Mega Thread VICBias - Genuine Discussion Part 2

[Jez1974]

Well I suppose every vic fan could follow their club in the vfl, if we all did that, then guess what? the vfl would be bigger than the afl.

You and I both know that isn't going to happen anyway.

The point I'm making, which I've stated repeatedly, why is it so important that non vic fans must follow a league that has 'vic bias' and incessantly complain about? Why not just follow the wafl instead? No vic bias. Win win!

Follow both mate

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Like I've repeatedly stated, the expansion was necessary.

>Now< it wouldn't be necessary and every remaining vic club >now< has enough public support to survive in a vfl that just has vic clubs.

>Now< Every vic fan has no choice but to accept the current expanded vfl, whereas every non vic fan can follow their current or any other club in their state league, they have choice.

So I'll ask the question again, why is so important to follow a league that you all complain about all the time? Why not just follow your club in a league that doesn't have 'vic bias'?

Seems a bit contradictory here.

Speaking for myself I didn't want an expanded vfl in the first place.

So you didn’t want it to expand even though your club likely would have gone broke and ceased to exist but then you also say it was necessary but also that we should just abandon it now for state leagues again.

You can’t claim that now it wouldn’t be necessary because if the expansion didn’t happen in the past, the “now” vfl clubs wouldn’t even exist.

So your solution is expand when you’re broke, only then to tear apart the league now the clubs are stable and go back to state leagues which would bleed $billions in the process and likely resulting back to square 1?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Follow both mate

Do you admit there's vic bias in the current vafl?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Seems a bit contradictory here.



So you didn’t want it to expand even though your club likely would have gone broke and ceased to exist but then you also say it was necessary but also that we should just abandon it now for state leagues again.

You can’t claim that now it wouldn’t be necessary because if the expansion didn’t happen in the past, the “now” vfl clubs wouldn’t even exist.

So your solution is expand when you’re broke, only then to tear apart the league now the clubs are stable and go back to state leagues which would bleed $billions in the process and likely resulting back to square 1?

Apologies,

You've read me wrong.

I didn't want the necessity, in an ideal world, the vic clubs >then< wouldn't be writing cheques they couldn't cash.

>Now< every vic club would survive in either the current vafl we have now OR in a vic only league, I'd prefer this to what we've got. Because there IS bias toward the big vic clubs.

If every non vic fan voted with their feet and remotes and only followed their state leagues, guess what, those state leagues would once again be behemoths like they used to be.

So I'll ask again, why is it so important for non vics to follow a league with vic bias that they incessantly complain about? Why not just follow your state leagues instead? No vic bias, win win!

 

[LoungeLizard]

Apologies,

You've read me wrong.

I didn't want the necessity, in an ideal world, the vic clubs >then< wouldn't be writing cheques they couldn't cash.

>Now< every vic club would survive in either the current vafl we have now OR in a vic only league, I'd prefer this to what we've got. Because there IS bias toward the big vic clubs.

If every non vic fan voted with their feet and remotes and only followed their state leagues, guess what, those state leagues would once again be behemoths like they used to be.

So I'll ask again, why is it so important for non vics to follow a league with vic bias that they incessantly complain about? Why not just follow your state leagues instead? No vic bias, win win!

I think it's because they just want to beat Victoria.

The difference is we still look at who we play, not the state they come from, myself, I couldn't give a rats about WC or Adelaide etc., they are just another club to me, but the non-Vics seem to have this obsession on Victorian clubs.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I think it's because they just want to beat Victoria.

The difference is we still look at who we play, not the state they come from, myself, I couldn't give a rats about WC or Adelaide etc., they are just another club to me, but the non-Vics seem to have this obsession on Victorian clubs.

But why? Why is this so important?

The realities of the Australian rules landscape.

• Vics have the largest number of participants (players coaches employees etc.) and other stakeholders (us, the fans and members) in this game and the vafl
• There is vic bias toward the big vic clubs, market driven.
• IF there was a state league conference model, the vic one would have the largest market
• NOW, vic is still the largest market. This is not likely to change in our lifetimes, if at all.

That is the current landscape, and is likely not to change in our lifetimes, if at all.

So why are non vic supporters so incessant that they MUST follow this league that they all complain about?

 

[LoungeLizard]

But why? Why is this so important?

The realities of the Australian rules landscape.

• Vics have the largest number of participants (players coaches employees etc.) and other stakeholders (us, the fans and members) in this game and the vafl
• There is vic bias toward the big vic clubs, market driven.
• IF there was a state league conference model, the vic one would have the largest market
• NOW, vic is still the largest market. This is not likely to change in our lifetimes, if at all.

That is the current landscape, and is likely not to change in our lifetimes, if at all.

So why are non vic supporters so incessant that they MUST follow this league that they all complain about?

I can remember when I lived in Perth in the early 80's, they were sooking then,they weren't even in our league, it's an obsession with them, all they seem to worry about is Victoria.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I can remember when I lived in Perth in the early 80's, they were sooking then,they weren't even in our league, it's an obsession with them, all they seem to worry about is Victoria.

I live in Perth now, but I don't get the MUST follow this league that gives them (seemingly) perpetual misery.

It doesn't make sense.

 

[VicBased]

AFL House policy of ground rationalisation in Melbourne was inherent in the league.

Hawthorn and StKilda didnt choose to abandon Waverley, AFL House policy made that call to kill off their home ground.

In your Sydney mates made up time frame, starting from 2007, Hawthorn have travelled 9-11 times EVERY season.

Hawthorn have determined finding a ground advantage is more important than travel, smart decision makers at Hawthorn.

Well,,, yes, Hawthorn did decide to travel to tassie, and yes, it gives them an advantage.
But FMD, you could swim to Tassie faster than you can drive to Geelong.
It is like a bus trip. Clever Hawthorn but hardly taxing.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

You have choice, vics don't have choice, our clubs are in this expanded league not by our wish, it is what it is. Don't hear many if any North, Saints or Dogs supporters on a perpetual whinge like the wa and sa posters on here.

Ah yes, the expansion that was forced on the poor Victorian Clubs. Who would've ceased to exist if it wasn't for said expansion.

 

[_Mike_]

How does the #VICBIAS stack up to this years finals?

Sydney gets a home QF final, lose that to GWS and they get a home Semi
GWS win the QF they get a home prelim, Swans get a home semi

Port win their QF, they get a home prelim
Port lose their QF, they get a home semi & 1 prelim at the MCG

There is a very likely scenario that the MCG sees no prelim finals, 1 semi final, 1 elimination final and the GF

 

[Carringbush2010]

Who would've ceased to exist if it wasn't for said expansion.

Not necessarily, the big four clubs had enough public interest, they were never going to die off forever.

Besides that, I'm going to fairly assume you believe in vic bias, if so why are you still following a league that has vic bias?

 

[Carringbush2010]

So I'll ask again, why is it so important for non vics to follow a league with vic bias that they incessantly complain about? Why not just follow your state leagues instead? No vic bias, win win!

Are any non vic fans gonna answer this question?

 

[BallaratBulldog]

AFL Ladder and finals would look better if the top Eight was Bulldogs Melbourne Geelong Hawthorn Carlton Essendon Collingwood Richmond.

 

[JackOutback]

I live in Perth now, but I don't get the MUST follow this league that gives them (seemingly) perpetual misery.

It doesn't make sense.

Because it's the only national competition like we have. Like you, I then didn't want to join the VFL, I wanted a national competition. It would have been better to let the VFL sink into an even more suburban league and form a new national competition. But that didn't happen so now we all have to live here in the real world. We want a national competition with a semblance of equality.

 

[VicBased]

How does the #VICBIAS stack up to this years finals?

Sydney gets a home QF final, lose that to GWS and they get a home Semi
GWS win the QF they get a home prelim, Swans get a home semi

Port win their QF, they get a home prelim
Port lose their QF, they get a home semi & 1 prelim at the MCG

There is a very likely scenario that the MCG sees no prelim finals, 1 semi final, 1 elimination final and the GF

Maybe the Vic teams should have played better.

 

[Bont the Lord]

Yep. Doppleganger will never accept that there are even minor disadvantages to being a non-Victorian team.

And there are massive advantages too. Swings and roundabouts. Flicking through this thread and all you do is whinge. You just be fun at parties!

 

[Carringbush2010]

Because it's the only national competition like we have

National? Why is that so important? Why do you HAVE to follow a national, which btw it isn't, it's an expanded vfl.

It would have been better to let the VFL sink into an even more suburban league and form a new national competition.

Even then the biggest vic clubs would've revived, too much public following that they'd die off into the sunset forever and a day.

Nowadays those clubs are all behemoths, only behind WC in size, but probably ahead in profile, certainly Collingwood, probably the other 3 as well.

But that didn't happen so now we all have to live here in the real world. We want a national competition with a semblance of equality.

I'll be blunt, to reach that we'd have to literally cull the smaller vic clubs, now given that the smallest club in the comp has 50k members that's likely not going to happen.

So I'm going to fairly assume you believe there is bias toward the big vic clubs yeah? If so why don't you just follow WC in the wafl? No vic bias, win win!

 

[Carringbush2010]

So I'll ask again, why is it so important for non vics to follow a league with vic bias that they incessantly complain about? Why not just follow your state leagues instead? No vic bias, win win!

Are any non vic fans gonna answer this question?

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

So I'll ask again, why is it so important for non vics to follow a league with vic bias that they incessantly complain about? Why not just follow your state leagues instead? No vic bias, win win!

Are any non vic fans gonna answer this question?

The AFL is the largest and most well recognised sporting organisation in the country and one that markets itself as a national football competition.

They attract the greatest media coverage, attendances and have the brand recognition that’s second to none in the country.

Anyone born after the late 80s who’s interested in football is automatically going to be drawn to the most dominant league of that code. That’s the AFL.

Majority of people who attend games now are not from the VFL days. They do not know what the state leagues were like. They do not have any affiliation to the state leagues. After all that was 40 years ago. Generations have grown up following teams in the AFL and following a code that markets itself as a national competition.

Take myself, Port were in the AFL from the moment I started following football. They are my team and they play in the national league. The premier league in the country for this sport. Why should I dump my team to follow a state league reserves team because the league that sells itself as being a national league, actually holds onto its state based bias in multiple ways?

I didn’t grow up supporting the state leagues or teams. Absolutely no reason why I should just ditch my team to follow another. Makes no sense.

That’s the same for majority of the country. Majority of people who attend games now have only ever known it as the AFL and their club being in the AFL.

So no, we shouldn’t just go follow our state leagues after following a club for 10/20/30 years just to appease the old vfl fossils who one by one, are being outnumbered. Well in fact, they already are outnumbered.

Give it another 20 odd years and maybe 10% of people who actually attend games will even remember the vfl or the state leagues. They are the ones that need to adapt to the times and acknowledge the league has changed.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Majority of people who attend games now are not from the VFL days.

Have you got evidence of this? Plenty of 'old' people in Perth who still have vivid memories of the 'old' vfl

Why should I dump my team to follow a state league reserves team because the league that sells itself as being a national league,

Because your club is also in the sanfl, no vic bias, win win!

That’s the same for majority of the country

Have you got evidence of this?

So no, we shouldn’t just go follow our state leagues after following a club for 10/20/30 years

And what about those clubs in the sanfl and wafl with over 100+ years of history? Meh, 'not in the national league', let's just dump them for a new club in an expanded vfl (not port admittedly) coz it's national'?

Ok, then, if that's what you all want then STFU about the inequities, you're only gonna get the equity if the smaller vic clubs fold to make that happen, which won't, like I said the smallest vic club in the comp has 50k members.

So it's not gonna happen, so just accept this imbalanced league and stop complaining about it or just go watch the sanfl.

Your choice, vic club supporters don't have that choice.

Blunt I know, life isn't fair, sorry not sorry.

 

[sr36]

I'll be blunt, to reach that we'd have to literally cull the smaller vic clubs, now given that the smallest club in the comp has 50k members that's likely not going to happen.

