This is inspired by the Asian Cup.

I was talking to a soccer fan who hasn't been in Australia for very long and he told me that whilst he didn't mind watching the top teams in the competition play against each other, the thing that he found wrong with the game was that the weaker teams never cause upsets.

I did point out to him that in soccer, we only see a small number of clubs like Manchester United (and now City), Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal at the top of the EPL but he maintains that on any given day, one of the weaker sides can and does upset a stronger club.

I know St. Kilda upset Fremantle twice in the past two seasons (perhaps the circumstances were unusual) and we beat a finalist in Richmond (when they were at a low ebb) but how long will it take us to get to the position where we can beat a genuine finals contender or are we and the other weaker clubs stuck at the bottom for a long while yet?

Are we capable of producing a defining game that can change our destiny?

- Salary cap

- The draft

- tax on footy department spending

- annual handouts, varying amounts depending on club

- the draw(but those games become a bargaining chip in tv rights deals which benefit us)

- COLA finally being fased out. GC & GWS need to have a time limit on theirs.

Wasn't that long ago Saints were playing off in GF'S. We only have ourselves to blame.

  On 10/01/2015 at 01:48, Whispering_Jack said:

This is inspired by the Asian Cup.

I was talking to a soccer fan who hasn't been in Australia for very long and he told me that whilst he didn't mind watching the top teams in the competition play against each other, the thing that he found wrong with the game was that the weaker teams never cause upsets.

I did point out to him that in soccer, we only see a small number of clubs like Manchester United (and now City), Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal at the top of the EPL but he maintains that on any given day, one of the weaker sides can and does upset a stronger club.

I know St. Kilda upset Fremantle twice in the past two seasons (perhaps the circumstances were unusual) and we beat a finalist in Richmond (when they were at a low ebb) but how long will it take us to get to the position where we can beat a genuine finals contender or are we and the other weaker clubs stuck at the bottom for a long while yet?

Are we capable of producing a defining game that can change our destiny?

English Football consists on a number of tiers & allows promotion & relegation which in itself creates interest in who will drop & who will be promoted... The Champioship league is below the EPL which is very strong & with promotion comes millions of pounds to the club, increased sponsorship etc

They also play each other twice & a real home & away grounds!

Whilst only maybe 4-5 some clubs will win the premiership, lower teams still win the the FA cup or Carling cup along with the opportunity to finish mid table & play in the Europa cup...

The AfL I'm sorry is becoming less even, with super clubs emerging getting prime time exposure on TV to meet TV rights demand...

Clubs don't play each other twice & no real home & away comp

Bigger clubs taking advantage of free agency is seeing them top up with Kpp players from struggling clubs eg Frawley etc

So we're is this so called equalisation the AFL are talking about?

  On 10/01/2015 at 01:48, Whispering_Jack said:

This is inspired by the Asian Cup.

I was talking to a soccer fan who hasn't been in Australia for very long and he told me that whilst he didn't mind watching the top teams in the competition play against each other, the thing that he found wrong with the game was that the weaker teams never cause upsets.

I did point out to him that in soccer, we only see a small number of clubs like Manchester United (and now City), Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal at the top of the EPL but he maintains that on any given day, one of the weaker sides can and does upset a stronger club.

I know St. Kilda upset Fremantle twice in the past two seasons (perhaps the circumstances were unusual) and we beat a finalist in Richmond (when they were at a low ebb) but how long will it take us to get to the position where we can beat a genuine finals contender or are we and the other weaker clubs stuck at the bottom for a long while yet?

Are we capable of producing a defining game that can change our destiny?

We beat another finalist (Essendon) as well.

I think a main reason has been the expansion clubs, the compromised drafts, clubs willing to "bottom out" as the preferred strategy to rebuild and now FA. Resources will also play a large part.

  On 10/01/2015 at 02:13, Hogan2014 said:

English Football consists on a number of tiers & allows promotion & relegation which in itself creates interest in who will drop & who will be promoted... The Champioship league is below the EPL which is very strong & with promotion comes millions of pounds to the club, increased sponsorship etc

They also play each other twice & a real home & away grounds!

Whilst only maybe 4-5 some clubs will win the premiership, lower teams still win the the FA cup or Carling cup along with the opportunity to finish mid table & play in the Europa cup...

The AfL I'm sorry is becoming less even, with super clubs emerging getting prime time exposure on TV to meet TV rights demand...

Clubs don't play each other twice & no real home & away comp

Bigger clubs taking advantage of free agency is seeing them top up with Kpp players from struggling clubs eg Frawley etc

So we're is this so called equalisation the AFL are talking about?

Yep.The Free agency farce is making the gap between top and bottom bigger by the minute. Will the AFL ever learn?

  On 10/01/2015 at 02:13, Hogan2014 said:

English Football consists on a number of tiers & allows promotion & relegation which in itself creates interest in who will drop & who will be promoted... The Champioship league is below the EPL which is very strong & with promotion comes millions of pounds to the club, increased sponsorship etc

They also play each other twice & a real home & away grounds!

Whilst only maybe 4-5 some clubs will win the premiership, lower teams still win the the FA cup or Carling cup along with the opportunity to finish mid table & play in the Europa cup...

The AfL I'm sorry is becoming less even, with super clubs emerging getting prime time exposure on TV to meet TV rights demand...

Clubs don't play each other twice & no real home & away comp

Bigger clubs taking advantage of free agency is seeing them top up with Kpp players from struggling clubs eg Frawley etc

So we're is this so called equalisation the AFL are talking about?

It's been buried under more important issues like having a 'Match Day Experience'.

I always thought winning was the ultimate match day experience but maybe I'm just a bit old fashioned.

...by the way I think your points about the EPL are well made 'Hogan'. One thing the AFL must do is ensure the home & away season runs it's full course for all fans. As it sits now the season is over for many supporters by round 2 or 3 at the latest. I would say round one for us over the last number of years.

  On 10/01/2015 at 02:30, Don Williams said:

Yep.The Free agency farce is making the gap between top and bottom bigger by the minute. Will the AFL ever learn?

Who would you rather have; Sylvia or Vince?

In three years time, I wonder who we will prefer; Frawley or Brayshaw?

It's a completely different league with way more clubs.

The top club rest there best players againsted the lower club and in some game they will play there reserve team.

Even though you see the lower clubs beat the top clubs you never see the top 5 change.

The top 5 change from year to year in the afl.

You can't even compare the two.

  On 10/01/2015 at 04:45, rpfc said:

Who would you rather have; Sylvia or Vince?

In three years time, I wonder who we will prefer; Frawley or Brayshaw?

Yes but you're forgetting the other side of the equation in that Hawthorn were able to add a 26 y/o, highly rated KPP to their roster, free of charge. Sylvia has been a bust but same theory applies there too.

One day, we hope to be matching and even beating the likes of Hawthorn but if they can strengthen their list and top up so easily, as they have shown this year, then it's gong to be harder than ever before.

  On 10/01/2015 at 08:03, ILLDieADemon said:

It's a completely different league with way more clubs.

The top club rest there best players againsted the lower club and in some game they will play there reserve team.

Even though you see the lower clubs beat the top clubs you never see the top 5 change.

The top 5 change from year to year in the afl.

You can't even compare the two.

...but if we look at the good points of the EPL then the supporter at least has interest in the competition for most if not all of the season. For us the only interest we've had over the last few years after the first game is the draft. Hardly a satisfying result.

  On 10/01/2015 at 02:30, Don Williams said:

Yep.The Free agency farce is making the gap between top and bottom bigger by the minute. Will the AFL ever learn?

Will never have a chance of learning until they care :-(

  On 10/01/2015 at 08:20, rjay said:

...but if we look at the good points of the EPL then the supporter at least has interest in the competition for most if not all of the season. For us the only interest we've had over the last few years after the first game is the draft. Hardly a satisfying result.

That's because there's 4 different cups to win during the season. Different team but more effort into different cups. Of course it's going to be more interesting. Plus every second year there's the euro cup or the world cup.

Aussie rules only has one cup so if you know your team isn't going to win by halfway through the season then of course your going lose interest.

  On 10/01/2015 at 08:20, rjay said:

...but if we look at the good points of the EPL then the supporter at least has interest in the competition for most if not all of the season. For us the only interest we've had over the last few years after the first game is the draft. Hardly a satisfying result.

The benchmark is the US NFL apparently. Even though the teams are privately owned by billionaires the NFL insists on equalisation policies hoping that every team can beat the other and there is a different Superbowl winner each year, so I am informed. What a far cry from our parochial league. The EPL inequity works because the players and supporters have so many other diversions, European cups, FA, League Cups, higher honours playing for your nation and in the World Cup and on and on. NRL has higher honours but AFL has nothing higher. So we do have a lot in common with the NFL, if only we could take on board some of their ideas for equalisation. Not sure how they do it but there is a draft and strict controls on free agency; I believe top teams can't rape bottom teams in FA but not sure how else they even things up.

  On 10/01/2015 at 09:33, ILLDieADemon said:

That's because there's 4 different cups to win during the season. Different team but more effort into different cups. Of course it's going to be more interesting. Plus every second year there's the euro cup or the world cup.

Aussie rules only has one cup so if you know your team isn't going to win by halfway through the season then of course your going lose interest.

...and you think I don't know that. It's the point I'm making.

Maybe the geniuses that run the AFL could work out how to make the game more interesting for supporters of all teams.

...and by the way many supporters know there team isn't going to win the big one before the start of the season, at least 25% know they won't make finals by the first few games and that can't be healthy.

  On 10/01/2015 at 09:44, Earl Hood said:

The benchmark is the US NFL apparently. Even though the teams are privately owned by billionaires the NFL insists on equalisation policies hoping that every team can beat the other and there is a different Superbowl winner each year, so I am informed. What a far cry from our parochial league. The EPL inequity works because the players and supporters have so many other diversions, European cups, FA, League Cups, higher honours playing for your nation and in the World Cup and on and on. NRL has higher honours but AFL has nothing higher. So we do have a lot in common with the NFL, if only we could take on board some of their ideas for equalisation. Not sure how they do it but there is a draft and strict controls on free agency; I believe top teams can't rape bottom teams in FA but not sure how else they even things up.

The AFL is to US NFL focussed, they could do well by looking broadly and using their own brain power to come up with a solution.

The only thing they have come up with to date is the idea of cheaper pies (no solution as yet) and a game day experience, whatever that is.

The top 4 over the last few years:

2014: Sydney, Hawthorn, Geelong, Fremantle.

2013: Hawthorn, Geelong, Fremantle, Sydney.

2012: Hawthorn, Adelaide, Sydney, Collingwood

2011: Collingwood, Geelong, Hawthorn, West Coast

2010: Collingwood, Geelong, St Kilda, Western Bulldogs

2009: St Kilda, Geelong, Western Bulldogs, Collingwood

2008: Geelong, Hawthorn, Western Bulldogs, St Kilda

2007: Geelong, Port Adelaide, West Coast, North Melbourne

I know it feels like the same teams are ALWAYS at the top, but realistically the cycle has actually been in effect. What we don't know yet is whether (and it seems highly likely) free agency will have a drastic and highly negative impact on the natural cycle of teams going up and down the ladder.

If anything, the MFC are the true anomalies, permanently glued at the bottom of the spectrum. 14th, 16th, 16th, 12th, 13th, 16th, 17th, 17th. No other team has been that ingrained on the bottom of the ladder, and it's history of our own making.

  On 10/01/2015 at 11:24, Lamashtu said:

The top 4 over the last few years:

2014: Sydney, Hawthorn, Geelong, Fremantle.

2013: Hawthorn, Geelong, Fremantle, Sydney.

2012: Hawthorn, Adelaide, Sydney, Collingwood

2011: Collingwood, Geelong, Hawthorn, West Coast

2010: Collingwood, Geelong, St Kilda, Western Bulldogs

2009: St Kilda, Geelong, Western Bulldogs, Collingwood

2008: Geelong, Hawthorn, Western Bulldogs, St Kilda

2007: Geelong, Port Adelaide, West Coast, North Melbourne

I know it feels like the same teams are ALWAYS at the top, but realistically the cycle has actually been in effect. What we don't know yet is whether (and it seems highly likely) free agency will have a drastic and highly negative impact on the natural cycle of teams going up and down the ladder.

If anything, the MFC are the true anomalies, permanently glued at the bottom of the spectrum. 14th, 16th, 16th, 12th, 13th, 16th, 17th, 17th. No other team has been that ingrained on the bottom of the ladder, and it's history of our own making.

I get a bit of pleasure knowing that neither Essendon nor Carlton have made it!!

The comp is uneven, the only way for MFC to get on the better side of the equality debate - is to win games.

IMO the past couple of years at the draft table have basically saved this football club.
I think in a couple years MFC will be pushing for the 4. And the AFL can suck it.

Be in a position to stop selling home games.

All initiatives hinge on the availability of enough financing to ensure that all clubs have enough resources that the competitive advantage of having more money than the rest is diminished.

Beyond that, measures to push up the overall 'adequate standard' talent pool are very important. Deeper reserve grades / state leagues, including more money diverted from the top level (and the TV rights) to support development pathways, coaching and standards at the semi-professional levels.

Speculatively, I also think there's a discussion to be had about introducing a maximum individual player salary. High, but not so crazy as some of the contracts that are floating around now. Again, this would be a move that would shift more money to the depth of lists and the maintenance of overall high quality.

  On 11/01/2015 at 01:33, KingDingAling said:

The comp is uneven, the only way for MFC to get on the better side of the equality debate - is to win games.

IMO the past couple of years at the draft table have basically saved this football club.

I think in a couple years MFC will be pushing for the 4. And the AFL can suck it.

Winning games doesn't fix things when the competition is structured to financially handicap certain clubs so other clubs can benefit. It didn't help the Bulldogs, Saints or North, why would it help us?

  On 10/01/2015 at 09:44, Earl Hood said:

The benchmark is the US NFL apparently. Even though the teams are privately owned by billionaires the NFL insists on equalisation policies hoping that every team can beat the other and there is a different Superbowl winner each year, so I am informed. What a far cry from our parochial league. The EPL inequity works because the players and supporters have so many other diversions, European cups, FA, League Cups, higher honours playing for your nation and in the World Cup and on and on. NRL has higher honours but AFL has nothing higher. So we do have a lot in common with the NFL, if only we could take on board some of their ideas for equalisation. Not sure how they do it but there is a draft and strict controls on free agency; I believe top teams can't rape bottom teams in FA but not sure how else they even things up.

It's interesting that a competition set up for profit and specifically for the profit of the 32 owners is geared towards parity as a means to make their owners more money whereas our competition which is geared towards being the premier each year is dominated by parochial interests trying to lobby so their interests get looked after at the expense of others. Looking at it from a purely financial perspective there is no reason why the AFL shouldn't adopt the NFL revenue sharing model.

We should stop whinging about the so-called unevenness of the competition and recognise that the problem lies within.

Evidence? Port Adelaide. More evidence? North Melbourne.

Neither are considered to be in the competition's group of "heavyweight" clubs supposedly benefiting from free agency, undeserved free to air TV exposure, etc yet both were preliminary finalists last year. Neither is a financial powerhouse and Port was just a couple of years ago considered to be a basket case on and off the field.

  On 11/01/2015 at 23:43, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

We should stop whinging about the so-called unevenness of the competition and recognise that the problem lies within.

Evidence? Port Adelaide. More evidence? North Melbourne.

Neither are considered to be in the competition's group of "heavyweight" clubs supposedly benefiting from free agency, undeserved free to air TV exposure, etc yet both were preliminary finalists last year. Neither is a financial powerhouse and Port was just a couple of years ago considered to be a basket case on and off the field.

you could add bulldogs and saints to that list too in recent years

but it doesn't mean that there isn't a chronic un-eveness in the system and that nothing shouldn't be done about it

by some indications one could conclude that the un-evenness is even increasing in the manic chase of dollars and tv dictatorship

  On 11/01/2015 at 23:53, daisycutter said:

you could add bulldogs and saints to that list too in recent years

but it doesn't mean that there isn't a chronic un-eveness in the system and that nothing shouldn't be done about it

by some indications one could conclude that the un-evenness is even increasing in the manic chase of dollars and tv dictatorship

You mean, "Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't."

Now where have I seen that before?

  On 12/01/2015 at 00:01, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

You mean, "Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't."

Now where have I seen that before?

nice double negative pickup there ldvc.......yes, call me tweedledee if you like