Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks (Read 19985 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #15 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Seems like Eddie McGuire backs up what I've been saying.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/womens-afl/afl-news-2021-tayla-harris-contract-salary-carlton-aflw-boxing-record-return-for-world-title-sonny-bill-williams/news-story/82903cf645d74a7c3baf8d8439941646
Regardless of the effect on AFLW and women's sport, Carlton is or at least should be about winning flags, and the potential effect on the team is significant.

McGuire's comments would be in respect of that, he knows it might be good for AFLW and potentially bad for Carlton.

If you want to lump AFLW in one big bag, then fair enough, but accept that some operating units might have to take a hit for the greater good and in this case Carlton.

On another note, I wouldn't be surprised if we or the AFL stump up the marketing cash Tayla stills wants to box. I believe the potential income is several times larger because the sponsorship deals for a world title are global not local.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #16 –
Quote from: LP – on
Regardless of the effect on AFLW and women's sport, Carlton is or at least should be about winning flags, and the potential effect on the team is significant.

McGuire's comments would be in respect of that, he knows it might be good for AFLW and potentially bad for Carlton.

For a new supply of tin foil?

McGuire is speaking purely from a marketing point of view. If we offered Harris to Collingwood, he'd be the first in line to drove her across. Tayla for us is still better than not having Tayla.

Plenty of team-mates have had their issues over the journey and still managed to play through it just fine.

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #17 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
For a new supply of tin foil?
I can use the sheet covering your eyes if you let me borrow it!

Regardless, I probably would not have Tayla Harris on a football level in our top 5 for the last season, let alone in top spot but her manager is asking for top dollars.

Are they footballers, role models or fashion models?

If we pay Tayla big dollars are we just reinforcing the female stereotype, that tall blond, slender, gets the goodies! Why doesn't someone in the media ask her the question, and let's see how the response fits with her other messages?
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #18 –
Quote from: LP – on
I can use the sheet covering your eyes if you let me borrow it!

Regardless, I probably would not have Tayla Harris on a football level in our top 5 for the last season, let alone in top spot but her manager is asking for top dollars.

Are they footballers, role models or fashion models?

If we pay Tayla big dollars are we just reinforcing the female stereotype, that tall blond, slender, gets the goodies! Why doesn't someone in the media ask her the question, and let's see how the response fits with her other messages?

I'd say it again in sign language but you wouldn't be able to see it.

Let me try it one more time....
It has nothing to do with her playing ability. That is capped, as it is for all players. I posted the table before. That is her max figure (if she was tier 1....and she's not)
As far as CSC votes went, she came in 17th i think.

Now on to why she should get the money. She is very marketable. She is as equally well known in the boxing world as the footy world. Non-football watchers see her and might get interested in the 'other' thing she does and have a look. They will see her playing for Carlton and thats their team from now on.
Her silhouette will IMO end up becoming the Footy Shows Jack Dyer, or the NBA's Jerry West etc.
She won young Victorian of the year.
She has a statue pushing for gender equality.
Our club is the league standard in gender equality, she is the poster child of that.

There are many many reason why she is beneficial to the club and the AFL as a whole.....and it is not based on her performance this year in the slightest.

Buddy Franklin was paid a squillion dollars to go to Sydney, you think that was all about his footballing ability? On the length of contract he was on? No, it was about marketing the club, and the game, in Sydney. Yes, they got some good years out of him, and now he is shot, but the marketing still remains.

If you think its simply because she is tall and blonde, then you are perpetuating the stereotype.


You think Chris Judd was really that focused on the environment and cardboard boxes? No, he wanted the coin. He was happy to be paraded around as the brand sponsor and give a few talks here and there to justify those dollars. But no, it was about increasing the brand of Visy, and earning some 'brand credits' in the process. Same with Tayla.

FWIW, if she put her mind to it, she could be the best forward to ever play the game, which is 1 reason you should try and keep her on the list.

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #19 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
FWIW, if she put her mind to it, she could be the best forward to ever play the game, which is 1 reason you should try and keep her on the list.
True.

All the other examples you offered, Judd and Franklin, were already at the top when they got the big dollars, that is how it works performance before pay.

Promises are hollow, performance is real!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #20 –
After an enthusiastic  start I've turned right off the women's game.
I hardly watched any this last season.
I realise that may be against the trend, and the bits of games I did see showed the skills are improving.

I think the thing that unsettled me most was some of the player movements, where you would get invested in certain players only to have them leave.
A lot of this had to do with new clubs coming into the competition
Now this will settle down eventually and clubs will become more stable.

I understand all the points Kruddler is making and also understand that at this time promoting the competition is important and takes precedence over the  footballing ability.
But until 'football' becomes the focus it all seems a bit artificial.
If there is to be credibility and equality then players need to be judged and rewarded, just as the men are, on their ability to influence games.

Good luck to Harris, she has a rightly deserved high profile across a range of areas and she should make 'hay while the sun shines', and squeeze out as much as possible, because a few years down the track the criteria for contracts will probably have a different emphasis.

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #21 –
Quote from: Lods – on
After an enthusiastic  start I've turned right off the women's game.
I hardly watched any this last season.
I realise that may be against the trend, and the bits of games I did see showed the skills are improving.

I think the thing that unsettled me most was some of the player movements where you would get invested in certain players only to have them leave.
A lot of this had to do with new clubs coming into the competition
Now this will settle down eventually and clubs will become more stable.

I understand all the points Kruddler is making and also understand that at this time promoting the competition is important and takes precedence over the  footballing ability.
But until 'football' becomes the focus it all seems a bit artificial.
If there is to be credibility and equality then players need to be judged and rewarded, just as the men are, on their ability to influence games.

Good luck to Harris, she has a rightly deserved high profile across a range of areas and she should make 'hay while the sun shines', and squeeze out as much as possible, because a few years down the track the criteria for contracts will probably have a different emphasis.
Thats my issue with Harris, the only influencing she did this year (and last year probably) was on instagram.
Off field, I am sure she does a power of work in the gender equality space, good on her. She is a handy boxer also, tick, great. On field this year, she did less than SFA and her team mates were less than impressed with her leaving the track to post on instagram, what a tool. Some will say she was injured, I say she was hugely distracted by her off field stuff and was in poor condition for a lot of the year. So on the basis of game influencing, I say ta ta Tayla if you can get more elsewhere.
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time
2025-Carlton can win the 2025 AFL Premiership

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #22 –
Its ridiculous that a comparison to the men's wages is being brought up already.  Less than five years in I saw a call for pay parity on TV.

Equal pay should men equal performance.  Average men's wage is 260k accordingly to averages.

This is down from 350 not long ago probably thanks to covid and subsidising the women's game.

Add the TV rights and the women playing half a season at best and you have illogical arguments.

They need to grow their game organically.  Not demand equality off the bat.

Poor form really. 
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #23 –
I have no problem with Tayla being well rewarded, but it has to be in context of on-field performance and relative to the rest of the team and competition.

Cynically, some will be stating Tayla deserves the money, but primarily that is because they will argue the case given they are paid relative. If Tayla gets more, I get more!

As for arguing Carlton should pay because it influences little girls to barrack for Tayla and by association Carlton. As fans that might work, but the draft means there is little on field benefit for future generations of Carlton players for that cash. I'd also argue winning a flag does as much if not more for Carlton. So if Tayla is to be some sort of competition wide role model to attract girls to the sport, why isn't the AFL stumping up some cash?

I'm not sure Tayla's game style is such an attraction for parents of young girls, I think @ElwoodBlues1 stated as much during the season!

PS; We should not necessarily judge Tayla based on what her manager publicly states, perhaps Tayla is poorly advised which is why I'd love to hear what she has to say directly!

Why not be as forthright about this as she is on Instagram or Twitter about other issues?
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #24 –
I think the women's game, much like the men's, has a pecking order, and Tayla, much like Dangerfield, Bont, Dusty, is at the very top of that pecking order, and we need to compare like with like. When you look at how much those men get paid, Tayla is asking for one fifth or one sixth of their salary. Of course, her form was off this year, but you don't dock the men simply based on output. Charlie Curnow and Marchbank would earn $10 / week if that was the case.

Reading the internet, reports are saying the relationship between her and Carlton is strained, so she may be playing elsewhere next season.

