- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Well the Sydney Swans have done it again. Or have they? Yeah, probably.
While there is a chance the AFL may still nix their attempt to secure Lance ‘Buddy’ Franklin, it seems likely that for the second year running the Swans have pulled-off the off-season’s biggest recruiting coup.
Of course, the deal has raised many questions and caused a reasonable amount of furore. Here are my two cents on some of these questions/issues.
Does Sydney really need Lance Franklin?
When, at this same time last year, the Swans swooped on Kurt Tippett, doubts were immediately raised about what the Swans were doing, and whether they really needed a Tippett, given the presence of Sam Reid and Adam Goodes already in their forward line.
While, due to injuries, we rarely saw all three together on the park at the same time this year, it’s hard to imagine a Swans side, anymore, without Tippett in its midst.
Chances are it will similarly be the case once Buddy settles in.
Sure the Swans have many tall marking forward options. In addition to the four already mentioned, there is Mike Pyke as well as everyone’s favourite swingman and three-letter acronym, LRT (or Lewis Roberts-Thomson as he is less affectionately, and efficiently, known).
Of course, we’ll rarely see more than three, let alone all six, of these in the forward line at the same time. And nor should we. With the exception of Reid, each has a proven ability in other roles.
Lewis Roberts-Thompson plays more or less as a permanent backman these days, and only moves forward in the case of emergency – which is even less likely given the choices the Swans now have up forward.
Mike Pyke’s primary role is that of ruckman. Tippett will likely play secondary ruckman (until Sam Naismith makes his expected graduation to the seniors).
Goodes and, to a lesser extent, Franklin, will be required to play more roaming roles, sashaying back and forth between the centre line and the goal-square.
Even Reid, who took a match-saving mark at full-back against Fremantle earlier this year, may be tested in a swingman role.
So, all said and done, with the flexibility that each of these tall timbers offers, it’s quite fathomable we’ll see all six in the starting 22 (save for injuries).
Indeed, when Franklin first burst on to the scene, back in 2005, all pundits – professional and armchair alike – were united in their view that Buddy was the prototype of the ideal future footballer: tall, strong, athletic and fast, and thus capable of playing almost any position on the field and near-impossible to match-up on.
And while, to date, he’s played predominantly as a forward, his potential value as a more versatile option is evident.
Structurally he should easily fit into the Swans best 22 without causing any major disruption.
And, as the likes of Goodes and LRT retire in the next couple of years, his value will become that much enhanced.
What about the Swans’ famed ‘no dickheads’ culture?
Over the years the Swans have fashioned a culture – both off-field and on – that has become the envy of the competition.
It is one built on simple principles such as always putting team first and, basically, not doing anything stupid, selfish or undisciplined.
With each always giving 110% towards the cause, the idea is that the sum will be far greater than the sum of its individual parts.
Buddy carries with him the reputation of a superstar, of a show-pony. But it’s not like the Swans have not had their share of superstars.
Adam Goodes has been there since as far back as we can remember. And not too long ago there was Barry Hall, whose presence in the team was indispensable to the Swans breaking their 72-year premiership drought back in 2005.
The way for Buddy to endear himself to his new teammates, and win their respect, will simply be for him to do the team thing.
And I don’t see him not doing that.
To the extent he has a reputation of a player who is self-absorbed, it’s probably unwarranted. While I can think of many others who’ve been so, Buddy’s neither petulant nor sulky when things aren’t going his way.
Sure he’s had his occasional bout of selfishness, but only a one-eyed Swans fan would suggest Kieren Jack hasn’t ever himself.
Indeed, Buddy runs and tackles and does the one-percenters on a fairly consistent basis.
In any case, the ‘no dickheads’ terminology is a bit of a harsh one. If there is an antonym for the word euphemism, it would aptly describe the use of this phrase to describe the Swans’ culture.
A nine-year contract? What’s Andrew Ireland smoking and where can I get some?
A nine-year contract certainly seems both excessive and highly optimistic.
A contact sport like footy is rife with so many risks. Just one simple incident can cause a horrible injury and put a player out for a year and, even upon his return, render him far less effective than he was pre-injury.
It’s a massive gamble the Swans are taking. Even if he were to stay injury-free, the chances of Buddy doing enough on the field at the age of 32 or 35 to justify his salary at that time seems a bit fanciful.
But, there are other factors worth keeping in mind.
The current salary cap per club is $10m, give or take. However, this is likely to continue to grow at a fairly decent clip, and it’s not unreasonable to expect that it will double in the next few years (while Buddy is still playing).
It’s also inevitable that, in the next couple of years, many Sydney stalwarts – such as Goodes and Ryan O’Keefe – will hang-up their boots, freeing up more room in the salary cap.
On the flip side, the Swans will likely have to fork out more to retain the likes of Josh Kennedy and Daniel Hanneberry and Jack, as their market prices will surely increase.
All said and done, there are probably some very clever people doing all the calculations, and no doubt they’ve thought of all possible eventualities.
It remains a gamble nonetheless, but perhaps a calculated one.
If the Swans, with Buddy’s help, can bring home two more premierships in the next nine years, then everyone involved in this coup will look back on it as a move well made.
What is this COLA all about anyway, and is it justified?
The COLA, our favourite four-letter acronym, and less enthusiastically known as the cost of living allowance, provides the two Sydney-based teams with an addition 9.8 percent in their salary cap in comparison to all the other teams in the competition.
Now, ostensibly, the COLA is not to be used to snare additional high-profile players, but rather to be distributed evenly across the player group, i.e. 9.8 percent to each.
But, as any accountant would know, that’s wishful thinking.
Money is completely fungible, and what does it mean, anyway, to prove that the Swans are paying each player an extra 9.8%?
Let’s say they’re paying Joey Kennedy $400,000 per year (and I’m making this up; I have no idea what Joey Kennedy is on). Then, someone would have to prove that were Kennedy playing for any other team (except GWS) he would be on $364,300.
That exercise is a non-starter for even one player, let alone any player on the Swans’ roster.
Ah, that elusive counterfactual… I’m sure an economist somewhere will observe it some day.
The plain and simple fact is the Swans and the Giants get an extra 9.8% each in their salary caps. To spend how they want. Full stop.
The question is: Is it justified?
The COLA argument attempts to justify it by suggesting that, since the cost-of-living is so much higher in Sydney than it is in other cities, the Sydney teams need this extra buffer.
Of course, it’s a weak argument for several reasons.
The first is that it implies the cost of the living is the same in all other cities in which AFL teams are based except for Sydney, which, if it were true, would be a coincidence of epic proportions.
If we’re equalising for cost-of-living then the salary caps should clearly be different for teams based, respectively, in Adelaide, Melbourne, Geelong, Sydney, Perth, Fremantle, Brisbane and the Gold Coast.
Second, the COLA argument assumes finances are the only factor at play in a player’s decision over which club he wants to play for.
This, of course, is also patently not the case. There are many factors at play.
Lifestyle may be one. No offence to my friends in Adelaide, but many 23 year old men might be happy earning $350k per annum if it meant living in Melbourne or Sydney versus $400k to live in Adelaide.
The strength of the football team, and in particular its prospects for achieving on-field success, would be another obvious factor.
A player may quite reasonably take 10 percent less to play for Hawthorn versus Melbourne, given the relative prospects for a premiership medallion hanging around his neck in the foreseeable future.
In which case, one could argue that salary caps should be higher for lower-ranked teams.
I could go on and make many other similar arguments, each of which I’m sure will have quite sound counter-arguments against them.
The truth of the matter probably is that Sydney is the AFL’s most prized expansion market. It is the biggest city in Australia, and it’s the AFL’s most difficult market to crack, given that it is rugby heartland.
So, the AFL would like to do what it can to help win more fans in the city and what better way than to help Sydney teams win more games.
And therein probably lies the true motivation for COLA (even if the cost of living in Sydney is actually notably higher than it is in other cities).
Will the COLA last? Possibly not for much longer.
Even if the Swans have done everything above board and by the book – and there’s no reason to believe that they haven’t – the fact they managed to secure Kurt Tippett immediately after finishing number one and now are likely to grab Buddy Franklin after finishing equal third, is not the best look.
In some ways they may be hoisted by their own petard – they’ve perhaps been too astute by half with their deal-making and money-management.
How will the Swans go next year?
Chances are the Swans will there and thereabouts again come the pointy end of the season.
Ultimately, what will separate #1 from #6 will have less to do with skill and much more to do with things like desire, hunger and intensity. And also a bit of luck (can never ignore that factor).
The Swans will certainly have the firepower on paper. If the team can avoid the slew of injuries that ravaged them this year, and the boys remain hungry, they could certainly push for the flag again in 2014.
Here’s what a best 22 might look like:
F: Parker, Tippett, Reid
HF: Goodes, Franklin, Rohan
C: Jack, Kennedy, McVeigh
HB: Malceski, Grundy, Johnson
B: Smith, Richards, Rampe
R: Pyke, Hanneberry, Mitchell
I/C: Jetta, Lamb, McGlynn, O’Keefe
Banging on the doors: LRT, Cunningham, Everitt, Bird, Shaw, Biggs, Walsh, B. Jack
Having said that, predictions this far ahead are fraught with risk. Modern day football is so competitive, and small momentum shifts can have such sustained consequences, that it’s entirely plausible that the Swans may even miss the eight next year.
Wouldn’t that cause the rest of the competition to have a little chuckle?
Who’s in your ultimate team? Pick the best team and compete with other fans for daily prizes on Draftstars. For the best odds on the game try out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Think. Is this a bet you really want to place? Set a deposit limit.