VFL Changes 2011 and Beyond

[divvydan]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-clubs-set-to-go-it-alone/story-e6frf9jf-1225962341857?from=public_rss

The 12-10 player rule has already been abolished for next season, meaning VFL clubs can field as many AFL-listed players as they want.

"We're in the process of looking at putting on the table to AFL clubs the opportunity to consider whether they want to run their own VFL team from the 2012 or 2013 season," O'Riley said.

"Some of the AFL clubs are very, very happy with their alignment and I don't believe they would ever find the need to break away.

"But a couple believe they'd be able to get better (AFL) results with their own VFL side."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-clubs-set-to-go-it-alone/story-e6frf9jf-1225962341857?from=public_rss

Abolishing the 12-10 rule from next year could hurt Frankston and Port Melbourne but is good news for aligned clubs as it means no one will miss out on playing seniors for quota reasons.

[LostDoggy]

Re: VFL Changes 2011 and Beyond

Do you guys think we would be looking at our own vfl team or would we be happy with Williamstown?

[divvydan]

Re: VFL Changes 2011 and Beyond

Do you guys think we would be looking at our own vfl team or would we be happy with Williamstown?

This bit of the article gives some idea as to the cost of doing so. Given our debt levels and our low football department spending, I can't see it being financially viable to run our own VFL team, even if we wanted to.

Collingwood and Geelong field VFL teams, which gives them total control of player and team development.

Both pay a licence fee of about $110,000 and incur a raft of staffing costs and player payments

[soupman]

Re: VFL Changes 2011 and Beyond

Do you guys think we would be looking at our own vfl team or would we be happy with Williamstown?

Considering the costs of doing so, and that our focus appears to be on "Bulldozing the debt", I don't think we can justify it.

[GVGjr]

Re: VFL Changes 2011 and Beyond

Considering the costs of doing so, and that our focus appears to be on "Bulldozing the debt", I don't think we can justify it.

Agreed. I still think the best option is to have an alliance with 2 sides but that wont happen either.

[Cyberdoggie]

Re: VFL Changes 2011 and Beyond

Agreed. I still think the best option is to have an alliance with 2 sides but that wont happen either.

True, so i guess the best option is to have an alliance with a single team that we have a history with and a good working relationship. So sticking with Williamstown is a must.

[soupman]

Re: VFL Changes 2011 and Beyond

I wonder how much more beneficial a stand alone reserves side for us would be for us anyway.

The key benefit would be an ability to play players in the positions we want, but who's to say that we don't get this benefit almost entirely as is? Williamstown has been very accomdating with where our players play, and the main downside has been the limit on AFL players in the senior side, which isn't an issue anymore.

Williamstown even fund a rookie spot for us, so I'm not sure that this current arrangement is that bad when we seem to work pretty well as a senior and reserves side. I haven't heard of any major issues arising out of our arrangment in recent times, and now that Rose and Little look like being elsewhere next year it will be even better for our young players development.