Expansion Alternate AFL World 1987

[Power Raid]

In a real alternate AFL world, the VFL wouldn't be the basis of the AFL, rather a truely national competition would be formed which would include multiple sides from various states and territories, a 'fixture' where everyone plays each other twice (or a conference style fixture).
We would also have a 2-tier competition where the bottom sides in the top tier are relegated and the grand finalists of the 2nd tier promoted.
The MCG wouldn't be where every GF is played, 'State of Origin' wouldn't be Victoria vs everyone else, and teams would be rewarded or punished by their performances.

Relegation is a bad business model and cements teams at the top and the also rans

 

[AndyD]

I did not say they would. The idea is to imagine how it would play out. Does not sound like you have at all with your comments as the following shows..

No I have thought about it, I just came to a different conclusion than you did.

What you are proposing to do would speed up the process of what you were trying to avoid. Revenue/viewers generated by Port/Norwood/East Perth over that time period that DID go to the SANFL/WAFL would’ve gone to the the VFL instead, leaving them at a weaker starting point in 1988. Companies that sponsored/got involved with those leagues on the basis of the strength of those clubs would desert those leagues because they wouldn’t be able to replace the departing clubs.

The only possible league that would benefit in your alternate world would be the VFA (as they would be the only league adding teams that draw more fans than the exisiting teams in the league do), but even then that benefit would eventually fade as Bulldogs/Saints supporters drop off once the players that played in the VFL retired and replaced by lesser standard players. Or the VFA/other state league clubs would get themselves into the same financial trouble the VFL clubs did by getting into bidding wars with better financed clubs to try and retain their better players. Or in this alternate world would players just be happy to play in a league that pays them less?

The only way this hypothetical world wouldn’t end in the even quicker loss of relevance for state leagues would be age restrictions on the leagues, which would stop clubs between leagues competing for the same players


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Football Tragic]

I always find these types of threads curious plus the ones stating that we should have equal representation from each state. Retrospect is a wonderful thing but even looking at the competition as it now stands, I struggle to comprehend how people could imagine a strong competition with equal representation from every state. In reality, support and representation is based on population and support levels. Its very much like the government representation/electorates rather than state equality. NSW and Queensland really should have more teams but the population does equal the percentage of support.

Ultimately our game is built on levels of fanatical support. It generates the money for the game. Having less teams may make the competition fairer but it would reduce revenue and exposure.

The AFL Competition is still supported by Victorian. Ultimately the competition is still evolving. We will have another non-Victorian in the next five years and (if we use the GWS/Suns example) and second team to go with it (though perhaps they'll just create a bye for teams at this time). This will finally even out the competition between Victorian teams and Non-Victorian teams. I can't see a time when the league will ever allow teams to relocate or die out. The reduction in revenue/ratings/sponsorship would be too much.

Overall though, the idea of a competition without 18+ teams is extremely improbable. States may increase the amount of teams they have ie creating a 3rd WA team but reducing the amount of Victorian teams would have far too much impact of growth and be a step back for the AFL. It just won't happen

 

[CURVE]

This hypothetical has more flaws (floors) than the Burj Khalifa.

 

[Scotland]

AFL happened by accident. There was no staged plan for national expansion, it all just happened ad hoc in the 80s and early 90s. WC and Brisbane are in because the VFL needed money, Adelaide are in because the SANFL wanted to thwart Port Adelaide's attempt to leave and join the VFL. The rest was a bit more planned from then on.

The geographical mix of teams is fine. If clubs were left to their own devices GC, GWS and probably Brisbane would fold before any Vic club. That the AFL is just an evolved VFL isn't ideal, but it's also not a big problem. The biggest problem that has been created is too many teams for a 22 game fixture. The VFL/AFL did not manage the transition from 12 to 14/15/16/17/18 teams well from a competition standpoint. We're long past the point of mergers, cutting teams back to the VFL etc. so it looks like we are stuck with a season format most people don't like.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I always find these types of threads curious plus the ones stating that we should have equal representation from each state. Retrospect is a wonderful thing but even looking at the competition as it now stands, I struggle to comprehend how people could imagine a strong competition with equal representation from every state. In reality, support and representation is based on population and support levels. Its very much like the government representation/electorates rather than state equality. NSW and Queensland really should have more teams but the population does equal the percentage of support.

Ultimately our game is built on levels of fanatical support. It generates the money for the game. Having less teams may make the competition fairer but it would reduce revenue and exposure.

