Why is the AFL never going to be truly equal?

[Colonial]

You know, when you go the man, not the ball, it usually means your argument sucks.

It's a big thing for the AFL, for the expansion of the game and the long term development of the game in NSW & QLD.

Showing low rating programming is NOT a big thing for the networks.

Low ratings = low advertising revenue. They're not going to be forking out a fortune for something that wont make them money during the current contract.


Just because I don't accept your false claims doesn't mean I don't support the expansion of the league.

Havent gone the man at all. They are investing in the biggest game in the country finally having a presence every week in the biggest and 3rd biggest areas in the country. Wether it hasn't rated as highly as they expected or not isn't the issue.

 

[telsor]

Havent gone the man at all. They are investing in the biggest game in the country finally having a presence every week in the biggest and 3rd biggest areas in the country. Wether it hasn't rated as highly as they expected or not isn't the issue.

For the AFL, you're right. They are investing for the long term.

For the a network which has a 5 year contract, they only care about two things. Returns during that period (ie. ratings and advertising revenue during the current contract) and securing the contract for the next period. They're not going to be paying "massive" amounts of money for a return that will be many years after this deal is done.

 

[Colonial]

For the AFL, you're right. They are investing for the long term.

For the a network which has a 5 year contract, they only care about two things. Returns during that period (ie. ratings and advertising revenue during the current contract) and securing the contract for the next period. They're not going to be paying "massive" amounts of money for a return that will be many years after this deal is done.

Wrong.

Look at the NRL as an example. Ch9 has already come out and said that a team in Perth and a 4th Qld team is their priority. They don't mean successful either. Having a new team in a large region opens doorways for them in regards to advertisements viewerships etc. Lets face it (even though im a fan of the club) the numbers aren't as great as what the AFL were hoping for, I would say the same for ch7. They both gambled and it hasn't given the early results they were hoping for. Thankfully the AFL know its a long term project.

 

[Kwality]

And we love you to. Personally I disagree though I believe they should have their own team just not ahead of us, I now have my own team so for selfish reasons....
Also just a point the massive tv deal just gotten for having a 2 QLD and NSW team means the bailouts that have been coming thick and fast can be paid easily by the AFL and also not effect junior funding.

Tassie should have been a franchise relocated from Vic, & we'd have a better comp if the gold Coast & GWS franchises were ex Melbourne too.

 

[Kwality]

You know, when you go the man, not the ball, it usually means your argument sucks.

It's a big thing for the AFL, for the expansion of the game and the long term development of the game in NSW & QLD.

Showing low rating programming is NOT a big thing for the networks.

Low ratings = low advertising revenue. They're not going to be forking out a fortune for something that wont make them money during the current contract.


Just because I don't accept your false claims doesn't mean I don't support the expansion of the league.

& some who cant abide an opinion that differs from their own chose to characterise that view as playing the man - stick to the facts, dont sook behind playing the man claims. sticks & stones will break our bones, but names ..

 

[The_Wookie]

& some who cant abide an opinion that differs from their own chose to characterise that view as playing the man - stick to the facts, dont sook behind playing the man claims. sticks & stones will break our bones, but names ..

You've been warned about this already. You can have an opinion without attacking the poster. Its not a case of not being able to abide alternative view points, its a fact that attacking the poster is unacceptable on this forum.

 

[Kwality]

Wrong.

Look at the NRL as an example. Ch9 has already come out and said that a team in Perth and a 4th Qld team is their priority. They don't mean successful either. Having a new team in a large region opens doorways for them in regards to advertisements viewerships etc. Lets face it (even though im a fan of the club) the numbers aren't as great as what the AFL were hoping for, I would say the same for ch7. They both gambled and it hasn't given the early results they were hoping for. Thankfully the AFL know its a long term project.

Ditto Fox.

 

[footyninescom]

I agree, the AFL is run on day to day commercial lines to ensure the bills are paid & the game grows but it is a non profit organisation & is charged with developing the game as a whole
But If this is so then why is the financial blow torch & crap about TV rights etc applied every time discussion of a team from Tasmania is brought up?. No I'm sorry but the arguments about sustainability, equity, fairness, historic value, economics are definitely a movable feast for both BFers & the AFL itself.
Different factors are applied with liberal amounts of self interest when it comes to the discussions of expansion & especially to Tasmania where we put up with 2 FIFO carpet baggers, but apparently we're not up to having our own team!.
Not too many years ago Demitriou spoke about the right of Western Sydney to have its own AFL team, but not here. WHY?
Talk about Animal farm, we're all equal but some are more equal than others.

