ThePrez wrote: As for victorian based teams - the simple cant compete with interstate teams.
For no other reason than base supporters.
Queensland = 1 Team
NSW = 1 Team
SA = 2 Teams
WA = 2 Teams
Victoria = 10 teams.
its as simple as that
Well, only if it was that simple. This is the trouble, many arguments on this topic are brought down to simple statements and can be countered with just as many simple statements in return. I'm not denying that the non-Victorian clubs have some advantages over their Victorian counterparts, but it's a two way street yet this is rarely acknowledged. You only have to look at where Brisbane played their preliminary final last year, not to mention the location of the grand final, for proof of that.
1. Is there a city anywhere else in Australia that has a football "industry" as big as Melbourne's? This extends from media coverage (ie. sponsorship exposure) thru to available supporters.
2. On available supporters, due to the VFL's history, I wonder how many non-Victorians support Victorian based clubs? Take myself as an example, according to the AFL I should be following the Swans or, maybe, the Roos, yet, I contribute in my own small way to a Victorian based club every year. I wonder how many people from, say outside of South Australia, have Crows memberships. A small point I know, but just as one should not dismiss the advantages of one and two team states, one should not also deny the fact that the Victorian based clubs have their own unquie advantages too. There is a history there, that rightfully places the Victorian based clubs at an advantage to attract members. To be fair, to anyone under 20 years of age this probably doesn't apply quite so much, and yes, this advantage to the Vic based clubs will diminish over time.
3. Look at membership categories. Carlton offers a 17 game deal so, you get our 11 home games, plus our Victorian based away teams. Name me one team outside of Victoria that can offer that sort of deal to its members. Not to mention the ability for their fans to get to finals. Scott, I can see you'll reply with, if they want to watch their teams play in finals the fans should be prepared to cough up and get to the games wherever they are held. To a point I agree with you, but the law of averages will prove that at this point in time members of non-Victorian based clubs are likely to be far more out of pocket than their Victorian cousins.
4. Yes, 10 teams probably is too many in Victoria, but what is the solution? In terms of memberships I think you'd need at least 20 years, or a generation in other words, for there to be any real net benefit to potential members if any clubs were relocated, or worse, closed down. In terms of attracting sponsors, yes, having fewer teams in Victoria would no doubt alleviate some of the pressue on the available sponsorship pool, but if clubs were relocated this effect would be lessened by the fact the AFL is a national competition and a relocated club would most likely take its sponsors with them.
I know there will be plenty of holes in my comments above for pro-Victorian supporters to pick up on. I'm not attempting to provide a foolproof debate declaring that a club in ine state has a definte overall advantage to clubs from another state, merely highlighting that for every negative point that gets raised for the Victorian clubs it can be countered by an equally compelling negative for the non-Vic clubs.
I think we need to accept that the AFL is a national competition and therefore accept that by by its very nature there will be inherent inconsistencies to the pros and cons for each club, be that attracting sponsors, members or travel arrangements.
IMO there will never be a totally equal system, I'd even suggest it would be impossible to achieve such a result. How do you balance a team like Carlton with almost 140 years of history to a club like Freo with around 10 years? Yes, if I was starting a club from scratch I'd probably want to start it outside of Melbourne, but that would largely be because it would be nigh on impossible to break into a market steeped in history and traditions, which has so many positives, but its many negatives as well.
And Scott, you know as well as I do that the attendance figures at Optus Oval over the last few years show, pretty much beyond doubt, that opposition fans (as a rule) hated the place. Unfortunately, we weren't filling the ground to a sufficient capacity that enabled the club to make a financially responsible decision to remain there. Indeed one could argue that by moving to shared grounds this is one step to providing a more equitable approach to a club's ground maintenance costs, thereby negating some of the advantages that clubs like the Power and Crows have.
Anyway, I know this debate will go around in cricles for ever, and in some ways, that is just the point I am trying to make. I don't think there is a definitive position able to be declared as The Prez suggested by saying, "As for victorian based teams - they simply cant compete with interstate teams."
|
