The what if thread

Remove this Banner Ad

I guess with fewer teams in the comp there would be:
  • A smaller group of players and thus the average level of AFL footballers would be higher.
  • the average attendance for games in Melbourne would be higher as would the attendances for the VFL as I would think too, as you’d get a significant minority of footy fans from asforementioned merged clubs jump away from the AFL and pick up clubs like Port Melbourne etc, plus the standard of players in the VFL would be higher with fewer AFL roster spots available
All that is likely to be true.

Nevertheless, as Stefan Szymański said in his 2005 ‘Tilting the Playing Field: Why a Sports League Planner Would Choose Less, not More, Competitive Balance’, fewer games each week and less consistent wins by popular clubs would reduce attendance (and no doubt in the unique AFL environment reduce television viewership even more).

It would also make the AFL less dominant in the sport of football than it has wanted to be.

In fact, when the league decided to replace Waverley in the middle 1990s the administration had already realised what Szymański demonstrated a full decade before ‘Tilting the Playing Field’ was published. This being that the league as a whole can gain greatest profit by keeping as many poorly-supported Melbourne clubs as possible, as their presence allows the greatest TV viewership when they provide “fodder” for the well-supported clubs to win and generate the maximum possible television viewership and attendance.

The problem of increasing attendance and TV viewership had plagued the league ever since the road lobby’s political dictatorship over transport policy made attending games impracticable for an increasing proportion of Victoria’s population in new suburbs with zero weekend public transport. Attendances declined alarmingly between 1982 and 1986: the then-VFL was in severe danger of being supplanted by basketball, whilst the VFA entered terminal decline as attending games became less practical and Asian immigrants replaced former Association supporters. Docklands, by making the game much more suitable for TV, was the only practicable solution.

Retaining all the Melbourne clubs – except the weakly-supported “basket case” of Fitzroy who would without the late 1960s expansions of zoning never have survived (at all events in Melbourne) beyond the middle 1970s – when the early 1990s press expected only six or seven to remain by 2010 also provided extra TV viewers.
What if Tony Lockett came to Richmond in 1995 and Richo didn't do his knee, Richmond premiers 95? granted I'm not sure if Richmond had enough strength in the midfield and back line but that forward line would have been very hard to stop.
Even with Carlton as powerful as they were, and the other “power clubs” of the 1990s – Geelong, Essendon, North Melbourne and West Coast – in top form, a 1995 Richmond with Lockett and Richardson would have been very formidable indeed. More than that, as long as Lockett played Richmond would have possessed a forward line to rival North Melbourne and Footscray, and would not have slumped as they did between 1996 and 1999. Even if a Tiger outfit with Lockett and Richardson together could not defeat the 1995 Blues, they would have had a good chance to win one of the next four flags for Tony.
 
Last edited:
What if West Coast hung on to beat Richmond in that Round 22 encounter. Tigers bundled out of top 4, Eagles remain in the top 4. The Eagles gave the Tiges the best fight in that massive winning sequence.

West Coast would have made the GF and faced Richmond if it could have panned out that way. Tige's still would have got there imo if they wouldn't have gone to Perth in the Prelim.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Another one from a long time ago:
  • What if Fitzroy instead of South Melbourne had relocated to Sydney, and had done so a bit earlier, as was originally planned?
A possible difference with an earlier relocation is that it would have occurred a few more years before the nadir in rugby league crowds in 1983, so that there is the possibility Australian rules establishes itself better in New South Wales.
 
Collingwood beat the eagles in perth in the 94 qualifier.

I think they would have played Melbourne in the prelim, beaten them and would have played us in the Granny who they beat in the home and away season the 2nd time around ( Ablett mark of the year was in the first game )


Interesting. Could they have won it from 8th place? Would have fancied us but the Pies are dangerous when they have their tails up ( except when they choke away 28 point leads:tearsofjoy: )
 
Collingwood beat the eagles in perth in the 94 qualifier.

I think they would have played Melbourne in the prelim, beaten them and would have played us in the Granny who they beat in the home and away season the 2nd time around ( Ablett mark of the year was in the first game )


Interesting. Could they have won it from 8th place? Would have fancied us but the Pies are dangerous when they have their tails up ( except when they choke away 28 point leads:tearsofjoy: )

Hope I have not said this before...

