Women's Footy AFLW Bulldogs - 2022 Round 1 vs Demons

[Mantis Toboggan]

Whether Conti stays or goes she deserves booing next time she’s sighted at Whitten Oval. Same goes for Brennan. Give them all the vitriol the blokes would receive for this kind of scumbaggery.

 

[Munnez]

Don't blame them for making the most of their opportunities but be up front about why!! Fresh start after 3 years of a 7 week league. Believable as the Golden Unicorn that I have been hiding.
Just come out say Richmond made me a godfather offer that I was unable to refuse, it's not that hard

 

[jatz14]

It should be pointed out amidst all the cursing of the AFL and the way its set the comp up, and its lack of consultation. The AFL wanted a point system, which would have meant all clubs had to lose talent, but it would be roughly equally, and limited. It was the clubs that didnt want this system. They seemed to think none of their wanted players would want to leave their club, and therefore a point system would force them to lose some good players they could have retained. In hindsight, it was an error, player losses have been high and uneven, but its the clubs error.

 

[AuTo00Z]

It should be pointed out amidst all the cursing of the AFL and the way its set the comp up, and its lack of consultation. The AFL wanted a point system, which would have meant all clubs had to lose talent, but it would be roughly equally, and limited. It was the clubs that didnt want this system. They seemed to think none of their wanted players would want to leave their club, and therefore a point system would force them to lose some good players they could have retained. In hindsight, it was an error, player losses have been high and uneven, but its the clubs error.

Please, it's not like it matters what system is in place if the AFL can make up rules on the run so that can some teams can lose more players than the set limit. And I'm sure everybody knew players were gonna change clubs due to a number of reasons.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

The AFLW is being run like the old VFL, money talks and players walk.

 

[The Nostradamus]

Since tigers don’t have a first round pick why not trade Conti to a club that does?

 

[jatz14]

Please, it's not like it matters what system is in place if the AFL can make up rules on the run so that can some teams can lose more players than the set limit. And I'm sure everybody knew players were gonna change clubs due to a number of reasons.

It matters because with each club having to give up a certain number of points in the first expansion, the precedent would have been set. The AFL would still have been able to make up rules on the run, but within the confines of a point system. Instead, we got a maximum number of players per club, meaning a club could lose none, or its four best players, or this season, for some clubs, their 8 best players. So we now get tinkering within the confines of that system, with all its inherent flaws.

 

[TheFool]

It matters because with each club having to give up a certain number of points in the first expansion, the precedent would have been set. The AFL would still have been able to make up rules on the run, but within the confines of a point system. Instead, we got a maximum number of players per club, meaning a club could lose none, or its four best players, or this season, for some clubs, their 8 best players. So we now get tinkering within the confines of that system, with all its inherent flaws.

If you have a points system and every club has to give up a certain number of points, that means if no players (or not enough players) want to leave to go to an expansion club, you would have to force them out. Surely no real football club would ever want this.

And let's not pretend like a points system wouldn't be rorted and changed at the last minute and horribly controversial in its own way. Presumably each team would have the same total number of points, but you'd have your strong teams, your weak teams, your even teams, your teams with just a few superstars and a lot of below-par role players. People would be just as much up in arms about whatever point allocation system was used as they are about the current system, if not more so. Equal isn't the same as equitable, after all.

It's the decision to expand so suddenly that's the real problem here. No matter what system is put in place, doubling an eight-team competition in three years is always going to suck, and especially for the teams that have been in it from the start. It was always going to hurt, but easily the worst part of it for me is that players are straight-up being bought now, completely outside of a salary cap. Losing players who want to go is a normal part of any sport, but the six-figure sums being thrown around are embarrassing in a semi-pro competition with such remarkably low pay overall.

One of the things I used to love about the AFLW was that it was more equitable than the AFL. Feels like forever ago now.

 

[GreatSouthWest]

Since tigers don’t have a first round pick why not trade Conti to a club that does?

I'd love to see this. I'd also love to see the reaction.

 

[Mattdougie]

I’m down the caravan park this weekend and have been told from a very reliable source that KB will be paid $130,000 just from Richmond next year plus endorsements! How do we compete with that? Good luck to Katie but the AFL can hang their heads in shame.

No woman’s footballer is getting close to that so not sure who you heard that off mate.

There simply isn’t the money in the comp or interest sponsor wise to grow those figures.

 

[footyknut]

No woman’s footballer is getting close to that so not sure who you heard that off mate.

There simply isn’t the money in the comp or interest sponsor wise to grow those figures.

Dana Hooker is reportedly getting over $160,000 to play for West Coast next year so that figure for Katie Brennan would seem very possible.

 

[Mattdougie]

Dana Hooker is reportedly getting over $160,000 to play for West Coast next year so that figure for Katie Brennan would seem very possible.

Lol who is reporting that?

The comp makes NO MONEY, it runs at a loss even with sponsorship money.

That’s as much as an Australian female cricket player makes in a season i highly doubt those figures for 7 games and if it’s true that’s a joke.

 

[AuTo00Z]

Since tigers don’t have a first round pick why not trade Conti to a club that does?

Because neither the AFL or Conti want that (both player and club needs need to agree on it). Due to the Puma brand deal, it's either Richmond or she's staying (well unless she delists herself and enters the draft). Given the circumstances she likely would've stayed, but now that the AFL intends to get involved to help Richmond, it looks like she's gonna get her wish.

 

[Oliver G]

Lol who is reporting that?

The comp makes NO MONEY, it runs at a loss even with sponsorship money.

That’s as much as an Australian female cricket player makes in a season i highly doubt those figures for 7 games and if it’s true that’s a joke.

The four new clubs in 2020 are allowed to pay their Tier 1 players an uncapped ASA (additional services agreement), there is no ASA for the inaugural 8 clubs or the 2 new clubs in 2019

Wealthy clubs can afford that kind of money so I guess it is feasible and I bet you Brennan went for a big figure too. Even though she says there was no other reason to go to Richmond except for a "fresh start", however, I am certain the ASA sweetened the pot.

 

[Mattdougie]

The four new clubs in 2020 are allowed to pay their Tier 1 players an uncapped ASA (additional services agreement), there is no ASA for the inaugural 8 clubs or the 2 new clubs in 2019

Wealthy clubs can afford that kind of money so I guess it is feasible and I bet you Brennan went for a big figure too. Even though she says there was no other reason to go to Richmond except for a "fresh start", however, I am certain the ASA sweetened the pot.

If any AFLW player is getting above 30k they are taking the p!ss

It’s 7 games in a comp that brings in zero money

To pay them that now is beyond ridiculous because IF the league ever makes its own money they will expect ridiculous paychecks.

They should be paid to their ability and at the moment it’s nowhere near the amounts named above

 

[Oliver G]

If any AFLW player is getting above 30k they are taking the p!ss

It’s 7 games in a comp that brings in zero money

To pay them that now is beyond ridiculous because IF the league ever makes its own money they will expect ridiculous paychecks.

They should be paid to their ability and at the moment it’s nowhere near the amounts named above

I'm merely stating that they "can" be paid literally anything with the ASA, as for what they should be paid is another question.

 

[jatz14]

The four new clubs in 2020 are allowed to pay their Tier 1 players an uncapped ASA (additional services agreement), there is no ASA for the inaugural 8 clubs or the 2 new clubs in 2019

Wealthy clubs can afford that kind of money so I guess it is feasible and I bet you Brennan went for a big figure too. Even though she says there was no other reason to go to Richmond except for a "fresh start", however, I am certain the ASA sweetened the pot.

This is from the website for the 2019 deal.
A minimum $20,000 for additional service agreement (marketing appearances etc) will also be in place for all clubs, with no cap for 2019.

Expansion clubs are not able to offer more than other clubs, and they do not get special consideration under ASA that I am aware. It is uncapped, but it is uncapped for all clubs.

 

[jatz14]

Lol who is reporting that?

The comp makes NO MONEY, it runs at a loss even with sponsorship money.

That’s as much as an Australian female cricket player makes in a season i highly doubt those figures for 7 games and if it’s true that’s a joke.

One, in any market, value is determined by what people are willing to pay, ergo, if AFL clubs will pay $160k for a female player, that is, by definition, what they are worth.
Two, If Hooker is being paid $160K by West Coast (I have my doubts), and the bulk of that is due to ASA, then she is not being paid $160K for 7 games of football, and whether those games are revenue positive is therefore not at all relevant.

West Coast does, and pays for, lots of things not directly related to its mens football team, these tend not to generate profit. They still pay the people they have do these things. All large organisations do things for reasons beyond immediate profit. Why does the prospect of the female players getting paid beyond the financial returns of the AFLW trouble you so much?

In a 2 team market, West Coast have watched Freo get a 3 year head start on marketing themselves to girls and young women, and they are now in catch up. IF they are paying Hooker $160K, this is why. Given the amount sports spends on things like new logos, external consultants, marketing consultants etc, it isnt that much.

 

[Mattdougie]

One, in any market, value is determined by what people are willing to pay, ergo, if AFL clubs will pay $160k for a female player, that is, by definition, what they are worth.
Two, If Hooker is being paid $160K by West Coast (I have my doubts), and the bulk of that is due to ASA, then she is not being paid $160K for 7 games of football, and whether those games are revenue positive is therefore not at all relevant.

West Coast does, and pays for, lots of things not directly related to its mens football team, these tend not to generate profit. They still pay the people they have do these things. All large organisations do things for reasons beyond immediate profit. Why does the prospect of the female players getting paid beyond the financial returns of the AFLW trouble you so much?

In a 2 team market, West Coast have watched Freo get a 3 year head start on marketing themselves to girls and young women, and they are now in catch up. IF they are paying Hooker $160K, this is why. Given the amount sports spends on things like new logos, external consultants, marketing consultants etc, it isnt that much.

I won’t say why it won’t be popular but one organisation should not exist purely off the back of another

 

[Doggy Dan]

I was happy for KB to go, she shits me and is overrated. Conti is another matter, could easily be the best player in the comp in the next 2-3 years.

If/when this happens Dogs should just fold this s**t up. Have a big party to finish all the two birds cans and get back to worrying about the men’s game.

 

[jatz14]

I won’t say why it won’t be popular but one organisation should not exist purely off the back of another

They aren't 2 organisations, they are 1 organisation.

 

[Mattdougie]

They aren't 2 organisations, they are 1 organisation.

Competitions then if you wish to quibble

 

[jatz14]

Competitions then if you wish to quibble

How many competitions are supported or subsidised by the AFL? How many teams? Should teams be allowed to exist of the back off others? Lets cut the whole comp back to teams that make a consistent profit. As it seems profit should be the motivating factor for the not for profit AFL.

 

[Mattdougie]

How many competitions are supported or subsidised by the AFL? How many teams? Should teams be allowed to exist of the back off others? Lets cut the whole comp back to teams that make a consistent profit. As it seems profit should be the motivating factor for the not for profit AFL.

I think ALL teams should be at least break even entities in a “professional” sporting comp in present day.

How can any men’s team that is not making a profit expect to run an AFLW team and it not effect it’s core business which regardless what people think is the men’s team.

 

[jatz14]

I think ALL teams should be at least break even entities in a “professional” sporting comp in present day.

How can any men’s team that is not making a profit expect to run an AFLW team and it not effect it’s core business which regardless what people think is the men’s team.

No professional sport comp runs with all teams breaking even, certainly not the AFL, now or ever.

The reality is, if the weakest clubs financially were cut from the comp, and finances concentrated in the remaining 'profitable' clubs, then in a few years, some of those remaining clubs would be unprofitable. It's the nature of the industry, competition drives expenses upwards to the point the bottom clubs struggle.

The AFL needs those clubs despite their marginal financial state, and will support them indefinitely while it has the financial capacity to do so.

As for clubs, so for leagues. The AFL needs healthy lower and elite junior leagues. Most of them would struggle to survive in their current state without AFL support. Even the WAFL needs the money funneled to it from WC and Freo via the WAFC.

In this day and age the AFL has decided it needs a healthy high profile national women's comp, you may disagree, but it's their strategic direction, and their money.

I would also point out, these deals were negotiated by the AFLPA, probably the organisation with the greatest stake in a financially secure AFL. They will funnel money to it in proportion to their need for a high profile financially attractive women's comp, and their capacity to absorb the cost . The more money it brings in, the more they can pay within that framework, but it doesn't need to be profitable. I would bet they have budgeted for losses out as far as they have projected.

The AFL, and the AFLPA want the female players paid as much as possible, within the confines of the overall AFL budget. They want footy to be the sport of choice for young women, and seeing players getting full time careers in footy goes a long way to doing that.

Dana Hooker at $160 K (still don't believe this btw) is still something the Eagles can well afford as a marketing campaign.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk