Opinion Hypothetical, Back to pre nationalisation. What's your opinion?

[Carringbush2010]

Probably. Would prefer Fitzroy in a national compeitition, but both options are pipe dreams.

Like I said in the op, it's not realistic, thanks for your thoughts.

 

[Kwality]

You wouldn't have teh $ we have now with so many competing leagues, and so many more teams.
I ...

I prefer a genuine high quality competition played across Australia.

Arguably the aim of the AFL ?

 

[ziad]

The AFL is about 20 years away from being a national comp - if they work at it. The key would be cultural change.
The strength of the AFL is that it is available on TV. If the WAFL was televised and accessable I would watch it and the AFL.
There is no going back to it is not worth debating.
SOO isnt supported so has no brand. It works for NRL because there are only two states.

 

[Carringbush2010]

It depends on how you spread the players.

Do the players get spread like the 1970's?

Go back to the 70's and about 10 of the best 60-70 odd WA players were in Victoria. It diminished the WAFL and enhanced the VFL - but only by a bit. It was part of what made sure the VFL was the best comp in the nation - but certainly not the preeminent single superior league that the AFL is now. The AFL has ALL the best players in the country but the VFL never had that. It wasn't the case that SOME good players stayed in SA and WA. The overwhelming majority did.​

​

If you recreate the 1970 to 1980 period you would take (what is it 80-100?) WA origin AFL players and spread them among only 8 WAFL teams then, then chuck in about half the best 20 Territorian players .... then you have a watchable WAFL. Each side would have 10 to 14 AFL quality players.​

But if you spread the players like 1990 onwards....

The comp in Melbourne would have all the best players and the WAFL would be unwatchable.​

Even better than all this malarkey would be a revolutionary change in the AFL. ie making the AFL govern for ALL clubs in an equal basis.

The reason players went to the VFL was because they were more lucrative situations then playing at home. The reason why the VFL was attractive to those players was because it had the biggest public market as vic still does now.

 

[Carringbush2010]

The AFL is about 20 years away from being a national comp - if they work at it. The key would be cultural change.
The strength of the AFL is that it is available on TV. If the WAFL was televised and accessable I would watch it and the AFL.
There is no going back to it is not worth debating.
SOO isnt supported so has no brand. It works for NRL because there are only two states.

To achieve that cultural change you'd need a market increase in non vic states to level the playing field so to speak. The reason soo works in rl is because its market values it more than its premiership season. Soo is bigger in rl than the premiership season because of it and thus attracts more tv, crowd, and therefore dollars.

The same thing would need to happen in Aus football, us, the market would need to value it more than the premiership season. That's not going to happen. IF my unrealistic hypothetical were to pass we'd probably value soo more.

 

[Kwality]

The reason players went to the VFL was because they were more lucrative situations then playing at home. The reason why the VFL was attractive to those players was because it had the biggest public market as vic still does now.

Equally players didnt go at all or went for a season or 3 & went home, most famously Graham Moss & his brand new Brownlow. The indigenous players stayed home in droves.

The financial divide between rich & poor was as transparent as in the AFL today.

 

[HardcoreGeelongFan]

Yes either revert it to state leagues or bring Fitzroy back into the AFL and give them Tasmania. We can't keep things the current way it's a joke

 

[Kwality]

Yes either revert it to state leagues or bring Fitzroy back into the AFL and give them Tasmania. We can't keep things the current way it's a joke

the same old VFL thinking that Tas is theirs to do what suits Vic, take their players ..... the AFL added money to that.
Elitist nonsense.

 

[Engimal v3]

The AFL is a national competition?

Nope. There are two major comps that serve Australia: the AFL (Australian Football League) and the TSL (Tasmanian State League).

 

[Choogler]

Forever and a day there seems to be daily shit fights with non vic vs vic on BF. Just about every thread is hijacked by emotional childish types that post non thread relevant diatribe to vent their spleen.

Remember this is purely hypothetical and is not realistic, but interested in how everyone would feel about not having a national comp.

Any posts that state 'you can't because' will be ignored, just want your opinion on what the big 3 leagues and 2nd tier leagues would look like in today's Australia and whether you'd be in favour of it or not.

This implies current stadia, fan bases, media coverage,coaches, staff and players (payed employees) but the clubs remain as they were pre 1981 (before South goes North) for obvious reasons. Roylion likes this! (And any changes in other leagues post or coinciding with theses - please post them in the thread)

It's the old leagues in today's Australia. Think of today's professionalism without a national comp.

• The 3 big leagues would obviously be the VFL, WAFL and SANFL.
• All other leagues would be 2nd tier largely because of market forces (like it used to be), the 3 are obviously the most populated heartland states.
• By extension the largest markets would attract the lands best talent and would likely dilute the talent of smaller comps like the VFA, TFL (was the highest profile of this group) QFL, NTFL, VAFA etc..

The pros & cons for current non vic fans:

• Obviously less travel.
• More equitable fixturing than now.
• Finals and GF in home state.
• These leagues would be much larger and much higher profile as a result.
• No current teams Bris, WC, GWS, Freo, GC and Ade. - you follow teams in your leagues (or any other league you choose).
• Port fans the big winners here, everyone else returns to following their old team (or adopt one depending on your age).

Please keep this thread relevant and refrain from turning this into a kick a vic competition or non vic baiting, let's try to have fun with it.

Watch "The Merge", if you haven't seen it it primarily deals with the Fitzroy/Brisbane merger but also covers, and this is particularly relevant to this conversation, the state of the VFL in 87 when expansion first occurred.

Ross Oakley, the head honcho of the VFL at the time, says in very plain English that the VFL and at least half its clubs were bankrupt.

This has to be a consideration in your conversation because the VFL would NOT have continued as it was and the decision to expand was not made because the VFL or it's clubs wanted a national competition, it was an exercise in self-survival and was only agreed to by the clubs when they discovered each was going to get $666,000 as their share of the combined $8 million licence fee WCE & the Bears put up. Effectively, the Bears and WCE saved the VFL and I could insert a diatribe here, but will simply say that they WCE continue to contribute more than their fair share to support not just the nonviable Vic clubs, but the competition as a whole.

With out a national comp, the WAFL would have continued to flourish and continued to reap the transfer fees for our players..... the very same transfer fees that would see the VFL and its clubs go broke.

 

[Philth]

I've heard a few old boys here in WA talk about going to WAFL matches back in the 80's, sounds awesome.
Freo derbies etc.
So it could be good, and i think you'd get good crowds.
Only thing is, with the talent spread so thin with all those clubs, the standard of footy we've come to expect would drop, a lot. You'd lose a lot of fans, potentially.

 

[Philth]

To answer the OP question though, no I wouldn't support it.
I quite like the AFL the way it is, with the current teams.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Watch "The Merge", if you haven't seen it it primarily deals with the Fitzroy/Brisbane merger but also covers, and this is particularly relevant to this conversation, the state of the VFL in 87 when expansion first occurred.

Ross Oakley, the head honcho of the VFL at the time, says in very plain English that the VFL and at least half its clubs were bankrupt.

This has to be a consideration in your conversation because the VFL would NOT have continued as it was and the decision to expand was not made because the VFL or it's clubs wanted a national competition, it was an exercise in self-survival and was only agreed to by the clubs when they discovered each was going to get $666,000 as their share of the combined $8 million licence fee WCE & the Bears put up. Effectively, the Bears and WCE saved the VFL and I could insert a diatribe here, but will simply say that they WCE continue to contribute more than their fair share to support not just the nonviable Vic clubs, but the competition as a whole.

With out a national comp, the WAFL would have continued to flourish and continued to reap the transfer fees for our players..... the very same transfer fees that would see the VFL and its clubs go broke.

Without getting off topic, Fitzroy and Bris did not 'merge' and there's speculation that the WAFL was in some trouble at the time as well, there's also speculation the main driver was for a national comp.

Anyway not for here, what do you think the comps would look now without an expanded vic comp?

 

[Choogler]

Without getting off topic, Fitzroy and Bris did not 'merge' and there's speculation that the WAFL was in some trouble at the time as well, there's also speculation the main driver was for a national comp.

Anyway not for here, what do you think the comps would look now without an expanded vic comp?

Two things.
Firstly, the Brisbane and Fitzroy "merger" was officially approved by the AFL on 4th July 1996 when they rejected the competing North Melbourne bid and chose the Brisbane bid. The Brisbane bid adopted Fitzroy's colours, logo, club song, 3 of Fitzroy's directors and provided payment options for Fitzroy's creditors.... The only thing I can see that remained of the Bears was the "Brisbane" the location, management and some directors. So, yes the 2 clubs did "merge" in every sense of the word.