The AFL Competition is still supported by Victorian. Ultimately the competition is still evolving. We will have another non-Victorian in the next five years and (if we use the GWS/Suns example) and second team to go with it (though perhaps they'll just create a bye for teams at this time). This will finally even out the competition between Victorian teams and Non-Victorian teams. I can't see a time when the league will ever allow teams to relocate or die out. The reduction in revenue/ratings/sponsorship would be too much.

Overall though, the idea of a competition without 18+ teams is extremely improbable. States may increase the amount of teams they have ie creating a 3rd WA team but reducing the amount of Victorian teams would have far too much impact of growth and be a step back for the AFL. It just won't happen

This is EXACTLY the problem with the popular conception with culling or relocating teams from Vic. There is too much supporter base for HQ to gamble with to un vic central the comp. Even the lowest vic member base is around 40k - speculate thrice that for total fan base.......... a minimum of 100k for one team. Apart from that - even if the idea was plausible there's a little thing called the charter.

• To pass any such culling or relocation requires a 3/4 majority vote from the clubs.
• IF that passes then HQ have to make that decision which is not in their best interest.

Still there are some with plenty of space between the ears who believe that the vic footy market is oversupplied <insert eye roll and sigh here>

As far as Footy Tragics hypothetical it does one major thing, it splits the fan bases between the supposed 1st tier league and the rest (WAFL, SANFL and VFA) with a view to splitting between Saturday and Sunday (at the time).

All good and well with the exception of adding the Hawthorn fan base (at the time) on the scrap heap............................ on top of the loss of the Sth Melb and Fitzroy base I think this hypothetical would've been in worse shape than reality (at the time).

 

[Carringbush2010]

AFL happened by accident. There was no staged plan for national expansion, it all just happened ad hoc in the 80s and early 90s. WC and Brisbane are in because the VFL needed money, Adelaide are in because the SANFL wanted to thwart Port Adelaide's attempt to leave and join the VFL. The rest was a bit more planned from then on.

The geographical mix of teams is fine. If clubs were left to their own devices GC, GWS and probably Brisbane would fold before any Vic club. That the AFL is just an evolved VFL isn't ideal, but it's also not a big problem. The biggest problem that has been created is too many teams for a 22 game fixture. The VFL/AFL did not manage the transition from 12 to 14/15/16/17/18 teams well from a competition standpoint. We're long past the point of mergers, cutting teams back to the VFL etc. so it looks like we are stuck with a season format most people don't like.

Yeah pretty much a decent summary, if the public were really really so p155ed off with it they'd turn their back and the comp would die if not at least diminish badly.

But we keep getting record numbers year on year, but the whinging gets louder and louder year on year as well - go figure.

 

[Scotland]

1981: 12 team VFL, average H&A attendance 25,409
1986: 12 team VFL with Sydney, average H&A attendance 22,514
1991: First season with a team in the 3 main markets, average H&A attendance 23,013
1995: First 16 team season, average H&A attendance 29,078
2019: Most attended season on aggregate, average H&A attendance 35,122

Prior to expansion (and no one watching Brisbane) the last time the VFL had average crowds under 20,000 was 1953. The competition went from Victorian only and semi-pro to national and fully professional in the space of a few decades and we are really only up 10,000 per game. The biggest feather in the AFL's cap (other than counting their TV rights billions) is that they've managed to get aggregate attendances to more than double. We now play 207 matches including finals compared to 138.

But it's different to how it was. An average of 35k means Collingwood get 50k vs whoever, Richmond vs Carlton gets 80k, Essendon get 45k at Marvel, WC get 55k in Perth etc. and then the rest is brought down by GWS and GC having home games, Melbourne teams having home games vs Port and Freo, Hawthorn and North playing in Tassie, Melbourne playing in Alice Springs etc. If you look back at the 80s most teams weren't a long way off the 20-25k average. If you were a Bulldogs fan you attended 11 games at the Whitten Oval and then maybe the odd away game. Etc. Fitzroy battled for support but Haw/Ess/Carl who were winning all the flags were getting at most 25-30k over a season.

Melbourne has become sort of two speed. The top teams get 60k per game, the bottom teams 20k or less. Fans flock to "blockbusters" and abandon other fixtures. The averages look good but they don't paint a realistic picture. Hawthorn's home crowds (MCG only) ranged from 14k to 66k. Melbourne 20k to 74k. There aren't many clubs who consistently get big crowds without opposition supporters padding the numbers. AFL HQ love it. They have a hard on for having a near full MCG and will happily shuffle around 18 into 22 to get the double ups they want because the average of 90k + 15k is still more than the average of 40k + 40k.

