West Australian football in crisis

Sheek, It seems you and I share similiar views on keeping teams competitive. What the AFL has done to date is give expansion teams an early leg up on draft picks. For example the West Coast Eagles were given the whole state of WA as an exclusive recruiting zone in their early years as was Adelaide with the South Aust zone. Swans and Lions given extra room in the salary cap. The only clubs without any assistance were Port Adelaide and Fremantle. Now that these clubs have been in the AFL for a few years and indeed tasted success (except Fremantle), those draft and salary cap concessions have been wound back. The new Gold Coast and West Sydney are mooted for extra draft benefits to do likewise. I agree the culture of West Coast is very bad. Judd left due to this. They won the flag in 2006 and could end up wooden spooners in 2008 - an AFL record I would imagine. Much of this poor culture as you say. Contrast this to the modern approach where player leadership groups are suspending their own players for off field indiscretions, Essendon with Andy Lovett and North Melb with Shannon Grant and you can see where clubs act now to protect the right culture at the club. Both of these players are important to these teams and it could cost them winning this week or next, but as West Coast have shown a much more dramatic cultural deficit can cause larger and long term problems. West Coast will recover, they don't need any help. i think the Voss recruitment is aimed at straigtening them up a bit off the field. a strong tough leader is what they need. though i'm a bit surprised Woosha is not up to it. Redb

I've probably mentioned before my sister's boyfriend (ex-VFL player) happens to be the uncle of a leading WCE player (no names mentioned, to protect the guilty). He tells me of the excesses of his nephew & team mates. Example one - Dom Perignon champagne bottles guzzled like water bottles. Example two - $100 bills left around the house like the rest of us leave coins around the house. It's the welfare system in reverse. These guys are on mega bucks, & the Perth business community can't give them enough freebies in the hope of some return publicity. Consequently, these young guys, already on huge salaries, rarely have to put their hand in their pocket for anything. What happens is that they have little appreciation for the value of money, & little perspective of how the rest of society copes. In a place like Perth, the Eagles & Dockers players are big fish in a small pond. Keep on hand-feeding young players & they'll eventually bit your hand, like Ben Cousins did. Fail to teach them the value of things, or give them moral perspective, & they'll run amok. It seems to me, WCE are unravelling because the players have been over-indulged, with no boundaries of behaviour put in place. I'm a fan of socialism in sport. Consider the alternative. A particular team that your club has played for 50 or more years suddenly hits the skids. Unless they're helped, they disappear from the comp. All that history & tradition of your team playing that team is lost. It could even be your club. We all love to hate Collingwood for example. But if Collingwood disappeared from the AFL, it would hurt all the remaining teams. The rest would actually miss Collingwood's presence. Success goes in cycles. It's important to keep all the 16 clubs afloat & reasonably successful. Although relocation is a meritorious option for 2 Melbourne clubs in a nationally motivated comp. Is there value in Eagles & Dockers having 1st 6 picks (3 each) of WA's best young talent before other clubs bid? Ditto Crows & Power in SA. For Swans & Lions, they get the first 3 picks respectively in NSW & Qld. Perhaps in Vioctoria the top 18 players should be reserved for local teams (9 x 2)? Then the others can go hell for leather. Anyway, has a study been done on how well the first 3 draft picks each year have gone in their careers? Perhaps some have gone on to great careers, others quickly into oblivion. Being a promising, talented young player is one thing. Fitting into the culture of the club that snaps you up is another matter. Do clubs give this sort of thing enough thought?

I agree totally with you for once MC - on the short-sighted, insular, bemoaning people. Whatever else is said about AFL, to have a competition drawing the size of crowds and TV audiences that it does - especially relative to the small size of the core overall market by world standards, is quite amazing. This is nothing short of enormously successful entertainment. Any rock band or theatre troupe who drew 250000+ live audience numbers (over 8 games), plus say a total of 5 times that again on TV for 26+ weeks of the year, plus peripheral revenues (merchandise, advertising/sponsorship, etc) would be on far more than these lads are...

Millster - agreed - - and good article from back in Feb. funny thing is, people can sometimes be a little short sighted an insullar - - bemoaning that AFL players get paid too much etc etc (for in many cases - really quite short and non-transferable careers) and yet think nothing of the monies earned by EPL players, IPL cricketers, NBA bastketballers etc. So - - certainly, it'd be nice if the salary cap could allow greater capacity for team success - - it has annoyed me that there's so little range - I think the minimum is 92.5% of the allowable salary cap - - which means, even as Carlton won successive wooden spoons, their squad was being quite well paid relative to a squad winning premierships on 100%. There is at least a marketing allowance, and some allowances for veterans as well that fall outside the salary cap - - I would assume that moving forward there will be extra 'flex' brought into the system. HOwever - - I guess that might be on hold until the 17th and 18th teams are bedded down.

MC - in the piece I allude to in my post immediately above yours, I make detailed comment of the NBA's "Larry Bird" exemption. Rather than re-iterate what I wrote back in February, here is the link : http://www.theroar.com.au/2008/02/05/the-nbas-soft-salary-cap-and-its-potential-for-the-a-league/ I think it could be worked well into something to pick up your idea and implement in the AFL. I thoroughly support this kind of structure which rewards success, rather than propping up failure. Despite the good news about players making sacrifices to remain as a unit, in reality there is something wrong with a system that forces them to make that choice.

Lazza - I loved my old North Melb '90s era of success built on nurturing 'home grown' talent via the Under 19s. Alas, that has gone to the past, and everyone accesses the same pool of talent via the draft. Tanking - - - only so many teams will ever deliberately seek a wooden spoon. I challenge you to illustrate where there's been a draft where the number 1 draft pick is so far and away ahead of the number 3. Often, the 3rd choice is almost prefered because you can't then be held accountable for choosing the 'wrong' number 1!!!! However - thanking for the priority pick most likely occurred in some way or other - - and that has ideally been solved now with that priority pick pushed back to between the 1st and 2nd rounds. And that requires successive ultra crap seasons - - not many clubs can afford to consider that. I really don't think Carlton had much say in it at all - - they were losing no matter what they did. I still maintain though, that hard line 'tanking' definition would include most elements of list management - - i.e. playing 'development' players is ALWAYS at the short term expense of having the best team on the paddock. i.e. Ess NOT playing Peverill and J.Johnson - - is that tanking? Well, 8 weeks ago, the cynic would say yes. After the last month, the support of list management points to 4 wins on the trot with extra games and game time in the 'tank' for a developing list. It's not good to be overly cynical. btw - I reckon the premiers should be permitted a decent 'salary cap' 'bonus' for the following season - - to pay bonuses to players and as much as possible retain their list. Although, the 'nice' stories often abound of players taking pay cuts to keep the successful 'squad' together. Geelong did it, Brissie did it, North Melb always did it just to survive even when winning flags!!!

Ah Lazza - don't get me started on salary caps. My pet hate, and equally socialist in my eyes! A few months back I wrote a piece on the liberalising of the A-League salary cap by adopting many of the structures used by the American NBA in their 'soft cap' approach. I think they might be equally valid for any sport. Its the only way in which I can see the moderating impact of salary caps (required for many clubs) have the desired effect without squashing motivations for on-field excellence and long-term player development and retention, and without over-distorting a merit-based system. I don't now how to link it here but it may be worth your while to read as it was certainly a really interesting piece of research for me to do / write.

Millster, Lazza, There are different systems around the world, the AFL has modelled the NFL system in the States as promotion/regulation system is deemed problematic for a small country with large travel distances. The priority draft picks is an issue and needs to be addressed by the AFL to make it less attractive to finish near the bottom, no doubt. To keep a sporting comp churning over creating differing stronger and weaker teams it is fairer and more competitive IMO for supporters. Not sure the HAL has got it right and it only has 8 teams at the moment. However with the constant potential for players to be snapped up by overseas clubs its not running as the premier comp for the best players in the land, or else Harry kewell et al would be running around in his prime in the A League. In addition and to be fair to the HAL it is only 3 years old and very conscious of maintaining financial integrity over maximising the potential success of the 16 teams like in the AFL. When the HAL as 16 teams and some teams are constantly cellar dwellers it will need to look at ways of getting the smaller (perhaps regional) clubs off the canvas and thus viable. It is a fickle world with new franchises, support can come and go with success and failure. Redb .

"You find ways of gaining a competative advantage" Exactly, by coming last and getting access to draft picks and talent. Please, don't tell me teams don't expolit this by 'tanking'. I understand you can't have an 'open' league without promotion/relegation, cup and international competitions like the EPL but do we really need this 'Socialist' system. Why can't you just have a Salary Cap like the ALeague? That would keep the competition even but give clubs flexibility with recruiting. The ALeague has a loophole for the big clubs with the Marquee player being outside the Salary Cap. Even then, the two smallest teams made the Grand Final last season? It does work.

Opps didn't read back to Lazza's post before but quite obviously I strongly agree!

RedB - I've always been curious about that point of view. That is, relating to the "fairer comp that shares the spoils around". Is it really fairer that a team that wins doesn't get some benefit for winning, and isn't able to accelerate or consolidate their success over a number of seasons? Is it really fairer that a team which is unsuccessful for whatever reason gets a 'leg up' by the system and is given the chance of redemption despite its failings, and beyond what it deserves in a merit-based system? Superficially yes it is cute. And also necessary in a closed franchise competition like the AFL where maintaining internal competitiveness of all clubs is vital to the brand. But at the most basic of philosophical levels, fairness is about merit - and the right balance of reward for effort and success. It is not about simplistic equality - which is a far more socialist concept which history has shown time and time again to lead to mediocrity.

Lazza - the socialist system. My NOrth Melb have dared NOT bottom out, and therefore have also struggled to have early draft picks. The main quality picks come then from trading, and we only got D.Wells because of the dual aspect of W.Carey and Carlton penalties. Note therefore that Adelaide traded to get W.Carey. I also lamented during the 90s that the AFL system seemed to assume that success would be it's own reward - but, for a club like North Melb, the ability to translate success (premierships) to lucrative financial pay-day was far lesser than for example a Collingwood. So - - certainly, the 'socialist system' - that in part I support - - needed a tweak to allow for some reward other than just a trophy. Adelaide though, has certain state based advantages - and the WA and SA clubs have seemingly exploited the rookie list far, far better than the Vic clubs. You find ways of gaining a competative advantage. For a while, some Vic clubs (inc Nth Melb) couldn't even afford to 'employ' rookies (and we missed Aaron Davey). Main surprise so far, the Crows haven't been able to tailor a package to lure Matthew Pavlich back to Adelaide - - but, then, he's an example that being 'forced' to go somewhere doesn't necessarily kill off your choice long term - - and, so far, he's chosen to stay where he was 'forced' to go.

Lazza, Double teaming you know. But I would point out that Essendon were in the finals approx 18 years out of 25 years under Sheedy winning 4 Grand Finals, 3 runners up in that time. Not ocne did we finish bottom or get the best shot at early draft chopices. This year we have risen again fof the bottom without top pick draft choices. Unlike the EPL which favours the 4-5 major teams who have the dollars, the AFL is actually a fairer comp that shares the spoils around. Redb

Lazza - the lure back home is often strong. It's still a case that the WA clubs are over represented by WA 'natives', likewise the SA clubs by SA 'natives'. My NOrth Melbourne lost Scott Welsh and Byron Pickett back to SA even after premierships, we lured Peter Bell over after Freo cut him after 1 season, but, the home state lured him back again, - again, after 2 premierships. It MAY just be a matter of time before Daniel Wells heads back - - he's said all the right things so far, but, you never know. Point is - - while that's the case - then, clubs outside of WA are less likely to recruit the WA kid in a toss up between a local and a WA boy. Or - - if recruited, are aware that perhaps they might be looking more towards a mutually benefiicial trade with a WA club in the future. FOr now - this year in the draft, one might expect, should Freo, WCE and Melb hold the last 3 places, that Freo and WCE would got for Natanui and Rich, and Melb for Jack Watts - - sticking nicely on the home state basis.

What's the point of having so many talented kids in WA? They go into a national draft and are told where they must play. No advantage for WA teams? You don't have to do anything to improve except finish as low as possible and get those draft picks. If WA fans don't mind watching rubbish teams then finish bottom for a few years and you'll get the cream of the crop. Like all Socialist systems the AFL rewards failure and punishes success. My club, the Crows, have over achieved in the last few years because fans here won't tolerate failure. Our reward? Without access to quality recruits we're not going to win a premiership anytime soon.

I strongly disagree. Yes, on the field West Coast and Fremantle are struggling, but off of it they are a hell of a lot safer than some of the other teams in the competition. Crowds still seem healthy too: this weekend West Coast v Richmond attracted 37,085 people, while in comparison Port v North Melbourne only got a paltry 19,851. Good infrastructure and fan support are crucial in order to have a competitive team in the first place, and given that Freo and the Eagles both have this I feel that next season will be much brighter for both sides. Remember, half of 2007's top 8 (including premiers Geelong and runners up Port Adelaide) missed the finals in 2006. Both sides already have a good core group of players (whether they are currently performing or not), so I feel that with the high draft picks both sides will recieve this season there's no reason why 2009 shouldn't be a better year for the two WA teams. Looking at it from another perspective, once again WA has one of the strongest crop of youngsters about to enter the AFL via this year's draft. Certainly, WA has the best and largest amount of talented kids outside of Victoria. I hear that WAFL crowds are up as well. Hardly the signs of a state in crisis. So while things may look grim this season, I fully expect that the WA teams will be able to turn things around next season and the sport will only get stronger in WA if the state continues to produce quality players.