Victorian Clubs "Drowning"

[clogged]

One club has a distinct advantage over the rest of the competition.

It has salary cap concessions, access to as many father son picks as the VFL clubs, and an academy in the biggest city in Australia to draft athletes from. No other club has all these benefits.

The AFL should do something about removing some of these.

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Please share with me how Hawthorn have been able to also recruit top line players after winning Premierships or in Lake's case, essential to winning one?

Agree on the first 2 though.

Who?

 

[Stratton_Gun]

Fcuk me. This again
Every player that has come to Hawthorn is either on similar money or less money due to wanting to play in a flag. That is also how Geelong kept their list together in 08 I think it was with, many taking a pay cut so the group could stay together
Sydney on the other hand are able to recruit all these big name players on bumper deals
Even when they signed Josh Kennedy, he misconception was that we didn't want him but the reality was that Sydney just offered him a better contract

 

[KissKiss]

I really wish that the Victorian media wouldn't refer to the 'interstate' teams as a collective. Let's be very clear here, there is a big difference between the clubs from SA and WA compared to the clubs from NSW and QLD.

And there is a big difference between Brisbane and the other northern teams.

Really shouldn't group any teams in a collective like that

 

[Tuco]

Didn't traditional Victorian clubs just win 6 of the last 7 Premierships. Excuse me but WTF is the problem?

So basically they're whinging that hypothetically interstate teams might get their swings and roundabouts in the next few years. And this big 'what if' annuls the actual success we've recently seen in Victoria?

This moaning is really becoming pathological.

 

[NickoST]

What gets tiring Syd is when non-Victorians rabbit on about a collective Victorian mentality when it comes to football.

I've been suckered into believing this about Vics in general, but it's only the fans who don't care. The any-success-out-of-Victoria-is-bad crowd clearly dominate the media and in my opinion are holding the game back. Fact is, half of Australia does not care about footy. Why? This insular bull**** we see time and time again.

 

[Illinois Nazi]

I am also drowning after reading that article. Drowning in tears. No, really I am.

It's going to be strange when the AFL has no teams from Victoria in it, because there really is no way any of them can survive.

 

[Ron The Bear]

No doubt whatsoever that the AFL has taken the Victorian footy public for granted. Ye reap what ye sow.

 

[carlton2dabone]

Lets be honest people, even though its a national competition, it relies on Victoria as its foundation.

The AFL gets a lot more people at games in Victoria in one weekend than the rest of the country gets combined.

The reason why people become concerned when Interstate teams start dominating the competition is because if most of the Vic teams languish down the bottom of the ladder and have no future prospect of success, then the massive crowds that we have been used to seeing drop off dramatically.

Imagine if the competition had to rely on successful teams such as GWS, GC, Sydney and Brisbane (although the last is nowhere near success atm) to provide the crowd numbers to sustain the gate receipts that the AFL currently has.

Even teams that are established such as WC, Freo, Port, Adelaide will not be able to sustain the current gate receipts we are used to (as these teams already have near full houses at every game so very minimal improvement is possible).

The truth of the matter is its a national comp but Victoria is the heartland of this comp, Victoria provides the most gate receipts by far and Victoria has the most amount of AFL supporters by far, enough to sustain 10 teams.

We need the Victorian teams to be healthier otherwise the whole competition suffers.

 

[Tuco]

No doubt whatsoever that the AFL has taken the Victorian footy public for granted. Ye reap what ye sow.

By that do you mean reaping record memberships, crowds across the League, and revenue for all clubs? Yes, I'm sure they're crying into their piles of gold earmarked to disburse to all Victorian clubs as we speak.

 

[master bate]

I've been suckered into believing this about Vics in general, but it's only the fans who don't care. The any-success-out-of-Victoria-is-bad crowd clearly dominate the media and in my opinion are holding the game back. Fact is, half of Australia does not care about footy. Why? This insular bull**** we see time and time again.

Kind of ironic when part of the complaint here is the concessions given to the expansion clubs.

The reality is since coming in to the AFL West Coast (3), Port (1), Sydney (2), Adelaide (2), Brisbane (3) have had a good run. In that time only Carl, Coll, Haw, Ess, Geel, North have won flags. No flags for Melb, Rich, St Kilda, WB. So it's 6 out of 10 for Victorian and 5 out of 6 interstate and every expectation is that GWS and Gold Coast will make it 7/8 teams will have won a flag within 35 years of a national comp. Where St Kilda have been battling away for 100 years and only 1 flag.

The media comes from Victoria as it's where we can get home and away attendances boosted by attendance by both teams and the money! South Australia (with a heap of work by the AFL) got their stuff together and built a new stadium and have seen increased attendance and if Adelaide get back on track they will become a lot more noisy. If WA could do the same any time soon they will have a huge say on the game. You simply can't ignore teams that can get 60 or 70k to a match compared to the 40k.

I do think this article is premature though. And I have no Victorian/interstate bias when it comes to Port and Freo. Two well run and super teams and clubs. I begrudgingly respect Sydney and they do a lot right I just wish for their own sake they weren't treated so well in the Tippett deal and the COLA allowance.

When it comes to GWS and Gold Coast if they win flags in their first 8 or so years of existence given the allowances afforded to them I can't help but feel like the competition will have taken a year off whilst a flag is gifted away.

The perennially struggling Victorian clubs (Melb, Rich, WB, St K) have a lot to blame themselves for. But a footy arms race led by much wealthier Victorian clubs and interstate teams that had lesser financial worries has left these clubs significantly disadvantaged. And instead of fixing this problem first the AFL decided to expand in to new markets and allow player concessions that would massively hurt those teams who hadn't caught up to player recruiting and developing that the big clubs were doing. It's why equalisation is so important. If every team has a fair and equal draft, salary cap and finances that allow them to compete then I don't really care who wins the flags.

 

[carlton2dabone]

By that do you mean reaping record memberships, crowds across the League, and revenue for all clubs? Yes, I'm sure they're crying into their piles of gold earmarked to disburse to all Victorian clubs as we speak.

You do realize that crowds figures for the entire comp this year are down compared to other years (even with interstate teams doing well and getting full houses at their games)

It's suppose its just a coincidence that the Vic teams are not strong and the AFL has made some stupid decisions for game times in the same year that crowd figures have started dropping off.

 

[dthom]

And there is a big difference between Brisbane and the other northern teams.

Really shouldn't group any teams in a collective like that

I was more referring to the fact that the WA and SA teams are well-supported, self-sufficient and well run clubs. The other four cannot make the same claim.

 

[Tuco]

Lets be honest people, even though its a national competition, it relies on Victoria as its foundation.

The AFL gets a lot more people at games in Victoria in one weekend than the rest of the country gets combined.

The reason why people become concerned when Interstate teams start dominating the competition is because if most of the Vic teams languish down the bottom of the ladder and have no future prospect of success, then the massive crowds that we have been used to seeing drop off dramatically.

Imagine if the competition had to rely on successful teams such as GWS, GC, Sydney and Brisbane (although the last is nowhere near success atm) to provide the crowd numbers to sustain the gate receipts that the AFL currently has.

Even teams that are established such as WC, Freo, Port, Adelaide will not be able to sustain the current gate receipts we are used to (as these teams already have near full houses at every game so very minimal improvement is possible).

The truth of the matter is its a national comp but Victoria is the heartland of this comp, Victoria provides the most gate receipts by far and Victoria has the most amount of AFL supporters by far, enough to sustain 10 teams.

We need the Victorian teams to be healthier otherwise the whole competition suffers.

I remember hearing a lot of this talk in the early naughties. But the 'down cycle' of Premierships results for 6 years actually was a period when all Victorian clubs were going through a bit of a renaissance. The Dogs were up and about, Richmond made finals, Melbourne had just recently made a GF, the Bombers and North were powerhouses, Collingwood was back off the wooden spoon and their crowds were turning up in droves as Eddie masterfully turned their fortunes around.

There was no crisis. 5 Victorian teams played in Grand finals during the so called 'interstate dominance'. Bombers twice, Melbourne, and Pies twice. And at least two of those games could very easily have gone the way of the local teams. There was simply change...and all of it was for the better.

Seems to me all this doomsday talk of dropping crowds simply means you are accusing Victorian supporters of being fair weather fans only prepared to follow their clubs when they're winning.

 

[Tuco]

You do realize that crowds figures for the entire comp this year are down compared to other years (even with interstate teams doing well and getting full houses at their games)

It's suppose its just a coincidence that the Vic teams are not strong and the AFL has made some stupid decisions for game times in the same year that crowd figures have started dropping off.

Not according the Footy Industry thread on Crowd Figures. Victorian crowds are marginally down, but the comp is sitting on a 1.8% increase on last year. We're not sitting on all time records. But looming recessions have that effect.

 

[carlton2dabone]

I was more referring to the fact that the WA and SA teams are well-supported, self-sufficient and well run clubs. The other four cannot make the same claim.

I would love nothing more than if the AFL competition no longer existed and we went back to every state supporting their own competition.

I'd love to see how much money interstate teams can make by just playing themselves, while I am sure that Vic teams will make plenty just from the crowd attendances that we get between all our Vic teams.

 

[Ron The Bear]

By that do you mean reaping record memberships, crowds across the League, and revenue for all clubs? Yes, I'm sure they're crying into their piles of gold earmarked to disburse to all Victorian clubs as we speak.

I'm talking about crowds being down in Melbourne, with only a handful of the 40-odd matches still to be played in Victoria to be contested by top-eight sides.

Richmond and St.Kilda pulled 50K twice last year, and 49K to the Docklands in 2012. Yesterday, with both clubs giving away free tickets, there was 28K (officially). Footy's on the nose in this town.

 

[sherb]

Wasn't there a worry about "interstate" dominance following the period 2001 - 2006?

 

[Igloo]

Actually, weren't both signed using the same FA rules?
Who's to say that Buddy wouldn't have signed anyways with the additional CoLA???
Who'd sneeze at a mere $9 Mil??

No, we traded Lake, and chose to do so since he was contracted. You'd be hard pressed to find many Dogs supporters unhappy with that trade. Losing Ward and Harbrow to GWS and GC on the other hand... Pretty much our 2 best young players at the time just walking out the door, even when we offered Ward almost $500k a year, which was definitely overs at the time, was ridiculous. We needed them. We didn't need a 31 year old Lake as much.

Big difference between the two.

 

[Papa G]

Too many clubs. Too many shit clubs in Victoria. GWS was not really wanted or needed. COLA is an unfair advantage. BIG Victorian clubs get looked after and really have no right to whinge. Solve these issues and we'd have a better comp.

 

[carlton2dabone]

I remember hearing a lot of this talk in the early naughties. But the 'down cycle' of Premierships results for 6 years actually was a period when all Victorian clubs were going through a bit of a renaissance. The Dogs were up and about, Richmond made finals, Melbourne had just recently made a GF, the Bombers and North were powerhouses, Collingwood was back off the wooden spoon and their crowds were turning up in droves as Eddie masterfully turned their fortunes around.

There was no crisis. 5 Victorian teams played in Grand finals during the so called 'interstate dominance'. Bombers twice, Melbourne, and Pies twice. And at least two of those games could very easily have gone the way of the local teams. There was simply change...and all of it was for the better.

Seems to me all this doomsday talk of dropping crowds simply means you are accusing Victorian supporters of being fair weather fans only prepared to follow their clubs when they're winning.

Simple test for you:

If the competition were to break up right now, interstate teams playing only themselves while Victorian teams play only themselves.

Which competition do you think would attract more gate receipts?

We get 90,000 and 70,000 to some games in the one weekend even though the state is split up with 10 teams.

The entire SA state is spilt between only 2 teams and I couldn't imagine them getting 90 thousand to one game even if they had the stadium for it.

And its laughable that GWS and Sydney cannot even get full houses even though they have tiny grounds.

 

[NickoST]

The AFL think that buying off the other half of Australia with concessions and premierships is going to get them to support the game. It clearly is not working.

What is needed is an attitude change. An acceptance of success outside of Victoria. No witch-hunts and demonising. WA and SA are having a tough time dealing with this as it is, imagine what it's like for non-footy states?

I mean, if you hand me a fistfull of money and slap me as hard as you can right after, do you think I'm going to support your cause? It doesn't work that way.

The fact that we are still having this conversations in 2014 is disappointing.

 

[ziad]

I really wish that the Victorian media wouldn't refer to the 'interstate' teams as a collective. Let's be very clear here, there is a big difference between the clubs from SA and WA compared to the clubs from NSW and QLD.

This is so. Two from NSW and Qld will be a worry for some minnows from melbourn town for some years to come.

I think there are bigger problems in the game related to equalisation - the draw for one and share of gate etc. But that would take unpopular leadership to resolve so we will not see it.

As for the Melbourne foundations, if the Eagles had not chipped in $4M the VFL would be dead.

But we all make mistakes.

 

[Tuco]

I'm talking about crowds being down in Melbourne, with only a handful of the 40-odd matches still to be played in Victoria to be contested by top-eight sides.

Richmond and St.Kilda pulled 50K twice last year, and 49K to the Docklands in 2012. Yesterday, with both clubs giving away free tickets, there was 28K (officially). Footy's on the nose in this town.

Hawks, Pies, and Cats are all in top 4 contention. Essendon still have a chance to make the 8. They have 10's of thousands of members. Record numbers in fact. Now why aren't they turning up to games? If they're not turning up to games they've actually paid for how is that the fault of the 'interstaters' as you call them? Perhaps the comfort factor of choosing which rounds to attend is making the difference? You tell me.

 

[refresh]

When has a welfare system ever produced a good work ethic?