Originally posted by Joffaboy
Survival instincts has nothing to do with it, the world is a little different from the depression days. The AFL has been transformed into a financial heavyweight. It take approximately 20mill to run a footy club, that is close to $320 mill to run the clubs a year. That is substaintial turnover in anyones book.
Player payments would eventually kill off clubs. Player payments would blow out with no cap, just like it did in the 80's and the exact reason the AFL commission was formed. Even powerhouses like Richmond and Collingwood almost went under due to flagrant overspending.
Survival instinct has everything to do with it. That is what will prevent clubs from running themselves into the ground. Sure it isn't the '70's any more but the increased size and financial aspect has been met by increased professionalism and sophistication. Clubs aren't run by armatures and Mr. Popular ex players any more. The financial scale in any case is relative. Has much really changed in relative terms? If anything the scope for a nimble and innovative management team is greater than it has ever been. To assume, as many do, that a '70's North scenario is impossible forevermore is wrong IMO unless we continue as is, in which case it is impossible by design.
Player payments did not send clubs broke in the 80's. That is a big misnomer. Which clubs went broke due to player payments being too high? Take my club. We got into strife. First of all we were able to get out of strife because the survival instinct saw to it that we addressed the issues and made appropriate spending cuts. Sure we had more resources than most but that just saw us urinate more against the wall than most so we had a deeper hole to dig ourselves out of. Secondly and regardless of the first point, it was not player payments that saw us in trouble. It was poor management that saw poor decisions made. Most significantly was spending on transfer fees. That was the real issue. Bloody mindedness was the driver as it was with Richmond. Frankly we and Richmond got what we deserved and we did not deserve protection from ourselves. Now take your club. A period of terrible management dragged your club into court. To put it down to player payments is very misleading.
Apart from all that, the VFL, as an entity, drove club insolvency by virtue of its grip on revenue raising and its distribution policy. First was ground rationalisation. Not a bad idea in principle but when you set your sights on elimination of the viability of a club like South to ensure the rationalisation can begin and get the added bonus of Sunday live football beamed into Melbourne while the Victorian State Government won't allow Sunday senior footy, let alone live coverage of it, you have the beginnings of financial ropes to bind clubs. Anyway, I am digressing now as usual.
Originally posted by Joffaboy
There has always been a draft and a Salary in AFL history. Since the Commission was formed in fact, so history is no guide in this instance. Just plain financial realities.
So what do base your assumption on then?
Originally posted by Joffaboy
Well IMO and in the opinion of the AFL commission this is incorrect. The sum of the whole is greater than the parts in the AFL. The AFL has worked out that it would cost more in lost revenue to kill a club than it does to prop a club up. Simple maths Mark. The commission gets what it is able to regarding revenue, it has been astonishingly successful since it has come on board. Only one club merged one relocated, and 5 brand new fully operational (well Freo is another argument) AFL clubs with three of these winning flags.
But that is a completely unrelated issue. I agree in the theory of synergies Joffa. that has nothing to do with regulation or deregulation. There are a lot of issues in your few lines there from start up clubs and their prompted success to growth of the competition that has resulted in part from that success to where we are v where we could be to one club in Melbourne surviving v a new club in another location al-la swapping Fitzroy and south for Port and Sydney.
We could debate all these issues but they are completely separate to the overriding operational systems and rules such as equalisation etc. You assume that everything we have now is a result of how we operate. What about everything we don't have now then? How can you take all the positives and put them down to the AFL and how it is run without either looking at the negatives or looking at what we might be with more vision and self interest dominated club governance?
I'll share one opinion of mine for free Joffa.
i have no problem in principle with Communism as an economic theory. the ideas are wonderful. The problem is that it is applied to humans and it cannot work. Humans are governed by survival instincts which include self interest. As a result they will never be fully motivated by the common good. Therefore communism cannot fully work. We have seen in practice time and again. What we also unfortunately see time and again is the political control that communism brings because without it the system would not be adhered to. Once you get into that territory is all downhill. What we have in the AFL is a case study in socialism (not really communism) with some innovative flair and capitalism allowed but in a controlled sense. What we get is AFL control and a lack of accountability. It is a familiar story. Even if you believe this is not really the case, ask yourself what people make of inconsistent tribunals, salary cap breaches etc. I doubt the AFL really has agenda's to let Collingwood off lightly at the tribunal because they are scared of Eddie or to grind Carlton into the dirt because they hate a former president of theirs in spite of the fact they now have a former AFL high flier at Carlton or there is a conspiracy to help Collingwood make money with blockbusters. However a large part of perception is reality and even if none of it is true, a lack of openness and accountability is a massive issue and it has a significant damaging effect.
Originally posted by Joffaboy
This regulated 16 team comp has dramatically expanded revenue and the game itself to all parts of the country. IT is in great overall financial health.
Again, what does that have to do with how it has been done. Every high profile sport in the world has done the same with revenue. It's the time we live in. AFL has outperformed other Australian sports with market growth but I could just as easily argue they have a superior product so they should have done so.
Originally posted by Joffaboy
However. Deregulate, and all that has been achieved by the sum of the whole will be destroyed by the clubs who believe they are greater than the sum.
Do so at your own peril. And remember Mark, if a club goes down the legal course to challenge the AFL, and my wild doomsayer, end is nigh, prognosis of the comp is accurate, there is no unscrambling the egg. Once the AFL comp is farked it is farked for ever.
Of course there is Joffa. Fitzroy and South Melbourne could have been saved. If the worst did happen then the clubs would likely do something IF you are correct about the sum of the parts etc. In any case, they could be levied to provide a bailout fund, we could leave TV revenue in central control, and we could do lots of things to provide safeguards. If a club goes under now there is absolutely no guarantee of any bailout as it is.
I have to agree that the probability of a poorly managed club going under or being faced with a longer period of underperformance is increased in a deregulated system. I have never said that isn't the case. The opportunity to raise your own bar, as hawthorn did in the 70's/80's/90's is there for the taking though.
We’ve probably done all this to death far too many times. Neither of us will convince the other and neither of us can prove any of the hypotheticals. I will just make one final point and you can have the last word or leave it at that if you like. Ask yourself why evolution occurs. There are basic underlying fundamental forces or truths in nature – albeit that we may or mat not be right in what we assume them to be. Whether it is God in some form or whether it is nothing more or less than the particles that make up the universe, evolution is driven by forces that the AFL deny and try to halt. Why doesn’t it work in politics, economics or anything else? Self interest and survival of the fittest breeds improvement.