?

[aussierules0k]

[Armoooo]

It is a very interesting point, I wonder if JB's plan for survival includes trying to get 11 of the other clubs together in the aim of overthrowing the current AFL board...

I would be all for it, the AFL needs to learn it's role, the AFL was created for the teams and that is the way it should be, the AFL should ensure the stability of every team and worry about it's bottom dollar alot less... yes there are many bonuses to having a very successful league such as the amount of money each club received thanks to the TV deals however the AFL is well enough established that any moron could keep it afloat and keep all 16 teams healthy and where they belong...

Teams like the kangaroos, bulldogs and us shouldn't be constantly living in fear of when the AFL is going to turn on us, they are the teams the AFL should be helping...

[Shaggy]

Adding another team is a form of inflation tax imposed on all clubs and supporters. Just like the bankers create dollars out of thin air, the AFL wants to create a new team out of thin air which devalues the existing teams. For a very long time we were 1 in 12, soon we could be 1 in 20.

16 teams is the absolute limit imho. Byes are to be avoided at all costs.

I don't agree with the logic.

Our revenue comes from our supporter base (majority Vics or former Vics) and sponsors who are looking at the Victorian market.

Introducing interstate teams makes little difference.

On the contrary I believe the current set up works against the Vic teams because we are so dilluted in terms of teams but other states are not. Despite the fairness of the draft there is resistance from 17-18 year olds moving state and in the short or long term enough want to return "home" or give enough vibes to leave them for their home state in the draft to make the system biased.

To make the system fair either the number of Vic teams is reduced which I am against or the number of interstate teams must increase. I would love to see 22 teams in the comp. SA and WA should have at least 4 teams each because we are competing currently against the odds. West Coast has only missed making the finals something like 4 times in the last 20 years . They are the Carlton of old but they are not using paper bags for their success just the system (and some substances apparently ).

Lets keep all the Vic teams, increase the number of interstate teams and play each team once the during the year.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

It is a very interesting point, I wonder if JB's plan for survival includes trying to get 11 of the other clubs together in the aim of overthrowing the current AFL board...

I would be all for it, the AFL needs to learn it's role, the AFL was created for the teams and that is the way it should be, the AFL should ensure the stability of every team and worry about it's bottom dollar alot less... yes there are many bonuses to having a very successful league such as the amount of money each club received thanks to the TV deals however the AFL is well enough established that any moron could keep it afloat and keep all 16 teams healthy and where they belong...

Teams like the kangaroos, bulldogs and us shouldn't be constantly living in fear of when the AFL is going to turn on us, they are the teams the AFL should be helping...

Business environment at the moment (well, honestly, i don't know when this is not true, but it's very true right now) is that you're either growing or you're dying. Successful companies are going through consolidation and aquisition in just about every industry. This is true for the AFL too.

If the AFL is to truly be a national competition, the teams need to be balanced across the nation. I would suggest most people involved from the moment the decision to change the V to an A have realised this.

It means it's inevitable that either a level playing field is created by saturating other markets, or this market consolidates to reflect the potential of other markets - within the competition, it's highly likely West Coast will compete for a premiership again before the Dogs or Roos, in spite of their player losses, simply because of resources and money. To be even, we either put 4 more teams in Perth (which probably fail, because the people of Perth have long since differentiated between local clubs and the AFL), or we reduce the number of teams in Melbourne to level the playing field.

The AFLs concern is not and nor should it be the continuance of all current clubs indefinately, it's having the best competition in the land - otherwise some bold entrepreneur is going to come along with a superleague idea and kill the AFL, because the other states fans don't share the view that it's important for half the best league in the land to be in Melbourne.

If Brayshaw's plan involves a revolt, I cannot see why any interstate club would join in, and that would stop him getting his 11 clubs.