Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[Obeanie1]

So Vic media and recruiters are all up in arms because Vic Metro and Vic Country haven't won a game this champs.

Asking for the AFL to priorities more funding for grass roots and football pathways for Victorian kids development.

Very concerned on the lack of Vic talent this year and its up the the AFL to fund more development.

So firstly is this a knee jerk reaction from one poor year or something tangible?

I'd also be interested to know what junior development funding the AFL invests in every state.

The Northern academies are funded. What about Vic, SA and WA?
.

 

[doppleganger]

How long had it been since the Lions played finals.

I agree that finals experience is important.

Close losses can be motivation to improve the following years.

Hawthorn losing big finals in close games in 2011 and 2012 was a big factor in them then saluting the following years.

Pies close final losses in 2022, helped them in 2023.

Lions losing a close GF in 2023 would have helped in 2024.

But also, embarrassing GF capitulation can set clubs back - Pies 03, Port 07, Adel 17, GWS 19, Syd 24 - get belted in a GF and often spend a few years in wilderness.

 

[doppleganger]

And some, yourself included, are dismissive, despite the testimony of players and coaches themselves.

WA teams sure.

SA teams who travel less than some "Vic based clubs" having a laugh.

And then you have the WC fans who pretend travel doesn't count if you choose to sell a home game

If you are trying to run a travel disadvantage argument you don't bundle WA teams with SA teams.

You don't bundle Hawthorn (who travel the most of Melbourne teams with Carlton (who travel the least)

But lazy VIC-Bias posters don't actually consider the difference between clubs, they just run with their inane two groups of Non-Vic and Vic.

 

[randyzany]

WA teams sure.

SA teams who travel less than some "Vic based clubs" having a laugh.

And then you have the WC fans who pretend travel doesn't count if you choose to sell a home game

If you are trying to run a travel disadvantage argument you don't bundle WA teams with SA teams.

You don't bundle Hawthorn (who travel the most of Melbourne teams with Carlton (who travel the least)

But lazy VIC-Bias posters don't actually consider the difference between clubs, they just run with their inane two groups of Non-Vic and Vic.

I don't have any sympathy for any team who travel 'more' because they decide to sell some of their home games interstate for financial gain. Specially when it's a team like Hawthorn that are supposedly now well resourced and are doing it for extra coin for purposes other than mere survival.

I have some sympathy for North who are doing it for survival though, although I don't like it that they're compromising the competition by selling games in locations where a team already exists. Thankfully the Weagles and the Purple Haze are crap right now so it has zero impact on the ladder positions for finals but if the Weagles and the Purple Haze were decent I'd be livid.

 

[sr36]

I don't have any sympathy for any team who travel 'more' because they decide to sell some of their home games interstate for financial gain. Specially when it's a team like Hawthorn that are supposedly now well resourced and are doing it for extra coin for purposes other than mere survival.

I have some sympathy for North who are doing it for survival though, although I don't like it that they're compromising the competition by selling games in locations where a team already exists. Thankfully the Weagles and the Purple Haze are crap right now so it has zero impact on the ladder positions for finals but if the Weagles and the Purple Haze were decent I'd be livid.

Hawks now get a football advantage from doing it. They turn some neutral venue games into advantage games. It's good for them.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Be good to know what you think the advantages are that apply to all 10 VIC teams, and what your suggestions are to address them.

a big one is easier access to off-field talent.

If you're former player for west coast or Adelaide and you want to move into coaching, you either become an assistant coach for your old club (which is not always the best pathway for more learning), move to your arch rival (assuming a position is available) or you move interstate.

So if they move interstate, where are they most likely to go? one of the states with 2 AFL employers or the one with 10?

If a prospective coach is already in victoria, they have little incentive to leave as they 9 different clubs they join.

There is not a lot of options to address this unless he AFL was prepared to give non-vics clubs a higher soft cap. Which is never going to happen.


There's also more money in victoria outside of the salary caps with media gigs, commercial sponsorships, etc.

