Veteran List how many Qualify

[robsaint]

Wonder if the new ruling is better or worse for us. Thought it was something like 10 years and 30 1/2 the of the player's remmuneration was not included.
Now the ruling is.
The amount of the allowance has been calculated as a fixed percentage of Total Player Payments (TPP) per player based on the average amount of football payments excluded from the TPP for players on the Veterans’ List for seasons 2007-09, divided by the average number of players with 10 or more years’ service at one club during that period.

The fixed percentage has been set at 1.229 per cent and the allowance per player in 2013 is $112,320.

Those that is can apply to now are
Nick R
Nick Dal
Monty
Fish

Saving us Aprox 450K

Old system Nick(Approx 600K) and Lenny(Approx 500K)
Saving 550K

[plugger66]

Wont matter at all this year. We may not even use the vet list as we may struggle to get to 95% of the salary cap. Ans i reckon lenny qualifies as well if we did use it.

[robsaint]

You are right had Lenny at the top of the list. Would have made it about the same anyway.
Not sure why we would try to use the whole amount to entice someone good.

[plugger66]

You are right had Lenny at the top of the list. Would have made it about the same anyway.
Not sure why we would try to use the whole amount to entice someone good.

If we use the whole amount now then what happens if we come good quickly. No room to move. The lower the salary cap now the better and when its time to try and get good FA then we have plenty of money to play with.

[dragit]

You are right had Lenny at the top of the list. Would have made it about the same anyway.
Not sure why we would try to use the whole amount to entice someone good.

If we use the whole amount now then what happens if we come good quickly. No room to move. The lower the salary cap now the better and when its time to try and get good FA then we have plenty of money to play with.

I'm sure if we are short of the minimum we will re-organise some current contracts to front-load them too, freeing up more space down the track.

There aren't many decent free agents going around this year, apparently the year after will be very good (of course this can all change as players re-commit to their current clubs)

[Zed]

I thought we were under salary cap pressure last year which was one of the major reasons we let Goddard go. I suspect Kosi was on good coin but I would not have thought either Blake or Milne were on anything substantial. Now we are struggling to pay the minimum 95% .. Seems odd at face value.

[Dr Spaceman]

I thought we were under salary cap pressure last year which was one of the major reasons we let Goddard go. I suspect Kosi was on good coin but I would not have thought either Blake or Milne were on anything substantial. Now we are struggling to pay the minimum 95% .. Seems odd at face value.

But surely that's partly because Goddard has indeed gone.

[dragit]

I thought we were under salary cap pressure last year which was one of the major reasons we let Goddard go. I suspect Kosi was on good coin but I would not have thought either Blake or Milne were on anything substantial. Now we are struggling to pay the minimum 95% .. Seems odd at face value.

But surely that's partly because Goddard has indeed gone.

Goddard, Milne, Blake, Kosi, Gram, Roo (on less) maybe Dal gone would be something like 2-3 mil less than our 2012 cap.

[plugger66]

I thought we were under salary cap pressure last year which was one of the major reasons we let Goddard go. I suspect Kosi was on good coin but I would not have thought either Blake or Milne were on anything substantial. Now we are struggling to pay the minimum 95% .. Seems odd at face value.

Milne would be on 350K and Blake 250k plus Grammy was probably on 400K, Rooy took something like a 400K drop in wages. Plenty of reason to be well under.

[Zed]

I thought we were under salary cap pressure last year which was one of the major reasons we let Goddard go. I suspect Kosi was on good coin but I would not have thought either Blake or Milne were on anything substantial. Now we are struggling to pay the minimum 95% .. Seems odd at face value.

Milne would be on 350K and Blake 250k plus Grammy was probably on 400K, Rooy took something like a 400K drop in wages. Plenty of reason to be well under.

Yeah fair enough. Didn't know about Roo and forgot about Gram who's pay would still have been in this years cap I assume.

What is the overall cap total , and when we say 95% vs 100% what's the $ value difference ?

[plugger66]

I thought we were under salary cap pressure last year which was one of the major reasons we let Goddard go. I suspect Kosi was on good coin but I would not have thought either Blake or Milne were on anything substantial. Now we are struggling to pay the minimum 95% .. Seems odd at face value.

Milne would be on 350K and Blake 250k plus Grammy was probably on 400K, Rooy took something like a 400K drop in wages. Plenty of reason to be well under.

Yeah fair enough. Didn't know about Roo and forgot about Gram who's pay would still have been in this years cap I assume.

What is the overall cap total , and when we say 95% vs 100% what's the $ value difference ?

Think it is only about 500K but then you have the vet list. I reckon all up we may pay a million less than what is allowed which will give us some good room in the coming seasons which hopefully we will need to use.

[dragit]

I thought we were under salary cap pressure last year which was one of the major reasons we let Goddard go. I suspect Kosi was on good coin but I would not have thought either Blake or Milne were on anything substantial. Now we are struggling to pay the minimum 95% .. Seems odd at face value.

Milne would be on 350K and Blake 250k plus Grammy was probably on 400K, Rooy took something like a 400K drop in wages. Plenty of reason to be well under.

Yeah fair enough. Didn't know about Roo and forgot about Gram who's pay would still have been in this years cap I assume.

What is the overall cap total , and when we say 95% vs 100% what's the $ value difference ?

