Opinion Competitive balance - The AFL's most divisive topic

[GC2015]

Before delving into this topic, it's important to point out that people will have differing opinions on what is and isn't fair when it comes to striking a competitive balance throughout the AFL because we're all conditioned to prioritise what we see from our own lense. So just keep in mind that there's always going to be different perspectives and opinions on a topic like this. Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean they are wrong or vice versa.

Some call it 'equalisation' and it has been at the forefront of the AFL's priorities for many decades now (even before the league expanded outside of Victoria with the old zoning system) and it remains a big priority to this day as the AFL attempts to run a highly competitive national league in which every club has a realistic / fair chance of building a premiership list, despite any disadvantages they may face. The AFL formally refers to it as 'competitive balance' these days and they categorise it into 27 separate projects that aim to address inequities across the league such as club wealth, fanbase size, geographical or historical advantages / disadvantages, draft access, list retention, second tier football, facilities / stadia, travel requirements, growth opportunities, state of grassroots footy etc.

A few years ago, the AFL asked clubs to submit suggestions and ideas to consider during their competitive balance review (see link below). We've seen several new concepts suggested or implemented over the last few years that are likely designed to help improve competitive balance among other things. For example:

• It was reported on Footy Classified tonight that the AFL is considering clubs with top 5 picks that are pushed down the draft order due to F/S or NGA/Academy bids will be awarded an end of first round pick on top of their natural pick that's been pushed down the order.
• Gather Round offers an extra home game to South Australian clubs every year, while also forcing Victorian clubs to travel interstate more.
• Another example would be the AFL replacing North Melbourne's home games in Hobart with two in WA to help reduce the travel requirements for the West Australian teams. Having said that, North fans may make the argument that being required to play three games in WA (on top of their seven other interstate games) is unfair and that's a perfectly reasonable position to hold if you're a Roos supporter given no other non-WA team is required to play so many games in WA each year.

So what are your thoughts on the current state of 'competitive balance' in the AFL? Do you believe every club in the AFL currently has the means to build a premiership team in the short-to-medium term if they get things right or should more issues be addressed and what issues would you fix if you were in charge?

https://www.nine.com.au/sport/afl/news-2024-competitive-balance-review-what-each-club-wants-revealed-exclusive-20240528-p5jhfb.html

 

[Byron_Clanger]

I mean..the test case/Coke Zero kind of version of this is literally West Coasts draft last year. Duff-Tytler pushed back to 4, but we also had pick 19 and took Josh Lindsay.

Yes, pick 25 was the real end of first round pick, but I'm sure there isn't gonna be another 9 Academy/Father son picks in the first round in a draft for hopefully a long time.

 

[The_Reaper]

we will never get any balance until the governance of the league is separated from the governance of the sport

The afl deliberately engineers imbalances in order to drive other objectives

 

[Art Vandelay_]

It was reported on Footy Classified tonight that the AFL is considering clubs with top 5 picks that are pushed down the draft order due to F/S or NGA/Academy bids will be awarded an end of first round pick on top of their natural pick that's been pushed down the order.

That sounds like hot garbage.
Top 5 and you get re-imbursed for being pushed back, which sounds great. Go from 4 to 7 and get pick 24 on top.

But clubs with pick 6-18 get their first selection pushed back also and then get their 2nd round selections pushed back for the additional extra selections. In essence punishing 2/3 of the competition even further.

 

[Philhawk]

Yet again, the AFL simply fails to realise that more compensation picks aren’t the problem.

We just want a completely uncompromised draft. That’s it. You finish third last? You get pick 3.

Why is this so ****ing hard?

 

[Cyclops]

Yet again, the AFL simply fails to realise that more compensation picks aren’t the problem.

We just want a completely uncompensated. That’s it. You finish third last? You get pick 3.

Why is this so ****ing hard?

Its the Coral reef of incompetence. Have a stupid idea, make a stupid change, announce everything is better.

It isn't better, but you don't want to admit that or you might lose the cushy job, so you make another stupid decision, and announce thing a are even even better.

 

[TheUnicorn]

The draft is a f**king joke.

The fixture is a f**king joke.

 

[Jezzitizle]

The afl outsource growing the game to clubs in the northern states, which the afl should handle directly, including elite talent development.

And at the same time, those clubs should be doing everything within their power to grow the game in their local area without payback, perhaps with afl funding, simply because it is the right thing to do.

Honestly the afl is completely inept when it comes to equalisation, they just need to recognise it and stop.

On the kangas games in WA, I don’t agree with it but that is the kangas selling games.

 

[Yoda_]

we will never get any balance until the governance of the league is separated from the governance of the sport

The afl deliberately engineers imbalances in order to drive other objectives

what$ that $uppo$e to mean?

lol...

 

[Yoda_]

Yet again, the AFL simply fails to realise that more compensation picks aren’t the problem.

We just want a completely uncompensated. That’s it. You finish third last? You get pick 3.

Why is this so ****ing hard?

have suggested for a few years, if your NGA or Father/Son gets taken in the first round, get a comparable compensation pick, if you lose one in the second, get a comparable second, if you lose one in the third, get an extra rookie election

Clubs want to be recognised to be developing the kids they produce. If the AFL rewarded clubs they would continue to develop.


In the end, clubs will manipulate any which way they can to engineer a result that benefits them. Its shit but the way professional sport is across the board

 

[g_TRAIN]

This is the worst AFL administration I've seen in my 30 years watching footy.

Seriously worried for the next 10 years

 

[adelaidecrows]

Well my favourite is Brisbane crying victim because they are finding out what a salary cap does yet no one told them to draft in all their stars via father son and Academy while bringing in free agents Brisbane need to STFU

 

[adelaidecrows]

This is the worst AFL administration I've seen in my 30 years watching footy.

Seriously worried for the next 10 years

Its a dollars first culture built by Andy D. It is by far the worst run professional league on the planet.

 

[JustaBattler]

AFL is a packaged product which is now so manufactured and fake that even die hard watchers are getting to the stage of think - meh.

 

[Philhawk]

Well my favourite is Brisbane crying victim because they are finding out what a salary cap does yet no one told them to draft in all their stars via father son and Academy while bringing in free agents Brisbane need to STFU

I’m nearly certain Brisbane will find a way to manufacture a new rule to find extra money in TPP to keep “local kids”.

 

[SC_Power]

If we’re going to mention Gather Round, can we include the Grand Final venue?

(And to be pedantic, in a 23 round H&A season, you should get 11.5 home games, and we get 12, so an extra half a game. The two clubs who play us, get half a game less. Every other team has a neutral game, which is the very definition of a half a game. Not as big an issue as it gets reported on)

 

[SC_Power]

we will never get any balance until the governance of the league is separated from the governance of the sport

The afl deliberately engineers imbalances in order to drive other objectives

So exactly true

“AFL, custodian of the sport?” Embarrassing to even suggest they do that well.

 

[M Malice]

Opening round
Byes spread over multiple weeks
Andrew Dillon

 

[SC_Power]

certainly consider for the WA situation to be set up for a cycle of 2 games travel and 2 games home, both for them and for those travelling. Would need to pair up with fixtures with SA teams

Example
WC travel to Melbourne week 1, then Port Adelaide on the way back week 2
Collingwood travel to Fremantle week 1 then Adelaide on the way back week 2
St Kilda travel to Adelaide week 1 and then on to Fremantle week 2

I’m sure there’s flaws that people will find with it, but the travel burden certainly reduced.

 

[Obeanie1]

That sounds like hot garbage.
Top 5 and you get re-imbursed for being pushed back, which sounds great. Go from 4 to 7 and get pick 24 on top.

But clubs with pick 6-18 get their first selection pushed back also and then get their 2nd round selections pushed back for the additional extra selections. In essence punishing 2/3 of the competition even further.

Dropping from pick 2 to pick outside the top 5 is a tad more of a disadvantage than pick 21 slipping to pick 23.

Especially now with clubs needing to pay with multiple 1st rounders. Which will eat up more 1st rounders and helps lower the 2nd rounders, not push them out.

Not sure what you are describing would occur.

 

[glengowan]

Should be looking to get to 22 or 24 AFL teams and a division/promotion relegation set up. (Canberra/Southport based representing NQLD as Gold Coast does NT/Norwood/Port Melb/WA3).

A 12 team top tier with 11 home and 11 away games should be a must.

There should also be opportunities for the best players in each state to be drafted to their home club. Tassie to get an academy set up like the northern states and SA/WA/VIC to choose from their state junior system.

 

[Obeanie1]

AFL have been hounded to fix their flawed policies which have created a two tiered comp supporting club for the sole reason to increase TV rights deals and $$$$.

They are finally doing something.

The issue is a very simple one.

Dont provide assistance to team winning multiple back to back flags. If a list is strong and team playing finals year in year out, reduce access to assistance. They 9bviously dont need it.

If a person needs welfare fine, when they get back to work and dont warrent receiving welfare then it ends. Thats not a difficult concept to accept is it?

 

[Sentinel]

I mean..the test case/Coke Zero kind of version of this is literally West Coasts draft last year. Duff-Tytler pushed back to 4, but we also had pick 19 and took Josh Lindsay.

Yes, pick 25 was the real end of first round pick, but I'm sure there isn't gonna be another 9 Academy/Father son picks in the first round in a draft for hopefully a long time.

I'd say Richmond's 2025 draft was a better test case given the pick for Duff-Tytler was itself a free agency compensation pick which helped pushed their natural pick 2 all the way back to pick 7. Under the AFL's draft points system, they went from a pick worth 2481 points down to a pick worth 1543 points. That 938 point slide was equivalent to losing pick 16, through no fault of their own.

It's clear that F-S, academy and FA compo heavily dilutes the top end of the draft, and clubs that aren't allowed to play get disproportionally punished and can subsequently struggle to get out of rebuild mode. At least this latest idea goes somewhat towards fixing that, but unfortunately also impacts every other club (to a lesser degree).

In my mind, the solution should be along the lines of:

• Abolish FA compo as it currently stands but introduce some kind of mechanism to transfer picks/draft points from clubs receiving a player to clubs losing a player. Make it a zero sum game, rather than have picks just appear out of thin air to everyone's detriment besides the 2 clubs involved.
• Ideally, have the AFL run the academies so that no player is tied to a club via any junior academy.
• Noting that the above is highly unlikely to occur, scrap the discount and either introduce protection of the top 8 picks (i.e. those who don't make finals) or introduce a sliding premium for bid matching based on finishing position whilst ensuring that a pick within say 5-10 of the bid must be used to match. A team from the top 4 should be forced to pay signficantly more than others to access the top end of the draft.
• Where a club's natural bid slides a set # of points, provide a compensation pick at the end of the round.

 

[SC_Power]

AFL have been hounded to fix their flawed policies which have created a two tiered comp supporting club for the sole reason to increase TV rights deals and $$$$.

They are finally doing something.

The issue is a very simple one.

Dont provide assistance to team winning multiple back to back flags. If a list is strong and team playing finals year in year out, reduce access to assistance. They 9bviously dont need it.

If a person needs welfare fine, when they get back to work and dont warrent receiving welfare then it ends. Thats not a difficult concept to accept is it?

That almost sounds like a draft where the worst team one year guaranteed to get pick 1 the next; etc etc

What a great idea, wonder if the AFL will consider that idea one day.

(Sarcasm aimed at AFL, not you)

 

[Teen Wolf]

Every issue with the draft can be traced back to the league listening to club 'suggestions', rather than rightfully ignoring them as self-serving complaints.