2021 Fixture

[ding 5,126]

16 hours ago, DubDee said:

out of interest, for the double up games, would you prefer more games against tougher opposition than bring in more revenue or more easier games that would result in a potentially higher ladder position but less revenue?

I know it is not black and white but in general

I would take the double-up games against tougher opposition any day of the week if it meant more money.

If we cant beat good teams we wont be winning he premiership anyway. Playing the lower teams might help us to make the finals, but if we are still no good we go out in straight sets anyway with not much gained. 

If the revenue difference is big enough (so many variables my brain hurts), take the harder games and learn to beat the best.

Edited September 18, 2020 by ding
Typo

[Dr. Gonzo 24,216]

18 hours ago, Pates said:

The Cons are that it creates a communistic style of running things, meaning clubs that have managed themselves well and got into strong positions to have larger crowds don't get to reap the benefits of it. I would also be willing to bet it'll happen just as we start to get big crowds regularly at the G!

It's not communistic, it's co-operative. This is how things were run in the early days of the competition and when the AFL specifically pursues policies of profit/crowd maximisation that favour some clubs at the expense of others (oppposition, timeslots etc) then a revenue sharing model is the only choice. Of course it will be opposed by those who benefit from it.

Edited September 18, 2020 by Dr. Gonzo

[Pates 9,660]

5 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It's not communistic, it's co-operative. This is how things were run in the early days of the competition and when the AFL specifically pursues policies of profit/crowd maximisation that favour some clubs at the expense of others (oppposition, timeslots etc) then a revenue sharing model is the only choice. Of course it will be opposed by those who benefit from it.

I get what you mean by saying it's co-operative and I wouldn't be against that model going forward as I feel like that it was create a stronger, more stable competition across the board (every second year there's talk of a team being being "one their knees") which you would hope would bridge the gap between the rich and poor clubs. As I said though clubs that have managed their finances and clubs well would obviously feel as though they are "propping up" the lowly clubs and would have cause to feel it's unfairly diminishing their earnings.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,216]

3 hours ago, Pates said:

I get what you mean by saying it's co-operative and I wouldn't be against that model going forward as I feel like that it was create a stronger, more stable competition across the board (every second year there's talk of a team being being "one their knees") which you would hope would bridge the gap between the rich and poor clubs. As I said though clubs that have managed their finances and clubs well would obviously feel as though they are "propping up" the lowly clubs and would have cause to feel it's unfairly diminishing their earnings.

"Managed their finances well" is a euphemism for "being given financially lucrative fixtures for the last 25 years"

[Jaded No More 68,915]

On 9/17/2020 at 8:35 PM, Diamond_Jim said:

Players wont be allowed in Qld on that basis....

"There are reports that Queensland is considering changing its requirements for opening the borders to New South Wales.

The Chief Health Officer’s current recommendation stipulates that NSW has to go 28 days with no cases of community transmission before we would let them back into Queensland.

That clock was reset yesterday, when just one mystery case was recorded over the border.

It’s understood Queensland Health is now considering halving the number of days to 14, after South Australia announced similar measures yesterday.

They are today opening up to the ACT but will not open to NSW until it’s been two weeks of no new community transmission.

Queensland Health maintains that it reviews the border restrictions at the end of every month."

https://www.mygc.com.au/queensland-considering-changes-to-border-opening-requirements/

As to games in Vic with those numbers crowds would be limited maybe even as low as 25% and at most 50%

QLD are on drugs. Their premier is an absolute [censored] and as soon as she wins her election those borders will open up quicker than the speed of light. 

QLD cannot afford the hit to tourism in summer. Anna is all about the money. It’s why AFL players and Hollywood stars get a free pass. 

[titan_uranus 25,020]

In terms of next year's fixture, double up games aren't the big issue. They rarely are.

The big issues are prime time games, travel, shortness of breaks and venues played at.

[Diamond_Jim 12,588]

1 hour ago, Jaded said:

QLD are on drugs. Their premier is an absolute [censored] and as soon as she wins her election those borders will open up quicker than the speed of light. 

QLD cannot afford the hit to tourism in summer. Anna is all about the money. It’s why AFL players and Hollywood stars get a free pass. 

When this is all over there will hopefully be a rational consideration of the world's reaction.

Unfortunately this relatively mild pandemic has shown us that the world does not act rationally.

As an avid student of alternative histories who will write the history of 2020?

Could it be Asia?

[Pates 9,660]

43 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

"Managed their finances well" is a euphemism for "being given financially lucrative fixtures for the last 25 years"

Yes and no. I definitely agree that the likes of the Pies, Essendon, Blues, Hawks, and Tigers have been well looked after for a while by being given a more commercially helpful draw. The Blues in particular were inexplicably given a free ride for a long time even when they were a pile of crap. 

It’s why I get defensive towards fans of those clubs when they complain about us getting handouts when they get handouts in a different way (ie a better commercial draw). But at the same time the Hawks are actually a good example of a club that was literally in the same position as us but through intelligent moves managed to become a powerhouse club. 

I think it is fair that we expect things to be shared more equally as does feel like the powerful clubs have been getting more powerful.