Nah. That would make the surviving Vic clubs stronger. There's the right amount of clubs in Vic for the size of the comp. 55% of the clubs. 55% of the players and about that of the AFL fans too.

The issue for the Non-Vic clubs isn't travel - Hawthorn have shown that - that's the only thing that would change for surving Vic clubs and you'd have to cull a lot to have much inpact there - thus making all the survivors really strong. The issue is that the bottom Vic teams become too weak to compete with the top Vic clubs. Victoria dominates spoons as well as flags. The top Vic clubs can top up with recruits more cheaply and become better on-field. if you want to reduce the chance of the next dominant team comig from Victoria - you need to stop the situation where the bottom Vic teams are terrible and really unattractive destinations for recruits - they need to be able to compete for recruits so they don't go more cheaply to those at the pointy end of the comp. Non-Vic teams don't need to cull Vic teams - they need tthem - and they need to work out how to level the Victorian market - as the bottom teams become too weak which means the top teams are in a position to become too strong.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Nah. That would make the surviving Vic clubs stronger. There's the right amount of clubs in Vic for the size of the comp. 55% of the clubs. 55% of the players and about that of the AFL fans too.

The issue for the Non-Vic clubs isn't travel - Hawthorn have shown that - that's the only thing that would change for surving Vic clubs and you'd have to cull a lot to have much inpact there - thus making all the survivors really strong. The issue is that the bottom Vic teams become too weak to compete with the top Vic clubs. Victoria dominates spoons as well as flags. The top Vic clubs can top up with recruits more cheaply and become better on-field. if you want to reduce the chance of the next dominant team comig from Victoria - you need to stop the situation where the bottom Vic teams are terrible and really unattractive destinations for recruits - they need to be able to compete for recruits so they don't go more cheaply to those at the pointy end of the comp. Non-Vic teams don't need to cull Vic teams - they need tthem - and they need to work out how to level the Victorian market - as the bottom teams become too weak which means the top teams are in a position to become too strong.

Good points Fonz!

So how do we appease the non vic fans then? My fair assumption is they can't be, and will continue to complain. If they just voted with their feet and remotes and followed their clubs in their state leagues, they couldn't complain about vic bias.

OTOH, even before expansion, non vic fans were complaining about players and coaches poached to the vfl. So I guess there's no appeasing, must be an inferiority complex then.

So I'll ask again, why is it so important for non vics to follow a league with vic bias that they incessantly complain about? Why not just follow your state leagues instead? No vic bias, win win!

Are any non vic fans gonna answer this question?

On a side note, I will reiterate that North, the smallest vic club has 50k members, that goes to show that the vic market in football always has and always will have the largest market.

 

[sr36]

Good points Fonz!

So how do we appease the non vic fans then? My fair assumption is they can't be, and will continue to complain. If they just voted with their feet and remotes and followed their clubs in their state leagues, they couldn't complain about vic bias.

The issue is clubs becoming too weak - and it's usually Vic clubs - and the strong Vic clubs benefit from it - draft assistance packages are the wrong mechanism - takes too long for players to develop and in the meantime they either get raided and/or get into future salary cap trouble by overpaying their players to stay - plus they offer no recruiting competition for the strong teams. I think you need to give weak teams heaps more salary cap as their assistance package and picks that have to be traded. A strong North/Saints etc will help Non-Vic clubs as their weakness helps the top Vic teams.

 

[Carringbush2010]

The issue is clubs becoming too weak - and it's usually Vic clubs - and the strong Vic clubs benefit from it - draft assistance packages are the wrong mechanism - takes too long for players to develop and in the meantime they either get raided and/or get into future salary cap trouble by overpaying their players to stay - plus they offer no recruiting competition for the strong teams. I think you need to give weak teams heaps more salary cap as their assistance package and picks that have to be traded. A strong North/Saints etc will help Non-Vic clubs as their weakness helps the top Vic teams.

Whilst all that is true, it doesn't take away that a state league model would work just as well AND would alleviate any vic bias.

Thoughts? Are you willing to agree that our premierships would be more meritorious IF we didn't have the GF home ground advantage against non vic teams? If yes, wouldn't it be better to have state competitions instead of an expanded vfl?