Why did the VFL become the AFL?

[GENX]

Why did the VFL become the AFL?

History lesson for the youngster and uneducated with "aussie rules" history. This threads for ones who are not so AFL brainwashed.

Why couldn't we have a new "super" league and left the VFL like it was.... Saving South Melbourne and Fitzroy!!


The 1986 Crawford Report what did it say for "aussie rules" in order too continue on?


Tell Us all... add your say!

 

[Hawkk]

Here we go....

When do school holidays finish in Victoria?

 

[Former]

For the money.

 

[littleduck]

For the money.

exactly.

 

[Zeke]

Who won the first AFL premiership?

 

[MarkT]

Why couldn't we have a new "super" league and left the VFL like it was.... Saving South Melbourne and Fitzroy!!

Why would the VFL clubs leave the VFL to form a new comp. when they didn't need to? What would have been in it for them?

 

[*Danni*]

Why would the VFL clubs leave the VFL to form a new comp. when they didn't need to? What would have been in it for them?

Especially considering the competition expanded nationally with the admittance of 2 interstate teams to the VFL in 1987. What changed in the next few years to make the decision of changing to the AFL? It's interesting watching those flashback reports on foxfooty, the delivery of news information regarding the recommendations both for and against expansion in the mid to late 80's.

You have to give the current AFL some credit though. Even though they'd expanded to the AFL already, the advent of the ARL/Superleague rot in the 90's gave them a window of opportunity. And they took it. Jumped through it feet first with their hands grabbing $$$ as they did. It was the birth of the corporate AFL we know today, but also the shot in the arm to help the AFL sustain Melbourne as the home of Aussie Rules. Kinda ironic in a sense that the good and bad of today's AFL competition came from actions in another code of football.

 

[floppinab]

Why would the VFL clubs leave the VFL to form a new comp. when they didn't need to? What would have been in it for them?

The bigger ones certainly could have in order to stop the smaller ones from dragging them back. They could have grown much faster into something far bigger than they are now. You can say a few things about that era but they certainly held the all of the Melb. clubs interest at heart (while raping the bejesus out of Perth particularly as well as Adelaide football to keep them all going) (except for the Swans of course, making them pay a licence fee to remain in the competition was an interesting interpretation of the rules of the day). I'm referring to the initial expansion era of course with West Coast and Sydney. After the licence fee money ran out they then finally bought the bullet and starting pushing the mergers et. al.

 

[littleduck]

Who won the first AFL premiership?

Whoever won the first VFL competition...

the AFL and the VFL are one and the same competition that simply changed names.

 

[MarkT]

Much faster? Not likely. They had an established successful competition. To leave that for an unknown with multiple new start ups and without some of their older rivalries would have been a huge risk for no greater return from their perspective.

As I said, if they didn’t have to why would they?

 

[Count Zero]

http://www.footy.com.au/dags/FAQ2v1-5.html

Why did the VFL admit interstate teams and expand ?
Despite the success of the VFL, many teams were suffering financially. Much of this is blamed on "cheque-book recruiting", that is where teams attempted to buy successful players from other teams in the VFL or playing in other states. This lead to many clubs being technically bankrupt, with some being investigated by the Department of Corporate Affairs. In addition, crowds were falling, as were club memberships. Transfer fees were excessive and the competition was operating at a loss, whilst ground facilities were falling into disrepair. The new teams provided income to save the failing Victorian teams by firstly paying substantial licence fees to join the competition, and secondly by providing increased income from television rights. The money from these two areas helped refinance the teams in the VFL.

Why did the VFL change its name to the AFL ?
In admitting the inter-state teams, the view of the direction of the VFL changed. This is best summed up in the first underlying principle of the AFL's 5 year plan. "... we take a national view of football, simply not an expanded VFL view. The AFL emerged from the VFL and a Victorian focus was inevitable given the beginning. This plan, however, is based on the view that football followers throughout Australia are of equal importance." Hence the VFL became the AFL to reflect the change in focus from just Victoria, to Australia as a whole

 

[MarkT]

Such misnomer. There was a recession. Being broke was the order of the day. The VFL brought in a cap and a draft and eliminated transfer fees. The elements that lead to the poor financial performance were addresses independently of the expansion of the competition. The drop in the ocean discounted license fees saved no one. South and Fitzroy still headed north or died depending on your point of view and as did the cost of operating a team headed North along with them.

That's not to say expansion was a bad thing or the expansion franchises haven't added a lot to the competition but far too much is made of a few poorly managed clubs performances in a down economic cycle under outlawed operating conditions and the impact of a measly $4m license fee here and there that wasn't all distributed and was paid back via the Waverly sale anyway.

 

[tigerdan]

Why would the VFL clubs leave the VFL to form a new comp. when they didn't need to? What would have been in it for them?

Rhetorical questoin I know, but to answer it:

At some stage the league took ownership of the team colours, mascots and guernseys (as well as employing all the players and having access rights to most major grounds in the country).

Not sure when this happened, but it will prevent any super league scenario in the AFL unless someone incredibly wealthy wants to lose a hell of a lot of money.

 

[Count Zero]

Here's yet another slant on the topic:
http://www.convictcreations.com/football/codebattle.htm
When commercial flight becoming economically viable, football fans around Australia suggested a national league. However the VFL closed ranks and said that the national league would be the VFL, and other states must enter a team and pay a licence fee. The SANFL and WAFL refused.

With South and West Australia refusing to play ball, the VFL was forced to expand to the virgin market of NSW. In 1982, the VFL relocated the failing South Melbourne Swans to Sydney. In 1987 they established a team in Brisbane and another in Perth.

Adelaide remained steadfast in its refusal. However in 1991, the Port Adelaide Magpies defected from the SANFL by making a submission to join the VFL. This ultimately lead to the establishment of the Adelaide Crows.

Another view follows: http://www.fullpointsfooty.net/adelaide.htm
Matters came abruptly to a head on 31 July when perennially successful Port Adelaide, concerned that it was effectively being forced to subsidise several of the other SANFL clubs, made an independent and unilateral application to join the AFL. The move was totally unexpected and precipitated South Australian football into a period of quite unprecedented turmoil, controversy and confusion. Port Adelaide, already far and away the most loathed (as well as the best supported) SANFL club, became Public Enemy Number One in South Australia, whilst simultaneously - and paradoxically - earning the respect and admiration of many football aficionados in Victoria. The SANFL was left with little option but to table a counter submission of its own and, once this had happened, it soon became clear that Port Adelaide's bid was doomed. For a start, the marketing potential of a composite side clearly outstripped that of an established club, however well supported. Equally importantly, the SANFL could guarantee the availability of Football Park, a ground with few equals anywhere in Australia.

In November 1990 the new Adelaide Football Club, to be known as the Crows, was officially born. Admission to the AFL was earmarked for the following season. In just three short months the SANFL had come almost full circle in its attitude to the national league. Against this backdrop, the quiet dismantling of the SANFL's Player Retention Scheme went almost unnoticed.

 

[GENX]

With South and West Australia refusing to play ball, the VFL was forced to expand to the virgin market of NSW. In 1982, the VFL relocated the failing South Melbourne Swans to Sydney. In 1987 they established a team in Brisbane and another in Perth.
.

ahhhhmmm the VFL didn't relocate them... Dr Edelsten DID. Millions $$$$$$ went to going broke league VFL!

QUOTED
"However, this goodwill all changed in 1982 when the South Melbourne Swans relocated to Sydney and became known as the Sydney Swans. As the public face of Australian Rules in Sydney, the club redefined the code's image. Instead of being seen as working class, Football became associated with chardonnay, ballet and yuppies. 105 years of Australian Rules in Sydney was wiped clean and instead League fans viewed the game as a recent Melbourne import. Local clubs folded or amalgamated, grounds were rationalised or demonlised.

As for the Swans, they were also rejected and were headed for extinction until sold to medical entrepreneur, "Dr Geoffrey Edelsten" in 1985. Edelstein instigated a marketing campaign intended to gloss over the Swan's liabilities.

The campaign was based on razzmatazz, excitement and a carnival atmosphere. The doctor flew a pink helicopter, American style cheer girls waved their goodies at the crowd whilst a long haired pretty blond full forward named "Warrick Capper" became the face of the promotion thrust. The campaign struck a chord with the inner city professionals who were endeared by the circus atmosphere. Of course, once the razzmatazz became old hat, the support dwindled and the club once more tittered on the edge of extinction. Although Edelstein had given the club a profile, he had also damaged its image by making the fans appear fairweather yuppies.
-------------------------------------------------------------

In order to continue on... the VFL HAD to introduce to NEW teams from interstate "1986 Crawford Report".
Too test the water... teams from Perth and Brisbane...
If successfull this would continue... 1990 the AFL was born!


But why couldn't we keep the then VFL and have 4 new victorian teams introduce in 1990???? Bringing back South Melbourne and saving Fitzroy.

Just like the SANFL, WAFL, QAFL, NSWAFL have "SUPER" team(s) above...

 

[floppinab]

ahhhhmmm the VFL didn't relocate them... Dr Edelsten DID. Millions $$$$$$ went to going broke league VFL!

erm, as the quote in your post alluded to the Swans were in Syd. for a quite a while before the Doctor took over, the VFL certainly did it's best to get them up to Sydney.

 

[floppinab]

Much faster? Not likely. They had an established successful competition. To leave that for an unknown with multiple new start ups and without some of their older rivalries would have been a huge risk for no greater return from their perspective.

As I said, if they didn’t have to why would they?

Yep it would've been a huge risk for sure but for say 6 Melb. clubs to have broken away to become part of a next tier competition, particularly given the optimism of the time (early eighties), I would suggest they would've seen huge growth during the late eighties by taking a bigger slice of the $$$$ avail. in Melb. compared to those clubs left behind. Given most of those old rivalries would've been between those big six clubs they would've been maintained.

 

[floppinab]

Such misnomer. There was a recession. Being broke was the order of the day. The VFL brought in a cap and a draft and eliminated transfer fees. The elements that lead to the poor financial performance were addresses independently of the expansion of the competition. The drop in the ocean discounted license fees saved no one. South and Fitzroy still headed north or died depending on your point of view and as did the cost of operating a team headed North along with them.

That's not to say expansion was a bad thing or the expansion franchises haven't added a lot to the competition but far too much is made of a few poorly managed clubs performances in a down economic cycle under outlawed operating conditions and the impact of a measly $4m license fee here and there that wasn't all distributed and was paid back via the Waverly sale anyway.

The impact of the license fees was not insignificant, particularly to the smaller clubs, it definately kept them going in the late eighties, early nineties. Debts of hundreds of thousands were wiped out by a 300k or so distribution from license fees, signficant amounts for the smaller clubs at the time. Ultimately it didn't save the Swans or the Lions but it definately kept them going a bit longer and you could argue that it did save 2 or 3 of the other smaller clubs.

Yes certainly issues associated with poor financial performance were addressed at the same time allowing other clubs to survive but the license fees played their part at the time.

And the reduction and eventual elimination of transfer fees also contributed (and all but wiped out the WAFL and SANFL clubs major source of income)