IF

[Quolls2019]

Been a bit of talk about expansion, relocation and team numbers.

IF both codes could each start a new league, based on current population and the sports actual or realistic potential following in your league:
How many clubs?
Where would each club be based?
How would you make it work? (Fixture, innovations, etc)

Lets try and keep the discussion reasonably intelligent.

[Fred]

On your premise of starting from scratch but based on what we know I think I would have less teams in Melbourne for afl. I’d have a team in Tassie. I’d have a team in Newcastle as a targeted growth areA for the game given there is supporters there already. I’d have another in Adelaide (3). I would set gws up a whole lot different - no greater in the name and just west Sydney. Canberra would have a team. Geelong would remain. Now- if setting up today without historical context I’d have maybe 6 teams from Melbourne - north, south, east and west maybe, a Melbourne, maybe a Gippsland team playing out of Casey area. So that’s 16 teams I believe. I would also have relegation and promotion with their being a league under the afl level - so no seconds per se - and it would also be national - then leagues under that at a state level that could work up to national level then to AFL. I don’t think I’d want a New Zealand team - but if they were interested they could be part of the lower leagues

[TLPG]

For the AFL it has to be a smallish number to allow for clubs to play each other twice. Maximum 14 clubs, 26 rounds with a final six. The fourteen clubs would be.

West Coast
Fremantle
Adelaide
Port Adelaide
Tasmania
Canberra
Sydney
Brisbane
Carlton
Collingwood
Essendon
Melbourne
Geelong
Richmond

The other Melbourne based AFL clubs to the VFL.

The less AFL clubs would lead to better competition for the best players. It would also increase the strength of certainly the VFL (goodness knows it could do with it) and bring it up to the same level as the SANFL and the WAFL. Oh and the reserves in the AFL would come back. TV deal should include the state leagues - and that includes the TFL and maybe the leagues in Canberra, Sydney and Brisbane. That way it doesn't come down.

However - if it has to be an expansion instead I would go to 22 to create two divisions. The four clubs should be Tasmania, Canberra, Centrals from the SANFL and Swan Districts from the WAFL. Promotion and relegation with a smaller salary cap for the lower division to encourage youth recruitment and development. Teams can play each other twice over 22 rounds with two byes each, a final six over five weeks for the top division and a final five for the lower division. Reserves to be included. Expand the state leagues as well, especially in Victoria.

[Quolls2019]

22 teams
22 rounds each team playing each other once, alternating home and away each season, plus one rivalry round, (plus extra round(s)for byes if required).

An extra 2 games per round with an extra 44 games a year.
This should result in a substantial increase in broadcast rights and associated income, attendance and membership.
The Teams
WA 3
SA 3
Canberra 1
Northern Australia (based in Darwin) 1
NSW 3
Tas 1
Qld 3
Vic 7

Another suggestion
Vic 6
Tas 2 (1 each in Hobart and Launceston) would certainly need financial assistance but the increase in broadcast rights will cover this and more…but wait ther’s more

The last on field player number reduction was in 1899 when the number was reduced from 20 to 18. Since the ground surface had improved greatly as has player fitness, no comparison from then to now.
The game is much quicker but paradoxically there are more packs and lower scoring.
Reduce the player numbers to 14 on field, eliminating the centre half and
Wing positions. Reduce the bench to 3 (maybe 4).
That’s a saving of six players per game plus and additional proportionate list reduction of 4 players would mean there would be 180 players available for the new teams pool selection.

Lists are reduced to 30 players (with some allowance for a couple of 2 or 3 more for new clubs).
They would be 180 players to share between 4 clubs.
The lists could be over 30 initially and reduced each year, but there would still be enough players for the new teams to have an experienced side.

Salaries to be standardised.

Salary cap is reduced nearly proportionately, with allowance for remaining players to be paid a little more.

All clubs have the same salary amount and the same player salary levels.
That is: the best player in each team has the same salary, the next best the same salary and so on.
Each selected player gets a an equal match payment (currently $5,000).
Clubs could not recruit players (or players change clubs) unless there is a vacant salary spot available.
This will stop the sometimes outrageous salary offers and the subsequent salary blowouts each year. A team may offer a player a long term contract bust it must equal the available salary spots.
To encourage loyalty, players with 7+ years service can be paid 25% over their salary level and those with 10+ years service 50% over their salary without being counted in the total player payments…bonus payments.

Example salary levels below with some based on AFL Draftee schedules.


Level Players Salary Total
Level 1 1 1 700,000 700,000
Level 2 5 4 600,000 2,400,000
Level 3 9 4 500,000 2,000,000
Level 4 11 2 450,000 900,000
Level 5 13 2 400,000 800,000
Level 6 14 1 350,000 350,000
Level 7 15 1 300,000 300,000
Level 8 16 1 200,000 200,000
Level 9 18 2 150,000 300,000
D1-2 20 2 100,000 200,000
D2-2 22 2 95,000 190,000
D3-2 24 2 90,000 180,000
D1-1 26 2 90,000 180,000
D2-1 28 2 85,000 170,000
D3-1 30 2 80,000 160,000


So under this proposal player numbers for the new teams are catered for with excess.

The quality of the players will be wide because of the salary structure/restrictions.

The AFL fund allocation reduced proportionately for the reduced total salaries of each club will pay for the new clubs players salaries and the increase in tv rights etc will cater for the rest and make the AFL extra profit.

[TLPG]

I don't think it's needed to bring the on field numbers any lower than 16. The VFA showed how beneficial that was (they got rid of the wings).

[Quolls2019]

I don't think it's needed to bring the on field numbers any lower than 16. The VFA showed how beneficial that was (they got rid of the wings).

That was in the time of part-time footballers, grounds, speed and fitness have all improved since then…by a long way.

The VFA were also the first to reduce from 20 to 18, 1897, the VFL followed in 1899.

[TLPG]

I don't think that really makes any difference. We can't take too many off the field - we don't want it to end up like basketball in a sense (as in both sides kicking 30 goals a game sort of thing).

[leeroy*NRL*]

i think both comps NRL AND AFL would still like around 20 teams
Both would have 3 teams less in there major cities.

i like the format of EPL play each other twice home and away.

but it is impossible in NRL or AFL.

[leeroy*NRL*]

Each major city and territory should be locked up.

[Quolls2019]

i think both comps NRL AND AFL would still like around 20 teams
Both would have 3 teams less in there major cities.

i like the format of EPL play each other twice home and away.

but it is impossible in NRL or AFL.

Playing each other twice in a season wont happen in either code….season would need to be extended way too much or the number of teams would need to be reduced by far too many.

Trick is to get as even a fixture as possible when there is no way of playing each team twice.

Seems to be settled on 22 rounds for each code (not count bye rounds)

[TLPG]

Or go to multiple divisions or reduce the numbers of clubs as I suggested originally.

[Quolls2019]

Or go to multiple divisions or reduce the numbers of clubs as I suggested originally.

Starting from scratch you could reduce the number of teams, but based on what we know…all current teams are affordable and add to the overall financial stability of the league there is no need (or wish) from most to do so.

2 divisions of 12 clubs, with promotion and relegation is possible ….starting from scratch..
However there would need to be an equalisation fund with all clubs having similar salary caps and allocated similar funds from the leagues. Otherwise most of the lower league teams would just fade away.
And VFA/VFL split was mainly about the bigger clubs not wanting to share “their” money with the lower clubs.
I think that attitude would rear up very quickly.

You could always have 2 equal divisions that only play the other division teams in finals….but not sure that would work in Australia. Tyranny of distance and who goes where would be a problem.
I suppose you could have 2 equal divisions where teams of that division can change every year based on their position on the ladder at the end of the finals, say division A is made up of odd numbers, 1,3,5 etc and Division B 2,4,6 etc.
But blockbuster and rivalry games could be intermittent, and that would cost money.

[TLPG]

2 divisions of 12 clubs, with promotion and relegation is possible ….starting from scratch..
However there would need to be an equalisation fund with all clubs having similar salary caps and allocated similar funds from the leagues. Otherwise most of the lower league teams would just fade away.
And VFA/VFL split was mainly about the bigger clubs not wanting to share “their” money with the lower clubs.
I think that attitude would rear up very quickly.

I disagree - two divisions can be done now with 2 divisions of 11 clubs as I suggested. The top 11 of a given 18 club competition to Division 1 (the top eight and the next three) and the other seven clubs plus the new four to Division 2. It will definitely benefit North Melbourne and probably Essendon too. The whole idea of the lower salary cap is to get fresh young players in and have the extra time to develop them and build to a Division 2 flag and promotion when the players can earn more money. No team would fade away - in fact this arrangement would prevent it.

And while the equalisation stragedy in the VFA did partly lead to the formation of the VFL, it wasn't the whole story. There were other factors as well. And there can be no doubt that Port Melbourne were a bigger club at the time than St Kilda just to add to that. The only reasons Port weren't invited were because of poor spectator behaviour (and Port supported the VFA's plans).

[Quolls2019]

2 divisions of 12 clubs, with promotion and relegation is possible ….starting from scratch..
However there would need to be an equalisation fund with all clubs having similar salary caps and allocated similar funds from the leagues. Otherwise most of the lower league teams would just fade away.
And VFA/VFL split was mainly about the bigger clubs not wanting to share “their” money with the lower clubs.
I think that attitude would rear up very quickly.

I disagree - two divisions can be done now with 2 divisions of 11 clubs as I suggested. The top 11 of a given 18 club competition to Division 1 (the top eight and the next three) and the other seven clubs plus the new four to Division 2. It will definitely benefit North Melbourne and probably Essendon too. The whole idea of the lower salary cap is to get fresh young players in and have the extra time to develop them and build to a Division 2 flag and promotion when the players can earn more money. No team would fade away - in fact this arrangement would prevent it.

And while the equalisation stragedy in the VFA did partly lead to the formation of the VFL, it wasn't the whole story. There were other factors as well. And there can be no doubt that Port Melbourne were a bigger club at the time than St Kilda just to add to that. The only reasons Port weren't invited were because of poor spectator behaviour (and Port supported the VFA's plans).

We agree to disagree.

With the 1897 schism, I agree that Port Melbourne was not invited because of their fans behaviour but the primary reason for the split was money.

[Bbear]

Team 1
Definitely a Northern Territory team, despite small population 250000, it punches beyond its weight. This team would need some subsidies but the social and economic benefits to the Territory would be to great to ignore.
Would have to identify as NT not Northern Australia. ( no one identifies as a Northern Australian)
Green Bay packers NFL team is based in a city of only around 120000 so it's possible.

Team 2

A Newcastle North Coast team would have a catchment all the way to the qld border and play some games in regional centres.

Team 3
Canberra team, the catchment would be Southern NSW and identify as a team for Riverina, Murray and NSW far south coast

North Melbourne would do well to relocate to one of the above areas instead of trying to compete for fans in a city over saturated with teams.