Carlton Supporters Club

Quote from: DJC – on August 30, 2025, 12:49:04 am

Teams can underspend 5% of their TPP and carry it forward.  Is there any evidence that St Kilda had an underspend this season?  We’ll find out early next year.

Regardless of whether they do have savings, and whether TDK, will get an extra $200K next season, they still have to pay close to $4M to two players in 2027.  That’s more than 20% of their TPP on two players.  Even if most of their players were on the minimum, that’s going to be a challenge.

I understand how much they are paying in the future, but you need to look at the now and the past first.

We have cripps Charlie harry weiters....some might throw in McGovern, Saad, Williams and cerra.....and then you have tdk. All on huge money to varying degrees.

Do the same thing with the saints. I doubt you'll come up with half that list and even then, it's not to the same extent.
Who are they paying....Marshall? Hill??
Anyone else??

They wouldve been front loading and banking for a few years now. All planning towards this moment.

We saw it with sos while he was with us. Year on year we were throwing cash around. We never could get the players to commit though. He's solved that problem.

Quote from: kruddler – on August 30, 2025, 07:16:48 am

I understand how much they are paying in the future, but you need to look at the now and the past first.

We have cripps Charlie harry weiters....some might throw in McGovern, Saad, Williams and cerra.....and then you have tdk. All on huge money to varying degrees.

Do the same thing with the saints. I doubt you'll come up with half that list and even then, it's not to the same extent.
Who are they paying....Marshall? Hill??
Anyone else??

They wouldve been front loading and banking for a few years now. All planning towards this moment.

We saw it with sos while he was with us. Year on year we were throwing cash around. We never could get the players to commit though. He's solved that problem.

That's all well and good but clubs must spend at least 95% of their TPP.  If the Saints had an underspend this year. they must still have forked out at least $16.8M.  Next season's TPP is rolled in with an increase of the soft cap but it's set at $18.4M for 2027 so, split the difference and go with $18M. That goes up to $18.9M if they did have a 5% underspend.  With Nas and TDK raking in at least $3.8M, they've only got $15.1M to pay the other 40 odd players.  Take out $800K for Leek Aleer and possibly another $800K for Silvagni, and that drops their available budget to $13.5M.  That's around $350K each and Steele, Hill, King, Sinclair, Wilkie and Marshall all get considerably more than that.  Haircuts and frontloading doesn't get you from $16.8M down to $15.1M or lower and they will be pushing players out the door.

I'm not saying that they can't afford to pay players next season but it's not sustainable and they won't be able retain their young talent.

Quote from: DJC – on August 30, 2025, 05:11:10 pm

That's all well and good but clubs must spend at least 95% of their TPP.  If the Saints had an underspend this year. they must still have forked out at least $16.8M.  Next season's TPP is rolled in with an increase of the soft cap but it's set at $18.4M for 2027 so, split the difference and go with $18M. That goes up to $18.9M if they did have a 5% underspend.  With Nas and TDK raking in at least $3.8M, they've only got $15.1M to pay the other 40 odd players.  Take out $800K for Leek Aleer and possibly another $800K for Silvagni, and that drops their available budget to $13.5M.  That's around $350K each and Steele, Hill, King, Sinclair, Wilkie and Marshall all get considerably more than that.  Haircuts and frontloading doesn't get you from $16.8M down to $15.1M or lower and they will be pushing players out the door.

I'm not saying that they can't afford to pay players next season but it's not sustainable and they won't be able retain their young talent.

By my maths, when you take away 5.45M from the TPP for TDK (1.85M), NWM (2M), SOS(0.8M) and Alir (0.8M), , it leaves an average of around 300K for the other 41 players. Enjoy the carnage Saints.

Quote from: kruddler – on August 30, 2025, 07:16:48 am

I understand how much they are paying in the future, but you need to look at the now and the past first.

We have cripps Charlie harry weiters....some might throw in McGovern, Saad, Williams and cerra.....and then you have tdk. All on huge money to varying degrees.

Do the same thing with the saints. I doubt you'll come up with half that list and even then, it's not to the same extent.
Who are they paying....Marshall? Hill??
Anyone else??

They wouldve been front loading and banking for a few years now. All planning towards this moment.

We saw it with sos while he was with us. Year on year we were throwing cash around. We never could get the players to commit though. He's solved that problem.

That's all well and good but clubs must spend at least 95% of their TPP.  If the Saints had an underspend this year. they must still have forked out at least $16.8M.  Next season's TPP is rolled in with an increase of the soft cap but it's set at $18.4M for 2027 so, split the difference and go with $18M. That goes up to $18.9M if they did have a 5% underspend.  With Nas and TDK raking in at least $3.8M, they've only got $15.1M to pay the other 40 odd players.  Take out $800K for Leek Aleer and possibly another $800K for Silvagni, and that drops their available budget to $13.5M.  That's around $350K each and Steele, Hill, King, Sinclair, Wilkie and Marshall all get considerably more than that.  Haircuts and frontloading doesn't get you from $16.8M down to $15.1M or lower and they will be pushing players out the door.

I'm not saying that they can't afford to pay players next season but it's not sustainable and they won't be able retain their young talent.

If they had 1 year to work all this out, you are correct...now let's say they were I understand the cap a year ago. They use the war chest to 'pay un advance' some players....front loading contracts.

So if you are under the salary cap, year on year, you can save more and more cash because you keep front loading contracts and paying in advance.

So yeah, what you say works for 1 year; but sos has been at it for a few years and that's how you get extra over and above the traditionally overspend allowance.

Quote from: kruddler – on August 30, 2025, 08:54:12 pm

If they had 1 year to work all this out, you are correct...now let's say they were I understand the cap a year ago. They use the war chest to 'pay un advance' some players....front loading contracts.

So if you are under the salary cap, year on year, you can save more and more cash because you keep front loading contracts and paying in advance.

So yeah, what you say works for 1 year; but sos has been at it for a few years and that's how you get extra over and above the traditionally overspend allowance.

First of all, St Kilda spent $2M more on “football expenses” in 2024 than they did in 2023.  Their TPP is part of those expenses but their annual report doesn’t give any details.  However, if they increased overall expenditure by $2M, it’s reasonable to assume that they didn’t underspend their TPP.

If they have been systematically underspending by 5% and using the savings to “top up” their TPP each season, all that means is that they’re paying slightly less than the TPP each season and there’s no “war chest”.

5% of the 2025 TPP is $900K and that doesn’t go far when you’re shelling out $3.8M for two players.

A TPP underspend is not a magic pudding.

However, what i am saying is this....
95% in year 1, means 5% extra, but take 5% of year 2 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
90% in year 2, means 10% extra, but take 10% of year 3 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
85% in year 3, means 15% extra, but take 15% from year 4 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
80% in year 4, means 20% extra. Lets go shopping!

Quote from: kruddler – on August 31, 2025, 10:55:57 am

However, what i am saying is this....
95% in year 1, means 5% extra, but take 5% of year 2 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
90% in year 2, means 10% extra, but take 10% of year 3 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
85% in year 3, means 15% extra, but take 15% from year 4 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
80% in year 4, means 20% extra. Lets go shopping!

What are you shopping for, magic pudding?

I'm starting to understand why so many clubs end up in strife!

Tom Lynch highest paid player in the AFL this year. Over 1.5 mil.

[Cmon mate, its not that hard.

Lets say the saints salary cap all things considered is 95% year on year (it may be even less - before you jump up and down about minimums, follow the train of thought first)

95% in year 1, means 5% extra
95% in year 2, means 5% extra
95% in year 3, means 5% extra
95% in year 4, means 5% extra
At most, you can use 10% in a war chest after banking 2 years of 95% extra.
so what you say (in isolation) is correct.

However, what i am saying is this....
95% in year 1, means 5% extra, but take 5% of year 2 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
90% in year 2, means 10% extra, but take 10% of year 3 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
85% in year 3, means 15% extra, but take 15% from year 4 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
80% in year 4, means 20% extra. Lets go shopping!

Same amounts of money year on year, just distributing it differently so they have a larger than normal war chest to go shopping with.

Now, if they were under 95% of it to begin with, then they can bank even more simply bring forward more payments.
Also worth noting the cap increases each year, so even with paying it forward, you actually get more than the extra 5% each year when you take into account cap increases on top of that.

Now, i don't care to argue %'s. I'm just showing you proof of concept.
FWIW, if you disagree that this is possible, i urge you to trawl through youtube. There was a video on this about 10 years ago from Cameron Schwab (??) who was in charge of the dees at the time saying this is what clubs can/will do.

So, there is no magic pudding, nobody says there was, but there is pretty simple manipulations that are open to every club which mean what the saints are doing are well within what is possible before you go down the rabbit hole into conspiracy theories.

As i said earlier, why Tigers, North and West Coast are not doing the same i don't understand. With the talent they have (and more importantly, where the age of that talent it) they should be building huge war chests by doing similar to what i described above.

Quote from: kruddler – on August 31, 2025, 10:55:57 am

[Cmon mate, its not that hard.

Lets say the saints salary cap all things considered is 95% year on year (it may be even less - before you jump up and down about minimums, follow the train of thought first)

95% in year 1, means 5% extra
95% in year 2, means 5% extra
95% in year 3, means 5% extra
95% in year 4, means 5% extra
At most, you can use 10% in a war chest after banking 2 years of 95% extra.
so what you say (in isolation) is correct.

However, what i am saying is this....
95% in year 1, means 5% extra, but take 5% of year 2 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
90% in year 2, means 10% extra, but take 10% of year 3 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
85% in year 3, means 15% extra, but take 15% from year 4 and pay it in advance, so you pay 100% of the cap this year.
80% in year 4, means 20% extra. Lets go shopping!

Same amounts of money year on year, just distributing it differently so they have a larger than normal war chest to go shopping with.

Now, if they were under 95% of it to begin with, then they can bank even more simply bring forward more payments.
Also worth noting the cap increases each year, so even with paying it forward, you actually get more than the extra 5% each year when you take into account cap increases on top of that.

Now, i don't care to argue %'s. I'm just showing you proof of concept.
FWIW, if you disagree that this is possible, i urge you to trawl through youtube. There was a video on this about 10 years ago from Cameron Schwab (??) who was in charge of the dees at the time saying this is what clubs can/will do.

So, there is no magic pudding, nobody says there was, but there is pretty simple manipulations that are open to every club which mean what the saints are doing are well within what is possible before you go down the rabbit hole into conspiracy theories.

As i said earlier, why Tigers, North and West Coast are not doing the same i don't understand. With the talent they have (and more importantly, where the age of that talent it) they should be building huge war chests by doing similar to what i described above.

It's not hard if you read Item 6.3(f) and (g) of the CBA:

(f) The permitted amount of overspend will be tied to the level of underspend in the relevant preceding periods. For example, if a Club was $500,000 below the combined Total Player Payments and Additional Services Agreements limit in 2022, and paid 100% of the Combined Limit in 2023, 2024 and 2025, the Club would be entitled to spend $500,000 above the Combined Limit in 2026. If a $500,000 overspend was not made in 2026, the Club has lost the right to overspend in 2027.

(g) It is agreed that the overspend amount is to be capped at a maximum of 105% of the Combined Limit in any given year. 

In other words, clubs can only overspend up to 5% of the TPP in any season and only if they have an underspend in any of the four preceding seasons.  Regardless of how many seasons St Kilda may have spent only 95% of their TPP (and their annual reports suggest zero), the most they could pay their players in 2026 is $18M + 5% = $18.9M.  On their current list, that's $15.1M between 42 players, and a sizeable chunk of that will go on Steele, Hill, King, Sinclair, Wilkie and Marshall, as well as the recruits SOS is after.

Despite what Cameron Schwab may have said on YouTube, Item 6.3 of the CBA is pretty clear ... and each club's auditors are required to ensure that player payments comply with the TPP rules.

Tom Lynch highest paid player in the AFL this year. Over 1.5 mil.