Ok I will rephrase the question even though you already know what i was asking.
Why is it that 10 State League clubs out of Melbourne is acceptable but a State League club from anywhere else is not?
The WAFL, SANFL and VFL clubs in the National competion
- Thread starter The_Reaper
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Ok I will rephrase the question even though you already know what i was asking.
Why is it that 10 State League clubs out of Melbourne is acceptable but a State League club from anywhere else is not?
Albert Ross
Premiership Player
Because 27 years ago they had a league that they could invite others to join, and others accepted he invitations. No other league in the country had an invite that anyone would accept. And now, 27 years later, there is no State League club that could remotely draw enough support to finance an AFL team. Even Port Adelaide the side best placed to do it are doing hard yards.
Absolute rubbish, any State League club which gets promoted and funded as half of the Vic state league clubs in the AFL could do well. If Norwood, East fremantle or West Perth were entered in the AFL and they were given million upon millions as GWS, Gold Coast, Bulldogs, Melbounre, Saints etc etc then of course they could do well.
Obviously as they are today they could not finance themselves. But then again 3/4 of the clubs in the AFL are not turning a profit so it is not as if it is something high to aim at.
Port Adelaide were probably the biggest SANFL club but when the Crows were given a head start it made the task of establishing themselves in the AFL & still part of the SANFL, a difficult job.
That is much the same as Freo who had to contend with a well established WCE outfit. The whole growth aspect of the AFL has been a complete Forkup.
How would it have been if the initial AFL had started with 7-8 old VFL teams & then 4-5 years later decided to add another clubs who would have been playing in a revamped VFL league, which would probably have included the rump of the old VFA clubs like Port Melbourne, Williamstown, Coburg etc. How much hassle would they have had trying to make up for lost time??
The advantage was gained by the worst VFL teams being propped up & staying in the AFL. The Dogs, Roos, Saints or whoever was left out originally would have found it a tough ask to lift themselves back up to the required level of operation they now have.
'Continuity' helped those who were given the nod to stay in or start up in the AFL.
- Moderator
- #305
No offence but thats far from a given, and is at least a factor in why the Tasmanian bid was probably a non starter - the 7 - 9 million the AFL gives most clubs a year isnt a quarter of the average clubs revenue. So go ahead and show me a club - other than Southport - who are making anywhere near enough or have the latent support to generate 30,000 members and at least 25 million in revenue. It doesnt spring up over night.
- Moderator
- #306
Freos troubles were nothing on what Port Adelaide had to deal with. For a start Freo were a completely manufactured club, with no vindictive state league presidents deciding what it could and couldnt do. Port Adelaide never controlled its own destiny in the league, and still doesnt, and the SANFL presidents have never let them forget how they were betrayed in 1990.
As for the growth aspect of the AFL being a complete stuff up. The figures dont lie. More crowds, more members, more tv audiences, better facilities, better tv coverages, more money, more participants at junior and club level than ever before. Thats commercial and statistical reality.
Its odd, because this is exactly what happened when the AFL was formed - A hundred and fifteen years ago. 8 clubs formed the VFL, then they picked the cream out of the VFA in 1908 and 1925.
They werent given the "nod" - their clubs were part of the voting process that decided the 12 team VFL should go national. There was no permission given for them to say in the league, nor was there ever a question raised by the VFL concerning this at the time - they were part of the league.
The question is how much support did those 10 state league clubs have in Victoria before the AFL juggernaught turned them into the clubs they are now? How many members did Footscray, North melbourne, Saint Kilda etc have in 1986?
Why is 30000 members the magic number? I have no doubt West Perth in WA could get 15-20k members and be financially viable. They would never be the size of the Eagles or Dockers but so what, its not as if the Saints, Kangas, Bulldogs, Melbourne etc are even half the size of Collingwood, Essendon etc.
Just don't understand the hypocrisy of Sate League clubs are acceptable in Victoria but no where else. In fact why would anyone care really if a state league club or Franchise is in?
Being in the AFL gives a huge boost to attracting sponsors. Being on TV & in the news is an attraction. The situation in Tassie would see an AFL team also being a big part of the tourism industry, hence the government support. People would also support it by becoming members.
Being in the Melbourne footprint just means being one team in 10, nothing special in that. Being one of one is an attraction.
& the revenue is courtesy of the pokies, next to NIL footy income?
The thing that amazes me is Tasmania sponsoring the Hawks?? They should withdraw that money. It is one of the reasons why the AFL give them lip service as they are helping to prop up a club. Tassie should offer as a sponsorship 5 million per year for any club willing to relocate. Until then they should hold on to their money. Just being wasted as far as Tasmanians are concerned, and a gift as far as the Hawks are concerned.
The money that the Tasmanian government are giving both North and Hawthorn would have to be up there with the highest sponsorship deals in the league wouldn't it? It would also appear that they would have a pretty good stadium deal too? A good stadium deal plus a good sponsorship deal and you're half way there.
- Moderator
- #312
Well
1. membership didnt start until the mid 80s.
2. 30,000 is the magic number to replace a Victorian side NOW. Its the difference between having 5 million in revenue, and not.
3. In terms of Revenue, most if not all Melbourne clubs have at least half the revenue of Collingwood - which derives almost a third of its revenues from pokies anyway.
4. State leage clubs were acceptable in victoria, because when it expanded it WAS a state league, and in any case the other state leagues werent willing to allow their clubs to leave their control. WA and SA essentially got new franchises that they could completely and utterly dictate to without meddling club boards and members. Then theres the Port Adelaide experience which will ensure that no state level club ever gets an entry into the league again.
From a personal point of view
, I wouldnt want an old VFL club forced to come down here. They should stay in their own city & play in whatever league they can, in front of their own supporters. Tassie should have its own team. I dont want cast offs, it would struggle for support.
Because they're not state league clubs any more? They're national league clubs?
The gap between the old VFL clubs and WAFL and SANFL clubs has widened immeasurably in the last 25 years. Back then they were at least comparable - now they're basically local sides vs the elite level.
Ports the only one who got a ticket on the train.
What has really been that bad about the Port Adelaide experience? There is a few Clubs in Melbourne that would gladly swap their experience.
The AFL and the original Port people are to blame for the so called experience you refer to.
The AFL did not promote who they really were which was the most succesful football club in Australia, they didn't do that because they did not want to admit that the best club in Australia was not in Victoria.
Port management were weak as piss to allow this, they should of stood their ground and not compromise on their jumper or colours. The magpie emblem was the only thing they needed to change. By allowing the VFL/AFL to dictate to them it set themselves up as a puppet instead of a player and they are now only coming out of this.
As for the experience you are talking about, half the AFL clubs have been through worse and some are perinially still in it. Port are a great club and as worthy as any member of the VFL/AFL, if not the most worthy.
The AFL in my view have totally done it wrong by promoting franchises instead of the great clubs out there. Yet in the same breath they continue to fund and support the exact same types of clubs they are anti introducing.
Bunk I was more referring to why they wanted franchises and not some of the great clubs from WA and SA? anyway it is what it is now.
Because none of the existing clubs had the means or resources that a combined franchise like the Eagles would.
It wasn't much of a decision - a pretty risky propostion/a that would have split the WAFL, or a WAFC backed surefire on and off field powerhouse. Wasn't much of a choice.
The only way the Eagles ever could has failed was if the local public rejected them en masse. I think the VFL and WAFC did their homework and realised that wasn't going to happen.
Politics & power.
The AFL have a cosey little boys club relationship in Melbourne. They & the Victorian state Government go along together, dick in hand.
They are not interested in any aspect of the game that wont benefit them. We may try to look at the game of Australian Rules in a national sense. They just look for self interest & maintaining the status quo in their home town.
The AFL probably now see the Port thing as a mistake, a moment of weakness when they actually thought about the game for a brief moment.
That's a laughable post.
The AFL is owned equally by the 18 clubs. That's 10 in Melbourne and 8 elsewhere.
Since 1980 they've sent two of the Victorian clubs interstate, tried to send another, brought the strongest club from outside Victoria into the league, established 3 others that are owned by the SANFL and WAFC, and now spent tens of millions (soon to be hundreds) on two more clubs in QLD and NSW.
They've done nothing over the last 20 odd years but reduce the share of power that resides in Victoria.
The biggest aim is national domination and has been for some time.
Absolute bullshit. How big has the "footy industry" become in the last 10-15 years. How many hangers on are now making a bloody good living out of the "footy industry", jobs and roles that weren't even thought of in the 1980's. And where are most of these jobs based? The Victorian Government has obviously cottoned on to this. The "footy industry" is quite a big employer in Victoria. How many big AFL events are held outside of Melbourne?
telsor
Hall of Famer
Because the WAFL and SANFL didn't want that.
Damn those Victorian for respecting the wishes of the WA & SA leagues and expanding the way THEY wanted it to happen.
telsor
Hall of Famer
Is the trend in the AFL moving more or less to having more in Victoria?
Or is your argument that everything you want hasn't happened overnight, therefore it isn't true?
telsor
Hall of Famer
Love the tinfoil hat.
It's actually not the Victorians, it's the aliens in Roswell controlling the league, and they shot JFK because he loved the game and wanted to introduce it to the US, which would have made it too big for them to control.
- Moderator
- #324
Not even close to half way there. And its relatively easy to work out - annual amounts
- 3.5 million - Tasmanian Government Sponsorship of Hawthorn
- 0.5 million - TTLine Sponsorship of North Melbourne
- 3.5 million - Hawthorns match returns from clean Aurora Stadium deal (note memberships would affect this massively if the stadium was sold out)
- 7.0 million - current AFL Dividend
- 2.0 million - Sponsorship offer from Mars confectionary in 2006, and estimated deal at Carlton in 2013
you can add a league average of about 1.5 million in merchandise, to that. Hell Ill round it up to 20 million. Now you need to find another 10 million to catch the smallest clubs in the league at the moment. Its the secondary and tertiary sponsorships which get you, not so much the big names.
- Moderator
- #325
You should ask the respective state leagues that. The SANFl were pushing a composite side from 1981, Adelaide FC inc was registered in 1986 - the SANFl never intended for a local club to go national.
I dont recall a WAFl side being put forward to represent WA either.
Similar threads
- Poll
