AFLW North Melbourne Football Club AFLW - Season 2023 [GF: North vs Brisbane @ Ikon Park, Sunday 3 December @ 2:30pm - NM 27 - 44 BL]

Remove this Banner Ad

I'll be a little disappointed if the AFLW only increases the number of games to 12 or worse still doesn't increase it at all. At the moment the draw is so unfair, and they expanded the number of teams in the competition rapidly, surely, they can do the same with the numbers of games the teams play.
Gill last year said outright he doesn't believe 17 rounds = a fairer competition. He would say that even if he doesn't actually believe it, nevertheless HQ would've been thrilled with how 10 rounds worked out:

Overrated Vic teams gifted home finals, and even the crappy new teams in Melbourne winning a few games. None of which got in the way of the most deserving teams making the GF and prelims (unlike the 2019 debacle).

With that in mind, there's a lack of incentive to rapidly increase the number of rounds. Gill also said it's the gap between the best and worst teams which is preventing a longer season. Again, sounds disingenuous, but there's no doubt they are uncomfortable with the amount of single-digit scores.
 
Jul 18, 2013
3,484
13,260
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Gill last year said outright he doesn't believe 17 rounds = a fairer competition. He would say that even if he doesn't actually believe it, nevertheless HQ would've been thrilled with how 10 rounds worked out:

Overrated Vic teams gifted home finals, and even the crappy new teams in Melbourne winning a few games. None of which got in the way of the most deserving teams making the GF and prelims (unlike the 2019 debacle).

With that in mind, there's a lack of incentive to rapidly increase the number of rounds. Gill also said it's the gap between the best and worst teams which is preventing a longer season. Again, sounds disingenuous, but there's no doubt they are uncomfortable with the amount of single-digit scores.

If they are so concerned about the gap between good teams and poor teams, then perhaps they need to set up two divisions, with minnow clubs like Port Adelaide, Sydney, GWS, West Coast, Hawthorn, Essendon and Carlton playing in second division until they are good enough to challenge the real clubs.
 
If they are so concerned about the gap between good teams and poor teams, then perhaps they need to set up two divisions, with minnow clubs like Port Adelaide, Sydney, GWS, West Coast, Hawthorn, Essendon and Carlton playing in second division until they are good enough to challenge the real clubs.
Are they not essentially already doing that by capping the number of rounds to ~10, and prioritising strong v strong and weak v weak match-ups.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

AT ARDEN STREET!!
AC02CC77-D028-441B-A91C-BD5D15ED0E40.jpeg
 
Mar 16, 2001
23,964
55,788
Melbourne VIC
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wales, Eastwood, West Ham
So the latest four expansion clubs get ANOTHER crack at poaching players, no trade required - North, Crows, Lions and Demons can lose up to maximum five players each as the final top four clubs last season - the next four can’t lose more than two each (Richmond I guess now happy to be back in the pack).

We already got shafted by getting no extra help in the previous expansion, but this is really poor to give the last four clubs such a bonus compared to earlier expansion clubs.

Hopefully the players who chose to stick with NMFC earlier will do the same again, with more incentive as we feel closer to breaking through for a flag.

As an aside, the target everyone is talking about now is Chloe Molloy to Sydney. That would be amusing given her earlier comments but crap for the Pies.
 
Not too concerned tbh all our players had the chance to go to those clubs 12 months ago for free and didn’t. If anything we look much better a year on and those expansion clubs are in for long builds

Plus only 3+ season players are eligible

Honestly can’t think of 1 player eligible that would go, maybe hardiman but she’s not very good and not in the best team anyway
 
So the latest four expansion clubs get ANOTHER crack at poaching players, no trade required - North, Crows, Lions and Demons can lose up to maximum five players each as the final top four clubs last season - the next four can’t lose more than two each (Richmond I guess now happy to be back in the pack).

We already got shafted by getting no extra help in the previous expansion, but this is really poor to give the last four clubs such a bonus compared to earlier expansion clubs.

Hopefully the players who chose to stick with NMFC earlier will do the same again, with more incentive as we feel closer to breaking through for a flag.

As an aside, the target everyone is talking about now is Chloe Molloy to Sydney. That would be amusing given her earlier comments but crap for the Pies.
I wasn't happy when I read that either. Sounds ridiculously unfair to me.

