SA Footy

He's at it again, complete with online voting for one of his pet projects.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/oval-move-wont-stop-sa-sides-falling-behind/story-e6frecj3-1226053594674

Oh, and the usual stuff to funnel more money to the 2 AFL sides (implications: less money for the license holder, and the SANFL clubs).

It's pretty easy, if they think there's a correlation between footy department spend and performance, just cap footy department spend!! They have a salary cap and a draft, to even things up surely it's logical. leave our comp alone. it doesn't exist to "better" the AFL, or for the benefit of the Crows and Power.
I wonder how much has to do with spend versus the cycle of draft picks.
The article might have more cred. if he listed each clubs footy dept. spend and their ladder position over the last 15 years.

If the WA AFL sides get their way with reserves teams in the WAFL it's going to make it very hard for the SANFL to fight the SA AFL clubs off. (Someone suggested putting the SA AFL teams' reserves teams in the SANFL Reserves comp which would be a more palatable option for me.)
But the mention of the football department money spent on the Reserves teams in Melbourne seems to contradict the line coming from clubs like Collingwood who say it costs them $300,000 to field that team.

sjt wrote:It's pretty easy, if they think there's a correlation between footy department spend and performance, just cap footy department spend!! They have a salary cap and a draft, to even things up surely it's logical. leave our comp alone. it doesn't exist to "better" the AFL, or for the benefit of the Crows and Power.
I wonder how much has to do with spend versus the cycle of draft picks.
The article might have more cred. if he listed each clubs footy dept. spend and their ladder position over the last 15 years.

That would defeat the purpose of the article. Western Bulldogs would be down the bottom of spend, yet near the top in performance in the same time. West Coast would be reverse. Adelaide and Port have both drafted and traded below average in the last 5 years also.

They're two seperate debates that should be delineated. What's the impact of a reserves team and performance. And what's the impact of spending a ridiculous amount on coaches and football depts. and performance.
I could argue freo have as many wins as Essendon and don't have a reserves team. They're ahead of Melbourne, Sydney, richmond Western Bulldogs, St Kilda, North Melbourne and brisbane that all to my knowledge have a reserves team. Brisbane have one, and they're bottom. Are reserves teams detrimental to a sides performance? Stupid argument. Port and the Crows have been consistent finals competitors without reserves. How many Victorian based sides have underperformed despite having a reserves side. There's no value in it.
The debate on footy dept spend is different. But, I understand Rucci trying to tie them together to push his agenda.

This is why I cancelled my paper subscription.

Rubbish.

I just wanna see the Power Reserves play Port Magpies...

One team....Bring it on....

SJABC wrote:I just wanna see the Power Reserves play Port Magpies...

One team....Bring it on....

If this were to happen Rucci wouldn't have achieved his objective.

SJABC wrote:I just wanna see the Power Reserves play Port Magpies...

One team....Bring it on....

That would likely be one of their attempted selling points to get in ... Power and Magpies become 1, Crows come in, by by bye.

Well, get on to his poxy little poll and vote NO.....there doesn't seem to be a limit on how many times you can vote.....just unfortunate there isn't a GAGF option......

SJABC wrote:I just wanna see the Power Reserves play Port Magpies...

One team....Bring it on....

It would be interesting to see how this could work for the supposed one port adelaide.

Means they would have 4 senior teams and 2 junior teams..Financial disaster i'm tipping.

and on game day when they faced each other it would be like Australia v australia A.

Lose lose i would think not win win.

I for one will never - NEVER - attend a SANFL game featuring an AFL reserves side.

They want reserves? Fine. Just don't play 'em in the SANFL.

tigerpie wrote:

SJABC wrote:I just wanna see the Power Reserves play Port Magpies...

One team....Bring it on....

It would be interesting to see how this could work for the supposed one port adelaide.

Means they would have 4 senior teams and 2 junior teams..Financial disaster i'm tipping.

and on game day when they faced each other it would be like Australia v australia A.

Lose lose i would think not win win.

And they could have infighting on who would get the game day revenue......

Excuses, excuses.

The more you hear from Trigg and co the more you understand why the Crows have been middle of the road for so long. They think they've done remarkably well to consistently make finals without having high draft picks. Now the football dept spend is being used as an excuse.

Port have done pretty well in the last decade - at least up until the last couple of years, but made a big mistake in extending Williams' contract and are now paying for it.

It's more the decisions that have been made in the recent past by the people in charge and the natural cycle of the draft/salary cap that have the two SA AFL clubs struggling at the moment as opposed to lack of money to spend on football dept or not having a reserves side IMO.

Both the Crows and Port need to harden up as a whole club instead of constantly making excuses.

Get in there and vote on the Article. Currently the Yes camp are in front (16 to 9)

The Crows spent $20million on their training facility so presumably they decided to spend that money that way rather than more directly on their football department. i.e it was a matter of choice, not a lack of resources.

Mr Irate wrote:Well, get on to his poxy little poll and vote NO.....there doesn't seem to be a limit on how many times you can vote.....just unfortunate there isn't a GAGF option......

And add a comment as well. I could only vote once.

Aerie wrote:Port have done pretty well this decade

Debatable since this decade only just started.

Just part of the unrelenting Rucci agenda. Nothing will satisfy him short of complete removal of the AFL licences from the SANFL.
Never mind the two AFL clubs are going through a trough experienced by most clubs. Welcome to the real world, work through it and work on your revenue streams. Everyone else has had to.

Wedgie wrote:

Aerie wrote:Port have done pretty well this decade

Debatable since this decade only just started.

Oops! I was living in 2009 for a while there... My mistake!