Secondly, you are correct that the WAFL and some of its clubs were in trouble but so was the VFL and half its clubs, including Richmond and Collingwood and it was this more than anything that drove the expansion moves because, as it stood, the VFL competition was unable to increase the revenue to the levels necessary to sustain the competition's increasing costs. They needed to inject new life into it and expansion was seen as the best option to increase revenue and a national draft the best way to decrease their ever increasing and debilitating recruiting and player payment costs.

To answer your question as to what the comps would look like now without expansion my firm belief is that WAFL, SANFL and Tassie would be stronger comps than present, with better player strength and more supporters attending the games. The financial status of these comps and their clubs is anyone's guess!

I think the VFL would look somewhat different. It would still be the premier comp in the land but may have lost some of the clubs that were on the brink at the time of expansion. Some of these are the same clubs that wouldn't survive now without the extra support they get from the AFL.

This is very interesting and gives a timeline, from 1907, to the national comp and beyond http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=1469

 

[Roylion]

Two things.
Firstly, the Brisbane and Fitzroy "merger" was officially approved by the AFL on 4th July 1996 when they rejected the competing North Melbourne bid and chose the Brisbane bid. The Brisbane bid adopted Fitzroy's colours, logo, club song, 3 of Fitzroy's directors and provided payment options for Fitzroy's creditors.... The only thing I can see that remained of the Bears was the "Brisbane" the location, management and some directors. So, yes the 2 clubs did "merge" in every sense of the word.

No they did not "merge". The Brisbane Bears rebranded to the AFL owned Fitzroy branding such as the colours and lion logo.

No Fitzroy Football Club director ever served on the Brisbane Lions board. After 1996 the same Fitzroy directors remained in control of the Fitzroy Football Club which was ejected from the AFL competition and today exists in its' own right in Melbourne - a fact recognised by the Victorian Supreme Court in 2010.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Two things.
Firstly, the Brisbane and Fitzroy "merger" was officially approved by the AFL on 4th July 1996 when they rejected the competing North Melbourne bid and chose the Brisbane bid. The Brisbane bid adopted Fitzroy's colours, logo, club song, 3 of Fitzroy's directors and provided payment options for Fitzroy's creditors.... The only thing I can see that remained of the Bears was the "Brisbane" the location, management and some directors. So, yes the 2 clubs did "merge" in every sense of the word.

Secondly, you are correct that the WAFL and some of its clubs were in trouble but so was the VFL and half its clubs, including Richmond and Collingwood and it was this more than anything that drove the expansion moves because, as it stood, the VFL competition was unable to increase the revenue to the levels necessary to sustain the competition's increasing costs. They needed to inject new life into it and expansion was seen as the best option to increase revenue and a national draft the best way to decrease their ever increasing and debilitating recruiting and player payment costs.

To answer your question as to what the comps would look like now without expansion my firm belief is that WAFL, SANFL and Tassie would be stronger comps than present, with better player strength and more supporters attending the games. The financial status of these comps and their clubs is anyone's guess!

I think the VFL would look somewhat different. It would still be the premier comp in the land but may have lost some of the clubs that were on the brink at the time of expansion. Some of these are the same clubs that wouldn't survive now without the extra support they get from the AFL.

This is very interesting and gives a timeline, from 1907, to the national comp and beyond http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=1469

Firstly there was no merger, Fitzroy still exist in the VAFA and the Brisbane bears rebranded as the lions once Fitzroy was ejected from the competition.

Secondly, we think the same as how the landscape would look. Certainly the wafl and sanfl would be as strong as ever and the VFL would be the largest comp purely coz because of market size.

 

[Corkintheocean]

As long as I can get qtr results of matches via smoke signal directly to my cave I don't see any reason not to return to the past.

 

[Gavin Excell]

To answer the OP question though, no I wouldn't support it.
I quite like the AFL the way it is, with the current teams.

Agreed

 

[Carringbush2010]

Thought I'd bump this thread.

With the non vics still complaining to this day about the current expanded vfl, a return to state leagues looks increasingly attractive and viable for all stakeholders, particularly us fans, even more so the non vic fans IMHO

No longer do I view this as unrealistic, I view this as a solution to the many inequities of the current vafl.

As far as I'm aware the WAFL, SANFL, NTFL, TFL, QFL still exist, and expansion clubs Ade, WC, Port compete in them.

All the northern clubs are currently in the VFL - where they'd fit is probably up to how much public interest there is for them. Certainly Syd and Bris would have market interest in Vic, given their vic history. GC and GWS I'm not so certain, again the market (us the fans) would decide.

Basically the vfl get their Fitzroy and South Melbourne back, albeit a different name.

As for Freo, I know their wafl affiliate is Peel, how do Freo fans feel about this hypothetical? Given Freo's very large supporter base would Peel be renamed as Fremantle by popular demand? Thoughts?

I've proposed this model in the Vic Bias thread, and I don't understand why there is opposition to it.

• State leagues, considering their AFL clubs compete in them anyway (cept Freo)
• They're governed locally, like they are now.
• Overseen by a committed body to the growth and the health of the game i:e a separate body from the state league governing bodies. Instead of one league that is vic centred and governed from Victoria.
• There's a playoff series of champions at the end of the state league premiership seasons.*

How much public interest this would have I don't know* For my own interest I wouldn't take too much interest in it unless my club was in it. I'd be more interested in the whatever the vfl premiership is.

All academies, pathways and FS, are local to the state and the rules apply locally.

Travel is eliminated.

Basically every inequity that non vic clubs currently endure would be eliminated.

Stadia may be an issue though, depending on market demand for the game, for example in vic, Ikon park (the old Princes park) would have to host more games, given there's only currently Marvel and the G.

Over here in WA, IF the WAFL were to flourish back to its glory days, then the hills at all the burb grounds would swell, given there's only Optus that is top level standard. Would this and could this drive stadium upgrades? Of course there'd be hurdles like local council etc.

It'd be the same in SA and Vic, all the burb grounds would be locked out IF public interest would take hold, and it would take hold, in all footy heartland states IF we no longer had an expanded vfl.

Of course this will probably never happen, but IMHO this hypothetical would be better for the most important stake holders in the game, and that's us the paying fans and members.

Give me your reasons that this wouldn't be better for you?

 

[oak79]

IF the AFL reverted back to a state based VFL... A new national league would start - either with new clubs or break away with existing clubs.

The benefit it is, if wouldnt have half the teams based in one state.

People want to support a club in the top league.
So count me in - all for the Eagles joining a break away league with the biggest clubs like the crows, freo, Port, Sydney, tigers and Pies.

And You can have your local state league.

 

[Choogler]

Thought I'd bump this thread.

With the non vics still complaining to this day about the current expanded vfl, a return to state leagues looks increasingly attractive and viable for all stakeholders, particularly us fans, even more so the non vic fans IMHO

No longer do I view this as unrealistic, I view this as a solution to the many inequities of the current vafl.

As far as I'm aware the WAFL, SANFL, NTFL, TFL, QFL still exist, and expansion clubs Ade, WC, Port compete in them.

All the northern clubs are currently in the VFL - where they'd fit is probably up to how much public interest there is for them. Certainly Syd and Bris would have market interest in Vic, given their vic history. GC and GWS I'm not so certain, again the market (us the fans) would decide.

Basically the vfl get their Fitzroy and South Melbourne back, albeit a different name.

As for Freo, I know their wafl affiliate is Peel, how do Freo fans feel about this hypothetical? Given Freo's very large supporter base would Peel be renamed as Fremantle by popular demand? Thoughts?

I've proposed this model in the Vic Bias thread, and I don't understand why there is opposition to it.

• State leagues, considering their AFL clubs compete in them anyway (cept Freo)
• They're governed locally, like they are now.
• Overseen by a committed body to the growth and the health of the game i:e a separate body from the state league governing bodies. Instead of one league that is vic centred and governed from Victoria.
• There's a playoff series of champions at the end of the state league premiership seasons.*

How much public interest this would have I don't know* For my own interest I wouldn't take too much interest in it unless my club was in it. I'd be more interested in the whatever the vfl premiership is.

All academies, pathways and FS, are local to the state and the rules apply locally.

Travel is eliminated.

Basically every inequity that non vic clubs currently endure would be eliminated.

Stadia may be an issue though, depending on market demand for the game, for example in vic, Ikon park (the old Princes park) would have to host more games, given there's only currently Marvel and the G.

Over here in WA, IF the WAFL were to flourish back to its glory days, then the hills at all the burb grounds would swell, given there's only Optus that is top level standard. Would this and could this drive stadium upgrades? Of course there'd be hurdles like local council etc.

It'd be the same in SA and Vic, all the burb grounds would be locked out IF public interest would take hold, and it would take hold, in all footy heartland states IF we no longer had an expanded vfl.