Hopefully our culture and our want to win a premiership together pulls us through with limited losses (ideally none at all)
 
Jul 18, 2013
3,484
13,260
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Unless there are further changes to the salary cap and tier structure, I can't see how any of the 4 expansion clubs can lure players who didn't want to go last year especially when the clubs have filled their top tier franchise spots. The only way it would work is if a good paying job suddenly appeared for the other 6 months of the year like the one that Aileen Gilroy took at Hawthorn.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Is it also true that as well as the same player poaching concessions given to Hawks, Port, and *, Sydney also receive even more ?

edit : kind of looks like it to me :

But across the four clubs, only 13 players in total will be able to be signed as a PSP player (two at Essendon, three each at Hawthorn and Port Adelaide and five at Sydney), with the rules allowing anyone who has played at least three AFLW seasons to be classified as such.

There was also understanding as to Sydney being able to offer longer-term deals (up to four years instead of the current maximum of two), given the need for the Swans to attract interstate players as the New South Wales talent pool develops – although Greater Western Sydney would be justified in maybe feeling slightly miffed it cannot do the same.
 
Last edited:
So the latest four expansion clubs get ANOTHER crack at poaching players, no trade required - North, Crows, Lions and Demons can lose up to maximum five players each as the final top four clubs last season - the next four can’t lose more than two each (Richmond I guess now happy to be back in the pack).

We already got shafted by getting no extra help in the previous expansion, but this is really poor to give the last four clubs such a bonus compared to earlier expansion clubs.

Hopefully the players who chose to stick with NMFC earlier will do the same again, with more incentive as we feel closer to breaking through for a flag.

As an aside, the target everyone is talking about now is Chloe Molloy to Sydney. That would be amusing given her earlier comments but crap for the Pies.
Crocker has built a strong, united team so I can't see players like Kearney, Bruton, Garner, the Kings, Riddell, Brown and Bresenehan wanting to leave, especially with the chance of a premiership being a real possibility in the next few seasons. Perhaps fringe players like Hardiman and Campbell may look for opportunities elsewhere, but I wouldn't be to upset if they go, there are a number of younger players that have past them by in the last season or so.
 
Jun 9, 2001
37,651
145,100
Fogarty Street
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
St Johnstone
There was also understanding as to Sydney being able to offer longer-term deals (up to four years instead of the current maximum of two), given the need for the Swans to attract interstate players as the New South Wales talent pool develops – although Greater Western Sydney would be justified in maybe feeling slightly miffed it cannot do the same.

and-so-it-begins-gif-6.gif
 
Mar 16, 2001
23,964
55,788
Melbourne VIC
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wales, Eastwood, West Ham
Today Sarah Black on the official site explaining why everyone overreacted - max of 13 players in total can be poached, more likely to be lower tier players than stars moving. Always a surprise. Does anyone at AFLW actually think anything through to logical conclusions BEFORE the announcements?
 
Mar 16, 2001
23,964
55,788
Melbourne VIC
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wales, Eastwood, West Ham
Is it also true that as well as the same player poaching concessions given to Hawks, Port, and *, Sydney also receive even more ?

edit : kind of looks like it to me :

But across the four clubs, only 13 players in total will be able to be signed as a PSP player (two at Essendon, three each at Hawthorn and Port Adelaide and five at Sydney), with the rules allowing anyone who has played at least three AFLW seasons to be classified as such.

There was also understanding as to Sydney being able to offer longer-term deals (up to four years instead of the current maximum of two), given the need for the Swans to attract interstate players as the New South Wales talent pool develops – although Greater Western Sydney would be justified in maybe feeling slightly miffed it cannot do the same.
“Slightly miffed”. GWS would be justified in being livid.
 

“Loyalty”.

That's a huge move and the Pies are entitled to feel mightily miffed.

I just hope this doesn't start some other higher profile players deciding to join her there. Well some of our higher profile players at least making that decision.
 
Mar 16, 2001
23,964
55,788
Melbourne VIC
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wales, Eastwood, West Ham
That's a huge move and the Pies are entitled to feel mightily miffed.

I just hope this doesn't start some other higher profile players deciding to join her there. Well some of our higher profile players at least making that decision.
If they’d got Ash they wouldn’t have had the space - so hope now if they have Molloy they can’t add other big names.

If Pies lose her and also trade away Cann, Lambert and Chiocchi as reported, I don’t know what they are doing. Coach should be following Harford out of a job pretty soon.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back