AFL Finances

[Vankri]

There is indeed something very rotten in the way the AFL operates and how it distributes finances. Sometimes, a lot of the times, it benefits the QLD and NSW teams because it fits the AFL's unrealistic expansion plans. Other times it goes against them, when the AFL imposes a random trade ban to the Swans and leaves the Lions in their dire situation once they've created their fancy new toys in GC and GWS.

The league is over-controlling, and over-manipulating and left completely unaccountable for what they do because they have so much power in the face of clubs. They keep creating shady rules to overcome their previous shady rules' issues (e.g. COLA then trade ban, equalisation with uneven fixturing, new academy and father sons bidding but then add the pick debt for 4 teams). It's not equalisation the league needs, it's neutralisation.

And by neutralisation I mean making the league as uninvolved and as neutral as possible when it comes to the rules of the game. Neutralisation of the fixturing rules, neutralisation of the salary cap rules, neutralisation of the revenue distribution.

 

[moistie]

He said the Swans were hoarding it to recruit big names.

Pffft. I provided ample evidence that Newbold prefers to settle issues behind closed doors and that's the best you can do? A semantic argument around COLA?

Again, Newbold wouldn't go public unless he had a legitimate grievance to air with the AFL.

However, the COLA is slowly being removed and on that score you eventually will have to work by the same rules as every other club. I mean, why would the AFL agree to remove it when Sydney used COLA so responsibly?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Pffft. I provided ample evidence that Newbold prefers to settle issues behind closed doors and that's the best you can do? A semantic argument around COLA?

Again, Newbold wouldn't go public unless he had a legitimate grievance to air with the AFL.

However, the COLA is slowly being removed and on that score you eventually will have to work by the same rules as every other club. I mean, why would the AFL agree to remove it when Sydney used COLA so responsibly?

IS THAT A SERIOUS QUESTION?????? Do you know the first thing about the AFL, its operations, and why Newbold and Maguire operate through the media the way they do?

* me.......I have to go feed the kids.

*Walks away shaking head*

 

[moistie]

IS THAT A SERIOUS QUESTION??????

*snip*

No credible evidence to support your insinuation that Newbold is making it up then?

I've seen nothing that says the AFL is about to do anything that Newbold is getting so hysterical about.

 

[Colonial]

No credible evidence to support your insinuation that Newbold is making it up then?

I see no evidence he isnt just talking crap and scaremongering. You and your pie pals do seem to do that often when ever the north are brought up.

And as the show says. The North will remember.

 

[Tedeski]

To be fair have you thought about actually responding to the point raised?

That is your lack of goals and spectators despite landing marquee signings

Let me tell you this much.

From good sources I know that Buddy has paid himself of already.
The rest is all a bonus.
Should we win another flag?
Great!

 

[Kwality]

Pffft. I provided ample evidence that Newbold prefers to settle issues behind closed doors and that's the best you can do? A semantic argument around COLA?

Again, Newbold wouldn't go public unless he had a legitimate grievance to air with the AFL.

However, the COLA is slowly being removed and on that score you eventually will have to work by the same rules as every other club. I mean, why would the AFL agree to remove it when Sydney used COLA so responsibly?

Try looking forward, done to death COLA & as usual, the AFL admin aren't lily white.

 

[cos789]

COLA was compensation for the high cost of Sydney living.
Same as handouts given to many clubs in compensation for playing away from home.
Your inequities are the same as everybody else's.
No matter what, Victorian clubs will always have the advantage when it comes to (lack of) travel and use of the MCG.

 

[walhawk]

I don't buy it. All clubs are dependent on the AFL, Hawks and Pies included. Just random chest beating my club is so powerful hurrr.

So you think that Hawks and Pies are the only two clubs not happy with NSW/Qld clubs receiving draft advantages?
Dogs, Saints, Dees must love that they have less chance of winning a flag in the next 10 years than in the past 50 years. These clubs are the one who will drop further behind should northern states continue to get more than their share of top players.

 

[Colonial]

So you think that Hawks and Pies are the only two clubs not happy with NSW/Qld clubs receiving draft advantages?
Dogs, Saints, Dees must love that they have less chance of winning a flag in the next 10 years than in the past 50 years. These clubs are the one who will drop further behind should northern states continue to get more than their share of top players.

Vic entitlement. Its our comp etc etc.

What was their excuse for being crap before us? We are just the latest in the blame game

 

[Kwality]

So you think that Hawks and Pies are the only two clubs not happy with NSW/Qld clubs receiving draft advantages?
Dogs, Saints, Dees must love that they have less chance of winning a flag in the next 10 years than in the past 50 years. These clubs are the one who will drop further behind should northern states continue to get more than their share of top players.

You mean like the opportunity to recruit NSW players like Witts - not critical of the Pies, they took advantage of a poorly thought out concession to grab kids out of NSW.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

So you think that Hawks and Pies are the only two clubs not happy with NSW/Qld clubs receiving draft advantages?
Dogs, Saints, Dees must love that they have less chance of winning a flag in the next 10 years than in the past 50 years. These clubs are the one who will drop further behind should northern states continue to get more than their share of top players.

The greatest barrier to success for those clubs is not the otherwise non existent academy talent not joining their clubs, but their inability to obtain equitable exposure for sponsors and members by virtue of a stacked fixture. We are not their problem, the big Victorian clubs are.

 

[Vankri]

COLA was compensation for the high cost of Sydney living.
Same as handouts given to many clubs in compensation for playing away from home.
Your inequities are the same as everybody else's.
No matter what, Victorian clubs will always have the advantage when it comes to (lack of) travel and use of the MCG.

COLA has nothing to do with cost of living, otherwise it would be applied across the nation and WA clubs would have an allowance as well. It is just yet another concession given by the AFL to Sydney to maximise their chance of success, in this instance by giving them extra room to play with in their salary cap.

Lack of travel is not an argument, because any advantage that VIC clubs gain in lack of travel they lose in home ground advantage, both against interstate teams and against each other.

So use of the MCG is your only point, which makes it a particularly weak one. And use of the MCG really only applies to the four teams who have it as their home ground, not all VIC clubs.

 

[Colonial]

COLA has nothing to do with cost of living, otherwise it would be applied across the nation and WA clubs would have an allowance as well. It is just yet another concession given by the AFL to Sydney to maximise their chance of success, in this instance by giving them extra room to play with in their salary cap.

Lack of travel is not an argument, because any advantage that VIC clubs gain in lack of travel they lose in home ground advantage, both against interstate teams and against each other.

So use of the MCG is your only point, which makes it a particularly weak one. And use of the MCG really only applies to the four teams who have it as their home ground, not all VIC clubs.

And the multiple derbies? Boosting crowds for gate dollars and sponsorships? We get 1. Not 7.

 

[The 747]

So you think that Hawks and Pies are the only two clubs not happy with NSW/Qld clubs receiving draft advantages?
Dogs, Saints, Dees must love that they have less chance of winning a flag in the next 10 years than in the past 50 years. These clubs are the one who will drop further behind should northern states continue to get more than their share of top players.

Was that what I posted was it?

 

[Vankri]

And the multople derbies? Boosting crowds for gate dollars and sponsorships? We get 1. Not 7.

Every Victorian club has to compete with the 9 others when it comes to attracting attendance and sharing sponsorship dollars. You get to play in a city of 5 million inhabitants and only have to compete with one other club when it comes to local events, initiatives and sponsorships. Your sponsorship pull is much larger than any Vic club.

The only problem is that not many people care about the game in your market. But that's no reason to be compensated at all and the competition shouldn't have to be so skewed because the AFL put the cart before the horse with their expansion plans by implemented 4 teams in areas before making sure there is enough interest for their product in those areas.

 

[Colonial]

Every Victorian club has to compete with the 9 others when it comes to attracting attendance and sharing sponsorship dollars. You get to play in a city of 5 million inhabitants and only have to compete with one other club when it comes to local events, initiatives and sponsorships. Your sponsorship pull is much larger than any Vic club.

The only problem is that not many people care about the game in your market. But that's no reason to be compensated at all and the competition shouldn't have to be so skewed because the AFL put the cart before the horse with their expansion plans by implemented 4 teams in areas before making sure there is enough interest for their product in those areas.

Please sponsors pay for whose watching. Having so many derbies boosts the gate as well as adds to sponsors with so many people threw it.check out the avgs for vics against interstate clubs. Especially the small vic clubs. The difference between the crowds for derbies and non derbies is massive.

So the benefits vics enjoy is just our bad luck? Natural and unstoppable?

Ooook

Done with this thread. Common sense is long gone.

 

[Vankri]

So the benefits vics enjoy is just our bad luck? Natural and unstoppable?

Ooook

Done with this thread. Common sense is long gone.

VIC clubs don't enjoy benefits gifted by the league to ensure their success. The only benefit we've managed to agree on is the fact that 4 clubs have the MCG as their home ground and that's where the GF is played. The other things listed I've explained aren't benefits.

Some VIC clubs benefit from the rigged AFL fixturing because they are the bigger clubs. Others are the hardest hit by the same fixturing.

Common sense is what the AFL lacks. The system put in place to administer the competition is obscure, constantly tweaked and manipulated and lacks a clear set of fair, neutral rules.

 

[Vankri]

Please sponsors pay for whose watching. Having so many derbies boosts the gate as well as adds to sponsors with so many people threw it.check out the avgs for vics against interstate clubs. Especially the small vic clubs. The difference between the crowds for derbies and non derbies is massive.

Gate receipts: stadium deals are different, a 20k crowd would give you more $$ than a 30k crowd gives North. Also, when you host a Collingwood game at home you get a nice bump in the crowds because we are a big club and have a following nationally. When we host you at the MCG we get nothing because you barely have any supporters here.

The fact that there are derbies is not an advantage. Manchester United doesn't give a crap about the fact that there are so many teams in London in the EPL.

Sponsorship: 10 clubs in a city of 4 million vs 2 clubs in a city of 5 million. VIC clubs would have much harder time with the competition it brings.

 

[cos789]

Done with this thread. Common sense is long gone.

Ditto.
It's funny how we don't hear much from the smaller Vic clubs that do have a legitimate axe to grind.

 

[Papa G]

Gate receipts: stadium deals are different, a 20k crowd would give you more $$ than a 30k crowd gives North. Also, when you host a Collingwood game at home you get a nice bump in the crowds because we are a big club and have a following nationally. When we host you at the MCG we get nothing because you barely have any supporters here.

The fact that there are derbies is not an advantage. Manchester United doesn't give a crap about the fact that there are so many teams in London in the EPL.

Sponsorship: 10 clubs in a city of 4 million vs 2 clubs in a city of 5 million. VIC clubs would have much harder time with the competition it brings.

I think you might be forgetting the Rugby League Clubs that the 2 AFL clubs have to compete with as well as a hostile media. Aussie Rules is still very much a niche sport in Sydney playing very much second fiddle (actually probably 3rd fiddle after Union) to the NRL.

 

[cos789]

Manchester United doesn't give a crap about the fact that there are so many teams in London in the EPL.

If Man U played football then it would probably be a concern.
If Man U had to regularly travel 1000s of km it might be a concern.
If Man U was just starting up it might be a problem.
If all the London clubs banded to together to bring Man U down that might be a problem.
If all the refs came from London that might be a problem.

But Man U can buy anything they want much like the big Vic clubs.

 

[Kwality]

Every Victorian club has to compete with the 9 others when it comes to attracting attendance and sharing sponsorship dollars. You get to play in a city of 5 million inhabitants and only have to compete with one other club when it comes to local events, initiatives and sponsorships. Your sponsorship pull is much larger than any Vic club.

The only problem is that not many people care about the game in your market. But that's no reason to be compensated at all and the competition shouldn't have to be so skewed because the AFL put the cart before the horse with their expansion plans by implemented 4 teams in areas before making sure there is enough interest for their product in those areas.

Same argument applies to every market, with supply for bums on seats far exceeded by demand in the Melbourne market - Vanman thats A POOR ATTEMPT to compare Sydney & Melbourne / Sydney & Collingwood - our game is the better off when you guys are contenders.

 

[Kwality]

COLA has nothing to do with cost of living, otherwise it would be applied across the nation and WA clubs would have an allowance as well. It is just yet another concession given by the AFL to Sydney to maximise their chance of success, in this instance by giving them extra room to play with in their salary cap.

Lack of travel is not an argument, because any advantage that VIC clubs gain in lack of travel they lose in home ground advantage, both against interstate teams and against each other.

So use of the MCG is your only point, which makes it a particularly weak one. And use of the MCG really only applies to the four teams who have it as their home ground, not all VIC clubs.

Dail a prayer? Pathetic excuse, EXCUSE Vanman!!! What is true is that good teams have to be able to win anywhere/anytime.

 

[cos789]

Sponsorship: 10 clubs in a city of 4 million vs 2 clubs in a city of 5 million. VIC clubs would have much harder time with the competition it brings.

You really don't have a very analytical mind do you.
Sponsorship.
Melbourne - 9 AFL, 1 NRL, 1 SRU, 2 AL = 13 clubs
Sydney - 2 AFL, 9 NRL, 1 SRU, 2 AL = 14 clubs