 

[Sttew]

In a real alternate AFL world, the VFL wouldn't be the basis of the AFL,

In a real alternate AFL world where would the competition be headquartered? Would have to be Melbourne, so you'd expect Victorian bias.

 

[revo333]

Definitely. Ideal world has Eagles, Dockers, Crows, etc, plus Tassie, and about 4 or 5 Victorian start-ups, all commencing circa 1987.

The 4 or 5 Victorian start-ups would've been just as loved and well-supported as Eagles, Crows etc. are.

That's not what happened obviously, so we are stuck with a Vic-centric comp, for better or worse.

Go follow a different competition then.

 

[Dazzler9]

Go follow a different competition then.

Why?

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Definitely. Ideal world has Eagles, Dockers, Crows, etc, plus Tassie, and about 4 or 5 Victorian start-ups, all commencing circa 1987.

The 4 or 5 Victorian start-ups would've been just as loved and well-supported as Eagles, Crows etc. are.

That's not what happened obviously, so we are stuck with a Vic-centric comp, for better or worse.

Lmao.

Right. So in 1986 the VFL which was functioning the strongest of all state leagues and attracting the premier talent should’ve gone - “alright, we’ve had a good run but let’s establish a new competition full of franchises and establish them all to compete directly with our own interests that have been running for nearly 100 years. That’ll garner widespread support”. And all existing Victorian teams rolled over and allowed all their existing talent to be assumed by these new entities?

You can see how desperately unrealistic what you’re proposing is at that juncture no? It would’ve been as much of a shambles as the Super League in the 1990s.

And don’t come at me with the fact youve said “ideal world” because that’s a crock of shit too. Why is 1987 the ideal start point for this competition in your scenario? Let me think...

 

[Dazzler9]

Lmao.

Right. So in 1986 the VFL which was functioning the strongest of all state leagues and attracting the premier talent should’ve gone - “alright, we’ve had a good run but let’s establish a new competition full of franchises and establish them all to compete directly with our own interests that have been running for nearly 100 years. That’ll garner widespread support”. And all existing Victorian teams rolled over and allowed all their existing talent to be assumed by these new entities?

You can see how desperately unrealistic what you’re proposing is at that juncture no? It would’ve been as much of a shambles as the Super League in the 1990s.

And don’t come at me with the fact youve said “ideal world” because that’s a crock of shit too. Why is 1987 the ideal start point for this competition in your scenario? Let me think...

I said "ideal world" nobber.

Why 1987 you ask? Read the thread title. lmao.

 

[Roylion]

Fitzroy relocate to Brisbane as Brisbane Lions and debt all cleared.

Would all the fans have an AFL club they follow in first part of weekend and a state league club each Sunday ?

In an alternate world why not merge Melbourne and Fitzroy to form the Melbourne Lions?





Club in Melbourne for both sets of supporters.

New list drawn from the following two lists in 1986


Fitzroy 1986 Playing List
# Player GM GL
1 Roos, Paul 24 5
17 McIvor, Scott 25 10
12 Conlan, Mick 24 45
24 Pekin, Tim 24 2
38 Harris, Leon 18 6
11 Barwick, Doug 23 30
14 Turner, Dean 20 4
44 Osborne, Richard 25 62
3 Pert, Gary 24 8
4 Thornton, Ross 20 1
40 Clayton, Scott 19 3
16 Lokan, Bill 16 6
18 Blakey, John 23 2
15 Hinchen, Graeme 17 2
9 Rendell, Matthew 15 5
13 Harris, Bernie 18 25
58 Dwyer, Mark 11 5
34 Lawrie, Grant 18 6
35 McGrath, Craig 16 13
5 Quinlan, Bernie 17 52
28 Reeves, Michael 16 2
19 Osborne, Graham 8 2
25 Keane, Gary 14 10
27 Cooper, Jamie 13 1
36 Knight, Phillip 8 4
30 Tilley, Paul 9 1
8 Browne, Murray 6
32 Mitchell, David 4 2
20 Rowe, Duane 5 1
37 Cameron, Stuart 3 2
6 Williamson, Graeme 5 1
58 Wynd, Jim 2 1
45 Bolden, Darren 2 2
2 Coates, Michael 3
29 Lyon, Ross 1 1
7 Gale, Michael 1
31 Stacey, Chris 1
15 McCormack, Peter 1
40 Ryan, Brendan 1

Melbourne 1986 Playing List

Number Player Games Goals
2 Robert Flower 16 15
3 Garry Lyon 20 26
4 Peter Giles 1 1
5 Robin White 9 1
6 Michael O'Sullivan 5 0
7 Brian Wilson 12 5
8 Graeme Yeats 5 0
9 Alan Johnson 10 9
10 Danny Hughes 15 6
12 David Williams 5 14
14 Rod Grinter 11 9
15 Mark Withers 12 3
16 Adrian Battiston 19 16
17 Frank Rugolo 2 4
18 Steven Stretch 18 4
19 Rodney Wright 2 0
19 Paul Payne 15 0
20 Russell Richards 20 13
21 Michael Reynolds 6 9
22 Chris Connolly 12 5
23 Daryl Bourke 9 0
24 Bret Bailey 10 2
25 Simon Eishold 5 3
26 Joe Rugolo 4 0
27 Sean Wight 6 0
28 David Cordner 9 3
29 Dale Dickson 9 4
30 Peter Moore 16 15
32 Shane Zantuck 9 3
33 Greg Healy 17 35
34 Stephen Newport 18 13
35 Darryl Cox 2 1
36 Ted Fidge 8 15
37 David Allday 11 3
38 Nigel Kol 17 9
39 Jeremy Nichols 4 2
40 Tony Campbell 12 5
41 Steve Turner 17 7
43 Len Gandini 5 1
44 John Fidge 4 12
45 Ricky Jackson 2 0
46 Darren Louttit 2 1
47 Alan Jarrott 18 11
50 Brett Lovett 8 0
57 Greg Sizer 1 1
59 Andrew Dale 2 0

 

[Evolved1]

Wayne Harmes is called out of bounds and it's a boundary throw in.

I can find maybe 5 alternate scenarios in which Essendon win the 1999 PF, and that's just from the last 2 minutes.

 

[footyfan1978]

In an alternate world why not merge Melbourne and Fitzroy to form the Melbourne Lions?

View attachment 834212

View attachment 834214

Club in Melbourne for both sets of supporters.

If both sets of fans want it, I'd say go for it.
I like the look of it.

 

[Pessimistic]

For those of us that lived through the football in the 1980's and saw the transition of so much of football clubs and leagues in next couple of decades I wonder if we can imagine an alternate footy world where things took an alternate path as if two worlds branched off in reality.

Suspend every little detail of the time and how this came about, just imagine it did.
Somehow the leagues got together for the good of the overall game and things change which would not be to everyone's liking but it got decided for the good of the sport overall this was what is happening from 1987 onwards:


The VFL adopt it's name change to AFL for 1987 and it is to be a 14 club league for now on.

7 current VFL clubs stay as is. Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond, Geelong, Melbourne and North Melbourne
The two worst historical clubs on premierships get told they can keep their identity as a club and their debts are cleared but have to go play in the VFA... St.Kilda and Footscray

Two clubs each, from WAFL and SANFL are added to the expanded AFL. Port Adelaide Magpies, Norwood, East Fremantle Sharks and West Perth Falcons
Hawks relocate to Tasmania as Hobart Hawks
Fitzroy relocate to Brisbane as Brisbane Lions and debt all cleared.

The AFL agree to that Sunday football is off limits except for Sydney Swans and all traditional state leagues including the VFA get the niche market of Sunday for them to get AFL free in their state. AFL games can be played Friday night to Saturday night on weekend but apart from Sydney Swans no other games can ever be programmed for a Sunday. Sunday is state league football day forever more.
SANFL becomes an 8 club league for Sunday's.
VFA gets Footscray and St.Kilda added to it and Sunday football market in Victoria.
WAFL has to decide if it runs as a 6 club league in Perth on Sunday's or invites two other suburban clubs to remain as 8 there for Sunday's.

TV broadcasts rights are advanced and all finances are underwritten to fix club and league finances in the late 80's.

Would we be in a better situation of the sport in such an alternative footy world timeline ?
Would all the fans have an AFL club they follow in first part of weekend and a state league club each Sunday ?

You dis St Kilda and footscray based on 'no flags' yet in the 20 years before 1987 the flag count was: Hawthorn 5 : Carlton 5 : Richmond 4 : Essendon 2 : North 2
These should have been the First five in your 'keep' list collingwood and st kilda made some grand finals also

Clearly Hawthorn are in and Melbourne are not by your logic, or melbourne shipped off to Tassie. which wasn't even a thought till 91-92 when Fitzroy played games there

 

[Pessimistic]

Another alternat world if Footy was te only code in australia, the national league would be historically dominated by Melbourne and Sydney, as was everything else.
The mix would be something like one team each WA SA QLD and the rest divided between melbourne and sydney

Even now the second team in WA QLD SA will be on life support for however

 

[Carringbush2010]

I can find maybe 5 alternate scenarios in which Essendon win the 1999 PF, and that's just from the last 2 minutes.

