International Development

Remove this Banner Ad

RedV3x said:
Hard Yes, but not if you pick the right sports.
Click to expand...
It isn't picking the right sport, its paying the right amount. Doesn't matter the sport if you paid to much.



RedV3x said:
Because of the possible LEVERAGE. Please read answers before you reply.
Click to expand...
Possible, you could also use the term hypothetical. The great disadvantage of streaming as a medium to leverage is, it tends to be people already aware of what is being streamed who watched. All those Americans who stumbled across AFL on ESPN probably wouldn't have if it was a streamed service. Not saying it cannot be good, but there is a lot of downside if things are not going well.



That's what media analysts are looking at. "LIVE" is the big attraction.



RedV3x said:
Again, pay attention. The industry is moving towards independent suppliers. AFL and NRL are already setup.
Click to expand...
Are you able to have a conversation without being condescending? That the industry is moving towards independent suppliers, and that the AFL is ready for this, doesn't mean the AFL comes out ahead, or even equal. Pay TV and FTA pay a premium for what high end sport brings them, this results in the AFL being paid more than what a straight dollars and cents analysis of the value of the sports might indicate. Will distributors like Amazon pay a premium? I think they will for NFL, for AFL? Amazon has actually stated that using NFL to grab audience in places like the UK and Australia is part of their hopes in acquiring NFL content. Buying big sports and packaging them globally suits their profile more than buying local sports to attract a local audience. I do not think the AFLs own service will return the same value long term, certainly the NFL seems to be going to external streamers, not in house.




RedV3x said:
Ask the AFL and NRL. It could easily make the AFL more than that.
Click to expand...
Or less? Or a lot less? Certainly not a lot more.
 
jatz14 said:
It isn't picking the right sport, its paying the right amount.
Click to expand...

The AFL deal is mutually beneficial. I cannot say that about most other sporting deals in Australia.

jatz14 said:
streaming as a medium to leverage is,
Click to expand...

is simply something to leverage off of when you haven't much else to leverage off.

jatz14 said:
I do not think the AFLs own service will return the same value long term,
Click to expand...

The AFL has been reading the market and the market direction expertly so far.
The market for live sports shows no sign of abating and I see the AFL's service only increasing in value.
 
Agree with Jatz, if overnight the AFL was left to its own devices to stream directly to footy fans, there are no guarantees that it would earn what it currently earns from Foxtel/7.

It would certainly get nowhere near it by selling subscriptions, the question would be whether it would make up the gap by selling advertising.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Gigantor said:
the AFL was left to its own devices to stream directly to footy fans, .
Click to expand...

A.t.m. we have the anti-siphoning laws which skew the situation.
A.t.m. we have Pay TV that skews the situation by paying more than FTA (proportionally).
A.t.m. AFL streaming is an absolute bargain in comparison to a Fox subscription.
No doubt the structures would change dramatically if the mix changed.
IMO it's a pretty good mix a.t.m. with AFL streaming continuing to expand exponentially.
Maybe those people concerned with the details could start a dedicated thread.
 
"The AFL has released the twenty-first intake into Level One of the NAB AFL Academy. Of World Footy interest is the inclusion of 15 year old Hewago "Ace" Paul Oea.

Ace comes to the Academy via PNG's participation in the AFL Queensland development pathway and first came to prominence when he starred in Queensland's U16 team at the recent National carnival. As well as winning the best on ground medal in the recent International Cup grand final, he has recently also been playing senior football for Broadbeach in the AFLQ competition. "

http://www.worldfootynews.com/article.php/20170831131951149
 
RedV3x said:
The development in S.E. Asia is shown in this discussion on quotas.
http://www.afl-asia.com/new-asian-champs-rules-released/
Click to expand...
I get a lot of satisfaction out of this news Red - The Administration up there are class acts and are now moving into a new phase, which may need paid administrators down the road.
The glass up there is now half full and needs to be filled up. What a challenge after starting with a few expats who wanted to have a kick.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TWLS said:
I get a lot of satisfaction out of this news Red - The Administration up there are class acts and are now moving into a new phase, which may need paid administrators down the road.
The glass up there is now half full and needs to be filled up. What a challenge after starting with a few expats who wanted to have a kick.
Click to expand...

Yes. so professional that I thought the AFL must have been involved.
It is now up to the AFL leverage the good work.
So many people here poo-hooed the idea of a world body - "what can they do that a telephone can't ?"
Here is a concrete example of what working together can achieve.
Europe achieved a lot with a little help and now the Pacific is expanding with a little help.
I don't see much help for North America and when you look at the Tulsa Buffaloes' lead you have to wonder why.
You'd have to be crazy not to follow up on developments in Canada.
 
So M.L.F. runs parallel to the USAFL -Very interesting. The biggest problem the former will face IMHO is longevity, can that structure be sustained in a neutral/hostile enviroment.
Another topic I want to raise is 18 a side football overseas vs 9 a side.
Just noticed that the IC17 Mens Grand Finalists- PNG and NZ - both have established 18`s Leagues. Does this give them an advantage long term.
Other countries have regular 18`s such as - Canada, South Africa, England (London),and Ireland (Perhaps).
Or another reason maybe having their expats in the GF regularly play in Australia. There are very few from Canada and South Africa.
Will having the same teams dominate the Mens GF cause some problems over time, or will it act as an incentive for the remainder to reach that level.
It maybe that 9`s will have to do for most countries for many years into the future, which is not a desirable situation.
 
TWLS said:
So M.L.F. runs parallel to the USAFL -Very interesting.
Click to expand...

Still yet to commence according to the countdown clock and they'll need those two months after Irma.


TWLS said:
Another topic I want to raise is 18 a side football overseas vs 9 a side.
Click to expand...

Having played 18-a-side is definitely an advantage.
Most countries play 18-a-side at representative level though they might play 9-a-side domestically.
Not a lot of 18-s-side in Europe, but Croatia doesn't need to.

TWLS said:
It maybe that 9`s will have to do for most countries for many years into the future, which is not a desirable situation.
Click to expand...

The problem with 9-a-side is that it looks and feels exactly like football. (The exact opposite to what trolls say - ha)
Proper 9-a-side football should look like a shootout.
So 9-a-side football is the Bees knees in developing football but the aim should always be to produce 18-a-side football.
 
With respect to everyone here, I want to clear up a couple of things that I've read on this thread.

Firstly, the Guardian article wasn't written by the president of the USAFL, but rather by the president of one of the clubs. I won't opine on this as this has already been addressed internally within the league.

Secondly, Major League Footy is independent of the USAFL. It began as a metro league within the St. Pete Starfish > Tampa Bay ARFC > St. Pete Swans. Twitter accounts for some of the "out of state" teams (Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Memphis, San Antonio) started showing up within the past couple of months -- all of which are non USAFL markets. St. Pete played Pittsburgh last year, but as far as I can tell, these were all St. Pete players wearing Pittsburgh uniforms.

In my opinion (as a footy fan / rank and file person), I wish MLF the best of luck with its franchise model. But I, personally, prefer the club approach, which is the core philosophy of growth in the USAFL as well as back in Australia.
 
NoobPie said:
This is a great precedent. Should get all the countries doing it.
Click to expand...

That is a great sentiment and worthy of a little discussion.
Canada is arguably at the forefront of junior football uptake by being virtually unassisted.
Canada could actually develop substantially more juniors but is limited by the number of assistants available
and there are other areas were this is also true to a lesser degree.
Why is Canada successful and across the border in the U.S.A. little is happening?
Why is Canada successful and in most of the world little is happening?
The short answer is that every situation is different.
The common thread is all countries would benefit from assistance.
Canada is trying to educate the educators to reduce the demand on volunteers
but obviously any assistance at high level will create a much easier pathway.
 
Last edited:
RedV3x said:
Why is Canada successful and across the border in the U.S.A. little is happening?
Click to expand...

Whilst Canada has the CFL which plays Canadian Football and crowds outdraw that of the NRL, the CFL and Canadian Football have a very low profile.
Ice hockey is touted as the Canadian game and the CFL lives in the shadow of the NFL across the border.
Think back to the pre-AFL days where Australians would watch the VFL because they had acquired all the talent and state leagues suffered.
Australian Football is seen as a rough and tumble, free-flowing game that is a closer match to the indigenous game of ice hockey in Canada.
In the U.S.A. sport revolves around the high school system which in the higher divisions is run professionally.
Whilst Auskick style programs could be run in lower schools the only chance Australian Football has in the American educational system
is to get into the lower division high schools that don't have high profile football team.

I broached this subject with a member of faculty at Tacoma and the reply was money.
High profile sporting teams provide income to high schools and universities. Other sports are a drag on resources.
It's a roll of the dice situation. Fund a competition and see if takes off but that is a totally different situation to the current approach.
The current approach is akin to AussieX, which is, "hey we have this fun fitness sport, that involves all facets of participation
and places all players on a level playing field. It requires little in the way of infrastructure".
This fitness style push has been successful in Canada, London, Malta and some other regions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BigBrainUSA
AFL International Regional Championships 2024
Replies
4
Views
1K
ike2112
I
jarrod_island_doggies
International jumpers available for purchase in 2023?
Replies
0
Views
405
jarrod_island_doggies
jarrod_island_doggies
Canberra Pear
2024 International Cup
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
RedV3x
RedV3x

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top