Where the AFL should be heading according to me!

[mjp]

What happens if there is a 'soft' conference? One of those freak years where the 4 best sides are all in the same conference.
Leave it in the traditional sense, one league and then a final series. The draw is never going to be completely fair. Neither is a golf tournament when half tee's off in the AM and half PM. Its just the way it is

Now - those are reasons I can understand and talk about.

At least if there is a 'soft' conference, those 'softer' teams are fighting it out against one another...in todays footy, two evenly matched teams can finishes 2 or 3 wins apart simply because of the schedule. That annoys me no end - the AFL says it tries to even these things out, but because of the cap/draft and pull towards parity, it is impossible to pre-emptively assess strength of schedule.

After all, the 'good' conference will always get right of reply in the Grand Final.

I know that the draw is uneven, and I know it will never be perfect. I am convinced it can be better though...

[LostDoggy]

Now - those are reasons I can understand and talk about.

At least if there is a 'soft' conference, those 'softer' teams are fighting it out against one another...in todays footy, two evenly matched teams can finishes 2 or 3 wins apart simply because of the schedule. That annoys me no end - the AFL says it tries to even these things out, but because of the cap/draft and pull towards parity, it is impossible to pre-emptively assess strength of schedule.

After all, the 'good' conference will always get right of reply in the Grand Final.

I know that the draw is uneven, and I know it will never be perfect. I am convinced it can be better though...

Im not convinced with the conference system the 4 best sides will get to prelim final day. The 2 best from each conference might, maybe not the 4 from the whole comp

[Sockeye Salmon]

16 Teams is good.

2 in each of Perth and Adelaide.
1 in each of Brisbane and Sydney.
1 in each of the satellite cities (Geelong and Gold Coast - it is gonna happen).
8 in Melbourne.

Two conferences with 8 teams in each one - each year you play home and away within your conference, and each of your 'inter-conference opponents' twice. In this way, the season goes for 22 games and there is no 'bias' in terms of schedules for the finals.

Each 'conference' has a Page system type finals system (first semi, second semi, prelim, conference championship), followed by the grand final between the two winners.

I am honestly sick of proposals talking about playing 30 games etc to 'equalise' the draw - the draw can be equalised with 16 teams, but we just have to split into two.

Barassi Conference:

Collingwood
Essendon
Saints
Hawks
Gold Coast
Sydney
Port Adelaide
West Coast

Whitten Conference:
Richmond
Carlton
Dogs
Dees/North (whoever is left)
Cats
Brisbane
Adelaide
Fremantle

As for the whole rivalry thing etc, splitting up Adelaide/Port, Freo/WCE etc can be sold pretty easily - you will never play off in a grand final unless you do this.

I've written 20 posts over the last few years saying basically the same thing.

I think you've got one or two very minor points wrong.

* The finals should be a combined Page system.
1st (Barassi) v 2nd (Whitten) - winner to prelim A, loser to qualifying A
1st (W) v 2nd (B) - winner to prelim B, loser to qualifying B
3rd 9B) v 4th (W) - Winner to qualifying A, loser eliminated
3rd (W) v 4th (B) - Winner to qualifying B, loser eliminated

In this system if the two best teams are from the same conference they can play off in the grand final, regardless of where they're from.

* Leave Port and Adelaide in one conference and West Coast and Freo in the other. Less travel for everyone and give the supporters two Showdowns/Derbies a year. If (when) Gold Coast come in they should be included in the same conference as Brisbane (probably in the Adelaide conference, you don't want clubs going to Perth and Brisbane twice each year).

* Split Essendon and Collingwood. Let them keep Anzac Day but it will be their only H & A match each year. This evens up the financial side a bit with every club getting three home games against these two sides every two years.

* Conferences can be altered every two years on a rotating schedule to even out any travel discrepancies (why do we have to travel to Perth when they only have to go to Adelaide, boo hoo).

My conferences

Barassi

West Coast
Freo
Sydney
Essendon
Richmond
St. Kilda
Geelong
Hawthorn



Whitten

Adelaide
Port Adelaide
Brisbane
Gold Coast
Collingwood
Carlton
Melbourne
Western Bulldogs

[mjp]

Im not convinced with the conference system the 4 best sides will get to prelim final day. The 2 best from each conference might, maybe not the 4 from the whole comp

Yep - I accept that.

Perhaps Sockeye's similar system with a different finals structure is better?

[LostDoggy]

Yep - I accept that.

Perhaps Sockeye's similar system with a different finals structure is better?

Sockeyes final structure is better. Still would hate to see the conference system.

[aker39]

I've written 20 posts over the last few years saying basically the same thing.

I think you've got one or two very minor points wrong.

* The finals should be a combined Page system.
1st (Barassi) v 2nd (Whitten) - winner to prelim A, loser to qualifying A
1st (W) v 2nd (B) - winner to prelim B, loser to qualifying B
3rd 9B) v 4th (W) - Winner to qualifying A, loser eliminated
3rd (W) v 4th (B) - Winner to qualifying B, loser eliminated

In this system if the two best teams are from the same conference they can play off in the grand final, regardless of where they're from.

* Leave Port and Adelaide in one conference and West Coast and Freo in the other. Less travel for everyone and give the supporters two Showdowns/Derbies a year. If (when) Gold Coast come in they should be included in the same conference as Brisbane (probably in the Adelaide conference, you don't want clubs going to Perth and Brisbane twice each year).

* Split Essendon and Collingwood. Let them keep Anzac Day but it will be their only H & A match each year. This evens up the financial side a bit with every club getting three home games against these two sides every two years.

* Conferences can be altered every two years on a rotating schedule to even out any travel discrepancies (why do we have to travel to Perth when they only have to go to Adelaide, boo hoo).

My conferences

Barassi

West Coast
Freo
Sydney
Essendon
Richmond
St. Kilda
Geelong
Hawthorn



Whitten

Adelaide
Port Adelaide
Brisbane
Gold Coast
Collingwood
Carlton
Melbourne
Western Bulldogs

That makes too much sense for the AFL to ever consider it.

[The Underdog]

Wouldn't the conferences be called Coventry and Buckley?

[bornadog]

According to the age today, Gold Coast will start 2011 and Western Sydney 2012 making it an 18 team competition.

[LostDoggy]

There is a balance to be found between growing the game (which I think is important) and doing it in a way that does not rip the heart out of game.

Growth into any and all urban areas of Australia is viable in a long-term sense (I'm talking in 20 to 50 years if we start the process now). When we say things like the Gold Coast or West Sydney is not viable it's probably because we've been so spoilt as to what constitutes a good crowd. Even the English Premier League, one of the world's most successful sporting competitions, outside of the top four to eight teams, do not get an average crowd of more than 20,000. So I can understand why the AFL wants to push into these areas. I think even four or five new clubs with stable average memberships of 20,000 or so will be valuable additions to the competition. Not every club has to be a mega-club.

I also, by extension, don't agree with the converse argument that 10 teams are too many for Melbourne. Even the Roos, who are supposed to be the weakest team here financially, will have close to 30,000 members and probably the same again in terms of fans who are not members. How is 60,000 fans not supposed to represent a significant chunk of support for the AFL as a 'product'? Also, every single existing club in the AFL currently is a major part of the brand -- you cannot get rid of a single club without damaging the brand in some way -- witness South Melbourne and Fitzroy people still wandering around hurt after ten/twenty years.

And for all those worried about the rumours of the Dogs relocation to West Sydney, the AFL would have to be seriously unintelligent to even consider that. While it has potential, no one can argue that West Sydney is more ripe for AFL brand exploitation than the West of Melbourne, still far under-saturated as far as AFL penetration goes, and no club is better positioned to take advantage of that fact than the Western Bulldogs (Geelong and Essendon will do their best to interfere but they are geographically and culturally at best square pegs in round holes as far as the next ten/twenty years of development in the western suburbs of Melbourne are concerned). If you think the West of Sydney is going to explode just wait for the imminent explosion economically and culturally out west-way over here.

If we are thinking truly long term, there is no reason the 'traditional' clubs cannot coexist with the new 'franchise' clubs. SS or mjp's conference system or a more vertical division (first and second division with relegations/promotions) or an entirely new system will have to be used to even out the draw, but it can't be any worse than the ridiculously lopsided system we already have at present, so anything is an improvement in any case. The viability of clubs long-term may not be dependent on local fans anyway. The AFL will have to continue to develop as a TV product for an (even limited) international market. Arsenal in the UK until they moved to the Emirates Stadium recently only had a 25,000 seat capacity stadium, yet are one of the biggest, richest and best followed teams in England. Arsene Wenger said just last week that 80% of their fans are outside the UK. The NBA, MLB and NFL teams in the US are primarily TV products for an international audience now, even while local fans continue to love and follow their teams.

Can you imagine a day when our old crusty Doggies' memberships are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars to fans in Japan and South Africa over ebay, while we pass them on to our kids and grandkids?

ps. very general and quickly typed up, so don't please don't take me to task over too many details -- I know the analogies I've used aren't precise nor were they meant to be, more just general ideas.

[LostDoggy]

ps. I know that American and UK sports having global audiences are largely a product of their previous or current global influence, but don't underestimate the influence Australia potentially has on our northern neighbours, welcome or otherwise. (In this sense the move of the Socceroos into Asia may actually turn out to have a welcome by-product of 'globalising' Australian products -- sport especially -- even further..)

[Sockeye Salmon]

While we're playing 'let's pretend', how about we keep the same 16 clubs that we've already got and introduce a 2nd tier national comp.

Gold Coast (Southport perhaps?)
Brisbane Reserves
West Sydney
Sydney Reserves
Canberra
VFL (Port Melbourne perhaps?)
SANFL (Norwood, Centrals, a combined side?)
WAFL (Claremont, Subiaco, a combined side?)
Tassie
Northern Territory


This would:

Give decent competition for Brisbane and Sydney reserves
Start a club culture at Gold Coast and West Sydney and starts off local interest.
Give an environment for those who have missed their AFL boat another place to show recruiters what they've got.
Allow established footy fans in Tassie and the NT to have an interest at a State level.

If an AFL club fell over financially Gold Coast or West Sydney would already be established to take their place in the AFL.

[mjp]

While we're playing 'let's pretend', how about we keep the same 16 clubs that we've already got and introduce a 2nd tier national comp.

Gold Coast (Southport perhaps?)
Brisbane Reserves
West Sydney
Sydney Reserves
Canberra
VFL (Port Melbourne perhaps?)
SANFL (Norwood, Centrals, a combined side?)
WAFL (Claremont, Subiaco, a combined side?)
Tassie
Northern Territory


This would:

Give decent competition for Brisbane and Sydney reserves
Start a club culture at Gold Coast and West Sydney and starts off local interest.
Give an environment for those who have missed their AFL boat another place to show recruiters what they've got.
Allow established footy fans in Tassie and the NT to have an interest at a State level.

If an AFL club fell over financially Gold Coast or West Sydney would already be established to take their place in the AFL.

Talk about further decimating what is left of 2nd Tier footy SS...

[bornadog]

Talk about further decimating what is left of 2nd Tier footy SS...

don't worry mike, you will be the coach of the combined team in WA

[LostDoggy]

No one discussed yet how ridiculous the AFL plan for 18 clubs is? I've already mentioned I can't understand why they would be expanding when the current set up isn't right yet
If the AFL was to expand why go to West Sydney and Gold Coast where they are certain to fail? Wouldn't places like Tasmania and NT be safer bets?
There is something else behind all this as it all reeks of jealously and competition against other codes.
I very much doubt there will be new teams made. I have no doubt what the AFL want is for 2 teams to move there.

[bornadog]

No one discussed yet how ridiculous the AFL plan for 18 clubs is? I've already mentioned I can't understand why they would be expanding when the current set up isn't right yet
If the AFL was to expand why go to West Sydney and Gold Coast where they are certain to fail? Wouldn't places like Tasmania and NT be safer bets?
There is something else behind all this as it all reeks of jealously and competition against other codes.
I very much doubt there will be new teams made. I have no doubt what the AFL want is for 2 teams to move there.

NT and and Tassie are small markets, Gold Coast and West Sydney are two of the fastest growing areas in Australia. Having said that, I believe they will cut funding to existing clubs after 2009 and then its sink or swim and then move for those that don't make it.

Where should the AFL Be heading. If the AFL were fair dinkum about expanding into these areas, they need to hit them with a bang. You have to look at Clubs that don't don't really represent a decent geological area

Carlton - small suburb
Collingwood - the brand can work anywhere.
Essendon - Northern Suburbs
Geelong - covered
Hawthorn - Eastern Suburbs/Tassie
Melbourne - unfortunatelty untouchable to move, but can merge
North Melb - very small base
Richmond - small suburb
St Kilda - Possible to represent South East Suburbs
Dogs - Western Suburbs

In an Ideal World based on the above, North would move North, Richmond to hit West Sydney. Yes I know it sounds controversial but if you want a club to succeed in Western Sydney, they have to come with a ready made supporter base. Other candidates would be either Collingwood or Carlton, yes you read correctly. Why not? Why should a club that has a small membership base be moved before a bigger club. The Collingwood and Carlton brands are big and can work anywhere in Australia. Imagine Collingwood in West Sydney, boy the game would really grow and they could become massive.

I know it wouldn't happen, but we are talking shit here anyway.