The salary cap, known officially as Total Player Payments, is A$9,130,000 for the 2013 season with a salary floor of $8,673,500
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFL_salary_cap

[older saint]

I believe the 50% 2 player thing changed a few years ago and it became as many as qualified first $150 K per player off cap. Blake with this was basically on nothing for cap purposes. Kosi and Gram with back ended contract were on big coin last season so that helps off the cap , along with Milne retired and Lenny new contract . IF Dal gets traded that will also reduce cap used. Should be positioned for a good free agent run in the future

[Zed]

Ok thanks. I guess this was one of the reasons Pelchen was brought in to sort this out and guide us through FA. Hope he sees it through and doesn't pull the pin in 2 or 3 years when we will really need to have this bedded down.

[The Saintsational Man]

.....Nettlefold told a small group of about 30 of us in Sydney, that we can only afford to pay around 95% of the salary cap, due to our current financial state.

[dragit]

.....Nettlefold told a small group of about 30 of us in Sydney, that we can only afford to pay around 95% of the salary cap, due to our current financial state.

How much does he earn again - $750,000 PA ?

[Kickit]

You are right had Lenny at the top of the list. Would have made it about the same anyway.
Not sure why we would try to use the whole amount to entice someone good.

If we use the whole amount now then what happens if we come good quickly. No room to move. The lower the salary cap now the better and when its time to try and get good FA then we have plenty of money to play with.

I'm sure if we are short of the minimum we will re-organise some current contracts to front-load them too, freeing up more space down the track.

There aren't many decent free agents going around this year, apparently the year after will be very good (of course this can all change as players re-commit to their current clubs)

Stuff all that, If we are under 95% just give Lenny a pay rise until we aren't.

[dragit]

Stuff all that, If we are under 95% just give Lenny a pay rise until we aren't.

Yeah, why would we want to make room for a couple of A graders down the track…

[WinnersOnly]

.....Nettlefold told a small group of about 30 of us in Sydney, that we can only afford to pay around 95% of the salary cap, due to our current financial state.

How much does he earn again - $750,000 PA ?

He is probably getting paid in line with other clubs CEO's, but isn't it amazing how these supposed SAINTS people end up being some of the highest paid individuals in the league while their club wallows in financial despair!

[The Saintsational Man]

.....Nettlefold told a small group of about 30 of us in Sydney, that we can only afford to pay around 95% of the salary cap, due to our current financial state.

How much does he earn again - $750,000 PA ?

He is probably getting paid in line with other clubs CEO's, but isn't it amazing how these supposed SAINTS people end up being some of the highest paid individuals in the league while their club wallows in financial despair!

I don't see the problem with Club CEO's getting paid large salaries, you get what you pay for and I think Nettlefold is more then worth every penny.

[dragit]

I don't see the problem with Club CEO's getting paid large salaries, you get what you pay for and I think Nettlefold is more then worth every penny.

Is he?
I hope you're right…
Letting your coach be head-hunted and having the lowest membership in the comp & struggling for any major sponsors doesn't fill me with enormous confidence.
I won't profess to know the inner dealing of the club to make a proper judgment.

Just seems weird that a club which hasn't got enough money to pay the players is paying the CEO top dollar, surely the financial state of the club is a responsibility of the corporate staff? Their salaries should reflect performance IMO, just like the players.

[Junction Oval]

Dragit commented :

Is he?
I hope you're right…
Letting your coach be head-hunted and having the lowest membership in the comp & struggling for any major sponsors doesn't fill me with enormous confidence.
I won't profess to know the inner dealing of the club to make a proper judgment.

Just seems weird that a club which hasn't got enough money to pay the players is paying the CEO top dollar, surely the financial state of the club is a responsibility of the corporate staff? Their salaries should reflect performance IMO, just like the players.

I have empathy with your comments, Dragit. Also, the enormous, but un-publicised staff turnover is another indicator about how well things are run internally at the Saints.

[Kickit]

Stuff all that, If we are under 95% just give Lenny a pay rise until we aren't.

Yeah, why would we want to make room for a couple of A graders down the track…

It would have exactly the same affect?

Front end contracts = pay now, then pay cut at the end of their contract making space
Pay Lenny = pay now , then salary cap space when he retires.
You can do it mathematically identically.

So what's your point?

[dragit]

It would have exactly the same affect?

Front end contracts = pay now, then pay cut at the end of their contract making space
Pay Lenny = pay now , then salary cap space when he retires.
You can do it mathematically identically.

So what's your point?

Not sure if you are really across the concept of front-loading.

If we need to spend 400K more to reach the cap floor next year… and say Jack Steven is on 300 for the next 3 years… we could pay him 700 next year, then 100 for each of the next 2 years… freeing up 200 for each season.

If we just paid Lenny 400K more as you have suggested, cause he is a ripping bloke… that doesn't help us fit in another player down the track.

You following here?

[Kickit]

It would have exactly the same affect?

Front end contracts = pay now, then pay cut at the end of their contract making space
Pay Lenny = pay now , then salary cap space when he retires.
You can do it mathematically identically.

So what's your point?

Not sure if you are really across the concept of front-loading.

If we need to spend 400K more to reach the cap floor next year… and say Jack Steven is on 300 for the next 3 years… we could pay him 700 next year, then 100 for each of the next 2 years… freeing up 200 for each season.

If we just paid Lenny 400K more as you have suggested, cause he is a ripping bloke… that doesn't help us fit in another player down the track.

You following here?

Yes it does because it will open up the cap space when he retires.
The question was about getting the cap up to the minimum 95% in the short term.
I certainly hope that in 3 years time we aren't relying on the likes of Steven to be in the end of a front ended contract to keep us under the cap. If so our longer term prospects would be pretty dim.