Last Thursday the AFL sent a document to its 18 clubs entitled ‘Future AFL Competition’ and asked for feedback on a number of issues as the league looks to move forward post-COVID-19.
Soft caps and list sizes were front and centre, as was how a national second-tier competition would look.
How indeed could a second-tier competition work, where do the AFL’s priorities lie and where does it leave our state leagues?
The future of Australian Rules football is upon us, and it’s not going to be what we’re used from the era of excess we’ve suddenly departed from.
Soft salary cap slashing in the national competition will inevitably lead to smaller football departments, fewer coaches and obviously less money in football’s reboot. It appears list sizes will also shrink to less than the 45 the clubs currently enjoy, with some football insiders predicting a number closer to 35.
Fewer coaches mean less coaching, while smaller lists will result in players having to spend less time at their clubs. Less time will equal less money.
(Quinn Rooney/Getty Images)
The issue of list size is imperative to how a second-tier competition will look. If lists are culled, how would clubs access top-up players if and when they’re needed? With ten clubs in the AFL based in Victoria, the VFL in particular is being looked at closely.
However, this isn’t all about Victoria, and football fans in South Australia, Western Australia, New South Wales and Queensland will also be interested to know what the future holds. One thing that seems certain is the idea of a national AFL Reserves competition can be forgotten, though a Victorian-centric reserves tournament may be feasible.
Eddie McGuire on Triple M’s Hot Breakfast recently spoke of a likely merger between the VFL and the NEAFL, saying that an AFL reserves competition “would’ve killed off the VFL, the SANFL, the WAFL”. But then that’s something COVID-19 may have done already anyway.
Why would a merger between the VFL and NEAFL work? One way of looking at it is that the AFL is really still a glorified VFL. AFL House is prioritising the best interests of the ten Victorian clubs and their New South Wales and Queensland clubs at heart given the millions they have invested into them to grow the game.
The VFL currently consists of standalone clubs Port Melbourne, Williamstown, Frankston, Werribee and Coburg. There are the aligned clubs of Box Hill (Hawthorn), Casey (Melbourne) and Sandringham (St Kilda), while the other Victorian-based AFL clubs all have their own sides in the VFL.
In a new football economy supporting another club financially will make no sense, so the Hawks, Melbourne and St Kilda can cut adrift their aligned affiliates and go it alone in a second tier.
While Hawthorn do not have a problem with this financially, it could prove to be an issue going forward for the financially struggling Melbourne and St Kilda operations while also sounding the death knell for some of the standalone clubs.
The NEAFL has struggled since its inception. Sydney, GWS, Brisbane and Gold Coast could disband and join the VFL, forming a 14-club VNEAFL.
The AFL has no interest in clubs like Ainslie, Southport and Canberra going forward, and like Williamstown and the other VFL standalone clubs, they could be tossed out and left to fend for themselves.
(Ryan Pierse/Getty Images)
The AFL is also seeking the views of the clubs on the level of investment in junior talent in this new economy.
Clubs are being asked to give their ideas on lifting the draft age and returning to an under-19s competition rather than under-18s, but with the draft age remaining the same.
It would mean kids drafted would most likely spend a year or two in a pathway program rather than be thrust into an AFL footy system with smaller lists to break into.
The TAC Cup is broken up into zones, and one possible scenario is a ten-club VFL under-19s competition, with the ten Victorian clubs regaining their identity for this league.
The better players would get an opportunity to play in the higher second tier while players who were 18 and already in that league could be dropped down to the under-19s competition.
Players who were not drafted to a Victorian AFL club but who showed talent and potential in school football or suburban football could still be invited to train and play within the pathway and perhaps drafted the following year.
It’s a throwback to the olden days, but it might just be the future.
(David Mariuz/Getty Images)
It leaves the four northern clubs outside the under-19s, but an AFL-endorsed NEAFL under-19s would work and perhaps be better than the academy system at the moment.
That leaves South Australia and Western Australia and their pathways moving forward in the new era.
The problem at the moment is that without football some clubs in these two proud, historic and great football states are on life support, and who says that if an entire season is rubbed out, others will not follow?
Already in the SANFL West Adelaide and Central Districts, to name two, have their backs to the wall and are asking fans and footy lovers in general if they can help with donations to avoid going bankrupt. In Western Australia West Perth are in a similar position, and the longer this goes on, the more clubs it will affect.
It appears that helping the state leagues means helping just the VFL and NEAFL.
So how do the SANFL and WAFL go forward?
Make the state leagues true state leagues and evolve from suburban leagues.
I’m not really sure if this is the answer, and obviously feedback and debate are welcome, but I think it’s how the five standalone VFL clubs should look to the future also.
The SANFL could add another club from Adelaide, and maybe that could be Tea Tree Gully, which has been spoken about before. Whyalla could be an option. A side from the Riverland, which is an area that has produced some of SA’s finest players, could also work.
Despite the size of Western Australia, could Bunbury, Geraldton and Broome be added to the mix as we go forward?
I would like to see a new-look ten or 12-club VFL devoid of interference from the AFL. Almost a throwback to the VFA, but a modern-day variation. I hope Sandringham, Casey and Box Hill survive without the money from their AFL affiliates, but if not, maybe Vermont, Balwyn and North Ballarat could get something up and going. And representation from Gippsland or Sunraysia perhaps?
There are four AFL clubs from South Australia and Western Australia and their state leagues and pathways need to be strong in order for them to survive. If they lose clubs and perhaps an entire season, it will have devastating financial effects.
michael RVC
Roar Pro
For sure this is seemingly far fetched, I don't expect it to happen, just a suggestion given the potential for significant structural change over the next 12 months and to improve the balance of the AFL and second tire comps. The greater likelihood is that very little will change in this regard. PS, glad you picked up on the comment about your president. All the best.
Flagpies
Roar Rookie
A/ This will not happen as it takes a vote from all of the current clubs with a 3/4 majority vote in favour. It's in the charter. You can forget this idea unless 4 melb / vic clubs fold through insolvency - even then HQ have stated as much the current 18 will remain. That's the $600 million which Marvel stadium is equity against.
Seymorebutts
Guest
The AFL should give some of the money it makes back to clubs who keep the game running, like the ones in the VFL, WAFL, SANFL, TAFL, QFL, NSWFL, NTFL. Not sure exaclty how they should do it.. maybe southern clubs get more because they have more juniors in their cachment areas.. but something, to help clubs with administration, pay electricity bills etc. Without those local comps we dont have a feeder system for the AFL, its those local clubs where all those future stars begin.
Pedro The Fisherman
Roar Rookie
I also have never heard of the Tea Tree Gully option. Nonetheless, they (and Modbury) are the oldest clubs in the State (yes Port fans, they are both older than Port) and have quite a large number of registered players throughout the grades (they have over 500 juniors in 25 sides).
The Dom is good
Roar Rookie
saving the WAFL and SANFL should be on the same level of priority as the vfl
Jwoody74
Roar Rookie
Jwoody74
Roar Rookie
Hi Gyfox, I never mentioned the Crows being kicked out of the SANFL as I don’t see that happening I’m more worried about some of the other clubs being disbanded and possible clubs who could enter the competition.Adelaide will remain in the SANFL I would imagine so as they can implement their own style and game plan without hijacking the league. Would be terrible to see Canberra and Southport be discarded but if the NEAFL came to an end I think they would go back to the ACT league and the QAFL. I think a lot of people are unaware of the history and importance of a club like Southport.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Too right. I dont speak Corporatese, just don't understand it.
BurningMad
Roar Rookie
Adding regional teams is a harebrained idea, and didn’t work when the VFL tried it in the 90s. The second tier works best when it’s based on traditional rivalries and clubs are relatively close, so that more fans can attend and the players don’t have to take too much time out of their lives. Not to mention country areas have their own valuable football history that shouldn’t be subsumed with one team. The TSL and NEAFL struggle precisely because of the length of travel involved. The second tier’s struggles are financial. They either need to find a way to appeal to a new generation and increase their crowds (a tall task), or cut their expenses. Maybe even return to amateur status if it keeps them alive. Not everything can be popular and successful, everything has a shelf life.
DTM
Guest
Thanks for your comments Peter. That's easy to fix. We need to take the power away from the AFL clubs. Each player gets a base salary (commensurate with their experience) then a fee per game played. If they are playing for the AFL team, that's who pays them. If they play for the 2nd tier team, that's who pays them so the AFL coach gets no say in how they are used by the 2nd tier team. Having these AFL coaches demanding certain players are played in certain positions only benefits that AFL team - it does nothing for the 2nd tier club, their supporters or the game in general. In fact, it is detrimental to the clubs and can be detrimental to the player's development. The game cannot afford all AFL teams to field 2 sides (one at elite level and one at 2nd tier). Therefore, something has to give - in my opinion, it's the AFL coaches. For too long, everyone has had to bow down to these guys, it's time they understood that the world does not revolve around them. Maybe it makes their job harder, maybe they'll have to be more flexible.
6x6 perkele
Roar Rookie
I think you mean vfa clubs not VFL but I'm sure you are aware of the difference.
peter ostle
Guest
Dear DTM, if a player is being paid by the AFL team I think they will have a large role in what that player is playing if not chosen in the list. It will be similar to the soccer loan system, the team 'loaning' the player will 'ask' the team playing the loanee to play him/her in certain positions, a certain number of minutes, and a certain number of games. If they do not agree then that player will not be loaned to that club and a club that is willing to follow the AFL team's wants/needs will get the player. As to non-Victoria players then a Victoria based AFL/WAFL club could use teams in the WAFL/SANFL etc. to train/play the player. In the farm system in North America, for example, NHL only the team directly below the NHL team is 'national' below that the farm system is still regional; the same is seen in the MLB.
DTM
Guest
I don't think that an AFL club having an "affiliated" club in the 2nd tier serves anyone other than the AFL club. Unfortunately, asking the AFL clubs for their submissions is not going to see this proposal surface. In my view, the clubs in the second tier should be completely independent of the AFL clubs. So, if a player on say Hawthorn's list is not part of the 22 players named for the upcoming weekend, he is free to play for his home club (say Williamstown). If Alistair Clarkson wants him to learn how to play CHF and the Williamstown coach wants him to be a back pocket then he plays whatever position his coach of the day determines. If nothing else, most players are more adaptable now than they were 30 years ago so this shouldn't be a problem. If a WA or SA kid is drafted into Hawthorn then the VFL teams negotiate direct with the kids WAFL or SANFL team to give him a Victorian home club. If we cut AFL list sizes to 35, there are likely to be only 5-10 players missing out on an AFL game each week as there will always be injuries. This way, we retain WAFL, SANFL, VFL and NEAFL (without the AFL affiliates). It will strengthen the 2nd tier competitions and reduce costs for the elite level. It will also create a smaller pool of AFL players which will improve the average quality. A reduction to 16 AFL teams is also something I think needs to happen before the start of the 2021 season.
John Grieve
Guest
A novel idea. The name should never have been changed.
peter ostle
Guest
First question to ask about leagues below the AFL are what are their purpose? Are they there to provide a 'pathway' to the AFL or are they there to express a sense of identity for a community? Are they there for both female and male participants at any level, and in any capacity within the game? If a club is seen as a pathway to the AFL/WAFL then it will be in a club's 'farm system'. That the players could be promoted to the AFL/WAFL list, and if injured, get some practice in the VFL/WVFL. They will 'learn' the club's playing philosophy etc. If a club is an expression of a community then the catchment area of the players will be more restricted than the above team. It may have ex-AFL/WAFL players, and some of the players may find their skills being recognised by a AFL/WAFL team. Even at this level you will need to have a competitive balance tax, and a maximum/minimum list size. Given the number of teams in Victoria you will probably end up with a league below the WAFL/AFL that is feeder teams for a single WAFL/AFL club. In the other states due to their being less AFL/WAFL clubs you will have more 'community based' sides in the leagues below the AFL/WAFL. A 'one size' attitude does not work. In Victoria you could argue the game is about maintaining its presence, whereas in the other states it is about growth/outreach into the communities.
michael RVC
Roar Pro
Beginning 2023: (A) 14 team AFL national comp seniors; 6 Melb licences, 8 Interstate; all awarded by AFL Commission determination.; $$$'s payable per licence. (B) 14 team AFL national comp seconds; Any combination of clubs from AFL Seniors clubs, all State league clubs can individually or combine to bid for licences to commence 2023 season. $0 licence fees payable until 2025 then $? at AFL Commission determination with terms of reference to develop the sport widely, not favour the old AFL clubs (or their sooky Presidents). (C) Non-national comp clubs and any others who may not have bid for Seconds comp combine into 2 conferences; 1 x VFL and 1 x Interstate; number and location of clubs to be negotiated; $0 club licences awarded by State league Commissions and sanctioned by AFL Commission. (D) Funding for national comp from usual sources plus equity partners; AFL trickle down, state funding and equity funding for non-national comp; all pooled and allocated according to equitable needs. (E) National comps play 14 game H&A resulting in a final 6. Final 6 play each one concurrent non-elimination round between them to determine choice of home ground for 1st round of elimination finals. Bottom 8 play Seniors curtain raiser elimination series for draft priorities during Seniors elimination series. (F) List sizes, draft avenues, age requirements etc etc can all be determined by those clever Football administrators we already have. (G) National and non national comp's operational budgets and P&L's can be similarly figured out.
Republican
Guest
Never a truer word was spoken with re the AFL having no interest in 'Canberra'. The AFL will no doubt continue its tokenism and expedience of the code in the nations capital, as it has done for decades and despite this regions illustrious and compelling footy heritage and pedigree. The AFL are first and foremost a business that holds to a culture of empire building for business sake. That they are the governing body of our indigenous code is a contradiction in terms in many respects, while these days of austerity will only compound this reality.
Gyfox
Roar Rookie
The Crows are not an original SANFL club & do not have a home ground or base. All the others, incl PAFC, do. VFA is definitely what it should be called!
R.king
Guest
None of us know what the future holds for any off the sporting codes. Im certain it will be a lot different. Maybe not straight away, but down the track. The media are doing their best to keep the status quo, i think it will be totally different once the new broadcast deal comes around. A lot less money, thats a given. Fingers crossed a more balanced draw. The talk of a 2nd division is not new, soccer are a long way down that track, in many ways, they are streets ahead in their strategy.
Paul2
Guest
Why would the Crows be replaced in the SANFL? Is that assuming we move to a national reserves competition? I'd certainly support an 8 club Victorian competition: I'd suggest calling it the VFA.