Relegation: good thing or bad thing?

[benchmark00]

How is the AFL any more equal? Surely there's inequalities between the best and worst teams in any given season?

We're not saying every team has to be the exact same level in the one season. It's like anything, there will always be teams better than others, but these teams change throughout the course of a decade.

Brisbane in the AFL won three straight premierships, and lost another on their fourth attempt at the start of the 2000's, now they're on the bottom of the ladder. Teams don't neccessarily bottom out like that all the time, but over the course of a decade or more, many different teams taste success, not just one or two.

 

[benchmark00]

Actually sums up my thoughts quite succinctly.

Fwiw, I love watching all sides in the Prem and the Championship (held a relegation flat party), and I thoroughly enjoyed the League One and Two games that were shown/involved Tranmere.

I don't know if it's the history, or maybe even the presentation, but nothing comes close to the Premier League for me. The best competition in the world.

Cool bro, stoked for you

 

[Furball]

We're not saying every team has to be the exact same level in the one season. It's like anything, there will always be teams better than others, but these teams change throughout the course of a decade.

Brisbane in the AFL won three straight premierships, and lost another on their fourth attempt at the start of the 2000's, now they're on the bottom of the ladder. Teams don't neccessarily bottom out like that all the time, but over the course of a decade or more, many different teams taste success, not just one or two.

Happens in the EPL as well, 10 years ago Arsenal were title challengers, Chelsea were a slightly above average side and Newcastle and Leeds regularly finished at the top of the table.

The only thing that skews things is the dominance of Manchester United, which is unprecedented in English footballing history.

 

[benchmark00]

Happens in the EPL as well, 10 years ago Arsenal were title challengers, Chelsea were a slightly above average side and Newcastle and Leeds regularly finished at the top of the table.

The only thing that skews things is the dominance of Manchester United, which is unprecedented in English footballing history.

And now they've plummeted way down to... 3rd.

 

[Jono]

And were 2nd favourite for the title only a month or so ago.

 

[Tom Halsey]

And all this despite a tiny net spend.

 

[Furball]

And now they've plummeted way down to... 3rd.

4th actually.

And the virtuous cycle which has kept the top 4 largely constant over the past few years is more down to the Champions League than the Premiership.

 

[Furball]

And all this despite a tiny net spend.

In terms of transfer fees they're actually running at a surplus are they not?

 

[Tom Halsey]

In terms of transfer fees they're actually running at a surplus are they not?

Could be, I didn't check.

 

[marc71178]

In terms of transfer fees they're actually running at a surplus are they not?

They certainly are in real terms, only team in Premiership history to be like that (up to end of 09/10 season) - the only other manager who actually breaks even is the much maligned FSW.

 

[Jono]

Coincidentally to this discussion we are having here, there has been an issue come up in the AFL today which is kind of relevant to this debate.

Collingwood are pretty much the richest AFL club. Their player salary spending is capped, however the spending of one's football departments (i.e. coaches, training facilities etc.) is not capped. Collingwood have traditionally spend a lot on their football department (much more than say North Melbourne have, which is Benchy's team and probably the poorest club in the AFL).

One of Collingwood's big expenditure projects has been flying their entire team to Arizona pre-season for training, as the high altitude improves player's stamina and endurance. They have a few injured players in their ranks and plan on sending these players to Arizona during the season to recover. We're talking go there for 5-6 days whilst they have a bye in the fixture. There are many clubs which would simply not be able to consider this as an option, and others who could do it but would have to sacrifice in another important area of their football department.

Tthis news only came out today but the rumour is the AFL is uncomfortable with this. For a while there has been talk of putting a cap on football department spending. I would not be surprised if this is the final straw for the AFL Commission.

Anyway food for thought.

 

[benchmark00]

Coincidentally to this discussion we are having here, there has been an issue come up in the AFL today which is kind of relevant to this debate.

Collingwood are pretty much the richest AFL club. Their player salary spending is capped, however the spending of one's football departments (i.e. coaches, training facilities etc.). Collingwood have traditionally spend a lot on their football department (much more than say North Melbourne have, which is Benchy's team and probably the poorest club in the AFL).

One of Collingwood's big expenditure projects has been flying their entire team to Arizona pre-season for training, as the high altitude improves player's stamina and endurance. They have a few injured players in their ranks and plan on sending these players to Arizona during the season to recover. We're talking go there for 5-6 days whilst they have a bye in the fixture. There are many clubs which would simply not be able to consider this as an option, and others who could do it but would have to sacrifice in another important area of their football department.

Tthis news only came out today but the rumour is the AFL is uncomfortable with this. For a while there has been talk of putting a cap on football department spending. I would not be surprised if this is the final straw for the AFL Commission.

Anyway food for thought.

Not sure how I feel about capping football department spending, but it's definitely one area where the richer clubs have a perceived advantage. Having said that NM have a fine young coach as it stands, and I don't know too many coaches in the league I'd swap him for at this stage. Think it is an area which clubs will try and exploit in the future though.

 

[Redbacks]

Brisbane in the AFL won three straight premierships, and lost another on their fourth attempt at the start of the 2000's, now they're on the bottom of the ladder. Teams don't neccessarily bottom out like that all the time, but over the course of a decade or more, many different teams taste success, not just one or two.

Which happened to coincide with them having $500k+ (about 8% above the normal cap) more money than all the other clubs in their salary, bar Sydney who had a bit more than that, under the competetive balance fund. It was Eddie through constant lobbying who help make the AFL move and take that away from them. We used to hear about in for 30mins every thursday night for years.

 

[Furball]

Coincidentally to this discussion we are having here, there has been an issue come up in the AFL today which is kind of relevant to this debate.

Collingwood are pretty much the richest AFL club. Their player salary spending is capped, however the spending of one's football departments (i.e. coaches, training facilities etc.) is not capped. Collingwood have traditionally spend a lot on their football department (much more than say North Melbourne have, which is Benchy's team and probably the poorest club in the AFL).

One of Collingwood's big expenditure projects has been flying their entire team to Arizona pre-season for training, as the high altitude improves player's stamina and endurance. They have a few injured players in their ranks and plan on sending these players to Arizona during the season to recover. We're talking go there for 5-6 days whilst they have a bye in the fixture. There are many clubs which would simply not be able to consider this as an option, and others who could do it but would have to sacrifice in another important area of their football department.

Tthis news only came out today but the rumour is the AFL is uncomfortable with this. For a while there has been talk of putting a cap on football department spending. I would not be surprised if this is the final straw for the AFL Commission.

Anyway food for thought.

Big whoop, what else are Collingwood meant to spend their cash on?

 

[Jono]

New teeth for their fans if truth be told.

 

[Jarquis]

Why is equality the be all and end all? I don't get it.
There's nothing to stop a team becoming better in the Premiership, nothing.

I'd much prefer a completely unequal system than one which forces artificial equality through the likes of drafts and things. They're the biggest crock of **** ever.

 

[benchmark00]

lol.

 

[Jarquis]

Funny, because that's how I feel when I read your posts on the matter.

 

[benchmark00]

So naiive saying there's nothing stopping a team getting better. Head in the sand type stuff.

If nothing's stopping them, why aren't they!?

 

[Jarquis]

So naiive saying there's nothing stopping a team getting better. Head in the sand type stuff.

If nothing's stopping them, why aren't they!?

The nature of competition. Teams improve all the time but obviously in the process they overtake other teams who become worse. For each place a team moves up, a different team moves down etc.
Norwich City just achieved their second successive promotion ffs.

Why should teams be helped to improve? If you're **** then suck it up or do something about it. Invest in youth, invest in a good scouting network, better coaches, better infrastructure, better training. Don't see why they should be given a leg-up in the interest of fairness, it's competitive sport ffs.
Just disagree with it.