Remove this Banner Ad

Less and less an even competition

  • Thread starter Thread starter DNine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Time to revisit this with next year being 40 years since the draft

Richmond has won 3 premierships, Hawthorn won another one while Brisbane Collingwood, Geelongc West Coast, Western Bulldogs and Melbourne all have added an additional flag to its tally since
this thread was created

This year sees Brisbane, Hawthorn, Collingwood and Geelong all playing in a prelim. Only 2005-06 was the only season neither were involved in a prelim
 
Time to revisit this with next year being 40 years since the draft

Richmond has won 3 premierships, Hawthorn won another one while Brisbane Collingwood, Geelongc West Coast, Western Bulldogs and Melbourne all have added an additional flag to its tally since
this thread was created

This year sees Brisbane, Hawthorn, Collingwood and Geelong all playing in a prelim. Only 2005-06 was the only season neither were involved in a prelim
Brisbane pretty much spent a decade down the bottom in between finals runs. Hawthorn spent 6 years out of 7 from 2016 out of finals

But what I said 11 years ago still remains true today
The 95% floor is the worst idea to make an equalised comp. It should be no higher than 85% but the AFLPA will never allow it.
 
The old recruiting zone system from 1967-1985 which was introduced pre-draft was worse. Clubs like South Melbourne, Melbourne and St Kilda were greatly disadvantaged whereas North, Hawthorn, Richmond and Carlton won premierships during that era
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Honestly, the only reason that the same few teams keep on being successful is that they are the only teams that entered the professional age in an administration capacity as well as a football department capacity.
What when you tell your players girlfriend to have an abortion?
 
Its a relatively even comp.

The only tweaks that should be made is to throw out the compromised draft ( father/son rule, academy picks, points system) and during the trade period stop letting players nominate clubs. By players nominating clubs during the trade period essentially sets up a second free agency period.

Just follow the american system where teams just trade contacts.
 
What when you tell your players girlfriend to have an abortion?
Are we going to play this game again?
The woman had a high risk pregnancy, there was a severe risk to her life, the player asked for advice, and the club said that the mothers life should be the priority, no different to what drs tell their patients
 
AFL has always been a whoever cheats wins competition.

In the 70s and 80s Carlton used to brown paper bag premierships.

Now it's Geelong handing out shady sponsorship deals and farmland.
 
I don't agree with the premise of the thread or the OP much at all to be honest.

Essentially the argument over the first few pages was that wealthy clubs could continue to be successful whilst poor clubs - like the Bulldogs and Melbourne - could never break through due to the limitations of less $$.

However, the Bulldogs won the flag less than 24 months later and Melbourne broke their premiership drought soon after. Our competition probably has the most equalisation measures of any comp in the world. Aside from the draft and salary cap, ee also have the soft cap and redistribution where the poorer clubs get more $$. We also have free agency compensation picks (tied to ladder position and 'special sauce'), priority picks and significant concessions for non-football states (academies, etc.)

To re-emphasise the point, by far the richest club in our competition is West Coast and by the logic espoused in the first few pages, means they will be continually successful. How are they tracking on field at the moment?

Whilst people are bemoaning some familiar names in the prelims this season, the truth is only 2 clubs have not featured in a prelim in the last 15 or so seasons; Gold Coast - a new club that just made and won their first final and are very likely to be thereabouts over the next 5 years, and Essendon - one of the richest and biggest clubs, who are equal leader on the all time premiership tally.

The very variability sought by the OP (where teams are up for a bit, mid for a bit and down for a bit) is exactly what we do see for nearly all sides in our competition. Perhaps the only real exception is Geelong - who have enjoyed sustained competitiveness for an extended period. Even North Melbourne were playing in multiple prelims just 10 years ago. The "familiar faces" of this year include Brisbane - who were rubbish for over a decade not that long ago, Hawthorn - who made finals once in 7 years recently and Collingwood - who missed finals last year and were bottom 2 a couple of years before that.

No matter what equalisation measures you introduce, you will still get some clubs that succeed and some clubs that don't (or don't as much) - which is exactly what you want - you still want it to be a competition where the teams that do it best are rewarded with success. I'd challenge anyone to find a top level professional sporting competition around the world that has more variability than the AFL - as all competitions have successful and unsuccessful teams - our competition is as even and variable as nearly as any in the world (even just season to season, let alone longer term). Look at how many teams jump from missing finals to top 4 and vice versa every year.
 
I don’t think it is a lack of players - it is a lack of decent coaches. It seems like the best teams have the most depth but they are just better drilled, consistent game plans in AFL and the seconds. Need to stop handing ex AFL players accreditation and start encouraging some thinking guys who can actually manage a team and club.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom