Ideas to better the AFL

[Jade]

A few ideas I have to improve the game, mainly on how it is administered:

1. Bring the SANFL/WAFC to heel

Unfortunately, many of my forthcoming ideas depend on the highly unlikely event that this occurs. But there it is.

This ridiculous circumstance of having two independent bodies outside of the AFL effectively acting as minor governing bodies has got to stop. Whilst the AFL can and does act in the interests of the game, the SANFL and WAFC act only to look after the game in their respective territories.

This is harmful to the game, as the AFL can never truly act - particularly when the decision would be unpopular - to affect football in these two states.

Have the AFL buy out and incorporate both the SANFL and WAFC. Maintain the branding (SANFL, WAFL); and we have a truly national competition under a single governing body.

2. Raise the draft age to 19.

An idea I've had for a while, and one that has been expressed before. I think the game would be much better off if the draft age was raised to 19 at October 31st prior to drafting. This would mean that every player drafted would have turned 19 before he is picked.

Why? A couple of reasons. Firstly, young kids will have finished school before they are on an AFL list. The extension of this, most kids would have to pick a trade and/or tertiary path as they would not yet have been drafted. This also eliminates the potential for kids to be drafted interstate whilst still in school.

Second, by maintaining a gap between the elite junior competition and the AFL, the secondary leagues of the VFL/SANFL/WAFL etc become more relevant, as the best 18 year olds in the country would first have to ply their trade in the state leagues prior to admission to the AFL.

3. Institute a state based draft.

Connected to the above idea, why not implement a draft for the state leagues, where bottom aged kids and 18 year olds are drafted into their corresponding home state league. All the best SA kids would be drafted to SANFL sides, WA kids to the WAFL and so on.

A year (or two) later, they nominate for the AFL draft - and if they are not drafted they are able to stay with their existing side.

You could televise the events in each state - would be interesting viewing watching the best kids in the land move into the second-tier.

4. Align the second-tier fixture with the AFL.

Just common sense as far as I am concerned. The second tier leagues in each state should mirror the fixturing of the AFL season. It is ridiculous that at the moment players not selected for the senior side can potentially have nowhere to play that week due to a bye.

5. Implement a draft lottery.

I know that Demetriou has already shot this one down, but I think that a weighted lottery for the draft order is a fantastic idea.

The team that finishes eighteenth gets eighteen numbers, seventeenth gets seventeen and so on. The draft is weighted so that poorer sides are more likely to get the lower picks, but that uncertainty remains.

Televise the event on the day before the trading period starts in order to finalise the draft order.

I think this would have two benefits in particular; help to remove the incentive to tank and just as importantly remove the threat of re-drafting in contract negotiations. That is, those players late season that are ‘enticed’ to re-sign with their existing club due to the threat of being re-drafted.

6. Remove the priority pick.

Get rid of it – completely. Teams should not be rewarded for terrible performance. If they are that bad, they will continue to finish low and be rewarded with the likelihood of low picks anyway. These quick fix solutions are not required.

7. Publish the compensation formula for free agency.

Would remove much of the angst that is likely to come when compensation comes in to effect with free agency. This does not mean publishing player salaries. A simple ‘if player x is paid in the nth percentile, compensation y is appropriate’.

If it is left secretive, fans will almost always accuse the AFL of under-rating or over-rating players. Clean, public and open – much better.

8. Expand senior lists / Remove rookie lists.

Whilst I think we have seen a great deal of value out of the rookie lists (particularly with senior recruits); they have served their purpose and now only needlessly complicate matters with senior lists (such as the LTI declaration).

Expand senior lists by up to six spots; allowing clubs greater flexibility in who they recruit.

9. Modify the veterans list.

One of my greatest disappointments in the AFL system is that it encourages clubs to move on older players. I would suggest a tiered structure for over 30 players to encourage teams to both recruit and maintain veterans on their list. With the expansion of the senior list (idea number 8) I would do away with the additional spots outside the list (again, needlessly complex) and institute the following:

- For each player aged 30 years old as at October 31st year prior, add 0.5% to the clubs salary cap
- For each additional year over thirty, add 0.1%, up to a maximum of 0.5%
- For each year said veteran has been continuously on clubs list, add 0.1%, up to a maximum of 0.5%
- Cap all benefits at 10%

In effect, this means you could get up to 1.5% addition to the salary cap for each player, and up to 10% total benefits on your cap. Certainly an encouragement to keep the old buggers on your list.

10. Foxtel Cup

Not really my idea of course, but this is such a good one I felt compelled to list it. The Foxtel Cup, as a vehicle for bringing clubs from multiple leagues together is a fantastic idea.

In order to encourage participation, the financial rewards should be high. If idea number 1 got through (all under the AFL umbrella); than instituting a prize pool of up to $5,000,000 shouldn’t be unrealistic (remember, the second-tier clubs fall outside the annual dispensation from the AFL).

Set specific qualification guidelines. Four teams from the VFL, three each from the WAFL and SANFL, Two from the NEAFL and TFL; and two invitational sides – possibly even a ‘best performed’ from outside the listed criteria, or defending champion.

11. Clash guernseys

Absolutely bloody mandatory. PROPER clash guernseys.

Collingwood and Essendon, I’m looking at you. Quit ya bitchin, make a proper clash guernsey and wear it when you clash with the home side. The AFL dictates when this is, not you.

No if’s, buts or maybe’s.

12. Captains

Each team has ONE. None of this co-captain rubbish. You have a captain, not seven of them. The captain and vice-captain is registered with the AFL at the start of the year and does not change. In the instances when both the captain and vice-captain are unavailable through injury or form, the replacement captain is specified at the point of picking the side (ie. Thursday night).

Why is this important? Firstly, because having a clear leader for the club on field is important to the fans.

Second, the ability to talk to the umpires should be restricted to captains – and having a clear ‘go-to’ player for this role is vital.

13. Etihad Stadium

I think the AFL needs to bite the bullet and buy it out early. If we are going to progress with the ten Victorian sides, the financial viability of the sides needs to be guaranteed and I think this is the best way to achieve it.

 

[Kwality]

The Vic centric aims are there for all to see, its Aussie Rules footy not the VFL.

 

[StKildaUSA]

I do not think that a weighted draft lottery will stop tanking. The NBA has had something like this in place for over 20 years and has not stopped accusations of tanking. The only way to completely stop tanking is to have an unweighted draft lottery.

 

[jethro11]

11. Clash guernseys

Absolutely bloody mandatory. PROPER clash guernseys.

Collingwood and Essendon, I’m looking at you. Quit ya bitchin, make a proper clash guernsey and wear it when you clash with the home side. The AFL dictates when this is, not you.

No if’s, buts or maybe’s.

Two clash guernseys enough for you mate...

 

[Jade]

The Vic centric aims are there for all to see, its Aussie Rules footy not the VFL.

I think you might need to clarify what you mean here mate - I thought my ideas were largely favourable to the interstate sides. Do you have a specific concern?

 

[Jade]

I do not think that a weighted draft lottery will stop tanking. The NBA has had something like this in place for over 20 years and has not stopped accusations of tanking. The only way to completely stop tanking is to have an unweighted draft lottery.

Good comment - I agree.

However I don't believe a completely random draw is practical, as some preference needs to be given to the lower ranked sides (IMO that is).

It was my intention to imply that the difference between say 10th and 12th is not that much when it comes to a draft, and might help to encourage sides to give 100% when the season is clearly over.

 

[Jade]

Two clash guernseys enough for you mate...

Yeah thats pretty much my point in a nut shell. That, as far as I am concerned is not a clash guernsey, and neither is this:

I want to see something more like this:

(Much as I hate Carlton that's a good clash guernsey).

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Why should WA and SA give control of football to the AFL? The AFL have destroyed their leagues as it is, have not helped grow those leagues or funded those leagues to keep them strong.

It is of no benefit to Football in WA if the AFL run football here. I can't speak for SA. The WAFC look after football here across the state including the WAFL, Amatuers, Sunday leagues, Country leagues. As if the AFL are going to give two hoots about that.

Now I would agree if the AFL were going to invest into second tier football and make the second tier important again, but they are not.
Second tier leagues like the WAFL and SANFL have salary caps of just 300-400k per year, now if this was 1.5 million and the games were televised and made important by the AFL thyen you could have a point. But the AFL don't care!!!!

The AFL is a self interest body only. Football is going great in WA because the WAFC runs it, give control to the AFL and within 3 years clubs will start to fold the state wide all at the expense of the AFL.

Never going to happen, The 9 WAFL clubs have the controlling vote on all things in WA football and while that is in place nothing will change and nor should it.
This is just my opinion however!!

 

[Jade]

Why should WA and SA give control of football to the AFL? The AFL have destroyed their leagues as it is, have not helped grow those leagues or funded those leagues to keep them strong.

It is of no benefit to Football in WA if the AFL run football here. I can't speak for SA. The WAFC look after football here across the state including the WAFL, Amatuers, Sunday leagues, Country leagues. As if the AFL are going to give two hoots about that.

Now I would agree if the AFL were going to invest into second tier football and make the second tier important again, but they are not.
Second tier leagues like the WAFL and SANFL have salary caps of just 300-400k per year, now if this was 1.5 million and the games were televised and made important by the AFL thyen you could have a point. But the AFL don't care!!!!

The AFL is a self interest body only. Football is going great in WA because the WAFC runs it, give control to the AFL and within 3 years clubs will start to fold the state wide all at the expense of the AFL.

Never going to happen, The 9 WAFL clubs have the controlling vote on all things in WA football and while that is in place nothing will change and nor should it.
This is just my opinion however!!

Cheers for your comment.

I'll answer your first point with my own - why should the AFL help grow football in WA and SA when they don't recognise the AFL as the governing body of the sport?

To use a poor (and not quite accurate) analogy, it's like the NBL pointing the finger at the NBA and screaming, "it's all your fault!!" because funding, resources and involvement weren't forthcoming.

Now that that's said, the AFL DOES fund the SANFL and WAFL. The licenses they have handed those leagues (controlling bodies of anyway); are a massive revenue source.

The AFL is directly assisting the funding of what is in effect two competing governing bodies!

As far as I am concerned, the AFL has shown immeasurable patience with WA and SA; helping them despite this backward, stubborn refusal to acknowledge that the AFL is indeed the governing body of the sport.

Your second point regarding the AFL not caring about development / country sport etc. I think that is flat out false. In areas where the AFL has control (VIC, NSW, QLD etc), the AFL has a proven history of development, forward thinking and care. I don't think many could argue that. For that reason, I think its unfair to say the AFL would act differently in relation to WA and SA.

Third point, re: investing in secondary leagues, televising games etc. The AFL initiated the Foxtel Cup, which as I mentioned is a brilliant idea as far as I am concerned. Several SA sides refused the offer of nationally televised games! Madness!

The VFL is televised in VIC; and you'll notice in some of my other points re: state drafting, Foxtel Cup, lifting of the draft age etc that I am all for development of the second tier leagues. In ALL states.

Lastly, not going to happen - I agree. I have a fair amount of anger towards WA and SA football, as I believe they are taking from the AFL (and therefore the game as a whole) without offering much in return. I also believe that having multiple governing bodies not answerable to a truly all-encompassing authority is a terrible structure - proven in many sports. BUT I agree with the fact that it won't happen in the near future (much as it pisses me off, backward ass organisations.....)

Worth noting as well that the AFL COULD wipe both leagues out, or severely hinder them by removing the licenses of Freo, West Coast, Adelaide and Port OR in an even more sadistic act create new org's (Say AFL SA and AFL WA) and giving the licenses to them. Again, not going to happen - but it does illustrate that the AFL is not this evil overlord out to destroy the western states; they help them IN SPITE of the WAFC and SANFL.

 

[hitthepost]

I'll answer your first point with my own - why should the AFL help grow football in WA and SA when they don't recognise the AFL as the governing body of the sport?

The SANFL and the WAFL recognise the AFL as the governing body of the sport. They also believe that they should still have their own say in how their leagues are run. The AFL sets the rules. The state leagues can vary them slightly to reflect the differences between AFL and state league footy (eg 25m penalties). This doesn't mean they disregard the AFL as the governing body.

Third point, re: investing in secondary leagues, televising games etc. The AFL initiated the Foxtel Cup, which as I mentioned is a brilliant idea as far as I am concerned. Several SA sides refused the offer of nationally televised games! Madness!

Correction. FOXTEL initiated the Foxtel Cup. They wanted something to televise between afternoon and night games on Saturdays. It's changed a little from there but if it weren't for Foxtel it wouldn't be happening.
The SANFL sides declined to play because they want to win the SANFL Premiership. Having to play and travel in your bye rounds for Foxtel Cup doesn't necessarily assist that aim. Also, they weren't able to keep any sponsorships they had if they clashed with Foxtel Cup sponsors...equals big cost (not just financially but also to their players) for what?

The VFL is televised in VIC

And the SANFL is televised in SA and the WAFL is televised in WA. And?

Location: Ivory Tower. How apt.

 

[hitthepost]

Yeah thats pretty much my point in a nut shell. That, as far as I am concerned is not a clash guernsey, and neither is this:

I want to see something more like this:

(Much as I hate Carlton that's a good clash guernsey).

And what's the difference between that one and Collingwood's white one? Both are the same design, just switched where the dark and light colours are. I don't know anyone who's had trouble telling Collingwood apart from another team in black when they've worn their clash top. Just coz (a) they're lucky to be able to keep it SO familiar without compromising the clash and (b) your team can't do the same, doesn't mean it's an inadequate clash top.

 

[Jade]

The SANFL and the WAFL recognise the AFL as the governing body of the sport. They also believe that they should still have their own say in how their leagues are run. The AFL sets the rules. The state leagues can vary them slightly to reflect the differences between AFL and state league footy (eg 25m penalties). This doesn't mean they disregard the AFL as the governing body.

I don't want to pick at minor details, but the SANFL considers itself the governing body of football in SA. The AFL, through not challenging this effectively makes it a reality.

Make no mistake, the SANFL is an independent governing body that happens to have some interaction with another (the AFL).

To put that into a practical sense; if the AFL instructed the SANFL to re-jig the format of its competition, would they do it? Answer is no. The SANFL does not answer to the AFL.

Correction. FOXTEL initiated the Foxtel Cup. They wanted something to televise between afternoon and night games on Saturdays. It's changed a little from there but if it weren't for Foxtel it wouldn't be happening.
The SANFL sides declined to play because they want to win the SANFL Premiership. Having to play and travel in your bye rounds for Foxtel Cup doesn't necessarily assist that aim. Also, they weren't able to keep any sponsorships they had if they clashed with Foxtel Cup sponsors...equals big cost (not just financially but also to their players) for what?.

Allow me to rephrase, I'm not overly concerned with the idea of the event, but more support of it.

Yes, I understand that the primary goal of SANFL teams is to win the SANFL premiership; but it is a very good example of SA football looking out for SA, not what is in the national interest - and this is my core problem with the existing setup.

And the SANFL is televised in SA and the WAFL is televised in WA. And?

Remember, I was responding to a a comment relating to the AFL's 'care' for football - I was not implying that it is not currently televised in said states. I was referring to the idea that the AFL would not 'shut down' all things SANFL and WAFL should they take direct line control of those organisations.

Location: Ivory Tower. How apt.

Been a good thread so far with conflicting opinions - we don't have to do that mate.

 

[Jade]

And what's the difference between that one and Collingwood's white one? Both are the same design, just switched where the dark and light colours are. I don't know anyone who's had trouble telling Collingwood apart from another team in black when they've worn their clash top. Just coz (a) they're lucky to be able to keep it SO familiar without compromising the clash and (b) your team can't do the same, doesn't mean it's an inadequate clash top.

Regardless of black on white, or white on black, the design is very similar to North (the primary concern where clash is concerned, with both colour and design). Carlton's is completely different to a competing club - they are either in Navy against other clubs, or if similar they completely switch to an all white top.

As for your second point, Essendon could of course do the same (black on red for example); but they refuse to do it.

Keep in mind, it's an opinion the AFL currently seems to share (ie. they are not pushing too hard to force those two clubs in particular to conform). I think they should.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I don't want to pick at minor details, but the SANFL considers itself the governing body of football in SA. The AFL, through not challenging this effectively makes it a reality.

Make no mistake, the SANFL is an independent governing body that happens to have some interaction with another (the AFL).

To put that into a practical sense; if the AFL instructed the SANFL to re-jig the format of its competition, would they do it? Answer is no. The SANFL does not answer to the AFL.



Allow me to rephrase, I'm not overly concerned with the idea of the event, but more support of it.

Yes, I understand that the primary goal of SANFL teams is to win the SANFL premiership; but it is a very good example of SA football looking out for SA, not what is in the national interest - and this is my core problem with the existing setup.



Remember, I was responding to a a comment relating to the AFL's 'care' for football - I was not implying that it is not currently televised in said states. I was referring to the idea that the AFL would not 'shut down' all things SANFL and WAFL should they take direct line control of those organisations.



Been a good thread so far with conflicting opinions - we don't have to do that mate.

What is wrong with the SANFL and the WAFL being an independent body? The problem is that the AFL are the governing body when the governing body should be independent and represented by one person from each state. The AFL should then also report to that governing body. With the AFL being the governing body it is effectively Victoria which is the governing body and how is that good for football in WA or SA? It is obvious in many other threads on a different array of topics that Victorians don't give a dam about Football in WA or SA, not now or even back when many of our clubs were bigger and better clubs than half those we now call AFL clubs.

WA produces numerous footballers for the AFL, in fact some would say it is the best set up system 0utside the AFL, it is financial, the AFL clubs do well, the WAFL is doing well and football across the state is doing well. How is the VFL going? it is a shambles and has become a joke because of AFL interference. Many South Australians and said they wish they could operate like we do in WA with their own Commission.

The AFL have created a culture where the only thing that matters is the AFL. They have sold that to the public especially Gen Y because they know they are the supporters of their product for the next 50 years. But what is wrong that Central Districts and or West Perth want to win their state league premiership at all costs? You seem to imply although not sure that if it is the difference with helping the highest level out as opposed to winning a premiership or even a game then that should happen??

The AFL want to run football Australia wide so they can make the second tier level a colts competition, simply a feeder comp only. Make no mistake that is what they want to do. And while that may suit you and you would not care myself and many thousands of others would care that our great clubs would be basically pulled apart at the seams to achieve this.

No disrespect mate but it is very easy for you to sit back while your side is in the AFL. The rest of the entire country had to pick a new side to follow in 1987 onwards. That is a hell of a lot of people who had to find a new club.
West Perth are my football club, they are my heart just as Essendon is probably your's. I follow the Eagles and are a member as I want to watch the highest level.
I know that when or if the AFL get hold of football in WA that the club I love will be in trouble because the AFL have only one agenda and that is the AFL, like you said they are supposed to be the governing body. When was the last 20 million dollar cheque they have sent the SANFL or the WAFL? You know those two s**t leagues which keep stopping the AFL from progressing!!!!! Those two leagues which keep producing talent for the game country wide.

Mate an emotional issue for me, I love and respect the WAFL, I have little respect for the AFL as an organization. You have no idea what the AFL has done to the culture of football in this state.

It is what it is and we accept it, but the WAFL must stay and be run by WA unless a proper Australian Football body is setup. Until that day I hope nothing changes, it aint broke so why fix it. Cannot speak for SA there.

ps no disrespect intented or any issues with your points mate, please don't take any offence as none intended.

 

[Jade]

What is wrong with the SANFL and the WAFL being an independent body? The problem is that the AFL are the governing body when the governing body should be independent and represented by one person from each state. The AFL should then also report to that governing body. With the AFL being the governing body it is effectively Victoria which is the governing body and how is that good for football in WA or SA? It is obvious in many other threads on a different array of topics that Victorians don't give a dam about Football in WA or SA, not now or even back when many of our clubs were bigger and better clubs than half those we now call AFL clubs.

I actually don't have a problem with this. The AFL sort of works in this way now, where the executive and operational arm (ie. Demetriou), reports to the 'governing body' (the AFL commission). I'd fully support an electoral type arrangement with the AFL, where say x amount of members from WA, VIC, SA and so on are elected to terms on the commission. How would that sit with you?

WA produces numerous footballers for the AFL, in fact some would say it is the best set up system 0utside the AFL, it is financial, the AFL clubs do well, the WAFL is doing well and football across the state is doing well. How is the VFL going? it is a shambles and has become a joke because of AFL interference. Many South Australians and said they wish they could operate like we do in WA with their own Commission.

Yeah I recognise the quality of players that come out of WA; hence the reason I want WA football developed and nurtured just as much as any other place in the country.

The VFL is doing fine. It attracts lower crowds than the SANFL and WAFL (not surprising considering our 'main' teams have always been those in the now AFL). I wouldn't mind you expanding further on that - the VFL is about as healthy as can be expected.

The AFL have created a culture where the only thing that matters is the AFL. They have sold that to the public especially Gen Y because they know they are the supporters of their product for the next 50 years. But what is wrong that Central Districts and or West Perth want to win their state league premiership at all costs? You seem to imply although not sure that if it is the difference with helping the highest level out as opposed to winning a premiership or even a game then that should happen??

Hmmmmm I half agree. I think that the total football structure of the country should be geared in such a way that the AFL is the peak of football, above that of the SANFL and WAFL; BUT the second tier sides should still be busting their asses to achieve SANFL/WAFL/VFL success.

Note as well, that my other ideas about implementing a higher draft age and second-tier drafts would increase the quality of players in the second leagues.

The AFL want to run football Australia wide so they can make the second tier level a colts competition, simply a feeder comp only. Make no mistake that is what they want to do. And while that may suit you and you would not care myself and many thousands of others would care that our great clubs would be basically pulled apart at the seams to achieve this.

Actually a good point. Yes, that is how I see it - the 'football pyramid' as it were, with all leagues feeding into the AFL. How would you envision things changing in the WAFL? As I see it, the AFL isn't going to enforece removal of sides - why would they? They are popular as it is.

No disrespect mate but it is very easy for you to sit back while your side is in the AFL. The rest of the entire country had to pick a new side to follow in 1987 onwards. That is a hell of a lot of people who had to find a new club.

The highlighted I think is your best point thus far; I acknowledge that with no particular emotional attachment to a VFL side it is easy for me to talk about the structure and fate of the league.

I would however point out that nobody has to find a new club; in your case you could have just as easily stayed a West Perth fan.

West Perth are my football club, they are my heart just as Essendon is probably your's. I follow the Eagles and are a member as I want to watch the highest level.
I know that when or if the AFL get hold of football in WA that the club I love will be in trouble because the AFL have only one agenda and that is the AFL, like you said they are supposed to be the governing body. When was the last 20 million dollar cheque they have sent the SANFL or the WAFL? You know those two s**t leagues which keep stopping the AFL from progressing!!!!! Those two leagues which keep producing talent for the game country wide.

Two points:

1) the 20 million dollar cheque was made in deposits - one called, West Coast, the other Freo. They are substantial revenue earners for the WAFC.

2) I definetely DO NOT think the SANFL or WAFL are s**t; it's my belief that all football needs to be answerable to one body - not three.

Mate an emotional issue for me, I love and respect the WAFL, I have little respect for the AFL as an organization. You have no idea what the AFL has done to the culture of football in this state.

It is what it is and we accept it, but the WAFL must stay and be run by WA unless a proper Australian Football body is setup. Until that day I hope nothing changes, it aint broke so why fix it. Cannot speak for SA there.

ps no disrespect intented or any issues with your points mate, please don't take any offence as none intended.

I'd be interested in what you think of the elected AFL commission idea (ie. mandated representation from each state).

And no offense taken - I enjoy robust discussion and am more than happy to see your conflicting views.

 

[jethro11]

Yeah thats pretty much my point in a nut shell. That, as far as I am concerned is not a clash guernsey,

How is that not a clash guernsey. It removes the clashes in the games that it is worn in.

Tell me there is a clash here....

compared to this situation, where carlton refuse to wear their clash guernsey....

Is there a clash here....

or here....

I agree with you about essendon, but please give the collingwood bashing a break.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

A few ideas I have to improve the game, mainly on how it is administered:

1. Bring the SANFL/WAFC to heel

Unfortunately, many of my forthcoming ideas depend on the highly unlikely event that this occurs. But there it is.

This ridiculous circumstance of having two independent bodies outside of the AFL effectively acting as minor governing bodies has got to stop. Whilst the AFL can and does act in the interests of the game, the SANFL and WAFC act only to look after the game in their respective territories.

This is harmful to the game, as the AFL can never truly act - particularly when the decision would be unpopular - to affect football in these two states.

Have the AFL buy out and incorporate both the SANFL and WAFC. Maintain the branding (SANFL, WAFL); and we have a truly national competition under a single governing body.

We are going to have to disagree here. I note that you titled the thread how to imrove the AFL, not how to improve Australian Football. This may improve the power of the AFL, its unlikely to do much one way or another with the actual competition; and evidence in Victoria and Tasmania is that it would be very liekly to be completley ruinous to football within those states.
In an ideal world, the AFL would run the competition and there would be a separate governing body controlling the sport as a whole. Unfortunately revenue dictates power, and the AFL has taken it upon itself to get invovled in affairs outside it ideal mandate. SA and WA are by far the best run states in football terms and a large part of that is because they can run their states without the AFL looking over their shoulder.

2. Raise the draft age to 19.

An idea I've had for a while, and one that has been expressed before. I think the game would be much better off if the draft age was raised to 19 at October 31st prior to drafting. This would mean that every player drafted would have turned 19 before he is picked.

Why? A couple of reasons. Firstly, young kids will have finished school before they are on an AFL list. The extension of this, most kids would have to pick a trade and/or tertiary path as they would not yet have been drafted. This also eliminates the potential for kids to be drafted interstate whilst still in school.

Second, by maintaining a gap between the elite junior competition and the AFL, the secondary leagues of the VFL/SANFL/WAFL etc become more relevant, as the best 18 year olds in the country would first have to ply their trade in the state leagues prior to admission to the AFL.

I can understand your reasoning here. Is it more important for a player to have an uninterrupted year 12, or uni/apprenticeship/whatever else to be as stable as possible? I'm not sure what is best in that circumstance, it really varies from person to person. One thing is that the draft is late in the year, it could be made a little later so year 12 exams are over by the time its held. In that case, there is no interruption to school or uni; there still would be for their jobs and apprenticeships, but that is inevitable at some point.

3. Institute a state based draft.

Connected to the above idea, why not implement a draft for the state leagues, where bottom aged kids and 18 year olds are drafted into their corresponding home state league. All the best SA kids would be drafted to SANFL sides, WA kids to the WAFL and so on.

A year (or two) later, they nominate for the AFL draft - and if they are not drafted they are able to stay with their existing side.

You could televise the events in each state - would be interesting viewing watching the best kids in the land move into the second-tier.

Maybe for those Victorian players where the under-age competition does not align to a senior club. In all others states, they do; and clubs should benefit from their own investment and expertise in developing junior players.

4. Align the second-tier fixture with the AFL.

Just common sense as far as I am concerned. The second tier leagues in each state should mirror the fixturing of the AFL season. It is ridiculous that at the moment players not selected for the senior side can potentially have nowhere to play that week due to a bye.

Again, this might work to improve the AFL - but the state competition are their own, and should be beholden to the whims of the AFL. Are state clubs n leagues with odd numbers going to have to die or be created to avoid having byes? State leagues are important in thewor own right, what has happedn to the VFA/VFL in becoming nothing more than a reserves competition with (in most clubs) the majority of players not wanting to play for their VFL club has cheapened and ruined a once meaningful league. The AFL should keep their hands out of state set-ups entirely. (Unfortunately, once again, funding realities mean the AFL can dictate everything.)

5. Implement a draft lottery.

I know that Demetriou has already shot this one down, but I think that a weighted lottery for the draft order is a fantastic idea.

The team that finishes eighteenth gets eighteen numbers, seventeenth gets seventeen and so on. The draft is weighted so that poorer sides are more likely to get the lower picks, but that uncertainty remains.

Televise the event on the day before the trading period starts in order to finalise the draft order.

I think this would have two benefits in particular; help to remove the incentive to tank and just as importantly remove the threat of re-drafting in contract negotiations. That is, those players late season that are ‘enticed’ to re-sign with their existing club due to the threat of being re-drafted.

If you believe tanking is real, the only way to remove it is to remove the draft. Anything else is window dressing.

6. Remove the priority pick.

Get rid of it – completely. Teams should not be rewarded for terrible performance. If they are that bad, they will continue to finish low and be rewarded with the likelihood of low picks anyway. These quick fix solutions are not required.

See point 5.

7. Publish the compensation formula for free agency.

Would remove much of the angst that is likely to come when compensation comes in to effect with free agency. This does not mean publishing player salaries. A simple ‘if player x is paid in the nth percentile, compensation y is appropriate’.

If it is left secretive, fans will almost always accuse the AFL of under-rating or over-rating players. Clean, public and open – much better.

Agreed, though there probably is no "formula" as such and will no doubt have subjective clauses.

8. Expand senior lists / Remove rookie lists.

Whilst I think we have seen a great deal of value out of the rookie lists (particularly with senior recruits); they have served their purpose and now only needlessly complicate matters with senior lists (such as the LTI declaration).

Expand senior lists by up to six spots; allowing clubs greater flexibility in who they recruit.

I'm in two minds on this one. In the case of long term injury, a club would have the more flexibility than at present but less than clubs without the same injury concern. The current situation could be seen as fairer for the clubs, in that clubs with injuries are placed on a more equal footing at present than wold be the case. On the other hand, they a listed to the club why should a club only be able to play them uner certain circumstances.[/quote]

9. Modify the veterans list.

One of my greatest disappointments in the AFL system is that it encourages clubs to move on older players. I would suggest a tiered structure for over 30 players to encourage teams to both recruit and maintain veterans on their list. With the expansion of the senior list (idea number 8) I would do away with the additional spots outside the list (again, needlessly complex) and institute the following:

- For each player aged 30 years old as at October 31st year prior, add 0.5% to the clubs salary cap
- For each additional year over thirty, add 0.1%, up to a maximum of 0.5%
- For each year said veteran has been continuously on clubs list, add 0.1%, up to a maximum of 0.5%
- Cap all benefits at 10%

In effect, this means you could get up to 1.5% addition to the salary cap for each player, and up to 10% total benefits on your cap. Certainly an encouragement to keep the old buggers on your list.

Is the incentive to keep an older player any stronger under that circumstance that at present?

10. Foxtel Cup

Not really my idea of course, but this is such a good one I felt compelled to list it. The Foxtel Cup, as a vehicle for bringing clubs from multiple leagues together is a fantastic idea.

In order to encourage participation, the financial rewards should be high. If idea number 1 got through (all under the AFL umbrella); than instituting a prize pool of up to $5,000,000 shouldn’t be unrealistic (remember, the second-tier clubs fall outside the annual dispensation from the AFL).

Set specific qualification guidelines. Four teams from the VFL, three each from the WAFL and SANFL, Two from the NEAFL and TFL; and two invitational sides – possibly even a ‘best performed’ from outside the listed criteria, or defending champion.

I like the format as it stands right now, except I would add last season's winner in place of a TSL team. If the champion from last year has qualified through their state league, the next team in that league gets an invite. It does need more money in order to get the SANFL clubs interested. Full strength SANFL clubs would romp it in most years.

11. Clash guernseys

Absolutely bloody mandatory. PROPER clash guernseys.

Collingwood and Essendon, I’m looking at you. Quit ya bitchin, make a proper clash guernsey and wear it when you clash with the home side. The AFL dictates when this is, not you.

No if’s, buts or maybe’s.

I'm not convinced clash jumpers are really a necessity, but if they have to exist then all clubs should be made to either ensure their clash jumper works against all "clashing" opponents, or have enough clash jumpers so that between them they do. (Personally, I actually find it easier to watch games where everyone wears their normal jumper, even if there is a so-called clash. I'm used to the normal jumper, not the clash one.)

12. Captains

Each team has ONE. None of this co-captain rubbish. You have a captain, not seven of them. The captain and vice-captain is registered with the AFL at the start of the year and does not change. In the instances when both the captain and vice-captain are unavailable through injury or form, the replacement captain is specified at the point of picking the side (ie. Thursday night).

Why is this important? Firstly, because having a clear leader for the club on field is important to the fans.

Second, the ability to talk to the umpires should be restricted to captains – and having a clear ‘go-to’ player for this role is vital.

So long as their is one mnominated player for speakin g to the umpires, who cares how a club names its leadership group. Captaincy, as opposed to leadership, is massively over-rated in terms of importance in my view. In cricket it is important, in footy its a title.

13. Etihad Stadium

I think the AFL needs to bite the bullet and buy it out early. If we are going to progress with the ten Victorian sides, the financial viability of the sides needs to be guaranteed and I think this is the best way to achieve it.

It would appear to be the only way of ensuring clubs get a decent deal. Or the AFL could not have its own contract with the ground, enabling clubs to go elsewhere without having to get to an AFL agreed minimum number of games at the stadium. Clubs are hamstriung in their negotiations because the league is contacted to provide a vertain number of games. The last, usually weaker, clubs to do a deal can't use the bargaining chip of looking at other venues.

 

[The_Reaper]

How has AFL control gone for Tassie?

You make the mistake of equating the best interests of the AFL (the league) with the best interests of the sport.

 

[The_Reaper]

How has AFL control gone for Tassie?

You make the mistake of equating the best interests of the AFL (the league) with the best interests of the sport.

Why should the WAFL or SANFL become joke leagues like the former VFA?

I'm a firm believe that a strong second tier will lead to a strong first tier, rather than killing the second tiers for short time gains for the first tier teams.

 

[hitthepost]

How is that not a clash guernsey. It removes the clashes in the games that it is worn in.

Tell me there is a clash here....

compared to this situation, where carlton refuse to wear their clash guernsey....

Is there a clash here....

or here....

I agree with you about essendon, but please give the collingwood bashing a break.

There'd be a clash with North if Collingwood wore the white one against them. But it's a clash top, you only wear it when you CLASH. Hence they don't wear it against North. Not directed at you Jethro. Crows clash top looks a lot like the Eagles one and the old Hawthorn one. Oh no, might get them confused.

 

[The_Reaper]

I actually don't have a problem with this. The AFL sort of works in this way now, where the executive and operational arm (ie. Demetriou), reports to the 'governing body' (the AFL commission). I'd fully support an electoral type arrangement with the AFL, where say x amount of members from WA, VIC, SA and so on are elected to terms on the commission. How would that sit with you?

Fully agree with this. I'd suggest having the CEO of the AFL and then 3 Victorian representives, 2 from WA, 2 from SA and 1 from QLD/NT, 1 from NSW/ACT and 1 from Tasmania.

Yeah I recognise the quality of players that come out of WA; hence the reason I want WA football developed and nurtured just as much as any other place in the country.

Per capita wise, the WAFL and SANFL are perfoming better than the TAC Cup at producing AFL players.
http://www.wwtfc.com.au/?p=21728

6 of the top 10 are from WA or SA. Geraldton in WA produces 11 AFL draftees per 1000 males in the population.
The VFL is doing fine. It attracts lower crowds than the SANFL and WAFL (not surprising considering our 'main' teams have always been those in the now AFL). I wouldn't mind you expanding further on that - the VFL is about as healthy as can be expected.

1) the 20 million dollar cheque was made in deposits - one called, West Coast, the other Freo. They are substantial revenue earners for the WAFC.

But the WAFC paid money to the VFL for West Coast and Fremantle to exist. Same with the SANFL.

Lets not forget that the West Coast money was very important to the survival of the VFL.

 

[Willo #6]

There'd be a clash with North if Collingwood wore the white one against them. But it's a clash top, you only wear it when you CLASH. Hence they don't wear it against North. Not directed at you Jethro. Crows clash top looks a lot like the Eagles one and the old Hawthorn one. Oh no, might get them confused.

They do wear a clash against North, their two stripe one. Check Jethro's photo of the North match again.

 

[Kwality]

Vic footy would be better off it adopted the SA/WA model - imagine the Pies pumping the millions into local footy instead of writing off $8mil on pub investments. $8 mil do some good for Vic footy, because the amount the Eagles have pumped into local footy is many times that.

The WA model wouldnt have allowed some clubs to do deals at stadiums at the expense of the other clubs.

Now there are a couple of benefits of a Vic body controlling all the Vic clubs.

 

[Slattery_20]

More beauracracy will solve everything.

Bit confused about what the "WA model" is? Isn't Subiaco owned by the Gov't? And WCE owned by a private company?? And hasn't there been a 5-year s**t-storm about building a new stadium?

Oh and for heaven's sake, you're not really suggesting SA football is well-run, are you? Where the state league hold out proudly against the AFL having any sort of say in things, which costs them MILLIONS? Where one club is in the red and blocks off sections of the stands due, in part, to a s**t stadium deal signed with the state league?
You think that's a GOOD situation?

More beauracracies just leads to more beauracratic s**t-fighting. Very rarely achieves anything real.
Far better off with the AFL controlling everything & the WA & SA administrations having far less power.

 

[Kwality]

More beauracracy will solve everything.

Bit confused about what the "WA model" is? Isn't Subiaco owned by the Gov't? And WCE owned by a private company?? And hasn't there been a 5-year s**t-storm about building a new stadium?

Oh and for heaven's sake, you're not really suggesting SA football is well-run, are you? Where the state league hold out proudly against the AFL having any sort of say in things, which costs them MILLIONS? Where one club is in the red and blocks off sections of the stands due, in part, to a s**t stadium deal signed with the state league?
You think that's a GOOD situation?

More beauracracies just leads to more beauracratic s**t-fighting. Very rarely achieves anything real.
Far better off with the AFL controlling everything & the WA & SA administrations having far less power.

The WA model Slatts aint the SA model & it is run to benefit the SANFL not footy, on that we both agree.

Subi is owned by the goverment just like the G, your point?

The WAFC (WA footy) has a long term lease on Subi & isnt forking out money to a cricket club or developer - the money stays inside the game. The Eagles dont have a better deal at Subi than Freo unlike the Bombers deal at Etihad compared to say North (spin it any way you like, the Bombers profit at the expense of the div 2 Melbourne clubs). The WAFC does not compete for members with their AFL clubs, unlike the AFL & the SANFL.
Remember there is not $1 of pokies money subsidising WA footy.

Cant see the AFL giving WA country footy the money that flows from the WAFC or supporting Swan Districts in the Pilbara. The AFL are just another FIFO mob in WA.