Which clubs are really the big four of the AFL?

[Meteoric Rise]

Could I just bring it to everybody's attention that this "Big 4" list that everyone seems to be wanting to quote is merely something that has been dreamt up by Caroline Wilson. Of course she is going to put Richmond in it.

Geelong FC won popularity contests in: 1878 1879 1880 1882 1883 1884 1886....

Well, could I just bring to everyone’s attention that these “titles” newcs seems to want to quote between 1877 and 1887 were something dreamed up by the press. The Geelong Advertiser no doubt.

"From 1877 until 1887, the premiership was a title given to the best performing team, determined largely by press consensus. These premierships, as well as premierships between 1870 and 1876 decided in the same manner prior to the foundation of the VFA, were at the time an informal title."

If that ludicrous system carried on to this day then your finals averse club may even have been a chance for the 2019 premiership newcs.

On one hand, press opinions are listed all over your profile as if they were universally recognised Geelong achievements of the highest order, yet on the other hand, you get a perfectly unbiased factual report you don’t like from a member of the press and suddenly press opinions are worthless.

 

[Dazzler9]

Facts please....WCE crowds 2019 turnover and memberships LOL. Lucky to top Essendon and Carlton.

Not sure about the membership numbers, although we do have people paying for the privilege of being on a membership waiting list. What other club has that problem?

Here are the financials -

 

[Robertio]

There will be a growing resentment of the ‘have nots’ before too long....while the ‘haves’ get their spending and lists hard capped to stop them from growing further and getting better, and the ‘middle pack’ strive to take that next step.

Can’t see that being palatable for very long.

Solution: If a club can’t afford to play at the highest level, they don’t HAVE to play at the highest level. State based competitions could really benefit from the presence of ‘big fish’ in a smaller pond and the existing supporter base will get even more access to their club as they won’t need to travel interstate.

Pure redneck comment,why don't we move four teams over to Perth and see how we go.

 

[BBC1967]

Not sure about the membership numbers, although we do have people paying for the privilege of being on a membership waiting list. What other club has that problem?

Here are the financials -

Richmond total revenue 92million. Number of members 103k, like I said challenging.

 

[Capriati]

Not sure about the membership numbers, although we do have people paying for the privilege of being on a membership waiting list. What other club has that problem?

Here are the financials -

That's actually incorrect.

88 million in ordinary revenue
13m in non ordinary revenue (dev funding)
TOTAL: 102 million

Membership: 91K

 

[Capriati]

Richmond total revenue 92million. Number of members 103k, like I said challenging.

SI got confused. It's 88 NOT including the 13m dev funding for a total of 102m

You can find financial info here:

2019 League, Club, Stadium Annual Reports - Sports Industry AU

AFL Annual Reports 2019 AFL Concise Report 2019 AFL Stadia Annual Report 2019 Adelaide Annual Report 2019 Brisbane Annual Report

www.footyindustry.com

here is the spreadsheet run by the same person (who is a member here).

 

[Dazzler9]

Richmond total revenue 92million. Number of members 103k, like I said challenging.

Yeah, I don't necessarily disagree.

 

[BBC1967]

SI got confused. It's 88 NOT including the 13m dev funding for a total of 102m

You can find financial info here:

2019 League, Club, Stadium Annual Reports - Sports Industry AU

AFL Annual Reports 2019 AFL Concise Report 2019 AFL Stadia Annual Report 2019 Adelaide Annual Report 2019 Brisbane Annual Report

www.footyindustry.com

here is the spreadsheet run by the same person (who is a member here).

So this guy works for AFL. His figures dispute official AFL disclosure.

 

[Capriati]

So this guy works for AFL. His figures dispute official AFL disclosure.

I don't understand what you're saying. What are you referring to?

 

[BBC1967]

I don't understand what you're saying. What are you referring to?

Richmond also have a fighting Tiger fund, which I assume is not added. It largely depends on who interprates figures. Like I said we are challenging, which appears to go straight over your head. By the way Tigers have more competition in Victoria, and are not part of a two team town.

 

[Capriati]

Richmond also have a fighting Tiger fund, which I assume is not added. It largely depends on who interprates figures. Like I said we are challenging, which appears to go straight over your head. By the way Tigers have more competition in Victoria, and are not part of a two team town.

It's not interpretation though. The link I sent you with the website houses every club (and the AFL's) financial report, and the figures are there black and white. The fighting fund would have been counted as part of RFC revenue and counted in the total (and possibly cash on hand).

Tiger's are doing great, and totally agree that they have emerged as a powerhouse on and off the field in the last few years, but West Coast is in another league when it comes to financial clout.

Not really sure about the relevance of your last comment, arguably West Coast is competitively disadvantaged by being in a two team state. West Coast rely on their membership turning up every home game and can't inflate their gate receipts with blockbuster games against local rivals.

Either way, at the end of the day, neither West Coast or Tiger fans need to worry about their club in this difficult time and we should count ourselves lucky for that.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

The Melbourne 1960s and Carlton 2020s comparison doesn’t stack up in my opinion.

.

As bad as Carlton have been in the 21st century they have been much more competitive than the Melbourne of the 1970s and early 1980s

I think you to a degree can forget about the 70s and 80s

5-6 clubs didnt have any money - Melb being one of them . And you could have the best culture and the best administration and all the rest of it - but if you didnt have any money you had no hope

Im not anti Carlton - when they were winning those flags - i thought they played attractive football - they were good to watch - however you look at the system back then - one year in the 80s - and they were allready a top of the ladder team - they bought in the off season Kernahan Motley and Bradley

You buy the best players you have to win - Chelsea and Man City both did absolutely nothing for 50 years - then they got the rich owners - bought the best players and won the titles

The current AFL system - which has been in place - what 20 years or so - no club has got an excuse not to do well - end of story

 

[Altum Volantes]

Pure redneck comment,why don't we move four teams over to Perth and see how we go.

So...you agree that there are too many eating from the same trough in Melbourne?

That’s kinda my point.

Doesn’t mean clubs have to die - they can just play in a league that is more suited to their financial limitations.

All this saga has shown us is how many weak businesses the league is supporting on a full time basis - might be time to accept that isn’t a permanent thing.

 

[Capriati]

Pure redneck comment,why don't we move four teams over to Perth and see how we go.

If Victorian Clubs moved over to Perth, they would need to clean up their act pretty quickly.

For a start, clubs like yours wouldn't be able to run a business model based on pokies whereby the club makes multi million dollar profits off the back of misery and destruction of community social problems like gambling.

 

[Hawkk]

I think you to a degree can forget about the 70s and 80s

5-6 clubs didnt have any money - Melb being one of them . And you could have the best culture and the best administration and all the rest of it - but if you didnt have any money you had no hope

Im not anti Carlton - when they were winning those flags - i thought they played attractive football - they were good to watch - however you look at the system back then - one year in the 80s - and they were allready a top of the ladder team - they bought in the off season Kernahan Motley and Bradley

You buy the best players you have to win - Chelsea and Man City both did absolutely nothing for 50 years - then they got the rich owners - bought the best players and won the titles

The current AFL system - which has been in place - what 20 years or so - no club has got an excuse not to do well - end of story

Those are good points but nonetheless Carlton have not sunk to the same depths as Melbourne from 1966-1987 - and that’s why they stand a much stronger chance of keeping their base

 

[Dazzler9]

Pure redneck comment,why don't we move four teams over to Perth and see how we go.

Because there's not enough population to economically sustain that many teams. I think that's the point.

 

[JayJ20]

Not entirely accuarate Carlton were higher drawing than Essendon 08 to 12. Pound for pound we are a higher rating club on TV as well.

Actually it was from 2008-2010 only. 3 years.

From 1991 to 2008 and 2011-2019 we’ve been the higher drawing club. Even our top up year in 2016. Carlton haven’t drawn above 50K vs an interstate side ever. Even Hawthorn have. In fact, Geelong with 71K is the only 70K+ other than the big 4. Only really rely on Collingwood, Richmond and Essendon for high crowds. But sure. Carlton are higher drawing because Carlton. Forget the facts.

 

[What else we can do]

Actually it was from 2008-2010 only. 3 years.

From 1991 to 2008 and 2011-2019 we’ve been the higher drawing club. Even our top up year in 2016. Carlton haven’t drawn above 50K vs an interstate side ever. Even Hawthorn have. In fact, Geelong with 71K is the only 70K+ other than the big 4. Only really rely on Collingwood, Richmond and Essendon for high crowds. But sure. Carlton are higher drawing because Carlton. Forget the facts.

We did play at Princes Park till 2005 so that is not an even playing field fact. Have you looked out our record since 2002? Diabolical, Essendon have made finals every second year.

Fact we have played over 50K against interstate sides Adelaide twice West Coast twice Brisbane twice Sydney once.

Fact we don't rely on Coll, Rich, Ess, for crowds our crowds turn up in bigger numbers for big matches against those clubs.
Essendon have had 28 years to catch up to Carlton first by moving away from Windy Hill and given marquee games. The fact is overall Essendon still is third biggest drawing club in the history of the game and Carlton second.

 

[Capriati]

We did play at Princes Park till 2005 so that is not an even playing field fact. Have you looked out our record since 2002? Diabolical, Essendon have made finals every second year.

Fact we have played over 50K against interstate sides Adelaide twice West Coast twice Brisbane twice Sydney once.

Fact we don't rely on Coll, Rich, Ess, for crowds our crowds turn up in bigger numbers for big matches against those clubs.
Essendon have had 28 years to catch up to Carlton first by moving away from Windy Hill and given marquee games. The fact is overall Essendon still is third biggest drawing club in the history of the game and Carlton second.

What does being a powerhouse in the 70's and 80's have to do with ranking clubs in the modern era?

You are right that Carlton's decline has had an impact on their financial standing in the game, but that is true for any club.

Now that we have 12 clubs, including Carlton, seeking loans from the AFL upwards of 10 million dollars each, the era of clubs recovering and shooting up the ladder is probably over. I wouldn't be surprised to see gaps widen between the 'haves and have nots' and for this to materialise on the field and cement in a long term pecking order, one where Carlton is towards the bottom.

Carlton will now be compared to its poverty stricken cousins St Kilda and Melbourne. A permanent member of the AFL underclass.

What a time to be alive!

 

[hawkman]

We did play at Princes Park till 2005 so that is not an even playing field fact. Have you looked out our record since 2002? Diabolical, Essendon have made finals every second year.

Fact we have played over 50K against interstate sides Adelaide twice West Coast twice Brisbane twice Sydney once.

Fact we don't rely on Coll, Rich, Ess, for crowds our crowds turn up in bigger numbers for big matches against those clubs.
Essendon have had 28 years to catch up to Carlton first by moving away from Windy Hill and given marquee games. The fact is overall Essendon still is third biggest drawing club in the history of the game and Carlton second.

Think he meant non finals games. Most Victorian clubs would be able to get 50k+ for a final against an non Victorian team

 

[What else we can do]

Think he meant non finals games. Most Victorian clubs would be able to get 50k+ for a final against an non Victorian team

There still games just like big home and away games. I have been to many h/away games where Carlton have had at least 50k in the ground. It is not valid point to say Carlton cannot bring 50k to a home and away game.

 

[What else we can do]

What does being a powerhouse in the 70's and 80's have to do with ranking clubs in the modern era?

You are right that Carlton's decline has had an impact on their financial standing in the game, but that is true for any club.

Now that we have 12 clubs, including Carlton, seeking loans from the AFL upwards of 10 million dollars each, the era of clubs recovering and shooting up the ladder is probably over. I wouldn't be surprised to see gaps widen between the 'haves and have nots' and for this to materialise on the field and cement in a long term pecking order, one where Carlton is towards the bottom.

Carlton will now be compared to its poverty stricken cousins St Kilda and Melbourne. A permanent member of the AFL underclass.

What a time to be alive!

You right about our financial state through bad management. I think we are about 8th according to Hawkk. Im ranking Carlton in terms of followers, supporter base out there.

 

[Hawkk]

There still games just like big home and away games. I have been to many h/away games where Carlton have had at least 50k in the ground. It is not valid point to say Carlton cannot bring 50k to a home and away game.

I agree with this.

Blockbuster home and away games can sometimes draw very comparable crowds. In a Hawthorn context the Haw v Geel round 15 2013 (?) game drew 85,179 and the same two drew 85,569 to a Preliminary Final

In 2014, Hawthorn and Sydney drew 72,764 to a home and away game, and Hawthorn and Port Adelaide drew 74,941 to a Preliminary Final that same year...

In all those games it’s highly likely the same number of Hawthorn supporters were in attendance

 

[JayJ20]

There still games just like big home and away games. I have been to many h/away games where Carlton have had at least 50k in the ground. It is not valid point to say Carlton cannot bring 50k to a home and away game.

I didn’t say they can’t. I said they haven’t against an interstate side. You’re talking about “facts” when you actually didn’t rely on facts at all.

Now that I have presented the actual facts, do you agree that Essendon are the higher drawing team? If you don’t, then you’re not relying on facts. If so, then don’t mention facts and say that it’s your opinion.

 

[What else we can do]

I didn’t say they can’t. I said they haven’t against an interstate side. You’re talking about “facts” when you actually didn’t rely on facts at all.

Now that I have presented the actual facts, do you agree that Essendon are the higher drawing team? If you don’t, then you’re not relying on facts. If so, then don’t mention facts and say that it’s your opinion.

I have provided the fact overall Carlton is the higher drawing team do you agree with that fact?