Opinion League equalisation - a joke

[Yonchi]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...xed-to-give-fairer-league-20131209-2z1t0.html

This idea of taxing clubs for their off-field spending is crazy. Obviously my views are tainted because I'm a collingwood fan andthis can only be to our detriment. Apparently some random dollar value might be drawn up in the near future regarding a club's off field expenditure and clubs will pay a tax to a central pool if they exceed this.

Where to start with the problems with this equalisation concept...

Perhaps if we are going to be truly equal we should tax Hawthorn, Sydney and especially Geelong because they have been the most successful in terms of premierships in recent years.

Let's say that Buckley ends up being a terrible coach. Should Collingwood receive a tax from Melbourne because they had Roos at the helm? If all things are to be equalised why shouldn't a club be penalised when they have a proven top-line coach? (it's an example - I'm not saying Buckley is a bad coach)

I'm not sure how intelligent Matt Finnis is, but the inherent contradictions and sheer practical idiocy in what he is reported to have said (in this case) are mind boggling. How will we arrive at this 'magical' number that will hit Collingwood the hardest? Who decides how much this number increases as the cost of business and access to state of the art medical science increases? How will clubs be penalised for breaching this new code and who investigates it? As fans are we expected to foot the bill for further AFL administrative expenditure?

Collingwood has been around a while, but so have most of the other clubs and it's not our fault we got our sh!t together and have become a financial success. Actually it is our fault - as a club we worked bloody hard to get where we are.

 

[ppoiter]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...xed-to-give-fairer-league-20131209-2z1t0.html

This idea of taxing clubs for their off-field spending is crazy. Obviously my views are tainted because I'm a collingwood fan andthis can only be to our detriment. Apparently some random dollar value might be drawn up in the near future regarding a club's off field expenditure and clubs will pay a tax to a central pool if they exceed this.

Not sure im 100% with you on this. I can see sense in making sure all clubs are on a level playing field in terms of football department spending. Level playing field doesnt necessarily mean equal amounts, but it wouldnt be good for the game if we get into a situation where we clearly have 'haves' and have nots.'

But it does feel a bit like we're being targeted here. Is there actually a correlation between footy department spending and premierships in the last 10-15 years? Does someone have data on this? If there were I think we would have won a few more

 

[Tbone McGraw]

Why does the AFL punish success and reward mediocrity?

Surely instead of punishing clubs for being successful, you should instead study those clubs and see how they became successful. We do it on field with tactics and the like. Why don't we do it off field as well?

We were a basket case in the late 90s. Turned it round with hard work. I can't see why other clubs can't do it as well.

 

[frizzle]

If my membership money is taxed to prop up the new franchises & clubs that have not been managed well, then that will be it for me.
I pay my money to benefit my club & my club only. It's bad enough the AFL is propping them all up. But once my club is used to do it by way of taking from the rich & giving to the poor, then I'm outa here.
If they change that, then membership will be a thing of the past for me & the Mrs.

 

[Yonchi]

Not sure im 100% with you on this. I can see sense in making sure all clubs are on a level playing field in terms of football department spending. Level playing field doesnt necessarily mean equal amounts, but it wouldnt be good for the game if we get into a situation where we clearly have 'haves' and have nots.'

But it does feel a bit like we're being targeted here. Is there actually a correlation between footy department spending and premierships in the last 10-15 years? Does someone have data on this? If there were I think we would have won a few more

There is a correlation between department spending and premiership success. Hawthorn, Collingwood and Geelong have some of the highest spending in the league. The only team to really buck this trend in recent years has been St Kilda. The subject does the rounds at least once a year in the papers.

When people talk about a 'level playing field' I'm not really sure what they want. To the point that I don't think the concept has a true meaning. This homogenised concept of a utopian system of everyone being locked in to an equal chance at everything - except for the teams that get millions in AFL handouts and the expansion clubs whose lists are full of AFL gold - is fundamentally flawed.

All said though we easily out-spent Port and when it mattered, lost the final to them last year

 

[TradeDraft]

Agree. The Comptition will never be 100% Equal.

Especially with the Knobs in Charge of the AFL at the Moment

 

[ppoiter]

There is a correlation between department spending and premiership success. Hawthorn, Collingwood and Geelong have some of the highest spending in the league. The only team to really buck this trend in recent years has been St Kilda. The subject does the rounds at least once a year in the papers.

When people talk about a 'level playing field' I'm not really sure what they want. To the point that I don't think the concept has a true meaning. This homogenised concept of a utopian system of everyone being locked in to an equal chance at everything - except for the teams that get millions in AFL handouts and the expansion clubs whose lists are full of AFL gold - is fundamentally flawed.

All said though we easily out-spent Port and when it mattered, lost the final to them last year

And even if there was a set amount clubs were allowed to spend there would almost certainly be clubs that use it far more effectively than others. What do we do then?

Hate to pick on Melbourne (actually dont mind) but their use of high draft picks is a case in point. As many as you could want in recent years but very few (any?) elite players.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Let's also pay doctors the same as local Coles workers while we're at it.

 

[jonbe54]

Why does the AFL punish success and reward mediocrity?

Surely instead of punishing clubs for being successful, you should instead study those clubs and see how they became successful. We do it on field with tactics and the like. Why don't we do it off field as well?

We were a basket case in the late 90s. Turned it round with hard work. I can't see why other clubs can't do it as well.

Been saying this for years on BF and in my social life (such as it is) and nobody listens, its just not cool to oppose the current mantra of dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator.

 

[MyManLynch]

Since the AFL was formed in 1990 & equalization introduced in terms of draft & salary caps (operating since the 1980's), the following has happened:
- 11 AFL clubs have won Premierships
- 14 AFL clubs have played in Grand Finals (Melbourne, St Kilda & Fremantle not winning)
- Western Bulldogs & Richmond have played in Preliminary Finals
- Gold Coast & GWS, recent additions will have their chance soon

Hence, nearly every club has had a shot at winning a flag (the two biggest disappointing & under performing clubs are Melbourne & Richmond).
Therefore the concept of a level playing field has already delivered results.
If clubs cannot manage their own finances then why punish the successful?
A socialistic system of revenue sharing will remove incentives for clubs to aim higher with membership, sponsorship & lower the bar for acceptable financial/administrative performance.
A welfare comp is not the answer.

 

[Ketchup]

If we just kick norf, bulldogs, melbourne, gws, port, brisbane, saints and other non sustainable peasant clubs out of the comp. It will mean a higher talent pool for the remaining clubs, thus allowing stronger teams, a fairer draw and higher competitive matches. Meaning the competition would be more "equal". Without having to tax the clubs who have good supporters and piss them off. Or punish the clubs who have well ran operations so they don't have to leach of their supporters/the AFL for more money that they spend on shit they don't need. Or in some cases sacking a coach for no good reason and having to pay him out over half a million just so they can get spend another million or 2 on another one.

Seems the easiest and most obvious solution imo. Which be a lot faster and better than trying to cap spending. Clubs will just find more ways. Like maybe we'll go get 100 recruiters compared to melbournes 3.

 

[ppoiter]

If we just kick norf, bulldogs, melbourne, gws, port, brisbane, saints and other non sustainable peasant clubs out of the comp. It will mean a higher talent pool for the remaining clubs, thus allowing stronger teams, a fairer draw and higher competitive matches. Meaning the competition would be more "equal". Without having to tax the clubs who have good supporters and piss them off. Or punish the clubs who have well ran operations so they don't have to leach of their supporters/the AFL for more money that they spend on shit they don't need. Or in some cases sacking a coach for no good reason and having to pay him out over half a million just so they can get spend another million or 2 on another one.

Seems the easiest and most obvious solution imo. Which be a lot faster and better than trying to cap spending. Clubs will just find more ways. Like maybe we'll go get 100 recruiters compared to melbournes 3.

Would you really want that to happen? I dont necessarily think we should be propping them up any more than we already are but come on, its definitely in our interests that most of them survive

 

[Ketchup]

Would you really want that to happen? I dont necessarily think we should be propping them up any more than we already are but come on, its definitely in our interests that most of them survive

Tbh its the only way its ever going to get fair. Reality is, regardless of who has money, who doesn't. There is only a small pool of players to go around a large share of clubs now. You can never have a equal chance. Lets take the NFL for example which is where we went for equalisation.
In a league that has 32 teams.
There are 4 teams to never appear in the superbowl
10 teams who have never won the superbowl
2 teams who havn't been to the superbowl in over 40 years

Thats a arguable fact that 50% of their teams arn't even competitive. Not to mention the multiple of other who havnt been to the superbowl in 20 years.

Hardly a very equal league.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

Why does the AFL punish success and reward mediocrity?

Surely instead of punishing clubs for being successful, you should instead study those clubs and see how they became successful. We do it on field with tactics and the like. Why don't we do it off field as well?

It's like putting up hurdles only for Usain Bolt because everyone else simply isn't fast enough.

Hardly a very equal league.

To be truly equal:

Adelaide to get the premiership in 2014
Brisbane in 2015
Carlton in 2016
Collingwood in 2017
Essendon *
Fremantle in 2018
Geelong in 2019

etc...Where does equalisation start, where does it end?

 

[blaze036]

It's like putting up hurdles only for Usain Bolt because everyone else simply isn't fast enough.



To be truly equal:

Adelaide to get the premiership in 2014
Brisbane in 2015
Carlton in 2016
Collingwood in 2017
Essendon *
Fremantle in 2018
Geelong in 2019

etc...Where does equalisation start, where does it end?

Collingwood have more supporters than other teams, so we should get 2 premierships to the others 1. Some teams are more equal than others

 

[Smokeyr67]

Let's also pay doctors the same as local Coles workers while we're at it.

Excellent, I always wanted to be a checkout chick!

 

[76woodenspooners]

Personally I don't think taxing the rich clubs and giving the proceeds to the poor clubs will make any difference.

In a perverse kind of way it'll make clubs less equal.

The rich clubs will remain rich.

The poor clubs that rely on welfare will always rely on welfare.

 

[doodles98]

This concept is absolute BS. Lower the bar down to the level of Norf and Bulldogs!...because they are shite and can't keep up so everyone else has to be brought down to their level. We have some highly paid supposedly intelligent and professional freaks saying that the AFL should effectively limit how much money clubs can spend on things like injury recovery, player fitness and conditioning (which relates to injuries), psychological counseling, media training, life training, player development and coaching, talent scouting etc.... So don't worry about the players best interest then... as long as Brayshaw is kept happy and his shitey little footy club can bob up and win a flag every 18 years in some communist utopian sporting league; then we're all good!

 

[Sunbot]

If fans of poor clubs are jealous of more successful clubs they do have a choice to join those other clubs.

 

[doodles98]

What we need is a 2 tier competition that goes a little something like this......

Champions League: (year 1 starting line up)
Collingwood
Carlton
Essendon
Hawthorn
Geelong
West Coast
Sydney
Adelaide
Brisbane
Richmond
Fremantle
Norf

12 teams each playing 2 games against all opponents home and away. 22 games and an old school final 5 system. The team that finishes top of the ladder gets a trophy ... then they play off in the finals for the big trophy.... the grand final. Bottom 2 sides play off in relegation finals with the top 3 sides of the Division 1 competition... which comprises:

Division 1
Saints
Bulldogs
Port
Suns
GWS
Melbourne
Canberra
Hobart
Darwin
Auckland
Ballarat/Bendigo
Fitzroy/South Melb

The 2 highest finishing teams of the relegation play off are promoted or safe to stay in the Champions League.
Draft/salary cap and player movement rules stay pretty much the same. Need some new grounds built.

 

[jmac70]

I don't get it...

 

[doodles98]

yeah sorry.. drunk.. rambling again... and my knee hurts!

 

[jmac70]

Never apologise for being drunk.

 

[Deathray]

Our relative ability to turn it around was assisted by a massive supporter base. The concepts of fairness and equality should be applied to the afl's manufactured, stage managed draw before they have any credibility on anything.

 

[Eddierules]

Excellent, I always wanted to be a checkout chick!

I would be a gynocolegist for a Coles workers pay