Premiership Window Clock about to tick out of sync
By The Cattery, 6 Jun 2012 The Cattery is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- AFL, Port Adelaide Power, Western Bulldogs
Western Bulldogs fan favourite Luke Dalhaus (Slattery Images)
Related coverage
- Western Bulldogs news
- Port Adelaide Power news
- AFL news
- Toyota Premiership news
- Western Bulldogs news
The equalisation policies operating in the AFL over the past 25 years have intentionally worked to create an environment whereby the majority of clubs can experience a relatively equal number of ups and downs over a period of time.
This has given rise to the expression ‘the premiership window’.
The term serves to describe the period of around three to six seasons during which a club has the best chance at challenging for the premiership.
Before this, most clubs will experience a period of bottoming out and rebuilding to become a challenger in the future.
After some 25 years of such policies, we can discern a bit of a pattern about how this phenomenon plays out, also noting that there are many variables and exceptions to the general rule.
I have seen pundits liken the premiership window to a clock face, with each five-minute interval representing a season. This gives us a complete cycle, lasting 12 years.
We can imagine midnight representing the bottoming out of a club.
At five and ten past, the club is in the process of rebuilding, collecting those early draft picks that could produce future champions.
At quarter past, a club may be in a position to knock on the door of the top eight. They might just miss out, but show potential for a further rise up the ladder.
At twenty past, a club will enter the top 8 and play finals for the first time in a few years. They may even win a final, but will not quite be ready to challenge the top four.
At twenty-five past, the club enters the premiership window in earnest. They break into the top four, make the preliminary final and give themselves a chance to win it.
At half past the hour, with three consecutive years in finals, the club will start the season as one of the premiership favourites.
The team will be at the peak of its powers, will have the perfect blend of maturity and young stars. Most importantly, they will have that hardened finals experience.
At 35 and 40 past the hour, the premiership window remains open. The teams that can overcome mounting injury lists and the mental pressures of staying up will push for a final hurrah.
At quarter-to, the hand is starting to swing upwards; there are signs of an ageing list and things don’t fall into place on the field like they once did in the previous five seasons.
Yet there is still enough talent to stay in the mix for a finals spot – only just.
At ten to and five to, it’s the slippery slope downwards.
Champions have retired, mid-range draft picks haven’t come on and there are changes in coaching staff.
It becomes a case of keeping your head above water until you can get those low draft picks coming through again.
So there we have it – a cycle that lasts some 12 seasons. Some clubs might be able to stay up for eight seasons; many will be lucky to do it for four seasons.
Some clubs are able to reduce the length of their cycle to nine or so seasons, with bottoming out meaning nothing more than failing to reach the final eight.
Other clubs get it very wrong and stretch out the cycle to 15 or so seasons, like Richmond making two finals appearances in 30 years.
To test the concept, I thought I would look through two real life examples. Let us start with Port Adelaide.
1997 (Midnight): First season of the club. Actually does a bit better than expected. Finishes ninth.
1998 (12:05): Finishes 10th with nine wins.
1999 (12:10): Finishes seventh with 12 wins.
2000 (12:15): Finishes 14th, with seven wins. Their first finals appearance the previous year probably came sooner than expected.
2001 (12:20): Jump into top four. Finishes third with 16 wins.
2002 (12:25): Well and truly in the premiership window now. Finishes top with 18 wins, but fails to make Grand Final.
2003 (12:30): Finishes top again with 18 wins, but fails to make Grand Final again.
2004 (12:35): Third consecutive year on top with 17 wins. This time they break through for their first premiership.
2005 (12:40): Scrapes into top eight. Finishes eighth with 11 wins and a draw.
2006 (12:45): Stumbles to 12th with eight wins.
2007 (12:50): Finishes second with 15 wins. Fluke a last hurrah, but get thrashed in Grand Final by Geelong.
2008 (12:55): Slides to 13th with 7 wins. This is a permanent slide. The rebuilding phase starts in earnest. Within a couple of seasons, only a handful of players are left from the 2004 premiership.
Another example of a premiership window clock, albeit one where they failed to make it count, is the Western Bulldogs.
2003 (Midnight): Finishes last with three wins and a draw. Bottom out. Draft Adam Cooney, Farren Ray and Jade Rawlings. Matthew Boyd is a rookie elevation.
2004 (12:05): Finishes 14th with five wins. Rebuilding has started. Draft Ryan Griffen and Tom Williams.
2005 (12:10): Finishes ninth with 11 wins. Draft Shaun Higgins and Dylan Addison.
2006 (12:15): Finishes eighth with 13 wins. Win a final. Trade for Jason Akermanis and draft Jarrod Harbrow.
2007 (12:20): Temporary drop to 13th with nine wins and draw. Trade for Ben Hudson and Tim Callan. Draft Jarrad Grant, Callan Ward, Easton Wood and Scott Welsh.
2008 (12:25): Finishes third with 15 wins and draw. Makes preliminary final.
2009 (12:30): Finishes third with 15 wins. Makes preliminary final. Now in the middle of premiership window.
2010 (12:35): Finishes fourth with 14 wins. Makes preliminary final for third consecutive occasion, but misses out on Grand Final again.
2011 (12:40): Finishes 10th with nine wins. Loses a few from retirement and players move to new teams. Slow slide down the ladder starts.
2012 (12:45): Likely to finish lower than 10th. The same is expected for next season.
In both case studies, and with other examples as well, it is an identifiable pattern which doesn’t necessarily stick to a smooth rise-and-fall pattern.
As always, you will find anomalies, bolters, temporary steep drops before the trend continues as expected, or final hurrahs before the inevitable bottoming out.
The entry of the two new teams confuses matters somewhat with the monopolising of the best young talent in the country and the existence of temporary trade rules to assist the rapid development of squads.
On top of that, the introduction of a limited form of free agnecy, plus the increasing gap between the haves and have nots that assist some clubs in maintaining very high levels of football department expenditure, means the clock model might change in the ensuing years.
Geelong has managed to stay relatively up now for some 25 years, while Collingwood has seemingly managed to reduce the length of the down periods. West Coast has done this even more successfully.
Incidentally, those latter two are the AFL’s two wealthiest clubs.
It’s possible that in this new era of 18 teams, limited free agency and football department expenditure disparities, the premiership window model might become vaguer and less discernible.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
![]()
Passionate about your AFL? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily AFL email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
AFL articles
- Record low AFL crowd for GWS home match (209)
- Giant challenges ahead for Greater Western Sydney (200)
- Kevin Sheedy sticks by comments (143)
- My open-letter to AFL supporters (91)
- Long, cold winter ahead for Western Bulldogs (86)
- Why we should ease up on the Giants (81)
- Who was the greatest: the 2001-03 Lions or the 2007-09 Cats? (80)
- Richmond vs Essendon: AFL live scores
- Brisbane Lions vs Carlton: AFL live scores, blog
- St Kilda vs Western Bulldogs: AFL live scores
- GWS Giants vs West Coast Eagles: AFL live scores, blog (110)
- Port Adelaide vs Geelong: AFL live scores
- Indigenous round marred by shocking racial slur (77)
- GWS on search for star recruits: Sheedy (5)
- Richmond vs Essendon: AFL live scores (0)
- Brisbane Lions vs Carlton: AFL live scores, blog (0)
- St Kilda vs Western Bulldogs: AFL live scores (1)
- GWS Giants vs West Coast Eagles: AFL live scores, blog (110)
- Port Adelaide vs Geelong: AFL live scores (0)
- Indigenous round marred by shocking racial slur (77)
- Collingwood vs Sydney Swans: AFL live scores, blog (93)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- AFL, Port Adelaide Power, Western Bulldogs


June 6th 2012 @ 8:50am
Redb said | June 6th 2012 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Excellent article TC.
The Premiership window opens but it does not guarantee success, look at the Saints and your Bulldogs who have come so close in the late 1990s and late 2000s only to miss out.
No matter how much levelling the AFL does there will always be clubs with more money due to the variation in membership bases. Bigger memberships attract more sponsors and other flow on benefits.
The salary cap and draft work to a point but but they do rob the smaller clubs an entrepreneurial chance to have a real crack with big dollars support like North Melb in the mid 1970s. They got the best coach, players ,etc all wth money.
It’s a strange twist that the AFL comp with various levellers to help out the battlers also denies them a chance at glory through a well endowed supporter or group.
In the end, we have a club like North Melbourne with a naturallly small fan base that had no success for its first 50 years coming from a small demographic in Melbourne left hobbled against the power clubs like Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, etc who built they fan base off regular premiership success through the decades.
Hawthorn managed to elevate itself after sustained success in the 1980s pre salary cap which they reap the benefits of now through a bigger fan base. They almost fell over also but I think that was a product of poor management rather than lack of fan base.
The more money that comes into the game the higehr the stakes get. The Salary cap gets higher and the push for bigger football departments gets greater as clubs seek an edge. Without the salary cap I think we would end up in an EPL situation but envitably 1-2 smaller Melb clubs just cant keep growing to keep up and will eventually either fold, relocate or merge to compete.
June 6th 2012 @ 9:36am
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 9:36am | Report comment
Personally, I feel the equalisation policies have gone as far as they can go. If some clubs are able to create advantages for themselves via greater support and better management, then so be it. Such clubs will keep the premiership window open for longer, and reduce the down times, and other clubs will need to work a little bit harder.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:08pm
Redb said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
TC,
A fairly realistic view. I cant see the AFL dropping the cap or draft nor the big clubs not getting stronger. Even free agency is viewed as potentially damaging to the ‘battler’ clubs.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:17pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:17pm | Report comment
Free agency might affect battler clubs in a negative way, but there is an alternative view, they can continue trying to snap up the best young talent in the land, and that talent will willingly go to battler clubs with the knowledge that around the age of 26/27, they’ll have a good chance to do something different if it doesn’t work out. I think players deserve that opportunity, 8 years is more than a reasonable commitment.
June 6th 2012 @ 1:42pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
The player’s association will refuse to let the cap go down and will no doubt fight to let them get a piece of the action at the burgeoning mega-clubs (WCE, Coll, Ess, Haw, Geel, etc, the ones on or just below the $50m mark). Too much money for them not to be wanting to sink their teeth into. Things like more veterans exemptions, for example.
I don’t think free agency is necessarily going to be harmful to battler clubs in a salary-capped market though – I think it could be a new avenue to get ready-built players for those that don’t have the development resources to make them.
June 6th 2012 @ 2:20pm
Redb said | June 6th 2012 @ 2:20pm | Report comment
Salary cap does err cap free agency, but I think the view is that eligible players with struggling clubs might see it more desirable to move to a stronger club.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:03pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
That’s a real possibility (though restricted free-agents can’t leave if their existing club can match the offer.) the trade off is that good depth players and 15-22 ranked players at the big clubs who would generally be regular 22 players at other clubs, will eventually leave for opportunity or money (as the salary cap is obviously tighter on the top clubs and they will use most of it on the big stars.) If these players go to a club near the bottom, they could help turn that club into a finals contender which then makes them a more attractive destination for bigger name players.
For example Melbourne won’t get Cloke given their position on the ladder but they might be able to get some fringe players from Collingwood or another big club who want more game time, or maybe (if they’re lucky) a 15-22 ranked player from those same clubs who are playing on a back-up players wage due to the salary cap. These players won’t make melbourne a premiership contender but they might (with more development of Melbourne’s younger players) be able to turn Melbourne into a finals contender looking to make the next step which suddenly makes them a potential destination for a player of Cloke’s ilk in the future.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:11pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
Matt F
yes, I think things like that might happen. A club like Collingwood ties up its big names, that costs dollars, little room in the cap, and a 26 yo who is only barely in the top 22, maybe even already battling for his spot with up and comers, not offered too much, might be keen for a change, especially where he is second in line for a particular role, ruck, or full forward, or whatever it is.
I think we might be surprised at what falls out, and plenty of opportunities will emerge for players and clubs alike – the cap will ensure that it won’t be all one way traffic.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:19pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:19pm | Report comment
A number of Collingwood depth players currently standing up may be writing their meal tickets for next year – when the normal starters return next season these depth players have proven they a worth a starting spot at other clubs.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:25pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:25pm | Report comment
That’s right, especially with Buckley having blooded so many players this season (by necessity), you’d have to think a couple of players will be looking for new clubs next year – especially if Cloke gets re-signed (which is still an if)
June 6th 2012 @ 3:35pm
Redb said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:35pm | Report comment
If Collingwood dont sign Cloke, then they will have big dollars in their cap to chase players from other clubs, especially seeing as existing big names have already signed probably on the basis of staying together at the Pies.
Pendles for example probably accepted less to stay.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:36pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:36pm | Report comment
I should point out that I’m basing this mainly on what I’ve seen with the NRL over the past decade or so. Generally speaking a club rises and wins/challenges for a competition. It’s star players then start to demand more cash given the success. In order to give them pay rises and keep within the salary cap they have to get rid of their squad players, or starting players who get offered alot more money from another club.
Obviously the fact that the NRL have unrestricted free agency compared to AFL’s restricted version will mean they won’t be exactly alike but I do expect some similarities.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:52pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:52pm | Report comment
Redb – Apparently Collingwood still have players like Reid, Wellingham, Beams, Blair, Keefe O’Brien and Sidebottom out of contract as well. If Cloke stays then they’ll have to let at least one or two of those go. Apparently Sidebottom and Keefe are basically signed. It’s hard to see them losing Beams or O’Brien either.
If Cloke leaves then they will probably put a fair bit of that money to keeping some of these guys before looking outside the club. They might have some money to go after another player or two but I can’t see them spending the money they are offering Cloke on a player from outside the club.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:57pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
Interestingly, I’ve previously read that of those players, the best catch at a decent price would be Reid, and with Cornes playing just the one year, wouldn’t GWS love someone like Reid in their backline?
June 6th 2012 @ 4:04pm
Redb said | June 6th 2012 @ 4:04pm | Report comment
Matt F,
Thats a fair list. No wonder Collingwood is baulking at Cloke.
June 6th 2012 @ 4:22pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
He’d slot in very nicely with the Giants TC. It would also put him in the same city as his brother, though in different teams. Imagine that rivalry in a few years! Don’t GWS still have this year to sign uncontracted players as well? They’d be able to get him without a trade then, unlike everybody else.
June 6th 2012 @ 4:29pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 4:29pm | Report comment
Yep, another year of grace for them – you’d have to think Reid would be very, very high on the shopping list.
The Giants are well served up forward with Cameron, Patton and Izzy will be given another year to develop – throw in Setanta, and a couple of handy small forwards as well.
So Reid complements things nicely as the other bookend.
June 6th 2012 @ 9:22am
brendan said | June 6th 2012 @ 9:22am | Report comment
I am glad they cant tell the time in Geelong as there first prelim in this cycle was 04 and there still a chance this year and for a couple more.I enjoyed reading this article but i believe the premiership clock mentality has been superseeded by a believe amongst clubs that bottoming out doesn’t produce flags.Stkilda, Melbourne, Richmond and Carlton have all had multiple no 1 selections but haven’t as yet won a premiership this century.West Coast, Adelaide have regenerated there lists quickly within a few years of being good sides.
June 6th 2012 @ 9:41am
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 9:41am | Report comment
brendan
no doubt about it, Geelong has circumvented it completely, in fact I mention in the article that they have remained relatively up for 25 years now.
And yes, the evidence is clear that going into absolute freefall, like finishing bottom in successive seasons, does you as much harm as good in the long run, without any guarantees of premiership glory.
There are no free lunches, there is no substitute for hard work on and off the field.
Nevertheless, as a general proposition, there remains a tendency within the system that encourages clubs to go through these natural cycles. You will never again have (I hope) a team like St Kilda winning six consecutive wooden spoons as they did relatively recently in the mid 1980s.
But certainly teams will experience varying cycles, some spending more time at the lower reaches, and other clubs spending more time in the top four.
But yes, Geelongs window, now into its 9th season, is remarkable.
June 6th 2012 @ 10:40am
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 10:40am | Report comment
Notably, West Coast has never had a #1 draft pick that wasn’t (near as I can tell) a compensation pick or a WA-only establishment pre-draft pick, and even then, not since the 1996 National Draft, 16 years ago.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:11am
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:11am | Report comment
Was that Gardiner?
I can recall in the early to mid 90s, West Coast did a fair bit of wheeling and dealing where they’d nab themselves a high pick by trading with some naive club – but those days are gone – these days all clubs absolutely hang on to their high picks by dear life.
Mind you, probably no other clubs has managed to do as well as West coast in the draft, their choices over the last few years have been top notch.
When I was looking through the Bulldogs case study, I went looking for all the good draft picks they got in those couple of years near the bottom, but actually, it was thin on the ground!
There was Cooney, Boyd and Griffen, and then it dried up! Most of their draft selections were duds. They managed to top up by getting in mature players such as Aker, Hudson, Welsh and Hall, and that was probably the key to their three years in the top four.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:40am
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:40am | Report comment
Yes, that was the one they nabbed Gardiner with a compensation pick.
There was a post on BF on the North Melbourne board where someone laid out the trade history of the West Coast Eagles. Suffice to say it was used as a cautionary tale. I touched on this in my post below, simply having a high draft pick cannot compensate for not having the scouting, coaching and development framework to make that pick count. Or as an example, if Melbourne had taken Naitanui with Pick # 1, would the Eagles have even picked Watts (because their scouting reports would have given them a better picture) or if they had felt he still had the potential, does anyone think his development would have been the same in the WC infrastructure?
There may be a strong argument for clubs lower to the ground to go for “plug and play” mature state-league players in rookie drafts more than young players that they aren’t able to properly develop.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:49pm
Ian Whitchurch said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:49pm | Report comment
Regarding plug-and-play, Mohr, Giles, Saad, Podiadsly and Stephenson are all reinforcing that you can spend a low draft pick and a list slot and get a “good average” player – and the strength of your bottom six can be as important as the strength of your top six.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:27pm
Charlie said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
They may not have had any #1 picks, but they have had 17 top 30 draft picks since they won the premiership in 2006, including 9 top 20 picks. This doesn’t include Josh Kennedy, who was pick #4. That’s a full starting team from the last 6 drafts just in top end draft picks. When you add in premiership stars such as Cox, Glass, Kerr and Embley, it’s pretty easy to see how they have regenerated so quickly. You could even mount the argument that they shouldn’t have finished as low as they did in the years 2008-10 (15th, 11th, 16th).
June 6th 2012 @ 12:54pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
Trading and compensation picks accounted for a number of those, you must recall.
June 6th 2012 @ 2:13pm
Charlie said | June 6th 2012 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
They do, but that also serves to highlight seroius flaws in the draft system. The eagles received a compensation pick just two seasons after winning a grand final. That smells funny, whichever way you look at it.
On their trading for draft picks, they have been exceptional. How the other clubs allowed the Eagles to have that many low draft picks is simply mind boggling.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:08pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Well, lets see…
2007 – 2 first round, 2 second round picks
Gained by trading Judd and #46 to Carlton for Kennedy, #3 and #20
Further traded picks #30 and #35 (which it got in exchange for Mitch Morton to Richmond, which I think the Tiges did well out of) to the Doggies for pick #22.
No funny smell there, got three successful picks (Masten, Ebert, Scott Selwood) and a dud in Tony Notte.
Had pick #13 as ordinary first round pick.
2008 – 1 first round, 1 end-of-first round priority pick, 1 second round pick, 1 third round pick
Gained priority pick due to winning less than five (although notably they managed to get two good home victories in the tail end of the season that, if they were tanking would have put them below Melbourne getting #1 and #17 instead of #2 and #18). Low finishing position attributable to the enormous Judd and Cousins shaped-hole punched into a side whose premiership was built almost entirely on the Judd-Cousins-Kerr Trinity.
Got wins on Naita at #2, Shuey at #18, not looking promising on Swift and Smith for the second and third round picks though.
2009 – 1 first round, 2 second round
No priority/compo picks as the Eagles were on the way back up, doing well late in the season (injury gods were to destroy their next season)
Got a #22 by dint of mega trade – off loaded Staker, Seaby, #39 and #55 for Dalziell (a swap of depth players) #22 and #118 (unused).
Other spots were #7 and #23 – Shappard at #7 looks like a successful pick, of the second round picks, Wheedon looks like it’s not going to happen and Stevens is a maybe.
2010 – The Year the Injury Gods Destroyed – 1 first round, 1 end-of-first round (devalued by 7 picks), 1 second round, 1 fourth round
Traded # 45 for a Third Round Compo pick to Collingwood, which I don’t think we used.
Got #4 by dint of finishing last, #26 as a priority pick for number of wins (which in most years is a pretty normal second round pick) #29 as normal first round pick.
Success stories were Gaff at #4, Darling at #26, Brennan was a Father/Son at Rnd 4, #62 and is looking positive and Lycett is one that probably has a lot of work ahead at #29.
2011 – 1 first round, 1 end-of-first-round, 1 third-round
Enormously compromised draft again but…
Got the priority pick (#28) by trading Ebert and #45 for #28 and #49
Used pick #49 to get Josh Hill, so ended up selecting:
Got Murray Newman at #23 as our normal first-round, McInnes at #28 with the traded pick, and Hams at #63 with a normal pick. Of these three, only the late-rounder Hams as kicked a ball in anger yet.
So, all in all, only two additional picks were granted to the Eagles, both of which were end-of-rounders (one of which a bizarre 26 instead of a ‘normal’ 18), not a single #1 in the lot.
All other additional top 20 picks were fairly traded for.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:55pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
Good points Charlie.
Agree that the Eagles’ rapid decline during 08-10 was as much a matter of extraneous events as anything else, although by the same token, these are precisely the sorts of things that ensure such cycles – it’s just so hard for a club to keep it all together for long periods.
But there’s no doubting the Eagles’ capacity to bounce back very quickly – no 12 year cycle for them!!
And what an inspired decision by the Eagles to not panic during those lean years and stick with Woosha, similar to Geelong sticking with Bomber.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:41pm
Charlie said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
In the 16 seasons since 1996, the top 5 teams for finishing in the top 8 are Sydney (13 times), West Coast (11), Adelaide, Essendon and Geelong (all 10 times each), with all 5 teams likely to finish in the top 8 again this year. To me, this indicates that the non-Victorian teams enjoy a rather large advantage when it comes to regenerating their teams. I suspect that it’s because they have such a strong home ground advantage and because they are in one- or two-team towns and therefore don’t have as much competition for fans, sponsorship etc, however it would be a little naive to not think that they are also well run organisations.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:59pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
Charlie
interesting stats there.
No doubting that these clubs are well run.
Sydney have said publicly that they don’t believe in the concept of bottoming out, being in an environment where a couple of years at the bottom would translate immediately into financial pain – but the question then becomes: ok, what are they doing specifically to overcome the normal cycle?
June 6th 2012 @ 1:15pm
Charlie said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
I don’t think any club really believes that it needs to bottom out, more that that situation has been thrust upon them. This may be due to a number of factors, such as poor recruiting/development (St Kilda / Richmond / Brisbane / Melbourne / Freo), AFL enforced sanctions (Carlton), or just plain tanking (Carlton / Collingwood, Melbourne / West Coast), but I refuse to believe any club actively pursues the lower reaches of the ladder, at least at the very start of the season.
