Should the AFL get rid of VFL Premierships and only count AFL?

[Hawkk]

1920. The official VFL publication ceased listing VFA Premierships
2020. The official AFL publication ceased listing VFL Premierships

(or maybe theyll wait till Geelong get 5)

If they count from 1914 onwards it’ll be dandy

 

[LightTower4]

What?

My bad.
Probably quickly drafted while at work!

 

[Frank Grimes]

Actually only premierships from 2012 should be counted. That is when the latest club (GWS) entered to competition, making it the 18 team competition it is today.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Actually only premierships from 2012 should be counted. That is when the latest club (GWS) entered to competition, making it the 18 team competition it is today.

So when Tassie comes in or the next club, we start again. Got it.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I love these threads!

It reeks of desperate insecurity and is very amusing even though the op is a WC supporter - just won a flag and have 4 in total. lol, some people just can't handle the fact the league we have now is the league that started in 1897.

 

[Father Jack]

Actually only premierships from 2012 should be counted. That is when the latest club (GWS) entered to competition, making it the 18 team competition it is today.

So we either reset every time there's a change in clubs, or we have it set at 1897? Is there a third option, such as when the league changed its name to reflect it's fundamentally changed nature?

 

[Father Jack]

I love these threads!

It reeks of desperate insecurity and is very amusing even though the op is a WC supporter - just won a flag and have 4 in total. lol, some people just can't handle the fact the league we have now is the league that started in 1897.

I see insecurity in those supporters who are scared that their flags from a suburban comp from 100 years ago won't be counted the same in today's league, which is so different you can't possibly say that flags from each era are comparable.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I see insecurity in those supporters who are scared that their flags from a suburban comp from 100 years ago won't be counted the same in today's league, which is so different you can't possibly say that flags from each era are comparable.

Scared? When did HQ announce they're going to do this? When did I mention comparing flags? 100 years ago EVERYTHING was different, what's your point?

If we go by that logic of only counting flags from when colour tv started or the draft or whatever we may as well stop counting flags period, how about Brownlows? Norm Smiths? Colemans?.

Time changes everything including footy. 100 years from now do we count this years or last years flag because it was 100 years ago?

 

[Father Jack]

Scared? When did HQ announce they're going to do this? When did I mention comparing flags? 100 years ago EVERYTHING was different, what's your point?

If we go by that logic of only counting flags from when colour tv started or the draft or whatever we may as well stop counting flags period, how about Brownlows? Norm Smiths? Colemans?.

Time changes everything including footy. 100 years from now do we count this years or last years flag because it was 100 years ago?

When the comp became the AFL seems like a pretty good time to count AFL flags from.

 

[telsor]

So we either reset every time there's a change in clubs, or we have it set at 1897? Is there a third option, such as when the league changed its name to reflect it's fundamentally changed nature?

But that's just it...the league changed it's name.

It didn't become a new competition, it only changed it's name.

 

[Father Jack]

But that's just it...the league changed it's name.

It didn't become a new competition, it only changed it's name.

Yes, but the point is that the league changed fundamentally in the decade around that time, and hence the new name that reflected that change. As has been pointed out, you can't go changing things every time there's an alteration, but on the other hand, when you have lots of changes that make the competition fundamentally different, maybe it's a good idea to start treating the eras differently.

If nothing else, it makes things far more interesting, we haven't had a GF where the most amount of premierships would have changed since 2001 (although last year we might have added a team to equal-most), but essentially it's a discussion that only includes three clubs at the moment. The stats are dead in a way they would never have been if it were still the same 12 team comp it used to be.

As a quick'n'dirty short hand way of doing it, it would be interesting to see what the flag table would look like if you removed all the expansion clubs and awarded the flag to whichever old VFL club happened to end up on top. Just as an exercise.

 

[Carringbush2010]

When the comp became the AFL seems like a pretty good time to count AFL flags from.

Seems like a pretty good time to whom? What about 100 years from now? Why don't we just reset every year? Was last years flag not comparable to this year?

 

[Father Jack]

Seems like a pretty good time to whom? What about 100 years from now? Why don't we just reset every year? Was last years flag not comparable to this year?

I explained all that in my post

 

[Tiger2709]

With the lack of proper draft, salary cap, etc. it really devalues the earlier premierships. People can count them all they like, but they really have no place in official counts

Did you ever see one, teams were overall better than these days as in more skilled in many ways of course training and the rest has advanced but 12 teams feeding on a bigger pool of players, only 4 or 5 making the finals, if anything it was more difficult back in the day.

Of course the reality is this is the same competition so the flags have to count, it was a rename only.

 

[Boston tiger]

In Advance, If this thread is in the wrong place, move it.

Now, with the recent talks of the AFL possibly counting VFA premierships as AFL Premierships, I would like to bring forward the reverse. There has been 37 years since the first full time Interstate club (South Melbourne to Sydney), 29 Years of AFL history since the name change, 27 years since the Cup left Victoria for the First Time. There has been Decades of History in the AFL era and there is 8 Interstate Teams in the AFL and 11 Clubs playing home games Interstate. This is amazing and I strongly support this, I Believe that the AFL should not consider VFL Premierships as part of the AFL Premiership Tally. The Victorian clubs will still have the Flags and Cups in their Trophy Cabinet but they will not count as part of the AFL Premiership Tally.
Give me your thought on this.

West Coast were part of the VFL. If you won some premierships in your early years before the name change I’m sure you’d feel ripped off if they weren’t counted.

It’s pretty academic anyway because if the VFL premierships were not to be counted .. no one would have agreed to the name change.

 

[Guju]

The AFL should separate flags won from VFL and AFL eras in their official records listing publications. Hawthorn for example, in the official AFL records, should show as 5 AFL flags and 8 VFL flags. Not lump them all together and just show 13 flags.

The league did officially become national and change its name in 1990 (why the name didn't change in 87, when WCE and Brisbane joined the league, is beyond me). Hence, all premiership won since 1990 should only be put in the AFL basket of flags. VFL is still recognised in the club's and league history, but should be separated in official record listings.

This makes it more fair for interstate clubs when comparing flags won against Victorian clubs. For instance WCE has won 4 AFL flags compared to Essendon winning 2 AFL flags, and 14 VFL flags. Not just WCE has 4 and Essendon has 16 as the listing.

 

[Father Jack]

Yes, I should clarify too that I don't mean that all pre-AFL flags should be expunged from the record or anything, just that they be recorded differently. Apples to apples and all that, so the Pies, Blues and Bombers can still keep their little mini contest going for most VFL/AFL flags, whilst pretty much everyone else is in the hunt for most AFL flags. The side benefit is it makes it all far more interesting and relevant again.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I explained all that in my post

So yeah it's a good time if it suits your liking, in that case let's just dismiss any records and start every year.

 

[Boston tiger]

Yes, I should clarify too that I don't mean that all pre-AFL flags should be expunged from the record or anything, just that they be recorded differently. Apples to apples and all that, so the Pies, Blues and Bombers can still keep their little mini contest going for most VFL/AFL flags, whilst pretty much everyone else is in the hunt for most AFL flags. The side benefit is it makes it all far more interesting and relevant again.

I think they are recorded differently. But Richmond have won 11 premierships. Likewise if New Zealand and Fiji joined the comp and we called it the Pacific League. West Coast will still have 4 premierships.

 

[Father Jack]

So yeah it's a good time if it suits your liking, in that case let's just dismiss any records and start every year.

Not what I said.

 

[telsor]

Yes, but the point is that the league changed fundamentally in the decade around that time, and hence the new name that reflected that change.

It didn't really change all that much.

It went from being clearly the best comp in the country to being clearly the best comp in the country...

The name change reflected the increased geographical coverage, but that's a process that had been going on since the 70s, so it's not like it was a fundamental change at that time.

 

[Father Jack]

It didn't really change all that much.

It went from being clearly the best comp in the country to being clearly the best comp in the country...

The name change reflected the increased geographical coverage, but that's a process that had been going on since the 70s, so it's not like it was a fundamental change at that time.

So you think that it could remained being called the VFL with no real difficulties?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Not what I said.

Then do tell us all why the timeline you think should be would be appropriate.

 

[Father Jack]

Then do tell us all why the timeline you think should be would be appropriate.

Yes, but the point is that the league changed fundamentally in the decade around that time, and hence the new name that reflected that change. As has been pointed out, you can't go changing things every time there's an alteration, but on the other hand, when you have lots of changes that make the competition fundamentally different, maybe it's a good idea to start treating the eras differently.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Like I said IF that is your argument, the flag this year and last year should not be recognised in 100 years because it's 100 years ago. The same logic you're using to dismiss flags from 100 years ago today.

You can't have it both ways....................... the most simple solution is to start from when the league started. 1897.