SA Footy

Dutchy wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:

Booney wrote:

Booney wrote:Players take a 50% pay cut for the next two months.

The AFL has said "We can't give you what we don't have" and will be looking at a 75% pay cut for players.

Yep. 50% until 31 May and then it goes to 78%. that's a massive pay cut no matter what wage you're on.

Based on the player average wage of $371k and a cut of 78%, they still earn $81k pa. And if they have mortgages etc they will be able to get 6 months relief from repayments, they will be OK.

David King had a good suggesting, that the % of cuts gets increased for every $100k extra you earn over the 1st $100k, so the better paid players take more of a hit, makes sense to me but these guys have lived privileged lifestyles for ever.

what about the one's paying nearly a grand in rent a week?

I recon if they deferred the payments rather than simply cut them they would see substantial buyin from the players.

20% deferral on the first 100k
50% deferral on 100-250k
90% on everything above 250k

[quote="Bum Crack"]

If they are paying $1k per week, that means they are living alone in a property worth $1.5m, they can make changes. Move properties, share with others, move back into host families etc.

Dutchy wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:
If they are paying $1k per week, that means they are living alone in a property worth $1.5m, they can make changes. Move properties, share with others, move back into host families etc.

Don't get much for $1.5 Mil in Sydney. Landlords just let them move out no questions asked hey?

Bum Crack wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:
If they are paying $1k per week, that means they are living alone in a property worth $1.5m, they can make changes. Move properties, share with others, move back into host families etc.

Don't get much for $1.5 Mil in Sydney. Landlords just let them move out no questions asked hey?

How are they going to pay if they have no $'s?

Dutchy wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:
If they are paying $1k per week, that means they are living alone in a property worth $1.5m, they can make changes. Move properties, share with others, move back into host families etc.

Don't get much for $1.5 Mil in Sydney. Landlords just let them move out no questions asked hey?

How are they going to pay if they have no $'s?

Squat

I for one feel for the poor bastards.
How will they survive living off similar amounts to you and I.

Maybe a gofundme page for AFL players?

Dutchy wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:
If they are paying $1k per week, that means they are living alone in a property worth $1.5m, they can make changes. Move properties, share with others, move back into host families etc.

Don't get much for $1.5 Mil in Sydney. Landlords just let them move out no questions asked hey?

How are they going to pay if they have no $'s?

That's not going to bother the landlord. He's not going to think it's all beer and skittles and write off the rent until he finds another tenant (if he can, especially in the current climate). I'm just saying that it's going to stuff a few people up and it doesn't matter if they're footballers or not.

I thought I heard on Footy Classified last night Lloydy say contracts are for 12 months from November to October. Players are paid monthly and that they would have already had 5 pay cycles and that players had in principal agreed to 50% cut for next 2 months. This means by my maths a player on $360,000 would have already been paid $150,000, and effectively only going to be paid $15,000 a month for the next 2 months rather than the normal $30,000.
Doesn’t really sound like a generous offer to me from the players if I heard him right!

Chris Scott not taking his salary this year at all, zero dollars , says it doesn’t feel right when others around him are being let go or told no work with no pay

Brodlach wrote:Chris Scott not taking his salary this year at all, zero dollars , says it doesn’t feel right when others around him are being let go or told no work with no pay

Good on him.
Shows strong leadership and an understanding of the real world.

amber_fluid wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Chris Scott not taking his salary this year at all, zero dollars , says it doesn’t feel right when others around him are being let go or told no work with no pay

Good on him.
Shows strong leadership and an understanding of the real world.

And he's trying to keep his job.

tigerpie wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Chris Scott not taking his salary this year at all, zero dollars , says it doesn’t feel right when others around him are being let go or told no work with no pay

Good on him.
Shows strong leadership and an understanding of the real world.

And he's trying to keep his job.

That too.

I just read that the AFL coaches put forward a 20% pay reduction which the AFL knocked back.
AFL have said 50%.

Anyone see that?

why dont they pay players all the same amount, lets say 60 or 70k for the year?

daysofourlives wrote:why dont they pay players all the same amount, lets say 60 or 70k for the year?

Still has to be some sort of provision for those on backloaded contracts. Maybe they can be paid outside of the cap in the future when things turnaround.

Jim05 wrote:

daysofourlives wrote:why dont they pay players all the same amount, lets say 60 or 70k for the year?

Still has to be some sort of provision for those on backloaded contracts. Maybe they can be paid outside of the cap in the future when things turnaround.

Why?
Theres no provisions if you lose your job though in the real world.

amber_fluid wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

daysofourlives wrote:why dont they pay players all the same amount, lets say 60 or 70k for the year?

Still has to be some sort of provision for those on backloaded contracts. Maybe they can be paid outside of the cap in the future when things turnaround.

Why?
Theres no provisions if you lose your job though in the real world.

Some of these blokes have taken well unders for 3-4 years at the request of the club. They are owed back pay in effect and are entitled to collect it, maybe not currently but over the coming years most definitely

Jim05 wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

daysofourlives wrote:why dont they pay players all the same amount, lets say 60 or 70k for the year?

Still has to be some sort of provision for those on backloaded contracts. Maybe they can be paid outside of the cap in the future when things turnaround.

Why?
Theres no provisions if you lose your job though in the real world.

Some of these blokes have taken well unders for 3-4 years at the request of the club. They are owed back pay in effect and are entitled to collect it, maybe not currently but over the coming years most definitely

I dont care what they have done in the past or whats due to them in the future, its about survival. They are all contributing exactly the same to the game at the moment. The rookie listed player and the superstar should be getting a survival payment and thats it, they are still better off than most.

They could always go and try get a real job and make money if needed

daysofourlives wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

Jim05 wrote:[quote="daysofourlives"]why dont they pay players all the same amount, lets say 60 or 70k for the year?

Still has to be some sort of provision for those on backloaded contracts. Maybe they can be paid outside of the cap in the future when things turnaround.

Why?
Theres no provisions if you lose your job though in the real world.

Some of these blokes have taken well unders for 3-4 years at the request of the club. They are owed back pay in effect and are entitled to collect it, maybe not currently but over the coming years most definitely

I dont care what they have done in the past or whats due to them in the future, its about survival. They are all contributing exactly the same to the game at the moment. The rookie listed player and the superstar should be getting a survival payment and thats it, they are still better off than most.[/quote]Hence why I said they should get something back in the future.
Take a 70-80% cut or even play for free if need be this year and in future years when things get better they get the rest of what they are owed