Expansion Why the National comp can never be national

JEagle

All Australian
Jun 4, 2013
727
666
AFL Club
West Coast
It won't be national for the simple fact that it isn't! NSW and QLD are rugby states and will remain so. A niche may exist, but Gold Coast and GWS will eventually fold. Western Sydney is NRL heartland.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 13, 2015
19,369
20,190
AFL Club
Hawthorn
You must work for the VFL with a statement like that.
Every other sporting comp in the world finds a way to create fair finals venues, but clearly too hard for us "smart" Aussies.
Wembley is the best stadium in the UK. The MCG is the best stadium in Australia.

In the US the Super Bowl stadiums must meet certain minimum standards of which capacity is one.

Only Olympic Park comes close at 85,000.

The MCG was massively upgraded and part of the reason was the guarantee to host the GF for a few decades. All the interstate stadia are able to push for the new contract when it comes up for renewal.

Build bigger stadia or shut up.
 

PowerForGood

Deleting account. No interest in AFL anymore Enjoy
Sep 1, 2006
15,309
13,144
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool FC
Wembley is the best stadium in the UK. The MCG is the best stadium in Australia.

In the US the Super Bowl stadiums must meet certain minimum standards of which capacity is one.

Only Olympic Park comes close at 85,000.

The MCG was massively upgraded and part of the reason was the guarantee to host the GF for a few decades. All the interstate stadia are able to push for the new contract when it comes up for renewal.

Build bigger stadia or shut up.
Yep.

Except that Wembley is a neutral stadium with no regular season games played there (except special circumstances like Spurs this year only)

And also that the Superbowl has a minimum of 70K and is moved around the country well in advance. That figure can include temporary seating specifically for the game, so Adelaide Oval could probably meet that with the entire northern area available.

As it stands, Adelaide Oval has more chance of hosting a Superbowl than an AFL Grand Final.
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 13, 2015
19,369
20,190
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Yep.

Except that Wembley is a neutral stadium with no regular season games played there (except special circumstances like Spurs this year only)

And also that the Superbowl has a minimum of 70K and is moved around the country well in advance. That figure can include temporary seating specifically for the game, so Adelaide Oval could probably meet that with the entire northern area available.

As it stands, Adelaide Oval has more chance of hosting a Superbowl than an AFL Grand Final.
Its maybe 15 or 20 years til the contract is up. Start planning now.

The AFL always chases the money.

Always.
 

BIRDBRAIN

Club Legend
Aug 12, 2013
1,846
2,849
AFL Club
West Coast
Bunch of whingers in this thread. The fact is we are playing in an expanded VFL comp and the Grand Final has always been played at the MCG and that's where it belongs. If the Eagles won their Premierships in front of 44,000 people at Subiaco Oval they wouldn't count for shit in my eyes, the trip to the MCG to play in the grand final is like a holy pilgrimage to the Mecca of footy, to defeat the Vics on their own sacred turf and take their Premiership Cup from their bloody hands and hear the lamentations of their women. Victory at the MCG makes it all the more sweeter for interstate sides.
 

DERIBERATE

Premiership Player
Feb 12, 2010
3,393
5,658
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide United, Leeds, Bohemians
A grand final series is the answer. Best of 3. 1st MCG. 2nd home of highest qualifier (Adelaide oval). 3rd (optional) at highest bidder.

Bound to happen eventually.
They've copied almost everything American. Now it's down to whether they go Superbowl or the NBA finals series.
 

caloschwaby

The One and Only
Jan 3, 2017
3,528
3,923
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Celtics, Renegades, Packers
It's a bit weird talking about this.
We can discuss it all we like as to what is the best option but the reality is that it will never eventuate and that sort of makes me annoyed.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
6,100
3,507
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Once again, other threads have been taken up with this particular conversation, these two come to mind of recent.

Time to bump this thread again. I like a good stoush! kranky al FreeTK



I'll start off with the misnomer that HQ are Vic centric and point out why the popular belief is a misnomer.

  • The comp is "vic biased" because HQ doesn't truly want a national comp
If this was actually true then why bother with pushing the game in rl states like nsw & qld? Why bother adding teams like gc and gws in a long long haul attempt to garner support for them? Why give Cola to teams with higher residential expenses? Why would HQ bother with pushing a game in China? Why would HQ bother with pushing games in NZ or India?

As Gil is South Australian why would he be "vic" bias? There are also members on the board of the AFL who are not Victorian - are they vic biased too?

Although it may "seem" "they're against us" then why would HQ even have anything outside state comps?

It's not because they're "against" non vic clubs, it's because the bulk of the market is in vic and support vic clubs.

I still maintain as much as some would view it as a national comp, it is not. And we cannot possibly have one.
 
Last edited:

LoungeLizard

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 15, 2009
8,342
6,382
gippsland
AFL Club
Collingwood
Once again, other threads have been taken up with this particular conversation, these two come to mind of recent.

Time to bump this thread again. I like a good stoush! kranky al FreeTK



I'll start off with the misnomer that HQ are Vic centric and point out why the popular belief is a misnomer.

  • The comp is "vic biased" because HQ doesn't truly want a national comp
If this was actually true then why bother with pushing the game in rl states like nsw & qld? Why bother adding teams like gc and gws in a long long haul attempt to garner support for them? Why give Cola to teams with higher residential expenses? Why would HQ bother with pushing a game in China? Why would HQ bother with pushing games in NZ or India?

As Gil is South Australian why would he be "vic" bias? There are also members on the board of the AFL who are not Victorian - are they vic biased too?

Although it may "seem" "they're against us" then why would HQ even have anything outside state comps?

It's not because they're "against" non vic clubs, it's because the bulk of the market is in vic and support vic clubs.

I still maintain as much as some would view it as a national comp, it is not. And we cannot possibly have one.
If NSW takes to footy, gets the support like Vic has, things will change, but i can't see much change until then.
 

Papa G

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 13, 2006
22,040
40,127
The Bitter End
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Lol. Are you guys that stupid? It's about money. It's always about money. The move into NSW and Queensland is to make more and more money in the long term. The whole comp is designed to propagate and promote the big 5 or 6 Victorian sides. The other 3 or 4 are used to prop up the bigger ones and know not to step out of line because they can't afford to and are just happy to still have a seat at the big table.

It is true the AFL don't mind Sydney doing well because they covet the money and acceptance from Australia's most important city, but outside of that they just want the "interstate" sides doing well enough to keep rolling up and paying their money but not really contending. Despite all this West Coast have risen to be the biggest and richest club in the country. Will be interesting to see whether the AFL move to curb them in the near future. Maybe they are happy with one "interstate" bogeyman?
 

LoungeLizard

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 15, 2009
8,342
6,382
gippsland
AFL Club
Collingwood
Lol. Are you guys that stupid? It's about money. It's always about money. The move into NSW and Queensland is to make more and more money in the long term. The whole comp is designed to propagate and promote the big 5 or 6 Victorian sides. The other 3 or 4 are used to prop up the bigger ones and know not to step out of line because they can't afford to and are just happy to still have a seat at the big table.

It is true the AFL don't mind Sydney doing well because they covet the money and acceptance from Australia's most important city, but outside of that they just want the "interstate" sides doing well enough to keep rolling up and paying their money but not really contending. Despite all this West Coast have risen to be the biggest and richest club in the country. Will be interesting to see whether the AFL move to curb them in the near future. Maybe they are happy with one "interstate" bogeyman?
Yeah you're right, Gil would hate it if a SA side did well.
 

Yoey

Debutant
Oct 7, 2019
69
66
AFL Club
West Coast
We whinge about the inequities because they are obvious and in your face, if the AFL were to just dump on every team we would not be bothered. When you see the Premiership team play 7 games in a row at their home ground and belt the opposition in the GF you can't help but think this show is rigged. I know if we got the same crap each year that we normally do and Richmond got to play their last 5 games away the whinging stops.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
6,100
3,507
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Lol. Are you guys that stupid? It's about money. It's always about money
Of course it's about money, that's why HQ want to grow the game. Without sustained support from the public in the rl states then they're not going to make as much money as they would wish would they?

So no, the posters you're referring to aren't stupid (I'm assuming you think I'm one of the stupid), you're just not seeing the big picture.

In an ideal world the AFL would like an even spread of clubs and travel across the country i:e a fair and equitable national comp and for the code to be number 1 in the nation i:e have the highest interest from the public - so they can make more money.

Games in rl states generate tv ratings because footy fans watch it not rl fans. They want to somehow entice rl fans to favour footy over rl:drunk: to generate more attendance in the stands and on the couch i:e more money.

What we have now is not the ideal, what we have now is dictated by the market. Not because of some sort ridiculous belief in "vic bias"

The bulk of the market is in Vic, and this is why every non vic fan gets their nose out of joint - it doesn't favour their clubs or state.

There is no better alternative unless we go back to state leagues.

It's why the national comp can never be truly national.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
6,100
3,507
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Gill is the head of a Victorian institution, hugely important to the Victorian Government, business, economy, self worth and psyche. He knows where his bread is buttered.
So he's not vic biased then, he's money biased. Just like the comp has been since semi professionalism.
 

JackOutback

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 15, 2011
19,305
24,158
AFL Club
West Coast
Of course it's about money, that's why HQ want to grow the game. Without sustained support from the public in the rl states then they're not going to make as much money as they would wish would they?

So no, the posters you're referring to aren't stupid (I'm assuming you think I'm one of the stupid), you're just not seeing the big picture.

In an ideal world the AFL would like an even spread of clubs and travel across the country i:e a fair and equitable national comp and for the code to be number 1 in the nation i:e have the highest interest from the public - so they can make more money.

Games in rl states generate tv ratings because footy fans watch it not rl fans. They want to somehow entice rl fans to favour footy over rl:drunk: to generate more attendance in the stands and on the couch i:e more money.

What we have now is not the ideal, what we have now is dictated by the market. Not because of some sort ridiculous belief in "vic bias"

The bulk of the market is in Vic, and this is why every non vic fan gets their nose out of joint - it doesn't favour their clubs or state.

There is no better alternative unless we go back to state leagues.

It's why the national comp can never be truly national.
There is an alternative, it’s called forward thinking. There is more money to be made in the long term from an equitable national competition. You seem to be arguing that the AFL would/should chase the maximum Vic dollars today and become equitable only when there is just as much cash to be made from outside Vic. Alternatively, creating an equitable competition may actually hasten the addition of fans outside Vic and more money overall.

Many a business has lost out in the long run chasing short term dollars. An example of this is the terribly shortsighted decision to lock the grand final in at the MCG for 50 years just to get some cash upfront in the way of upgrades.
 

Papa G

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 13, 2006
22,040
40,127
The Bitter End
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
So he's not vic biased then, he's money biased. Just like the comp has been since semi professionalism.
Everything is run from a centralised Victorian perspective. If you can't see that you are blind. I get why we are here, I understand the reasons, but to argue it's not is sheer stupidity. Why are you bothering? Your club is at the pointiest point of it. You benefit from it more than anyone. Again I ask, why do you bother? Just enjoy it.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
6,100
3,507
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
There is an alternative, it’s called forward thinking. There is more money to be made in the long term from an equitable national competition. You seem to be arguing that the AFL would/should chase the maximum Vic dollars today and become equitable only when there is just as much cash to be made from outside Vic.
I'm not arguing they should or would I'm arguing they are already. Thought that was pretty evident, given the bulk of the teams are centralised in one state.

Alternatively, creating an equitable competition may actually hasten the addition of fans outside Vic and more money overall.

Many a business has lost out in the long run chasing short term dollars. An example of this is the terribly shortsighted decision to lock the grand final in at the MCG for 50 years just to get some cash upfront in the way of upgrades.
I'd agree IF and WHEN the population outside of vic outstrips vic, currently the vic population is larger than all other footy states and territories combined and likely always has been and by more than a million people.

And that's why we don't have an equitable national comp - it's catered to the bulk of the market.

This has nothing to do with short term dollars, even more pronounced chasing $$ in rl states in seeming futility - that's long term stuff right there.
 
Last edited:

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
6,100
3,507
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Everything is run from a centralised Victorian perspective. If you can't see that you are blind. I get why we are here, I understand the reasons, but to argue it's not is sheer stupidity. Why are you bothering? Your club is at the pointiest point of it. You benefit from it more than anyone. Again I ask, why do you bother? Just enjoy it.
I can see you're not comprehending what I would've thought was plain and simple.

Of course it's run from a Victorian perspective, it has since day dot and I've mentioned that since the OP.

I'm explaining the (what should be obvious) WHY!

WHY do I bother? I posted that in the bump post just today. It is because most non vic posters on here and other forums have this petulant childish belief that HQ is only there to create misery for them - support vic purely because vic. Which is just rubbish.

And I don't mind if you and others continue with the salt, that's for my and others enjoyment. I'm merely pointing out the obvious so if the toys are thrown I can just point out the facts.

Pretty simple stuff I would've thought.
 

Top Bottom