SAAFL Div 2 & Div 2R (2011)

[Bulls forever]

This rumour comes around every few years that we dont want to go up. When we were in Div 3 it was rumoured that we didnt want to go up to Div 2, but then we went and won the flag and got promoted. Now we apparently dont want to go up to Div 1. It's all cr@p. If a club doesnt want to go up divisions then it's telling the world that it doesnt want to win A grade flags, and that's what footy is about - winning flags.

We had a good year and fell during the finals, happened last year to Uni and this year they've missed the boat again to go back up to Div 1. We'll have another crack at getting promoted next year and put to rest all this talk about us not wanting to go up.

Well answered Suri, I think people get mixed up in clubs not wanting to go up and believing that they will not have the financials to compete in Div 1. Most of us know that to be competitive in Div 1 you player / footy spend has to be around $60k minimum. Personally I think this is ridiculous, but it is what the market generates. OK I will qualify that I have no idea of Uni or SHOC spend, ideals, etc, but fair to say that the other clubs are spending at least that and some probably more. So some clubs go up, try and be competitive, remain financially viable and probably come back down again. But the ideals are about the club and the longevity of it, irrespective of what Division it is in.

I think if you are spending 60k on players than the club is attracting the wrong players to the club. No player theoretically is worth over $300 a game, and if they want more let them go and play country footy. I think district clubs that promote their juniors are the clubs that are successful and who recruit younger players and not washed up hacks from the sanfl who want $600 a game cause that is what a HFL or BL&G club has offered them. Let them go there cause you will get more from a 19yr old junior on most occassions then a 30 yr old that has been at 10 different clubs on big $. IMO of course!

WU, I am not arguing with what you say, but I can quote the TTG example of the junior issue. Probably now the most dominant club in NEMJFA, which is far and away the biggest junior league in this state, yet we see what happens when the dollar talks and they lose players. I don't agree with this, but unfortunately it is the way of the world. Further example is Gaza, juniors almost non existent in top ranks of NEMJFA, but they obviously have money to spend and look where they are. I would love your philosphy to be adopted but unfortunately money talks, some players chase it.

[Bulls forever]

(quote) I think if you are spending 60k on players than the club is attracting the wrong players to the club. No player theoretically is worth over $300 a game, and if they want more let them go and play country footy. I think district clubs that promote their juniors are the clubs that are successful and who recruit younger players and not washed up hacks from the sanfl who want $600 a game cause that is what a HFL or BL&G club has offered them. Let them go there cause you will get more from a 19yr old junior on most occassions then a 30 yr old that has been at 10 different clubs on big $. IMO of course! (quote)

Well said White Unicorn! IMO the key to a club being successful at any level is good depth. Most of the real successful clubs in the amatuer league have good junior systems and have an u/18's team. This gives a developing kid a real feeling of belonging to a club if he has played there in his juniors therefore making him want to stay.
You don't have to look too much further than Div 2 for a classic example of clubs with good depth being successful.
Top 5 this year in Div2 and 2R were the same clubs. ROCS, Walkies, SPOC, Uni and Iggies.
Clubs that pay a handful of players big coin to try and win a flag fall just as quickly back down as they go up. Classic example being North Haven a few years back, Salisbury West a few years back, and even Greenacres last year. If you are missing a key ingredient like a full forward or CHF yeah for sure, maybe pay a player who will dominate there, but pay him on performance or incentives at the club. That way the player doesn't simply rock up to pick up his pay cheque and piss off the following year when the club decides he isn't worth that money. The sooner clubs realise that paying big money to attract players is not the way to build a club into a successful one but rather promoting juniors and looking after the loyal club players, the sooner they will start to climb the divisions.

FF, you might think I am not agreeing with you, in a perfect world I agree with what you say and how the system would work, but unfortunately in this money driven society it is definately not the case. You quote the top 5 Div 2. One could argue the colleges do not have a junior system or you could argue the other way. I think you would probably win that one. But Walkerville have not had a U16 team for 10 years, let alone a U18 team and Uni, despite the fact they are trying to start up junior teams next year, have absolutely no junior system.

[Bulls forever]

Err 150th? Is that serious

established in what 1861? If maths are correct: cbf checking

but anyway was football even existant in melbourne at this stage.
Was the sanfl even goin then. Like to see proof of ttg & modbury teams in these days. Obviously the remote towns in these days would hav played lots of sports against each other but hmmm bit odd to me. 120th i could believe but 150 dunno dunno

i don't think it would be far off that number.
i have heard that modbury and ttg are 2 of the oldest clubs in south australia, and that one of the first games of footy played in SA was between these 2 sides.
footy smart may have to follow this up and let us know the specifics.

BOP, well done, 1862, first two clubs in SA. Unusually TTG celebrated something about 150 this year and Modbury think that next year is the biggie. Someone explained it to me and it sort of made sense, but you can be sure the two clubs will publicise the big events for next season.

If 1862 is year 1, then year 150 is 2011, not 2012.
1862 and 2012 are 150 years appart, but it's 151 season as both 1862 and 2012 are included.

IMO, TTG has it right.

Not quite old enough to let you know what happened in 62 (18), but I am pretty sure they both will celebrate something pretty big next year with the two games they play.

[teaoby]

there is no way known that either rocs or saints pay anywhere near the 60k you speak of.

ROCS would have 3-4 blokes getting money (and not much at that)
saints would have maybe 6-7 blokes, with only 1-2 of those getting anything worth writing home about.

will be interesting if the 2 of them can attract back guys like copping (spoc) and giles (rocs) plus heaps of others that are either old scholars or close enough too. because imo in their current state they would both be straight back down next year. saints a certain anyway ROCS may go ok.

[old moz]

would have to agree with you teaoby. saints will have to do a lot of work to compete in D1, only based on watching 2 games admittedly but enough to get an idea.

[lutz]

would have to agree with you teaoby. saints will have to do a lot of work to compete in D1, only based on watching 2 games admittedly but enough to get an idea.

Fair to say that this is said about every side going from D2 to D1

[Cash 123]

(quote) I think if you are spending 60k on players than the club is attracting the wrong players to the club. No player theoretically is worth over $300 a game, and if they want more let them go and play country footy. I think district clubs that promote their juniors are the clubs that are successful and who recruit younger players and not washed up hacks from the sanfl who want $600 a game cause that is what a HFL or BL&G club has offered them. Let them go there cause you will get more from a 19yr old junior on most occassions then a 30 yr old that has been at 10 different clubs on big $. IMO of course! (quote)

Well said White Unicorn! IMO the key to a club being successful at any level is good depth. Most of the real successful clubs in the amatuer league have good junior systems and have an u/18's team. This gives a developing kid a real feeling of belonging to a club if he has played there in his juniors therefore making him want to stay.
You don't have to look too much further than Div 2 for a classic example of clubs with good depth being successful.
Top 5 this year in Div2 and 2R were the same clubs. ROCS, Walkies, SPOC, Uni and Iggies.
Clubs that pay a handful of players big coin to try and win a flag fall just as quickly back down as they go up. Classic example being North Haven a few years back, Salisbury West a few years back, and even Greenacres last year. If you are missing a key ingredient like a full forward or CHF yeah for sure, maybe pay a player who will dominate there, but pay him on performance or incentives at the club. That way the player doesn't simply rock up to pick up his pay cheque and piss off the following year when the club decides he isn't worth that money. The sooner clubs realise that paying big money to attract players is not the way to build a club into a successful one but rather promoting juniors and looking after the loyal club players, the sooner they will start to climb the divisions.

Hasn't seemed to work for PDFC...who have (considered by many), a strong junior programme, and have played in 3 consecutive U18's grand finals. The strong juniors/U18's hasn't translated into senior depth or success. A lot of ex-Districts juniors can be found at rival clubs.

I rekon you would agree with me Lutz in saying that U18 form cant be taken into account for A grade selection at Div 1 & 2

[Footy Follower]

(quote) I think if you are spending 60k on players than the club is attracting the wrong players to the club. No player theoretically is worth over $300 a game, and if they want more let them go and play country footy. I think district clubs that promote their juniors are the clubs that are successful and who recruit younger players and not washed up hacks from the sanfl who want $600 a game cause that is what a HFL or BL&G club has offered them. Let them go there cause you will get more from a 19yr old junior on most occassions then a 30 yr old that has been at 10 different clubs on big $. IMO of course! (quote)

Well said White Unicorn! IMO the key to a club being successful at any level is good depth. Most of the real successful clubs in the amatuer league have good junior systems and have an u/18's team. This gives a developing kid a real feeling of belonging to a club if he has played there in his juniors therefore making him want to stay.
You don't have to look too much further than Div 2 for a classic example of clubs with good depth being successful.
Top 5 this year in Div2 and 2R were the same clubs. ROCS, Walkies, SPOC, Uni and Iggies.
Clubs that pay a handful of players big coin to try and win a flag fall just as quickly back down as they go up. Classic example being North Haven a few years back, Salisbury West a few years back, and even Greenacres last year. If you are missing a key ingredient like a full forward or CHF yeah for sure, maybe pay a player who will dominate there, but pay him on performance or incentives at the club. That way the player doesn't simply rock up to pick up his pay cheque and piss off the following year when the club decides he isn't worth that money. The sooner clubs realise that paying big money to attract players is not the way to build a club into a successful one but rather promoting juniors and looking after the loyal club players, the sooner they will start to climb the divisions.

Hasn't seemed to work for PDFC...who have (considered by many), a strong junior programme, and have played in 3 consecutive U18's grand finals. The strong juniors/U18's hasn't translated into senior depth or success. A lot of ex-Districts juniors can be found at rival clubs.

I rekon you would agree with me Lutz in saying that U18 form cant be taken into account for A grade selection at Div 1 & 2[/quote

I think you have misunderstood me a little. I am not saying that all under 18 players would walk up and play A grade footy at div 1 or div 2 level. Obviously if they were good enough to do that then they would most likely be playing at a league club. However, those who aren't at league clubs and are still wanting to play footy at a reasonable level are more likely to stay at a club they played their juniors or under 18's at. So no matter how good they are you will have more players playing at that particular club meaning all of a sudden your b and c grade sides become stronger and pressure on spots becomes a factor which only benefits a club which also pushes the "fringe players" to lift their games and strive to get into the A's or B's. A ripple effect happens and the club then has good depth.

[FOURTH ESTATE]

Have seen many an U/18 who could not make D1 & D2 wander down to play A grade at D5 - D7 and pick up a little coin along the way.

[lutz]

I rekon you would agree with me Lutz in saying that U18 form cant be taken into account for A grade selection at Div 1 & 2

I think you have misunderstood me a little. I am not saying that all under 18 players would walk up and play A grade footy at div 1 or div 2 level. Obviously if they were good enough to do that then they would most likely be playing at a league club. However, those who aren't at league clubs and are still wanting to play footy at a reasonable level are more likely to stay at a club they played their juniors or under 18's at. So no matter how good they are you will have more players playing at that particular club meaning all of a sudden your b and c grade sides become stronger and pressure on spots becomes a factor which only benefits a club which also pushes the "fringe players" to lift their games and strive to get into the A's or B's. A ripple effect happens and the club then has good depth.

Have seen many an U/18 who could not make D1 & D2 wander down to play A grade at D5 - D7 and pick up a little coin along the way.

Yea spot on Cash, I think this has occurred far too much the last couple of seasons, where U18's have played A grade footy at Districts after showing some form in U18's comp, which has been no great standard to the last couple of years.
Well said Footy Follower, it is all about keeping the U18's players playing, and at the club to increase depth, and pressure for spots; however this is difficult, with many just making up the numbers at U18 level and quitting all together when they are forced to play senior footy. This is a problem at all clubs.

[NO-MERCY]

Ricky Pearce wasn't afraid of playing the young ones in his time at Districts, unfortunately it cost him his job as Districts want to see junior development but expected to win every game in the process, that just doesn't happen especially when a heap of your experienced players leave the club, they were the ones Ricky needed to stay & help with the development of these kids but they got $money$ hungary and the club has struggled since.

No pain no gain.

[teaoby]

Ricky Pearce wasn't afraid of playing the young ones in his time at Districts, unfortunately it cost him his job as Districts want to see junior development but expected to win every game in the process, that just doesn't happen especially when a heap of your experienced players leave the club, they were the ones Ricky needed to stay & help with the development of these kids but they got $money$ hungary and the club has struggled since.

No pain no gain.

the horse is dead. time too stop flogging it

Pt Districts are terrible people we get it

[LMA]

Ricky Pearce wasn't afraid of playing the young ones in his time at Districts, unfortunately it cost him his job as Districts want to see junior development but expected to win every game in the process, that just doesn't happen especially when a heap of your experienced players leave the club, they were the ones Ricky needed to stay & help with the development of these kids but they got $money$ hungary and the club has struggled since.

No pain no gain.

Your bitterness and disdain for a club that you have never been involved with is embarrassing. Some of the same players you mention to help out the young ones were also told by coach that they weren't guaranteed to play A grade, hence the departure, you can't have your cake and eat it too. FTR i didn't like what happened to Pearcy as he's a good bloke, but move on was a season and a half ago. Also by the way Districts have played more U/18 eligible players this year than probably the last 3 years combined

[wobat head]

Looking forward to next year with Port Disticts and Portland -think I am over it already

[S Demon]

Div 2 Medal
Tim Davey (Modbury) 20 votes
Matthew Dawes 15 votes
Matthew Ashley 14 votes

[S Demon]

Great speech by Davey too, I reckon he's had a good night!!

[Footy Chick]

Great speech by Davey too, I reckon he's had a good night!!

I;d be having a good night too if I won back to back medals!

[Footy Smart]

Great speech by Davey too, I reckon he's had a good night!!

I;d be having a good night too if I won back to back medals!

No doubt he was enjoying himself and rightly so.... Great Club man is Diesel by far the best all round sportsman in the North East A very deserved winner!

[bondy]

Great speech by Davey too, I reckon he's had a good night!!

I;d be having a good night too if I won back to back medals!

No doubt he was enjoying himself and rightly so.... Great Club man is Diesel by far the best all round sportsman in the North East A very deserved winner!

Gun Player!!!! Even better bloke!!!! Well done Diesel!!!

No stopping the candyman...

[teaoby]

word around is that none of the saints blokes attended the dinner last night because a heap of players have the flu! that along with a big game in hot conditions last week could give ROCS an even bigger edge.