Is Zac Bailey worth $2 million? | The Eminently Sensible Phil Davis (01.04.26)

Phil Davis, eminently sensible, every Wednesday morning, actually it's a phrase that might catch on, I heard this from the new chairman of the AFL.

We think makes eminently good sense.

Eminently good sense, this might catch on in our language, the eminently sensible Phil Davis, how do you feel?

Good morning, Jared, and thank you very much for pairing me with Craig Drum, that's a very big compliment.

Well, if the chairman's going to take on our language, we've got a bit to live up to.

Yeah, I know, he's a very sensible man.

So, yeah, we've got a high bar to clear, Jared, you all right?

I've got two big tickets before we get into the nitty-gritty, and just see if you can solve Carlton, everyone's having a crack at it this week.

Chris Fagan yesterday, he speaks sense.

Just the idea of the new economy in 40, which took me back to a conversation that we'd had last year.

We've tried to keep our player payments fair in terms of where players sit in importance to our 40 club, and we don't think we've overpaid anyone.

So, we're probably pretty keen to keep that intact, but whether we will be able to or not able to in this new economy that we have, I'm not sure what the answer is for the future.

I'll be interested to see how it all turns out.

The new economy, Phil, you cautioned about this when the first $2 million contract was signed.

Yeah, and yeah, I think it's just part and parcel of it.

When I think about more broadly, Jared, I do think sometimes we do lose ourselves.

The thing that really matters, Jared, more than anything, is percentage of salary cap.

That is the true indicator of if someone's getting paid a lot of money, because in the end of the day, it's all proportional.

So, when Kerry was on a million dollars in 1995, and the salary cap was $5 million, quite that's it today. He'd be on $4 million, Jared.

So, that is an important part of it that we should always try to keep, and I would like it if people more broadly spoke about contracts as a percentage of the salary cap.

The reason why they don't, Jared, is because clubs are trying to swindle money, and they're trying to peg you to the old numbers.

But at the moment, what's hurting them is it's going the other way.

But then secondly, the piece is more around the fact that why would managers ever let the prices go down.

Very much like the cost in construction of a house or building is more broadly during COVID.

When you realise people are going to pay, why would they ever come back down?

That's why still hasn't gone down, and that's my concern for fuel at the moment, too, Jared.

Once you realise people are willing to pay for it, it doesn't come back for those trying to set the price.

And I think for us, that is the managers, and there will always be in the vicinity of one to five clubs willing to pay absolute premium to get a play.

So we rushed through sort of 1.4 as the top price, and then because of what St. Kilda did, set it at two million.

And your question at the time is that everyone had to accept that this was an outlier rather than the standard.

But of course, once Zack Butter's management has gone to market, the price is two million dollars.

Yeah, and I think if you listen to Chris there, you've just got to have a very clear view on what it looks like,

in terms of how you do your salary card and where the money flows.

And you've also got to be very clear that you're allocating it correctly, and you're moving with the times within reason.

And then once you get to that point, you realise, Zack Bailey is a very good player.

Really like him.

Is he worth two million dollars, not to me.

Would I pay him a million dollars? Probably, probably, I think.

That's a big gap.

You're going to put your cards on the table and be like, hey, you're going to play elsewhere or you pay for us for a million dollars.

You'll get to play with the luggage. You'll get to play with Rainer.

You'll get to play with Andrews. You'll get to play with all these stars. That's what it looks like.

And we'll put more than three more in the next five years. Who knows.

That's the bit. And the clubs will always chase it. The St. Kilda's will always chase it.

And I know Chris has made comments about that too. But at the end of the day, other clubs will always have,

these clubs right now, I don't know how they're going to spend $20 million on their salary cap.

And that creates a hyperinflation on certain deals.

So I don't think he needs to worry about it as much because I think the proposition that Brisbane can offer Zack is pretty tremendous.

And one that'll be hard pressed to say no to.

So Luke Hodge had the great observation around the Zack Butter scenario.

He can either take $2 million or he can go to a team that's in contention for a premiership.

Do you think that is the right equation?

That's usually how bounce is out. Yeah, I think there might be a few weird anomalies in that.

Where maybe it's kind of with somehow I've got lots of money and they could rebound in two years and be a premiership contender.

That could happen. But more than likely what you say, Joe.

If Zack Butter's wants to go along, which would create a formidable midfield,

all of a sudden he's probably only can take 1.2, 1.3 to make that work.

Oh, yeah, you're right. He can go somewhere else. He can go to Essenden.

And he'll get all these 2 million. But when will Essenden be up near the top again?

And I think that's the bit.

Yeah, there are lots of big decisions because I think when I talk to players and even myself included,

when I went to the Giants at the start, it was a lot harder than I thought.

And there was nothing for grounded.

But you don't get anything from that. It's still an unknown.

As much as it seems, all these great things, you just don't know what's going to happen.

And I think that's the thing. They'll burn their hand about going over a very good side.

That's what I think players stay a lot more than we give them credit for, Joe.

They often stay because they burn their hand.