National Reserves Comp
- Thread starter Seedsfan
- Start date
- Tagged users None
At this point, it just seems to make sense to have a reserves side for every AFL team that plays a curtain raiser to the league game. Try and encourage spectators to arrive earlier.
Allow the VFL to be its own standalone comp, where the stand alone teams don’t have to fly interstate to play the Swans and Lions etc.
Let the WAFL and SANFL not have the problems of trying to fit the Eagles and Crows etc in.
Allow the VFL to be its own standalone comp, where the stand alone teams don’t have to fly interstate to play the Swans and Lions etc.
Let the WAFL and SANFL not have the problems of trying to fit the Eagles and Crows etc in.
- Nov 21, 2013
- 6,107
- 4,549
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Get the fans in earlier to spend more om food and drink
Even when they have curtain raisers which is rare these days as they have to look after the ground surfaces the curtain raiser finishes nearly and hour to and hour and a half before the main game.
It won't ever be like it was with Reserves in the 80's.
Although, currently any curtain raiders are sporadic. They aren’t before every game. So they put them early enough that AFL teams get a consistent warm up on the field as when there is no curtain raiser.
If there is a reserves team for every club, the warm up can be consistent at a shorter time for every week, and the league teams can just adjust for the whole season, rather than on a sporadic basis.
The grounds won't allow for these games mate, doubling the amount of games on these grounds will cause issues for the AFL potentially being liable to injuries as the grounds will get chewed up.
If a national reserves comp happens they will almost certainly be played at other grounds and on other days most of the time.
Just play on the state league suburban grounds- whenever the local team plays away, the reserves game is on their ground that week.
Ie- South Fremantle play away v Subiaco- Fremantle plays on Fremantle oval. Simple.
Beside, every team in the league have developed training grounds- just play on there as well. Be great to see Princes Park, Arden St etc all being used again.
Dirty Bird
Pokémon Master
Could the AFL try and align it so they can use an oval nearby for all the games.
If it's a night/Twilight game, have it nearby 4h before.
And if it's an afternoon game have it 30min after the AFL finishes.
Ie. Any game at the MCG has the ressies at Punt Road before or after
Use Arden St for Marvel Stadium games
WACA for WA games
Karen Rolton Oval for SA games
games at SCG have the ressies on the Swans training facilities
Same for the Giants at Homebush and Suns on the Gold Coast
And you can use Morningside Football Club's ground in Brisbane?
Then for any rural games, you just play on the same oval before or afterwards?
Also, If I were the AFL I'd expand lists. They get 45 main list players, then a pool of others to call upon for ressies. Make it Academy/F+S players. Then beyond that u18s in the state (I know ~15 years ago Sydney's top up players in the canberra league were the junior players in sydney - so do that?)
If it's a night/Twilight game, have it nearby 4h before.
And if it's an afternoon game have it 30min after the AFL finishes.
Ie. Any game at the MCG has the ressies at Punt Road before or after
Use Arden St for Marvel Stadium games
WACA for WA games
Karen Rolton Oval for SA games
games at SCG have the ressies on the Swans training facilities
Same for the Giants at Homebush and Suns on the Gold Coast
And you can use Morningside Football Club's ground in Brisbane?
Then for any rural games, you just play on the same oval before or afterwards?
Also, If I were the AFL I'd expand lists. They get 45 main list players, then a pool of others to call upon for ressies. Make it Academy/F+S players. Then beyond that u18s in the state (I know ~15 years ago Sydney's top up players in the canberra league were the junior players in sydney - so do that?)
neogh
Senior List
- Apr 17, 2015
- 239
- 242
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Dolphins, MVFC
Kick the NEAFL clubs out and split the VFL in half like they did in the VFA days.
But have a cross-state cup tournament every 3-4 weeks, where the teams that lead the table goes into some cup competition.
AFL reserves isn't a new idea, but needs to be continuously decentralized as it was after 2000-ish.
But have a cross-state cup tournament every 3-4 weeks, where the teams that lead the table goes into some cup competition.
AFL reserves isn't a new idea, but needs to be continuously decentralized as it was after 2000-ish.
AFL national reserves bombshell nears as Port Adelaide ‘officially applies’ to join VFL
AFL national reserves bombshell nears as Port Adelaide ‘officially applies’ to join VFL
www.foxsports.com.au
I have never understood why there isn't a national reserves competition anyway.
Play a full AFLW season at the same time too.
Follow the same fixture as the seniors and then play all three games on the one day (just like the old days).
10:00am - AFLW
12:00noon - AFL Reserves
2:00pm - AFL Seniors
AFootballParent
Rookie
AFL national reserves bombshell nears as Port Adelaide ‘officially applies’ to join VFL
AFL national reserves bombshell nears as Port Adelaide ‘officially applies’ to join VFL
I have never understood why there isn't a national reserves competition anyway.
Play a full AFLW season at the same time too.
Follow the same fixture as the seniors and then play all three games on the one day (just like the old days).
10:00am - AFLW
12:00noon - AFL Reserves
2:00pm - AFL Seniors
Love this idea
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
- Oct 3, 2008
- 7,545
- 8,093
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I think it would be awesome, like the old days.
Just not sure about costs...Travel etc.
Just not sure about costs...Travel etc.
It won’t be anything like the old days, more than likely the games will be at other grounds on different days and the goal now is simply developing instead of trying to win the reserves flag.
- Feb 26, 2013
- 582
- 1,064
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Ah yes! The old days when on a wet day after U19s and ressies the ground is a muddy heap for the seniors game. Please no.
Suns would actually reduce cost by flying both AFL and VFL reserve on the same plane, sharing hotel. Curtain raisers happen already. Like this weekend.
- Sep 25, 2014
- 5,305
- 3,903
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Adelaide United & Leeds United
This topic needs to be an ongoing discussion. Getting Tassie up and running and a reserves comp needs to be priority by the AFL. The crows and Power reserves are hanging on by a thread in the SANFL and clearly dont want to play in that comp. The VFL format is a disgrace. Its time the state league comps get a bit of credibility back and be stand alone comps with stand alone teams. The is more than enough cash in the game/AFL to fund a National reserves comp. It will be better for player development and something great for the fans too. the good old curtain raiser. all games to fall in line with the AFL games.. finals included.
You think leaving the SANFL which is a higher level than the VFL will help player development?
You think AFL grounds will allow curtain raisers and even if they did have one every now and again it will finish 2 hours before main game so no one will watch it.
If your fans are not going to watch your reserves play in the SANFL they will not go and watch them everywhere.
I can here your sentiment but it's just a fantasy and not going to happen. The money needs to go to State leagues not to a national reserves league which will be a glorified colts comp. Put the money where you get players from, not where you see how average many of your recruits are.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
I think it's ridiculously silly to get the four western teams to fly dozens of players and support staff for the eastern states, when the matches themselves don't have any attendance whatsoever to cover costs, when there's already an appropriate level of talent in the home cities that don't involve someone paying for flights. Just because the cash exists doesn't meant that there's better ways of spendin git.
The AFL should absolutely flex its arms more to the WAFL/SANFL, such as the extent those teams are allowed to recruit and pay top-up players to field competitive teams, are fixtured to a normal amount of games and don't randomly get extra byes or whatever, and play under identical rules to the AFL, though. I don't understand why the AFL doesn't already do it.
The Eagles this year used only 65% of their allotted recruiting points. Not the WAFL's fault the Eagles didn't recruit.
Peel seem to have little issue working with Freo. Eagles have issues no matter what system. Maybe they need to look within and admit they are the problem.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
I may be entirely wrong on this but isn't there difficulties in recruiting players because of the Colts/U19/Reserves/Seniors zoning system that young players graduate to in those two states, and West Coast/Adelaide have difficulties recruiting top-up players (even ones that would be guaranteed to get a game every week even if every West Coast player was fit, let alone the difficulties in not having a WAFL reserves team to drop down to if West Coast had a lot of fit AFL listed players), because of zoning and transfer rules etc?
You're more a Perth fan than a West Coast one going by your profile so of course you're going to take issue with a West Coast team, which is not a historic WAFL team, taking away from the zones and competitiveness of the history of WAFL teams.
WAFL: Eagles granted improved recruiting, TPP allowances
The WAFL Eagles will have an increased player payment allowance and improved recruiting conditions from 2024
Such was West Coast's uncompetitive 2023 WAFL season among the quality of their top-up players but they still have significant restrictions that prevent (e.g.) the signing of ex-AFL listed players who may have mad a meaningful AFL career. Compare to the Dogs VFL team this year that was able to recruit Trent Bianco (23 senior games across 4 years) that wouldn't be allowed to be recruited.
Peel don't have the issue because they've worked out a compromise with Fremantle obviously that they get the best of both worlds - they can recruit players in the Peel geographic area and build them up through the system, but also play every one of their AFL-listed players in a way on the field that is the positions they would play in the AFL team and would help develop them under the interests of the Fremantle team.
I may be entirely wrong on this but isn't there difficulties in recruiting players because of the Colts/U19/Reserves/Seniors zoning system that young players graduate to in those two states, and West Coast/Adelaide have difficulties recruiting top-up players (even ones that would be guaranteed to get a game every week even if every West Coast player was fit, let alone the difficulties in not having a WAFL reserves team to drop down to if West Coast had a lot of fit AFL listed players), because of zoning and transfer rules etc?
You're more a Perth fan than a West Coast one going by your profile so of course you're going to take issue with a West Coast team, which is not a historic WAFL team, taking away from the zones and competitiveness of the history of WAFL teams.
WAFL: Eagles granted improved recruiting, TPP allowances
The WAFL Eagles will have an increased player payment allowance and improved recruiting conditions from 2024www.westcoasteagles.com.au
Such was West Coast's uncompetitive 2023 WAFL season among the quality of their top-up players but they still have significant restrictions that prevent (e.g.) the signing of ex-AFL listed players who may have mad a meaningful AFL career. Compare to the Dogs VFL team this year that was able to recruit Trent Bianco (23 senior games across 4 years) that wouldn't be allowed to be recruited.
Peel don't have the issue because they've worked out a compromise with Fremantle obviously that they get the best of both worlds - they can recruit players in the Peel geographic area and build them up through the system, but also play every one of their AFL-listed players in a way on the field that is the positions they would play in the AFL team and would help develop them under the interests of the Fremantle team.
I am all in on it being fair so don't give me the WAFL club support mantra. The Eagles have difficulty recruiting players because players who have just lost their AFL career don't want to play for them. They want to go back to their original WAFL club. They also don't want to play for the Eagles because their priority is not to win the WAFL premiership where as the WAFL clubs priority is.
They don't want to play for the Eagles because the Eagles are only their to develop their players, they couldn't care less about the top ups and therefor it's not an attractive place to play.
The Eagles have had their players farmed out to all WAFL clubs, won two AFL flags doing so but ended up not happy.
They have had 3 alignments and each and every one of them the WAFL clubs have said see you later.
Now they have a stand alone club in the WAFL and again still not happy even after many concessions provided to them.
The bottom line with all of this is finding players who want to play for them as top ups. It's not easy to do that. I am not sure how that can be fixed other than an open cheque book and if that happens then the WAFL clubs will of course not be happy with that.
How about just using up your allocation and recruit from the East or other places and see how that goes first.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
They've also had difficulties recruiting players because of regulations that prevent them to do so, as with the above link - merely pointing out the points you highlight doesn't consider the other restrictions.
The Eagles don't want their players farmed out to other WAFL clubs or even an alignement where they don't have strong control because it limits their control over the development of these players, such as choosing the position they play on the field. That should be self-evident. Fremantle have far greater control with their listed players and their development and Peel, and they can do that, because Peel is a weaker WAFL club than the others in the power balance with an AFL club.
I don't think it's wrong for the AFL to step in and say, the WAFL exists, not only for a premier to be decided among West Australian teams, but to also serve the interest of West Coast's AFL-listed players. They should say this because what's the alternative - either someone pays money to fly these players to the Eastern states to play in front of two men and a dog, or West Coast reserves counter-productively play in 20-goal losses (as has been the case with the quality of the top-up players). So the other WAFL clubs can whine all they want about an open "chequebook". they ultimately are financially stable by the fact that people pay money to attend West Coast AFL games in the state.
If West Coast keep harassing the AFL about the lack of development of their listed players not getting an AFL games, and to play in a national reserves competition, the AFL clearly could go to the WAFC, take money away from them to pay for the flights, because of the WAFC's inability to construct a system where listed players are playing alongside quality top up reasons, which they should have an obligation to do so.
The Eagles problems stem from within. Like all AFL clubs do they like passing the blame elsewhere but ultimately it's on them. The development has been poor because of a very poor (well below AFL level football system) at the Eagles in general which has seen a huge amount of injuries and no club can have a back up for that amount of player availability.
We saw this year that with a full list to pick from the Eagles reserves were much more competitive and won a handful of games. It's easy to complain when things are not going well but the the Eagles as a club have been in disarray for sometime now and only recently decided to change direction.
The AFL don't really have much pull over the WAFL. They have a better relationship with the WAFC which have become puppets of the AFL so that is where they can maybe pull some strings. The WAFC though own the licences to the two AFL clubs and the WAFL clubs get a significant vote for that to ever change. This was all part of the agreement for the WAFL clubs to vote in favour of the Eagles entering the VFL in 1986, the WAFL must always ben looked after.
That hasn't exactly happened and neither of the two AFL clubs have really done anything to help the WAFL. The AFL don't give the WAFC any money so not sure they could take any away.
The lack of development is again on the Eagles. Not sure how it is on WAFL clubs that AFL listed players on the Eagles list can't get a kick at WAFL level?
Could the Eagles end up joining the VFL? Maybe?? Would that be good for the WAFL? Not at all in my opinion. But it can't be all about the Eagles either. There has to be a way to do it that all are happy about. There will however get to a point where is the Eagles don't stop complaining and sooking that the WAFL clubs will have to say see ya. Hopefully Don Pyke will be able to sit down with his big boy pants on and have adult discussions with the WAFC and WAFL clubs that ensures it's a good fit for all. Nisbett couldn't do it so hopefully Don is better.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
This is entirely fair, but at the same time, they were put into a position where they had to call on a retired player (Schoefield) because he could be expected to be a more competitive player than whatever top-up player could be called up. Even if a team needs to get 15-20 top-up players they should not be that woeful as footballers.
In part because of the existing rules changing with my link above.
They also still finished bottom on the ladder and they still had an average margin of a eight goal loss with numerous matches of at least 10 goal losses, which continues to be counterproductive to their talent development, even if on a slightly lesser scale than last year. For the purposes of talent development it's only fair that their players roughly win as many games as they lose as determined by the quality of the top-up players supporting the listed players, with an average amount of injuries to their AFL list. They're clearly not there yet.
Which is inevitable with the increasing dichotomy with the size of the AFL and its two clubs (the license holders being the WAFC notwithstanding) and the WAFL over time.
Yes, but it doesn't mean it's the best solution heading forward. Even the process in 1986 was essentially flawed in understanding the relationship between V/AFL and the WAFL, because the WAFC famously underestimated the drop-off in WAFL attendances. There will get to a point that the "WAFL always having to be looked after" is not a productive goal heading forward, and we are heading to that direction, such as the fact that there's been evolution since 1986 about things like how the West Coast Eagles have a large list size and how the nature of talent development evolves. West Coast listed players, who weren't getting a game at AFL level, weren't even necessarily earning a full-time salary in 1986 or even 1996, for instance.
It's only a matter of legal framework this is the case. West Coast and Fremante's operating surpluses go to the WAFL. The AFL pay for the WAFC fielding a representative team in the U18 National Championships, for instance, too. It's obviously self-interested in allowing for talent develpoment for AFL clubs to draft those players, but it still serves a benefit for WAFL clubs, too. The AFL practically holds a lot more power in controlling the clubs of West Coast and Fremantle than the WAFC ever do though. If the WAFC was being too obstructionist, they could simply remove West Coast and Fremantle as clubs and create two new expansion entities and transfer all players over to those new clubs. WAFC could be pretty powerless to stop them. There's a moral debate about how much of the money that Perthites spend on West Coast and Fremantle's revenue generation that should morally be self-contained in WA football how or how much should be given to wider AFL ecosystem. I think it's fair the answer should be "some" but it's an inherently complex discussion.
This effectively boils down to the fact that you don't believe it's the WAFC restrictions on West Coast's ability to recruit top up players (whether it's the rules themselves or the cultural prevention given the strength of the WAFL clubs, you get to the same end point) has prevented the fact that West Coast have finished on the bottom of the ladder in consecutive years, or that West Coast have a valid argument about, given that they have a reason for fielding a team in the first place, why they would want to avoid that.
Thats like me saying you don't believe an AFL club could develop this poorly. Every year the Eagles sook, every year they ask for more, every year they are granted more. They didn't use their points this year, they could of recruited another 4 players. Why didn't they?
Of course I can see their reasoning and yes I also agree that their has to be give and take. But you are asking only for the WAFL clubs to give and thinking we should all be on our knees praising the AFL clubs.
You simply don't know enough about the WAFC -WAFL and how it has been for 40 years. I respect your opinion but seriously it's not the WAFL clubs fault here, they could not bend over anymore than they have.