Not as infamous as the Harmes incident though.

 

[Scotland]

A hybrid VFL/SANFL/WAFL mix with either an 8/2/2 or 6/3/3 split of teams probably would have been a disaster, at least early on.

No one who supported a side in those leagues at the time would have started supporting a rival because all of sudden they were in a national comp and their original team was in a state comp.

The reality though is that if any of the 12 VFL clubs from the 1980s were playing in the current VFL (then VFA) they'd be just like the current VFL clubs are now. Thousands upon thousands of people born in the 80s and later would end up just following teams in the AFL. Footscray for example would be based at the Whitten Oval playing home games at the Whitten Oval getting a couple of thousand along each week. Hawthorn (unlikely to be punted in the 80s) would still be based at Glenferrie and would have gone back to playing there. Etc.

 

[telsor]

What people who wish the league was less 'Vic-centric' need to remember is that even with expansion in NSW & QLD, the comp is still >50% Vic...not just in teams, but in fans (TV & attendances), where the players come from, and perhaps most importantly than either, money (AFL HQ isn't in Melbourne for the weather).

Any 'alternative' proposals that don't keep that in the forefront of their minds were just bound to fail.

 

[Pessimistic]

What people who wish the league was less 'Vic-centric' need to remember is that even with expansion in NSW & QLD, the comp is still >50% Vic...not just in teams, but in fans (TV & attendances), where the players come from, and perhaps most importantly than either, money (AFL HQ isn't in Melbourne for the weather).

Any 'alternative' proposals that don't keep that in the forefront of their minds were just bound to fail.

And if the country had grown up with one footy code, the concentration in Melbourne and Sydney would be even bigger

 

[Pessimistic]

A hybrid VFL/SANFL/WAFL mix with either an 8/2/2 or 6/3/3 split of teams probably would have been a disaster, at least early on.

No one who supported a side in those leagues at the time would have started supporting a rival because all of sudden they were in a national comp and their original team was in a state comp.

The reality though is that if any of the 12 VFL clubs from the 1980s were playing in the current VFL (then VFA) they'd be just like the current VFL clubs are now. Thousands upon thousands of people born in the 80s and later would end up just following teams in the AFL. Footscray for example would be based at the Whitten Oval playing home games at the Whitten Oval getting a couple of thousand along each week. Hawthorn (unlikely to be punted in the 80s) would still be based at Glenferrie and would have gone back to playing there. Etc.

Gelenferrie is now declared unsafe for any footy above the level of auskick

 

[Blue1980]

Thinking about this and the various suggestions and thoughts of people on here, I don’t really think it could of been done much differently to how it has panned out.

Victoria being such a huge market and rusted on supporter bases meant losing any clubs risked losing people to the sport.

People can complain about it being Vic centric but in terms of the people in this country who love Aussie rules Victoria counts for at least 2 thirds of that. It’s basically a population a couple of million greater than NZ obsessed with a sport to the same extent NZ is with rugby union.

Now the OP did have a balance of clubs which reflected this, but I can’t see kicking out Vic clubs or relocating Hawthorn fresh off a premiership and 4 consecutive GFs off to tassie.

Also as others have mentioned the chosen SANFL and WAFL clubs wouldn’t of had instant converts of other clubs supporters or got everyone supporting them like the eagles and crows did when they came in.

I like the idea of promotion and relegation but the idea falls apart when you think you may have years with states not represented at the top level, which would be disastrous for NSW and QLD.

Ideally you wouldn’t stick to a 22 round season though, was brought it for a 12 team comp when it has been 18 rounds from around the late 20s to late 60s (minus some war years).

Also in alternate time line scenario I can’t see the state leagues really thriving that much even with a free day. VFA maybe more of a chance due to Vic being a bigger market but WAFL and SANFL would of struggled a fair bit.

 

[Carringbush2010]

What people who wish the league was less 'Vic-centric' need to remember is that even with expansion in NSW & QLD, the comp is still >50% Vic...not just in teams, but in fans (TV & attendances), where the players come from, and perhaps most importantly than either, money (AFL HQ isn't in Melbourne for the weather).

Any 'alternative' proposals that don't keep that in the forefront of their minds were just bound to fail.

50 % you say, the vic population outnumbers all other footy heartlands combined (including nt and tas) by around 1.5 million. Hazard a guess the vic market makes up much more than 50%. That's fair speculation.