On the surface, her actions may look like greed, and maybe that's all they are, but these things can sometimes have a flow on effect, and you may end up with most, if not all the girls, being better paid.

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #25 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
Of course, her form was off this year, but you don't dock the men simply based on output.
All the players you list above, Bont, Dusty or Dangerfield, performed before the big money contracts came to them.

I don't think anybody is demanding no play no pay, that is a confusion of two different issues.

Men do in effect get docked, when form drops contracts drop, so I'm not sure that point is relevant either. We spend a lot of time here debating what trade targets are worth, relative to other players in the competition, how is it different for the girls when judge relative to the other girls. Isn't that the right relative frame of reference?

Don't get me wrong, I'd like Tayla, want her to stay a blue, and want her rewarded. But I also want her reward to be delivered without hurting her team-mates reward or remuneration, what of Harrington, Vescio, Prespakis, Moody, Gee, Egan, McKay, etc., etc.?
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #26 –
Quote from: LP – on
All the players you list above, Bont, Dusty or Dangerfield, performed before the big money contracts came to them.

I don't think anybody is demanding no play no pay, that is a confusion of two different issues.

Men do in effect get docked, when form drops contracts drop, so I'm not sure that point is relevant either. We spend a lot of time here debating what trade targets are worth, relative to other players in the competition, how is it different for the girls when judge relative to the other girls. Isn't that the right relative frame of reference?

Don't get me wrong, I'd like Tayla, want her to stay a blue, and want her rewarded. But I also want her reward to be delivered without hurting her team-mates reward or remuneration, what of Harrington, Vescio, Prespakis, Moody, Gee, Egan, McKay, etc., etc.?

Yep, those are fair points, and I don't really have an answer, except to say that I hope Tayla is motivated by something more than personal gain (being the empathetic person I am).  :D

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #27 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
Yep, those are fair points, and I don't really have an answer, except to say that I hope Tayla is motivated by something more than personal gain (being the empathetic person I am).  :D
Note to Tayla, heed Dimma's words to Shai Bolton.

Sometimes money is what must be sacrificed to be successful!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #28 –
Quote from: LP – on
True.

All the other examples you offered, Judd and Franklin, were already at the top when they got the big dollars, that is how it works performance before pay.

Promises are hollow, performance is real!


re Judd and Franklin, yes they were on the top of their game.....but they got PLENTY for their outside of football endeavors, which was the point.

re Taylas football output, this season was a poor showing, but Tayla is a 2x Carlton leading goalkicker, and 2x All australian. She is the best contested mark in the game, and has about the best bump in the game too. She is not without her talents, even if it was not on show this year.

FWIW, i'm not sure if anyone even read the article i linked, but Eddie McGuire was saying she deserves it, and the AFL should fit some of the bill for it.......in the same way that the AFL funds superstars going to the northern states.....like Buddy Franklin for instance. ;)

From our end though, i would make it heavily incentivised, Give her lots of bonuses rather than guaranteed cash. If she wants it, and think she deserves it....prove it.
 

Re: Harris at Odds over Contract Talks

Reply #29 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
I think the women's game, much like the men's, has a pecking order, and Tayla, much like Dangerfield, Bont, Dusty, is at the very top of that pecking order, and we need to compare like with like. When you look at how much those men get paid, Tayla is asking for one fifth or one sixth of their salary. Of course, her form was off this year, but you don't dock the men simply based on output. Charlie Curnow and Marchbank would earn $10 / week if that was the case.

Reading the internet, reports are saying the relationship between her and Carlton is strained, so she may be playing elsewhere next season.

On the surface, her actions may look like greed, and maybe that's all they are, but these things can sometimes have a flow on effect, and you may end up with most, if not all the girls, being better paid.

Without putting people in any stratospheres as its neither here nor there, the men's players get the money rolling in that supports the aflw competition.

The girls rightly or wrongly play at most about 12 matches a season.  They aren't fully professional yet and frankly, I dont think they should be at such a high wage bracket irrespective of how much one puts on their value.

Particularly when if the women's game stood on its own two feet they couldn't afford to pay her.

How does this compare to the rest of her peers?
Note: she's currently on 75k.  Thats my annual full time wage.  She's asking for 150k next year.  Its a large amount and a creep up to 100k might be more applicable.

"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson