TOPIC:

Hi, I found this article from News.com.au that you might be interested in: www.news.com.au/sport/afl/adelaide-crows...62cb778a20c6b8a4bebc

Larry Bird wrote: Without the AFL players and cash in the WAFL it's deader than a dodo. Country and Amateur football would overtake it for vibrancy and quality. I am the biggest fan of getting rid of the current alignment model, but a go it alone "quality" WAFL competition is ridiculous.

Spot on.

swan42 wrote: The one very important thing to be considered by all in this discussing is that the licences of the two WA domiciled clubs are under the auspices of the WAFC. How is this for a novel idea? Instead of the two WA domiciled AFL clubs dictating to the WAFC, the WAFC dictate to those two clubs? How about the WAFC show some intestinal fortitude and make the determination that:

(i) the host club alignment is not in the best interests of the WAFL competition, the clubs, players, members and supporters;
(ii) the option of stand-alone reserves' teams for the two WA domiciled AFL clubs is ALSO not in the best interests of the WAFL competition, the clubsm players, members and supporters;
(iii) that a direct correlation exists between the host club alignment and the drastic drop in WAFL attendaces;
(iv) the WAFL competition, the clubs, players, members and supporters will be best served by reverting back to the previous arrangement of locally drafted remain at their WAFL club when playing in the WAFL competition and a reverse draft applies to the eastern states plaers drafted to the two WA domiciled AFL clubs.

There's one small problem Swan, its called MONEY - the Eagles and Dockers generate all the profits that keep the entire thing afloat, they are both owned by the WAFC, and the eagles are the richest club in the AFL, generate huge profits and have amassed millions in their own bank accounts.

This on the back of a free ride at the WA Tax Payers expense in that they have paid NOTHING for the use of Subi Oval over the journey since the WAFC deal that bailed WA football out, no wonder they are now having a hissy fit about moving to the new Stadium it means the free rivers of gold via seats and memberships from Subi will be coming to an end..they will have to put back.

The eagles and dockers pay the piper the WAFC and indirectly each WAFL club, as a result the two franchises hold the stick when it comes to controlling the WAFC.

Grassy wrote: Wasn't the same Adam Kelly who was at East Fremantle was it?He got very upset that I gad a go at 7's Brodcast efforts(or lack thereof).He seems to gave the art of BS Down pat and doesn't take too kindly to alternate opinions,contradicting the bug bits in town.

As for that article,you can sum it up pretty simply!

Overall Attendances are falling!

Do you think they'll get any better?Not likely,unless Rucci and Co fires up the Mad Crows Fans,about a Historic Double.Then they'll fly down to ADELAIDE OVAL in their Thousands,to bump up the Average a bit.

But it won't do the Clubs any good for that to happen.Further dominance by the Franchises will wreck the SANFL.
If you think that won't happen,you are living in Cloud Cuckoo Land!

Glenelg like every SANFL clubs has $2 Million cash coming its way via the Sale of Football Park, plus their Pokie Club makes $70,000 a year. They will have the 3 mill paid off in no time.

SANFL attendances are still well higher than WAFL, and don't forget a hell of a lot more people are attending Port and Crows games at the Adelaide Oval since it moved there, which is another reason SANFL attendances may have fallen.

Larry Bird wrote: Two things are virtually carved in granite. The AFL players will play in one team and secondly it will be in the WAFL. Take that as your starting point and work from there to make the best of it for all the clubs.

Yep you can lock that in from this point onwards under the current funding model 100%.

Grassy wrote: On the one hand,you rag on the WAFC for continuing to Bail Peel out,in the other,you appear to want this Farcical Situation to keep on going.

The 2 SA Clubs have a bigger stadium,which made it easier for fringe SANFL supporters to Completely Jump ship.Much easier!

Errr..NO - Since when have I supported Peel ??? Dumb idea from day one...some idiot voted them in!

To continue NO I do not - Did my post giving an outline for a way forward suggest any change. YES it did.

Grassy wrote:

Bazza wrote:

Larry Bird wrote: Two things are virtually carved in granite. The AFL players will play in one team and secondly it will be in the WAFL. Take that as your starting point and work from there to make the best of it for all the clubs.

Yep you can lock that in from this point onwards under the current funding model 100%.

You're not Kim Hagdorn are you?

Your not the bloke that voted Peel in are you?

swan42 wrote:

Larry Bird wrote: Two things are virtually carved in granite. The AFL players will play in one team and secondly it will be in the WAFL. Take that as your starting point and work from there to make the best of it for all the clubs.

NO I won't accept that at all. At the moment it is the tail wagging the dog. When we actually get some WAFC with a backbone and start DICTATING to the WA domiciled AFL clubs that THEY HAVE THE LICENCE then there is a future for the WAFL and THAT is the BRIEF and raison d'etre for the WAFC.

Swan unless the WAFL can find some financially via model that can extricate itself from the two local AFL Franchises and in turn the WAFC then ABSOLUTLEY nothing will change. Unless you can come up with a funding model that gives the same if not more income stream that can knock the current arrangement out of the picture your dreaming. Btw the WAFC sole concern has never just been the WAFL solely - read the constitution, it was actually formed to save the WCE and WAFL.

Bazza wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Larry Bird wrote: Two things are virtually carved in granite. The AFL players will play in one team and secondly it will be in the WAFL. Take that as your starting point and work from there to make the best of it for all the clubs.

NO I won't accept that at all. At the moment it is the tail wagging the dog. When we actually get some WAFC with a backbone and start DICTATING to the WA domiciled AFL clubs that THEY HAVE THE LICENCE then there is a future for the WAFL and THAT is the BRIEF and raison d'etre for the WAFC.

Swan unless the WAFL can find some financially via model that can extricate itself from the two local AFL Franchises and in turn the WAFC then ABSOLUTLEY nothing will change. Unless you can come up with a funding model that gives the same if not more income stream that can knock the current arrangement out of the picture your dreaming. Btw the WAFC sole concern has never just been the WAFL solely - read the constitution, it was actually formed to save the WCE and WAFL.

Save your breathe Bazza, the likes of Grassy, Swan et al, aren't interested in reasonable solutions but only offer up option, to get rid is of the AFL clubs second sides. Their inference that the sole reason that the WAFL is struggling is because of WCE and Freo is so far removed from the truth, it's laughable!!

The WAFL is a Teir 2 competition that only has itself to blame for its own demise. Take the funding that the AFL teams supply to the WAFL away and the competition would have collapsed years ago. The WAFL is the only part of the football industry within WA which is not financially self-sustaining but lives on WAFC handouts funded by the AFL. Grassy etc complain about Subiacos financial benefit, and they are clearly the most profitable club in the WAFL, but even their strong financial position rides on the back of the AFL games in Perth.

Pretty sad for the WAFL, that Community footy (A Grade WAAFL) is quickly surpassing the WAFL for weekly crowd attendances and isn't that far behind on the standard of footy produced.

Complain as much as you like that the WAFL is at the mercy of the AFL and WAFC but you've allowed yourself to be put in that position every time your club/s have stuck their hands out and happily accepted each and every cent that they've provided either directly or indirectly.

Also your continued comments that the WAFL should be the focus for the WAFC is pretty concerning and selfish. The WAFC is responsible for all football in WA and that certainly extends well past just the WAFL, which is one of the smallest parts of the WA footy industry.

good post redlegs...I think most of us accept the fact that there'll either be aligned AFL teams in the WAFL or stand alone ressie sides. this is what the AFL teams want and I can understand why to a certain extent. I think the issue we're all concerned about is the stacking of a team at finals time or conversely, pulling everyone out as Freo did last year. I does smack of contempt by the AFL clubs towards the WAFL so I think there should be some further thinking around minimum and maximum representation by AFL players in WAFL teams at finals time. how that will work on a go forward basis I don't know but I do agree the WAFL is surviving at the moment on hand outs from the WAFC coming from funds generated by the AFL clubs....so we shouldn't go biting the hand that feeds us but at the same time, making sure the entire WAFL comp isn't just an extension of WCE and Freo and giving in to their every whim and fancy.