National 2nd Tier Competiton Discussion

[smac]

Isn't it just supposed to be, initially at least, a Fox cash cow? TV stations aren't very altruistic.

Andy Collins is entitled to that opinion, just as the five clubs who have knocked it back are. Given the 5 clubs who knocked it back are the top 5 from last season, I would back their judgement ahead of the other 4 clubs.

[Brodlach]

Isn't it just supposed to be, initially at least, a Fox cash cow? TV stations aren't very altruistic.

Andy Collins is entitled to that opinion, just as the five clubs who have knocked it back are. Given the 5 clubs who knocked it back are the top 5 from last season, I would back their judgement ahead of the other 4 clubs.

So because those 5 teams played finals last year makes them a "smarter" club? Thats a never narrow minded view.

[smac]

Isn't it just supposed to be, initially at least, a Fox cash cow? TV stations aren't very altruistic.

Andy Collins is entitled to that opinion, just as the five clubs who have knocked it back are. Given the 5 clubs who knocked it back are the top 5 from last season, I would back their judgement ahead of the other 4 clubs.

So because those 5 teams played finals last year makes them a "smarter" club? Thats a never narrow minded view.

Good chance it's close though - they've been making good choices more than the bottom 4 haven't they?

I can be even more specific. Centrals know what it takes to win a flag and they believe this will get in the way. They even got together with 3 other clubs to discuss it and provided a common position - 4 clubs with identical views and a 5th who have a view that is barely different.

[Brodlach]

Isn't it just supposed to be, initially at least, a Fox cash cow? TV stations aren't very altruistic.

Andy Collins is entitled to that opinion, just as the five clubs who have knocked it back are. Given the 5 clubs who knocked it back are the top 5 from last season, I would back their judgement ahead of the other 4 clubs.

So because those 5 teams played finals last year makes them a "smarter" club? Thats a never narrow minded view.

Good chance it's close though - they've been making good choices more than the bottom 4 haven't they?

I can be even more specific. Centrals know what it takes to win a flag and they believe this will get in the way. They even got together with 3 other clubs to discuss it and provided a common position - 4 clubs with identical views and a 5th who have a view that is barely different.

Beacuse 4 clubs got together doesnt make it the correct decision. The other 4 clubs also have the same view. North Adelaide, whilst not having a great year last year, obviously makes great business decisions (ie pokie places, Adelaide United) and they think it is a good idea..I am glad my club as the same thoughts as them.

[smac]

My club makes good football decisions and sound business decisions. I'll back them in, thanks!

[dedja]

This thread is now 29 pages?

[redandblack]

Was Kris Grant was at the helm of Centrals when they were struggling?

Has his decision-making improved, or does wisdom only come when you start winning premierships.

Perhaps in this case, it's reasonable to say that no-one knows who is right and wrong until the end of next year.

I'm pleased that my club, Port and North have stood up to represent the SANFL.

[smac]

Wisdom comes with experience, does it not? I'm sure you already knew that.

I'm pleased you're pleased.

I look forward to playing against your teams late in the season when we are ramping up for finals and your players are looking forward to their 4 byes, all in September/October.

[am Bays]

I'm pleased that my club, Port and North have stood up to represent the SANFL.

That's all we need to beat most of the clubs in that competition - hell I'd back South agaisnt five of them (Morningside, NT Thunder, Eastlake, East Coast, and Clarence)

[redandblack]

Wisdom comes with experience, does it not? I'm sure you already knew that.
I'm pleased you're pleased.

I look forward to playing against your teams late in the season when we are ramping up for finals and your players are looking forward to their 4 byes, all in September/October.

I did know that, mate, being more experienced than you

[Dutchy]

Isn't it just supposed to be, initially at least, a Fox cash cow? TV stations aren't very altruistic.

Andy Collins is entitled to that opinion, just as the five clubs who have knocked it back are. Given the 5 clubs who knocked it back are the top 5 from last season, I would back their judgement ahead of the other 4 clubs.

So because those 5 teams played finals last year makes them a "smarter" club? Thats a never narrow minded view.

No

But look at a team like Centrals & Eagles (and to a lesser degree Glenelg and Sturt) all have been playing finals in recent years, 2-3 finals per year over 5 years means an extra 10-15 games their players have been exposed to, almost an extra season, in fact if the Gowans boys played at South they wouldnt be at the 200 milestone yet.

So workloads on players becomes really important for teams that have been successful recently v teams that havent.

Fair to say the top 5 clubs have different needs to the bottom 4, an interesting study of the average age of the squads would probably confirm that the bottom 4 clubs have a much lower average age, therefore are more likely to want the extra exposure and experience this comp gives.

[redandblack]

Whether the 2010 top 5 clubs are right or wrong (and they had to workshop their opinions together to arrive at a decision), I think it's reasonable to say they've left the SANFl open to looking a bit precious.

None of the other clubs invited across Australia (WAFL, TFL, VFL, etc) have come to the same conclusion, so rather than it being 5 - 4, it's probably something like 5 -16?

[Dutchy]

Whether the 2010 top 5 clubs are right or wrong (and they had to workshop their opinions together to arrive at a decision), I think it's reasonable to say they've left the SANFl open to looking a bit precious.

None of the other clubs invited across Australia (WAFL, TFL, VFL, etc) have come to the same conclusion, so rather than it being 5 - 4, it's probably something like 5 -16?

And those comps are more reliant on the AFL than us

[JK]

Perhaps in this case, it's reasonable to say that no-one knows who is right and wrong until the end of next year.

I would say that all clubs are right already, because they are making decisions that they believe are in their own best interests - Im not sure that would really change much in 12 months time?

If (for eg.) Central/Norwood/Eagles/Glenelg/Sturt have a lousy year and miss the five, why should they then rue their decision to avoid the national competition?

If (for eg.) Westies/North/Port/South make the GF of the national comp and suffer for it at SANFL level, again, why should they rue their decision if they've achieved the profile enhancement nationally, that they likely feel is a big positive for their club?

In each instances both clubs made decisions that best suited their circumstances .. I don't think people factor the different needs and perspectives of the various clubs enough into their thinking, and have made this a much bigger issue than it probably needs to be.

[redandblack]

We're all reliant on the AFL, we just don't like to admit it.

[sjt]

Whether the 2010 top 5 clubs are right or wrong (and they had to workshop their opinions together to arrive at a decision), I think it's reasonable to say they've left the SANFl open to looking a bit precious.

None of the other clubs invited across Australia (WAFL, TFL, VFL, etc) have come to the same conclusion, so rather than it being 5 - 4, it's probably something like 5 -16?

I think it's far from reasonable. They gave their reasons in the press releases. The reasons given were sound. Not worth going over old ground. I think it's reasonable to say the competition should be made attractive enough for the declining clubs to want to compete.
As mentioned, probably about ten pages ago, each club is probably at a different stage. Central have deemed it not viable to participate. West believe it is, so be it. Personally, I couldn't give a stuff, if people in the other states know who Centrals are. If I were to know who the Victorian, Tassie clubs are it would make no difference to the success of their club.

My understanding is Roy (for one) felt that our premiership chances would have been drastically reduced if they had played in such a comp last year. This makes the decision a "no brainer", given the limited positives.
Sure, they could have played all their under 18's or young players, that would have made an even greater mockery of the comp. Lucky they aren't so West, Port and North get an opportunity.
Each club has to do what's best for their own list management and premiership chances.

[Dirko]

Whether the 2010 top 5 clubs are right or wrong (and they had to workshop their opinions together to arrive at a decision), I think it's reasonable to say they've left the SANFl open to looking a bit precious.

The comp invited the top 3 sides. Central, Norwood & Eagles. They're the ones who should have the say whether they go or not.

If they don't go forfeit a place, and have NO teams.

The other 6 sides were basically offered slops, and we know the ones that took 'em....

[Wedgie]

I could just imagine North and Port having the conversation, "gee if we were smart like Glenelg and the Eagles we'd have 6 premierships between us instead of 50 and only have supporters that rock up when were winning and be experts at choking in the finals, let's do it"

I've read some crap on this site but he inference that clubs that make the finals in one specific year (or 2 or 3) are "smarter" than others takes the cake easily.

[sjt]

I could just imagine North and Port having the conversation, "gee if we were smart like Glenelg and the Eagles we'd have 6 premierships between us instead of 50 and only have supporters that rock up when were winning and be experts at choking in he finals, let's do it"

I think they'd be more inclined to be looking forward than looking back.

[Wedgie]

I could just imagine North and Port having the conversation, "gee if we were smart like Glenelg and the Eagles we'd have 6 premierships between us instead of 50 and only have supporters that rock up when were winning and be experts at choking in he finals, let's do it"

I think they'd be more inclined to be looking forward than looking back.

Exactly, if they were more prone to looking forward than back they have approximately 50 flags to show for it, not just a couple of handful or two.