Is the process of eliminating the vic teams wrong?

[sedders]

We all know there are too many vic teams, and as such it seems that a vic team wont win a GF until things change. It also seems that the AFL is just waiting for a vic team to become bankrupt, or waiting for them to put their hand up for a merge or a move.

Well i think we should just boot Geelong and Carlton out.

thoughts?

 

[Ron]

We all know there are too many vic teams, and as such it seems that a vic team wont win a GF until things change. It also seems that the AFL is just waiting for a vic team to become bankrupt, or waiting for them to put their hand up for a merge or a move.

Well i think we should just boot Geelong and Carlton out.

thoughts?

Sounds good to me.
Carlton couldn't win a game in the VFL, and Geelong, well they just suck.
Kick those two out and it would be alot better for the AFL.

 

[The Dice Man]

We all know there are too many vic teams, and as such it seems that a vic team wont win a GF until things change. It also seems that the AFL is just waiting for a vic team to become bankrupt, or waiting for them to put their hand up for a merge or a move.

Well i think we should just boot Geelong and Carlton out.

thoughts?

I dont follow.

How can the amount of teams in Victoria possibly have anything to do with the fact that the last 4 premiers have been from outside Victoria?

Do you suppose that if we relocate, merge or create a new team in a state other than Victoria that all of a sudden the Victorian teams playing lists will improve for some reason?

there would still be 16 teams, with just as many players going around as there have been for the past 4 years.

If Footscray all of a sudden left Melbourne, does this somehow improve Geelong's or Hawthorn's chances of winning a flag next year?

 

[Fire]

I dont follow.

How can the amount of teams in Victoria possibly have anything to do with the fact that the last 4 premiers have been from outside Victoria?

Do you suppose that if we relocate, merge or create a new team in a state other than Victoria that all of a sudden the Victorian teams playing lists will improve for some reason?

there would still be 16 teams, with just as many players going around as there have been for the past 4 years.

If Footscray all of a sudden left Melbourne, does this somehow improve Geelong's or Hawthorn's chances of winning a flag next year?

Of course.

you know it makes sense.

 

[m.diddy]

What's fremantles and Sydneys excuse then?

 

[The Dice Man]

What's fremantles and Sydneys excuse then?

Jeff Kennet.

 

[sedders]

I dont follow.

How can the amount of teams in Victoria possibly have anything to do with the fact that the last 4 premiers have been from outside Victoria?

Do you suppose that if we relocate, merge or create a new team in a state other than Victoria that all of a sudden the Victorian teams playing lists will improve for some reason?

there would still be 16 teams, with just as many players going around as there have been for the past 4 years.

If Footscray all of a sudden left Melbourne, does this somehow improve Geelong's or Hawthorn's chances of winning a flag next year?

well apparently thats the case. Not that i believe a word of it, but thats the latest excuse coming from the vic supporters; 'theres too many clubs in victoria' or 'we only get 4 home state advantage games a year' or 'we have to compete with 10 clubs for the pick of the vfl, whereas eagles only have to compete with freo for players in the whole wafl'.

I agree its all bollocks, but if it means less vic clubs, well I'll believe it.

anyway, apart from the onfield failures, victoria simply cant support 10 clubs finantially.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Bring on the Carlton Cats.

 

[littleduck]

We all know there are too many vic teams, and as such it seems that a vic team wont win a GF until things change. It also seems that the AFL is just waiting for a vic team to become bankrupt, or waiting for them to put their hand up for a merge or a move.

Well i think we should just boot Geelong and Carlton out.

thoughts?

I'll phrase your question better...

There are two schools of thought:

(1) that the AFL competition remain a glorified VFL (which does not involve a reduction of Victorian teams, but may include more non-Victorian teams)
(2) that the AFL evolve beyond a glorified VFL competition into a national competition (which necessarily involves a reduction of Victorian teams and an increase in non-Victorian teams)

Thus, there are two options. There is no right or wrong answer. Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

In my view option (1) is the preferable future for the AFL because Victoria/Melbourne will forever be the heart and soul of Australian Rules football. In my view an 18 team AFL competition is the ideal number with the admission of a Western Sydney team and second South East Queensland team to compete against the existing 16 teams. However, 16 teams is the correct number for the foreseeable future.

 

[Hawkk]

I'll phrase your question better...

There are two schools of thought:

(1) that the AFL competition remain a glorified VFL (which does not involve a reduction of Victorian teams, but may include more non-Victorian teams)
(2) that the AFL evolve beyond a glorified VFL competition into a national competition (which necessarily involves a reduction of Victorian teams and an increase in non-Victorian teams)

Thus, there are two options. There is no right or wrong answer. Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

In my view option (1) is the preferable future for the AFL because Victoria/Melbourne will forever be the heart and soul of Australian Rules football. In my view an 18 team AFL competition is the ideal number with the admission of a Western Sydney team and second South East Queensland team to compete against the existing 16 teams. However, 16 teams is the correct number for the foreseeable future.

But how many rounjds in a season.

hypethitcally let say that 2 clubs go under in 15 years using this method, would we expand the game throughout the Pacific???

 

[Skeppersap]

No wonder Victorians hate interstate football teams and interstate football supporters!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why geelong? Why Carlton? Because of an irrational hatred. Thats like me saying "lets get rid of st kilda" when i know that this is a ridiculous statement. Carlton have maybe the finest history in the AFL, Geelong offers something no other team can, a strong regional base.

If the AFL got divided into Victorian and Non-Victorian, despite interstate clubs having bigger memberships, higher bank balances, we would have the media!!!!!!!! Therefore Vic would thrive, Non-Vic would not. Non Vic clubs may be wealthy, but all the wealth depends on media. And Melbourne have a lions share of football media.

Back in your box you ********!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Bomber Spirit]

We all know there are too many vic teams, and as such it seems that a vic team wont win a GF until things change.

Not necessarily. It could also be argued that the current non-Victorian dominance is a phase that will pass. It was only 5 years ago that only 1 non-Victorian side made the top 8, and the top 4 were all Victorian clubs.
I can't see any reason why the current non-Victorian dominance is structural not cyclical.

 

[sedders]

chill out skeppesap, i have nothing against geelong, if you just looked at the other similarly titled thread and the team of the knob who started it, you might get it

 

[Hawkk]

No wonder Victorians hate interstate football teams and interstate football supporters!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why geelong? Why Carlton? Because of an irrational hatred. Thats like me saying "lets get rid of st kilda" when i know that this is a ridiculous statement. Carlton have maybe the finest history in the AFL, Geelong offers something no other team can, a strong regional base.

If the AFL got divided into Victorian and Non-Victorian, despite interstate clubs having bigger memberships, higher bank balances, we would have the media!!!!!!!! Therefore Vic would thrive, Non-Vic would not. Non Vic clubs may be wealthy, but all the wealth depends on media. And Melbourne have a lions share of football media.

Back in your box you ********!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It was just an example, it could have been any club

 

[Skeppersap]

chill out skeppesap, i have nothing against geelong, if you just looked at the other similarly titled thread and the team of the knob who started it, you might get it

OK, my mistake.

Apologies all, hadnt seen the other thread. Just couldnt believe what i was reading when i saw this thread. COntinue on with your evening everyone, nothing to see here!

 

[Bestbird]

The AFL can have all the equalisation programs in place but in the end the teams with the most money will eventually rise to the top or at the very least be very competitive over a long period

In the old VFL days it was Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon and Richmond who were the rich clubs and they attracted or bought the best players and hence won the most premierships.

In the new AFL it is Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane, Collingwood and Essendon with Port and Freo soon to catch up who have the most money, They can't buy a premiership these days by getting the best players but there advantage is gained by more staff, better medical programs and facilities.

With so many Clubs in Victoria, they struggle to compete membership or sponsorship wise.

 

[Tas]

Geelong is quasi interstate. At times it is easier to get to Adelaide than it is Geelong.

 

[_Ron_]

We all know there are too many vic teams, and as such it seems that a vic team wont win a GF until things change. It also seems that the AFL is just waiting for a vic team to become bankrupt, or waiting for them to put their hand up for a merge or a move.

Well i think we should just boot Geelong and Carlton out.

thoughts?

Parrot would be proud of that post

 

[flamethrower]

With so many Clubs in Victoria, they struggle to compete membership or sponsorship wise.

The major sponsors involved in the AFL are national or international companies, not state based. It is irrelevant to them where the teams are based, as long as the companies are getting plenty of exposure.

Membership numbers are finite. Each club only has x number of supporters. Relocating a club will not increase this number by a significant amount, and in most cases will decrease membership numbers.

 

[littleduck]

But how many rounjds in a season.

hypethitcally let say that 2 clubs go under in 15 years using this method, would we expand the game throughout the Pacific???

Absolutely AFL should expand throughout the Pacific at the grassroots level, but I don't reckon the AFL competition should expand beyond Australia, except maybe to New Zealand.

 

[embleygirl]

Geelong and Carlton have a lot of history and it would be sad to see them go a bit like Fitzroy.

If merging was the answer what clubs would they merge to or would they just merge together to become the Geelong Blues or Carlton Cats.

 

[rooboy]

Geelong is quasi interstate. At times it is easier to get to Adelaide than it is Geelong.

Yep, that's why Geelong get a lousy go from the umps, they also think the cats are from interstate.

 

[local]

What we need to do is merge some of the Victorian teams together.
North and Geelong = North Cats
Hawthorn and Melbourne = Melbourne Hawks
StKilda and Bulldogs = St Kilda Dogs

Richmond, carlton, collingwood and essendon are untouched, obviously.

AFL now can bring in a second team from Sydney.
StKilda final gets that second premiership
Hawthorn and Melbourne merger final goes ahead.
Geelong can move to Melbourne where it counts.

Done, and everybody is happy.

 

[linger_isgod]

Done, and everybody is happy.

Yeah, couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[Crowked]

We all know there are too many vic teams, and as such it seems that a vic team wont win a GF until things change. It also seems that the AFL is just waiting for a vic team to become bankrupt, or waiting for them to put their hand up for a merge or a move.

Well i think we should just boot Geelong and Carlton out.

thoughts?

Surely if this was the case, half the Victorian clubs would be extinct. When was the last time the AFL didnt give an end of season handout to a Victorian club to avaiod them going bankrupt. The only thing that changes is which club it is.

The truth behind the issue is there should never have been so many Victorian clubs in a national football competition. 10 teams from one state in a national comp of any sport in this country is a gross over representation of that states contribution to the sport. In this case its a gross over representation of Victoria at the expense of other established and more profitable possiblities in both SA and WA, which as proportion of input to australian rules is equally under represented.

I'm not saying the SANFL or the WAFL were the equal of the VFL in the old days, the VFL was always IMO the strongest comp in the land. However the St.Kildas, Fitzroys and Footscrays of the old VFL would have been making up the numbers in our comps too. Now they are members of a national comp, while other much more successful and profitable clubs in SA and WA have been decimated in every way by their exclusion from a competion they deserved to be part of much more than some existing members.