Play Nice AFL Womens - General Discussion

[banzai]

Hate the suggestion of August
Make footy a year round game

Mens March-September, womens October-February

Basically - start the womens the week after the mens GF, start the mens the week after the womens GF.

This.

Starting the womens season as the mens is heading towards finals will see it get no publicity at all. How much attention did the North Freo game get this week? Then once the AFL season finishes many of the womens teams season will be long done so people wont get interested. For me the start of the season is most important especially given how uneven the competition is.

 

[Walshawk]

This.

Starting the womens season as the mens is heading towards finals will see it get no publicity at all. How much attention did the North Freo game get this week? Then once the AFL season finishes many of the womens teams season will be long done so people wont get interested. For me the start of the season is most important especially given how uneven the competition is.

Footy in Jan/Feb is finished. The heat makes the games worse and the hard grounds cause more injury.
AFLW will get a heap of publicity starting on the pre-finals bye. The finals will overshadow it but it gives plenty of time slots for games. 12 rounds, GF the day before the BBL starts. Perfect time to play it.

 

[NorthernBastard]

New season start time means the finals will be on in spring when there is nothing good to watch (unless you actually like horse racing) - And during AFLM finals series when there is 4,2,2,1 matches being played it will allow for AFLW to get prime time slots when footy is at its most popular.

My concern is the talent (or lack of) being signed up - Some of the players getting picked up are slightly above average state league players

 

[Biggie]

AFLW Latest News - AFL.com.au/aflw

Latest breaking AFLW news from the official website of the Australian Football League.

www.womens.afl

 

[Biggie]

GIANTS to Appoint New AFLW Head Coach​

Following a comprehensive review of the 2021 AFLW season, and with mutual agreement with Alan McConnell, the GIANTS are set to embark on the process of appointing a new AFLW head coach. The club and Alan remain in discussions about a new role with the GIANTS.



McConnell is the GIANTS’ first-ever employee having joined the club in 2009, during which time he has held numerous coaching roles within the GIANTS’ AFL program, before taking over as AFLW head coach in 2018.



Over the past five seasons, McConnell has led Sydney’s inaugural AFLW team to its first finals appearance, in 2020, while successfully steering the program through two extremely challenging COVID-impacted seasons.



GIANTS Chief Executive Officer, David Matthews, thanked McConnell for his immeasurable contribution as AFLW head coach, confirming the club is working with him on a new role.



“Alan’s impact on our AFLW program can’t be overstated,” he said.



“He has brought an extremely high level of expertise, experience and insight to our AFLW program and continued to set new standards.



“We’re in discussions with Alan on what the next chapter looks like as a continuation of an already outstanding coaching career.”



McConnell said he is proud of all he has achieved as head coach of the GIANTS’ AFLW program.



“It's time for me to take on the next challenge, which I’m looking forward to,” he said.



“I leave the AFLW head coach role with a huge amount of pride, having learnt and experienced so much over the past five years.



"To have been a part of the formative years of the AFL Women’s competition has been an absolute honour. It’s been a privilege to lead this group of women - I’ve learned so much from them and about myself.”



The GIANTS will now commence the process to identify its next AFLW head coach.

 

[cmndstab]

Not exactly an ideal time to search for a new coach, right after four new teams have come in and presumably picked the eyes out of the available options.

 

[CrowdedHouse]

Not exactly an ideal time to search for a new coach, right after four new teams have come in and presumably picked the eyes out of the available options.

Yep. I know Covid screwed things up, but you would have thought mid last year would have been the best time to move McConnell on and start with the coach (and their staff) that would've been guiding them for at least the next 5 years?

 

[cmndstab]

It's weird to think that an expansion club in Sydney will have had their coach for longer than their cross-town rivals when they play their first match.

 

[Teen Wolf]

It's weird to think that an expansion club in Sydney will have had their coach for longer than their cross-town rivals when they play their first match.

Turns out that's also what happened last time. Sheedy became coach of GWS in late 2009, a year before Longmire took over at the Swans.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I was planning on waiting 'til season's end before speculating about the fixture for the next. But, with the prelim at the MCG this weekend, it brings up the question of games there in the future.

If next season does start in the pre-finals bye week of the men's comp, what would that actually look like? One assumes the AFL will want to exaggerate the benefits of the move. That should mean the opportunity to give maximum exposure to big matchups in the best stadiums:



Ensuring every team opens the season by playing in their home state and on free-to-air TV in their local market would be enticing for the league. And although it would mean having Port's first game against the Crows, which has high bloodbath (and therefore supporter discouragement) potential, I'm certain the club would embrace it.

Once October rolls around, smaller venues will mostly be the only option, so I'd like to see the major ones used when possible (though in some cases, like the SCG vs Henson Park, I don't think there's much chance). In some respects, by guaranteeing these fixtures at the start of the AFLW season, it's a better deal than the current situation where a team might get to play at the MCG etc. once every six years.

---

Previously I've mentioned the possibility of playing several AFLW games on the Grand Final Eve public holiday. Gill McLachlan, however, has even bigger ideas and recently floated playing an entire round "around Melbourne" on the Friday in question. Accounting for the logistics involved, presumably the fixture would have to look something like this:



Clearly the strategy would be to have a whole day of grand final build-up (especially on Fox Footy) structured around the AFLW games in various ways that are easy to envision. But it does raise a few obvious problems without clear solutions, such as the fact that it's not a public holiday elsewhere (hence having non-Vic teams play at 1pm or 3pm on a Friday would seem pretty inconsiderate).

 

[TigFan1966]

Please hear me out to make AFLW as exciting as mens footy. In golf ladies play a much shorter course because they can't hit it as far as the men, in cricket the ladies play on a smaller ground because they can't hit it as far as the men. So lets make the AFLW grounds smaller by around 30%, now people will say it will be even more congested. Well then lets reduce the players on each side to 12, four in the fwd line, four in the middle and four on the back line. Don't have the 50 metre arc have the 35 metre arc. It will mean it would take around the same amount of kicks from one end to the other as in mens footy.

 

[The Nostradamus]

bring on the next season in 4 months

 

[Walshawk]

It AFLW GF needs to be at night with decent entertainment. Felt flat yesterday with the 1/3 full stadium (11.30am start what were they thinking). Keep it at the small stadiums.

 

[Teen Wolf]

The current minimum wage for an AFLW player is $20,239, but would increase to $46,426 for season seven and $59,013 by season eight under the AFLPA plan.

The AFLPA wants a 12 round season with four weeks of finals (plus a mid-season bye) later this year, and a 14 round season with four weeks of finals and a mid-season bye in season eight.

Asking for a mid-season bye seems ludicrous to me. As for the salaries and number of games, the AFL will probably just split the difference.

Also a four-week finals series would be a mistake imo. Once they get to 17 H&A games, then it's fair to give weeks off for high ranking teams. Until then it should just be 1v8 2v7 3v6 4v5 and straight shot from there.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

A mid year bye would be good if they played everyone once.

 

[Munga]

Asking for a mid-season bye seems ludicrous to me. As for the salaries and number of games, the AFL will probably just split the difference.

Also a four-week finals series would be a mistake imo. Once they get to 17 H&A games, then it's fair to give weeks off for high ranking teams. Until then it should just be 1v8 2v7 3v6 4v5 and straight shot from there.

The pay increase is good. But I'm absolutely floored that the players only want a 12 round season! That's just not going to work, it has to go to 17.
Maybe this is only for next year but not subsequent seasons? If so, that's ok coming off a short break right now.

 

[jatz14]

The pay increase is good. But I'm absolutely floored that the players only want a 12 round season! That's just not going to work, it has to go to 17.
Maybe this is only for next year but not subsequent seasons? If so, that's ok coming off a short break right now.

A pay increase is good, but for most, its still not a full time wage, they will still need careers, or at least supporting jobs as well. 17 week season makes that hard.

There is also the elephant in the room, that no one is talking about. The coming hump, which will be very hard on the league and the players to negotiate.

As pay and season length increases, and it DOES become a full time job, a lot of current players are going to have to make a decision between full time football, and the careers outside football they have already invested a lot of time into. Its alright for young players coming into the league, who have made that commitment when they nominate for the draft, but the 25 - 32 year old already in the league, that may be in the armed forces for instance. The military has supported woman pursuing sport, but full time sport? I think they will need to choose, military, or football. Plenty of other woman in other careers will be in the same boat. Do I give up my career, at least temporarily, for another few years in footy?

I think for a few, especially the older ones, the answer will be career.

The league could lose a bunch of experienced players over a short period during the switch from part time to full time.

The mens transition to full time pro was a bit more spread out.

 

[Teen Wolf]

But I'm absolutely floored that the players only want a 12 round season! That's just not going to work, it has to go to 17.

The players have always wanted 17, and it will happen eventually. To reiterate the quote: the AFLPA's plan is 12 for the next season, 14 the season after that.

If you want more reassurance, this is also from the article:

Part of the AFLPA’s 2026 vision is for all 18 teams (the last four being introduced in this August’s season) will play each other once, making for a 17-match per team home and away season.

 

[Teen Wolf]

There is also the elephant in the room, that no one is talking about. The coming hump, which will be very hard on the league and the players to negotiate.

As pay and season length increases, and it DOES become a full time job, a lot of current players are going to have to make a decision between full time football, and the careers outside football they have already invested a lot of time into. Its alright for young players coming into the league, who have made that commitment when they nominate for the draft, but the 25 - 32 year old already in the league, that may be in the armed forces for instance. The military has supported woman pursuing sport, but full time sport? I think they will need to choose, military, or football. Plenty of other woman in other careers will be in the same boat. Do I give up my career, at least temporarily, for another few years in footy?

I think for a few, especially the older ones, the answer will be career.

The league could lose a bunch of experienced players over a short period during the switch from part time to full time.

The mens transition to full time pro was a bit more spread out.

A few players, mostly older ones who are near retirement, prioritising career (and even careers in other sports) over football doesn't seem like an elephant-sized issue to me. It's been happening for the last 6 seasons.

Besides, have you not heartily joined in on the avalanche of praise and optimism for the younger generation while deriding the older players who are supposedly the biggest weaknesses in the bottom teams. Why shed a tear for the Ashlee Atkinses all of a sudden?

 

[Munga]

The players have always wanted 17, and it will happen eventually. To reiterate the quote: the AFLPA's plan is 12 for the next season, 14 the season after that.

If you want more reassurance, this is also from the article:

Yep, I didn't read it properly and completely missed that second part. Cheers.

 

[Bombermania]

Please hear me out to make AFLW as exciting as mens footy. In golf ladies play a much shorter course because they can't hit it as far as the men, in cricket the ladies play on a smaller ground because they can't hit it as far as the men. So lets make the AFLW grounds smaller by around 30%, now people will say it will be even more congested. Well then lets reduce the players on each side to 12, four in the fwd line, four in the middle and four on the back line. Don't have the 50 metre arc have the 35 metre arc. It will mean it would take around the same amount of kicks from one end to the other as in mens footy.

They are playing on the old suburban grounds which are shorter but its also counterproductive because the smaller grounds produce more congested footy but I would like to see Hawthorn use Glenferrie, if they cleaned up the terraces on the wing and put a bit of money into its two stands then it could host a few thousand.

 

[jatz14]

A few players, mostly older ones who are near retirement, prioritising career (and even careers in other sports) over football doesn't seem like an elephant-sized issue to me. It's been happening for the last 6 seasons.

Besides, have you not heartily joined in on the avalanche of praise and optimism for the younger generation while deriding the older players who are supposedly the biggest weaknesses in the bottom teams. Why shed a tear for the Ashlee Atkinses all of a sudden?

Its not the players that need delisting anyway thats the issue (and Atkins isn't going to be, the Eagles need her, its why they are so bad). Losing an Ashlee Atkins would hurt the Eagles in the short term, but lets face it, it isn't going to cost them a flag. And the issue extends to the younger as well. Its a bigger issue for older players, but younger players will face it to. Men have to decide as teenagers, 'do I put other career aspirations on hold while I chase an AFL dream, or do I forgo an AFL dream, and pursue other options'. If they want to be a Dr, they never nominate for the draft, and likely curtail involvement in the development pathway, and are never heard of by the bulk of casual footy fans. Currently, their female equivalents are doing both. I have no doubt that there are more than a few players in the AFLW system right now, who had they faced the decision to commit to a full time footy career as teenagers, wouldn't have.

How many AFLW players right now have careers that are already stretched to accommodate AFL commitments, and who aren't going to be able to accommodate much more? Does anyone know? If forced to choose, how many choose footy? Do you know? I dont, but I suspect the AFL does.

And there is a limit to the bounty of younger players. The Eagles need to replace a lot of players with good young players, but there is a limit to the number coming through. Even considering I have 'derided' older players, I don't think the Eagles can delist many more than they have already lost. They certainly cannot afford required players walking away from footy.

At this point, not many clubs can.

 

[Teen Wolf]

How many AFLW players right now have careers that are already stretched to accommodate AFL commitments, and who aren't going to be able to accommodate much more? Does anyone know? If forced to choose, how many choose footy? Do you know? I dont, but I suspect the AFL does.

I suspect it is not incumbent on the AFL to care. Their focus is to build towards a professional competition for women who wish to prioritise football. And the AFLPA's focus is to represent the players, who overwhelmingly do want full-time salaries.

The Eagles need to replace a lot of players with good young players, but there is a limit to the number coming through.

The limit comes from AFLW salaries being part-time. "Players that need delisting" are mostly "players that would improve immensely if they had the opportunity to quit their day jobs and fully commit to football".

The gains from that change will far exceed the loss of players who give up a professional AFLW career to become doctors, for god's sake.

 

[HugeJohnson]

How does the AFLW actually make money? This is a genuine question, as far as I know entry to games is free and I can't see TV viewership being too high, although I'm not aware of exact figures.
I understand the importance of women's sport and I'm in no way trying to belittle the competition, I'm just curious how they justify tripling the salaries of these players in the next couple of years with no money being generated from the competition.
The AFL are already propping up quite a few AFL clubs, they've cut the soft-cap, and now with even more AFLW teams coming in on top of that and minimum salaries being tripled, all the while crowds in both the men's games and women's games seemingly falling away in the last couple of years... I'm wondering how sustainable it is in the long run. The women's game is decades away from even thinking about it being profitable, I'm not sure 60k per year adds up.

They say they want to be paid for 22 hours a week. Over a 16 round season (12+4 finals) plus let's say 6 weeks of preseason
22×22 = 484 hours
59013÷484 = $121.92p/h

Let's say a team doesn't even make finals so just 12 rounds plus 6 week preseason
18×22 = 396
59013÷396 = $149.02p/h

To me, thats crazy money. And that would just be the minimum salary!

 

[HugeJohnson]

The article also mentions currently players are being paid for 15 hours a week, yet in reality are doing 20-25, adding up to about 300 hours of overtime (not sure how that adds up unless they are training 25 hours a week 30 weeks a year), my question is then who is allowing this? Are clubs forcing the players to put in the extra hours? Maybe there needs to be more regulation and tightening up of the hours. It happens in my job, if I do too many hours, my boss will know about it straight away and either tell me I have to leave early some days or start later, and if its really unavoidable pay me the overtime.