Expansion IS IT TIME FOR TWO DIVISIONS ??

[AFootballParent]

I've been against the idea of having conferences and the like but after talking to a colleague of mine in Adelaide today, I'm a little more open to the concept.

Based on the current ladder positions today (Tuesday, 4th August), here's how it might work :

Premier Division
1. PORT ADELAIDE
2. BRISBANE
3. ST KILDA
4. WEST COAST
5. RICHMOND
6. GEELONG
7. GREATER WESTERN SYDNEY
8. BULLDOGS
9. ESSENDON
10. COLLINGWOOD

Champion Division
1. GOLD COAST
2. CARLTON
3. HAWTHORN
4. NORTH MELBOURNE
5. MELBOURNE
6. FREMANTLE
7. SYDNEY
8. ADELAIDE
9. SYDNEY NORTH (new)
10. TASMANIA (new)

• 18 round season (teams play each other twice, one home and one away)
• final 5 in each division with playoffs to eventual premier
• relegation to Champion Division for bottom two teams of Premier Division annually
• promotion to Premier Division for top two teams of Champion Division annually
• two new teams created (eg. Sydney North & Tasmania) who start off in Champion Division
• team lists reduced to 35
• team numbers reduced to 20 (18 onfield plus two interchange/reserves only)
• one national draft for all 20 teams
• all teams who finished 3-10 in Champions Division get an extra priority pick prior to the first round of the national draft (they are given picks 1-8, then are given 9-16 and the remaining 12 teams follow from pick 17 in ladder finishing order)

Advantages

• makes games count for more due to finals eligibility and promotion & relegation
• gives everyone a completely even draw
• clubs get rewarded for being quality player recruitment & development (premiership & promotion)
• clubs get penalised for being continually poor in talent identification & performance (relegation)
• dramatically reduces the reasons for a club to tank
• extra game per week potentially increases broadcast rights value or opens up the option of splitting it between three FTA networks
• 10 teams play finals each year instead of 8
• extra finals each year
• creation of new Norm Smith medal & Brownlow medal (obviously with new names) for Champion Division
• the two new entities can be initially set-up via some (but not all) of the players who are delisted with the playing list reductions

Disadvantages

• clubs in lower division may be prone to player raids from clubs in higher division (some more thought is needed to prevent this from regularly happening)
• due to only 18 rounds, there are 18 less games over the whole year but this may be slightly offset by some extra finals matches
• will need to recruit, train & develop more umpires due to extra game each week

Nice in theory but not practical in a small Aust market


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[JohnZ]

Think about how the draft would work - you can't send the best players to Division 2 clubs

This is where we disagree. Why shouldn't we send draftees to Div 2 clubs?

The way I see it, you have Div 1 which are the clubs peaking, or just peaked. No different to the top 8 today. The difference is if you have a 10-12 team division, instead of getting the easy wins against the bottom 6, it would be like only being fixtured against the cream of the comp.

And the same goes for Div 2. Take a team like Freo/GC last year who were competitive in most games but not winning many. Instead of playing games against Top 8 teams, they become the top dogs of the comp making their games more interesting to watch.

Never mind TV will be pissed off because they have less elite product to show

From a TV perspective, I disagree. By having 2 divisions, you reduce the gap between teams. Instead of 1v18 being the worst matchup, it becomes 1v12 and 13v24 (for example). The games with lower ranked teams (13-18 currently) become more competitive because they're not being matched up against the top 4. People care less about where teams are ranked (outside of top4) and more about the relative ranking. I'll happily watch 10v12 because I know it will be a close game.

*******

In an ideal world, we'd have the AFL Seniors and Reserves being run as concurrent comps (probably looking at 50-60 player lists total). The reservers comp would have a strong focus on player development (think like a college football program).

 

[Rob]

This is where we disagree. Why shouldn't we send draftees to Div 2 clubs?

Because it would undoubtedly get challenged in court and be ruled illegal. Imagine Harley Reid accepting playing in 2nd division for the next few years? Of course he wouldn't.

You also can't have the same salary cap in the 2nd division either, and that's if you have a cap at all. Clubs will lose significant amounts of income getting relegated, and would need a far lower cap or else they wouldn't be able to compete or go broke trying to. Ultimately you'd end up with a few big clubs finishing at the top of Div 1 every year, a bunch of clubs at the bottom of Div 2 and every other club yo-yoing between divisions. I don't agree that this would be more competitive though. You're assuming that all the teams would be the same strength they are now. That wouldn't be the case. If anything it's going to become more imbalanced. Good players aren't going to want to play Div 2, nor for clubs at risk of getting relegated.

That's not to say there wouldn't be advantages. The product at the top would be better with all the best players all going to Div 1 clubs. Probably bigger crowds at the top as well with the teams permanently there attracting higher supporter bases (the opposite at the other end of course). But on balance it would be a far worse competition than what we have now.

 

[Gigantor]

You see a lot of dumb ideas doing the rounds.
I used to think conferences was the king of the dumb ideas, but having a second division easily would surpass it.
There is a very good reason why the VFL/AFL has never needed one (and in fact, as been better off for it - immeasurably better off), and why pissant comps like the NSL and A-league toy around with the idea (let them keep toying with it because it guarantees pauperisation).

 

[Bjo187]

2 conferences of 10 teams each when we go to 20 teams.

You play your own conference twice and half the teams from the other conference once.

The champions of the 2 conferences play off in a best of 3 grand final.

 

[JohnZ]

Because it would undoubtedly get challenged in court and be ruled illegal

Right. How? Not seeing the connection between the two.

Say AFL is running a two div comp, if a draftee can't go to court becuase they don't want to be drafted to GC/GWS/North in 2023, how would introducing a 2nd div make that more likely to occur?

 

[Rob]

Right. How? Not seeing the connection between the two.

Say AFL is running a two div comp, if a draftee can't go to court becuase they don't want to be drafted to GC/GWS/North in 2023, how would introducing a 2nd div make that more likely to occur?

Because it would almost certainly cross the line to restraint of trade.

And of course that's if the AFLPA accepts it in the first place, because it probably wouldn't.

 

[Coolangatta]

8 Vic, 3 WA, 2 each NSW, QLD, SA, 1 each TAS, ACT, NT would've been an ideal max 20 team comp.

It's too late for that, so I'd say 22 teams should be the max, without the need for conferences or divisions. I do agree that at a certain point, you'd just end up waiting too long to see your team win a premiership, or play in the top division.

I think an ACT team and a 3rd in WA is a must - both markets are underserviced.

An NT team would be amazing but if it can't ever be done, a second Brisbane side in the future seems reasonable.

19 TAS
20 ACT/Riverina
21 NT or 2nd Brisbane
22 3rd WA (South West)

Sure, you could argue the case for teams in NZ, Newcastle, 3rd SA, but do we really want to blow out to 24+ teams? As much as I've suggested it in the past, it seems like a bad idea... which is why you can never count out the AFL from doing it.

 

[weewilly]

Yes it is time go to two divisions of ten teams play each other twice like the VFA did for over 20 years but the difference have no relegation and the the winners of each division play off for the AFL GF CUP!

 

[terrybull]

Not a conference, but groups for easier and fairer way to determine who plays each other twice. Original ladder and Finals remain the same.

Groups based on ladder the previous year l.

Group 1 - top 6 plays each other twice

Group 2 - middle 6 plays each other twice

Group 3 - bottom 6 plays each other twice

Cross groups play each other once.

That’s 22 games per team.

Again ladder based as now and not groups

Could also have 1 more game for each team being the rivalry round.

Adelaide vs Port Adelaide
GWS vs Sydney
Brisbane vs Gold Coast
Fremantle vs West Coast
Carlton vs Collingwood
Essendon vs Richmond
Geelong vs Hawthorn
North Melbourne vs Western
Melbourne vs St.Kilda

Of course this could mean some teams playing each other three times which is not so ideal. So better with the Gather Round being an extra game for each team if we want 23 games per team.

Bit one could use the system till Tasmania enters the League.

 

[JohnZ]

Because it would almost certainly cross the line to restraint of trade.

No it wouldn't. If having two divisions puts us into restraint of trade, how does the draft stopping kids from going to the club of their choice not count as restraint of trade.

The idea behind the divisions is that all things operation between the two would be equal. Salary cap, player wages, access to facilities etc. This is because the AFL would be running the two rather than having separate bodies in the European Soccer. Therefore being drafted to the 20th placed team would not be restraint of trade, because there is no meaningful difference whether that 20th placed team is in a uniform comp, or a division.

And the reason why we need the divisions is because the fixture is compromised without being full H+A for all teams, and whilst I'd prefer the AFL to play a 34 game season, the reality is that 34 games would be too many, and if we keep expanding (20 teams being likely, 24 somewhat likely one day), that's just too many games full stop. Whereas a 12 team division can play a full H+A season in 22 games.

 

[Rob]

No it wouldn't. If having two divisions puts us into restraint of trade, how does the draft stopping kids from going to the club of their choice not count as restraint of trade.

It might do. It's never been tested in court (at least not the AFL's version). Rugby League had a draft that went to court in the early 90s that was ruled illegal for that very reason. The AFL and AFLPA have generally had a good working relationship so it's never been challenged. But throw the best young kids in the country into Division 2? I reckon you'd get one pretty quickly.

The idea behind the divisions is that all things operation between the two would be equal. Salary cap, player wages, access to facilities etc. This is because the AFL would be running the two rather than having separate bodies in the European Soccer. Therefore being drafted to the 20th placed team would not be restraint of trade, because there is no meaningful difference whether that 20th placed team is in a uniform comp, or a division.

And the reason why we need the divisions is because the fixture is compromised without being full H+A for all teams, and whilst I'd prefer the AFL to play a 34 game season, the reality is that 34 games would be too many, and if we keep expanding (20 teams being likely, 24 somewhat likely one day), that's just too many games full stop. Whereas a 12 team division can play a full H+A season in 22 games.

Sounds like one of those things that works in theory, but in practice is a complete disaster. To think that Division 2 clubs will generate the same sort of income is fanciful. That doesn't happen anywhere in the world.

 

[JohnZ]

think that Division 2 clubs will generate the same sort of income is fanciful.

Same income?nah ofc not. But the AFL would need to fund the clubs from TV money to ensure the salary cap is the same across both divs

 

[Coolangatta]

Same income?nah ofc not. But the AFL would need to fund the clubs from TV money to ensure the salary cap is the same across both divs

Wouldn't the TV money produced by two divisions of twelve teams each be smaller, though, given that the broadcasters would be paying for six premier league games per week rather than nine? Yes, there'd also be six other games they'd be paying for, but wouldn't the value of the second division games be considerably less because most people will just watch the premier comp instead? If that's the case, the AFL TV money won't be enough to be able to keep the second tier clubs as financially competitive as the big teams would be.

I see no reason why they can't just have all teams playing in the same league, but different divisions without pro/rel. Not conferences, but two groups of twelve. You don't play your group twice, but maybe about 1.5 times and 0.5 times the other group for roughly 23 games per year.

Pluck the best five teams from each group and pool them together into a top 10 finals system and away you go.

Something like Vic clubs + Tasmania and NZ = 12 teams
4 NSW/ACT, 3 WA, 2 SA, 2 QLD, 1 NT/NQ = 12 teams

Each league might play each other once + three rivalry return matches for a total of 14 games and play 8 games against teams from the other league (4 home, 4 away) + gather round.

Edit: People say just have everyone play once but no, if you're gonna have 3 WA clubs they need to all play each other 2x a year.

 

[terrybull]

Wouldn't the TV money produced by two divisions of twelve teams each be smaller, though, given that the broadcasters would be paying for six premier league games per week rather than nine? Yes, there'd also be six other games they'd be paying for, but wouldn't the value of the second division games be considerably less because most people will just watch the premier comp instead? If that's the case, the AFL TV money won't be enough to be able to keep the second tier clubs as financially competitive as the big teams would be.

I see no reason why they can't just have all teams playing in the same league, but different divisions without pro/rel. Not conferences, but two groups of twelve. You don't play your group twice, but maybe about 1.5 times and 0.5 times the other group for roughly 23 games per year.

Pluck the best five teams from each group and pool them together into a top 10 finals system and away you go.

Something like Vic clubs + Tasmania and NZ = 12 teams
4 NSW/ACT, 3 WA, 2 SA, 2 QLD, 1 NT/NQ = 12 teams

Each league might play each other once + three rivalry return matches for a total of 14 games and play 8 games against teams from the other league (4 home, 4 away) + gather round.

Edit: People say just have everyone play once but no, if you're gonna have 3 WA clubs they need to all play each other 2x a year.

Don’t think people will be dropping their club if they are in div2

What if Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond and West Coast are in div2 at the same time? Probably get more viewers and crowds then div1

 

[JohnZ]

I see no reason why they can't just have all teams playing in the same league, but different divisions without pro/rel

Thats what I’m suggesting, but you still need a top 12 and bottom 12. AFL div1 and div2.

