AFL Reserves Discussion...

[Dutchy]

I think its the easy option for clubs to select letting the Crows in, if it doesn't work they can blame the Crows.

Sadly they don't seem to be committed to do the hard work to ensure a long and successful SANFL competition/clubs.

Embrace that we wont have any AFL influence and market the comp as clearly the 2nd best comp outside the AFL and its grassroots feel. Get closer to the feeder clubs and work hard to ensure that they see a pathway to the SANFL league team.

You might find that it will help recruiting players that want to play in a genuine competition.

You cant tell me that this competition cant stand on its own 2 feet with its current support if people are prepared to do the work.

[LPH]

From a NAFC members perspective, all I want ,at this stage, is for the board to hold a special general meeting. The board can then have the opportunity to sell this proposal to its MEMBERS !!!. You know, the people that spend their hard earnt to buy a membership and then spend another $1000 a year on merchandise and product at the game .

If this proposal is so compelling, for god sake sell it to us !!! Convince me that its a good thing. If its a dog of a proposal then the MEMBERS can let you know and THEN you can act on the wants of the members. It's commonly referred to as a democratic process.

But if they do hold that meeting, I bet the argument for voting yes will be mainly along the lines of Olsen's statement:

“The alternative to this course of action exposes the SANFL to reduced corporate interest and reduced media coverage while also threatening the relevance of the competition as the best outside of the AFL.”

It is difficult for us "average" members to argue against this as it is just an opinion and the response will be "trust us, we understand the SANFL landscape much more deeply than you do, and we are sure this will happen".

& that is the problem - they are too easily dismissing those die-hard, 'bread n butter' supporters who pump & have continued to pump money into the Clubs since the advent of the Crows. It is so disrespectful - they have pleaded with their supporters to "Become a Member", etc. & what are they doing in return?

Simply, riding rough-shot over their CORE SUPPORT - "Trust Us & Trust Honest John"

[on the rails]

Hoskin is the only other Port Adelaide junior in the Power squad and he is a rookie. Thats not a realistic way of looking at it, given the draft doesnt allow you to take whoever you want from your junior grades.

No doubt they would have loved to have picked up Lycett and Broomhead in the last couple of years, but it doesnt always work our perfectly.

If you look at the number of players from the PA country academy who have gone on to play SANFL league footy, it would be a very high percentage compared to other clubs and their country zones.

Why didn't they?

[on the rails]

For those interested - log onto the NAFC website and go to the Virtual Runner section and you will see the latest comments posted by yours truly and Ian from here. The CEO has responded and made a general statement.

It is fair to say that our club is well divided on this matter but despite what the people in charge might think or say - there are far more against it than for it.

I am with what Agile posted a couple pages back - the club should hold an info evening and if the Board are going to vote YES then tell us why and let's have our say. You never know they may "sell" their case to the majority and end some of the angst.

[Slots It Through]

Hoskin is the only other Port Adelaide junior in the Power squad and he is a rookie. Thats not a realistic way of looking at it, given the draft doesnt allow you to take whoever you want from your junior grades.

No doubt they would have loved to have picked up Lycett and Broomhead in the last couple of years, but it doesnt always work our perfectly.

If you look at the number of players from the PA country academy who have gone on to play SANFL league footy, it would be a very high percentage compared to other clubs and their country zones.

Why didn't they?

Last year they selected Ollie Wines over Broomhead, and thats hard to argue with at the moment.

The year Lycett was drafted they took Ben Jacobs instead, which in hindsight was a silly option as Jacobs was no good and then ran back to Melbourne, and is still currently no good.
I am sure when both players come out of contract the club would look to at trying to get them back to SA.

[on the rails]

Thanks SIT, that is the lottery of the draft. You have to take the best player available when your pick comes up.

So why is it then that important for the PAFC AFL Club (One Club) to have development grades? It gives them no advantage other than appeasing the Magpie diehards. Some Victorian Clubs are looking at U18's Academy sides aligned to their clubs however what is the point other than have them training in an AFL system because they all go into the draft and can be selected by anyone. It is the same process as the TAC Cup. It won't be like clubs will be able to devlop and then hide a
player so they may have a chance to draft him. It would only work if all clubs could have the same set up and were able to select each year a certain number from their Academy to go onto the main lists - rookies or full list. Cannot sse that happening in an hurry?

If the Magpies Zone was divided up between the other 8 SANFL Clubs the best players will still get identified and still introduced into a club development system and if they are good enough eventually they will be drafted by an AFL Club. Those Clubs and their recruiters don't give a hoot about where the player originates from or what colour his club jumper is / was. Also as for developing SANFL League Standard players, there is a very very small percentage of juniors at each SANFL club who go onto to actually play League Football so in some ways those development grades at SANFL Clubs don't help as much as people believe in terms of producing League players.

[stan]

I would thought that with Port using the Magpies it wouldnt be as much of a distruption as putting on the "Ravens" in the comp. Trigg is spinning some happy PR and that how much they love the SANFL clubs and dont wish to upset them. Bit of flop really because they dont give a shit. I still can't see how either teams model will not cause an issue with the integrity of the comp, the magpies will but to a lesser extent due to there current existant.

What bothers me the most is the top up players. Um sorry but where were they coming form? Basically players 18-22 that arent getting a league game. So I would assume they will take some say Reserves players 18-22 that are not currently playing league? If that is correct then basically the SANFL clubs will need additional players on there list to cover these players electing or getting "called" up to the "Ravens" or Magpies. Right so now, and I feel confident when I say this, some SANFL teams that are doing better that season, say Norwood, West and North will probably smash the living hell out of a team full of a handful of AFL listed players, some rookies and then a bunch of resi players. That should really help the comp out.

But crap we (West Coast) dont have a reserves side and neither does freo as the model in the WAFL just wouldnt work at this stage. Just my thoughts.

[stan]

Thanks SIT, that is the lottery of the draft. You have to take the best player available when your pick comes up.

So why is it then that important for the PAFC AFL Club (One Club) to have development grades? It gives them no advantage other than appeasing the Magpie diehards. Some Victorian Clubs are looking at U18's Academy sides aligned to their clubs however what is the point other than have them training in an AFL system because they all go into the draft and can be selected by anyone. It is the same process as the TAC Cup. It won't be like clubs will be able to devlop and then hide a
player so they may have a chance to draft him. It would only work if all clubs could have the same set up and were able to select each year a certain number from their Academy to go onto the main lists - rookies or full list. Cannot sse that happening in an hurry?

If the Magpies Zone was divided up between the other 8 SANFL Clubs the best players will still get identified and still introduced into a club development system and if they are good enough eventually they will be drafted by an AFL Club. Those Clubs and their recruiters don't give a hoot about where the player originates from or what colour his club jumper is / was. Also as for developing SANFL League Standard players, there is a very very small percentage of juniors at each SANFL club who go onto to actually play League Football so in some ways those development grades at SANFL Clubs don't help as much as people believe in terms of producing League players.

On the rails, in regards to the zones. Cutting it up is a bullshit half arsed option based around lazy shits. With the Magpies zones re-added in all the zoning should be re-done to be sensible. Cutting up parts of Sailsbury for example which I think is part of Ports zone should not for example be allocated to South Adelaide. Common sense lets get the SANFL to do something properly.

[on the rails]

I agree Stan, if the Magpies disolved then the zone distubitions would need to be revisited - just carving up the exisiting would obviously not work.

[FlyingHigh]

IF the Maggies were to be removed and the areas re-zoned, as far as the country zones go, trying to combine least disruption plus what might work on the EP, I reckon Centrals should get that zone, Norwood the Barossa and keep the Torrens Valley area of Div 2 Hills, Sturt take over some of Norwood's central hills such as Onkas and Lobey, and South move a bit further up into the Hills Div 2 southern area. I understand the popualtions might not work exactly like this, but is a rough guide. I reckon Centrals, with their image and recent success would be the club that would be best received on the EP. No other clubs would be affected.

[Dogwatcher]

Ep's a fertile recruiting ground but our history with the Barossa is very important to us.
I understand your thinking but wouldn't like to see that.

West, I think, is one club that always talks about struggling for junior numbers in their zones, I think they certainly would benefit from the EP.

[Aerie]

AFL
40 on Main List - National Draft
18 on Rookie List - Under 20 (i.e. first two years out of U/18 junior football), from Recruitment Zone* only, stay aligned with junior club so if not picked for Futures League.

AFL FUTURES LEAGUE
Combination of AFL Reserves from Main List and Rookie List Players. All games played Saturday AM, Sunday AM or week nights for TV content.

SANFL/VFL/WAFL/NEAFL/TFL - these State Leagues still the centre of game development, along with TAC Cup.
The only AFL aligned players would be Rookie Listed Players. Strong senior competitions played in an even and fair competition. A fall back for those who don't make a main AFL List or a possibility for those who might also consider a career outside of football, but still want to play the game at a high level.

Get rid of State Junior Carnivals. Get rid of Foxtel Cup. Get rid of current Rookie List. Put a cap on football department spending. Money better spent on funding the above.

*Recruitment Zone encourages AFL clubs to also be active within their zone to help out State League teams with game development. Encourages cooperation between AFL and State Leagues.
Crows - Glenelg, Norwood, Sturt, South
Power - Port Magpies*, Eagles, North, Central, West
*PAFC to decide if they can fund both AFL, AFL Futures and SANFL teams.
All other 16 AFL clubs along similar lines in their respective states. A Victorian team to have Tasmania, if they don't get their own team.

There you have it. Every bit of Australia covered. More spots in an AFL environment for those just out of Under 18's. Allow the State Leagues to prosper, with an understanding they still play a significant role in the game of Australian Rules Football.

http://www.fairplayinternational.org/fa ... foILJIQ6M4

Fair competition
To enjoy the fruits of success it is not enough to win. Triumph must be scored by absolutely fair means and by honest and just play.

Equality
Competing on equal terms is essential in sport. Otherwise performance cannot be measured properly.

Integrity
Being honest and having strong moral principles are essential to fair play. Practicing sport within a sound ethical framework is vitally important if you aim to be a true champion.

[Dogwatcher]

Aerie, is that your idea? It's a good one.

[FlyingHigh]

Ep's a fertile recruiting ground but our history with the Barossa is very important to us.
I understand your thinking but wouldn't like to see that.

West, I think, is one club that always talks about struggling for junior numbers in their zones, I think they certainly would benefit from the EP.

Yeah, there would be a lot of emotion and arguments involved no matter how it was split up. If it got to that stage, whichever club was to take over the EP, it would have to be with a great deal of care and sensitivity. Was also thinking that they are the four clubs close to Adelaide who are somewhat constrained with their zones, so this was a way of opening that up, because if you gave the EP to a West, North or Eagles, then you'd have the same issues with allocating their existing zones.

[SDK]

Port Adelaide's zones are not up for grabs they are still in the SANFL.

[FlyingHigh]

AFL
40 on Main List - National Draft
18 on Rookie List - Under 20 (i.e. first two years out of U/18 junior football), from Recruitment Zone* only, stay aligned with junior club so if not picked for Futures League.

AFL FUTURES LEAGUE
Combination of AFL Reserves from Main List and Rookie List Players. All games played Saturday AM, Sunday AM or week nights for TV content.

SANFL/VFL/WAFL/NEAFL/TFL - these State Leagues still the centre of game development, along with TAC Cup.
The only AFL aligned players would be Rookie Listed Players. Strong senior competitions played in an even and fair competition. A fall back for those who don't make a main AFL List or a possibility for those who might also consider a career outside of football, but still want to play the game at a high level.

Get rid of State Junior Carnivals. Get rid of Foxtel Cup. Get rid of current Rookie List. Put a cap on football department spending. Money better spent on funding the above.

*Recruitment Zone encourages AFL clubs to also be active within their zone to help out State League teams with game development. Encourages cooperation between AFL and State Leagues.
Crows - Glenelg, Norwood, Sturt, South
Power - Port Magpies*, Eagles, North, Central, West
*PAFC to decide if they can fund both AFL, AFL Futures and SANFL teams.
All other 16 AFL clubs along similar lines in their respective states. A Victorian team to have Tasmania, if they don't get their own team.

There you have it. Every bit of Australia covered. More spots in an AFL environment for those just out of Under 18's. Allow the State Leagues to prosper, with an understanding they still play a significant role in the game of Australian Rules Football.

http://www.fairplayinternational.org/fa ... foILJIQ6M4

Fair competition
To enjoy the fruits of success it is not enough to win. Triumph must be scored by absolutely fair means and by honest and just play.

Equality
Competing on equal terms is essential in sport. Otherwise performance cannot be measured properly.

Integrity
Being honest and having strong moral principles are essential to fair play. Practicing sport within a sound ethical framework is vitally important if you aim to be a true champion.

Great idea Aerie.
Why is it so hard for people running the game to see this?
I'd go a bit further and have each club allowed to draft two players out of it's zone each year before the draft.

[FlyingHigh]

Port Adelaide's zones are not up for grabs they are still in the SANFL.

IF??

[StrayDog]

On the rails, in regards to the zones. Cutting it up is a bullshit half arsed option based around lazy shits. With the Magpies zones re-added in all the zoning should be re-done to be sensible. Cutting up parts of Sailsbury for example which I think is part of Ports zone should not for example be allocated to South Adelaide. Common sense lets get the SANFL to do something properly.

I agree Stan, if the Magpies disolved then the zone distubitions would need to be revisited - just carving up the exisiting would obviously not work.

Yep.

All academic now (for the time being, at least) but I touched on this earlier in the thread with regards to Centrals' hypothetical gain of part of the Salisbury Council area.

In that scenario I'd suggest the balance (about 1/3rd), including Mawson Lakes (for example) would end up with North. They'd arguably see the biggest geographic changes.

[PhilH]

This weeks Part 1 of FOOT-e TIMES SA is attached.

It includes a submission from the Crows outlining where they see some benefits to the SANFL from their proposal.

[StrayDog]

It includes a submission from the Crows outlining where they see some benefits to the SANFL from their proposal.

They would.