Yep agree with a lot of what is said here.
The gradually, but never ending interchange increases are wild. They add one. People say "if my team gets injured we're at a disadvantage." Then they add a sub. Then they say the sub should be a full time player. Then it repeats. I've been an avid watcher of footy and seen this expansion from 1, to 2, to 3, to 4.
Shorter quarters is very TV friendly. Games run for 2.5 hours including breaks now. If they get that neatly into 2 hours of play plus 30 mins of discussion that's a neat product. It's a bit too long for neat time slots right now.
Footy has evolved to congestion + fast breaks. I feel like there's a lot less variations in playing style between teams than when I watched footy in the 90s and 2000s. Even the 2010s had the battle of good (hawthorn and Geelong style) v evil (st kilda, syndey and to an extent, Collingwood style).
I loved 2025 as a spectator. It was so unpredictable outside of the three disaster teams - but I reckon that's cos everyone is too similar.
I want a game where it's about attrition and managing 21 players across 4 quarters. If you lose one too bad. If you play a fatty in the forward pocket who can't run but can snap like a boss. That's strategy. I don't really like it when it's a matter of the deepest midfield wins. It's still enjoyable to watch but the teams are lacking differentiating styles in my view.
