Expansion Proposals for a Truly National AFL

[megadeth86]

Without a timeline on the period you refer to its a little difficult to comment.
When did the NSL go national?

NSL existed from 1977-2004. If you look at the NSL season articles one by one on Wiki, you will see which teams got relegated each year.

I have got some of the old NSL yearbooks with me. Here goes...

1977 season (end of): Mooroolbark was relegated back to Victorian Premier League. Newcastle KB United was promoted.

1978 season: Brisbane City should have been relegated but were not as the league wanted two Brisbane teams. Western Suburbs merged with APIA.

1979 season: Sydney Olympic (second last) were relegated but South Melbourne (last) were not. This shows how ad-hoc it was. Sydney Olympic were back after one year.

1980 season: St George was relegated to NSW Premier League - after one year they were back.

1981 season: Blacktown Demons (second last) were relegated but West Adelaide (last) were not. I think the League wanted to keep the two Adelaide club so relegation was at their discretion.

1982 season: Canberra City (second-last) and Brisbane City (last) were not relegated because the League wanted to keep those two clubs in the interests of keeping it a national-league abd not just a Sydney-Melbourne league.

1983 season: No relegation because they wanted to keep all existing clubs so as to add more and move to a two-conference system. Sydney Croatia and Melbourne Croatia admitted for 1984.

i run out of time, I can add more seasons later if you are interested. So there was relegation annually but certain teams were protected by the League in the interests of having more cities represented. Others went down, but got back in again the following year, e.g. Sydney Olympic, St George.

 

[megadeth86]

Ill stand corrected then but weirdly it seems to have been more financial than results based. The team that finished last was rarely relegated.

Optus Sport

sport.optus.com.au

Very often the League wanted to keep Canberra City and Brisbane City so they avoided relegation. St George and Sydney Olympic both got relegated but came back up after one year at the lower level. And, yes, South Melbourne finished last one year and theoretically should have been relegated. Mooroolbark got relegated after the initial 1977 season.

So, in AFL, you could easily have a case where Melbourne-based teams got relegated, but interstate clubs kept their positions even when relegation was deserved. In the long run, a second-division, with pro-rel only for Melbourne-based clubs, will be the best solution to prevent another Fitzroy case.

 

[The_Wookie]

NSL existed from 1977-2004. If you look at the NSL season articles one by one on Wiki, you will see which teams got relegated each year.

I have got some of the old NSL yearbooks with me. Here goes...

1977 season (end of): Mooroolbark was relegated back to Victorian Premier League. Newcastle KB United was promoted.

1978 season: Brisbane City should have been relegated but were not as the league wanted two Brisbane teams. Western Suburbs merged with APIA.

1979 season: Sydney Olympic (second last) were relegated but South Melbourne (last) were not. This shows how ad-hoc it was. Sydney Olympic were back after one year.

1980 season: St George was relegated to NSW Premier League - after one year they were back.

1981 season: Blacktown Demons (second last) were relegated but West Adelaide (last) were not. I think the League wanted to keep the two Adelaide club so relegation was at their discretion.

1982 season: Canberra City (second-last) and Brisbane City (last) were not relegated because the League wanted to keep those two clubs in the interests of keeping it a national-league abd not just a Sydney-Melbourne league.

1983 season: No relegation because they wanted to keep all existing clubs so as to add more and move to a two-conference system. Sydney Croatia and Melbourne Croatia admitted for 1984.

i run out of time, I can add more seasons later if you are interested. So there was relegation annually but certain teams were protected by the League in the interests of having more cities represented. Others went down, but got back in again the following year, e.g. Sydney Olympic, St George.

I dont believe there was relegation after 1983.

 

[Gigantor]

Very often the League wanted to keep Canberra City and Brisbane City so they avoided relegation. St George and Sydney Olympic both got relegated but
So, in AFL, you could easily have a case where Melbourne-based teams got relegated, but interstate clubs kept their positions even when relegation was deserved. In the long run, a second-division, with pro-rel only for Melbourne-based clubs, will be the best solution to prevent another Fitzroy case.

ACtually, the very best solution of all is that the AFL remain prosperous.

 

[Tonatopia]

Its worth noting that the NFL deal recently signed in at US10 billion PER YEAR, and a US100 billion over 10 years through 2033. The EPL signed a deal in March for US6.6 billion over 3 years, essentially rolling over its previous deal which WAS 10% down on the previous deal.

The EPL doesnt come close to dominating in revenue either. Total revenue for the EPL clubs came in at US5.9 billion last year - the NFL teams DROPPED US4 billion last year and still turned over US12 billion in revenue. Both leagues down in revenue for 2020.

And if you adjust those figures per capita, the EPL comes out ahead.

Not to mention that watching soccer is like watching paint dry, I think they are doing well.

 

[The_Wookie]

And if you adjust those figures per capita, the EPL comes out ahead.

be nice if "per capita" actually meant anything. The NFL recieves more per game $39m v $8m. If you factor in the 380 game EPL season v the 256 game NFL season, the per match/per capita rating is almost identical (0.12 each)

Not to mention that watching soccer is like watching paint dry, I think they are doing well.

Soccer to folks in england is a little more exciting than that i imagine.

 

[Kwality]

We are in the process of seeing the development and implementation of a European League, and I'm sure that there would be a pathway for promotion and relegation for superclubs, either on the rise or decline, aka, Manchester City.

Money talks, and bs walks.

Its application will be decide where the money goes, i.e the owners who are in it for the power it brings with it, not development of the game itself.

 

[Kwality]

NSL existed from 1977-2004. If you look at the NSL season articles one by one on Wiki, you will see which teams got relegated each year.

I have got some of the old NSL yearbooks with me. Here goes...

1977 season (end of): Mooroolbark was relegated back to Victorian Premier League. Newcastle KB United was promoted.

1978 season: Brisbane City should have been relegated but were not as the league wanted two Brisbane teams. Western Suburbs merged with APIA.

1979 season: Sydney Olympic (second last) were relegated but South Melbourne (last) were not. This shows how ad-hoc it was. Sydney Olympic were back after one year.

1980 season: St George was relegated to NSW Premier League - after one year they were back.

1981 season: Blacktown Demons (second last) were relegated but West Adelaide (last) were not. I think the League wanted to keep the two Adelaide club so relegation was at their discretion.

1982 season: Canberra City (second-last) and Brisbane City (last) were not relegated because the League wanted to keep those two clubs in the interests of keeping it a national-league abd not just a Sydney-Melbourne league.

1983 season: No relegation because they wanted to keep all existing clubs so as to add more and move to a two-conference system. Sydney Croatia and Melbourne Croatia admitted for 1984.

i run out of time, I can add more seasons later if you are interested. So there was relegation annually but certain teams were protected by the League in the interests of having more cities represented. Others went down, but got back in again the following year, e.g. Sydney Olympic, St George.

When did it go national?

 

[Tonatopia]

Its application will be decide where the money goes, i.e the owners who are in it for the power it brings with it, not development of the game itself.

All those evil business owners and entrepreneurs, especially the successful ones!
HOW DARE THEY!!!!

Your comment highlights the flaw in your philosophy.
History shows us that the free market is the most resilient and effective method of sustained growth, contingent to the quality of the product.
And arguably, Aussie rules is the most dynamic, interesting and most stimulating football code in the world. Our highlight reel is second to none.

My point is, our product is that good, that the free market alone, will drive it to become globally successful. All we need is a model which allows organic growth into not only all regions of Australia, but eventually the world. An open divisional structure offers the scope for growth and regional representation.

That is, unless you want to go the license model such as the NFL, where franchise teams are picked up and relocated at will?

 

[The_Wookie]

All those evil business owners and entrepreneurs, especially the successful ones!
HOW DARE THEY!!!!

Your comment highlights the flaw in your philosophy.
History shows us that the free market is the most resilient and effective method of sustained growth, contingent to the quality of the product.
And arguably, Aussie rules is the most dynamic, interesting and most stimulating football code in the world. Our highlight reel is second to none.

History shows us that the free market determined the clubs which formed the VFL from the deserters of the VFA in in 1897, 1908 and 1925. History tells us that those same free clubs VOTED to appoint the Commission in place of their own representatives on the Board of Directors, first in 1985, and as a direct replacement in 1993.

History shows us that the VFL/AFL has been one of the consistent top level domestic competitions in the world over 124 years, losing just one club who voluntarily stood themselves down - but still exist, and merging another license with the then Bears - but the original club still exists.

My point is, our product is that good, that the free market alone, will drive it to become globally successful. All we need is a model which allows organic growth into not only all regions of Australia, but eventually the world. An open divisional structure offers the scope for growth and regional representation.

Theres nothing wrong with the product as it is - AFL or not. Global success is not likely to happen for what is a niche sport to most of the world.

That is, unless you want to go the license model such as the NFL, where franchise teams are picked up and relocated at will?

We already have a franchise model. All clubs became franchises in 1985-86. Clubs however cant be picked up and relocated at will, nor can they be purchased by private owners to turn them into their own play things. Clubs are owned by either members or football bodies - member owned, or league controlled, or owned by the WAFC.

 

[RedV3x]

My point is, our product is that good, that the free market alone, will drive it to become globally successful.

That is the case w.r.t. organic growth of Australian Rules Football in the world.

All we need is a model which allows organic growth into not only all regions of Australia, but eventually the world. An open divisional structure offers the scope for growth and regional representation.

We already have that model w.r.t. organic growth of Australian Rules Football in the world and amateur football.

An open divisional structure offers the scope for growth and regional representation.

We already have that model w.r.t. organic growth of Australian Rules Football in the world and amateur football.
But for Australian Rules Football to have an AFL side in Auckland then we need planned investment.
We'd be waiting forever under your lack of system.

 

[Tonatopia]

Per capita, EPL is miles ahead of NFL in regard to broadcasting rights.
And what structure do they use?
and how many teams are based in London, compared to New York/ Chicago or LA, which obviously effects evg attendances?

It is obvious that our game is more similiar with its foundation clubs in the EPL than NFL. Why are we so resistant to seriously exploring the EPL model?
I just dont know why it is taboo, except for maybe a kind of institutional Groupthink mentality, which actually hurts people to think outside the box, although, it is not really outside the box, it is just outside their conditioned bubble.

 

[The_Wookie]

Per capita, EPL is miles ahead of NFL in regard to broadcasting rights.

settle down. its $15 per head and includes more than 120 additional matches.

It is obvious that our game is more similiar with its foundation clubs in the EPL than NFL. Why are we so resistant to seriously exploring the EPL model?

I just dont know why it is taboo, except for maybe a kind of institutional Groupthink mentality, which actually hurts people to think outside the box, although, it is not really outside the box, it is just outside their conditioned bubble.

Because our league already exists and seems to be working - and predates the EPL by 95 years for a start.

 

[madmug]

settle down. its $15 per head and includes more than 120 additional matches.



Because our league already exists and seems to be working - and predates the EPL by 95 years for a start.

Well, no. The AFL is only 2 years older than the EPL.

 

[Tonatopia]

Because our league already exists and seems to be working - and predates the EPL by 95 years for a start.

Let me break the news to you 'Sir Wookie', A league that does not allow major football cities to participate, is not a proper working nor inclusive league.

 

[Tonatopia]

That is the case w.r.t. organic growth of Australian Rules Football in the world.




We already have that model w.r.t. organic growth of Australian Rules Football in the world and amateur football.



We already have that model w.r.t. organic growth of Australian Rules Football in the world and amateur football.
But for Australian Rules Football to have an AFL side in Auckland then we need planned investment.
We'd be waiting forever under your lack of system.

w.r.t????

 

[The_Wookie]

Well, no. The AFL is only 2 years older than the EPL.

well no thats categorically wrong. The AFL started in 1897 as the VFL, it did not spring into existence in 1991 and it did not even change its governance setup until 1993.

 

[The_Wookie]

Let me break the news to you 'Sir Wookie', A league that does not allow major football cities to participate, is not a proper working nor inclusive league.

let me break this to you. Thats bullshit. And a 124 years of history testifies to it.

 

[Kwality]

All those evil business owners and entrepreneurs, especially the successful ones!
HOW DARE THEY!!!!

Your comment highlights the flaw in your philosophy.
History shows us that the free market is the most resilient and effective method of sustained growth, contingent to the quality of the product.
And arguably, Aussie rules is the most dynamic, interesting and most stimulating football code in the world. Our highlight reel is second to none.

My point is, our product is that good, that the free market alone, will drive it to become globally successful. All we need is a model which allows organic growth into not only all regions of Australia, but eventually the world. An open divisional structure offers the scope for growth and regional representation.

That is, unless you want to go the license model such as the NFL, where franchise teams are picked up and relocated at will?

Indeed how dare they: well you may ask. My point is the ownership of the clubs that are driving the current situation in Europe with the clubs just pawns.
Here the AFL has all that power, but its the game that interests me & your proposed relegation with the best talent spread across the country. We saw that as latest the 80s with Stephen Michael. Our current structure seeks to have the best v the best just as was Origin in the 70s.

The suggestion of 'tomorrow the world' does not move me for a second. Its the game we love, lets see if can convince Australia before our aspiration over reaches our ability.

let me break this to you. Thats bullshit. And a 124 years of history testifies to it.

Aussie Rules is suburb based & we have tried to impose that model on our national comp, warts & all, e.g home & away has nothing to do with its roots.

 

[Tonatopia]

let me break this to you. Thats bullshit. And a 124 years of history testifies to it.

The AFL national league only really started in the late 1980's.
Prior to that, it was state leagues.

cmon man. your just trolling now.

 

[Tonatopia]

The suggestion of 'tomorrow the world' does not move me for a second. Its the game we love, lets see if can convince Australia before our aspiration over reaches our ability.

Again, the flaws in your philosophy are becoming evident. you mention that we need to 'convince' Australia.
NO, we do not need to convince anyone, we need to 'Liberate' our game, and let the product speak for itself.

Those that think we need to convince, or corporately engineer our game, do NOT really have faith in our game, nor properly understand the western cultural values which have given us our global superiority, that is, open markets and consensus governance. It is only when authoritarian bodies start to impose their arrogant will and start manipulating the game based on their own ideals, that our game can come under threat and start losing its authenticity.

Imagine if the arrogant powerbrokers of the old VFA and VFL decided to join forces and have a unified Victorian Football League, then we would have had a pure state wide divisional structure, which would have grown to become a Truly National League.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Per capita, EPL is miles ahead of NFL in regard to broadcasting rights.
And what structure do they use?
and how many teams are based in London, compared to New York/ Chicago or LA, which obviously effects evg attendances?

It is obvious that our game is more similiar with its foundation clubs in the EPL than NFL. Why are we so resistant to seriously exploring the EPL model?
I just dont know why it is taboo, except for maybe a kind of institutional Groupthink mentality, which actually hurts people to think outside the box, although, it is not really outside the box, it is just outside their conditioned bubble.

View attachment 1159421

If you're being selective about population, per capita etc. with the sports you have to include college football with NFL. Simply because a hell of a lot of America don't live in the 28 more or less largest cities that the NFL represents, but live in the medium sized towns and cities that college football represents. If the EPL broadcast rights counts both London teams being represented but also regional teams like Burnley, then NFL represents Miami, New Orleans and Tampa but college represents the smaller cities in the region between them, like the entire state of Alabama, Baton Rouge (LSU), Orlando (UCF), etc. etc.

 

[Kwality]

Again, the flaws in your philosophy are becoming evident. you mention that we need to 'convince' Australia.
NO, we do not need to convince anyone, we need to 'Liberate' our game, and let the product speak for itself.

Those that think we need to convince, or corporately engineer our game, do NOT really have faith in our game, nor properly understand the western cultural values which have given us our global superiority, that is, open markets and consensus governance. It is only when authoritarian bodies start to impose their arrogant will and start manipulating the game based on their own ideals, that our game can come under threat and start losing its authenticity.

Imagine if the arrogant powerbrokers of the old VFA and VFL decided to join forces and have a unified Victorian Football League, then we would have had a pure state wide divisional structure, which would have grown to become a Truly National League.

If you understand the use of 'national' in Australia has a very parochial history.

As for the history of our game, the WA Goldfields were a force in WA at the turn of the 19th century. What if in history is a diversion.

Perhaps you could turn relegation to the Victorian clubs, with 6 spots in a national comp or any variations thereof. Vic footy could be returned its old model, 1's, 2's, 3rds.

 

[madmug]

well no thats categorically wrong. The AFL started in 1897 as the VFL, it did not spring into existence in 1991 and it did not even change its governance setup until 1993.

Well I beg to differ. The VFL started in 1897 as a break away from the VFA. It was called the the VFL. It changed its name to the AFL in 1990.

The FA 1st division, started in 1888. The EPL broke away from the FA in 1992 but is the continuation of the same competition.

 

[Tonatopia]

If you understand the use of 'national' in Australia has a very parochial history.

As for the history of our game, the WA Goldfields were a force in WA at the turn of the 19th century. What if in history is a diversion.

Perhaps you could turn relegation to the Victorian clubs, with 6 spots in a national comp or any variations thereof. Vic footy could be returned its old model, 1's, 2's, 3rds.

so long that every region and/or team, has an opportunity to join the AFL (if they can fund it), and players are free to join their club of choice, then I am happy.