I actually think Sydney has the right concept: trade well and draft for need, not best available, keeping in mind need may not be next years need but what they need 3-4 years down the track. To some extent Geelong have followed this path (especially the draft for need part), but they have been able to put this into place after the team was successful.
June 6th 2012 @ 1:26pm
Ian Whitchurch said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:26pm | Report comment
The Cattery,
Sydney’s style is to trade draft picks for players at the end of their first contract – Mumford is the poster child for this.
June 6th 2012 @ 1:49pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:49pm | Report comment
Ian W
but there have been past years where clubs have given up good draft picks only to discover that it has left them well short of quality, because the trades (or rejects) just weren’t good enough.
It’s a very fine balancing act.
But certainly agree that if you can pick up a good mid 20s player out of the second tier with a low draft pick, and can work well, especially if, as Charlies says above, is plugging a specific need and allowing the teams to continue at a high standard of performance, e.g, J-Pod coming into the cats’ line up as a 28 year old.
June 6th 2012 @ 1:53pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
Paul Roos talked about this recently (on “On The Couch” i think) and he made the observation that, according to the Swans research, 50% of all players drafted after Pick 15 don’t play any AFL football. He’s also a believer that 17-18 is too early to draft players as males don’t stop developing until they’re 20-21 and a lot can change between those age brackets. He always believed that their was a great risk in drafting and that picks outside the top 3-5 were overvalued. It’s a safer investment to trqade away picks outside the first round (or even in the first round) for players already in the system especially if you can idetify a player that can fulfill a specific hole in your current side.
For example, in 2009 we got Mumford (aged 23 at the time), Mcglynn (24) and Kennedy (21) for picks 28, 39, 46 and 70. All 3 of those players could potentially have 8-10 years at the Swans and they all at the time had played AFL football so were sort of “known quantities.” It’s possible that we could have used those draft picks and picked up some elite superstar kids who slid down the draft but, if the Swans research is correct, there was a 50% chance that we would get kids who wouldn’t make the grade.
In fact, if you look at the Swans history of 1st round draft picks (the one’s that we haven’t traded away but actually used in the draft) we have a very poor strike rate with them. Most of the players who are regular players for us right now (who we drafted, not traded for) are from our later picks, which could be an example of the lottery of the draft at work……or that our recruiters are just really poor with the early choices!
June 6th 2012 @ 1:57pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
Wonder if people could do a comparison of how many years on a roster each round-pick gets on average on an NFL compared to an AFL draft basis. I would imagine the extra years at NCAA would make the picks a much more known quantity with few development surprises, compared to AFL where a lot of gut and intuition comes into it.
June 6th 2012 @ 2:28pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 2:28pm | Report comment
It would be a very interesting comparion.
I should also point out that I’m not saying that trading is perfect. All clubs, includsing my own, have had some duds, but the success rate of trades does seem to be higher then the draft success rate.
June 6th 2012 @ 2:28pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 2:28pm | Report comment
Matt F
interesting stuff – and Paul roos would know!
Mumford and Kennedy are two players have actually helped Swans stay up the past two seasons, so there is definitely a bit of method there.
Just had a quick look at what the Swans did from 2000 to 2009:
2000:
Traded picks for Paul Williams; drafted Luke Ablett, Amon Buchanan, Jarrad Sundqvist, Stephen Tingay (pre-season draft)
2001:
Traded for Nick Daffy and Barry Hall; drafted Mark Powell, Lewis Roberts-Thomson, Daniel Hunt, Adam Schneider, Ricky Mott, Tony Lockett (pre-season draft)
2002:
Traded a pick for Nick Davis; drafted Jarrad McVeigh, Sean Dempster, Nick Malceski, Craid Bolton (pre-season draft)
2003:
Drafted Josh Willoughby, Tim Schmidt, Andrew Eriksen; rookie elevations: Heath James, James Meiklejohn
2004:
Traded a pick for Darren Jolly; Drafted Jarrad Moore, David Spriggs, Matthew Egan; Rookie elevation: Paul Bevan
2005:
Traded picks for Ted Richards; Drafted Matthew Laidlaw, Ryan Brabazon,
2006:
Traded a pick for Peter Everitt; Drafted Daniel Currie, Peter Faulks, Jesse White,
2007:
Traded a pick for Martin Mattner and Henry Playfair, Drafted Patrick Veszpremi, Brett Meredith, Craig Bird,
2008:
Traded a pick for Rhyce Shaw; Drafted Lewis Johnston, Daniel Hannebery, Campbell Heath, Rookie elevation: Nick Smith
2009:
Traded picks for Mark Seaby, Shane Mumford, Ben McGlynn and Josh Kennedy, Drafted Gary Rohan, Lewis Jetta, Sam Reid, Byron Sumner, Trent Dennis-Lane, Daniel Bradshaw (pre-season draft);
Well the evidence backs up Matt F – Sydney have had ordinary draft selections, but have been prominent in trading picks for good players. However, how about that 2009 year, the last one on the list above – what a beauty! Trades and draft picks – hit the jackpot!!
June 6th 2012 @ 2:55pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 2:55pm | Report comment
Yeah I still have very, very, very nice dreams about the 2009 trade week!
A look at how we used our 1st round picks since 2000 really hammers the point home as well i think.
We traded our 1st round picks in 2000, 2001, 2004 and 2005 and got Paul Williams, Barry Hall, Darren Jolly and Ted Richards. Admittedly all but Jolly also cost us at least one other pick as well.
I think we can confidently claim that all of those players are/were massive players for the club over time. 3 of them were key players in our premiership and Ted Richards is currently in potentially All-Australian form in defence for us.
The 1st round picks we used in the draft gave us Jarrad Mcveigh, Josh Willoughby, Daniel O’Keefe (you left him off our 2006 list) Patrick Veszpremi, Lewis Johnston, Gary Rohan, Lewis Jetta, Jed Lamb (2010) and Tom Mitchell (2011.)
Willoughby and O’keefe were cut without playing a game. Veszpremi and Johnston played a couple of games but didn’t make an impact and were both traded to other clubs. Johnston isn’t playing for Adelaide whilst Veszpremi has started playing for the Bulldogs. Mcveigh is now our co-captain whilst Jetta and Rohan look like turning into very good players from their time so far (though Rohan just can’t stop getting injured sadly.) Lamb and Mitchell haven’t played yet, though Tom Mitchell (Father/Son) is coming back from injury and playing very well in the reserves.
So basically, the 1st round picks that we’ve traded have all been big success stories while the ones we’ve used in the draft have had very mixed results.
As a side note, Luke Parker and Alex Johnson were both taken after Jed Lamb in 2010 yet Parker and Johnson are regulars in our 22 whilst Lamb hasn’t played a game. Perhaps another example of the lottery in action.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:05pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
Plenty of joy at the trade and draft table since 2008, which points to a few good years for the Swans, you’d have to conclude.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:10pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
Probably worth noting that West Coast and Sydney rarely trade – probably a sign of the dangers of trading with either team…
June 6th 2012 @ 3:56pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
I certainly hope so TC. Maybe we should go and sign up Cloke! Certainly solve our tall forward issues! I can’t see us having the cap space needed for that though I can dream!
Nathan – We’ve traded a couple of times. We got Seaby from you and also Jason Ball back in the day. Iincidently Ball is another example of us trading away a 1st round pick for an established player, and another who won us a premeirship.
Actually that seems to be another common them among Swans trading/drafting. Don’t draft ruckmen but trade for them.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:58pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:58pm | Report comment
Cloke and Reid would certainly present some tasty tall forward options.
June 6th 2012 @ 4:00pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 4:00pm | Report comment
On the small SCG as well! With Goodes floating in as a 3rd tall! I think I need to lie down!
Sadly I can’t see it happening, especially given that Josh Kennedy will be due a very substantial (and much deserved) upgrade this season.
June 6th 2012 @ 10:17am
The Pivotonian said | June 6th 2012 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Nice article, only thing I’d change is having the ‘window’ widest open at 12PM (top) and furthest shut at 6PM (bottom)!
June 6th 2012 @ 10:38am
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 10:38am | Report comment
Hi Pivonian (nice name)
Yes, I did wonder about that myself, but I rationalised it as midnight being the earliest hour, or the starting point (the bottom), and as the hour hand starts swinging down it gathers momentum, by the time it hits quarter past, the rebuilding phase is in full swing and the hour hand will swing around of its own volition, full of momentum, gathering pace, and will absolutely fly through the next 25 minutes in a blaze (haze) of glory.
By quarter to, the momentum is starting to wear thin, it’s becoming a bit more laboured, some mighty one percenters are needed to keep the team in the top tier, it’s possible, but it becomes that little bit harder, by five min to, all hope is lost, and supporters are resigned to the inevitable.
I’m then reminded of the Iron Maiden song: Two…minutes…to mid -niiiiiight!!
June 6th 2012 @ 10:18am
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 10:18am | Report comment
One of the in-depth articles on the AFL tab, nice change from the majority of GWS crowd articles
Will have to put some thought into a longer response later.
June 6th 2012 @ 10:39am
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 10:39am | Report comment
heh, heh, thanks Nathan, look forward to it.
Yes, nice to talk some fair dinkum footy every now and then.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:04am
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:04am | Report comment
Okay, not enough time to fully flesh out, but some notable points:
The equalisation policies compensate somewhat for financial imbalances, HOWEVER you can see the resource shortfall even in the midst of these equalisation policies. Witness the ineptitude of many of the weaker clubs at the draft and trade table. Number one draft picks are a mix of a) wrongly selected due to insufficiently developed scouting networks and b) upon selection, insufficiently developed due to the deficient training resources.
The lack of cap on coaching staff means that much of the arms race occurs in the box rather than on the field. Coaching can’t replace playing talent, but it can act as what the military would call a Force Multiplier. When you can budget $8million for your coaching staff instead of $2m and combine that with a better trained and developed playing squad you have a big gap to surmount.
Brian Cook should be one of the greatest names of Australian Rules football. Came to West Coast as CEO in 1990 and created the foundations of an absolute powerhouse in the space of 9 years. Moved to Geelong and laid the framework for the greatest golden age in that club’s storied history.
Did the Big Money follow the premierships or did the premierships follow the big money? Probably the latter, in my view, particularly in AFL where loyalties don’t swap so easily. West Coast, $50m revenue, none of it tied to gaming machines or clubs, Collingwood $75 milllion revenue, Essendon $50m revenue (both of the latter owing somewhat to gaming machines and other ventures), all of these clubs are running at or near $20m football department expenses, almost as much as some clubs have total turnover. All of them able to brute-force their downtimes to be short and sweet.
Consolidated and prolonged down-times affect revenue, affect club culture, affect the ability to develop on-field. I think Carlton may be in the middle of a very large, elaborate and nasty empirical experiment proving that unnecessary down-time pushes back Premiership windows rather than hastens them.
Would be interesting to run a comparison between West Coast Eagles and Brisbane Broncos, given their similar geopolitical situation.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:20am
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:20am | Report comment
Nathan
all good points, pretty much agree across the board.
I just put up a post to another of your comments above where I say how shocked I was at the poor draft choices the Bulldogs made when they bottomed out – they still managed a premiership window of some three years, but always as the 3rd or 4th best club in the comp, in other words, they did themselves in with poor draft choices.
And I agree with you – that’s the lot of the poorer club – scrambling towards an infrequent premiership window of 3 seasons, but always up against it.
