Talking point: the unevenness of the competition

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

We might need a statistician to help us with this, but I don't think the example of clubs that have managed to move sharply up the ladder from time to time disprove the general unevenness of the system, nor does the example of powerful clubs like Carlton so woefully mismanaged that they wobble constantly. And then there's the example of another powerhouse that was so mismanaged after 1964 that it hasn't had a flag since.

[Rob Mac...... 638]

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.

The reason a weaker EPL team is more likely than a weaker AFL side is to upset a power side on any given day is because a soccer final score could be two goals to one, therefor a lucky goal is far more likely to decide the result in a soccer match than in a footy match.

Edited January 12, 2015 by Rob Mac......

[Little Goffy 14,645]

The only reason a weaker EPL team is more likely than a weaker AFL side is to upset a power side on any given day is because a soccer final score could be two goals to one, therefor a lucky goal is far more likely to decide the result in a soccer match than in a footy match.

That, and the fact it is absolutely routine in soccer for top sides to take a 'soft' team to the field against weak opponents, to rest stars for more important games and leagues.

[Jarka 767]

I haven't done the stats but from memory the spread of premiership points is very similar to both codes. You obviously can't compare the two directly because of the scoring systems for each sport but the spread of points looks about similar.

I think in reality there is just as much chance of an upset occurring in either sport

[mauriesy 7,357]

EPL champions since 1992:

1992–93 Manchester United

1993–94 Manchester United

1994–95 Blackburn Rovers

1995–96 Manchester United

1996–97 Manchester United

1997–98 Arsenal

1998–99 Manchester United

1999–2000 Manchester United

2000–01 Manchester United

2001–02 Arsenal

2002–03 Manchester United

2003–04 Arsenal

2004–05 Chelsea

2005–06 Chelsea

2006–07 Manchester United

2007–08 Manchester United

2008–09 Manchester United

2009–10 Chelsea

2010–11 Manchester United

2011–12 Manchester City

2012–13 Manchester United

2013–14 Manchester City

If that was the AFL, how hopeless would the lower teams feel (not that they don't feel hopeless anyway)? It would be like 22 years sharing the premiership between Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney and Collingwood.

[rjay 25,093]

EPL champions since 1992:

1992–93 Manchester United

1993–94 Manchester United

1994–95 Blackburn Rovers

1995–96 Manchester United

1996–97 Manchester United

1997–98 Arsenal

1998–99 Manchester United

1999–2000 Manchester United

2000–01 Manchester United

2001–02 Arsenal

2002–03 Manchester United

2003–04 Arsenal

2004–05 Chelsea

2005–06 Chelsea

2006–07 Manchester United

2007–08 Manchester United

2008–09 Manchester United

2009–10 Chelsea

2010–11 Manchester United

2011–12 Manchester City

2012–13 Manchester United

2013–14 Manchester City

If that was the AFL, how hopeless would the lower teams feel (not that they don't feel hopeless anyway)? It would be like 22 years sharing the premiership between Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney and Collingwood.

...because the premiership is not the only goal in EPL then it's quite a different situation.

I think there are 2 things in play here (AFL). One is to make the premiership a reality for all clubs and the second is to find a way of keeping interest for supporters of all clubs throughout the season.

[Rob Mac...... 638]

That, and the fact it is absolutely routine in soccer for top sides to take a 'soft' team to the field against weak opponents, to rest stars for more important games and leagues.

That's a point too LG! ..I removed the word "only" from my post

[rpfc 28,779]

...because the premiership is not the only goal in EPL then it's quite a different situation.

I think there are 2 things in play here (AFL). One is to make the premiership a reality for all clubs and the second is to find a way of keeping interest for supporters of all clubs throughout the season.

There is only one other goal for clubs and that is to play in Europe, but that is reserved largely for the clubs competing for the domestic title anyway, all,other clubs are in a hopeless malaise only punctuated by the occasional years of overachievement which belie their actual desires - to win the premiership. Unfortunately, the only time a lowly club has turned into a perennial contender is when a shiekh took the club over and spent a billion dollars.

We may look to the U.S. quite a bit, but with good reason; supposed lowly clubs can compete with the bigger clubs and markets. St. Louis, Oakland, Kansas City, and Tampa Bay in the MLB, Seattle, Indianapolis, Tampa Bay (under Gruden), Oakland (up to last few years) in the NFL, and the Spurs, Thunder, Warriors, and the Raptors in the NBA are all examples of 'lesser' markets and supported teams, competing well and winning.

[rjay 25,093]

There is only one other goal for clubs and that is to play in Europe, but that is reserved largely for the clubs competing for the domestic title anyway, all,other clubs are in a hopeless malaise only punctuated by the occasional years of overachievement which belie their actual desires - to win the premiership. Unfortunately, the only time a lowly club has turned into a perennial contender is when a shiekh took the club over and spent a billion dollars.

We may look to the U.S. quite a bit, but with good reason; supposed lowly clubs can compete with the bigger clubs and markets. St. Louis, Oakland, Kansas City, and Tampa Bay in the MLB, Seattle, Indianapolis, Tampa Bay (under Gruden), Oakland (up to last few years) in the NFL, and the Spurs, Thunder, Warriors, and the Raptors in the NBA are all examples of 'lesser' markets and supported teams, competing well and winning.

That's not correct 'rpfc'. The interest is held in many areas and not just the European cup and premiership. There is the FA cup, the league cup and promotion & relegation which all add interest to the supporter.

...but as I have said these are 2 different issues. One to keep interest for all supporters throughout the season and the other is about making it possible for all clubs to win a flag. I most certainly wouldn't look to the EPL as a model for the second.

[drdrake 3,187]

On this topic, who cares it is what it is. The reason why the MFC isn't one of the big clubs is purely our fault and it isn't recent it stems back to the period from our last premiership till the next final series we played in. Our club lost 2 decades of supporters, we then had a period of success with out winning a flag and we attracted new members, the last 10 years once again you lose a decade of supporters. Our club was a power house that lost it's way. The issue since the late 80's early 90's the landscape changed for the better and we got our list right basically for 20 years say from 87-2006, we had some momentum going into 2007 but we lost that very quickly.

With the MFC, one thing we do have is a lot of bandwagon supporters, if we start winning games we have the ability to draw 50,000+ against most Victorian based clubs and get close over 35K against clubs like Adelaide, Sydney, Brisbane and WCE.

Outside of improving our performance the rest is out of our control and we can't blame or expect change until we do.

[rpfc 28,779]

That's not correct 'rpfc'. The interest is held in many areas and not just the European cup and premiership. There is the FA cup, the league cup and promotion & relegation which all add interest to the supporter.

...but as I have said these are 2 different issues. One to keep interest for all supporters throughout the season and the other is about making it possible for all clubs to win a flag. I most certainly wouldn't look to the EPL as a model for the second.

You have a point about the FA Cup but, to some managers the FA Cup (and even Europe) can be a hindrance to a team whose sole desire is to be in the Premiership the next season. The league cup is a joke.

Relegation keeps interest levels up for the most teams but that is devastating aspect to bring into an uneven league.

I really think that the problems we are facing are not horrendous, the are always going to be bad teams - the problem has been there are perennially bad teams and that has jaded some fan bases.

Oddly enough, a more lubricated Free Agency with some restrictions for the best teams will allow bad teams to aggressively chase talent and get better.

[rjay 25,093]

You have a point about the FA Cup but, to some managers the FA Cup (and even Europe) can be a hindrance to a team whose sole desire is to be in the Premiership the next season. The league cup is a joke.

Relegation keeps interest levels up for the most teams but that is devastating aspect to bring into an uneven league.

I really think that the problems we are facing are not horrendous, the are always going to be bad teams - the problem has been there are perennially bad teams and that has jaded some fan bases.

Oddly enough, a more lubricated Free Agency with some restrictions for the best teams will allow bad teams to aggressively chase talent and get better.

I wouldn't like to see promotion and relegation in the AFL and don't think the competition could sustain it anyway, our population is too small.

It would be good if the AFL could look at ways of keeping the interest levels up for supporters throughout the season though. For us on 'Demonland' it seems the draft threads become the most important way too early in the season. It's been season over after game one and in truth after the practice match series.

I've seen your ideas on Free Agency before 'rp' and agree with the line of thinking that restrictions need to be placed on the top teams to allow the bottom clubs access to good players.

[loges 6,767]

Bottom line, free agency has taken away any advantage lower clubs could get through the draft, of course there are other issues, but in the short term this one bites the hardest. Eg lets see where Dangerfield ends up next yesr

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

Hypothetical. In fact, more dream than reality - but let's say the Dees get off to a good start and gain some serious confidence and momentum throughout the season.

Not quite a baby Bombers circa 1993, more a Port Adelaide revival circa 2013. Exciting stuff - the Dees look organised, committed, fit, and play footy with genuine enthusiasm, excitement and spirit. Roos is pumped. Goodwin is pumped.

Meanwhile, Geelong slide - miss out on the 8 (won't happen, I know). Bombers, Carltank, Crows and Collingwood all have average seasons.

Goodwin calls Dangerfield. Get on board son - this is our club now. The future is good.

And here's the sweetener - financially, this is the best offer you'll receive from any club in the land.

Why wouldn't he select the Demons?!

[DeeSpencer 26,082]

Hypothetical. In fact, more dream than reality - but let's say the Dees get off to a good start and gain some serious confidence and momentum throughout the season.

Not quite a baby Bombers circa 1993, more a Port Adelaide revival circa 2013. Exciting stuff - the Dees look organised, committed, fit, and play footy with genuine enthusiasm, excitement and spirit. Roos is pumped. Goodwin is pumped.

Meanwhile, Geelong slide - miss out on the 8 (won't happen, I know). Bombers, Carltank, Crows and Collingwood all have average seasons.

Goodwin calls Dangerfield. Get on board son - this is our club now. The future is good.

And here's the sweetener - financially, this is the best offer you'll receive from any club in the land.

Why wouldn't he select the Demons?!

Because of the hypotheticals!

We have to finish higher or about level to Geelong, Collingwood and Adelaide, without Richmond finishing top 4 and looking legit. I think they are the biggest competitors to the Dangerfield market. I doubt Hawks, Essendon or North have the salary space, doubt Carlton can entice him, same with Saints, Dogs.

Now there's every chance Richmond again are in that 5-10th not looking likely to win a flag any time soon region. But to ask us to finish close enough to 3 other sides, 2 of which in Geelong and Adelaide could still make the 8 is a big call I guess.

Then there's the money. If Geelong have locked Selwood, Taylor, Motlop, Duncan and Hawkins away on salaries that fit within a team structure then I don't see anyone else on their list who's cashing big money. The older brigade - Bartel, Enright (both whom probably retire next season), SJ, Mackie, Lonergan, Stokes are either veterans or not on much anyway I'd say. Maybe Caddy, Vardy or Guthrie have somehow snared big deals but I doubt it. And surely they didn't over pay for Clark, Stanley, McIntosh etc. Even if we look a more promising side (which is a huge if) they should still have a big chunk of coin as well. Remember there's every chance we are paying Jones, Vince, Dawes, Dunn even Hogan, Tyson and Viney overs because managers know they have leverage.

I'm not too worried about signing a free agent though. I'm more concerned about getting on the right track. Build your club properly the free agents will come. If it's not on solid foundations then I don't think you'll get the right free agent anyway.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

One thing that's clear as day is that Roos and PJ are committed to building this club on solid and sustainable foundations.

Everything they have done to date confirms/reaffirms that in spades.

Edited January 13, 2015 by Ron Burgundy

[Demoneyes 562]

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.

If there's one thing that's clear as day - that is, that Roos and PJ are committed to building this club on solid and sustainable foundations.

Everything they have done to date confirms/reaffirms that in spades.

Yes they are! Very rare in our history since 1964 that we have had one, let alone 2 committed individuals in charge of the club. With PJ he has built the foundations for a stronger club into the future with no squabbling at board level... with Roos he is building a culture and ethic within the team that will also hold us in good stead. If this was 10 years ago we would be now living the glory but it is now and we have to wait a little longer! Be patient, we will rise!

And I would just like to beat Hawks and Kangas for once!

[old dee 23,872]

Yes they are! Very rare in our history since 1964 that we have had one, let alone 2 committed individuals in charge of the club. With PJ he has built the foundations for a stronger club into the future with no squabbling at board level... with Roos he is building a culture and ethic within the team that will also hold us in good stead. If this was 10 years ago we would be now living the glory but it is now and we have to wait a little longer! Be patient, we will rise!

And I would just like to beat Hawks and Kangas for once!

Think 2016

This year I will be happy for the game to be alive at three quarter time

Edited January 13, 2015 by old dee

[Demoneyes 562]

Think 2016

This year I will be happy for the game to be alive at three quarter time

Old dee, your memory is a slippin' boy! We were in the game at 3/4 time a dozen times in 2014!

[old dee 23,872]

Old dee, your memory is a slippin' boy! We were in the game at 3/4 time a dozen times in 2014!

We are talking Hawthorn and North it is usually all over at quarter time with them.

Three quater time in 2014

Hawthorn first game 13.8 in front . second game 8.0 in front

North " " 7.2 in front " " 4.2 in front

Not a good look Demoneyes one in four we were even close

[biggestred 5,140]

There are only 2 ways you can have true equalisation.

1. Divide all revenue streams equally. Ie tv rights, gate etc (not membership and club raised revenue though)

2. Televise the fixture creation And work out some way of making it random - ie pull balls out of a hat or something.

[Fork 'em 6,991]

Eddie wouldn't let either of those options happen.
I can already hear the squealing.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,909]

Yes they are! Very rare in our history since 1964 that we have had one, let alone 2 committed individuals in charge of the club. With PJ he has built the foundations for a stronger club into the future with no squabbling at board level... with Roos he is building a culture and ethic within the team that will also hold us in good stead. If this was 10 years ago we would be now living the glory but it is now and we have to wait a little longer! Be patient, we will rise!

And I would just like to beat Hawks and Kangas for once!

I don't know if there's squabbling at Board level or not. What I do know is that the Board doesn't leak...which is why I don't know if there's any squabbling.

Because of that we should probably add Glenn Bartlett and the rest of our Board members to the list of people making this a stronger club, along with Peter Jackson and Paul Roos.

[H_T 3,049]

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?

I know some people who have moved overseas for work to follow their dreams several years ago, they're not overly that keen on football, but they keep tabs on every so often. Before Christmas we caught up and the discussion came up on comparisons with Football (Soccer) ie. EPL, A League, and AFL etc and they were a little surprised that in the last 4-5 yrs not much had really changed in terms of ladder positioning apart from St.K and Port. Just an observation, but a relevant one regarding unevenness and the degree of 'same-same' for the EPL top sides / AFL sides.

[JV7 2,354]

The thing with the NFL is with the divisions of 4 teams, if you improve enough in your division you can easily go past the 3 other sides in the division and qualify for the playoffs, once your in the playoffs anything can happen. I always thought the divisional concept was stupid, only playing some sides once in a few years but it does create an even competition and a chance for every side to compete. For melbourne to improve enough to make the finals we must improve and jump 9 sides in the NFL like I said if your improvement is only minimal but it's enough to win your division and make the playoffs then it's a relatively successful year