Will having to play a grand final at the MCG potentially cost Fremantle a flag?

[Rob]

Not really, when I come to Perth I have trouble getting a seat because memberships essentially worthless to anyone that doesn't live in Perth hog 90% of the ground.

You're comparing a club's home game to a grand final?

Oh, you were joking. My apologies. Well played.

 

[The Darkman]

Just on the set up of the AFL. Have posted this many times before.
It was the worst way to set it up, by retaining all 11 VFL teams.
It should've been two new Melbourne-based franchises, and Geelong, plus the other cities (perth, fremantle, adelaide, port, sydney, tasmania, brisbane).
A 10-team comp in 1990, and gradually expanding into Canberra, Gold Coast by say 2005-2010.
If it were done that way, the history/tradition of those 100 year old Victorian clubs could've survived in the VFL like those 100 year old teams in the WAFL/SANFL.
Instead, having done it the way they did, it will ironically be the end of many of those Victorian teams as they get financially weaker and the game (and its money) expands into other states. Where a little Melbourne suburban club cannot compete with the might of a whole region/state/city.
In the end, by attrition, the AFL comp WILL end up that 12 team comp that I just talked about...with 2 melbourne teams and 1 geelong. And it will likely be two NEW melbourne teams because the Victorian people will not all be forced to barrack for a Collingwood and Hawthorn only, say.

Is this the genesis of your other thread?

 

[Exe Gesis]

Is this the genesis of your other thread?

Not genesis. Just some basic ideas I've always had or been formulating/evolving over the years.

 

[madmug]

Just on the set up of the AFL. Have posted this many times before.
It was the worst way to set it up, by retaining all 11 VFL teams.
It should've been two new Melbourne-based franchises, and Geelong, plus the other cities (perth, fremantle, adelaide, port, sydney, tasmania, brisbane).
A 10-team comp in 1990, and gradually expanding into Canberra, Gold Coast by say 2005-2010.
If it were done that way, the history/tradition of those 100 year old Victorian clubs could've survived in the VFL like those 100 year old teams in the WAFL/SANFL.
Instead, having done it the way they did, it will ironically be the end of many of those Victorian teams as they get financially weaker and the game (and its money) expands into other states. Where a little Melbourne suburban club cannot compete with the might of a whole region/state/city.
In the end, by attrition, the AFL comp WILL end up that 12 team comp that I just talked about...with 2 melbourne teams and 1 geelong. And it will likely be two NEW melbourne teams because the Victorian people will not all be forced to barrack for a Collingwood and Hawthorn only, say.

But it is what it is. You cant change history. That possibility, or any other chance at a balanced competition is gone for the medium-long term.

How we see the AFL 'evolve' going forward is the point. Or more particularly, how the AFL itself, sees its own progression.

The comp doesnt have to be 12 teams. Currently 18 team is contracted in for TV. I hope for 20 very soon because they will carry the suburban clubs, no matter how 'ratty' they may become.

WA3 & Tas1, yay!

 

[The Darkman]

Not genesis. Just some basic ideas I've always had or been formulating/evolving over the years.

I'm not going to discourage your ideas. I don't agree with them all but I'd you have them and express them for debate. It's better than nodding like a sheep.

How come no team has a Ram motif?

 

[CasuallyDressed]

Adelaide, West Coast, Sydney, Port Adelaide and Brisbane have all done it.

Turn it up Freo!

 

[Exe Gesis]

I'm not going to discourage your ideas. I don't agree with them all but I'd you have them and express them for debate. It's better than nodding like a sheep.

How come no team has a Ram motif?

I appreciate your stance -- good to debate, discuss, people to share their ideas, not ideal to just belittle people or have them afraid to share their thoughts. I don't care about disagreement and personal insult, enjoy it! but for others out there, it's good to not scare them away.

As for a Ram motif...good question...it's a good motif, or animal to choose for a football team. Another thing the AFL/NRL can copy from the USA next time around

 

[Exe Gesis]

But it is what it is. You cant change history. That possibility, or any other chance at a balanced competition is gone for the medium-long term.

How we see the AFL 'evolve' going forward is the point. Or more particularly, how the AFL itself, sees its own progression.

The comp doesnt have to be 12 teams. Currently 18 team is contracted in for TV. I hope for 20 very soon because they will carry the suburban clubs, no matter how 'ratty' they may become.

WA3 & Tas1, yay!

It's very true. Is what it is. Just repeating that even at the time, I was totally against the 11 VFL teams filling up the AFL. And after 30 years, I think more people now agree it wasn't the best way to go about it. In another 30 years, I think even more people will be in accord. By then even, the evolution of the AFL will 'agree' with me, in having to expand thus relocating those suburban Melbourne teams or letting them merge or die out.

 

[The Darkman]

I appreciate your stance -- good to debate, discuss, people to share their ideas, not ideal to just belittle people or have them afraid to share their thoughts. I don't care about disagreement and personal insult, enjoy it! but for others out there, it's good to not scare them away.

As for a Ram motif...good question...it's a good motif, or animal to choose for a football team. Another thing the AFL/NRL can copy from the USA next time around

I'm only on page 9 so I'll probably stumble across more of your thoughts.

The main issue I have is the draw. Fremantle playing Hawthorn in Launceston despite drawing 43.6k to the MCG last year. They do get two games at the MCG. West Coast play one game at the MCG this year but play Collingwood at Etihad and Melbourne in Darwin. Adelaide play one game at the MCG (ironically against Carlton) but play Collingwood at Etihad (that must annoy Eddie). Port play one game at the MCG (again Carlton) but play Hawthorn at Etihad and Melbourne in Alice Springs. Even GWS gets more games at the MCG than Port, Adelaide and West Coast.

There is a way of fixing this and one of your ideas (less Vic teams) will rebalance this situation. I hope that comment doesn't fink you out to anyone.

Tally ho.

 

[Exe Gesis]

I'm only on page 9 so I'll probably stumble across more of your thoughts.

May God have mercy on your soul.

The main issue I have is the draw. Fremantle playing Hawthorn in Launceston despite drawing 43.6k to the MCG last year. They do get two games at the MCG. West Coast play one game at the MCG this year but play Collingwood at Etihad and Melbourne in Darwin. Adelaide play one game at the MCG (ironically against Carlton) but play Collingwood at Etihad (that must annoy Eddie). Port play one game at the MCG (again Carlton) but play Hawthorn at Etihad and Melbourne in Alice Springs. Even GWS gets more games at the MCG than Port, Adelaide and West Coast.

There is a way of fixing this and one of your ideas (less Vic teams) will rebalance this situation. I hope that comment doesn't fink you out to anyone.

Tally ho.

My best idea for a schedule....

18 teams. So play 17 regular season games. Each team once. Next year, you flip the H&A's so that over two years you play every team both home and away. Also, less is more. Each game more of an 'event', so higher average attendances, more memberships, more demand less supply, so you'd probably even get more total attendance than playing 22 rounds.

 

[The Darkman]

May God have mercy on your soul.



My best idea for a schedule....

18 teams. So play 17 regular season games. Each team once. Next year, you flip the H&A's so that over two years you play every team both home and away. Also, less is more. Each game more of an 'event', so higher average attendances, more memberships, more demand less supply, so you'd probably even get more total attendance than playing 22 rounds.

Ok. It's worth a look and a think. It answers one of my issues. Less wear and tear on the MCG & Etihad. I don't mind a shorter season and it gets away from the 17-5 theories. The question is how do you sell it.

Would this be the only competitive matches played by the clubs in a season? No knockout tournaments. Pre-season cups. 12 a side tournaments on a three quarter field. Weekend tournaments with shortened game time.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Ok. It's worth a look and a think. It answers one of my issues. Less wear and tear on the MCG & Etihad. I don't mind a shorter season and it gets away from the 17-5 theories. The question is how do you sell it.

Would this be the only competitive matches played by the clubs in a season? No knockout tournaments. Pre-season cups. 12 a side tournaments on a three quarter field. Weekend tournaments with shortened game time.

Get rid of the pre-season comp. No tournaments.

Just play a couple of friendly games. The AFL can organize them, to ensure all 18 teams have two opponents. And they play these games around Australia....Darwin, Cairns, Newcastle, Canberra, country Vic, etc.

So just 2 pre-season friendly games to promote the game, etc. Then play 17 regular season games. Then play the finals series. Simple.

 

[telsor]

Get rid of the pre-season comp. No tournaments.

Just play a couple of friendly games. The AFL can organize them, to ensure all 18 teams have two opponents. And they play these games around Australia....Darwin, Cairns, Newcastle, Canberra, country Vic, etc.

So just 2 pre-season friendly games to promote the game, etc. Then play 17 regular season games. Then play the finals series. Simple.

17 games...so ~77% as many H&A games......Wonder how many AFL people/players would be happy with the 20% pay cut that would cause. (TV & sponsors pay for the volume of content)

It would also mean clubs play different numbers of home and away games, affecting their gate revenue. I'm not so sure about the 'less is more' argument, especially as you'd be losing a lot of the better weather games (early/late in the current season) while keeping those in the middle of winter.

 

[madmug]

17 games...so ~77% as many H&A games......Wonder how many AFL people/players would be happy with the 20% pay cut that would cause. (TV & sponsors pay for the volume of content)

It would also mean clubs play different numbers of home and away games, affecting their gate revenue. I'm not so sure about the 'less is more' argument, especially as you'd be losing a lot of the better weather games (early/late in the current season) while keeping those in the middle of winter.

One thing the AFL should be looking at is to reduce the time we play games. Limiting the 'package' to 2 hours would be better for TV, also better for players health & welfare & the game overall. Shorter quarters, shorter breaks etc.

We could then manage to fit two games on TV on friday & saturday nights if they want.

So, win/win?

 

[telsor]

One thing the AFL should be looking at is to reduce the time we play games. Limiting the 'package' to 2 hours would be better for TV, also better for players health & welfare & the game overall. Shorter quarters, shorter breaks etc.

We could then manage to fit two games on TV on friday & saturday nights if they want.

So, win/win?

In order to reduce the trend of all the players following the ball up and down the ground you'd need to savagely reduce the interchange (something I wouldn't really object to anyway) which would probably counter any 'player health and welfare' benefits.

Not sure it'd be that good either...TV might like it, but you'd probably get smaller crowds...A shorter game would give you less reason to travel to a game, and less of a 'game day experience' ( shorter breaks = less chance to grab a drink/pie and/or relieve yourself ).

 

[madmug]

In order to reduce the trend of all the players following the ball up and down the ground you'd need to savagely reduce the interchange (something I wouldn't really object to anyway) which would probably counter any 'player health and welfare' benefits.

Not sure it'd be that good either...TV might like it, but you'd probably get smaller crowds...A shorter game would give you less reason to travel to a game, and less of a 'game day experience' ( shorter breaks = less chance to grab a drink/pie and/or relieve yourself ).

I dont know why you'd think slightly more condensed games would reduce crowd sizes. T20 is more popular than 50over ODDs after all.

 

[telsor]

I dont know why you'd think slightly more condensed games would reduce crowd sizes. T20 is more popular than 50over ODDs after all.

T20 still goes for ~3 hours.

Also, in cricket, the shorter forms of the game tend to have more action squeezed in due to batsmen being able to play with more aggression because losing wickets matters less. The same wouldn't be true of football.

 

[madmug]

T20 still goes for ~3 hours.

Also, in cricket, the shorter forms of the game tend to have more action squeezed in due to batsmen being able to play with more aggression because losing wickets matters less. The same wouldn't be true of football.

I'm not sure. It might make for more effort to score given less time. Who knows.

It would be better for TV & allow back to back friday satday night games. NRL does it for better ratings.

 

[Our Game]

Really great teams can win anywhere so if Freo are as good as some will have it the MCG wont be a problem.

 

[maroon and blue]

Didn't worry the lions.

 

[Pessimistic]

By definition winning a grand final at the MCG qualifies you a flag.

So if you cant do that, you didnt have a flag in the first place

 

[King Cold]

Replace Fremantle with West Coast in the OP, because the Grand Final having to be played at the MCG will cost West Coast the flag this year.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

It does seem a little cruel. WC finish above Hawks. Beat them in the qualifying final, win their next prelim and now just for lols have the honour of being the home side at the Hawks home ground. For all this they get the right to wear their blue shorts. Yay!

 

[Xtreme]

Replace Fremantle with West Coast in the OP, because the Grand Final having to be played at the MCG will cost West Coast the flag this year.

Not so, the Eagles (excuse me i'm tired lol) handled the ground earlier this year.... yes their opponent was Richmond but still a wins a win.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Replace Fremantle with West Coast in the OP, because the Grand Final having to be played at the MCG will cost West Coast the flag this year.

How much did Hawks win by?