Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
I'm not convinced that expansion should be as high a priority as the AFL makes out. Expansion is premised on generating more revenue, and protecting existing revenue by out-competing other codes. To me the main benefit of that is that it gives financially weaker traditional clubs a better chance of surviving. If the AFL remained smaller, with less money and therefore slightly less professionalism, I don't actually think what's best about the game would be lost. But, if they need to expand, then the integrity of the game must be protected at all costs. They should give new teams every chance to succeed at start-up, but the AFL can't have an ongoing hand in those clubs, or set up conditions that distort the chances for on-field success. GWS had such a leg-up initially that they could have kept trading for top draft picks for years. In a way, free agency has actually mitigated against that somewhat. But it seems to me that the Gold Coast, full of retirees not families with young kids, doesn't want an AFL team, and players don't want to be there. If that becomes really clear, I think the AFL should admit its failure and get rid of them. They'd be far better off pumping the money and resources into Tassie.I understand what you are saying vis a vis the market distortion - have you another suggestion for expanding into non - heartland states?
i agree with your last - its hard to ever see gc being viable.I'm not convinced that expansion should be as high a priority as the AFL makes out. Expansion is premised on generating more revenue, and protecting existing revenue by out-competing other codes. To me the main benefit of that is that it gives financially weaker traditional clubs a better chance of surviving. If the AFL remained smaller, with less money and therefore slightly less professionalism, I don't actually think what's best about the game would be lost. But, if they need to expand, then the integrity of the game must be protected at all costs. They should give new teams every chance to succeed at start-up, but the AFL can't have an ongoing hand in those clubs, or set up conditions that distort the chances for on-field success. GWS had such a leg-up initially that they could have kept trading for top draft picks for years. In a way, free agency has actually mitigated against that somewhat. But it seems to me that the Gold Coast, full of retirees not families with young kids, doesn't want an AFL team, and players don't want to be there. If that becomes really clear, I think the AFL should admit its failure and get rid of them. They'd be far better off pumping the money and resources into Tassie.
Please refrain from letting your facts get in the way of my point...
Yeah it's a fair point. We're seeing a lot of elite basketballers come to footy for that exact reason. The problem with the expansionist logic is that it's potentially without limit. We might put up with a few GWS premierships, but then will we need to do the same for NZ, or China, etc. I think the integrity of the on-field stuff (which of course is shaped by off-field stuff) needs to be protected at all costs.i agree with your last - its hard to ever see gc being viable.
But as for gws - the blueprint is there in sydney - i think theres defo room for two clubs in sydney.
I worry about our sport not from the rugbys - but from the point of view of soccer.
Long term the threat will always be soccer. As it is we have soccer mums refusing to let their kids play the “harder codes”
Soccer now has more kids playing it than afl - these kids will be 18+ one day - if australia were to win a world cup i can see a momentum shift happening.
The bigger we are across the nation the less this momentum shift will be hopefully.
You see the freak athletes in sports and as they were growing up they played 3-4 sports and excelled at all - often you see them come to afl - but if they start going to a much invigorated soccer (as a draftees wage is millions not hundreds of thousands) you will start to see our sport become less spectacular - and less watchable as a result.
Now if herding this off means gws win a few grannies - i can survive that - i survived collingwood winning a granny - i reckon if i really grit my teeth i can survive essendon winning a granny - gws should be pretty easy comparatively!!!
But GC has 0.2% more people aged over 85 than Melbourne does...So many people are not across the facts of the gold coast. Its not 1981 and. Its not transient or old population.
So many people are not across the facts of the gold coast. Its not 1981 and. Its not transient or old population.
You do know Nick Riewoldt was a priority pick right, and than a year later you got another priority pick for Luke Ball.I think the AFL should stop giving out concessions to clubs like gold coast. Clubs like Saints never get concessions when they are having bad times because they are one of the biggest clubs in the league... its bullshit
As a travelling club the thought of nz brings me out in hives.Yeah it's a fair point. We're seeing a lot of elite basketballers come to footy for that exact reason. The problem with the expansionist logic is that it's potentially without limit. We might put up with a few GWS premierships, but then will we need to do the same for NZ, or China, etc. I think the integrity of the on-field stuff (which of course is shaped by off-field stuff) needs to be protected at all costs.
OP certainly took on the SA bitterness very quickly.
Because it's just Vic clubs that lure players home...
I just think you worded it badly (ie from an SA perspective)I wouldn't say I'm bitter....my points are much more to do with the overall running of the AFL than where I'm from. I haven't grown up here so don't have that burning passion of state vs state, rather I'm commenting on the competition itself. Overall you'd say the AFL is a competition that is fair and equal for every team? Take all things away and please tell me you don't think it's ok for people who are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to complain of 'homesickness' and ask for a trade to somewhere they can fly to in 45mins or drive to in 8hrs? I suggested some ideas to reduce this as I think it's an all too easy excuse. I get that more players come from Victoria and as such there's more of them asking to go home but think the whole idea of 'nominating' where you want to go silly!! Jack Gunston arrived in Adelaide and asked when the next flight home was....why play a sport that involves you getting drafted anywhere if you can't bear to be away from your home.....should just play VFL??
Don't want to be rude and it's nice to welcome an international fan, but these comments are pretty far from the mark.
There's no evidence of Vic teams in particular benefiting from raiding interstate clubs. What is a problem is that the AFL administrates the game in a particular way, based on the Harvard Business School MBA model, where the business must always grow, always capture new markets, even though the primary reason for the existence of the AFL should not actually be to generate revenue. Non-traditional aussie rules markets - in Sydney, Brisbane, and GC - have accordingly been given certain advantages that translate to better likelihood of onfield success, to maintain the interest of these markets. People laud the Bloods culture at Sydney and point to their incredible run of finals appearances, but much of this was built on the 'cost of living allowance', which was an excuse for a higher salary cap. After Sydney landed Tippet and Buddy in consecutive years, AFL Commissioner Michael Fitzpatrick admitted as much. GWS were introduced purely to make the AFL money. There is a shocking conflict of interest for the AFL between impartiality, on one hand, and an active desire to see GWS succeed on the other. Gil needs to sign off if Leon Cameron was to be fired. The active intervention of the AFL in creating and managing GWS is disgraceful. The AFL knows that there are rusted on fans of St Kilda, North Melbourne etc, who basically will put up with an unfair comp since they will always follow their team and the footy generally. Compared to US sports, it's not free market principles that are corrupting AFL - rather the AFL runs itself as a business and so distorts the market conditions in a particular way in order to further its business interests. But it's factually wrong to say that Melbourne based teams are the chief beneficiaries of this.
I just think you worded it badly (ie from an SA perspective)
Geelong just lost a bloke that was top 3 in the Brownlow after only 2 yrs!!
I agree with a lot of your points. I also think interstate sides get advantages not available to every team that offset the travel, but that horse has been flogged enough and we'll leave that to it's thread.
But 4yrs I think too long for everyone. Maybe 4 yrs (min) for a 1st rounder, 3 for a second, 2 for ensuing rounds. As someone else pointed out, the churn on lower picks makes a 4yr contract too big an ask.
Also, not in favour of raising the draft age. Plenty play in their first year. Imagine not seeing Walsh, Rozee, Stack, Butters, Smith etc etc. The first year players go ok.
St Kilda have received $170 million from the AFL since 2005 averaging $12 million a year.IMO the AFL exploits the loyalty of fans of clubs like St Kilda, North etc, since they are true fans and stick through the tough years, whereas they will give massive handouts to teams from 'non-traditional markets'.
When the AFL introduces new teams, it seems to stay clear of already established clubs. I.E.: West Coast, Adelaide, Fremantle, Brisbane, GWS and Gold Coast. The only "expansion club" with prior history is Port Adelaide.I am familiar with the gold coast and suggest that the Southport Sharks would have a much better chance of success.
Did you have the stats handy for all handouts given, per club?St Kilda have received $170 million from the AFL since 2005 averaging $12 million a year.
Dogs: $172 million
Kangaroos: $161 million
Fairly substantial hand-outs just to survive.
I agree the AFL system is compromised and not fair, not many things in life are.I wouldn't say I'm bitter....my points are much more to do with the overall running of the AFL than where I'm from. I haven't grown up here so don't have that burning passion of state vs state, rather I'm commenting on the competition itself. Overall you'd say the AFL is a competition that is fair and equal for every team? Take all things away and please tell me you don't think it's ok for people who are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to complain of 'homesickness' and ask for a trade to somewhere they can fly to in 45mins or drive to in 8hrs? I suggested some ideas to reduce this as I think it's an all too easy excuse. I get that more players come from Victoria and as such there's more of them asking to go home but think the whole idea of 'nominating' where you want to go silly!! Jack Gunston arrived in Adelaide and asked when the next flight home was....why play a sport that involves you getting drafted anywhere if you can't bear to be away from your home.....should just play VFL??
Here are all them. Got them from the AFL financial reports. These are the totals since 2005.Did you have the stats handy for all handouts given, per club?
Here are all them. Got them from the AFL financial reports. These are the totals since 2005.
Western B 172.1
St Kilda 170.7
Nth Melbourne 161.1
Brisbane 159.3
Melbourne 154.4
Carlton 142.9
Port 141.1
Sydney 140.7
Richmond 139.9
Essendon 138.2
Collingwood 138.1
Hawthorn 133.0
Geelong 131.3
Freo 122.7
Adelaide 122.3
West Coast 121.8
GWS 121.0
Gold Coast 114.6
Averages millions per year.Cheers mate, I wouldn't have known where to find them.
Interesting, expected Richmond to be higher. Also expected GC and GWS to be higher.
Was considered but problem is Southport have been a dominant and often hated AFLQ club for years. Sort of the Collingwood of QLD. Making the Sharks an AFL club may have alienated rival supporters of PBC, Broadbeach, Labrador, Surfers etc. Unfortunately, despite the Gold Coast having the strongest and richest local clubs in QLD, that support has not transferred to the Suns.I am familiar with the gold coast and suggest that the Southport Sharks would have a much better chance of success.