15.4%: Why North should receive expansion-style concessions

[Roylion]

What has that got to do with whether I think they should merge or relocate?

I've asked you several times how the AFL is going to merge or relocate North Melbourne, which you haven't answered, despite you being an advocate for such an action. The club itself clearly doesn't want to do that either.

And you're the one who brought up Fitzroy in the first place.

You stated that I.....

"have a Fitzroy guernsey as your avatar so surely you could use your imagination. It's been done before. And 5 premierships in 25 years shows it was the right move."

That "it's been done before" is not correct. That it was the "right move" is also disputable. There was no merger or relocation.

It's pretty obvious that's there too many teams in Melbourne.

That's disputable as well. North Melbourne is presently profitable and debt free. Why should they merge or relocate?

It seems like you're too emotionally invested to consider it objectively.

I support the Brisbane Lions in the AFL. Been a member of the Brisbane Lions for 28 years. I understand what it means to support a non-Victorian team, as well as a Victorian team. I'm far more objective on the matter than you are.

 

[Tbonefreo]

During the draft I've been thinking about concessions / priority picks. Like (I suspect) most people, I'm pretty much against them, and find the fact the West Coast have been handed them absolutely absurd.

What is more absurd, however, is the lack of concessions given to North. They have zero draft concessions this year (admittedly after having some in recent years). This led me down a bit of a path to see if North's performances are actually not as bad as I'm thinking.

And I was wrong... they're much, much worse.

The state of North is an enormous issue for the league, by far the #1 issue I think.

Over the past six years, North has won 20/130 games. That's a 15.4% win record.

How does that stack up? Well when people talk about teams going poorly, you'll inevitably hear "the worst team since Fitzroy". Or even comparisons to expansion clubs... the Bad New Bears, or Gold Coast and GWS when they were more-or-less Under 18 teams playing in the AFL. But none of these "bad" teams have been anything like North Melbourne.

In the entire history of the VFL / AFL - 129 season going back to 1897 - there is only FOUR teams that have ever had a worse win-rate over a comparable six-year period

1. St Kilda 1897 - 1902
2.0% (2/99)
St Kilda were the last side admitted to the VFL and were woefully unprepared to compete. They lost their first 48 games and over their first six seasons, won just two games.

2. North Melbourne 1926-1931
9.3% (10/108)
After a relatively successful first year in the league in 1925, North went through a very tough run. High player turnover and the effects of the Great Depression hit the club hard over an extended period

3. Fitzroy 1963 - 1968
12.7% (14/110)
Fitzroy in the 60s were a mess, with appalling conditions at Brunswick St before being homeless for a period - making it nigh-on impossible for them to recruit.

4. St Kilda 1943 - 1948
15.2% (16/105)
The period known as "the lean years" in St Kilda history, when they were forced out of their home ground as the Junction Oval was commandeered by government for the war effort.

5. North Melbourne 2020 - 2025
15.4% (20/130)

You can forget all the talk about expansion teams, Fitzroy, the Bears and other disastrous teams. North are worse than all of them by a stretch, and the worst performed club in 60 years... since well back before equalisation measures were introduced.

So what does it mean? I reckon this shows that North aren't just your average team going through a poor run. This is an all-time disaster and absolutely unprecedented in anything approaching modern, equalised footy.

Personally I'd be all for North being given some significant concessions in terms of draft and salary cap. Expansion clubs get them, and North are clearly in a worse spot. I've got no probably with teams having lean spells, but this has gone beyond that. Having one club so absolutely uncompetitive over such a long period affects the whole league and the money coming in from TV for all.

Perhaps this is the time to look at it. The league went through two lots of concessions at once for Gold Coast and GWS, perhaps North and Tassie could get them at the same time too.

And yes I'm well aware there'll be all the same nuffy calls about "fold them!", "relocate them!"... which is pointless, that's not going to happen, the league and the TV deal are predicated on the current number of teams so they're not going anywhere - they're required to bring the TV money in.

Who gives a fk how much the AFL makes?

 

[Saints43]

North based on geography have an excuse for being a poor club and not having a wide net of supporters, St Kilda on the other hand have the entire bayside from Port Melbourne to Frankston, and even inland through the South East as their catchment.. they should be a powerhouse yet remain a pathetic football club.

Carlton are our feeder club.
Pathetic. Feeble.

 

[Percel]

If North want to land decent players, at least give them a place to park when they go to training. It's insane they don't have parking for the players.

We don’t pay enough to own cars

 

[Percel]

What has that got to do with whether I think they should merge or relocate? It's pretty obvious that's there too many teams in Melbourne. It seems like you're too emotionally invested to consider it objectively.

Go away with your 31 years of nothingness as you drift into year 32.

North are here for the long haul, and likely to win a flag before you, Eagles may as well.

 

[Moonatic77]

Fold North just before Tassie come in keep it at 18

 

[thistimeforsure]

Fold North just before Tassie come in keep it at 18

I don’t think people realise just how pox ridden a 19 team comp is going to be

I did a quick research a couple of years back and I couldn’t find a serious pro league comp that is a weekly home and away set-up anywhere in any sport with an odd number of teams

 

[Saints43]

I don’t think people realise just how pox ridden a 19 team comp is going to be

I did a quick research a couple of years back and I couldn’t find a serious pro league comp that is a weekly home and away set-up anywhere in any sport with an odd number of teams

Teams don't play each other twice so what difference does it make?
But we used to. Before all these new teams came in and improved everything.

 

[Makeshift Park]

I don’t think people realise just how pox ridden a 19 team comp is going to be

I did a quick research a couple of years back and I couldn’t find a serious pro league comp that is a weekly home and away set-up anywhere in any sport with an odd number of teams

Yes, let's instead preserve this immaculate, rational and balanced fixture we have at the moment, where we play a third of the competition twice and everyone else once, and we purposely schedule an opening round that only involves half the comp, which in turn necessitates eight weeks of byes in an eighteen team league. Great evidence of a serious pro league comp right there. Better get rid of Norf when Tassie comes in, because who would want to change that.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

If North get off to a poor start they should sack Clarko and put in Crocker, is already an employee so won’t cost them any extrra

 

[thistimeforsure]

Yes, let's instead preserve this immaculate, rational and balanced fixture we have at the moment, where we play a third of the competition twice and everyone else once, and we purposely schedule an opening round that only involves half the comp, which in turn necessitates eight weeks of byes in an eighteen team league. Great evidence of a serious pro league comp right there. Better get rid of Norf when Tassie comes in, because who would want to change that.

Screw Tassie then till there’s another team ready to go

Even trying to do the math on 19 teams but everyone has to have 2 byes and play the same number of games in a 24 Rd season blew up my brain

 

[WilloTree]

Yes, let's instead preserve this immaculate, rational and balanced fixture we have at the moment, where we play a third of the competition twice and everyone else once, and we purposely schedule an opening round that only involves half the comp, which in turn necessitates eight weeks of byes in an eighteen team league. Great evidence of a serious pro league comp right there. Better get rid of Norf when Tassie comes in, because who would want to change that.

...and we play a round where everyone plays away except 2 teams from Adelaide..and 9 teams always have to play the grand final away...and it's the same 9 teams...and there's this thing called a floating round..and the final 8 isn't the real final 8 because it's actually 10 now..and.. oh no.. come back..no it's a good comp..honestly..

 

[Makeshift Park]

and 9 teams always have to play the grand final away

Its actually worse than that - only four can play the grand final at home.

 

[LeBronco]

North aren't going to fold, merge or relocate I'm not sure why people can't accept that.