SANFL needs to change...

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Booney » Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:30 pm

Is this all to happen just because we are a little low on funds? :shock:
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 61806
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8229 times
Been liked: 11959 times

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby LPH » Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:43 pm

No...

Just thinking about footy in this state, 20 - 30 years from now.

The problem doesn't appear to be going away.

We need 8 teams in local league.
The 2nd AFL Club is on it's knees - their solution is 700 million + on an upgrade of Adelaide Oval & to move there.
Not sure that's what SA FOOTY needs.

Why has there been no PUBLIC debate on the problems with footy in this state?
Stephen Trigg & Rob Chapman are SA Football Patriots
User avatar
LPH
League - Best 21
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 10:45 am
Location: Craven Cottage
Has liked: 541 times
Been liked: 326 times
Grassroots Team: Kenilworth

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby JK » Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:47 pm

LEH wrote:No...

Just thinking about footy in this state, 20 - 30 years from now.

The problem doesn't appear to be going away.

We need 8 teams in local league.
The 2nd AFL Club is on it's knees - their solution is 700 million + on an upgrade of Adelaide Oval & to move there.
Not sure that's what SA FOOTY needs.

Why has there been no PUBLIC debate on the problems with footy in this state?


Whilst it's still to be seen, if Adelaide Oval does indeed create greater revenue and accessibility for supporters, then that could be an answer to the current problem (ie, of adding $ to the Power and Crows, which in turn creates a bigger dividend to the Magpies and other SANFL clubs) right there .. So I think we need to wait until we're in that situation.

As for having a 9 team competition, some see it as an issue and some don't, so Im not sure that it's a problem overall for footy in the state.
FUSC
User avatar
JK
Coach
 
 
Posts: 37460
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Coopers Hill
Has liked: 4485 times
Been liked: 3024 times
Grassroots Team: SMOSH West Lakes

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Booney » Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:47 pm

Because as sad as the fact may be the PUBLIC has no say in the matter.
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 61806
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8229 times
Been liked: 11959 times

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Sojourner » Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:13 pm

One way that the SANFL could retain the N in their name and get rid of the bye in the competition could be to invite Port Melbourne to participate in the SANFL.
Steamranger, South Australia's best ever Tourist Attraction, Treat Yourself, Let your Money Buy you Happiness!!!
User avatar
Sojourner
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 3 times
Grassroots Team: Ovingham

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Wedgie » Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:31 pm

Sojourner wrote:One way that the SANFL could retain the N in their name and get rid of the bye in the competition could be to invite Port Melbourne to participate in the SANFL.

Not required, the "N" represents the word National as Australian Rules Football is the national football of Australia. Its not saying the competition is a national one, its saying the sport is our national football which is correct.
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
User avatar
Wedgie
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 51721
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:00 am
Has liked: 2153 times
Been liked: 4093 times
Grassroots Team: Noarlunga

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Barto » Fri Aug 13, 2010 6:34 pm

Wedgie wrote:
Sojourner wrote:One way that the SANFL could retain the N in their name and get rid of the bye in the competition could be to invite Port Melbourne to participate in the SANFL.

Not required, the "N" represents the word National as Australian Rules Football is the national football of Australia. Its not saying the competition is a national one, its saying the sport is our national football which is correct.


I stopped bothering to correct people on that one. Just assume they're trolls these days.
It's all the SANFL's fault.
User avatar
Barto
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Fremantle
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 6 times

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Barto » Fri Aug 13, 2010 6:37 pm

So anyway, lets carve up the metro zone into 4 areas and have a club represent each area, north, south, east and west. Re-name the comp AFLSA and be done with it all.

The only down side is, Port Adelaide will scream that it's just a ploy to destroy them.
It's all the SANFL's fault.
User avatar
Barto
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Fremantle
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 6 times

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby LBJ8 » Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:38 pm

LEH wrote:Suggestions;

1. End the SANFL @ the end of the 2010 Season - removing 'National' from the title, Sth. Aust. Football League
(afterall, a name change has been done before) - all records (Premierships, Medals, etc. stand upto 2010)
- PAFC & PAMFC keep their 30+ Flags & 140 years of tradition

Don't mind the idea of changing the name and definitely updating the logo/emblem of the league dunno about the rest of it.

2. Port Magpies fold (again, has been done before, 'Adelaide FC')
- 8 team SAFL competition begins in 2011; with Final 4, 21 Rounds (each club plays each other 3 times)
- Leaving the AFL team as the sole PAFC

I think this is in the best interest of the Power imho, not sure it's a great result for our league as they have the largest amount of supporters but an eight team comp is a must, as you say play each other three times a year one home one away one neutral, double header at Adelaide oval or as a curtain raiser.

3. SAFL competiton concludes BEFORE the AFL (afterall the AFL GF is the showcase game of Australian Rules, nationally)

No thanks i think there is more to be gained from playing it after the AFL GF then the week before.

4. Remove 'West Torrens' from WWTFC - to become the "Woodville FC"... WTFC & WWTFC go the same way as PAMFC, consigned to history of SANFL

Totally agree seems stupid to be still called WWTFC

5. Removing the 'Thomas Seymor Hill Trophy' & having a new one - again, confined to the history of SANFL

Not an issue but i see where you're coming from

6. A new Medal - for fairest & most brilliant, again Magarey confined to the history books of SANFL
- dare I say it, The Russell Ebert Medal or the like?

As above

What do you think?
GO THE BAYS
LBJ8
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 7:00 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Aerie » Fri Aug 13, 2010 10:39 pm

Personally I'd remove the "t" and a "l" to rename it foobal and I'd like to see the corners rounded slightly on the centre square.
User avatar
Aerie
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5750
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:05 am
Has liked: 186 times
Been liked: 590 times

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Sojourner » Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:11 am

am Bays wrote:
Sojourner wrote:To remain relevant the SANFL needs to expand the number of teams in it or relocate existing sides so that all suburban areas are represented. Interest in the SANFL will continue to diminish as whole suburban areas are set up such as Mt Barker that have no local representation in the SANFL, those growing areas are where the bulk of young families are, whose children are the potential Footballers in the not to distant future. If the SANFL are hell bent on retaining the SANFL footprint of the 1960's with the exception of South, its very likely to fall over.


Given that the Advertiser Survey has seen a rise in the "strong interest in SANFL" for the past two suverys (33% increase) and a comensurate decrease in the "no interest in the SANFL I am not sure how people can say that is happening - unless maybe they are South supporters.

Seriously with the club metro and country zone boundaries covering all the growth suburban areas it is up to the clubs to make sure with their resources from the SANFL they "Capture the market" Personally i don't see the need to relocate teams.

Given suburbs like Golden Grove and Blakeview which didn't exist in the 60s are now captured by the SANFL metro footprint I reckon the SANFL has done very well incapturing the growth areas of metroplitan Adelaide.

I mean FFS a 20 min drive from 'Dingy (country zone) to Noarlunga (SANFL club base) - how hard is that??


Attendance at Prospect on Saturday - 1,122 there, the record re-set for a second time for the lowest crowd ever at Prospect, I would suggest that this is an example of interest that is diminishing in the SANFL considering also the population increase in SA since the start of the Crows. Mainitaining the Status Quo and resisting change will only see more games getting crowds like this. Doing something different like putting lights up at Richmond clearly has the opposite effect. Clubs need to step up to the plate and be prepared to change if they plan to be around for the longer term, North are in a situation where they can wear low attendances due to good cash flow from Poker machines, yet not too many other sides enjoy the same luck!
Steamranger, South Australia's best ever Tourist Attraction, Treat Yourself, Let your Money Buy you Happiness!!!
User avatar
Sojourner
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 3 times
Grassroots Team: Ovingham

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby doggies4eva » Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:31 am

OK - an idea out of left feild that you can all shoot down because you want to be able to walk down the end of your street and watch your loacl team slowly disappear.

We go to an 18 team comp - merge with WA. 8)

There would be 3 groups each with 3 SA teams and 3 WA. Each group plays everyone twice - thats 10 matches.

Each team also plays all the other teams in their own state twice - thats another 12 rounds. A total of 22 rounds.

Very fair as avaryone plays everyone in their own state twice plus a home and away with a WA team.

This means 3 interstate games a year per club plus 3 hosted WA games.

The new league would then be able to claim to be theb 2nd tier to AFL and probably get better media and sponsorship attention which would cover the extra costs.

Dunno how the finals would work - maybe 8 teams - the top 2 from each group plus 2?

Anyway you can start rubbishing me now :roll:
We used to be good :-(
User avatar
doggies4eva
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:23 pm
Location: In front of a computer screen
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby ca » Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:22 pm

PhilH wrote:Finally for mine the move of the SANFL GF to before the AFL GF would be a MAJOR step back.

Competiting with AFL prelim finals (especial if Crows or Power get in) would see a massive drop in media coverage and interest in the game.

That week is the one time the SANFL gets some oxygen away from AFL saturation coverage, there is no advantage to the SANFL in going two weeks earlier.


I agree, I think it's great we finish a week later. The focus really grows on the SANFL during that week.
User avatar
ca
Reserves
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:00 am
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 2 times

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby gossipgirl » Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:36 pm

sounds like a good idea but just wonder about the costs involved in the travelling side
Adelaide Crows World champions 2017 - Crows 4.11 to Lions 4.5
gossipgirl
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: Looking for all the Boats
Has liked: 1541 times
Been liked: 57 times
Grassroots Team: Boston

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby doggies4eva » Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:43 pm

gossipgirl wrote:sounds like a good idea but just wonder about the costs involved in the travelling side


Better media cover would mean more sponsorship.

If the NT can cover the travel costs for every second game to Qld then the SANFL clubs can finance 3 trips away a year.
We used to be good :-(
User avatar
doggies4eva
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:23 pm
Location: In front of a computer screen
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Bluedemon » Mon Aug 16, 2010 2:40 pm

LEH you must be smoking that bad stuff again.
SAFooty.net, where you hear the community football news first
User avatar
Bluedemon
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4968
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Goodwood
Has liked: 136 times
Been liked: 106 times

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby devilsadvocate » Mon Aug 16, 2010 2:47 pm

Royal City wrote:
Pseudo wrote:
PhilH wrote:In essence the Magpies want a further advance of SANFL income due. If I was them I would start selling 2011 Memberships now... firstly it's a symbolic statement thet "we will be here next year"... and if the club needs an advance why not get it from the people who have the most to lose from their demise ... their owners, the members.

Make the membership $60 ... if 4,000 of the 7,000+ current members sign up then that's the cash flow in ($240,000) they need to stay afloat. Now there are costs on that and other issues but it buys them the time they need.


Very well thought out post Phil, but the above two paragraphs elevate your post from simply "good" into "completely effing genius". Makes one wonder why Port didn't think of that in the first place.


Absolute quality idea Phil.

But its much easier to just ask for money, and mobilise your media cronies if you don't get what you want.


Because the Magpies directly control everything rucci writes. :roll:

Good idea Phil - I reckon John Firth will be organising something along those lines already.
User avatar
devilsadvocate
Coach
 
Posts: 6872
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:28 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 0 time

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Barto » Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:15 pm

ca wrote:
PhilH wrote:Finally for mine the move of the SANFL GF to before the AFL GF would be a MAJOR step back.

Competiting with AFL prelim finals (especial if Crows or Power get in) would see a massive drop in media coverage and interest in the game.

That week is the one time the SANFL gets some oxygen away from AFL saturation coverage, there is no advantage to the SANFL in going two weeks earlier.


I agree, I think it's great we finish a week later. The focus really grows on the SANFL during that week.


It's better to finish after the AFL, but they're talking about moving their grand final to October as well. Do we want it to finish so late in the year?
It's all the SANFL's fault.
User avatar
Barto
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Fremantle
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 6 times

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby Benchwarmer » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:34 pm

Suggestions;

1. End the SANFL @ the end of the 2010 Season - removing 'National' from the title, Sth. Aust. Football League
(afterall, a name change has been done before) - all records (Premierships, Medals, etc. stand upto 2010)
- PAFC & PAMFC keep their 30+ Flags & 140 years of tradition

The SANFL logo is iconic and easily identifiable by anyone who follows the game. Changing it to modernise it would be the wrong way to go.

2. Port Magpies fold (again, has been done before, 'Adelaide FC')
- 8 team SAFL competition begins in 2011; with Final 4, 21 Rounds (each club plays each other 3 times)
- Leaving the AFL team as the sole PAFC

Not great for SANFL but good for Power and indirectly the SANFL clubs. As previously mentioned three rounds of minor round matches with 21 matches is simple and effective and when reversed the next season is balanced with no accusations of bias able to be levelled.

3. SANFL competiton concludes BEFORE the AFL (afterall the AFL GF is the showcase game of Australian Rules, nationally)

Better after than before - a number of good reasons already mentioned. In WA, the South West FL do the same thing and they get people travelling down to Bunbury from Perth for their 'last look at footy for the year' and get very good crowds.

4. Remove 'West Torrens' from WWTFC - to become the "Woodville FC"... WTFC & WWTFC go the same way as PAMFC, consigned to history of SANFL

Everyone calls them the Eagles and not WWT in general conversation - it's like the Western Bulldogs/Footscray FC, no need to change.

5. Removing the 'Thomas Seymor Hill Trophy' & having a new one - again, confined to the history of SANFL
6. A new Medal - for fairest & most brilliant, again Magarey confined to the history books of SANFL
- dare I say it, The Russell Ebert Medal or the like?

Doesn't make sense to me unless you make a major revamp the comp to include teams from the Hills, Spencer Gulf or South East and make things new to make these areas more inclusive.
User avatar
Benchwarmer
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1044
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:03 pm
Location: Sunny Perth
Has liked: 254 times
Been liked: 16 times
Grassroots Team: Callington

Re: SANFL needs to change...

Postby am Bays » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:34 pm

Sojourner wrote:Attendance at Prospect on Saturday - 1,122 there, the record re-set for a second time for the lowest crowd ever at Prospect, I would suggest that this is an example of interest that is diminishing in the SANFL considering also the population increase in SA since the start of the Crows. Mainitaining the Status Quo and resisting change will only see more games getting crowds like this. Doing something different like putting lights up at Richmond clearly has the opposite effect. Clubs need to step up to the plate and be prepared to change if they plan to be around for the longer term, North are in a situation where they can wear low attendances due to good cash flow from Poker machines, yet not too many other sides enjoy the same luck!


Yep who was it between South and North - one a club with an historically low supporter base remember the only sub 1000 crowd pre-Crows if IIRC was at Woodville when they played South on a day when it p!ssed down like it did on Sat morning. A club that has single handedly has dimisnshed the status of our state league by allowing cars in and around the oval. Nothing says 2nd rate footy (amateurs and country) like cars around the oval, FFS.

If you've read the roost over the last few weeks some of the punters have been been advocating not attending North games for the rest of teh year, so on one one hand a crowd of 1122 between North and South - given the events of the last year (with respect to North) and the last century (with respect to South) - on a day when it p!ssed down in the morning when people were deciding whether or not to go to the footy can be considered not that bad. Not good but it could've been worse. Look at all the other crowds that day I'd say it was the weather not the standard of teh competition that affected the crowd results.

Having said that I'm all for evolution of our competition. I ahve no problems with night games but we don't need revolution like relocating clubs to growth areas - when they are already covered by clubs nor do we have to look at clubs from outside our borders.

Strengthen what we've got don't dimish or weaken it by adding to it unnessecarily.
Let that be a lesson to you Port, no one beats the Bays five times in a row in a GF and gets away with it!!!
User avatar
am Bays
Coach
 
 
Posts: 19775
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: The back bar at Lennies
Has liked: 184 times
Been liked: 2130 times

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |