NEAFL - Thoughts on Year 1?

[KTigers]

Precisely, Mr Freedman. When the boys from North Shore (or whoever wins the PD GF) are sitting around after the game with a beer in hand, they sure ain't going to be thinking what a hollow victory their premiership is.
As I said yesterday, just because two Sydney clubs have put one each of their many teams into another league the world won't stop spinning on its axis. I think the Sydney AFL can handle it. Might be time to move on, and maybe even give SHE & SU a pat on the back for having the balls to give this NEAFL thing a go.

[northernspy]

Isn't the NEAFL just an extension of divisionalisation?

[Sterling Cooper]

Problem Solved.

Future will be -

4 NEAFL Clubs based in Sydney;

1. Sydney Hills Eagles (up and running and already looking healthy)
2. South East Sydney & Universities (Syd Uni, UNSW-Eastern Suburbs, Gong, & St George act as feeders)
3. West Sydney (Campbelltown, Western Suburbs & Pennant Hills feeders)
4. North Sydney (North Shore, Manly)

All current PD clubs will simply feed into the 4 'zones' above. All PD clubs will become completely amateur and remain the same..

'Top level' interested volunteers will migrate to the 4, other 'club focused' volunteers will remain.

UTS won't feed any players into the new comp because of their big fish in small pond mentality.

Best regards,

Roger Sterling

[Sterling Cooper]

My sincerest apologies, forgot to mention Balmain's future...

They'll be broke in 2013 and disintegrate along with their mercenaries. The Western Australians will end up playing for the highest bidders.


Best regards,

Roger Sterling.

[Flying Swan]

I enjoyed Roger's radical proposals. Sterling set of ideas but .............. no one wants to go to Canberra. It's boring and the football is not that much better than SAFL. When Northern Division played the Eastern Conference they beat Sydney/Canberra by 200 points! It's a strange old comp when some teams can use 'top up' players from other teams. There should be less teams in Sydney so that the comp gets more concentrated and the football standard rises. