Why is SA footy so much better than WA now?

[Cleric]

There is two sides to it, well three. Talent can be cyclical. One state may have a lack of pure talent come through for a period of years, while the other doesnt. Its like fishing, you cant control which fish takes the bait. In other words, if kids with natural athletic abilities decide not to pick up an Aussie Rules football, then there's nothing you can do.

However, WA is a quite a bit larger than SA, having 1.1 million more people in the talent pool, so even on a poorer cycle it should match what SA does on average.

The AFL has to do more for Jr development in both SA and WA.
Im not sure if the talent pathways of the SANFL match the pathways of the WAFL, but there needs to be serious attention paid to what is happening, how to streamline it and identify and then develop the kids coming through.
The AFL totally funds the entire Victorian Jr development which indicates that it does consider itself a Victorian organisation.
For Victorians thinking its not the fact, take two seconds and think about what Jr development in Victoria would look like if the AFL didnt have the talent league, and instead the VFL teams like Port Melbourne and Box Hill had to run it instead. Do you think things would go backwards? Well this is the case in SA and WA. You have SANFL and WAFL league teams who are spending their own resources to develop the kids, knowing that the best kids they get through wont even play for them.

The AFL has taken its eyes off SA and WA to concentrate on Victoria and the Northern States.

 

[Rob]

If we're measuring success by number of players drafted, then I reckon there's 2 reasons why WA struggle.

First is the obsession with keeping scores secret until kids are 13. And I don't mean no scoreboard secret, I mean they're literally not published anywhere. With every other sport not doing that, it's a huge deterrent for the competitive kids, I.e the pool of kids where drafted come from. Especially when you have other sports not just playing competitive leagues, they're selecting rep teams and playing best against the best. So a lot of the best kids leave the game.

Which brings me to the second problem, and that's that theres virtually no development programs untill kids get to 14. And even then they're pretty short, there's nothing serious until kids are old enough for futures when they're 15 or 16. Development is basically left to the PSA and a few state school programs until then. If you're not part of those, then bad luck. No footy scholarships over here either.

 

[bzparkes]

There is two sides to it, well three. Talent can be cyclical. One state may have a lack of pure talent come through for a period of years, while the other doesnt. Its like fishing, you cant control which fish takes the bait. In other words, if kids with natural athletic abilities decide not to pick up an Aussie Rules football, then there's nothing you can do.

However, WA is a quite a bit larger than SA, having 1.1 million more people in the talent pool, so even on a poorer cycle it should match what SA does on average.

The AFL has to do more for Jr development in both SA and WA.
Im not sure if the talent pathways of the SANFL match the pathways of the WAFL, but there needs to be serious attention paid to what is happening, how to streamline it and identify and then develop the kids coming through.
The AFL totally funds the entire Victorian Jr development which indicates that it does consider itself a Victorian organisation.
For Victorians thinking its not the fact, take two seconds and think about what Jr development in Victoria would look like if the AFL didnt have the talent league, and instead the VFL teams like Port Melbourne and Box Hill had to run it instead. Do you think things would go backwards? Well this is the case in SA and WA. You have SANFL and WAFL league teams who are spending their own resources to develop the kids, knowing that the best kids they get through wont even play for them.

The AFL has taken its eyes off SA and WA to concentrate on Victoria and the Northern States.

I think the other thing that gets missed in teh WA vs SA development topic is that WA is way bigger, so despite the higher population, it's very spread out. SA is a lot more condensed, so it's easier to condense programs for young players.

Any aspiring kid wanting to chase their AFL dread in WA has to move to Perth. Yes, WCE and Freo do regional camps in their zones but it's not the same as kids in other states get.

 

[bzparkes]

If we're measuring success by number of players drafted, then I reckon there's 2 reasons why WA struggle.

First is the obsession with keeping scores secret until kids are 13. And I don't mean no scoreboard secret, I mean they're literally not published anywhere. With every other sport not doing that, it's a huge deterrent for the competitive kids, I.e the pool of kids where drafted come from. Especially when you have other sports not just playing competitive leagues, they're selecting rep teams and playing best against the best. So a lot of the best kids leave the game.

Which brings me to the second problem, and that's that theres virtually no development programs untill kids get to 14. And even then they're pretty short, there's nothing serious until kids are old enough for futures when they're 15 or 16. Development is basically left to the PSA and a few state school programs until then. If you're not part of those, then bad luck. No footy scholarships over here either.

Yep. Up here in Brisbane, we have 2 of the 3 biggest Auskick centres in the entire country(Coorparoo and I think the other one is either Morningside or Bulimba). My daughter went to Coorparoo last year and there were a ton of kids, not to mention 2 AFL ovals for competitive matches, of which there were numerous ones on every weekend for all age groups, both boys and girls. Coorparoo has a development pipeline for kids all the way up to U18's.

As far as I'm aware in WA, as you said, it's mostly PSA and school run programs. It was even like that when I was a schoolkid in Perth in the early 90s, so it sounds like it hasn't improved much.

If the AFL put the same effort into pathways in WA as they do in Qld, we'd be seeing a hell of a lot more talent emerging form out of there.

Will be interesting to see how the NRL goes about it, considering they've got the government on side. RL was reasonably popular when I was a kid in Perth, had a few schoolmates who played it.

 

[Rob]

Will be interesting to see how the NRL goes about it, considering they've got the government on side. RL was reasonably popular when I was a kid in Perth, had a few schoolmates who played it.

The NRL are in a different situation because virtually nobody plays it. So I assume they're going to be focused on just getting players. Their under 17 comp - which includes under 16s as there is no separate under 16 division - has just 6 teams. And they're virtually all from the outskirts of Perth, making it a nightmare to get to games. There's no point focusing on development when your pool of players is literally in the dozens.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

If WA & SA clubs had 1st access to 2 players each draft, then there would be more of an incentive...

And so we get back to the argument for a state-based draft.

We’re close to being there anyway because of all the ridiculous academies and compromises.

The first 2-3 rounds of the draft would be state based. The clubs in each state pick in reverse order of where they finished, only from players in their state.

After that it’s open slather.

 

[StonesThrow]

It wasn't that long ago that we were talking about how bad SA is

 

[The Terrible Thinker]

Eagles flag was 7 years ago. Crows last was 27 years ago. PORTS was 21 years ago.

Dockers played finals in 22 and 25. Eagles from 2015 to 2020. SA needs to do more.

No. Just no. Adelaide played its first finals in 8 years this season and went out in straight sets. Port have been good but choke. Prelims in 20, 21, 24 and semis in 2023. I don't care about first rounders it's what the clubs success on the field that speaks. And as I pointed out, SA haven't did a whole lot more in recent times tbh. Port didn't play finals again. If it's like this for another 5 years then yeah OK. But ATM neither SA side has really produced.

Still to be determined.

Would be nice to pickup all that local talent in the draft but no, we have to share unlike our Northern friends.

 

[Sector 7G]

I think the other thing that gets missed in teh WA vs SA development topic is that WA is way bigger, so despite the higher population, it's very spread out. SA is a lot more condensed, so it's easier to condense programs for young players.

Any aspiring kid wanting to chase their AFL dread in WA has to move to Perth. Yes, WCE and Freo do regional camps in their zones but it's not the same as kids in other states get.

70 % of the population of WA is in Perth and is greater than the population of SA. Clearly the development programme in Perth and the rest of the state is inadequate. Whatever WAFC is doing is failing and should be reviewed.

 

[Golumless]

It does feel like these discussions end up being directed to a piss poor administrative group running the league and too many state league clubs who haven't got their shit sorted.

 

[Cleric]

I think the other thing that gets missed in teh WA vs SA development topic is that WA is way bigger, so despite the higher population, it's very spread out. SA is a lot more condensed, so it's easier to condense programs for young players.

Any aspiring kid wanting to chase their AFL dread in WA has to move to Perth. Yes, WCE and Freo do regional camps in their zones but it's not the same as kids in other states get.

But if you compare Perth to Adelaide alone, there still should be a far greater output from WA.
The reason I bring up the cyclical thing is that a decade ago WA was killing it. It had some of the highest profile kids coming through. Hogan, Martin, O'Mera etc.

 

[kid_a]

WAFL beat the SANFL this year in the rep game (in Adelaide and rather comfortably)

There are more Brownlow medalists in recent history from WA currently than form SA (4 different winner from WA since 2010 compared with SA's 1)

WA has a stronger (theoretical) state of origin side than SA

SA is producing better young players rn, but I mean that's kind of cyclical.

The SANFL is generally better resourced than the WAFL but WA has a lot more cashed up country leagues that pick off and attract talent

WA also has a much more diverse and cosmopolitan population where other sports get more of a look in than in SA

So no I don't think SA footy is "so much better" than WA footy

 

[LeBronco]

A point of difference here is that the SANFL don't own the licences for the Crows and the Power. Both clubs run as independent entities.

Incorrect as both SA clubs are controlled by the AFL and have been since the SANFL relinquished the licences. Unfortunately for the SA clubs their members essentially have no say in how their clubs operate as the AFL are responsible for appointing the board members.

Unfortunately for WCE and Freo(depending on how you look at it), the WAFC owns the licence to both clubs, which has supposedly been a bone of contention between the WAFC and AFL for a long time.

A question to fans of WA clubs is would you prefer to be controlled by the AFL or WAFC? Either way there's no way for club members to be able to vote for board members in fact Brisbane are the only non Victorian club that gives members the right to appoint the board and it's no coincidence Brisbane have also been the most successful club.

 

[Rob]

A question to fans of WA clubs is would you prefer to be controlled by the AFL or WAFC? Either way there's no way for club members to be able to vote for board members in fact Brisbane are the only non Victorian club that gives members the right to appoint the board and it's no coincidence Brisbane have also been the most successful club.

Other than branding, what would change being "controlled" by the AFL?

 

[LeBronco]

Other than branding, what would change being "controlled" by the AFL?

Would it improve the finances of the WA clubs? I know both SA clubs have been doing better in terms of finances since the SANFL relinquished the licences to the AFL.

 

[Rob]

Would it improve the finances of the WA clubs? I know both SA clubs have been doing better in terms of finances since the SANFL relinquished the licences to the AFL.

Dunno, but traditionally the WA (AFL) clubs have been far more profitable than the SA clubs. Losing access to that as a cash stream for WA footy probably wouldn't help.

 

[Underdog]

As someone heavily involved in junior community football for many years, WA Football are increasingly demonstrating that they are primarily focused on participation numbers rather than quality or high performance. They're artificially holding onto players that are not truly passionate about the game and are not capable of pushing the better performers to improve. There's also too many clubs and too many teams - resources and talent are spread thin.

 

[The_Reaper]

Well as the AFL and media tell us the northern academies are only positive and add talent to the competition without distorting the competition.

So naturally the best solution is to give the WA academies equivalent access

 

[Cleric]

Would it improve the finances of the WA clubs? I know both SA clubs have been doing better in terms of finances since the SANFL relinquished the licences to the AFL.

Thats because Port Adelaide were an Albatross around the neck of the SANFL. The amount of money the SANFL had put put into Port to keep them viable was staggering.

 

[SC_Power]

Thats because Port Adelaide were an Albatross around the neck of the SANFL. The amount of money the SANFL had put put into Port to keep them viable was staggering.

Complete and utter garbage.

Apart from that, the insistence that you all keep peddling this line is even more disturbing.

 

[SC_Power]

It wasn't that long ago that we were talking about how bad SA is

Exactly. Over the last 20 years, which squad would you prefer? (I’m sure I’ve missed a few)

WA: Lance Franklin, Simon Black, Josh Kennedy, Harry Taylor, Dean Cox, Jack Darling, Nat Fyfe, Andrew Swallow, Patrick Cripps, Mitch Duncan, Darren Glass, Daniel Kerr, Mark LeCras, Tom Mitchell, Alex Rance, Aaron Sandilands, Luke McPharlin, Michael Walters, Daniel Wells, Daniel Rich, Matt Priddis.

SA: Corey Enright, Scott Thompson, Shaun Burgoyne, Brian Lake, Brodie Grundy, Rory Laird, Tyson Edwards, Chad Wingard, Simon Goodwin, Kane Cornes, Chad Cornes, Adam Cooney, Ryan Griffen, Andrew Mackie, Jordan Dawson, Lachie Neale, Andrew McKay, Shannon Hurn, Shane Edwards, Sean Wellman, Phil Davis.

 

[The Feeder Club]

Whatever is happening now in WA is a failure, that much is clear. So it needs to change, carrying on as is seems increasingly untenable.. Apart from the entrenched trough snouters in the WAFC, pretty much everyone in WA agrees on that point.

What they can't agree on is the vision for what that change should look like, and whether it should be a more centralised top heavy, or a more devolved bottom heavy, future. Meanwhile the WAFC feed off this division and continue as is

 

[glengowan]

Would it improve the finances of the WA clubs? I know both SA clubs have been doing better in terms of finances since the SANFL relinquished the licences to the AFL.

That would have more to do with the move to the Adelaide Oval than a change in hands of the licences.

 

[Upgrayedd]

A combination of the WAFC/WAFL telling the AFL to get stuffed in terms of releasing control on certain things in the WAFL system, the AFL saying Get stuffed in terms of overall funding.

Im sure you give Freo/West coast an academy they would have some really talented players in the pipeline in 5/6 years. We're about 7 years behind in terms of youth development then most states because the AFL don't care right now.

 

[kid_a]

Incorrect as both SA clubs are controlled by the AFL and have been since the SANFL relinquished the licences. Unfortunately for the SA clubs their members essentially have no say in how their clubs operate as the AFL are responsible for appointing the board members.

A question to fans of WA clubs is would you prefer to be controlled by the AFL or WAFC? Either way there's no way for club members to be able to vote for board members in fact Brisbane are the only non Victorian club that gives members the right to appoint the board and it's no coincidence Brisbane have also been the most successful club.

For many years inbetween those successful periods they were utter dogshit