North wins SANFL Club of the Year (again!)

[BPBRB]

From the NAFC website:

North Adelaide Football Club was announced as the winner of the prestigious award at the SANFL Annual General Meeting Presentation Dinner last night at AAMI Stadium. This completes back to back victories as the Club tied with Central Districts in 2005.

Scoring 97 from a possible 126 points the Club was awarded the maximum in the following categories - Drafted Players (Incl Rookies), State Representation, Discipline (Reported players) and the Stanley.H.Lewis Trophy. The other assessed categories were Club Business Plan, Consolidated Profit, Salary Cap compliance, Club Membership, Home and Minor Round Attendance, League Premiership Ladder - all key performance indicators of a successful Club.

Here are the links to the SANFL Press Release and score table for all clubs.

http://www.nafc.com.au/common/uploaded_ ... 20Year.pdf

http://www.nafc.com.au/common/uploaded_ ... 202006.pdf

[ca]

You can't really argue with that, it probably all looks about right. You would expect the bottom four clubs to improve a bit in 2007.

[rod_rooster]

Just need to win the one prize that really counts now.

[topsywaldron]

Well done to Norwood for producing the most homegrown SANFL players, a clear stamp of approval for our junior programs.

[HeartBeatsTrue]

Central and West no business plan??
West salary cap breach?

Also notice that heavy recruiting doesnt get you premierships, with Central and Eagles 2nd and 3rd repectively in local players used.

[smac]

At least we get a clue as to Centrals membership numbers - somewhere between Port and North.

No business plan seems strange. I can't see how they can do everything they do out there unplanned.

Well done Norf.

[SimonH]

(As I posted on the 'Legs site:)

It's generally a good idea, and congrats to North for winning.

So many of the measures (attendances x2, premiership placing, Stanley H Lewis, state representation) are so closely linked with on-field success that it would be practically impossible for a team finishing 7th to win it. That's not a complaint-- clubs exist to field successful footy teams, after all-- just a statement that it's fairly inevitable that the winner will be a final 5 side who won a few more than they lost.

Some measures are a little crude to my mind. It seems that clubs get allocated 4 points each for just having a business plan, whereas they should really be ranked according to how well they've performed in compliance with that plan. There should also be a more sophisticated measure of financial performance than just giving everyone who made a profit 6 points, no matter whether it's $1 or a million bucks.

'SANFL debuting players' is a bit of a counterintuitive one-- struggling teams are more likely to give their under-agers a senior game, but they shouldn't get points just for giving unready kids a run or two in a team that's getting flogged, if the kids' playing career ultimately goes nowhere. I understand that they want to promote SANFL teams blooding their juniors rather than buying talent, but it would be better to give points on the number of locally-bred players who reach a career total of 10 (or 20) senior games during the year.

PS We all know why South got no points under the 'salary cap' heading. But West...?

[Blue Boy]

Well done to the cocks once again.

I rekon its great that the SANFL are rewarding clubs not only for on-field success and off-field success. But I would probably scrap the State and drafted player points though.

[redandblack]

(As I posted on the 'Legs site:)

It's generally a good idea, and congrats to North for winning.

So many of the measures (attendances x2, premiership placing, Stanley H Lewis, state representation) are so closely linked with on-field success that it would be practically impossible for a team finishing 7th to win it. That's not a complaint-- clubs exist to field successful footy teams, after all-- just a statement that it's fairly inevitable that the winner will be a final 5 side who won a few more than they lost.

Some measures are a little crude to my mind. It seems that clubs get allocated 4 points each for just having a business plan, whereas they should really be ranked according to how well they've performed in compliance with that plan. There should also be a more sophisticated measure of financial performance than just giving everyone who made a profit 6 points, no matter whether it's $1 or a million bucks.

'SANFL debuting players' is a bit of a counterintuitive one-- struggling teams are more likely to give their under-agers a senior game, but they shouldn't get points just for giving unready kids a run or two in a team that's getting flogged, if the kids' playing career ultimately goes nowhere. I understand that they want to promote SANFL teams blooding their juniors rather than buying talent, but it would be better to give points on the number of locally-bred players who reach a career total of 10 (or 20) senior games during the year.

PS We all know why South got no points under the 'salary cap' heading. But West...?

I agree. What makes it worse is that the Lewis trophy is weighted hopelessly in favour of the top finishing league teams, who then get a double-up for it as well.

A Club that has success at junior level is barely recognised for it. My Club finished bottom and probably deserved to, so this is just a general observation.

The point remains, though, that whoever works these points systems out for the League should start again and use a bit of logic. Perhaps that's too much to ask.

Regardless of that, congratulations to North, who deserved to win under any system.

[Leaping Lindner]

Great news. I look forward to reading Rucci's article on it tomorrow. Seeing as he seems to have recently discovered the North Web Site.

[rod_rooster]

Great news. I look forward to reading Rucci's article on it tomorrow. Seeing as he seems to have recently discovered the North Web Site.

Lol

[Adelaide Hawk]

I look forward to reading Rucci's article

Words you never see very often

[Aerie]

Are West Adelaide salary cap cheats as well?

[giffo]

Obviously Central have no business plans. They just decided to put up the lights one night after a couple of jugs and see what happens.

[redden whites]

Obviously Central have no business plans. They just decided to put up the lights one night after a couple of jugs and see what happens.

Giffo ,maybe if they had a better plan mate they could have put lights that actually light up the ground so the supporters can see( better than Norwood thgough I will admit,they are a disgrace)

[johntheclaret]

Obviously Central have no business plans. They just decided to put up the lights one night after a couple of jugs and see what happens.

What happened was they were taught a footy lesson by Norf.

[rod_rooster]

Obviously Central have no business plans. They just decided to put up the lights one night after a couple of jugs and see what happens.

What happened was they were taught a footy lesson by Norf.

jtc, North supporters have no place telling Central supporters that we gave them a football lesson at any stage in the last 15 years. We just managed to hang onto what should have been a more than comfortable lead in the last game at Elizabeth then a few weeks later when it really counted it was us who received a football lesson.