VFL into AFL

[Sausages]

Here's how I like to think of it:
Coll, Haw, Rich, Ess, Geel, Carl help supplement Melb, North, St K, WB.

WC, Freo, Adel, Port, Syd help supplement Bris, GWS, GC

The VFL was broke before it became the AFL. It needed to go national. But that doesn't directly mean that the VFL has leached off teams and fans from outside Victoria. Those teams have been richly rewarded by being part of the biggest sporting code in this country and 5/6 out of the established lot have won premierships.

You've started another thread largely without a point. So I'd love to know what it is? Do you feel Brisbane have been badly mistreated despite the AFL pumping in money and resources and not showing any signs of withdrawing that support.

I feel that almost all clubs, without exception, bristle at the reality of a "truly national competition", rather instead focus their energies on their own club's fortunes'.

Money =/= resources....to test that, go shopping with copper. It's currently around 6400US a tonne. Let me know how you go at Woolies. See the difference?

The point is, the AFL is struggling to maintain anything like "increased partiticpation rates" in QLD and NSW. Auskick numbers are measured by people who pay and/or attend for a minimum of 6 weeks.

So, in 6 weeks, I can turn a rugbly league/union/soccer fan into an AFL fan for life!! EASY PEASY!!

But all you southerners look at a balance sheet or a press release and think "Yep, she'll be right".

So did the quartet playing violins and cellos on the top deck of the Titanic...rather than help stop a sinking ship.

The fact is, the expansion clubs could argue WE ARE PROPPING YOU UP - but we don't, despite the figures indicating else. And I hate figures, because they CAN BE CONSTRUED ANY WAY YOU WANT.

And so, when I post my observations, these get smashed as well.

Figures lie, but also can be used to tell the truth. But only if you want to HEAR the truth. Which 95% of you guys don't. Then we have the AFL's defacto mouthpiece caning us.

And you all wonder why the average sports fan north of the Murray thinks the competition is still Vic-centric.

 

[FootyJunkie]

The inevitable and annoyingly repetitious threads of Bigfooty:

1. State of Origin
2. Where are ... at?
3. Victorian bias
4. Interstate concessions
5. Dumb idea for a rule change
6. Validity and value of past premierships: sanfl, wafl, vfl etc

7. Good Friday, I'm bored, where's my footy?
8. Share Anzac Day around, why must Collingwood and Essendon hog it all?
9. Bring in Tassie
10. Hate the footy on Ch 7
11. Bring back suburban grounds
12. Footy food is too expensive
13. NAB Challenge sucks, bring back the NAB Cup knockout

 

[fabulousphil]

I feel that almost all clubs, without exception, bristle at the reality of a "truly national competition", rather instead focus their energies on their own club's fortunes'.

Yep i would agree with that

The point is, the AFL is struggling to maintain anything like "increased partiticpation rates" in QLD and NSW. Auskick numbers are measured by people who pay and/or attend for a minimum of 6 weeks.

So, in 6 weeks, I can turn a rugbly league/union/soccer fan into an AFL fan for life!! EASY PEASY!!
.

That is true and not true, auskick run from schools ( usually after school) is run over a school term, the ABS records participation from 6 weeks onwards, so 6 weeks would be the smallest time frame, at club level auskick is usually the length of the footy season or a couple of weeks shy of that, usually around 14/15 weeks.

What auskick does even if kids never play again is give them a Australian football experience, it may not make them fans or life long fans or AFL club members, but it may make them interested enough at a later date to watch games and maybe get involved and perhaps even get there own kids involved.

It also breaks down stereotypes in the Northern states of GAYFL etc, much like soccer and wogball, rugby and toffee noses and rugby league and meatheads have stereotypes given to them

But all you southerners look at a balance sheet or a press release and think "Yep, she'll be right".

So did the quartet playing violins and cellos on the top deck of the Titanic...rather than help stop a sinking ship.

The fact is, the expansion clubs could argue WE ARE PROPPING YOU UP - but we don't, despite the figures indicating else. And I hate figures, because they CAN BE CONSTRUED ANY WAY YOU WANT.

And so, when I post my observations, these get smashed as well.

Figures lie, but also can be used to tell the truth. But only if you want to HEAR the truth. Which 95% of you guys don't. Then we have the AFL's defacto mouthpiece caning us.

And you all wonder why the average sports fan north of the Murray thinks the competition is still Vic-centric.

You are right figures can be construed any way you want, but the club level figures for SE QLD and other certain parts of QLD ( Cairns, Mackay, Darling Downs )show healthy grass roots support, it is not the biggest game in town, that will probably never happen but it is doing OK.

Is it behind what the AFL want's ?.... probably, but it is much bigger than in previous generations.

 

[Furn2]

Hawks Swans got 72,000 last year.

More people go to games that will get a big crowd as it has a better atmosphere and that's usually two vic teams.

 

[Hawkk]

Hawks Swans got 72,000 last year.

More people go to games that will get a big crowd as it has a better atmosphere and that's usually two vic teams.

The Swans are really a pseudo Victorian club though.

 

[Sausages]

You are right figures can be construed any way you want, but the club level figures for SE QLD and other certain parts of QLD ( Cairns, Mackay, Darling Downs )show healthy grass roots support, it is not the biggest game in town, that will probably never happen but it is doing OK.

Is it behind what the AFL want's ?.... probably, but it is much bigger than in previous generations.

Cheers mate, appreciate your thoughts

The last bit is the only contentious issue we might have - I'm firmly of the opinion that chucking a team down first, then building support is arse about, as I think/hope you might agree.

In all honesty, my anti-AFL tirade across a few threads was motivated by the thought the AFL will/might do exactly the same thing with an NZ team. And I'd really like to think they have learnt that it doesn't work and alienates the traditional states, with talk of extra cap space, players etc. All they net is broadcast money whilst traditional strugglers see only a new franchise going 20-2 and winning the flag, all at the whim of Head Office. Even if my club benefits, it's still wrong and totally undesirable. I've stated elsewhere that I don't WANT to have the AFL prop us up for another 20 years.

Build the game from the ground up imo - takes longer, but avoids this cycle of "AFL-granted" success.

 

[Sausages]

And FWIW - if they DID chuck a team over there, the QLD/NSW are more attractive to a great many ex-pat kiwis, because we also have strong rugby code comps too....so we might benefit more from that than anticipated.

Which is equally undesirable. Players should be proud to represent themselves and their junior clubs at ANY AFL club, irrespective of which team - just because you are playing at the highest level. That, in my perhaps misguided opinion, is what we should be looking to achieve.

 

[Iron]

Put it back in your pants mate, Collingwood has the highest average attendance of any club. Also playing Adelaide at Etihad would be like you playing the Saints at Footy Park. I hate Etihad it is a shit stadium compared to the G and I know fans who will only go to Pies games at the G. (I was at the Collingwood Adelaide game)

Think you'll find that was us last year

 

[Kwality]

Ok, I agree that many Vic fans are still stuck in the VFL. Collingwood will only get 33,000 vs Adelaide, the reverse fixture gets you 50,000. But Collingwood will get 55,000+ vs Geelong this week. The only explanation for me is that Vic fans are stuck in a VFL mindset. As for the media, the fact that the biggest football newspaper the Herald Sun is a Melbourne paper will inevitably mean that they cater for a Melbourne audience. AFL media in my opinion try very hard to do an even coverage. AFL admin has been trying to help Vic fans this season (cheap food etc) but I think that's because they're so worried about the fan turn-out in that state rather than a VFL hangover.

Fair observation Gus, but to sharpen the concentration on the Melbourne reality this century, clubs that cant put enough bums on seats on their own, are VFL dinosaurs, kept alive by subsidies, dress them up as you will, subsidies.

 

[Kwality]

Considering that more than 50% of the talent is recruited from Victoria, then it's probably fair enough that half the sides are based in Melbourne.
This table shows the number of players recruited from outside the AFL in the National & Rookie drafts (2010-2014)

Vic|297|52%
\SA|104|18%
\WA|94|16%
\NSW|30|5%
\Tas|19|3%
\Qld|18|3%
\Ire|7|1%
\NT|3|0.5%
\Tot.|572

The NSW and Qld numbers are somewhat slanted by many kids recruited via the NSW and QLD scholarship schemes.
Most of them don't make it in the AFL.

The NSW numbers are also boosted by a few NSW Riverina kids who lived closer to Melbourne than any other city.

Leaders lead. 89% from the traditional States, 34% from WA & SA for 4 teams is leadership, 52% for 10 teams is not, ie Vic, given the 3% in Tas support the 52% in Vic that need taxpayer subsidies.

 

[fabulousphil]

Cheers mate, appreciate your thoughts

The last bit is the only contentious issue we might have - I'm firmly of the opinion that chucking a team down first, then building support is arse about, as I think/hope you might agree.

In all honesty, my anti-AFL tirade across a few threads was motivated by the thought the AFL will/might do exactly the same thing with an NZ team. And I'd really like to think they have learnt that it doesn't work and alienates the traditional states, with talk of extra cap space, players etc. All they net is broadcast money whilst traditional strugglers see only a new franchise going 20-2 and winning the flag, all at the whim of Head Office. Even if my club benefits, it's still wrong and totally undesirable. I've stated elsewhere that I don't WANT to have the AFL prop us up for another 20 years.

Build the game from the ground up imo - takes longer, but avoids this cycle of "AFL-granted" success.

Sometimes it is hard to build support without a top tier team to look up to, since GC Suns have started the grass roots on the GC has grown significantly, same with Canberra thanks to GWS, the Western Sydney juniors has grown, albeit off a very low base, but realistically the AFL should have been spending plenty on WS 20 years ago.

Sometimes it is build it and they will come, other times building from the base up is the way to go.

I would be really suprised if the AFL was even semi serious about NZ in the next 10/15 years.

 

[The 747]

Wait don't AFL members get etihad seats too?

Etihad is a shit stadium.

 

[Kwality]

Etihad is a shit stadium.

Just an excuse, there is more footy in Melbourne than bums for the seats, supply of footy exceeds demand for footy, so this sort of excuse is run & believed in preference to the truth, too much footy in Melbourne.

 

[I am Jack]

I won't even bother splitting them, but VIC, SA and WA are Aussie Rules.
Victoria is the heartland of football - because of the historical roots that date back to the VFL, and a lot of those sides transitioned into the Australian Rules Football League. But no state is more important than another. South Australia, Western Australia, and to a lesser extent Tasmania, all lived and breathed football as much as any Victorian. States like Qld, NSW, ACT, are predominately rugby focused states. I think the AFL will always have more problems with Qld and Sydney sides.

 

[Father Jack]

Etihad is a shit stadium.

It must have really fallen into ruin since I was last there three years ago then

 

[master bate]

It must have really fallen into ruin since I was last there three years ago then

WA fans seem to really love Etihad. Makes me think either:
1) Subi is THAT bad
And/OR
2) Etihad is like Sydney, great place to visit but when you live in Melb/go the MCG you find some terrible faults with it.

It's not as bad as some make out, but when you can go to 15 other games at the MCG as a Pies, Rich or Melb fan then you're inclined to skip the ones at Etihad.

 

[master bate]

Cheers mate, appreciate your thoughts

The last bit is the only contentious issue we might have - I'm firmly of the opinion that chucking a team down first, then building support is arse about, as I think/hope you might agree.

In all honesty, my anti-AFL tirade across a few threads was motivated by the thought the AFL will/might do exactly the same thing with an NZ team. And I'd really like to think they have learnt that it doesn't work and alienates the traditional states, with talk of extra cap space, players etc. All they net is broadcast money whilst traditional strugglers see only a new franchise going 20-2 and winning the flag, all at the whim of Head Office. Even if my club benefits, it's still wrong and totally undesirable. I've stated elsewhere that I don't WANT to have the AFL prop us up for another 20 years.

Build the game from the ground up imo - takes longer, but avoids this cycle of "AFL-granted" success.

I still don't get this.

You'd prefer there not to be Brisbane Lions and then hope that grass roots footy fans pull together and start their own side? It just doesn't make sense to me. You've got more of a passionate base now than you'll ever have if the team goes away.

The AFL will bail you out but they usually only provide enough assistance to keep trouble away and at some stage you'll have to pull together and dig yourself out of the hole if you want to make it back to success.

That time might fast be approaching. If I were a passionate Brisbane fan I'd be readying myself for a big campaign to help the Lions. 10 million of debt is a tough ask to stock a full footy department even if there is equilisation.

 

[fabulousphil]

WA fans seem to really love Etihad. Makes me think either:
1) Subi is THAT bad
And/OR
2) Etihad is like Sydney, great place to visit but when you live in Melb/go the MCG you find some terrible faults with it.

It's not as bad as some make out, but when you can go to 15 other games at the MCG as a Pies, Rich or Melb fan then you're inclined to skip the ones at Etihad.

Going next week for the first time in a couple of years, i actually like it better than the MCG, pubs are closer at the G though and a much nicer walk past Punt Rd Oval.

I think Victorians love the history etc of the MCG, most other cities would love Docklands.

 

[Seedsfan]

Think you'll find that was us last year

We average 70k at the G this year

 

[Father Jack]

WA fans seem to really love Etihad. Makes me think either:
1) Subi is THAT bad
And/OR
2) Etihad is like Sydney, great place to visit but when you live in Melb/go the MCG you find some terrible faults with it.

It's not as bad as some make out, but when you can go to 15 other games at the MCG as a Pies, Rich or Melb fan then you're inclined to skip the ones at Etihad.

What are these terrible faults?

 

[Back One Out]

Leaders lead. 89% from the traditional States, 34% from WA & SA for 4 teams is leadership, 52% for 10 teams is not, ie Vic, given the 3% in Tas support the 52% in Vic that need taxpayer subsidies.

I don't really understand what point you're trying to make, but I just scoff at non-Victorians who act like us Vics are a minority interest and over-represented in the AFL. Victoria supplies more than 50% of the playing talent and more than 50% of the customers and money. That's the unpalatable truth. If NSW and Queensland were not Rugby League states - if they were AFL-mad like the rest of us, then Victoria would not be the hub of AFL footy.

(And that it isn't a cue for WA and SA people to bleat about my insular Victorian arrogance or whatever. I'm just pointing out the factual reasons why 10 Victorian teams is not the huge imbalance which some people seem to think.)

 

[Seedsfan]

What are these terrible faults?

Real cramped expensive parking and food real stricked on what comes in

 

[Scotland]

WA fans seem to really love Etihad. Makes me think either:
1) Subi is THAT bad
And/OR
2) Etihad is like Sydney, great place to visit but when you live in Melb/go the MCG you find some terrible faults with it

1) It is. I've been to AFL games at Subi, the WACA, Etihad, the MCG and whatever sponsor's name starting with S Kardinia Park is called these days. The WACA was the worst, Subi is the worst of those still in use.

It's not as bad as some make out, but when you can go to 15 other games at the MCG as a Pies, Rich or Melb fan then you're inclined to skip the ones at Etihad.

'It's not the MCG' is not a 'terrible fault'. Victorians massively overplay the very, very minor issues that Etihad has.

Your post highlights the different attitude of Victorian footy fans. You're basically theatregoers. It's fine for Collingwood and Essendon because they have big supporter bases and the AFL fixtures plenty of return clashes to maximise attendances, but for the smaller clubs it's a real problem.

 

[Augustine]

Well you'll have to direct me to the posts that have conclusively decided the debates in all those cases, if we don't have to discuss any of these issues ever again.

Haha yes you're right, but it does feel like groundhog day on here sometimes.

 

[Augustine]

Just an excuse, there is more footy in Melbourne than bums for the seats, supply of footy exceeds demand for footy, so this sort of excuse is run & believed in preference to the truth, too much footy in Melbourne.

You're probably right Kwality but my (and many other's) sheer emotional fervour means I'll never be able to truly accept your harsh economic rationalism.