Bugger me, it's a ■■■■■■ competition and success breeds success.
While it looks like it's becoming an arms race, as Bomber said after the HPC opened, it won't win you a premiership. The draft and salary cap allow for just and fair list management, and guess what, players win premierships. If anything the AFL farked it by introducing free agency.
The point is, if a club wins premierships and manages their money they shouldn't be penalised.
Funny they should use the US example of different cities needing to be subsidised… and THEN argue that unfairness between clubs in Melbourne is harsher.
NO. More than ever, with every team at one of two grounds, there is a very fair playing field.
Further, lets actually look at the facts.
Collingwood kick-started the modern day powerhouse club movement when McGuire came on board. They moved into the Westpac Centre a decade ago, a centre that other clubs have somewhat modeled since. They have massive membership, massive sponsorship, massive revenue and in-turn massive spending.
They've also won one premiership in almost 25 years and don't look like winning one for the next few, what is the need for equalisation?
Normally a fan of taking from the rich to give to the poor. That went out the window when Gordon and Koch opened their moronic mouths to have a crack at us. ■■■■ them and their ■■■■ clubs.
smacks of the AFL preparing for the new wave, the new administrators, the "new frontier"
■■■■ em.
Memo AFL/AFLPA: these poor clubs are poor because not enough people give a flying fark about them. It doesn't matter how many dollars you shovel at them, you will not buy them a fan base. And surprise surprise, you get a fan base by working at it like Essendon, and collingwood, and carltank, and whoreforn, and geelong etc do, and by periods of sustained success. Not by cracking out the "peter gordon memorial begging bowl" every few years when your incompetence and irrelevence begins to overwhelm you again.
Note to poor clubs - you are overwhelmed because the footy public is underwhelmed. So if you want to have money, and be competitive, and play with the big boys, then get off your lazy, incompetent arses and do something apart from beg for a share of everyone elses hard earned income. In essence; fire up or fark off!
Dont mince words reboot, tell us what you really think!
This is just a way for the AFL to work out how to continue throwing money at non performing clubs. But its not sustainable. Providing handouts to non performing clubs should be on the basis of a plan, yeah you know, they have to work out how they are going to become sustainable in 5 years, and the AFL will help.
After that they should be on their own and if they go to the wall, well so be it. And guess what Finis, the players have a role to play here too. (pardon the pun) They need to help get their club become sustainable, and if they cant, they should aim to get traded.
This is a sporting competition, there is supposed to be strong sides and weak sides, clubs are supposed to be fighting for their existence.
Its not supposed to be a revolving premiership of vanilla teams and clubs with little to differentiate them apart from their jumpers. Clubs have got where they are through fighting, rat cunning, and deal making. If these clubs cant stand the heat they need to get out of the kitchen.
Memo AFL/AFLPA: these poor clubs are poor because not enough people give a flying fark about them. It doesn't matter how many dollars you shovel at them, you will not buy them a fan base. And surprise surprise, you get a fan base by working at it like Essendon, and collingwood, and carltank, and whoreforn, and geelong etc do, and by periods of sustained success. Not by cracking out the "peter gordon memorial begging bowl" every few years when your incompetence and irrelevence begins to overwhelm you again.
Note to poor clubs - you are overwhelmed because the footy public is underwhelmed. So if you want to have money, and be competitive, and play with the big boys, then get off your lazy, incompetent arses and do something apart from beg for a share of everyone elses hard earned income. In essence; fire up or fark off!
This is pretty much the sentiment towards social security in this country isn't it? The poor are poor because they are lazy, incompetent and probably ungrateful for the little that they have. The wealthy are a shrine to diligence and ingenuity.
If you want a competition without St Kilda, North Melbourne, Western Bulldogs, Melbourne, Brisbane, GWS, Gold Coast and Port Adelaide, that's fine. But if we want them to exist, we have to enable them to be competitive. The management of our cub has been woeful for a decade. We've had board leaks, a drug scandal, some of the worst facilities in the competition and on-field, we have scraped into the finals just a few times. Luckily, we are popular though. We have lots of fans. I don't revel in our failings, it just suggests to me that we are not where we are because we are inherently better managed than North Melbourne. We may be rich because we had success in key moments in the evolution of the game. We may be rich because of where we are located and the people that live there. Who knows.
I don't like being taxed. In football or real life. But if we want a robust and dynamic competition, we need to keep the smaller teams viable. Not just for us to beat up on every week, but in a genuinely competitive way. Or we should let them fall apart and we can play Collingwood every weekend.
Memo AFL/AFLPA: these poor clubs are poor because not enough people give a flying fark about them. It doesn't matter how many dollars you shovel at them, you will not buy them a fan base. And surprise surprise, you get a fan base by working at it like Essendon, and collingwood, and carltank, and whoreforn, and geelong etc do, and by periods of sustained success. Not by cracking out the "peter gordon memorial begging bowl" every few years when your incompetence and irrelevence begins to overwhelm you again.
Note to poor clubs - you are overwhelmed because the footy public is underwhelmed. So if you want to have money, and be competitive, and play with the big boys, then get off your lazy, incompetent arses and do something apart from beg for a share of everyone elses hard earned income. In essence; fire up or fark off!
This is pretty much the sentiment towards social security in this country isn't it? The poor are poor because they are lazy, incompetent and probably ungrateful for the little that they have. The wealthy are a shrine to diligence and ingenuity.
If you want a competition without St Kilda, North Melbourne, Western Bulldogs, Melbourne, Brisbane, GWS, Gold Coast and Port Adelaide, that's fine. But if we want them to exist, we have to enable them to be competitive. The management of our cub has been woeful for a decade. We've had board leaks, a drug scandal, some of the worst facilities in the competition and on-field, we have scraped into the finals just a few times. Luckily, we are popular though. We have lots of fans. I don't revel in our failings, it just suggests to me that we are not where we are because we are inherently better managed than North Melbourne. We may be rich because we had success in key moments in the evolution of the game. We may be rich because of where we are located and the people that live there. Who knows.
I don't like being taxed. In football or real life. But if we want a robust and dynamic competition, we need to keep the smaller teams viable. Not just for us to beat up on every week, but in a genuinely competitive way. Or we should let them fall apart and we can play Collingwood every weekend.
Thing is though, less teams would make a better competition.
If 18 teams are adding to the league, then that's one thing.
If they're not, then...I'm not sure how a league with the hundred worst players cut is objectively a bad thing.
I'm not sure Cameron playing for virtually any other team is a disaster either.
Communist. There already is social security. They ALREADY get social security handouts from our money. What they want now is akin to demanding that everyone must have the same amount of money to spend on a house.
Memo AFL/AFLPA: these poor clubs are poor because not enough people give a flying fark about them. It doesn't matter how many dollars you shovel at them, you will not buy them a fan base. And surprise surprise, you get a fan base by working at it like Essendon, and collingwood, and carltank, and whoreforn, and geelong etc do, and by periods of sustained success. Not by cracking out the "peter gordon memorial begging bowl" every few years when your incompetence and irrelevence begins to overwhelm you again.
Note to poor clubs - you are overwhelmed because the footy public is underwhelmed. So if you want to have money, and be competitive, and play with the big boys, then get off your lazy, incompetent arses and do something apart from beg for a share of everyone elses hard earned income. In essence; fire up or fark off!
This is pretty much the sentiment towards social security in this country isn't it? The poor are poor because they are lazy, incompetent and probably ungrateful for the little that they have. The wealthy are a shrine to diligence and ingenuity.
If you want a competition without St Kilda, North Melbourne, Western Bulldogs, Melbourne, Brisbane, GWS, Gold Coast and Port Adelaide, that's fine. But if we want them to exist, we have to enable them to be competitive. The management of our cub has been woeful for a decade. We've had board leaks, a drug scandal, some of the worst facilities in the competition and on-field, we have scraped into the finals just a few times. Luckily, we are popular though. We have lots of fans. I don't revel in our failings, it just suggests to me that we are not where we are because we are inherently better managed than North Melbourne. We may be rich because we had success in key moments in the evolution of the game. We may be rich because of where we are located and the people that live there. Who knows.
I don't like being taxed. In football or real life. But if we want a robust and dynamic competition, we need to keep the smaller teams viable. Not just for us to beat up on every week, but in a genuinely competitive way. Or we should let them fall apart and we can play Collingwood every weekend.
Thing is though, less teams would make a better competition.
If 18 teams are adding to the league, then that's one thing.
If they're not, then...I'm not sure how a league with the hundred worst players cut is objectively a bad thing.
I'm not sure Cameron playing for virtually any other team is a disaster either.
I think a higher standard of competition is appealing as well. I think to move North to the Gold Coast and St Kilda to GWS would have been a much better choice. That didn't happen though. The footballing talent and resources have been spread thin. If the best decision is to kill the clubs off, then I'm not entirely opposed to that either. I just think if we are going to espouse a fair competition, we have to be serious about its implementation.
I think a higher standard of competition is appealing as well. I think to move North to the Gold Coast and St Kilda to GWS would have been a much better choice. That didn't happen though. The footballing talent and resources have been spread thin. If the best decision is to kill the clubs off, then I'm not entirely opposed to that either. I just think if we are going to espouse a fair competition, we have to be serious about its implementation.Thing is though, less teams would make a better competition.This is pretty much the sentiment towards social security in this country isn't it? The poor are poor because they are lazy, incompetent and probably ungrateful for the little that they have. The wealthy are a shrine to diligence and ingenuity.Memo AFL/AFLPA: these poor clubs are poor because not enough people give a flying fark about them. It doesn't matter how many dollars you shovel at them, you will not buy them a fan base. And surprise surprise, you get a fan base by working at it like Essendon, and collingwood, and carltank, and whoreforn, and geelong etc do, and by periods of sustained success. Not by cracking out the "peter gordon memorial begging bowl" every few years when your incompetence and irrelevence begins to overwhelm you again.
Note to poor clubs - you are overwhelmed because the footy public is underwhelmed. So if you want to have money, and be competitive, and play with the big boys, then get off your lazy, incompetent arses and do something apart from beg for a share of everyone elses hard earned income. In essence; fire up or fark off!
If you want a competition without St Kilda, North Melbourne, Western Bulldogs, Melbourne, Brisbane, GWS, Gold Coast and Port Adelaide, that's fine. But if we want them to exist, we have to enable them to be competitive. The management of our cub has been woeful for a decade. We've had board leaks, a drug scandal, some of the worst facilities in the competition and on-field, we have scraped into the finals just a few times. Luckily, we are popular though. We have lots of fans. I don't revel in our failings, it just suggests to me that we are not where we are because we are inherently better managed than North Melbourne. We may be rich because we had success in key moments in the evolution of the game. We may be rich because of where we are located and the people that live there. Who knows.
I don't like being taxed. In football or real life. But if we want a robust and dynamic competition, we need to keep the smaller teams viable. Not just for us to beat up on every week, but in a genuinely competitive way. Or we should let them fall apart and we can play Collingwood every weekend.
If 18 teams are adding to the league, then that's one thing.
If they're not, then...I'm not sure how a league with the hundred worst players cut is objectively a bad thing.
I'm not sure Cameron playing for virtually any other team is a disaster either.
Fark off Matt Finnis
The AFL ought to merge with Centerlink. The AFL have the policies and Centerlink have the staff not to enforce them. Perfect mix.
If the AFL want to equalise the competition how about they start at AFL House. Then I for one, might believe with a very small m, they are serious about making the comp equal. Finnis please shut up, you are a moron and trying hard to win a job in the big house.
As said above and in the article, if this were to come in, why would Collingwood bother going out to try and secure 100k members or multi-million dollar sponsorship deals if part of it will be taken away from them?
I love watching GC and GWS but I'm struggling to see how, in the long term, their inclusion can be viewed as anything other than a massive mistake.
Particularly when the next lowest membership is for Brisbane, while Sydney's 36k after 30 years as a one-town team in our biggest city is friggin' appalling.
I'm sure it helped with the tv rights for one negotiation, but it looks like payback has come a little early.
So hang on, not ONE club supported us throughout the supplements saga, and now they want a piece of our pie :angry:
It’s time the AFL just scrap all the clubs, and have all the players in the league training together. Then on the weekends they have a lucky dip to see who each player will player for.
It's time the AFL just scrap all the clubs, and have all the players in the league training together. Then on the weekends they have a lucky dip to see who each player will player for.
Captains doing schoolyard picks. I like it.
Captains doing schoolyard picks. I like it.It's time the AFL just scrap all the clubs, and have all the players in the league training together. Then on the weekends they have a lucky dip to see who each player will player for.