The Haves And Have Nots.

[Damon_3388]

Free agency is still restricted by the salary cap

As long as it still remains a "hard" salary cap (as opposed to a "soft" one like the NBA has, which allows teams to exceed the cap to re-sign their own players).

 

[Falchoon]

It would be irrational to appoint a coach on that basis alone

There are many coaches, ~95% of them drawn from playing ranks, by the time they hit free agency you'll have a very good idea on which ones will be worth throwing in a nudge nudge wink wink $1m over 3 years assistant coach gig whist getting their playing rights for much much less.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

The AFL will introduce a footy dept spend equalisation measure soon.

Most likely it will be some form of soft cap: for every $ over a set figure teams want to spend, they will have to pay $1 or $2 into a fund that will then be distributed among the clubs that pay the cap or below..

Some form of welfare tax along those lines would be satisfactory. But no cap. If you have the money to spend, you have the money. But you get taxed.

I wonder if clubs will be able to claim tax deductions when they lose money on bad investments?

 

[Teffy]

Alot of salty tears going on here.

Please, come back when you are minutely equipped to discuss the subject at hand.

The infantile, unimaginative, one upmanship, only serves to make you look juvenile.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

There are many coaches, ~95% of them drawn from playing ranks, by the time they hit free agency you'll have a very good idea on which ones will be worth throwing in a nudge nudge wink wink $1m over 3 years assistant coach gig whist getting their playing rights for much much less.

Nothing stopping that happening now. But if you want to succeed you want to appoint the best, not just those that you owe some under the table money to. Its going to be a rare catch to get the player you need for two yearrs who is also the coach you will need in three years time....

I hardly see how free agency makes any difference in this case anyway. If you want to provide jobs for the boys you can do it now. I'm sure when Luke Ball joins our coaching staff in five years the allegations will fly thick and fast.

 

[18Days]

No mate, the difference is we're playing a super young midfield against bigger, stronger, older opponents.

Brad Scott himself said he could have put Rawlings and Firrito in the middle against Carlton and probably 'ground out' the win but he thought it better for Ziebs et al to get the experience.

Wow! If that is true Scott should be sacked immediately for know they could win and put them in the 8 but decided giving Zeibel more experience was more important than a finals birth.

Why aren't you calling for his head??!?

 

[le dominateur]

Geelong & Collingwood players should be forced to play with 1 arm tied behind their backs. If this rule doesn't come in next year I'm off to watch the soccer.

 

[Falchoon]

Nothing stopping that happening now. But if you want to succeed you want to appoint the best, not just those that you owe some under the table money to. Its going to be a rare catch to get the player you need for two yearrs who is also the coach you will need in three years time....

I hardly see how free agency makes any difference in this case anyway. If you want to provide jobs for the boys you can do it now.

It's being done now, though it's much harder to change clubs.

Free agency will open the flood gates.

 

[Stone in sock]

Why not just put a cap on how many points you can score and award each team a premiership every 18 years?

 

[McOrist]

The AFL will introduce a footy dept spend equalisation measure soon.

Most likely it will be some form of soft cap: for every $ over a set figure teams want to spend, they will have to pay $1 or $2 into a fund that will then be distributed among the clubs that pay the cap or below.

Anyway, the facilities argument etc is a bit overblown. There's a minimum level all teams have to have and all do now.

North was in a far worse position than we are now about 5 years ago with Arden St craphole and not even having enough money to have rookies.

Also, I can very easily see the AFL funding standalone seconds teams for all the clubs. That is a very big advantage at the moment, more so than pretty much anything else.

Finally, Arizona et al is a bit overblown.

Brad Scott (who was at Collingwood and has a degree in sports science so knows a bit about these things) said the reason he took the North list to Utah wasn't because of any physical benefit that altitude gives, but so the younger players could see how truly elite athletes - the worlds best cross country skiers and biathletes - train and live in order to achieve that high performance lifestyle.

Shirley you can't be serious?? Arizona is overblown, but Utah is okay? The two states share a common border!

It must be all those fine cross country skiers and biathletes in Utah that gives it the edge (although their relevance to AFL footy is a bit mysterious -but I'm sure Scotty knows what he's doing)

 

[liam_13]

Few things
1) Remember when Barassi was out there 5-6 years ago, saying Victorian football needed an inquiry..sorry Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood, St Kilda and Western Bulldogs, didn't see you there. And hello Ablett, Swan, Judd, Murphy, Goodes, Cloke, Mitchell, Pendlebury etc...where are you from?

2) Poorer clubs are surviving at the moment through hand-outs and selling games. The AFL can afford to hand out money until Etihad deal goes to the clubs, when they can close the gap. Football will expand in the northern states you would think in 20 years or so once the kids who are going up through Auskick now are adults and starting families. The gap will close then

3) While the gap will close, there has to be the richest club, the poorest club, the club with the most members, and the club with the least members. Not everything can be equal.

4) I'm more then confident Norths current crop of youngsters will be able to get into the top 4 at least within a few years, it's not all about money, a lot goes into recruiting. As they say, a 20kg weight is a 20kg weight anywhere, it's about your work ethic, determination and approach to footy.

5) Having said that it's not all about money, it does help, takes pressure off club, able to spend more on rookies etc. If a poorer club like Melbourne/North/Western Bulldogs put in the years and effort Hawthorn did in Tassie and has success as well, they could quite easily be one of these power clubs. It's up to the administrations to not put in a half-assed effort and put in the hard yards to reap rewards, not just expect them.

My take, no need for this shit. Too many kneejerk reactions in footy, with rule changes et al. Leave it be, it will take it's cycle.

 

[Teffy]

The defensiveness of supporters of certain clubs to this idea is duly noted, and unfortunately, expected.

You'll never know what it likes to win against all odds.

You really are missing out on something special.

A sense of achievement that money could never buy.

 

[HFF]

Liam_13 hit the nail on the head.

As for Teffy, well there's some serious LOL going on in that post above. ^^^

 

[McOrist]

Few things
1) Remember when Barassi was out there 5-6 years ago, saying Victorian football needed an inquiry..sorry Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood, St Kilda and Western Bulldogs, didn't see you there. And hello Ablett, Swan, Judd, Murphy, Goodes, Cloke, Mitchell, Pendlebury etc...where are you from?

2) Poorer clubs are surviving at the moment through hand-outs and selling games. The AFL can afford to hand out money until Etihad deal goes to the clubs, when they can close the gap. Football will expand in the northern states you would think in 20 years or so once the kids who are going up through Auskick now are adults and starting families. The gap will close then

3) While the gap will close, there has to be the richest club, the poorest club, the club with the most members, and the club with the least members. Not everything can be equal.

4) I'm more then confident Norths current crop of youngsters will be able to get into the top 4 at least within a few years, it's not all about money, a lot goes into recruiting. As they say, a 20kg weight is a 20kg weight anywhere, it's about your work ethic, determination and approach to footy.

5) Having said that it's not all about money, it does help, takes pressure off club, able to spend more on rookies etc. If a poorer club like Melbourne/North/Western Bulldogs put in the years and effort Hawthorn did in Tassie and has success as well, they could quite easily be one of these power clubs. It's up to the administrations to not put in a half-assed effort and put in the hard yards to reap rewards, not just expect them.

My take, no need for this shit. Too many kneejerk reactions in footy, with rule changes et al. Leave it be, it will take it's cycle.

Well said. Agree with all your points (even the first part of point 4!)

We shouldn't have to 'apologise' or explain why some clubs have greater resources than others. The salary cap and draft is sufficient to ensure all clubs should have their years at the top -provided they are properly managed and directed.

 

[jonoman89]

How about we just hand the premiership out every year to a different club to appease all the piss weak, poor clubs and their fans?

Members put in their hard earned to support their club. Why shouldn't that money go towards helping the club they love so much give something back?

Let's cap everything and get rid of every competitive aspect of the sport. Great idea. You can't poach players due to the draft. You can't pay them more to entice them over due to the salary cap. And now some people want to prevent them being coached well due to an admin cap?

FFS...

If anything, the cap needs to be larger with a lower ceiling and more strictly enforced.

 

[MaddAdam]

Wow! If that is true Scott should be sacked immediately for know they could win and put them in the 8 but decided giving Zeibel more experience was more important than a finals birth.

Why aren't you calling for his head??!?

Because Ziebell et al are good enough to win as is.

On topic:

Mike Sheahan just said categorically the AFL will be providing clubs with footy dept spend money.

 

[MaddAdam]

The VFL/AFL went ok for the past hundred odd years without your garbage socialist views,

No one would care if North Melbourne folded, your fans certainly don't, I was at the Carlton V North game the other night and there were more Carlton supporters there and it was your home game,

PS, be thankfull we decided to give your Club ownership of itself back,

I don't recall a huge wailing or gnashing of teeth from opposition fans when you actually DID go bankrupt a few years ago.

Paid the AFL that money they gave to stop you from being like your mates down Elgin Street in Fitzroy yet?

 

[The_Wookie]

The defensiveness of supporters of certain clubs to this idea is duly noted, and unfortunately, expected.

You'll never know what it likes to win against all odds.

You really are missing out on something special.

A sense of achievement that money could never buy.

And so far its North supporters and Port people the only ones coming out to back the proposal. Unfortunately, once again...entirely expected.

 

[Soul_Pie]

I don't think that's a realistic solution at all, a knee jerk reaction akin to the "interstate teams are dominating" crap a couple of years ago. Footy is cyclical and teams will catch up, teams will become stronger and more stable off the field.

However, I do think at the moment there needs to be more effort on behalf of the AFL to ensure there's a level playing field.

They can start with the fixture, every team deserves their fair share of prime time football matches and to get the exposure they need to flourish. Right now it is all about maximising profit, but it's simply making the big clubs bigger.

They also need to make sure the clubs get a good cut, it's very well pouring a shit tonne of cash into expanding the game but there's not a whole lot of point if the existing clubs are struggling, many of which are previous expansion clubs themselves.

Also, I'd like to see the end of the SANFL influence in the south australian clubs, every club should be self determining and not restricted in any way.

 

[The_Wookie]

I don't recall a huge wailing or gnashing of teeth from opposition fans when you actually DID go bankrupt a few years ago.

Paid the AFL that money they gave to stop you from being like your mates down Elgin Street in Fitzroy yet?

The Blues never went bankrupt. It was a close thing for a while, and we still have a lot of debt. This isnt the same as bankruptcy.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

It's being done now, though it's much harder to change clubs.

Free agency will open the flood gates.

Not sure I agree on that specific point but irrespective I dont see any good reason to bring free agency in.

 

[liam_13]

Wow! If that is true Scott should be sacked immediately for know they could win and put them in the 8 but decided giving Zeibel more experience was more important than a finals birth.

Why aren't you calling for his head??!?

Because well, I guess falling into finals by grounding out shitty wins and playing 1 final isn't Scotts thing, even if it's Rattens.

What Scott believes is important is giving ZIEBELL (take note) and the others, the experience so they don't just fall into finals, but rather 'zoom' into it and make a real challenge rather then half-hearted.

 

[MaddAdam]

Shirley you can't be serious?? Arizona is overblown, but Utah is okay? The two states share a common border!

It must be all those fine cross country skiers and biathletes in Utah that gives it the edge (although their relevance to AFL footy is a bit mysterious -but I'm sure Scotty knows what he's doing)

No, I'm saying people attribute almost mystical powers to Arizona as regards Collingwood's success.

If that was correct, as you say, we should get some similar boost.

I'm saying that Collingwood's success is far, far more down to excellent drafting, coaching, fitness work and most of all, committment and desire from the players than a few weeks up a mountain in the off season.

 

[MaddAdam]

The Blues never went bankrupt. It was a close thing for a while, and we still have a lot of debt. This isnt the same as bankruptcy.

Closer than any club bar Port since Fitzroy.

 

[The_Wookie]

Closer than any club bar Port since Fitzroy.

Id love to see some sort of reference for that statement.

The early 2000s saw the AFL shift games from Princes Park to Etihad, just after a new grandstand was completed, but not paid for. Then the AFL handed down a somewhat deserved million dollar fine. All things considered, the Club was never in danger of folding at any point.