Of course this will probably never happen, but IMHO this hypothetical would be better for the most important stake holders in the game, and that's us the paying fans and members.

Give me your reasons that this wouldn't be better for you?

Why do you think the VFL and 7 of its 12 clubs were on the verge of being shut down in 1986 due to insolvency. Because the cost of recruiting the best interstate players in the country was sending the VFL clubs broke, and the WAFL and SANFL clubs were unprofitable, relying on transfer fees to stay afloat. Had the expansion not happened, the Vic corporate regulator would have shut down the whole VFL competition, personally I wish WCE and BB had waited a year and let the regulator shut down the VFL comp and clubs. We could have had a true national competition that would not be dominated by Victoria with all the inequalities that it has created.
What do you think would happen if the situation reverted to the way it was where clubs survived on their own without prop-up funding? You could kiss good-bye to NM, STK, WB and Melbourne who only survive on the back of millions upon millions of dollars of prop-up funding gifted by the AFL over the last decade and longer.
Be careful what you wish for!

 

[Carringbush2010]

I wish WCE and BB had waited a year and let the regulator shut down the VFL comp and clubs.

Even if that came to pass, there was too much public interest in the big vic clubs to just die off into the sunset. And there was enough interest in the WAFL and SANFL clubs to not just also fritter away without a wimper.

You may disagree, but it's unlikely the big clubs in those comps would just die off, sure the comps may have but the clubs would've come back in some way shape or form

What do you think would happen if the situation reverted to the way it was where clubs survived on their own without prop-up funding?

EVERY competition in the world has small clubs that are propped up, in saying that even North has 50k members. Hardly a club that's just gonna die off.

It's different now, the smallest club is not in financial trouble.

You could kiss good-bye to NM, STK, WB and Melbourne who only survive on the back of millions upon millions of dollars of prop-up funding gifted by the AFL over the last decade and longer.

Then, not now.

HQ distribute funds to all clubs to keep them viable, the smallest club with 50k members hardly screams of a disaster destined for death.

It wouldn't be any different if we had a vfl conference, it has the biggest market with that smallest club. Virtually zero chance of clubs dying off.

Not like it was with the $ wars buying the best players and coaches when the cheques were bouncing.

Be careful what you wish for!

You're dystopian hypothetical is based on financial disaster from 40 odd years ago, it's different now.

If you wanna keep the status quo with the inequities for non vic and small vic clubs, go ahead be my guest.

For mine, returning to state leagues, run by the state leagues and the sport of football has an independent guardian i:e like an afl that doesn't run a league is much better than what we have now.

More equal for everyone, including us the fans, the biggest stake holders.

 

[Carringbush2010]

IF the AFL reverted back to a state based VFL... A new national league would start - either with new clubs or break away with existing clubs.

The benefit it is, if wouldnt have half the teams based in one state.

People want to support a club in the top league.
So count me in - all for the Eagles joining a break away league with the biggest clubs like the crows, freo, Port, Sydney, tigers and Pies.

And You can have your local state league.

Thing is though, if you have the biggest clubs that'd mean that the fans and members of those big clubs wouldn't get to see their clubs play as often as they would if they stayed in their own state.

State leagues though........ your club you can see every week, and of course the vfl would be the biggest because it has the biggest market.

 

[TheEscapeClub]

Do the VFL, WAFL and SANFL have salary caps? If not I could just see Vic and WA plundering the SA talent and reducing them to second tier.

With a supporters expectation of what a properly run professional football club should look like these days, could WA support their league with 8 teams in it? I know there's plenty of money over there but there's still only 2.5m people.

I think the VFL would have to reduce in size to probably 8 clubs and go back to having u/19s, reserves and seniors and recruiting zones (which I would really like).

 

[Carringbush2010]

Do the VFL, WAFL and SANFL have salary caps?

Probably yes, I'm not sure, but likely

If not I could just see Vic and WA plundering the SA talent and reducing them to second tier.

And STILL the state clubs and leagues were still operating and are still operating, to this day, high standard competitions.

With a supporters expectation of what a properly run professional football club should look like these days, could WA support their league with 8 teams in it?

They still do now, and as I pointed out earlier, the expansion teams are competing in the Wafl and sanfl.

I think the VFL would have to reduce in size to probably 8 clubs

That wouldn't work, because the smallest clubs has 50k members and conservatively speaking probably north of 100k paying fans.

Whatever league they're in just wouldn't (and probably couldn't anyway) just cull them off.