30 Years of The AFL

[Dazzler9]

Same same, but different.

 

[Farang83150]

Something must have changed:

• 1985 – Ch7 pay 3.5 million for 1986 TV rights
• 1987 – Ch7 pays 6 million a year ($30 million) for 5 years from 1988 – 1992
  
  
• 1992 – Ch7 pays 17 million a year for 1993 – 1998 (100 million)
• 1998 – Ch7 Pays 40 million a year for rights to 2001
• 2001 – Fox, Ch9 and Ch10 pays 500 million for rights for 5 years from 2002-2006, Radio nets the AFl 2 million
• 2006 – Ch7, Ch10 and Foxtel bid 750 million for 5 years from 2007-2011, Radio nets the AFl 8 million
• 2011 – Ch7, Foxtel and Telstra bid 1.25 billion for 5 years to 2017.

Amazing what rotating a letter 180 degrees and bracing it can do.

Sporting comps the world over had similar rises. Going national doubtless helped, but it was a relatively small factor compared to the overall increase in the thirst for content by media groups.

Foxtel starting in 1995 was probably a bigger influence.

Would have the be THE stupidest comment I've ever seen on here, absolutely ridiculous.
Going national WAS sole the reason for the increase.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Because the name AFL is now a better reflection, but the AFL's foundation's was in the VFL.
Just as it was when Richmond and University eventually joined foundation clubs Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Fitzroy, Geelong, Melbourne, St Kilda and South Melbourne in the competition.
And later Footscray, Hawthorn and North Melbourne.
West Coast and Brisbane were later added in '87 and later Adelaide etc. building on an existing competition.
For reference, Ross Oakley headed the VFL and oversaw the transformation to AFL ..... it didn't cease to totally exist but was rather built on.

People just need to appreciate one thing. Without the VFL, the AFL would never have happened. Non-Victorian clubs can pat themselves on the back all they like, but the AFL had no chance of working unless it was a spin off of the existing VFL system.

We used to have a national competition played mid-week and it was reasonably successful because of the novelty factor, but in 1977 the VFL clubs decided they no longer wished to participate. Without VFL involvement, the competition only lasted 1 season before being discontinued. No VFL, no AFL.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

No one's neglecting the past Victorian League. However the AFL is a different comp. Proper professional comp.

And you are a lot different than you were when you were a baby. A start up company turns into a global corporation. McDonald's started with one store.

Do you see how this works?

 

[Coaster2012]

People just need to appreciate one thing. Without the VFL, the AFL would never have happened. Non-Victorian clubs can pat themselves on the back all they like, but the AFL had no chance of working unless it was a spin off of the existing VFL system.

We used to have a national competition played mid-week and it was reasonably successful because of the novelty factor, but in 1977 the VFL clubs decided they no longer wished to participate. Without VFL involvement, the competition only lasted 1 season before being discontinued. No VFL, no AFL.

And the VFL was in dire financial straights before the interstate interjection, but pat yourself on your back all your like.

* me, the arrogance just never ends.

 

[Dank Academy]

People just need to appreciate one thing. Without the VFL, the AFL would never have happened. Non-Victorian clubs can pat themselves on the back all they like, but the AFL had no chance of working unless it was a spin off of the existing VFL system.

We used to have a national competition played mid-week and it was reasonably successful because of the novelty factor, but in 1977 the VFL clubs decided they no longer wished to participate. Without VFL involvement, the competition only lasted 1 season before being discontinued. No VFL, no AFL.

Fair point, but is anyone arguing otherwise?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[greatwhiteshark]

And you are a lot different than you were when you were a baby. A start up company turns into a global corporation. McDonald's started with one store.

Do you see how this works?

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you, the one thing Victorians never acknowledge though is that the VFL was a suburban state football league which only ever decided the best football side in the state of Victoria. As the VFL morphed into the AFL it seems to have become quite common now that the VFL was always a national league and a VFL flag in 1958 is the exact same achievement as a flag in 2010. They count of course as the VFL did morph into the AFL but for gods sake a 5 year old knows they are two totally different things.
The status of winning the VFL in 1958 was the exact same status given to the winners of the WAFL and SANFL in those years. All 3 have won the state football league.
The WAFL and SANFL rightfully cannot have those flags counted in a VFL/AFL list, it would make no sense at all. But it does not change that they were all first tier football premierships and should be recognised when discussing football history and records of Australian football. The AFL however only wish to acknowledge VFL/AFL records and thats good and well but they do try and sell it as Australian Football history records when they are not.

If someone asked me who has won the most premierships at the top tier of Australian football I would say that Carlton and Essendon have won the most premierships in competition we now call the AFL. Port Adelaide and East fremantle however hold the record for the most top tier premierships in Australian Football. I don't know why this is a big deal for Victorians. it's not as if its fictional.

 

[MarkT2]

And the VFL was in dire financial straights before the interstate interjection, but pat yourself on your back all your like.

**** me, the arrogance just never ends.

The biggest misnomer of them all. Perpetuated according to agenda.

Clubs got into financial trouble due in the main to transfer fees and player salary escalation. Poor management for sure but hardly terminal. Fitzroy were in dire financial trouble but the reality is they didn't get their fair share of AFL revenue like all clubs at that time because there was a clear agenda to clear Victorian Clubs out so non Victorian Clubs could be introduced. This was the Alan Aylet regime agenda and South Melbourne having funds frozen and forced out of their ground was the first clear manifestation.

The VFL wasn't broke. In any case, they owned Waverly. In fact when they sold it each club, including recent entrants, got $2m of the proceeds with the rest being retained by the AFL - effectively the clubs.

 

[The_Wookie]

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you, the one thing Victorians never acknowledge though is that the VFL was a suburban state football league which only ever decided the best football side in the state of Victoria. As the VFL morphed into the AFL it seems to have become quite common now that the VFL was always a national league and a VFL flag in 1958 is the exact same achievement as a flag in 2010. They count of course as the VFL did morph into the AFL but for gods sake a 5 year old knows they are two totally different things.
The status of winning the VFL in 1958 was the exact same status given to the winners of the WAFL and SANFL in those years. All 3 have won the state football league.
The WAFL and SANFL rightfully cannot have those flags counted in a VFL/AFL list, it would make no sense at all. But it does not change that they were all first tier football premierships and should be recognised when discussing football history and records of Australian football. The AFL however only wish to acknowledge VFL/AFL records and thats good and well but they do try and sell it as Australian Football history records when they are not.

If someone asked me who has won the most premierships at the top tier of Australian football I would say that Carlton and Essendon have won the most premierships in competition we now call the AFL. Port Adelaide and East fremantle however hold the record for the most top tier premierships in Australian Football. I don't know why this is a big deal for Victorians. it's not as if its fictional.

The notion of Tiers is irrelevant to the counting of league titles, as premierships are awarded to the league regardless of where it sits in the Australian Football hierarchy.

The SANFL still counts its flags from inception up until this point - Port supporters still count their SANFL flags won after 1991 - even though the league is of demonstrably lower quality than it was pre 1991. The WAFL still counts flags won from inception through to post 1987 even though the league is of a demostrably lower quality than before the Eagles were introduced. Its worth noting that along the way both the SANFL and WAFL have changed names and still count all the flags won in that time.

For the VFL it went the other way, the only name change the VFL endured was the change to AFL in 1990. Flags before and after the name change counted even though there was a change in the nature of the league itself.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

As the VFL morphed into the AFL it seems to have become quite common now that the VFL was always a national league ...

Seems to? Nowhere have I ever seen this suggested. We all know the history of the AFL.

I have to wonder if this is some sort of insecure feeling people have when they make this observation, rather than a verifiable experience.

 

[The_Wookie]

And the VFL was in dire financial straights before the interstate interjection, but pat yourself on your back all your like.

**** me, the arrogance just never ends.

It also happens to be true. Not a single proposal for a national competition was viable without the VFL or many of its teams.

Would have the be THE stupidest comment I've ever seen on here, absolutely ridiculous.
Going national WAS sole the reason for the increase.

Not neccessarily, it certainly helped, but inflation played a large part, and the nature of the media deals themselves changed.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The notion of Tiers is irrelevant to the counting of league titles, as premierships are awarded to the league regardless of where it sits in the Australian Football hierarchy.

The SANFL still counts its flags from inception up until this point - Port supporters still count their SANFL flags won after 1991 - even though the league is of demonstrably lower quality than it was pre 1991. The WAFL still counts flags won from inception through to post 1987 even though the league is of a demostrably lower quality than before the Eagles were introduced. Its worth noting that along the way both the SANFL and WAFL have changed names and still count all the flags won in that time.

For the VFL it went the other way, the only name change the VFL endured was the change to AFL in 1990. Flags before and after the name change counted even though there was a change in the nature of the league itself.

Tiers are not irrelevant, only to you as it fits your narrative. There is not a person over 40 alive that follows football that doesn't know that the VFL/WAFL and the SANFL were the three first tier football leagues in Australia from day dot until the early 80's.
Look at my signature and you will see what is real with what flags are what, some are first tier and the others are not.
The football hierarchy as you said is pretty clear in my eyes, if you lived in any of those three states and played league football in those three states you were deemed to have played at the highest level of the game all the way up to the early 80's.
This does not deter from Victorian football achievements but for some reason you think it does.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Seems to? Nowhere have I ever seen this suggested. We all know the history of the AFL.

I have to wonder if this is some sort of insecure feeling people have when they make this observation, rather than a verifiable experience.

Ok, do you acknowledge that the premiers of the WAFL and the SANFL in 1960 was the exact same status and achievement as the VFL premiers in that year? If not, why not?

 

[The_Wookie]

Tiers are not irrelevant, only to you as it fits your narrative. There is not a person over 40 alive that follows football that doesn't know that the VFL/WAFL and the SANFL were the three first tier football leagues in Australia from day dot until the early 80's.
Look at my signature and you will see what is real with what flags are what, some are first tier and the others are not.
The football hierarchy as you said is pretty clear in my eyes, if you lived in any of those three states and played league football in those three states you were deemed to have played at the highest level of the game all the way up to the early 80's.
This does not deter from Victorian football achievements but for some reason you think it does.

Actually the only people that give a damn about this at all are people like you. You seem to think it matters that the VFL changed its name in 1990 and somehow its history is separated from that time on even though the AFL itself says otherwise.

that the premiership is awarded to the league premier regardless of some aribtrary perception of tier is an actual fact, despite the regular carrying on the fact is that all leagues count their flags from inception to present day regardless of where Western Australians feel they fit in the football pyramid at various times.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Actually the only people that give a damn about this at all are people like you. You seem to think it matters that the VFL changed its name in 1990 and somehow its history is separated from that time on even though the AFL itself says otherwise.

that the premiership is awarded to the league premier regardless of some aribtrary perception of tier is an actual fact, despite the regular carrying on the fact is that all leagues count their flags from inception to present day regardless of where Western Australians feel they fit in the football pyramid at various times.

Actually not true at all, I could not tell you when the AFL started as the VFL morphed into the AFL. All I am pointing out is that other leagues operated at the same level as the VFL for many many decades. It is you and other chronies like you who just can't accept that, actually won't even acknowledge it.

 

[Captain_Bender]

Nothing brings out Victorian insecurities more than when they claim VFL flags are an equal to AFL flags.

Nothing brings out the insecurities of Vic supporters when they realize interstate supporters don't give a s**t what they did before 1990. And get off your Vic arrogance, WA and SA have just a rich history as you Vics. Maybe if you showed a little respect posters wouldn't have a go at you.

And stop calling them franchises in a negative connotation. Richmond is a franchise just as much as any other "franchise." Your club isn't more special than other clubs simply because it was formed in a different decade. Just ask Fitzroy. Your club has the same goal as any other, to make money to keep it afloat.

And like clockwork the insecurities is on full display

 

[The_Wookie]

Actually not true at all, I could not tell you when the AFL started as the VFL morphed into the AFL. All I am pointing out is that other leagues operated at the same level as the VFL for many many decades. It is you and other chronies like you who just can't accept that, actually won't even acknowledge it.

Ive never denied it myself. And I dont have chronies anywhere, let alone Bigfooty. And the quality of the other leagues isnt really relevant to the AFLs history or title change. Something history acknowledges even if you cant.

 

[Coaster2012]

And like clockwork the insecurities is on full display

Jog on Troll. You label inter state clubs franchises in a negative light and when people respond, you call them insecure?

What are you 15?

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Ive never denied it myself. And I dont have chronies anywhere, let alone Bigfooty. And the quality of the other leagues isnt really relevant to the AFLs history or title change. Something history acknowledges even if you cant.

The quality of other leagues is very relevant when discussing the records and history of the sport at the top level. Not relevant when discussing just the VFL/AFL. The history of the sport and the VFL/AFL has been sold by the AFL as the same thing which is not correct.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

People just need to appreciate one thing. Without the VFL, the AFL would never have happened. Non-Victorian clubs can pat themselves on the back all they like, but the AFL had no chance of working unless it was a spin off of the existing VFL system.

We used to have a national competition played mid-week and it was reasonably successful because of the novelty factor, but in 1977 the VFL clubs decided they no longer wished to participate. Without VFL involvement, the competition only lasted 1 season before being discontinued. No VFL, no AFL.

Not really. A national competition would have happened. VFL clubs as we know them wouldn't exist had non-Vic clubs entered the VFL.

A truly national comp was always going to happen eventually.

 

[Captain_Bender]

Jog on Troll. You label inter state clubs franchises in a negative light and when people respond, you call them insecure?

What are you 15?

Nah just stated that the league existed long before their franchises existed, West Coast supporters just can't cope with that

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Nah just stated that the league existed long before their franchises existed, West Coast supporters just can't cope with that

So your insecurities about having less AFL flags than West Coast is coming out?

 

[Captain_Bender]

So your insecurities about having less AFL flags than West Coast is coming out?

Nah because no flags before an 18 team comp counts

 

[telsor]

Yes. That's what I said.

AFL says it started in 1897.

 

[telsor]

Would have the be THE stupidest comment I've ever seen on here, absolutely ridiculous.
Going national WAS sole the reason for the increase.

<insert can't tell if serious gif>