Fair points.

Self interest is spot on Madmug.

The AFL are just masquerading as a non profit organisation that cares about the greater good of football. They are a money making corporate brand/version of the sport that is Australian football who wants to maintain their financial monopoly(the AFL did start off as a pty ltd company if I'm not mistaken).
Here's a hypothetical. How do you think the AFL would respond?
A start up group comes up with a concept that state league (WAFL, SNFL etc) & grassroot clubs (amateurs and country clubs) want to be a part of because it brings people through their bar & canteen, thus giving these clubs financial benefits. Ex AFL players say that the concept has enormous performance benefits. The concept is for over the offseason so is no way a detriment to anything that the AFL does over the traditional season.
Do you think the AFL would?
A) Support the concept because the can see that the concept has performance and financial benefits and therefore makes the sport of Australian football stronger. (The greater good of the game). B)

 

[telsor]

Wrong.

Look at the NRL as an example. Ch9 has already come out and said that a team in Perth and a 4th Qld team is their priority. They don't mean successful either. Having a new team in a large region opens doorways for them in regards to advertisements viewerships etc. Lets face it (even though im a fan of the club) the numbers aren't as great as what the AFL were hoping for, I would say the same for ch7. They both gambled and it hasn't given the early results they were hoping for. Thankfully the AFL know its a long term project.

So, Ch7 is going to put over 100 Million dollars into a project when another channel can come along in a couple of years an reap the benefits? That's extrememly unlikely. They're not a charity after all.

As for Ch9/NRL is Ch9 saying they'll put "massive" amounts of money towards that in the startup phase?

TV advertising being able to cover all markets is a bonus, but when nobody watches the product, then adding 20% to nothing still gives you nothing, and for the duration of the current TV rights deal, the GWS/GC ratings are, practically, nothing in that is they showed the Collingwood game into NSW/QLD they'd get as many (probably more).

 

[footyninescom]

Sorry continuing from my last post that time lapsed.
B) Realise that the concept has performance and financial benefits and so bring out their own piss weak version of the concept. Clubs still want to play the start up groups version because it is more like football compared to the AFLs version which has more in common with netball and because the clubs make 80% of the profits from hosting events. The AFL tells these clubs that they can only play the AFLs inferior version where the clubs make no money and 100% of the profits go into the AFLs coffers. Effectively white-anting the start up group and maintaining their financial monopoly. (Greater good of the brand that is the AFL)
This is just a hypothetical of course.
Answer this question and you'll see where the AFLs priorities are.

 

[madmug]

Tassie should have been a franchise relocated from Vic, & we'd have a better comp if the gold Coast & GWS franchises were ex Melbourne too.

Oh God help us please.
Tassie doesnt want a 'franchise' dumped on it. Ripping a club out of Victoria is just wrong. If any Vic clubs cant hack it in their own city then they should go back to the VFL. If Tassie is to get a club it should be a new club started in this community, not ripped out of some suburb in Melbourne. That would show no respect for that club, its community or history, or indeed any respect for Tasmania.
We dont want a club at any cost, we just want our own club. Like every other part of the country that has been let into the boys club thus far.

 

[The_Wookie]

Oh God help us please.
Tassie doesnt want a 'franchise' dumped on it. Ripping a club out of Victoria is just wrong. If any Vic clubs cant hack it in their own city then they should go back to the VFL. If Tassie is to get a club it should be a new club started in this community, not ripped out of some suburb in Melbourne. That would show no respect for that club, its community or history, or indeed any respect for Tasmania.
We dont want a club at any cost, we just want our own club. Like every other part of the country that has been let into the boys club thus far.

Unfortunately while that might be the local sentiment, your government as done everything possible to say otherwise. Please continue that discussion in a thread about Tasmania.

 

[Kwality]

Oh God help us please.
Tassie doesnt want a 'franchise' dumped on it. Ripping a club out of Victoria is just wrong. If any Vic clubs cant hack it in their own city then they should go back to the VFL. If Tassie is to get a club it should be a new club started in this community, not ripped out of some suburb in Melbourne. That would show no respect for that club, its community or history, or indeed any respect for Tasmania.
We dont want a club at any cost, we just want our own club. Like every other part of the country that has been let into the boys club thus far.

My view is not opposed to yours madmug, in full I believe non viable Melbourne clubs to be moved should be stripped of their franchise, with only the playing list being transferred, no coaches, no playing strip, no admin - the missing bits to be the responsibility of the new club, in your case Tas.
Adding clubs reduces the quality of the comp IMHO & that is a road to nowhere. Respect is not the issue, WA then SA faced the need for a new beginning, man up !

 

[madmug]

My view is not opposed to yours madmug, in full I believe non viable Melbourne clubs to be moved should be stripped of their franchise, with only the playing list being transferred, no coaches, no playing strip, no admin - the missing bits to be the responsibility of the new club, in your case Tas.
Adding clubs reduces the quality of the comp IMHO & that is a road to nowhere. Respect is not the issue, WA then SA faced the need for a new beginning, man up !

Yes but they, GWS & GC had a proper new beginning with new clubs formed for the first time in their community, not a transplanted worn out body parachuted in from Melbourne.

 

[telsor]

My view is not opposed to yours madmug, in full I believe non viable Melbourne clubs to be moved should be stripped of their franchise, with only the playing list being transferred, no coaches, no playing strip, no admin - the missing bits to be the responsibility of the new club, in your case Tas.
Adding clubs reduces the quality of the comp IMHO & that is a road to nowhere. Respect is not the issue, WA then SA faced the need for a new beginning, man up !

Ideal Vs Realistic.

Do you think it's more likely a club will relinquish it's licence or relocate?

Considering the angst the AFL had over Fitzroy, would they rather a club 'willingly' moved or was moved to a lower league?

 

[madmug]

Ideal Vs Realistic.

Do you think it's more likely a club will relinquish it's licence or relocate?

Considering the angst the AFL had over Fitzroy, would they rather a club 'willingly' moved or was moved to a lower league?

Hence their is no equality. Thats why I have no time for certain clubs whinging about it. Some of them are just plain lucky they are still part of the league. The AFL dont have the guts to sort out the structure of the competition, so some in Melbourne will always have their hand out to remain viable,

 

[Kwality]

Ideal Vs Realistic.

Do you think it's more likely a club will relinquish it's licence or relocate?

Considering the angst the AFL had over Fitzroy, would they rather a club 'willingly' moved or was moved to a lower league?

Ducking hard decisions is par for the course for the current administration - the expansion will be a KPI measure in future judgements of this era as will be the failure to relocate North to the Gold Coast. Whenever a review is undertaken North will not be pulling its own weight.

As for relocation the idea that such a club would receive universal acceptance in a new market as say the Crows or the Eagles is unrealistic - a tough decision is required stripping some fans of their club, but West Aussies wore it, South Aussies wore it, millions of fans there telsor. Whats special about Fitzroy fans, is it a postcode thing?

 

[The_Wookie]

Ducking hard decisions is par for the course for the current administration - the expansion will be a KPI measure in future judgements of this era as will be the failure to relocate North to the Gold Coast. Whenever a review is undertaken North will not be pulling its own weight.

This is your opinion. Ducking YOUR decisions is par for the course. Norths "weight' in this case has been no less than the Bulldogs and Saints in recent years. Not to mention the Swans, Lions, and Power. That is backed by crowds, memberships and finances in recent years.

As for relocation the idea that such a club would receive universal acceptance in a new market as say the Crows or the Eagles is unrealistic - a tough decision is required stripping some fans of their club, but West Aussies wore it, South Aussies wore it, millions of fans there telsor. Whats special about Fitzroy fans, is it a postcode thing?

The idea that the Crows and Eagles were born into a new market is laughable. They were inserted into a well and truly existing market that had been trying to get a VFL side for years, and then stacked with local players to ensure support. The league lacked the will in 1996 to keep Fitzroy going. They have both in spades at the moment. Not only are clubs not dead, they arent dying either.

Maybe a new administration will change that in a couple of years. Maybe it wont. That the league would let a club go to the wall while it had the ability to keep clubs alive with the current financial state of the league is not likely in the near future though.

 

[Roylion]

The league lacked both the finances and the will in 1996 to keep Fitzroy going. They have both in spades at the moment. Not only are clubs not dead, they arent dying either.

Lacked the will certainly. Lacked the finances? The AFL were willing to part with $12 million to effect two mergers in 1996, but couldn't shell out $1.2 million to help Fitzroy? Fitzroy's total debt in 1996 was $2.7 million. Dyson Hore-Lacy was on record in 1996 saying that if Fitzroy had been able to find another million dollars they would have not sought a merger with any other club. It was official AFL policy at the time to force a Melbourne club to disappear.

 

[The_Wookie]

Lacked the will certainly. Lacked the finances? The AFL were willing to part with $12 million to effect two mergers in 1996, but couldn't shell out $1.2 million to help Fitzroy? Fitzroy's total debt in 1996 was $2.7 million. Dyson Hore-Lacy was on record in 1996 saying that if Fitzroy had been able to find another million dollars they would have not sought a merger with any other club. It was official AFL policy at the time to force a Melbourne club to disappear.

Man you must have like a Fitzroy bat signal somewhere whenever fitzroy is posted. lol. You are right of course.

 

[Roylion]

Man you must have like a Fitzroy bat signal somewhere whenever fitzroy is posted. lol. You are right of course.

I actually miss heaps of material that's posted on Fitzroy on these boards.. Sometimes I read it for the first time weeks after its been posted. I just read widely. For a club that's been out of the AFL for close to 18 years, they still get talked about quite a bit. And not by me either.

 

[telsor]

Ducking hard decisions is par for the course for the current administration - the expansion will be a KPI measure in future judgements of this era as will be the failure to relocate North to the Gold Coast. Whenever a review is undertaken North will not be pulling its own weight.

As for relocation the idea that such a club would receive universal acceptance in a new market as say the Crows or the Eagles is unrealistic - a tough decision is required stripping some fans of their club, but West Aussies wore it, South Aussies wore it, millions of fans there telsor. Whats special about Fitzroy fans, is it a postcode thing?

Are the WA/SA clubs 'stripped' from their fans no longer playing in the competitions they were before WCE/Adelaide were created?

Hardly a fair analogy.

But hey, if you want a fair, even, rational comp with no regard for sentiment.

WA should have at least 4 teams, but the fans are already commited to the current teams and unlikely to shift to the new ones in sufficient numbers...Lets shut down WCE & Freo and create 4 new teams from the ashes. If you like, WCE & Freo can move to the WAFL and play there.

 

[Papa G]

The AFL has become an industry in itself in Melbourne. It actually is in the best interests of the Melbourne economy to keep as many teams as they can. I'm sure the state government has cottoned on to this. The media certainly has. Nobody is calling for a cull of Vic teams anymore. It is in the best interests of those in the "footy industry" to keep all the Vic teams. Despite the expansion of the league, pretty much everything is still located in Melbourne. If you count all the hangers on, the "footy industry" employs thousands and thousands of people. If you include football tourism the AFL puts multi millions into the Victorian economy. Whilst I think the actual dream of people like Oakley/Schwab was to have a far more equitable and evenly dispersed competition, the reality has become clear under Vlad's regime that concentrated centralised power in Melbourne is what is best for Victoria both in a football sense as well as an economic one, fairness comes a distant second.

 

[madmug]

The AFL has become an industry in itself in Melbourne. It actually is in the best interests of the Melbourne economy to keep as many teams as they can. I'm sure the state government has cottoned on to this. The media certainly has. Nobody is calling for a cull of Vic teams anymore. It is in the best interests of those in the "footy industry" to keep all the Vic teams. Despite the expansion of the league, pretty much everything is still located in Melbourne. If you count all the hangers on, the "footy industry" employs thousands and thousands of people. If you include football tourism the AFL puts multi millions into the Victorian economy. Whilst I think the actual dream of people like Oakley/Schwab was to have a far more equitable and evenly dispersed competition, the reality has become clear under Vlad's regime that concentrated centralised power in Melbourne is what is best for Victoria both in a football sense as well as an economic one, fairness comes a distant second.

Yes, AFL Equality is just code for VFL self interest.

 

[GumbyRules]

I have a rule to suggest. What's happening at the lions is unacceptable in the long run. All of the clubs are happy and the fans are ok with stealing the lions players under the pretence of go home. In the NFL if a player leaves at the end of the draft two year contract, the acquiring team has to pay a large sum of money to the team losing the player. I would advocate that, as well draft equalisation measures in that a draft pick at least equal to the round the player was drafted in has to be paid. This would ensure that the interstate clubs don't suffer long term with no money for success and like the lions at the moment the other clubs trying to steal the players with a significant downgrade on the picks with no chance of picking up players of like ability.

I really feel sorry for the lions draft team. It must be very hard to try pick a players ability then try to get inside their head to make sure they won't walk out the door at the end of two years.