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe cap doesn't punish success, poor recruitment does It does punish success When a team wins, the value of its best players go up. The team can't afford to keep the players under the cap so they have to cut
You cant have watched much of the A League if you haven't seen this It also punishes progress. There is often a correlation between the quality (perceived or otherwise) of a player and the amount of money they get. Maybe the FFA should have a salary cap. $50k for a CEO, $35k for an accountant. Lets test their "creativity" and "innovation" and see what they can come up with And its not as if the metrics are good. Its not like we are choosing between a league with P/R / no salary cap, or a league with a $600m-$700m TV deal with games rating 300k-400k. Doing things the Australian way for a game built on conformity and all inclusiveness has given us no advantage than had we simply built a competitive football league The best A-League players either go to Europe or the J League or K League regardless of where a team finishes. I'm not talking about the best players. I'm talking about players that the A League can afford. If a team loses a $500k player to an overseas club, they can then offer that $500k to another A League player MV did it to Brisbane. Wellington did it to MV There's no science behind the salary cap. Its just something we have because we're Australian and that's what Australian's do. And the figure chosen is ambiguous. As mentioned above, the AFL can afford to have a salary cap because they have all the players. A salary cap stops players from wondering because there is no incentive to do so It doesn't work in the A League. Despite having a salary cap the amount of club whores in the league is ridiculous. I think one player is up to 7 clubs. We also have international interest to contend with Not only that but because the "punish the top teams" happens via the draft in the AFL, clubs can stay at top for 3-4 years. In the A League there is only 1 instance in 12 seasons of back to back titles (regardless of which one you value the most). There is just no chance for a team to go back to back There is no question as to the detrimental impact a salary cap has on the top teams. The "opinion" part of the topic is whether such a system can be vindicated Even 12 years on the A League still has "normal games" around the 8k-10k mark. Ratings at the 60k mark. Clubs haven't moved much from attendances in the first few seasons. This notion that fans are only interested in a balanced league is full of shit As for balance: If the team that won the season before is at a disadvantage, is that balance? Is concessions for WSW balance? Is Cahill for City balance? Is a 20 point gap in the top half of the table balance? The salary cap is not giving our league a level of support we couldn't get in an uncapped league. It also doesn't provide balance The only thing it does is crush the teams at the top so another team inevitably wins it, and over a long period of time titles are distributed across more teams
This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership.Is that really the goal of the A League first and foremost when we only have 9 Australian professional teams and all our national teams are struggling? No one is really in financial trouble at the moment.
There is nothing about the A League that we can look at and say "that's why we need a salary cap" The cap keeps the competition even and interesting. People aren't going to want to watch a league where only Melbourne City will win the league every year because they have the most money, especially since they are a small club. This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership. That's just an extreme doomsday rant that has no ground in reality Out of all the leagues in the world, why is it only Australia and Scotland will end up like Scotland? The Australian sports market is different. Investment is sport and the marketplace is fierce and competitive. There is just no way one team will dominate and everybody else will be left in their wake We have 3 major metropolitan areas (and 2 secondary). The major areas have (will have) multiple teams. There is more than one foreign investor. Plenty of local investors with money. The 4+1 rule means Aussie talent determines league winners (not just buying in talent) As for "people wont watch the league if its not interesting". This is also a poor argument with no grounding in reality There have been no crowds of 0. CCM in their worst year got a better attendance than the season before. As mentioned, Aussies love sport. Even when CCM are performing poorly they still have WSW home games, or visiting marquees Our league is built on the notion that the majority of people only want to watch their team win but its a complete load of shit. You are describing a handful of glory hunting casuals who only watch 1-2 games a year, and aren't watching the 9 seasons when it isn't their team's turn to win And its a loss for the club, not for the league. The loss of one set of glory hunting fans is replaced by another as somebody's gotta win it The Australian sports market has proven that teams cannot dominate for decades at a time. Usually its 4-5 years at most - with or without a salary cap. Even in the women's game where there is no cap and only two major academies developing talent we have seen 2-3 shifts of power The reasons against a salary cap are factual. The reasons against it are speculative I used Scotland as an example as Celtic spend way more than the other clubs and win the title every year. In the A-League we have Melbourne City who have way more money than the other clubs. If the cap goes they can spend as much as they want to win the league and go far into the ACL. You also say that crowds won't change much. That is incorrect. I'm an Adelaide fan and when we play like shit our crowds drop off. For example at the start of the season we were getting 14,000 to games. For the last two games against Victory and City we have got 10000. I think I heard that the crowd we got against Victory was the lowest we have ever got against them. Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all. The W-League also has a salary cap so that comment is wrong.as well Pretty funny when he calls his side of the argument factual when it in fact contains errors and is full of speculation. No its not. Point to where it is. Its easy to say stuff without backing it up jules.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe cap doesn't punish success, poor recruitment does It does punish success When a team wins, the value of its best players go up. The team can't afford to keep the players under the cap so they have to cut
You cant have watched much of the A League if you haven't seen this It also punishes progress. There is often a correlation between the quality (perceived or otherwise) of a player and the amount of money they get. Maybe the FFA should have a salary cap. $50k for a CEO, $35k for an accountant. Lets test their "creativity" and "innovation" and see what they can come up with And its not as if the metrics are good. Its not like we are choosing between a league with P/R / no salary cap, or a league with a $600m-$700m TV deal with games rating 300k-400k. Doing things the Australian way for a game built on conformity and all inclusiveness has given us no advantage than had we simply built a competitive football league The best A-League players either go to Europe or the J League or K League regardless of where a team finishes. I'm not talking about the best players. I'm talking about players that the A League can afford. If a team loses a $500k player to an overseas club, they can then offer that $500k to another A League player MV did it to Brisbane. Wellington did it to MV There's no science behind the salary cap. Its just something we have because we're Australian and that's what Australian's do. And the figure chosen is ambiguous. As mentioned above, the AFL can afford to have a salary cap because they have all the players. A salary cap stops players from wondering because there is no incentive to do so It doesn't work in the A League. Despite having a salary cap the amount of club whores in the league is ridiculous. I think one player is up to 7 clubs. We also have international interest to contend with Not only that but because the "punish the top teams" happens via the draft in the AFL, clubs can stay at top for 3-4 years. In the A League there is only 1 instance in 12 seasons of back to back titles (regardless of which one you value the most). There is just no chance for a team to go back to back There is no question as to the detrimental impact a salary cap has on the top teams. The "opinion" part of the topic is whether such a system can be vindicated Even 12 years on the A League still has "normal games" around the 8k-10k mark. Ratings at the 60k mark. Clubs haven't moved much from attendances in the first few seasons. This notion that fans are only interested in a balanced league is full of shit As for balance: If the team that won the season before is at a disadvantage, is that balance? Is concessions for WSW balance? Is Cahill for City balance? Is a 20 point gap in the top half of the table balance? The salary cap is not giving our league a level of support we couldn't get in an uncapped league. It also doesn't provide balance The only thing it does is crush the teams at the top so another team inevitably wins it, and over a long period of time titles are distributed across more teams
This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership.Is that really the goal of the A League first and foremost when we only have 9 Australian professional teams and all our national teams are struggling? No one is really in financial trouble at the moment.
There is nothing about the A League that we can look at and say "that's why we need a salary cap" The cap keeps the competition even and interesting. People aren't going to want to watch a league where only Melbourne City will win the league every year because they have the most money, especially since they are a small club. This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership. That's just an extreme doomsday rant that has no ground in reality Out of all the leagues in the world, why is it only Australia and Scotland will end up like Scotland? The Australian sports market is different. Investment is sport and the marketplace is fierce and competitive. There is just no way one team will dominate and everybody else will be left in their wake We have 3 major metropolitan areas (and 2 secondary). The major areas have (will have) multiple teams. There is more than one foreign investor. Plenty of local investors with money. The 4+1 rule means Aussie talent determines league winners (not just buying in talent) As for "people wont watch the league if its not interesting". This is also a poor argument with no grounding in reality There have been no crowds of 0. CCM in their worst year got a better attendance than the season before. As mentioned, Aussies love sport. Even when CCM are performing poorly they still have WSW home games, or visiting marquees Our league is built on the notion that the majority of people only want to watch their team win but its a complete load of shit. You are describing a handful of glory hunting casuals who only watch 1-2 games a year, and aren't watching the 9 seasons when it isn't their team's turn to win And its a loss for the club, not for the league. The loss of one set of glory hunting fans is replaced by another as somebody's gotta win it The Australian sports market has proven that teams cannot dominate for decades at a time. Usually its 4-5 years at most - with or without a salary cap. Even in the women's game where there is no cap and only two major academies developing talent we have seen 2-3 shifts of power The reasons against a salary cap are factual. The reasons against it are speculative I used Scotland as an example as Celtic spend way more than the other clubs and win the title every year. In the A-League we have Melbourne City who have way more money than the other clubs. If the cap goes they can spend as much as they want to win the league and go far into the ACL. You also say that crowds won't change much. That is incorrect. I'm an Adelaide fan and when we play like shit our crowds drop off. For example at the start of the season we were getting 14,000 to games. For the last two games against Victory and City we have got 10000. I think I heard that the crowd we got against Victory was the lowest we have ever got against them. Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all. The W-League also has a salary cap so that comment is wrong.as well If your fans are fickle then that your problem. Domt hold back growth of the game because you have fairweather fans. "Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all." Piss off draups. Every team has fairweather fans. I'm also not draups.