What if Pies had beaten Adelaide in 93 last home and away game??. We had beaten WCE in WA, and could have gone all the way that year. Even Sheedy admitted that Geelong was his most feared team that year. I spoke to Couchy at a function, and he thought that was the one that got away from us.
 
What if crowd invasions weren't allowed back in 2004 after a player's 100th goal?

What if Spida Everett had played the 1997 Grand Final?

What if there had been a pre-finals bye in 2009, alleviating the need for St Kilda to rest players against Hawthorn a few weeks before finals?

What if score reviews were around in 2009?

What if extra time was the rule with tied Grand Finals in 2010?

What if Akermanis had chosen St Kilda instead of the Dogs?

What if Lovett hadn't messed around?

What if St Kilda had drafted Bontempelli and Petracca instead of Billings and McCartin?
 
Last edited:
Said it before in a similar thread, Melbourne rolling over TWICE to the eventual wooden spooners in Carlton in 2006 cost Freo a flag. This will sound a bit tinfoil, but hear me out.

View attachment 623268

So if we give Melbourne two more wins, the ladder looks like the following:

WCE
Adelaide
Melbourne
Fremantle
Sydney
Collingwood
St Kilda
Bulldogs

The finals series goes as follows:

Week 1
WCE vs Freo - Eagles fans will disagree but Freo had the wood on them at this time
Adelaide vs Melbourne - We couldn't win at AAMI stadium no matter what
Sydney vs Bulldogs - Pretty self explanatory, Swans were better at this time
St Kilda vs Collingwood - Flip of a coin

Week 2
Melbourne vs Sydney - Think Swans had our measure at this stage, they already beat us at the MCG earlier in the season
WCE vs St Kilda - Eagles simply too strong at home

Week 3
Freo vs Sydney - Home ground advantage gets the Dockers home
Adelaide vs WCE - A matchup that occured in the real world, WCE take it again

Grand final
Freo vs WCE - Freo go 4-0 against the Eagles to take home their maiden premiership


freo wet dream

fact is freo 2006 side was very ordinary..No way they win the premiership no matter what scenario you come up with
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

north had Shwass and Archer in the 97 prelim against the Saints? Still probably lose. But it may have made it a lot more interesting.
 
freo wet dream

fact is freo 2006 side was very ordinary..No way they win the premiership no matter what scenario you come up with
beat you by 5 points with that Haselby goal at the end and then smashed you later on that season by 10 goals. I do agree though. Eagles weren't losing in 2006. Freo wouldn't have got them in the finals and got belted by both Adelaide and Sydney.
 
What if Richmond signed Tony Lockett in 1994 before AFL cockblocks us.

Can you imagine Ben Hartigan blitzing it down the wing and kicking it over Richo's head and just short of Lockett's feet! :moustache:
 
What if Melbourne had been allocated a stronger country zone in the mid [late] 1960s?
Alternatively, what if South Melbourne had been allocated a much stronger country zone?

This “what if” is actually more interesting than it might seem and to my mind much more so than the corresponding one re Melbourne. Partly for geographic reasons, I have often thought about how the League might have evolved if South Melbourne had been given the zone Hawthorn were in the Mornington Peninsula and West Gippsland.

Of the five poorest clubs in the League as of 1967 – the four “soccer belt” clubs and Hawthorn – South Melbourne possibly would have been in the best position without altered zoning to challenge the “big five” and St. Kilda for a place in the top half of the ladder. The Swans finished fourth in 1970, but the weakness of their country zone meant they collapsed immediately to win just five games in 1971 and 1972 combined, lose 29 in a row from Round 7, 1972 to Round 13, 1973, and finish last in all three grades in 1973. Between 1972 and 1979 South Melbourne’s Under-19s were wooden spooners six times (four in a row from 1973 to 1976) and had an overall record of 30—143—2 or a winning percentage of 17.71%.

If South had gained a much stronger country zone, I have ever since (mentally) studying the topic thought that the Swans would not have suffered their crash following that 1970 revival. Instead, the Swans would have remained highly competitive throughout the 1970s, and would not have been targeted for relocation ahead of Fitzroy or Footscray or (if they did not gain such a strong zone as they did) North Melbourne. Even Hawthorn, who were unaffected by Mediterranean and Eastern European immigration but possessed a very small supporter base and no wealthy patrons, might have been more vulnerable to relocation or folding than South.


What I’ve recently grasped, is that if South had stayed at South, there would have been an extra ground with pre-installed lights to cope with the demands of television – in sharp contrast to the other suburban grounds where installing lights was never possible due (I presume) to political opposition by local residents. That would at least potentially mean the Lake Oval could have been maintained even in a fully national competition, especially as it is not inaccessible by pre-existing public transport as Waverley was. So, would Docklands have been needed or built if South Melbourne had been allotted a stronger zone? Would the ground planning have been completely different from an early stage if South had been given a stronger zone?
 
James Hird was arguably the driving force behind Essendon's incredible 2000 season, probably the best single season on record.

What if James Hird had been 100% fit to play in the 1999 and 2001 Finals series?

Would we now be talking of Essendon 1999-2001 as one of the great dynasties?
 
What if crowd invasions weren't allowed back in 2004 after a player's 100th goal?

What if Spida Everett had played the 1997 Grand Final?

What if there had been a pre-finals bye in 2009, alleviating the need for St Kilda to rest players against Hawthorn a few weeks before finals?

What if score reviews were around in 2009?

What if extra time was the rule with tied Grand Finals in 2010?

What if Akermanis had chosen St Kilda instead of the Dogs?

What if Lovett hadn't messed around?

What if St Kilda had drafted Bontempelli and Petracca instead of Billings and McCartin?
St Kilda still find ways to not win premierships
 
What if zoning was still the way to recruit players.
From a Geelong perspective, who knows how powerful they would have been over the years with players including this side.
The 'best of the Geelong Falcons' side:
FB:
Steven Baker, Matthew Scarlett, Matt Maguire
HB: Luke Hodge, Nick Maxwell, Chris Heffernan
C: Travis Boak, Gary Ablett Jnr, Cameron Ling
HF: Patrick Dangerfield, Jonathan Brown, Brent Moloney
FF: Amon Buchanan, Scott Lucas, Gary Rohan
FO: Matt Primus, Jimmy Bartel, Jordan Lewis
INC: Ben Cunnington, Shaun Higgins, Darcy Parish, Sam Walsh, Taylor Adams (sub)
 
What if Chris Grant didn't have that shot smothered in the dying seconds vs the Crows in the prelim of 1997. The dogs would have played the Saints and we would of had a different winner. Who would have won that game?

What " what if " moments hurt you as a supporter? Injured players, closes losses, losses that could have been avoided or horrendous passages of play that changed the momentum or affected the outcome.

Travis Varcoe this is your life.
For the Hawk fan you'd substitute Isaac Smith in 2016. I recall watching that exact moment live, thinking I was about to witness either the absurd extension of that ridiculously awesome era, or the end of the dynasty with that very kick. If we'd won, a week's rest and then a home game v Sydney...you'd think if any side had the ability to manage a week and plan a response it'd be us, but the cracks were huge...I'd bet the Dogs would have done the same to Geelong as they did to us, and we'll keep history intact for the PF...nah...just can't see us lifting the 2016 flag. 2015 was only possible due to our experience and coaching, but two years in a row? Dogs over Swans in that parallel universe too. The most defining moment for me in that finals series as a Hawk fan was Bont's bump on Hodge, an emphatic changing of the guard...we were done...!

The Varcoe scenario...Hawthorn were never seriously troubled by Freo in the GF no matter how close the scores seemed. We could score and they couldn't, and when it counted later on that was what happened. We also used their bottleneck defensive game plan on them. The Cats would have had to do the same thing, and I've never given Chris Scott that much credit to be honest! But it's damned hard to repeat the dose, so if Freo played all their cards and pissed the Cats off in the QF, they would have found it monumentally difficult to win the GF as well...as Steve Waugh said to Herschell Gibbs, you could tell Varcoe he just dropped the premiership cup...!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The what if thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top