AFL Finances

[Scotland]

You need to read my initial post. I actually advocated a system which better encouraged all states to draft locally. I know Sydney isn't a bad destination. I was simply addressing the predictable COLA point that someone else made. The COLA which is gone.

What's wrong with a system where clubs draft the best available? If you nominate for the draft you do so knowing you could go to any of the 16 clubs.

The sole aim of the academies (or any football development initiative in NSW/Qld) should be to produce more AFL quality players from those states for the total player pool.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

What's wrong with a system where clubs draft the best available? If you nominate for the draft you do so knowing you could go to any of the 16 clubs.

The sole aim of the academies (or any football development initiative in NSW/Qld) should be to produce more AFL quality players from those states for the total player pool.

Nothing. If the organic interest in football was uniform across the states. But it's not.

The Academies are not about getting the best talent to Sydney. They are about developing talent at all levels such that interest in the game develops accordingly. At district level as well as League level. The reason it is beginning to work is its local flavour. And the local pathway. Local supporters seeing local boys playing for their local football team is starting to generate that base interest in Australian Football that the Southern states take for granted.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

What's wrong with a system where clubs draft the best available? If you nominate for the draft you do so knowing you could go to any of the 16 clubs.

The sole aim of the academies (or any football development initiative in NSW/Qld) should be to produce more AFL quality players from those states for the total player pool.

I actually fundamentally disagree with this. Leaving the Academies aside, if we're going to continue to draft at age 17 or 18, then there should be some kind of way of ensuring the majority of the talent is drafted by the clubs in their state.

 

[Pessimistic]

Its pretty simple Hawthorn and the other clubs agreed to a 2 year trial of the revenue sharing proposed by the AFL for the purpose of equalisation, the understanding was to the richer clubs would share their profits as long as the AFL created equality in the draft.
Now the AFL is proposing a compromised draft to the northern clubs, which is not what was agreed upon. AFL talks about equalisation but then gives freebees away.

Closest to the pin. Take one priority pick as a prize

 

[Pessimistic]

I actually fundamentally disagree with this. Leaving the Academies aside, if we're going to continue to draft at age 17 or 18, then there should be some kind of way of ensuring the majority of the talent is drafted by the clubs in their state.

That would be the case but theyre not going to get kids moving north

If al state had an afl heirarchy of clubs, im sure that would be the case

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

That would be the case but theyre not going to get kids moving north

If al state had an afl heirarchy of clubs, im sure that would be the case

I'm sorry I don't get what you're saying here.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

You've sighted the agreement have you? You were present when negotiations were occurring?

You're saying Newbold is lying when he stated the agreement was made on the condition of equalisation of the draft? Because if it's true (and I would take the word of my Club President over a keyboard warrior on a forum) the AFL have not acted in good faith and the signatories are entitled to consider the deal void.

your a bit daft. there's a large difference between back room handshakes and what's on the piece of paper. the paper states a two year trial run, no conditions that's it.

 

[cos789]

I actually fundamentally disagree with this. Leaving the Academies aside, if we're going to continue to draft at age 17 or 18, then there should be some kind of way of ensuring the majority of the talent is drafted by the clubs in their state.

That is an extremely good point.
The draft should take into account the age of a player and his residence,
thus giving his "zone" preference or allowing a veto on the players behalf.
This would give some reward to the host club and result in fewer uhheavals.

 

[nineteen eighty]

Hawks and Pies are the two most financial clubs and have received the least $$$ form the AFL in recent years.
Geelong are chasing $$$ for stadium improvements and Essendon would not want to start another fight with the AFL.
Richmond getting there.

It's not just about financial assistance. How bout the respective fixture that then have a direct flow on effect to sponsorship revenue.

 

[Colonial]

It's not just about financial assistance. How bout the respective fixture that then have a direct flow on effect to sponsorship revenue.

Boosted crowds for revenue. So many vic derbies

 

[Pessimistic]

Nothing. If the organic interest in football was uniform across the states. But it's not.

The Academies are not about getting the best talent to Sydney. They are about developing talent at all levels such that interest in the game develops accordingly. At district level as well as League level. The reason it is beginning to work is its local flavour. And the local pathway. Local supporters seeing local boys playing for their local football team is starting to generate that base interest in Australian Football that the Southern states take for granted.

Like karmichael hunt and izzy folau ?

Or the best goalscorers moving to the most defensive team ?


The draft is ALL about nsw and qld clubs getting access to players from outside those states, theyd be stuffed otherwise.
So when the same clubs want mecanisms to lock in talent from thise states, you can see why its being questioned

 

[fabulousphil]

It's pretty clear most people in this thread have't read the article, nor have they understood why Newbold has made this statement.


The AFL are about to hand a fresh set of special considerations to GWS, Sydney, GC and Brisbane.


"Hawthorn has sensationally declared it will walk away from the AFL's chief equalisation measure if the northern-based clubs are allowed to exclusively access future draft picks this season .

By using future picks in trading, the northern clubs will able to go into deficit under the points-based system if they choose to match high bids for multiple players. Clubs with father-son options may also have the right to trade into the future."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...afl-revenue-share-scheme-20150622-ghug6f.html

So the poos and wees club have the poos, what a suprise, how about this .... for every kid drafted from NSW and QLD to the 4 northern teams it leaves a Victorian kid to be drafted by a Victorian team, that is a win win, perhaps Hawthorn have a brown and yellow guey film over their eyes which sees them unable to see.

 

[moistie]

your a bit daft. there's a large difference between back room handshakes and what's on the piece of paper. the paper states a two year trial run, no conditions that's it.

You've sighted the agreement have you? Tell me which clause states they cannot break the agreement.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

You've sighted the agreement have you? Tell me which clause states they cannot break the agreement.

I'm just waiting on some sort of confirmation that Newbold is actually referring to something here at all. I've seen nothing that says the AFL is about to do anything that Newbold is getting so hysterical about.

 

[moistie]

I'm just waiting on some sort of confirmation that Newbold is actually referring to something here at all. I've seen nothing that says the AFL is about to do anything that Newbold is getting so hysterical about.

He's making it up now?

You're talking about a professional who has served on the boards of multiple businesses.

A man who bit his tongue when Hawthorn has been ****ed in the arse by Home and Away fixtures (check out who we played at home in our 2013 fixture and tell me the AFL weren't trying to hamstring us because we refused to vacate the Tasmania deal at their request). He didn't say a word when the AFL fixed Hawthorn the Saturday night Prelim before the 2012 Grand Final despite tradition stating the Minor Premier getting the Friday night match. He didn't say anything when Vlad publicly mentioned the AFL would offer Franklin ambassador money if he was to move to Sydney.

In fact, there are some Hawthorn supporters who wish he would be more vocal about injustices done toward the HFC like our former President.

Simple fact is he prefers to not air dirty laundry and to discuss issues away from the public eye. The fact he's gone public with his grievance shows the bloody mindedness of the AFL in favouring "developing markets" over the integrity of the competition.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

He's making it up now?

Well do you know specifically what he's talking about? He's lied before about COLA etc.... He does have form.

 

[fabulousphil]

He's making it up now?

You're talking about a professional who has served on the boards of multiple businesses.

A man who bit his tongue when Hawthorn has been stuffed in the arse by Home and Away fixtures (check out who we played at home in our 2013 fixture and tell me the AFL weren't trying to hamstring us because we refused to vacate the Tasmania deal at their request). He didn't say a word when the AFL fixed Hawthorn the Saturday night Prelim before the 2012 Grand Final despite tradition stating the Minor Premier getting the Friday night match. He didn't say anything when Vlad publicly mentioned the AFL would offer Franklin ambassador money if he was to move to Sydney.

In fact, there are some Hawthorn supporters who wish he would be more vocal about injustices done toward the HFC like our former President.

Simple fact is he prefers to not air dirty laundry and to discuss issues away from the public eye. The fact he's gone public with his grievance shows the bloody mindedness of the AFL in favouring "developing markets" over the integrity of the competition.

You only have to mosy on over to the 4 northern states boards to see the genuine excitement about drafting local boys.

For NSW/QLD it is about being tied to a team, a academy that belongs to a team not a AFL sponsored sanctioned academy, which i suspect just won't cut through in the nothern states.

And of course the other thing i suspect is that you will not get a Heeney every year, not that he has proven himself a champion, so it is all based on predictions.

The academies are actually a good thing, but so far with the academies going for a number of years Brisbane, GC, GWS and Sydney have not drafted a whole heap of players, so i am genuinely suprised about the fear from Melbourne clubs in the face of quite underwhelming numbers.

 

[Papa G]

When both Hawthorn and Collingwood have half minute of shitness in the 2000's and the AFL gift them priority picks which they both build premiership teams around, when Geelong builds a dynasty around father sons in exchange for 2nd and 3rd round picks, I personally will never bemoan the northern sides any draft concessions. The most advantaged seem to be squealing the most.

 

[moistie]

Well do you know specifically what he's talking about? He's lied before about COLA etc.... He does have form.

Do tell, what was the lie he told about COLA?

 

[fabulousphil]

When both Hawthorn and Collingwood have half minute of shitness in the 2000's and the AFL gift them priority picks which they both build premiership teams around, when Geelong builds a dynasty around father sons in exchange for 2nd and 3rd round picks, I personally will never bemoan the northern sides any draft concessions. The most advantaged seem to be squealing the most.

Lingy had a father ..... was it Neville Bruns or Tim McGrath ?.

 

[moistie]

You only have to mosy on over to the 4 northern states boards to see the genuine excitement about drafting local boys.

For NSW/QLD it is about being tied to a team, a academy that belongs to a team not a AFL sponsored sanctioned academy, which i suspect just won't cut through in the nothern states.

And of course the other thing i suspect is that you will not get a Heeney every year, not that he has proven himself a champion, so it is all based on predictions.

The academies are actually a good thing, but so far with the academies going for a number of years Brisbane, GC, GWS and Sydney have not drafted a whole heap of players, so i am genuinely suprised about the fear from Melbourne clubs in the face of quite underwhelming numbers.

I'm not advocating removal of the Academies. What I'm advocating is the teams who have them having to abide by the same rules as every other club in the competition. Which is exactly what Newbold is complaining about.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Do tell, what was the lie he told about COLA?

He said the Swans were hoarding it to recruit big names.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I'm not advocating removal of the Academies. What I'm advocating is the teams who have them having to abide by the same rules as every other club in the competition. Which is exactly what Newbold is complaining about.

I'd still like to know what he is complaining about. There's nothing reported.

 

[telsor]

Unfortunately doesn't work that way. Viewers (which equates to revenue re broadcast rights) in SA and WA is almost maximised. The real growth is in the eastern seaboard northern states.

What the Swans and to a lesser extent Queensland (but still significant) is leverage for the AFL when it comes to renegotiating broadcast rights. The real growth in revenue from broadcast rights will come with those two states being strong on field (which equates to viewers).

The dollars generated by the northern sides all goes into the pot to make the AFL the healthy industry that it is. You only need to look at the revenue from the NRL to understand how big the markets are in NSW and QLD. Rugby League from a commercial standpoint is miles behind the AFL and yet they picked up a lazy billion last time.

The Swans and other northern clubs bring more to the table than what the Hawks (and my Tigers) do. We just don't see it though. We see the passion (well for the Hawks this has only recently come to fore post Melbourne merger collapse) but not the behind the scenes revenue generation.

And FWIW, I think WA and SA should somehow be a little more balanced with regards to local talent. I don't have the answer...just that it's a shame to lose the vast majority of the kids interstate.

There's a lot of pissing in one's own pockets in this thread from both sides without understanding the real reason the AFL is gifting some of these kids to the northern states.

The Northern states are there for the potential of growth, but currently the revenue they bring in from TV rights would be roughly equivalent to their ratings....Which are bloody awful. Ch7 wont be paying megabucks in the current deal because in 40 years the ratings might be good.

Considering the costs associated with producing live TV (and they HAVE TO show every game live), ch7 would probably be better off showing repeats of some reality TV show which they already have the rights to, meaning the NSW & QLD rights wouldn't have added much at all to the total deal.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

The Northern states are there for the potential of growth, but currently the revenue they bring in from TV rights would be roughly equivalent to their ratings....Which are bloody awful. Ch7 wont be paying megabucks in the current deal because in 40 years the ratings might be good.

Considering the costs associated with producing live TV (and they HAVE TO show every game live), ch7 would probably be better off showing repeats of some reality TV show which they already have the rights to, meaning the NSW & QLD rights wouldn't have added much at all to the total deal.

You keep saying that. Where is your evidence? My understanding is that the ratings are growing every year, and the Grand Finals that the Swans are in rate better than any other.