- Thread starter
- #2,126
No , but 3rds and 4ths at Murphy reserve
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
VFL 2025
- Thread starter bedford
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
Essendon Player Sponsor 2025 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Werewolf - Town of Salem
Sweet F.A. 300+ Games Played in the SFA
Doctor Who's Tardis
East Side Hawks - Sweet F.A.
Essendon Player Sponsor 2024 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Veteran
Essendon Player Sponsor 2023 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Well then, basically covers all of them. Casey-South Melbourne use the other decks on Casey Fields, and Carlton CC use the grounds outside Princes Park.
I like the left field thinking but there isn't enough infrastructure (Australian Football only grounds) to support.
AussieNick1999
All Australian
- Oct 17, 2022
- 702
- 673
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Honestly it is a great concept, but you're right that the infrastructure just isn't there. You'd need every team to have a ground that isn't used for cricket, and has adequate lighting for night games.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
How's this from 1994 (from a book I am working on) ...
The VFA even considered the radical step of becoming a summer competition, with president Tony Hanneberry saying that “there are many, many people who believe the VFA should go to summer”.
In hindsight, he was one of the few with that view.
If such a concept was contemplated now, there wouldn't be much traction because of timing issues with the AFLW, clashes with cricket and the fact that many metro footballers wouldn't be up to playing the full 12 months of the year as the physical burden will catch up with them pretty quickly.
The VFA even considered the radical step of becoming a summer competition, with president Tony Hanneberry saying that “there are many, many people who believe the VFA should go to summer”.
In hindsight, he was one of the few with that view.
If such a concept was contemplated now, there wouldn't be much traction because of timing issues with the AFLW, clashes with cricket and the fact that many metro footballers wouldn't be up to playing the full 12 months of the year as the physical burden will catch up with them pretty quickly.
Last edited:
Flyingleslieskite
Club Legend
- Aug 24, 2023
- 1,613
- 1,833
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
The only VFL ground that isnt cricket is Frankston.
Flyingleslieskite
Club Legend
- Aug 24, 2023
- 1,613
- 1,833
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
Nah they do. Even though the standalones are targeting more mature players.
Box Hill and their link with Eastern is strong as always. Them and Casey offering opportunities to Gippy kids too.
Essendon VFL recruit lots of cannons and some pioneers.
Werribee offer opportunities for Jets and Falcons kids to train with them during the season.
Footscray VFL doing a bit with the rebels.
- Sep 22, 2011
- 44,397
- 98,680
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Taking all into account, the current structure really isn’t that bad. It’s survived 30+ years in some form for a reason. It does fit.
That is, mixing AFL reserves sides with VFL standalones (or allowing partnerships).
The Vic AFL clubs don’t want national reserves. They don’t want to be flying reserves teams around the country. So it works for them. A Vic only comp is the way to go.
It's a place directly below the AFL for those that want or need it - AFL reserves players, undrafted young players, and those who want to play a higher level than local footy.
It feels like a few things have taken it off course in recent years:
This as a league is fine:
Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Footscray, Geelong, North Melbourne, Richmond, St Kilda
Box Hill (Hawthorn), Casey (Melbourne)
Coburg, Frankston, Sandringham, Williamstown, Werribee, Port Melbourne
That is, mixing AFL reserves sides with VFL standalones (or allowing partnerships).
The Vic AFL clubs don’t want national reserves. They don’t want to be flying reserves teams around the country. So it works for them. A Vic only comp is the way to go.
It's a place directly below the AFL for those that want or need it - AFL reserves players, undrafted young players, and those who want to play a higher level than local footy.
It feels like a few things have taken it off course in recent years:
- The inclusion of NSW and Qld teams. This isn't a Vic problem, but has been made one. The league is too big and too expensive with these clubs in it. They need to peel off into another iteration of the NEAFL. That can be the four AFL reserves clubs, any interested standalones (Southport) and a few other sides that can service a higher level of rep footy across NSW and Qld. The northern academies are growing so there will be more and more undrafted youngsters
- Financial sustainability - it's not cheap and never will be cheap to compete at a level like this. The clubs involved need to be able to fund it. That's just life. For all the blame apportioned for the Bullants' demise, the fact is that their business model was totally rooted and they ran themselves into virtual bankruptcy while being completely uncompetitive. Clubs at all levels have always had to remain sustainable or face the inevitable. Many have. No club has a permanent right to compete if they're not sustainable. The standalone clubs need to be very honest with themselves and their strategic plans - if they truly aren't going to be able to compete at the level, then they need to look elsewhere.
- Strategic clarity - the standalone clubs need to realise (I'm sure they actually do) that the VFA is dead and is never coming back. Nobody wants it back (at least, not enough people). They don't care. It's not the 1970s. Reason I say that is they need strategy beyond wanting to win a VFA flag, a competition that no longer exists. If they want to remain at a "state league" level then they have to accept that a big part of their reason for being is development - that's the part they can now play in the football ecosystem and they need to embrace it if they want to play at a state league level. So some solid moves for the standalones - say they need to commit to fielding a minimum of 11 players (half the team) under the age of 23 every week. Also, every Coates League player who plays x number of games in their U18 years, but doesn't get on an AFL list, needs to be guaranteed a standalone VFL list spot for the following year. Give the standalones a Coates League team or two each and they can be a landing spot for those players. Because then they become a legitimate part of the development pathway and they can rightly raise their hands for some AFL funding.
This as a league is fine:
Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Footscray, Geelong, North Melbourne, Richmond, St Kilda
Box Hill (Hawthorn), Casey (Melbourne)
Coburg, Frankston, Sandringham, Williamstown, Werribee, Port Melbourne
Flyingleslieskite
Club Legend
- Aug 24, 2023
- 1,613
- 1,833
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
Also currently too many teams in the comp means not everyone plays each other once...
Great post. You can commit to development and winning at the same time.
Everyone could play eachother once, but it would mean 3 more games for each team. Which is fine, but it also means a lot more interstate travel (AFL expense).
- Thread starter
- #2,137
Saints keep going after Sandy players , what is wrong with them , can't they attract their own
- Sep 22, 2011
- 44,397
- 98,680
- AFL Club
- Essendon
For starters
- Coates League players are eligible to play seniors at VFL standalones
- Every player who plays 5 games (adjust for private school stuff) in their final year of Coates League and does not make the AFL is guaranteed a list spot (if they want it) for two years at the VFL standalone
- VFL standalones will play a minimum of 10 players aged 22 or younger every week
I think if the standalones went to the AFL and committed to stuff like this, they could rightly have their future assured and expect some funding as they are part of the development pathway.
For example:
Port Melbourne - Chargers, Pioneers
Coburg - Cannons, Knights
Sandringham - Dragons, Power
Williamstown - Jets, Bushrangers
Werribee - Falcons, Rebels
Frankston - Stingrays, Ranges
- Coates league player are already eligible to play seniors at VFL stand alone clubs
- I don't like the guaranteeing of contracts as it removes the merit behind earning an opportunity. Those kids had to earn their way onto a coates league list, it shouldn't be any different for a VFL list (if the VFL still had a reserves competition this problem would be largely solved)
- VFL standalones playing players aged 22 in each their last home and away game: Coburg had 10, Port Melb 7, Werribee 7, Frankston 5, Willy 6, Southport 4. Sandringham you would imagine are going to be young. 10 might affect competitiveness too much, and 22 might be too young a cut off. You would hate to be turning away peak aged players from clubs based on hitting a quota. Again VFL reserves fixes this problem
AussieNick1999
All Australian
- Oct 17, 2022
- 702
- 673
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Would that funding be enough to cover running costs if these policies cost clubs on-field success and crowds/memberships start to drop off?
Standalone clubs aren't just drafted factories, they are real football clubs with supporters who care about on-field success. Frankston's attendances on match day have blown our previous crowds out of the water (even our night crowds) and I'd bet money that it's because we're now getting on-field results and striving to win a flag. A few years ago we were using undrafted Talent League players as our main source of recruiting, and while we did find some handy players, the on-field performances were mediocre and our crowds were ordinary unless it was a night game.
We go back to this and we're going to lose revenue from people not coming through the gates or not buying memberships. So unless the AFL were to guarantee that they'd step in to ensure these clubs didn't fold (which I don't think they care enough to do), then there is no reason why any standalone should take this deal.
We know that, when comes the time, the AFL will either fund a national reserves competition OR a VFL competition without AFL club representation. Not both.
Wherever the AFL clubs are playing, the funding will go there as they are part of the AFL's elite pathway system.
We know already that the AFL grumbles about having to fund the VFL to the extent that it does now, so the idea of the AFL funding both competitions is fantasy.
Wherever the AFL clubs are playing, the funding will go there as they are part of the AFL's elite pathway system.
We know already that the AFL grumbles about having to fund the VFL to the extent that it does now, so the idea of the AFL funding both competitions is fantasy.
- Sep 22, 2011
- 44,397
- 98,680
- AFL Club
- Essendon
It could be tweaked as required. Maybe it’s not 10, maybe it’s 8 or 9.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong at all with guaranteeing a list spot to a player who has managed 5 Coates League games. He can clearly play. And it’s just a list spot, doesn’t mean he has to get a game.
But I think the standalones, if they want to remain at state league level, need to make a serious commitment to development. That’s the role they can now play if they want to embrace it. If they don’t then they probably need to look elsewhere.
Don’t want to? That’s ok, play each other then. There’s 6 of you. I’m not sure the league would last five years. That sucks, but it’s reality. Work within it.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong at all with guaranteeing a list spot to a player who has managed 5 Coates League games. He can clearly play. And it’s just a list spot, doesn’t mean he has to get a game.
But I think the standalones, if they want to remain at state league level, need to make a serious commitment to development. That’s the role they can now play if they want to embrace it. If they don’t then they probably need to look elsewhere.
Don’t want to? That’s ok, play each other then. There’s 6 of you. I’m not sure the league would last five years. That sucks, but it’s reality. Work within it.
AussieNick1999
All Australian
- Oct 17, 2022
- 702
- 673
- AFL Club
- Carlton
If you want standalones to commit to player development over fielding a team that will give them the best chance of success, then you need to guarantee that these clubs will be looked after in the event of financial trouble. Fans aren't going to to be interested in supporting a club that exists only to produce AFL players, which means worse crowds and worse sponsor money. The AFL needs to commit to not letting these clubs fold if they were to commit to this.
And if standalones need to commit to this to stay in the league, then so do AFL reserves teams. If standalone clubs have to reserve lists spots for undrafted u19s players while the AFL clubs can recruit whoever they want, the league will become even more lopsided.
If the VFL is going to succeed at developing players, it needs to retain the best non-AFL players in the country instead of losing them to local footy. How about incentivising recently-retired or delisted AFL players to sign with a VFL club? That way you get AFL experience to help guide the younger guys coming from the Talent League.
- Thread starter
- #2,144
St Scum will have about 8 Sandy players , god knows what they promise them
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
A sliding doors moment from 1980.
In the same week in June, two proposals were floated (not directly linked to each other).
In the meeting between the VFL and VFA on June 11, one of the items on the agenda was a merger of the VFL reserves competition with the VFA First Division competition. It was proposed that 12 VFA clubs would form an alignment with the VFL clubs (most likely in the way we have seen with the Box Hill Hawks), though it was never publicly revealed what the fate of the remaining 10 VFA would have been.
In November 1980, Prahran president Sir Ruper Steele revived the idea, calling for a 12-team competition consisting of the current First Division clubs plus Camberwell and Oakleigh, with the clubs being adopted by VFL clubs. Matches would still be played on Sundays and one match would be televised. VFL president Dr Allen Aylett suggested at the time that the future of the VFA clubs agreeing to Steele's plan would be guaranteed (suggesting there would be no relegation).
The day before this meeting, an article in the Age newspaper suggested that a six-division league was being proposed for metropolitan football, with promotion and relegation between each division, creating a pyramid system in local football in the same way that English soccer works. It was anticipated that the premier club in the top division would replace the wooden spooner in the VFA Second Division competition.
This means that it could have been possible for clubs like North Footscray, Templestowe or Mentone to rise up the ranks from, say, metro division 4 or 5 to eventually reach First Division in the VFA (with a fair bit of luck).
Let's say that a mix of the two ideas was agreed to (a merger of the VFL ressies and First Division, and the Second Division becoming the top tier of a new metro structure).
Hypothetically, the new structure could have become:
VFL - VFA - Metro Div 1 (ex-VFA Second Division) - other Metro Divisions
When the VFL went national in 1987, the VFA would have slotted in as the state league and kept this multi-divisional format, potentially to the current day!
Interesting to ponder.
In the same week in June, two proposals were floated (not directly linked to each other).
In the meeting between the VFL and VFA on June 11, one of the items on the agenda was a merger of the VFL reserves competition with the VFA First Division competition. It was proposed that 12 VFA clubs would form an alignment with the VFL clubs (most likely in the way we have seen with the Box Hill Hawks), though it was never publicly revealed what the fate of the remaining 10 VFA would have been.
In November 1980, Prahran president Sir Ruper Steele revived the idea, calling for a 12-team competition consisting of the current First Division clubs plus Camberwell and Oakleigh, with the clubs being adopted by VFL clubs. Matches would still be played on Sundays and one match would be televised. VFL president Dr Allen Aylett suggested at the time that the future of the VFA clubs agreeing to Steele's plan would be guaranteed (suggesting there would be no relegation).
The day before this meeting, an article in the Age newspaper suggested that a six-division league was being proposed for metropolitan football, with promotion and relegation between each division, creating a pyramid system in local football in the same way that English soccer works. It was anticipated that the premier club in the top division would replace the wooden spooner in the VFA Second Division competition.
This means that it could have been possible for clubs like North Footscray, Templestowe or Mentone to rise up the ranks from, say, metro division 4 or 5 to eventually reach First Division in the VFA (with a fair bit of luck).
Let's say that a mix of the two ideas was agreed to (a merger of the VFL ressies and First Division, and the Second Division becoming the top tier of a new metro structure).
Hypothetically, the new structure could have become:
VFL - VFA - Metro Div 1 (ex-VFA Second Division) - other Metro Divisions
When the VFL went national in 1987, the VFA would have slotted in as the state league and kept this multi-divisional format, potentially to the current day!
Interesting to ponder.
- Sep 22, 2011
- 44,397
- 98,680
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I think a state league in Vic only really works in the long term for two reasons - AFL reserves and the development of undrafted players.
There’s really no widespread hunger for it beyond that. Football supporters don’t care for it in enough numbers and there’s only six clubs.
The only other path would be a merger / amalgamation of all the metro local leagues to produce city-wide top division/s so that it’s filled out with more clubs. But that’s a complete shakeup of everything local footy which would be hugely unlikely, at least in the short-medium term.
AussieNick1999
All Australian
- Oct 17, 2022
- 702
- 673
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Frankston's crowds have proven there is a hunger for it. Put games in the right timeslots and put the work into making a competitive competition with a good match day atmosphere and it absolutely could work. Just because the AFL only sees state leagues as mature age draft factories doesn't mean that's the only value they have.
- Sep 22, 2011
- 44,397
- 98,680
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Frankston have had a few good crowds, but they’re the exception not the rule. They’re also the only standalone club in the outer suburbs, so have access to population. Perhaps you could say similar for Werribee, but not the others.
It’s an expensive exercise to compete in a state league which is why so many clubs have gone bust. There is only six left. Those that remain want direct AFL funding but they need to be of some use to the AFL if that’s the case. Other footy clubs outside the AFL don’t get a cheque written to them each year, why should the VFL clubs?
AussieNick1999
All Australian
- Oct 17, 2022
- 702
- 673
- AFL Club
- Carlton
VFL standalone clubs were receiving grant money prior to the pandemic. As far as I know there's been no explanation given as to why that hasn't returned.
The AFL needs to ensure it won't let standalone clubs fold if they agree to focus on player development. You can't expect these clubs to put in the work to develop these guys, bleed them dry and then leave them to fold when being a footy factory doesn't pay the bills. This is a moral obligation they accepted when they took control of the VFA's on-field competition. If they didn't want that, then they should have stuck to their own reserves league.
These would be my terms if the AFL wanted us to priortise player development:
- Standalone clubs are obligated to provide a spot to no more than 8 undrafted Coates players (whether they play or not depends on whether they are genuinely best 23 during the season)
- AFL reserves clubs are also required to provide spots for undrafted Coates players. Standalones should not shoulder the entire burden of developing players at the expense of building the most competitve list possible.
- A minimum standard for match day venues: drinking water, toilets, and some permanent seating in addition to an adequate playing surface. Grounds like Tramway Oval and Arden Street discourage spectators from attending VFL games.
- Incentivise recently-retired or delisted AFL players to sign with a VFL team (e.g allow clubs to sign a marquee player outside the salary cap.) This enables standalone clubs to attract high-profile players with experience at the elite level, and ensures that the VFL remains a high standard competition by encouraging the best non-AFL players to choose the VFL over local footy. This is to the AFL's benefit too, because a higher standard competition will produce better players.
Keep in mind that for these standalone clubs, "looking elsewhere" may not be an option. Frankston would not be accepted by either the MPFNL or the SFNL (both of which have Frankston teams already) and would lose supporters to other local clubs if they were forced into the same competition. We have no future in any competition that isn't the VFL, and I doubt we're the only club in that position. Being in the VFL is a matter of survival for us, so if the AFL wants to impose conditions on us being in the VFL, they need to commit to looking after us in the long term. If that's not a responsibility they want to accept, then they should have kept their noses out of the VFA and kept their own reserves league.
