That’s all completely arbitrary though. I agree you need a points system that accounts for different methods of success, but it’s impossible to come up with such a system off the cuff like you’ve doneYou need a points ranking system that allocated points for major kpi's
Premiers - 100 points
Grand finals - 50 points
Minor premiers - 30 points
Top four finishes post finals - 20 points
Bottom eight four finished post finals - 10 points
Membership ranking - 18 points 1st 1 point last
Financial performance - 18 points 1st 1 point last
Tally that up and you get your answer.
Um if its impossible how did I just do it?
I mean it’s impossible to pick a bunch of values and equate them to KPIs in an accurate manner, unless you did some serious analysis, which you haven’t. For example, how/why do you weigh premierships vs memberships vs finals etc. can’t be done by just pulling arbitrary numbers from nowhere.Um if its impossible how did I just do it?
The OP has defined this measure as looking beyond the number of premierships. Therefore you need to rank and meassure more than just premiership which is the reason I listed six major kpi's plus premierships. What I considered a higher kpi was weighted with higher points. That aspect can be debated and adjusted here and there depending on valid arguements but the basis of ranking success is in reality multiple kpi's.
The beauty of if it uses the same points system and same multiple kpi 's against every club.
Maybe other kpi's are added,, the more you add the more robust the measurement.
Maybe add negative kpi's. Number of head coaches turned over? Not making finals. AFL penalties imposed.
How would you do it?