Would footy be better without national expansion?

[Billy ray]

It’s just I’ve been there twice and have found it to be generally very artificial in its construct, filled with w***ers bars, tacky shops, and wouldbeiftheycouldbes. It’s like a failed attempt at recreating Santa Barbara. Both times I’ve wondered why people live there when there is truly glorious towns within 300kms north and south of it...

Anyways no offence intended, if you enjoy it then more power to you.

Each city has pockets like that. I could easily name where i think you went and got that impression and could name similar places in each of perth, sydney and melbourne. Its about finding the good places.

Anyway, if you come a third time, drop me a line and I’ll show you the best spots.

 

[M Malice]

Should have only 12 sides, play each other twice - hard decision territory, no chance of going there.

Easy peasey. 12 clubs, every team plays each other H&A, 22 rounds.
Collingwood
Essendon
Richmond
Carlton
Hawthorn
Geelong
Brisbane
Sydney
Adelaide
Port Adelaide
West Coast
Fremantle

The Suns and Giants fold, Bulldogs, Saints, Demons and Kangaroos play in the VFL. Implement an AFL Reserves competition. All done, get on the job Gill the Dill.

 

[74561347]

That was an issue before there were any interstate teams. For all the interstate moaning that they only get to play on the MCG twice, we only play there once this year. It is a big advantage to play there when all the big finals are there, however, it isn't much of a home ground advantage when so many other clubs are tenants there as well.

you chose to sell home games to tasmania rather than request more games at the G, which in turn robs interstate sides of games they could have played at the G, like melbourne playing adelaide at alice springs, which last i checked doesnt host the grand final.

 

[kickazz]

My ideal setup would be separate state leagues, all competetive. State of origin games and perhaps a champions league kind of thing.

Would be amazing.

 

[Marcus DuQuesne]

Player depth is cut a bit thin with the number of clubs. This leads to a watered down contrived competition. However I like the expansion and eventually it will all come together...but not without some hiccups along the way. Just not enough "footballers" play footy.

 

[Tas]

you chose to sell home games to tasmania rather than request more games at the G, which in turn robs interstate sides of games they could have played at the G, like melbourne playing adelaide at alice springs, which last i checked doesnt host the grand final.

We were based at the MCG, AFL promised us a better deal at Docklands and didn't deliver. After our initial contract to play games at Docklands expired, we requested that all of our home games be moved back to the MCG, the stadium that was built and run by the state government for all cricket and football clubs in Melbourne.

AFL did not let us. They forced us to play at Docklands, they forced a horrible stadium deal on us, they forced severe financial hardship on us. Richmond came up with the idea to sell games to Hobart, AFL denied them but told Tasmania they would approve it if they could get us to agree to it. In a bid to alleviate the financial strain of paying off a significant chunk of Dockands we chose to move some games there.

It was all orchestrated by the AFL, if you have issues, take it up with the AFL. Stop making up bullshit about my club.

 

[Firestarter]

If it stopped the passive aggressive bitching about the league being a pseudo "vfl" then yeah trash it. Sooks can have it both ways.

 

[74561347]

We were based at the MCG, AFL promised us a better deal at Docklands and didn't deliver. After our initial contract to play games at Docklands expired, we requested that all of our home games be moved back to the MCG, the stadium that was built and run by the state government for all cricket and football clubs in Melbourne.

AFL did not let us. They forced us to play at Docklands, they forced a horrible stadium deal on us, they forced severe financial hardship on us. Richmond came up with the idea to sell games to Hobart, AFL denied them but told Tasmania they would approve it if they could get us to agree to it. In a bid to alleviate the financial strain of paying off a significant chunk of Dockands we chose to move some games there.

It was all orchestrated by the AFL, if you have issues, take it up with the AFL. Stop making up bullshit about my club.

if your initial contract had run out to play at etihad, how can the afl "force" you to play at a venue you dont want to play at? did they say really mean things to you until you signed?

 

[Tim Evans Beard]

I don’t think footy has failed us, I think the AFL administration has.
I think the following could gradually be introduced to improve the afl.

1. Return to zones, reserves and juniors.
The ability to ‘grow’ your own strengthens the ties between club and community. It would take time for ‘non-traditional’ areas to catch up, however a draft-type arrangement for unsigned players would help fill the void.

2. Leave the rules alone. This would be the most frustrating thing and the easiest to address. The game has constantly evolved within the laws of the game, there is no need to manufacture change. Look at the the tunneling/high contact rule. If we go back 10 years and look at the rules, the first player was given the advantages. If a player slip in late and hit the ball carriers leg, it was a trip (or attempted trip). If a player had the ball and was bent over the ball and hit by a player above the shoulders, it was high. If the player was upright and ‘ducked’ to initiate high contact, it was ‘play on’. This work fine when officiated correctly. Changes like this (and the holding the ball, incorrect disposal) do not add to the game.

3. AFLW/grass roots/AFLX/masters. There is always a larger group not competing at the highest level and needs to be supported. It does not need to forced on the public. If there is a public will for AFLW, and this public will translates into an self supporting economic environment, AFLW will flourish. If not, it won’t. Trying to sell it as something it is not yet is insulting.

4. Revenue over competition. The league is compromised as revenues are prioritised over fairness. When ‘blockbusters’ are locked in, and a fair draw is an afterthought, the competition will always be compromised.

These are but 4 examples where I think the administration has failed football - I have plenty more. I am sure there are more, but I do not think it is footy failing us.

 

[ERead]

If the AFL was being considered today, I'd suggest they'd hand out brand-new franchises rather than elevating mostly VFL sides to play in it.

I think a national competition is a must, especially without any international competition. It would've been great if the AFL had the sort of spread of the the A-League or the big bash league. But, we have the competition we have.

Footy is better with national expansion. Perhaps it wasn't the ideal model, but I'd rather not now try and change tack on that.

The AFL should spend all its riches making the AFL/AFLW the best they can be, and reduce the amount it spends on gimmicks.

 

[Tas]

if your initial contract had run out to play at etihad, how can the afl "force" you to play at a venue you dont want to play at? did they say really mean things to you until you signed?

Look, talking to you about stuff like this is a cosmic waste of my time because the previous post wasn't sufficient enough for it to sink in.

Believe whatever the * you want to believe.

 

[Big Blood]

Two conferences - the VFL conference (Vic) and the AFL conference (WA, SA, Tas, NSW, Qld).
The two conferences play off at the end of the year at neutral venue. Plus we bring back State of Origin.
VFL teams get their heart's desire, which is to play other VFL teams at the MCG, and interstate teams play on equal terms.

If the game keeps growing at current pace in NSW, this would be viable in about ten years.

OK, not very likely, because there's a lot more money in the current arrangement, but it would fairer and more fun for 'interstate' teams than playing in a glorified VFL.

 

[Smartest Brain]

The biggest reason anyone older than 30 isn't as interested in AFL anymore is because it is way softer. You will have these loud politically correct idiots that pretend taking all the violence out of the game is good because "think of the kids" but the game used to be violent. When players biff most people get excited. When players are hit hard most people are excited. They are taking away a lot of the excitement of the game for stupid reasons. There is only a handful of "hip and shoulders" in AFL every weekend now, a key tenant of the game.

Why should players be fined for having a bit of biff after the siren? ffs they are grown men and if they want to slap each other a bit let it happen. AFL will not grow if it doesn't stick to its strengths. There are many, many rusted on supporters of AFL that do not like the changes that will eventually just give up and then the crowds and ratings will not be sustainable.

If the NHL toughened too much up on their biff the crowds would plummet, and everyone knows it.

 

[BIRDBRAIN]

but it would fairer and more fun for 'interstate' teams than playing in a glorified VFL.

No, it wouldn't.

 

[Knox Harrington]

Yes. Much better off.
Essendon won more because it was a level playing field.

 

[Scotland]

If the VFL didn't expand we'd either have a breakway comp with the richest VFL clubs of the 80s and whoever could afford to join them, or we'd have something like the A-League/Super Rugby.

People romanticise about the good old days but Carlton tried to buy North and it wasn't out of charity. Any VFL clubs that didn't make the cut would still be playing at suburban grounds and would be comparable to current day VFL sides.

 

[Power Raid]

I have nothing against the VFL expanding to Sydney and Brisbane and then Perth and Adelaide, this isn't some dumb hur hur VFL bitching.

This is mostly directed toward West Australians and South Australians.

Now, although my interest is waning in footy due to to the fact it's just so devoid of excitement, intensity, and intrigue and there are constant floggings and every team feels the same with about three clear rungs of sides, I have thought about this before. As much as I enjoyed being the opposition, wearing the purple, getting cheeky pricks making comments, all this, I've quite often wished I followed a club of history and lineage and where, although I'm third generation Freo, it's not proper third generation. It's cool to know your family have always done that same ritual you are, and you're just another one passing through.

Not getting into the politics or issues with Gold Coast and GWS, but there's clear issues in Tasmanian footy where no one is getting drafted, these historical clubs are all folding, and the development and pathways are cactus because there's no money or professionalism in the admin.

In WA, I grew up and a trip to the footy used to get other kids jealous – kids who were into footy and were middle class enough simply had never been to the AFL before. It's not that unique. The cost was so prohibitive and experience so unenjoyable at Subi, a generation has grown up following the footy but not actually going to games. It's a bit wrong.

Crowds and money is important but there's a divide in Victoria where no matter how good the opposition side is or the match-up looks, interstate sides don't garner the same attention that Hawthorn v St Kilda or Richmond v Bullies would.

Not to mention fundamental issues with some teams rarely leaving Melbourne and others travelling a minimum three hours every second week, then there's the Grand Final (it should always be at the MCG – I agree with that, but it's hard for clubs out of Vic).

The draft is a hot one as well, with expansion clubs given academies and poaching guys like John Blakey's son. The idea of being from a certain area and probably going for the nearest club but knowing that you're going to play juniors then seniors there is a cool thing; quaint, novel, but it's a cool thing. It'd help foster relationships to specific areas and it gives each club a rightful identity and feel. Not to mention the fact it'd force clubs to develop well.

All in all, is the game just too attached and based on regionality to succeed?

I like the idea of bringing back zones and scrapping the draft but it's just so obvious that the WA and SA clubs will be dominant that it's not really ever going to get up.

Naturally if the VFL didn't expand, we wouldn't have three ultra professional and crisp leagues, but that's probably a good thing. Do we need this much media attention and whoring when the end result is Lingy acting like a handball was the most amazing thing he's ever seen, like a double head transplant or man on the moon? If we had three leagues they'd probably all be at a similar level to the A-League or NRL. But is that so bad? Does it make a better standard game if the players get 80k a year as opposed to three or four times that? Is there anything wrong with having a Winners type show and keeping up that way, or one league trying to go toward the TV model and playing weekday games so people all over the country can watch?

Those who follow the Crows, Eagles, and Dockers... do you wish you could still follow a local club, probably the one your family went for?

The more and more I think about it, the more I'd love the idea of going down to a sunny Freo Oval or cold Leederville and watching a game of footy for 20 bucks, with connection and relevance. And how much worse could the standard really be?

I've been thinking a similar line recently. The game is definitely played at a higher standard than WAFL and SANFL of 1980 but that doesn't mean it has translated to a better spectacle.

So instead of a great VFL, WAFL, SANFL supporting ~30 good sides and a marginal gap between the leagues, we now have 18 teams and a massive divide. Worse for most of the competition, we have one sided crowds.

In short, the recipe is wrong.

 

[Priddis Is Done]

We were based at the MCG, AFL promised us a better deal at Docklands and didn't deliver. After our initial contract to play games at Docklands expired, we requested that all of our home games be moved back to the MCG, the stadium that was built and run by the state government for all cricket and football clubs in Melbourne.

AFL did not let us. They forced us to play at Docklands, they forced a horrible stadium deal on us, they forced severe financial hardship on us. Richmond came up with the idea to sell games to Hobart, AFL denied them but told Tasmania they would approve it if they could get us to agree to it. In a bid to alleviate the financial strain of paying off a significant chunk of Dockands we chose to move some games there.

It was all orchestrated by the AFL, if you have issues, take it up with the AFL. Stop making up bullshit about my club.

I don't agree with my club having to play these bullsheet places... its a Vic Problem...make 2 x Vic Clubs play there.

But in saying that, if what you say is true, and i have no reason to doubt it, then my sympathies and thank you for taking the time in explaining.

 

[dockshark]

My ideal setup would be separate state leagues, all competetive. State of origin games and perhaps a champions league kind of thing.

Would be amazing.

Yes I would personally love this kind of set up.

* Keep the state leagues strong with an agreed salary cap across all teams from all 3 leagues.
* Top 4 teams from VFL, WAFL, and SANFL play off in a super finals series.
* State of Origin played on a long weekend mid season.

 

[telsor]

if your initial contract had run out to play at etihad, how can the afl "force" you to play at a venue you dont want to play at? did they say really mean things to you until you signed?

The AFL chooses where clubs play.

Just because they don't push your club around doesn't mean it's not so....or did you think Collingwood chose to play the bulldogs at the bullies home ground last friday?

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Each city has pockets like that. I could easily name where i think you went and got that impression and could name similar places in each of perth, sydney and melbourne. Its about finding the good places.

Anyway, if you come a third time, drop me a line and I’ll show you the best spots.

You've only got to go to places in the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney like the Clovelly Hotel to realise it. Full of young couples drinking water and bragging about how much their home is worth, looking gaunt from a diet of instant noodlesbecause it's all they can afford after the mortgage. With a subset of crims and NRL players who can afford beer and to snort coke in the toilets.

 

[telsor]

you chose to sell home games to tasmania rather than request more games at the G, which in turn robs interstate sides of games they could have played at the G, like melbourne playing adelaide at alice springs, which last i checked doesnt host the grand final.

MCG (and Docklands) already have as many games each season as they can host.

Scheduling and ground quality mean there is a limit....

The AFL wants games to be sold elsewhere, both because there is nowhere to play them in Melbourne and because it's the only way to get games into markets too small to host a team.

 

[Tas]

I don't agree with my club having to play these bullsheet places... its a Vic Problem...make 2 x Vic Clubs play there.

But in saying that, if what you say is true, and i have no reason to doubt it, then my sympathies and thank you for taking the time in explaining.

Yeah, I don't think any clubs that sell games want to be in that position, a lot of clubs were slow to become professionally run club (largely because they didn't have the resources), and a lot of them shot themselves in the foot over the journey that with the benefit of hindsight they wouldn't have made the choices that they did (like us move from the MCG), however, all the clubs here put a significant amount of trust in the AFL and on almost every occasion the AFL has let down the clubs that could least afford the AFL to act in the manner it did over the years.

It has only been very recently that there has been a significant push from all presidents to rectify the situation (including interstate clubs like Eagles and Crows), that mandate forced the AFL to act and the first part was to buy-out Docklands prematurely and either make it profitable or sell it off and build a low cost boutique stadium (Collingwood was in favour of selling it off), the land alone at Docklands was worth $1.3b at the time and the bulk of it paid for by the poorest clubs in Victoria. The Victorian government is going to sink another $300m upgrading it and we have an in-principal agreement for a stadium deal with the AFL for 2018 and onward where a lot more of the lucrative revenue that was previously kept by the stadium owner now goes towards the gate so we can get a fairer return from home games.

It will take some time to undo the damage done, but at least something is being done about it finally.

 

[Boomerfan99]

It’s just I’ve been there twice and have found it to be generally very artificial in its construct, filled with w***ers bars, tacky shops, and wouldbeiftheycouldbes. It’s like a failed attempt at recreating Santa Barbara. Both times I’ve wondered why people live there when there is truly glorious towns within 300kms north and south of it...

Anyways no offence intended, if you enjoy it then more power to you.

Agree whole heartedly. For some unknown reason my wife loves staying there. Would take sunny coast or somewhere like Hinchcliffe any day of week.

 

[precarious]

Easy peasey. 12 clubs, every team plays each other H&A, 22 rounds.
Collingwood
Essendon
Richmond
Carlton
Hawthorn
Geelong
Brisbane
Sydney
Adelaide
Port Adelaide
West Coast
Fremantle

The Suns and Giants fold, Bulldogs, Saints, Demons and Kangaroos play in the VFL. Implement an AFL Reserves competition. All done, get on the job Gill the Dill.

Group the Vic clubs into 4 'representative' teams to arrive at 12 for the national comp: the Verticals (Hawthorn, North, Collingwood), Horizontals (Geelong, Western Bulldogs, St Kilda), Diagonals (Richmond, Essendon) and Stripeless (Carlton, Melbourne).

Schedule games 1 x Thursday Night, 2 x Friday Night (one Vic, one non-Vic), 2 x Saturday Night (one Vic, one non-Vic), 1 x Sunday Afternoon.

Leaves Saturday Afternoons free for state leagues with all Vic clubs entering standalone teams in the VFL.

The FTA network could show different games into different cities on Friday and Saturday nights, maximizing ratings, with Fox showing either all games nationally or games into the reverse cities.

Tassie and perhaps another team could come in to form 13 or 14. If 14, a second Sunday Afternoon game would enable different games to be shown into different states for that time slot as well.