|
|
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe cap doesn't punish success, poor recruitment does It does punish success When a team wins, the value of its best players go up. The team can't afford to keep the players under the cap so they have to cut
You cant have watched much of the A League if you haven't seen this It also punishes progress. There is often a correlation between the quality (perceived or otherwise) of a player and the amount of money they get. Maybe the FFA should have a salary cap. $50k for a CEO, $35k for an accountant. Lets test their "creativity" and "innovation" and see what they can come up with And its not as if the metrics are good. Its not like we are choosing between a league with P/R / no salary cap, or a league with a $600m-$700m TV deal with games rating 300k-400k. Doing things the Australian way for a game built on conformity and all inclusiveness has given us no advantage than had we simply built a competitive football league The best A-League players either go to Europe or the J League or K League regardless of where a team finishes. I'm not talking about the best players. I'm talking about players that the A League can afford. If a team loses a $500k player to an overseas club, they can then offer that $500k to another A League player MV did it to Brisbane. Wellington did it to MV There's no science behind the salary cap. Its just something we have because we're Australian and that's what Australian's do. And the figure chosen is ambiguous. As mentioned above, the AFL can afford to have a salary cap because they have all the players. A salary cap stops players from wondering because there is no incentive to do so It doesn't work in the A League. Despite having a salary cap the amount of club whores in the league is ridiculous. I think one player is up to 7 clubs. We also have international interest to contend with Not only that but because the "punish the top teams" happens via the draft in the AFL, clubs can stay at top for 3-4 years. In the A League there is only 1 instance in 12 seasons of back to back titles (regardless of which one you value the most). There is just no chance for a team to go back to back There is no question as to the detrimental impact a salary cap has on the top teams. The "opinion" part of the topic is whether such a system can be vindicated Even 12 years on the A League still has "normal games" around the 8k-10k mark. Ratings at the 60k mark. Clubs haven't moved much from attendances in the first few seasons. This notion that fans are only interested in a balanced league is full of shit As for balance: If the team that won the season before is at a disadvantage, is that balance? Is concessions for WSW balance? Is Cahill for City balance? Is a 20 point gap in the top half of the table balance? The salary cap is not giving our league a level of support we couldn't get in an uncapped league. It also doesn't provide balance The only thing it does is crush the teams at the top so another team inevitably wins it, and over a long period of time titles are distributed across more teams
This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership.Is that really the goal of the A League first and foremost when we only have 9 Australian professional teams and all our national teams are struggling? No one is really in financial trouble at the moment.
There is nothing about the A League that we can look at and say "that's why we need a salary cap" The cap keeps the competition even and interesting. People aren't going to want to watch a league where only Melbourne City will win the league every year because they have the most money, especially since they are a small club. This is a good thing. This keeps the league interesting. People won't watch a league where only one team can win the title. That's why no one gives a shit about the Scottish Premiership. That's just an extreme doomsday rant that has no ground in reality Out of all the leagues in the world, why is it only Australia and Scotland will end up like Scotland? The Australian sports market is different. Investment is sport and the marketplace is fierce and competitive. There is just no way one team will dominate and everybody else will be left in their wake We have 3 major metropolitan areas (and 2 secondary). The major areas have (will have) multiple teams. There is more than one foreign investor. Plenty of local investors with money. The 4+1 rule means Aussie talent determines league winners (not just buying in talent) As for "people wont watch the league if its not interesting". This is also a poor argument with no grounding in reality There have been no crowds of 0. CCM in their worst year got a better attendance than the season before. As mentioned, Aussies love sport. Even when CCM are performing poorly they still have WSW home games, or visiting marquees Our league is built on the notion that the majority of people only want to watch their team win but its a complete load of shit. You are describing a handful of glory hunting casuals who only watch 1-2 games a year, and aren't watching the 9 seasons when it isn't their team's turn to win And its a loss for the club, not for the league. The loss of one set of glory hunting fans is replaced by another as somebody's gotta win it The Australian sports market has proven that teams cannot dominate for decades at a time. Usually its 4-5 years at most - with or without a salary cap. Even in the women's game where there is no cap and only two major academies developing talent we have seen 2-3 shifts of power The reasons against a salary cap are factual. The reasons against it are speculative I used Scotland as an example as Celtic spend way more than the other clubs and win the title every year. In the A-League we have Melbourne City who have way more money than the other clubs. If the cap goes they can spend as much as they want to win the league and go far into the ACL. You also say that crowds won't change much. That is incorrect. I'm an Adelaide fan and when we play like shit our crowds drop off. For example at the start of the season we were getting 14,000 to games. For the last two games against Victory and City we have got 10000. I think I heard that the crowd we got against Victory was the lowest we have ever got against them. Your comment about the Australian sports market isn't relevant as most other sporting leagues in Australia are salary capped if not all. The W-League also has a salary cap so that comment is wrong.as well Pretty funny when he calls his side of the argument factual when it in fact contains errors and is full of speculation. Are you referring to me or bluebird? bluebird mate.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
|