If a coach wants to move into the media after their coaching career, it's a lot easier to do that if they're already in victoria because that's where so much of the industry is based.

Players also have more options, Dusty Martin's manager has talked about Adelaide offering a bigger deal to him than richmond did, but part his rational for staying was that he would make more money by staying in victoria anyway because the greater commercial deals available.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Why do people keep grouping Non-Vic teams together?

WA teams face completely different obstacles to that of NSW teams.

That's true WA clubs probably have the hardest road, followed by the SA clubs.

Did you know that NGA prospects in SA that come from the metropolitan area aren't eligible to under drafted under the bidding system and go into the open pool?

 

[sr36]

a big one is easier access to off-field talent.

If you're former player for west coast or Adelaide and you want to move into coaching, you either become an assistant coach for your old club (which is not always the best pathway for more learning), move to your arch rival (assuming a position is available) or you move interstate.

So if they move interstate, where are they most likely to go? one of the states with 2 AFL employers or the one with 10?

If a prospective coach is already in victoria, they have little incentive to leave as they 9 different clubs they join.

There is not a lot of options to address this unless he AFL was prepared to give non-vics clubs a higher soft cap. Which is never going to happen.


There's also more money in victoria outside of the salary caps with media gigs, commercial sponsorships, etc.

If a coach wants to move into the media after their coaching career, it's a lot easier to do that if they're already in victoria because that's where so much of the industry is based.

Players also have more options, Dusty Martin's manager has talked about Adelaide offering a bigger deal to him than richmond did, but part his rational for staying was that he would make more money by staying in victoria anyway because the greater commercial deals available.

Agree with most of that. The commercial aspect of the bigger market is also a reason why Non-Vics are mad to be dreaming of less Vic clubs - the extra competition that 10 Vic clubs bring for these things is part of the leveller - the issue regarding equity in Vic is that it will always favour the big clubs or successful teams - Pies are more attractive than the Saints for off field staff and players earn more off-field money as they get more exposure and that's magnified when we're up the top end of the ladder. I think it's a big factor in why Vic teams have won a lot of both flags and spoons. But in terms of Non-Vic - the Saints are extra competition for these things that have a negative impact for the Pies. The dollars for Pies players would be more if there were less Vic clubs and the amount we'd have to pay coaches who wanted to live in Vic would be less.

 

[Underarm]

That's true WA clubs probably have the hardest road, followed by the SA clubs.

Wouldnt SA have the easiest travel fixture, due to Gather Round and their close proximity to Victoria and NSW?

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Wouldnt SA have the easiest travel fixture, due to Gather Round and their close proximity to Victoria and NSW?

I didn't mean literal travel here, but still no. Gather round closes the gap but many vic clubs have much easier travel arrangements.

 

[Underarm]

I didn't mean literal travel here, but still no. Gather round closes the gap but many vic clubs have much easier travel arrangements.

Sorry I meant apart from Vic clubs. SA have the easiest travel load.

 

[jdisc]

I have some sympathy for North who are doing it for survival though, although I don't like it that they're compromising the competition by selling games in locations where a team already exists. Thankfully the Weagles and the Purple Haze are crap right now so it has zero impact on the ladder positions for finals but if the Weagles and the Purple Haze were decent I'd be livid.

It's a band-aid solution to the travel issue but I don't mind it, north get the financial kick backs and the WA teams have their travel load reduced. All parties have seemed to benefited.

There's also a weirdly large number of north fans in WA. Why you would want to do that to yourself I'm unsure.

 

[beatnik]

This sums up VicBias very succinctly…

537K views · 3K reactions | How has a 23-gamer played at MORE VENUES than Scott Pendlebury?! 🤔 On this week's ESPN Footy Podcast, the crew points out that one of the youngest players in the entire #AFL has played at more grounds than Collingwood's

How has a 23-gamer played at MORE VENUES than Scott Pendlebury?! 🤔 On this week's ESPN Footy Podcast, the crew points out that one of the youngest players in the entire #AFL has played at more...

www.facebook.com

 

[sr36]

That's true WA clubs probably have the hardest road, followed by the SA clubs.

Did you know that NGA prospects in SA that come from the metropolitan area aren't eligible to under drafted under the bidding system and go into the open pool?

No longer the case.

The reason for the original rules was an attempt to have equal number of possible kids for each team's zone. Everyone stopped caring when it went to no picks before 40, so they changed the rules. SA now have access to Adelaide kids. SA teams now have much better NGA zones than their Victorian counterparts. However, they've been slack as **** in terms of working the zones - despite the AFL being willing to stump up most of the money.

 

[sr36]

It's a band-aid solution to the travel issue but I don't mind it, north get the financial kick backs and the WA teams have their travel load reduced. All parties have seemed to benefited.

There's also a weirdly large number of north fans in WA. Why you would want to do that to yourself I'm unsure.

We ostracised them and drove them out.

 

[jdisc]

We ostracised them and drove them out.

did you do that to Melbourne fans too?

just trying to figure out why The Home Of Football (TM) is empty that regularly

 

[doppleganger]

a big one is easier access to off-field talent.

Some of that is valid, but it again it isn't a simple Vic v Non-Vic comparison.

If you're former player for west coast or Adelaide and you want to move into coaching, you either become an assistant coach for your old club (which is not always the best pathway for more learning), move to your arch rival (assuming a position is available) or you move interstate.

Physio, high performance, psychologist they all are off-field roles.

QLD and NSW clubs compete with NRL teams for those type of gigs.

It is per capital type stuff, would be more top physio's and psych's who would love to work in a professional sporting environment in WA (just 2 teams to go to) compared to Vic.

So if they move interstate, where are they most likely to go? one of the states with 2 AFL employers or the one with 10?

If a prospective coach is already in victoria, they have little incentive to leave as they 9 different clubs they join.

There is not a lot of options to address this unless he AFL was prepared to give non-vics clubs a higher soft cap. Which is never going to happen.

And from coaching and soft cap perspective it isn't Vic v Non-Vic.

WC can push the cap and spend more of them want (as they could afford to spend more), North and Melbourne rely on AFL to just pay the minimum.

The department soft cap was actually brought in to even up spending, as it was only Collingwood who could keep up with WC, Adelaide and Sydney back in the early 2000s.

There's also more money in victoria outside of the salary caps with media gigs, commercial sponsorships, etc.

Again not Vic v Non-Vic

A WC coach / player in leadership group would do very well commercially in WA, much better than equivalent Melbourne or WB staff as an example.

If a coach wants to move into the media after their coaching career, it's a lot easier to do that if they're already in victoria because that's where so much of the industry is based.

This may be the case, but it is hardly a reason why prospective coaches go for jobs.

As in A.Kingsley went for Collingwood gig and GWS gig, talented people who want to be senior coach are not applying based on potential media opportunities post coaching career.

Being a successful coach is more important than who or where you coach in terms of having a media career (of you want that).

Players also have more options, Dusty Martin's manager has talked about Adelaide offering a bigger deal to him than richmond did, but part his rational for staying was that he would make more money by staying in victoria anyway because the greater commercial deals available.

Again for a few big Vic clubs this may be the case, it ain't ALL Vic clubs.

Sydney is the city where a player can make major $$ off field.

And a small Melbourne club like StK wouldn't be able to offer any better off field commercial deals compared to WC.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Sorry I meant apart from Vic clubs. SA have the easiest travel load.

yes probably, but the northern clubs have the academies that SA clubs don't have.

should said pathway or or something rather than 'road'

 

[Grumpyshades]

I don't have any sympathy for any team who travel 'more' because they decide to sell some of their home games interstate for financial gain. Specially when it's a team like Hawthorn that are supposedly now well resourced and are doing it for extra coin for purposes other than mere survival.

I have some sympathy for North who are doing it for survival though, although I don't like it that they're compromising the competition by selling games in locations where a team already exists. Thankfully the Weagles and the Purple Haze are crap right now so it has zero impact on the ladder positions for finals but if the Weagles and the Purple Haze were decent I'd be livid.

You think the AFL would have agreed if West Coast were half decent ??

that's hilarious

 

[kranky al]

I don't have any sympathy for any team who travel 'more' because they decide to sell some of their home games interstate for financial gain. Specially when it's a team like Hawthorn that are supposedly now well resourced and are doing it for extra coin for purposes other than mere survival.

I have some sympathy for North who are doing it for survival though, although I don't like it that they're compromising the competition by selling games in locations where a team already exists. Thankfully the Weagles and the Purple Haze are crap right now so it has zero impact on the ladder positions for finals but if the Weagles and the Purple Haze were decent I'd be livid.

There’s also a massive difference between a one hour flight to Tassie to a ground you have a better win loss record than your home ground and that your oppo is still flying across the country for.

We have to fly days early same as any interstate gig. You are flying in and out same day no Timezone change.

Game over you are home soon after while out guys have the red eye flight cramped up for hours at high altitude low pressure which saps recovery times.

We miss training sessions from travel - they don’t

These things are not the same

 

[PeterSalt]

No longer the case.

The reason for the original rules was an attempt to have equal number of possible kids for each team's zone. Everyone stopped caring when it went to no picks before 40, so they changed the rules. SA now have access to Adelaide kids. SA teams now have much better NGA zones than their Victorian counterparts. However, they've been slack as **** in terms of working the zones - despite the AFL being willing to stump up most of the money.

Not NGA, indigenous players from metro zones in SA and WA aren't a part of any of those 4 clubs catchments.

NWM would've been aligned to Adelaide.

It's currently under review with changes expected to be brought in across the board sometime in August.

If there are changes to the metro zoning Port may get access to Dougie Cochrane who is currently touted as a potential top 1 pick next year.

Dougie's father Stuart played about 50 games for each of North and Port, so not eligible as a FS to either.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

As in A.Kingsley went for Collingwood gig and GWS gig, talented people who want to be senior coach are not applying based on potential media opportunities post coaching career.

Most are willing to move for a head coach role. I was talking more about assistant coaches.

Adelaide went after Ben Rutten recently, but he was unwilling to move back home if he wasn't the official senior assistant.

We lost our best assistant coach James Rahilly a couple of seasons ago when he returned to geelong because of family. Sometimes we can bring people over but it's often for the short term. If we were a another vic club that had lured him from geelong we would have been able to hold him for longer.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

No longer the case.

The reason for the original rules was an attempt to have equal number of possible kids for each team's zone. Everyone stopped caring when it went to no picks before 40, so they changed the rules. SA now have access to Adelaide kids. SA teams now have much better NGA zones than their Victorian counterparts. However, they've been slack as **** in terms of working the zones - despite the AFL being willing to stump up most of the money.

That excuse doesn't really hold up when adelaide have had 0 players through the system that have been drafted in the top 40.

most other clubs would have at least 1

 

[doppleganger]

That's true WA clubs probably have the hardest road, followed by the SA clubs.

Again based on what?

Did you know that NGA prospects in SA that come from the metropolitan area aren't eligible to under drafted under the bidding system and go into the open pool?

Did you know the Tigers are the only Melbourne club without a metropolitan NGA zone.

That North are going to lose Tassie allocation etc.

Again NGA and Indigenous zoning stuff isn't a VIC v Non-Vic issue as clubs all have different access.

IMHO the entire NGA / Indigenous zone stuff should be AFL controlled.

The objective should be about expanding potential playing talent pool, kids from backgrounds who traditionally don't enter AFL pathways.

It should not be a club linked program, as there will always be winners and losers no matter even if you give all clubs equitable distribution based on population data. But SA and WA clubs don't want that, they just want access to all their state based kids to make it "fair"...although it will mean much greater population pools.

 

[jdisc]

Again based on what?

year 5 geography one would think