Fix SANFL Fixture or AFL Reserves?

Should the SANFL schedule be amended to account for the AFL fixture or should we have an AFL reserve


  • Total voters
    33

footy4ever

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Posts
17,441
Likes
20,695
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
#51
Hopefully, if we win the SANFL premiership the SANFL will kick us out and the AFL will be forced to create a reserves competition.
The AFL don't give one nob of goat's poo about the Crows having a reserves side. If a reserve comp happens, the last reason will be because Crows need it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

chazwazza

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Posts
7,275
Likes
11,274
Location
Thebarton
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt Football Club
#52
chazwazza Care to explain Centrals? It was very well known that they were always over the salary cap via other means, so that argument doesn't wash with me. The two AFL reserve teams are not free to do as they want. Yes, they have AFL list players playing there, but the majority of those players are the lowest paid on an AFL list. They also have top up players who are not SANFL level and don't have the salaries the SANFL players get. So they have higher and lower.

I've competed against teams/athletes who have better training and facilities etc related to greater money they receive. Do I still get out there and want to do better than them. Hell yes and once the game/competition starts, we are on an even basis. If you think already that you are behind the eight ball, then you are very likely to get beaten. There are very few competitions where everyone is even. Even in the AFL it is not an even competition in terms of footy department spends etc and other teams with concessions, so it's already there in the AFL. Sometimes I am okay with the concessions, other times I think they have been too generous.

A few of the clubs were on the verge of having to either merge or go into bankruptcy without the bailout monies from the AFL teams. Those were some very real concerns about the failures of the sanfl at the time. There just isn't a market for the sanfl so much anymore. And as MRB37 says above, Glenelg still have financial issues and they wouldn't be the only one.
You basically just ignore the massive salary cap disparity by bringing an alleged breach by Centrals, what you fail to bring up are the penalties Norwood and West have had for breaching/cheating the salary cap. This is one of the points I was trying to make as an example, which you asked for, of what SANFL supporters are putting up with and have cause to be disgruntled about.

You also go on to mention "bail out monies from the AFL teams".....err there was and are none. Port pay nothing to be in the league and Adelaide pay about $40k-$50k to field a team, (that Port don't have to pay is ridiculous but that's another discussion), there's also the repayment over time of the two AFL licences, there is no bail out. No SANFL club has been bailed out!
Yes the money from Adelaide does help the finances of clubs but it's a drop in the ocean of what they need to generate to compete.

Finally, in your opinion there's just not that much of a market for the SANFL anymore, that's fine, you're welcome to that viewpoint. In my opinion there is, yes its diminished over the last 25 years but it's still a viable and vibrant competition to follow for those that care to. It's great for young families. What it didn't need is more undermining by AFL interests and morons in the media trying to run it down.

You asked for an explanation to my remark that SANFL supporters have had to put up with a lot in having the reserves teams playing in the comp. It's a valid and pretty well spot on explanation I've given you, if you do t like it or agree with it then I don't really care but you're attempt to wash over the vast difference in salary cap rules is laughable.
 

chazwazza

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Posts
7,275
Likes
11,274
Location
Thebarton
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt Football Club
#53
Yep just like none of the others have problems either!
No one is denying there's financial pressures for SANFL clubs but they're not being bailed out and if both reserves teams left for the VFL or an AFL reserves comp they'd adjust and carry on.
The only footy clubs that are constantly being bailed out and protected are AFL ones.
Never seems to get mentioned much.
IIRC at least 6 AFL clubs failed to make a profit last year.
 

GreyCrow

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Posts
44,405
Likes
63,649
Location
Down South Corvus Tristis
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, Redskins , White Sox
#55
While its not ideal I look at the opposite. Gives half of our list an opportunity to rest. Gives our younger 1st and 2nd year players a break on their bodies.

Ok it doesn't suit the AFL team nor those pushing for selection but I am certain the club took this into account when selecting emergencies and training schedules.

These are the weekends you load up the fitness
 

chazwazza

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Posts
7,275
Likes
11,274
Location
Thebarton
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt Football Club
#57
So how is the debt reduction program not a bail out?
The SANFL have just introduced that every club have to post at least a $100k profit every year. All clubs will receive some money from the sale of West Lakes, I'm not sure what that entails. While I haven't see the debt reduction program I'm pretty sure it's not a bail out as you choose to put it.
Maybe the AFL should embrace some of these measures, might be good business practice for a few protected clubs that are bleeding millions.
 

GreyCrow

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Posts
44,405
Likes
63,649
Location
Down South Corvus Tristis
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, Redskins , White Sox
#58
From AdelaideNow

SANFL clubs must budget for at least $100,000 profit each year and not fall into losses under strict new fiscal rules to control concerning club debt in the state league.But the SANFL will not — as European football leagues do — penalise financially troubled clubs with the loss of premiership points. Rather, the league will demand — and assist with — changes in the club’s spending or revenue sourcing. SANFL chief executive Jake Parkinson calls the “$100,000 rule” a “risk buffer” to bring an end to the debt cycle in SA league football. Ultimately, the new fiscal demands will stop SANFL clubs building up seven-figure debts before rushing to the SA Football Commission seeking bailout funds. “We can’t have one or two clubs reaching a point from where there is no return,” Parkinson told The Advertiser. “That $100,000 cash surplus in the budget allows for a risk buffer.

The basics as I understand it will mean clubs will not be allowed to spend that $100,000 without triggering an alarm at Headquarter who will send someone in to the club to deal with - and manage- the debt until the club has the $100,000 buffer again
 

chazwazza

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Posts
7,275
Likes
11,274
Location
Thebarton
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt Football Club
#59
From AdelaideNow

SANFL clubs must budget for at least $100,000 profit each year and not fall into losses under strict new fiscal rules to control concerning club debt in the state league.But the SANFL will not — as European football leagues do — penalise financially troubled clubs with the loss of premiership points. Rather, the league will demand — and assist with — changes in the club’s spending or revenue sourcing. SANFL chief executive Jake Parkinson calls the “$100,000 rule” a “risk buffer” to bring an end to the debt cycle in SA league football. Ultimately, the new fiscal demands will stop SANFL clubs building up seven-figure debts before rushing to the SA Football Commission seeking bailout funds. “We can’t have one or two clubs reaching a point from where there is no return,” Parkinson told The Advertiser. “That $100,000 cash surplus in the budget allows for a risk buffer.

The basics as I understand it will mean clubs will not be allowed to spend that $100,000 without triggering an alarm at Headquarter who will send someone in to the club to deal with - and manage- the debt until the club has the $100,000 buffer again
I assume this is part of the debt reduction program and to ensure that clubs don't fritter away any returns from the sale of West Lakes and or the payback of both licences.....whatever is happening with those.
 
Top Bottom