Whilst revenue per game would be lower, total revenue would be higher- especially with a team in Auckland and a third in Perth both of which expands the times games can be played that cant be in VIC (Friday 5pm for example).

12 games is also enough to possibly justify having two FTA partners whilst giving a pay streamer some exclusive games.

Edit. The point of the divisions is to make it obvious which other 11 teams you play. All the rules, salary cap etc would remain the same against both.

 

[JohnZ]

Don’t think people will be dropping their club if they are in div2

What if Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond and West Coast are in div2 at the same time? Probably get more viewers and crowds then div1

Exactly.

 

[Coolangatta]

Don’t think people will be dropping their club if they are in div2

What if Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond and West Coast are in div2 at the same time? Probably get more viewers and crowds then div1

Well if that did happen then two divisions would make a hell of a lot of sense, but with less to play for (Div 2 champ not the same as being the Div 1 Premier) and the best young draftees wanting to play in the top league (but this is where salary caps come in) it could still be a lopsided affair of the same teams year in year out.

That said, what if they implemented a loan system?

Say Tom Lynch (way too good to be playing in div 2) wants to play in div 1? Could another club loan him from Richmond, and if Richmond get promoted to div 1, they get him back? In exchange, the club that gets him on loan might have to loan a couple of players to Richmond to keep them under the cap as Lynch would cost more.

 

[Coolangatta]

Would you break up the competition into two divisions after team 20?

So:

21 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 9 teams
22 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 10 teams
23 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 11 teams
24 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 12 teams

Now thinking super far ahead, this is where it could get interesting:

25 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 13 teams

Do you keep Div 1 locked in at 12 teams? So even if there were 28 teams (sounds insane but who knows, maybe they'll keep adding expansion sides every 15-20 years for several more cycles depending on market demand/feedback) you'd still have 16 in the second div? Cause one major factor of splitting the league into two is a fairer draw but surely it's more important for the top league than the bottom.

The other factor would be giving your team more to play for. Two divisions = 1/12 or 1/14 odds of winning a premiership as opposed to 1/24, the downside, of course, is the second div prize is not the same as the first div. That said, as terrybull alluded to, a Carlton v Collingwood GF at the MCG would probably still crack 100k+ even if it was the 2nd div.

 

[terrybull]

Well if that did happen then two divisions would make a hell of a lot of sense, but with less to play for (Div 2 champ not the same as being the Div 1 Premier) and the best young draftees wanting to play in the top league (but this is where salary caps come in) it could still be a lopsided affair of the same teams year in year out.

That said, what if they implemented a loan system?

Say Tom Lynch (way too good to be playing in div 2) wants to play in div 1? Could another club loan him from Richmond, and if Richmond get promoted to div 1, they get him back? In exchange, the club that gets him on loan might have to loan a couple of players to Richmond to keep them under the cap as Lynch would cost more.

Only problem is they need Lynch to get back to div 1

 

[terrybull]

Would you break up the competition into two divisions after team 20?

So:

21 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 9 teams
22 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 10 teams
23 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 11 teams
24 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 12 teams

Now thinking super far ahead, this is where it could get interesting:

25 Div 1: 12 teams; Div 2: 13 teams

Do you keep Div 1 locked in at 12 teams? So even if there were 28 teams (sounds insane but who knows, maybe they'll keep adding expansion sides every 15-20 years for several more cycles depending on market demand/feedback) you'd still have 16 in the second div? Cause one major factor of splitting the league into two is a fairer draw but surely it's more important for the top league than the bottom.

The other factor would be giving your team more to play for. Two divisions = 1/12 or 1/14 odds of winning a premiership as opposed to 1/24, the downside, of course, is the second div prize is not the same as the first div. That said, as terrybull alluded to, a Carlton v Collingwood GF at the MCG would probably still crack 100k+ even if it was the 2nd div.

I thought the VFA did ok with two divisions. And you had powerhouse Williamstown there a while. Waverly won a div 1 Grand Final and then was mostly in div 2.

You need a cup so div 1 and div 2 clubs meet.

 

[Coolangatta]

Only problem is they need Lynch to get back to div 1

Yeah, so what does Lynch do? Stay or go because he wants to play in the top division instead? Would he have a say in the matter?

I thought the VFA did ok with two divisions. And you had powerhouse Williamstown there a while. Waverly won a div 1 Grand Final and then was mostly in div 2.

You need a cup so div 1 and div 2 clubs meet.

Good idea. A knockout tournament like the FA Cup, but semi random, accounting for rivalries. Put the Eagles up against the Dockers if they’re in different divisions.

Or even do a few gather rounds at those and have the major interstate rivalry as a curtain raiser i.e. Dockers v Eagles in Perth gather round.

No shame in the AFL manipulating the cup draw for $$$.

 

[Coolangatta]

terrybull how would you structure a cup tournament?

I used the 2023 ladder + new teams to break up the league into 21 teams as a starting point, 12 in division 1, 9 in division 2.

Division A

Collingwood
Brisbane
Port
Melbourne
Carlton
St Kilda
GWS
Sydney
Bulldogs
Adelaide
Essendon
Geelong

Division B

Fremantle
Gold Coast
Hawthorn
North
West Coast
Tasmania
North Perth
Canberra

Each Division plays a 22 round H & A season.

Pre-season scrapped.

FA Cup Style Tournament:

Round 1 (5 in HA season): 10 knockout matches = 20 teams involved out of 21 = 10 teams eliminated = 11 teams left. One of the match ups would be Brisbane v Gold Coast (interstate rivals in a different division. Hell, host the round of games in QLD).

Round 2 (9 in HA season): 11 teams left, 5 knockout matches = 6 teams left, one team has a bye. Host in different state.

Round 3: (14 in HA season) 6 teams left, 2 knockout matches = 4 teams left, two teams have a bye.

Round 4: (19 in HA season): Prelim cup finals

Round 5: (after GF?) Cup GF

5 different states host each round, so that’s an additional 5 games + 26 games from finals and normal season = 31 games per year.

Way too many games, right? Would they just rest players more often? Would they even fit them all in if the season started in the first week of March, or would it have to start in February?

 

[terrybull]

terrybull how would you structure a cup tournament?

I used the 2023 ladder + new teams to break up the league into 21 teams as a starting point, 12 in division 1, 9 in division 2.

Division A

Collingwood
Brisbane
Port
Melbourne
Carlton
St Kilda
GWS
Sydney
Bulldogs
Adelaide
Essendon
Geelong

Division B

Fremantle
Gold Coast
Hawthorn
North
West Coast
Tasmania
North Perth
Canberra

Each Division plays a 22 round H & A season.

Pre-season scrapped.

FA Cup Style Tournament:

Round 1 (5 in HA season): 10 knockout matches = 20 teams involved out of 21 = 10 teams eliminated = 11 teams left. One of the match ups would be Brisbane v Gold Coast (interstate rivals in a different division. Hell, host the round of games in QLD).

Round 2 (9 in HA season): 11 teams left, 5 knockout matches = 6 teams left, one team has a bye. Host in different state.

Round 3: (14 in HA season) 6 teams left, 2 knockout matches = 4 teams left, two teams have a bye.

Round 4: (19 in HA season): Prelim cup finals

Round 5: (after GF?) Cup GF

5 different states host each round, so that’s an additional 5 games + 26 games from finals and normal season = 31 games per year.

Way too many games, right? Would they just rest players more often? Would they even fit them all in if the season started in the first week of March, or would it have to start in February?

You forgot Richmond

But in the first round I give the top 4 a bye.

Then it’s 5-12 vs 13-20 (North Perth replaced by Tigers)

That’s 8 winners plus top 4

That’s where it gets tricky, maybe four best losers get a second chance, so we have 16 teams left.

Hopefully a big sponsor with huge prize money.

Winner of the tournament also can’t get relegated in the normal comp (if a div 1 team wins).

If a team 2 team wins, 1st draft pick.

 

[Coolangatta]

You forgot Richmond

But in the first round I give the top 4 a bye.

Then it’s 5-12 vs 13-20 (North Perth replaced by Tigers)

That’s 8 winners plus top 4

That’s where it gets tricky, maybe four best losers get a second chance, so we have 16 teams left.

Hopefully a big sponsor with huge prize money.

Winner of the tournament also can’t get relegated in the normal comp (if a div 1 team wins).

If a team 2 team wins, 1st draft pick.

Haha yeah, I did, whoops.

Try doing it with 21 teams.

Cause if we’re gonna stop at 20 then might as well keep the league as it is.