News Damien Hardwick urges AFL to name restart date as he sounds warning over potential cuts to lists

Remove this Banner Ad

THE THIN MAN

🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆🏆
Jan 7, 2010
11,939
35,108
AFL Club
Richmond
Richmond coach Damien Hardwick wants the AFL to go out on a limb and name a restart date so clubs and players have something to look forward to, while he’s sounded a warning over potential cuts to list sizes.

Damien Hardwick says clubs would need to slash list sizes by as much as 40 per cent and drop all development responsibilities if the AFL radically reduced football department spend.

The warning from the reigning premiership coach came as he said he would love to be handed a date by the AFL about a likely start point so clubs could start planning for a return.

He said clubs would be ready to play as early as two weeks after returning to their clubs.

Hardwick’s Tigers have won two of the past three premierships through securing elite talent but also developing a raft of young players like Sydney Stack with elite coaching from eight lieutenants.

He says under streamlined list sizes clubs could no longer park young developing players or take a punt on kids who are yet to mature.

Effectively the league would become like America’s NFL, which cherrypicks ready-made players from college football.

Instead the AFL would need ready-to-play talent and let state leagues or feeder pathways coach younger players.

He said the clubs had got their head around a new football department spending cap that could drop as much as $4 million from $9.7 million.

“I think we have. The landscape and new economy we keep talking about is the soft cap is going to come into play and be reduced by a significant amount,” he told the ABC’s Offsiders.

“Whether it’s 30 or 40 per cent we are not too sure but what will come into that is the playing list has to be cut at a similar rate for mine and the reality of the situation is at the moment we are a performance and development industry and if we go down this path it’s primarily going to become a performance industry for mine so it’s going to be a really interesting period for the AFL’s history but we have some great people in charge who will make some pretty smart decisions.”

Gold Coast would face the impossible task of reducing its list size from 51 down to as low as 35 given it has extra list spots because of the AFL’s extra concessions last year.

Suns chief executive Mark Evans told the Herald Sun there would need to be an elite development program somewhere across the talent pathway to keep standards high.

“It is difficult to take a firm position (on list sizes) until you can understand the entire model. If list sizes were smaller what are mechanisms to allow you to find replacements in the middle of the seasons and how does that fit into the talent pathway? You would still need to have a strong talent pathway programs around the country,” he said.

Hardwick said he was keen for the league to hand clubs a date for a return as possible.

“I really applaud the NRL for their aspirational leadership of giving a date. I would love a carrot, I would love a date to work with,” he said.

“The really challenging aspect for us as coaches and players is we haven’t got a date to work with. When to start, your training to prepare for that date, is something we haven’t got at the moment.

“We have got a great group of coaches who have worked really hard on getting a great understanding of what we require but as soon as we get that we have some certainty and we can plan because it’s one of the things we haven’t got at the moment and it’s really challenging from a mental aspect.”

 

Boxhead007

Cancelled
Mar 20, 2020
713
1,023
Sunny QLD
AFL Club
Richmond
Richmond coach Damien Hardwick wants the AFL to go out on a limb and name a restart date so clubs and players have something to look forward to, while he’s sounded a warning over potential cuts to list sizes.

Damien Hardwick says clubs would need to slash list sizes by as much as 40 per cent and drop all development responsibilities if the AFL radically reduced football department spend.

The warning from the reigning premiership coach came as he said he would love to be handed a date by the AFL about a likely start point so clubs could start planning for a return.

He said clubs would be ready to play as early as two weeks after returning to their clubs.

Hardwick’s Tigers have won two of the past three premierships through securing elite talent but also developing a raft of young players like Sydney Stack with elite coaching from eight lieutenants.

He says under streamlined list sizes clubs could no longer park young developing players or take a punt on kids who are yet to mature.

Effectively the league would become like America’s NFL, which cherrypicks ready-made players from college football.

Instead the AFL would need ready-to-play talent and let state leagues or feeder pathways coach younger players.

He said the clubs had got their head around a new football department spending cap that could drop as much as $4 million from $9.7 million.

“I think we have. The landscape and new economy we keep talking about is the soft cap is going to come into play and be reduced by a significant amount,” he told the ABC’s Offsiders.

“Whether it’s 30 or 40 per cent we are not too sure but what will come into that is the playing list has to be cut at a similar rate for mine and the reality of the situation is at the moment we are a performance and development industry and if we go down this path it’s primarily going to become a performance industry for mine so it’s going to be a really interesting period for the AFL’s history but we have some great people in charge who will make some pretty smart decisions.”

Gold Coast would face the impossible task of reducing its list size from 51 down to as low as 35 given it has extra list spots because of the AFL’s extra concessions last year.

Suns chief executive Mark Evans told the Herald Sun there would need to be an elite development program somewhere across the talent pathway to keep standards high.

“It is difficult to take a firm position (on list sizes) until you can understand the entire model. If list sizes were smaller what are mechanisms to allow you to find replacements in the middle of the seasons and how does that fit into the talent pathway? You would still need to have a strong talent pathway programs around the country,” he said.

Hardwick said he was keen for the league to hand clubs a date for a return as possible.

“I really applaud the NRL for their aspirational leadership of giving a date. I would love a carrot, I would love a date to work with,” he said.

“The really challenging aspect for us as coaches and players is we haven’t got a date to work with. When to start, your training to prepare for that date, is something we haven’t got at the moment.

“We have got a great group of coaches who have worked really hard on getting a great understanding of what we require but as soon as we get that we have some certainty and we can plan because it’s one of the things we haven’t got at the moment and it’s really challenging from a mental aspect.”



It will be interesting with the development section removed what the quality of football will be like. The performance based model will mean clubs will go back into the defensive mindset. The coaching merry go round will return as coaches will get moved on if not winning. The actual standard could/will possibly go backwards.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Nov 23, 2000
57,838
125,448
Country Victoria
AFL Club
Richmond
Slash list sizes by up to 40%? That would leave us with 28 on a list. What's he smoking?
1587950484421.png
 
Jan 3, 2012
43,352
88,006
From the interview room
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea FC, Victory, All Blecks,
that mental health condition caused him to go 100kms in the emergency lane right ?
Posted this in the wrong thread , but yeah that’s the gist of the defence, the only saving grace is he can’t get on a plane and piss off to india
 
Nov 23, 2000
57,838
125,448
Country Victoria
AFL Club
Richmond
Posted this in the wrong thread , but yeah that’s the gist of the defence, the only saving grace is he can’t get on a plane and piss off to india
The worry is though.He'll be sentenced by a Victorian Judge.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mar 1, 2010
23,158
16,560
AFL Club
Richmond



Lloyd comes across as ignorant at times or myoptic.


Anyway does anyone have a break up of revenues and costs of the AFL.

I do not understand why club lists and soft cap being targeted while AFLHQ squander broadcast revenue and talk about 45 million on hubs.


Tell me how much is being spent at AFL HQ and on what???

How much revenue was lost reducing rounds from 23 to 17??

Anyone have the answers to these questions??

It seems to be AFL HQ first, players second, clubs last

Club's caps and lists are always being scrutinised, who scrutinises AFL HQ?
 
They are talking some fairly large numbers of players lost - say 9 per club (+ extra at GC)

9 less player means that you cannot carry the developing kids, or trust them and not carry the marginal AFL players. Given the AFL does not have a high quality development league then it makes no sense. Short term relief, but at massive cost in player development. Some clubs could make the wrong choice and be screwed for years. If you went all in on older players you'd have no younger players and then in 3 years time you'd make GC look awesome.

I reckon the AFL are promoting a cure worse than the disease here. Cut wages and maybe 2 or 3 list spots. Dimma is overstating (I hope he is anyway) to get attention. Praising the NRL is a huge thing for an AFL coach, that'll get hackles raised in AFL HQ. Just slow down and think of how this will play out over 3 to 5 years. Don't destroy the competition just because of this crisis. And get a date and timetable to work to get playing again. I know they are letting the NRL do the heavy lifting, and take all the criticism if things go wrong. But get on with it now.
 
Mar 1, 2010
23,158
16,560
AFL Club
Richmond
They are talking some fairly large numbers of players lost - say 9 per club (+ extra at GC)

9 less player means that you cannot carry the developing kids, or trust them and not carry the marginal AFL players. Given the AFL does not have a high quality development league then it makes no sense. Short term relief, but at massive cost in player development. Some clubs could make the wrong choice and be screwed for years. If you went all in on older players you'd have no younger players and then in 3 years time you'd make GC look awesome.

I reckon the AFL are promoting a cure worse than the disease here. Cut wages and maybe 2 or 3 list spots. Dimma is overstating (I hope he is anyway) to get attention. Praising the NRL is a huge thing for an AFL coach, that'll get hackles raised in AFL HQ. Just slow down and think of how this will play out over 3 to 5 years. Don't destroy the competition just because of this crisis. And get a date and timetable to work to get playing again. I know they are letting the NRL do the heavy lifting, and take all the criticism if things go wrong. But get on with it now.

Its a crazy time to do it because your pushing players through a unfamiliar set up without proper club support initially which does not help optimal decisions either.

Why should players and successful support staff suffer for AFL HQ stuff up???

Just say we have to cut to 35 as some proposed.

I will do a hypothetical of what I would do atm for different reasons factoring in age and the future. If I am a list manager at the top of my head from afar, not seeing a lot of development from the youngsters, I am cutting (assuming the easy option for me as a selector dumping players Rance is not coming back) Rance, and from the bottom, Miller, Eggmolesse, Garthwaite, Aarts, English, Markov, Houli factoring in age and one of Nankervis or Soldo because assuming the young guy can step up and have other ruck hybrid options.

Not saying thats fair or right but thats just a quick call, but wait there is more.

That leaves from the top Vlastuin, Grimes, Prestia, Martin, Ross, Naish, Baker, JR, Cotchin, Edwards, Castagna, Astbury, Higgins, Short, Rioli, Lynch, Soldo or Nankervis, Balta, Caddy, Lambert, Collier Dawkins, Dow, Turner, Bolton, McIntosh, Graham, Broad, Martyn, Cumberland, CCJ, Chol, Nyoun, Stack, Ralpsmith, Pickett.

Thats 35 however one has to factor in draft picks especially top one in 2020 as well as other clubs dumping players especially Gold Coast arrying more credentially youngsters possibly. So there could be 3 or 4 off the 35 mentioned above as well!!

I do not think that is fair on the players nor the club nor is it justified individually or collectively, let alone some of the youngsters have a proper run of it to push through!!

It will be harder for the youngsters to form connections and develop with smaller lists to probably.

I had a look at some of the opposition lists. I might be biased but we seem to have far better depth. If this happens there are a few ways to approach this. Let go those that have not come on as much as others. Or back some of the youngsters in and let go some more high profile players. Either way we need good draft picks in return as good as possible while getting some quality youngsters would be handy to
 
Last edited:
Its a crazy time to do it because your pushing players through a unfamiliar set up without proper club support initially which does not help optimal decisions either.

Why should players and successful support staff suffer for AFL HQ stuff up???

Just say we have to cut to 35 as some proposed.

I will do a hypothetical of what I would do atm for different reasons factoring in age and the future. If I am a list manager at the top of my head from afar, not seeing a lot of development from the youngsters, I am cutting (assuming the easy option for me as a selector dumping players Rance is not coming back) Rance, and from the bottom, Miller, Eggmolesse, Garthwaite, Aarts, English, Markov, Houli factoring in age and one of Nankervis or Soldo because assuming the young guy can step up and have other ruck hybrid options.

Not saying thats fair or right but thats just a quick call, but wait there is more.

That leaves from the top Vlastuin, Grimes, Prestia, Martin, Ross, Naish, Baker, JR, Cotchin, Edwards, Castagna, Astbury, Higgins, Short, Rioli, Lynch, Soldo or Nankervis, Balta, Caddy, Lambert, Collier Dawkins, Dow, Turner, Bolton, McIntosh, Graham, Broad, Martyn, Cumberland, CCJ, Chol, Nyoun, Stack, Ralpsmith, Pickett.

Thats 35 however one has to factor in draft picks especially top one in 2020 as well as other clubs dumping players especially Gold Coast arrying more credentially youngsters possibly. So there could be 3 or 4 off the 35 mentioned above as well!!

I do not think that is fair on the players nor the club nor is it justified individually or collectively, let alone some of the youngsters have a proper run of it to push through!!

It will be harder for the youngsters to form connections and develop with smaller lists to probably.

I had a look at some of the opposition lists. I might be biased but we seem to have far better depth. If this happens there are a few ways to approach this. Let go those that have not come on as much as others. Or back some of the youngsters in and let go some more high profile players. Either way we need good draft picks in return as good as possible while getting some quality youngsters would be handy to

Exactly. Good analysis My Lord Magic. That RFC list of 35 doesn't include anyone not AFL quality, or a highly touted kid. We may be ahead of other teams. But if they go to 35 players there is no way you can keep both a deep AFL quality list to cover injuries and a solid development group of new draftees. If we had a genuine quality professional 2nd tier and drafted them at 20 then OK. But we don't.

Balme has been banging on about this on the TV. And I couldn't agree more. Cutting lists as deep as is suggested is so stupid. It'll lead to some teams with decent young squads now dominating in a few years. Teams full of oldies or very young groups are screwed. One cannot transition in a few years as their older guys retire, and the other can't develop as they can't have cover for the kids.
 
Mar 1, 2010
23,158
16,560
AFL Club
Richmond
Exactly. Good analysis My Lord Magic. That RFC list of 35 doesn't include anyone not AFL quality, or a highly touted kid. We may be ahead of other teams. But if they go to 35 players there is no way you can keep both a deep AFL quality list to cover injuries and a solid development group of new draftees. If we had a genuine quality professional 2nd tier and drafted them at 20 then OK. But we don't.

Balme has been banging on about this on the TV. And I couldn't agree more. Cutting lists as deep as is suggested is so stupid. It'll lead to some teams with decent young squads now dominating in a few years. Teams full of oldies or very young groups are screwed. One cannot transition in a few years as their older guys retire, and the other can't develop as they can't have cover for the kids.

The other thing is RFC is an attractive team at the moment. So if a gun, or value player wants to move in the disruption well RFC might be able to accomodate. But that means list changes again.

Look at disruption at Gold Coast, GWS, and a host of other clubs especially weaker ones where club finances come into question more.

I do not think AFL HQ appreciates the angst such changes will cause for players and clubs!! Some clubs might benefit but a lot of clubs and players no doubt in general will be pissed
 
Last edited:
If they got o 35 the impact will be so large it's impossible to fully understand now. It could easily lead to teams falling apart (hello Carlton) and other teams losing their ability to compete at the top. Crazy thinking. i hope the blow back has stopped this.

The easy solution is just to cut wages a bit more. Cut wages = $ problem solved. And then you don't have to trash lists
 

Marcel Proust

"Oohh WADA ooga booga" {Jul 11 2013}
Sep 6, 2018
29,608
38,560
#BigBigSound
AFL Club
Richmond
He’s talking about the coaching group I think, read it carefully

...but what will come into that is the playing list has to be cut at a similar rate for mine ....

He is saying the playing list may be cut to a similar degree. It'd help if his English was less rubbish

Yeah na four walls shell be right write on rocks
 
Last edited:

Marcel Proust

"Oohh WADA ooga booga" {Jul 11 2013}
Sep 6, 2018
29,608
38,560
#BigBigSound
AFL Club
Richmond
If they got o 35 the impact will be so large it's impossible to fully understand now. It could easily lead to teams falling apart (hello Carlton) and other teams losing their ability to compete at the top. Crazy thinking. i hope the blow back has stopped this.

The easy solution is just to cut wages a bit more. Cut wages = $ problem solved. And then you don't have to trash lists

AflPA, would sue for breach of contract/s(?)
 

Boxhead007

Cancelled
Mar 20, 2020
713
1,023
Sunny QLD
AFL Club
Richmond
I want to know how they got the magic number of 35? Didn’t we use 37-38 players last year? Most clubs use between 35-38 players most years. 35 is a big jump back from 40-42. I understand you’ll need some extra supplementary players but isn’t that just counter productive
 

Marcel Proust

"Oohh WADA ooga booga" {Jul 11 2013}
Sep 6, 2018
29,608
38,560
#BigBigSound
AFL Club
Richmond
I want to know how they got the magic number of 35? Didn’t we use 37-38 players last year? Most clubs use between 35-38 players most years. 35 is a big jump back from 40-42. I understand you’ll need some extra supplementary players but isn’t that just counter productive

Cause the dog are trying to poaxh Jayden short and hugo Ralphsmith
 
Back