Still, I fancy Richmond supporters will happily hang out for a three year premiership window – something they haven’t had for 30 years – and in doing so – they will create a new powerhouse club to challenge the pies, hawks, and eagles.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:56am
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Richmond has the supporter base; not unlike the US in the buildup to WW2 they have a great degree of underutilised resources that could be marshalled in strong Premiership challenge. Another ten million in the annual revenue would be quite achievable, I would think.
Equalisation policies aside, there is still an element of ‘Moneyball’ running around. If I was a struggling club that found a tenner under the couch cushion or got a fifty in the birthday card, I would feed it into scouting first, training second, other elements third. The one and only advantage to being on the bottom is draft picks, and you need to make sure they aren’t wasted. If you can’t get the money for training, then scout for mature age and keep your focus on the rookie lists and pre-season drafts.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:44pm
Ian Whitchurch said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
In the eagerness to have a good whinge about Phil Scully, a lot of fans havent realised just how much salary inflation there has been with scouting and coaching staff – the fragmentary data available is putting a full time scout at about a hundred grand a year (coincidentally, about what the scout GWS headhunted from Sydney to be in their Melbourne based scouting operation).
Their is a second advantage to being on the bottom – your players who dont want to move arent in a great position to demand more money.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:24am
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:24am | Report comment
On another thread, I talk about North’s run of 7 seasons in the top 4, which brought two premierships.
That’s a very handy run in the modern era of the AFL – did North do enough to set themselves up commercially during that run. Probably not. There was a lot of wasted effort in the decade after with games in Canberra, then Sydney, then the Gold Coast, etc, etc – in truth, they made a mess of it.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:44am
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
North Melbourne’s self-inflicted damage is extensive and lamentable. According to their annual reports they are down to about $28m revenue, which is a perilous spot for an established club. When you can go seven seasons in the top 4 you need to bed in the success whilst you can.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:22am
Cameron Rose said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:22am | Report comment
Good read. I do think that clubs can actually jump around the clockface a little bit rather than it happen so chronologically as described.
For mine, finals isn’t really until 12.30, and the ‘premiership window’ is a bit later, but that’s all just personal preference. A Hawthorn in 2008 probably grabbed a flag from 12.35 or 12.40. Geelong last year were at about 12.58, but somehow did it.
June 6th 2012 @ 11:25am
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:25am | Report comment
heh, heh, and Geelong are still around 12:59!!!
The cats have either worked out a way to slow down Father Time, or they are on the verge of the abyss – you decide!
June 6th 2012 @ 11:55am
Charlie said | June 6th 2012 @ 11:55am | Report comment
One of the interesting things I took out of that article is that both teams studied had one year quite early in the cycle where they finished quite a bit lower than they expected to. This also happened at Geelong, where they finished tenth in 2006, and Brisbane finished 16th in 1998, their only non top 8 finish in a decade (1995-2004). Essendon finished 14th in 1997, also their only non top 8 finish of the same decade. There are plenty of other examples of one-year dips, some of which then go on to a premiership, some don’t: Adelaide 12th in 2004, Hawks 9th in 2009, Melbourne 14th in 2003, North Melb 14th in 2006, St Kilda 9th in 2007, Sydney 12th in 2009. In fact, of premiers since 2000, only Collingwood, West Coast and Hawthorn didn’t suffer a one-year dip outside the top 8 in the preceding few years, although Collingwood dipped to 8th in 2008, West Coast suffered a two-year dip in 2000-01, and Hawthorn dipped to 9th the year after it won the flag.
This then raises further questions: Who was last year’s dipper? Both Freo and the Bulldogs dropped out of the top 8, will either of them bounce back? Based on their current form, is Carlton this year’s dipper, or will they drop out for a few years (nothing would make Redb happier)? Or will another team suffer a shock reversal of form for the rest of this year? Or will there even be a dipper at all?
I guess we’ll just have to wait until the end of the year to find out.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:00pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
Fremantle has a strong shot at being a bit of a charger next year. They have the financial strength to contend (based on my fuzzy-wuzzy analysis of the WAFC records, I think they’re somewhere on the 35-40m revenue mark, 15-17m football department spend) but they’ve always had this Benny Hill feel to their off-field operations. Ross Lyon is a professional, however much he is a horrible coach to watch. If they can match him with other front-office selections and churn then they too could become a regular fixture in finals.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:06pm
Redb said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
I think Fremantle, Nth Melb, Melb, Bulldogs & Carlton are the dippers to date.
Hawthorn still on the fringe with Geelong (based on expectation).
West Coast & Collingwood cementing their top 4 status.
Essendon, Richmond & Sydney on the improve but have to maintain it.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:46pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
Did expect more out of a most of those teams (bar the Dogs) than they have shown – Carlton in particular has surprised, the depth issues are a definite problem.
Collingwood and West Coast definitely seem to be the two clubs inviting others to join them in the Top 4. I think Essendon and Richmond might be a bit more genuine an improvement than Sydney atm though.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:43pm
Redb said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Sydney have missed Mumford and Goodes. Mumford in particular was a huge loss. I still rate Sydney’s chances at top 4.
June 6th 2012 @ 1:22pm
Charlie said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:22pm | Report comment
I wsa really using the term dip to describe one year out of the top 8 amongst a few years in it, so at this stage it really looks like it will be Carlton. Hawks and Cats are showing worrying signs, but with Hawks I suspect it will only be a dip (ie if they miss out this year they’ll be back next year), whereas if the Cats miss this year, they’ll probably have a few years outside the 8 IMO.
June 6th 2012 @ 1:39pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
Personally I would tip about two years out of the 8 for Geelong before they start rebounding up. Now they have to work to cement their bandwagon into true-blue supporters to keep going through a (probably short) lean season.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:22pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
Freo with a Benny Hill feel to their off-field operations – I’d almost think you were an Eagles supporter!
Jokes aside – I think what Freo have achieved with their numbers, on the back of limited success, is nothing short of a miracle.
Port are a slightly different situation, but they need to bounce back from where they are currently with their support.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:40pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:40pm | Report comment
Great article. It’s certainly been a trend for a fair while now for most clubs. The nature of havin g a draft and a severely restricted player movement system meant that, for a lot of clubs, this was seen as the best way to challenge for a flag in the long run. Though of course success isn’t guaranteed. I’m not talking about the likes of St Kilda or the Bulldogs here. They both follwed the cycle succesfully and managed to open the window, they just couldn’t quite reach through and take the trophy. The lack of a real tall forward cost the Dogs in 2009 and to a lesser extent in 2008 as well whilst the Saints fell agonisingly short and can blame the oval shape of the footy when it turned away from Milne in the 2010 drawn GF. Ultimately the window doesn’t get you a premiership, just the opportunity to win one. A combination of many other factors (injuries, September form, and just general good luck) play a large part in deciding who actually wins the flag.
It’s always been a strategy with high risk involved. Look at Melbourne’s present situation or Richmond under Terry Wallace. High draft picks are no guarantee to open that window and have kept them hanging around the bottom for a lot longer then they had anticipated.
Then you have the clubs who have scoffed at the system entirely and attempted to force open the window without following the usual timeframe. You could marke an argument that the Swans, Cats, Crows and Kangaroos have all attempted to go back from 12:50 to 12:15 (or even just keep the clock paused at around 12:20-12:30 for a bit longer) without going through the pain associated with 12:00. Each has had varying success with the approach.
The Swans managed to clinch a premeirship in 2005, and go within a point of back to back flags, despite only missing the finals twice since 1996 (10th in 2000 and 11th in 2002.) They now seem to have gathered together another group of talented young players despite only missing the finals once more in 2009 (12th.) Indeed you could argue that they’ve shown great disdain for the draft/premiership window concept so willing have they been to offload picks in the draft. The question is can they take the next step again?
Adelaide have followed a similar path. Though not quite as effective as the Swans in their ladder piositions they have, by and large, rebuilt from their 2002-2006 window without reaching rock bottom and signs look good for the near future.
Geeloing tried to avoid it as well and had tremendous success, though critics would argue that they were helped by some magnificent father-son selections under the old rule. Regardless, you can’t argue with their results!
The Kangaroos attempts to avoid the bottom has been reached from the view of financial survival. They’ve never believed that they could afford a long stint at the bottom. Sadly, after promising signs over the last 2 seasons, they seem to be going backwards in 2012.
I think that the new clubs and free agency will mean clubs place a bit less emphasis on the draft, or at least plan to be down the bottom for a year or two less than usual, as it is now easier (in theory) to recruit players already in the system. In particular you’ll see clubs sitting at around 12:10-12:20 look to sign an established player through free-agency who fulfills a need and that they feel can take them from a Top 8 side to a Top 4 and, hopefully, premiership contender. See Fremantle and the chase for Cloke.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:50pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
Matt
some really good comments and observations there, thanks.
June 6th 2012 @ 1:45pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
Yeah, agree with Cat, good comments, bit to think about in there.
June 6th 2012 @ 3:05pm
Matt F said | June 6th 2012 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
Thanks guys. What can I say, when you post enough comments eventually you’ll post one that’s worth reading
June 6th 2012 @ 12:45pm
TW said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:45pm | Report comment
Great in depth article – Aussie Rules written history needs more of this stuff –
A suggestion for you Cattery collate all of your in depth articles and publish them in a book form – There are small type publishers around who will assist.
One thing the Eagles have going for them – A big supporter base who are mostly WA born who have underneath a huge desire to beat any team east of the Nullabor. That culture permeates right through the club from the bosses to the sponsors.
The recruiting of eastern state players has not altered this culture one bit ie Most of them stick with the club through their own peak years. And it sustained the club through the “Cousins” affair when the AFL jumped on them which in turn created more resentment from the supporter base.
June 6th 2012 @ 12:51pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 12:51pm | Report comment
TW
The Eagles are a true phenomenon, and with the new stadium, are about to jump to a completely new level of operation – watch out!!
June 6th 2012 @ 1:02pm
Ian Whitchurch said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
The more success a club like the Eagles, or the Broncos, has, the more inclined the League is to put another team into their city, thus diluting their chance of success.
BTW, roll on a third team in Perth
June 6th 2012 @ 1:44pm
The Cattery said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:44pm | Report comment
When you look at the off-field success of Freo, and the massive growth in the WA economy – for the AFL hierarchy, it becomes more a question of when, rather than if (and a pressing question at that).
June 6th 2012 @ 1:36pm
Nathan of Perth said | June 6th 2012 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
If they keep the same management style as was set up for Subiaco Oval, which has been suggested by the State Government, then I would anticipate that within a couple years of the stadium commencing operation that all available memberships will be sold and they will be back to a waiting list. They have been looking hard at selling part-season membership, 3-5-7 game memberships which will enable more people to be a part, but I suspect a waiting list will be back on the agenda. With the new numbers, the new, much higher class corporate facilities, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Eagles pass $75m/yr revenue, without affiliates, and $35m football department spend before 2021. (Assuming 2018 for the stadium establishment date).
I just don’t see the Eagles off-field/front-room operations going anywhere but up – if they could survive the Cousins-Judd debacle without a hiccup and only have 800 members churn at the end of a wooden spoon year with no hope in sight (and I think only about 200 members didn’t renew, out 40,000, at the end of 2011) then they stand a good chance to outstrip all but Collingwood over the next few years.
Brian Cook set up a very potent operation. Now I know that the Eagles are not the most popular/most followed club in the land, although we have a continually developing Victorian supporter base, nor the highest rating, nor the highest valued label. But we do have what is a sort of fan-forced furnace in this state that the team has created and developed. There is a reason that absolutely no one hates the Eagles like a WA-based supporter of a Victorian team. There is barely any oxygen left for Fremantle, let alone other teams.