Strange article in the Age about the AFL considering:

1. Increasing the draft age by 6 months (sounds sensible I think)

2. Decreasing the number of coaches

3. Decreasing the number of players on a club's list.

Why I say it is strange is that it reads like they want development to occur outside the AFL system and a natural affect of decreasing list size is that the clubs would not be able to field a reserves side.

The concepts are muddled but need to be discussed.

"The AFL is considering changes to the draft age and cutting the number of players and coaches at clubs as part of an overhaul of football departments.

The number of coaches at clubs or the number permitted to work at games on match day could also be cut as part of the changes being discussed.

The option to increase the draft age by six months and to trim the number of players on club lists to a number yet to be determined are among options being canvassed by the AFL as a way of overhauling club lists."

"The argument for cutting lists sizes isthat with fewer players on a list you require fewer coaches at clubs and that it is the least talented players that take up most of the time of development coaches at AFL level."

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-considers-cutting-number-of-players-coaches-at-clubs-20180725-p4ztgg.html

Why does the AFL care how many coaches are squeezed into the coaches box?  And if some were outside the box, how do you limit the number of people coaching?  Does advice from Demonlanders in the Match Day thread count as coaching......

  On 25/07/2018 at 04:09, sue said:

Why does the AFL care how many coaches are squeezed into the coaches box?  And if some were outside the box, how do you limit the number of people coaching?  Does advice from Demonlanders in the Match Day thread count as coaching......

the argument seems to be that the game is "overcoached" and players are not performing to their natural best

  On 25/07/2018 at 04:09, sue said:

Why does the AFL care how many coaches are squeezed into the coaches box?  And if some were outside the box, how do you limit the number of people coaching?  Does advice from Demonlanders in the Match Day thread count as coaching......

probably at the suggestion of channel 7 but i can't find any logic to it from channel 7's view but then who says there is any logic in the afl's decisions anyway

a better idea would be to reduce the size of the afl media unit. there is obviously too much unproductive development of unskilled journos going on there. and cut back the salaries and bonuses of afl execs too because they would have less staff to lord it over 

Is Gil the biggest idiot to ever see over the league? Crash test dummies and erratic reactionary changes

  On 25/07/2018 at 04:01, Diamond_Jim said:

1. Increasing the draft age by 6 months (sounds sensible I think)

In principle this argument as run by the likes of Roos seems sensible.

Unfortunately as much as the AFL likes to think of itself as the major code and that it will be forever and a day, it won't be.

The AFL is not run in a vacuum (the only vacuum is in Dill's big head).

It just opens up the young talent to other sports.

Cricket is now a real threat with more money and opportunity in the short form game, basketball is growing again and kids have big opportunities o/s, not to mention the huge cash in soccer for talented kids worldwide.

6 months is a long time for a kid (it basically  means a year in football terms). Will I go to cricket and get my couple of hundred k starting now (opportunity of millions in near future) or should I be running around playing park footy for another year with no guarantee's???

I believe we will look back on the McLaughlin era as the big error of football that started the rot & pushed it back to being a regional amateur sport like Gaelic football is now.

I just hope we get a Melbourne premiership whilst it's still a premier sport and means something.

By the way, anyone who thinks they can build a solid pathway around the country has rocks in their heads. They don't have the money and won't use what will be better spent lining their pockets.

I think it is AFL head office that needs pruning. Too many highly paid executives and pseudo analysts with too much time on their hands in my opinion. 

Looks like a list of solutions in search of a problem! 

Edited July 25, 20186 yr by Earl Hood

  On 25/07/2018 at 05:06, Earl Hood said:

I think it is AFL head office that needs pruning. Too many highly paid executives and pseudo analysts with too much time on their hands in my opinion. 

Looks like a list of solutions in search of a problem! 

Agree Earl

As I said in my OP I found the mix of topics strange indeed.

I think the VFL is a good program although it has a few obvious weaknesses.The obvious concern with it is how the non aligned clubs will survive longer term both from a competitive and financial viewpoint. Then there is the cost of maintaining facilities at places like Coburg, Box Hill etc

  On 25/07/2018 at 05:00, rjay said:

In principle this argument as run by the likes of Roos seems sensible.

Unfortunately as much as the AFL likes to think of itself as the major code and that it will be forever and a day, it won't be.

The AFL is not run in a vacuum (the only vacuum is in Dill's big head).

It just opens up the young talent to other sports.

Cricket is now a real threat with more money and opportunity in the short form game, basketball is growing again and kids have big opportunities o/s, not to mention the huge cash in soccer for talented kids worldwide.

6 months is a long time for a kid (it basically  means a year in football terms). Will I go to cricket and get my couple of hundred k starting now (opportunity of millions in near future) or should I be running around playing park footy for another year with no guarantee's???

I believe we will look back on the McLaughlin era as the big error of football that started the rot & pushed it back to being a regional amateur sport like Gaelic football is now.

I just hope we get a Melbourne premiership whilst it's still a premier sport and means something.

By the way, anyone who thinks they can build a solid pathway around the country has rocks in their heads. They don't have the money and won't use what will be better spent lining their pockets.

A strange post, Gaelic football was always an amateur sport and never enjoyed popularity outside Ireland or expat communities. Footy is expanding at the moment and is the predominant code in most of the country, however the AFL needs to rid itself of the delusion that it can expand overseas. It won’t, and any idea that it ever could was simply a pipe dream.

The AFL are doing what they do best which is [censored] up the game. If they want better games stop scheduling Carlton StKilda and the Bulldogs on Friday and Saturday nights.

  On 25/07/2018 at 09:04, Goffer said:

A strange post, Gaelic football was always an amateur sport and never enjoyed popularity outside Ireland or expat communities. Footy is expanding at the moment and is the predominant code in most of the country, however the AFL needs to rid itself of the delusion that it can expand overseas. It won’t, and any idea that it ever could was simply a pipe dream.

Hey Goffer what about AFLX? ?

I must say I have been worried for the future of the VFL since they scrapped the Development League. 

Pardon my ignorance, or my stupidity, but what in the hell are those who are developing, returning from injury or 'depth' players supposed to do?

And what about clubs who get a long injury list if there is a significant reduction in list size?   Do they 'do an Essendon' and ask for supplementary (not supplemented) players?

Sounds like yet another  typical Gillon inspired half baked idea.

 

I'm assuming Channel 7 have asked Gill to have all coaches fired except for Chris Scott so they can just film his reactions?

Speculating, but my gut is saying that the reduction in list size will be one side of a deal that sees the introduction of mid-season rookies to be taken from the 2s. As a back door to then slip in mid-season trades.

Because one thing we all know, is that the media and AFL HQ are convinced that the biggest spectacle in the game is hyperventilating about stars like Franklin, Ablett, Dangerfield, and Folau...

The idea itself, of being able to recruit a vfl player to cover injury, isn't so bad provided that the glaringly obvious need to invest a lot more in the '2s' levels across the country.

  On 25/07/2018 at 09:04, Goffer said:

Footy is expanding at the moment and is the predominant code in most of the country,

Footy isn't expanding at the moment, it's in decline.

The numbers are down & that's why the AFL are looking at radical rule changes.

They have got to be kidding themselves if they think they can set up a pathway like the US college system here.

To answer the thread question I hope not I enjoy going to games.

  On 25/07/2018 at 09:04, Goffer said:

A strange post, Gaelic football was always an amateur sport and never enjoyed popularity outside Ireland or expat communities. Footy is expanding at the moment and is the predominant code in most of the country, however the AFL needs to rid itself of the delusion that it can expand overseas. It won’t, and any idea that it ever could was simply a pipe dream.

Wholeheartedly agree . It is so naive to think that AFL could “take” in a foreign country when it can’t even conquer the whole of Australia let alone greater western Sydney ! 

  On 25/07/2018 at 12:54, rjay said:

Footy isn't expanding at the moment, it's in decline.

The numbers are down & that's why the AFL are looking at radical rule changes.

They have got to be kidding themselves if they think they can set up a pathway like the US college system here.

Which numbers? I expect TV ratings are down, but what about crowd attendances? And overall revenues?

  On 26/07/2018 at 03:32, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Which numbers? I expect TV ratings are down, but what about crowd attendances? And overall revenues?

crowd numbers as a percentage of population are trending down year on year.

Revenues go up to some extent because of greater corporate revenues and ticket price increases. Of course the bulk of the revenue comes from the media deals.

A sustained corporate downturn such we saw post 1988 would seriously challenge today's AFL revenue model.

Edited July 26, 20186 yr by Diamond_Jim

There's obviously a bigger picture at play here as these changes don't make a whole deal of sense. I'd suggest the long term goal wouldn't go down very well with current club supporters so it'll be small steps along the way that may sneak through under the radar.

Raise the draft age and those now ineligible would probably play in a VFL type competition. Reduce the number of players and coaches, and those will also be looking for a gig in a lower competition. So what I'm seeing is an attempt to strengthen those comps.

Is it possible they're looking at evolving into a tiered competition with 2(?) leagues and promotion/relegation depending on performance? EPL style.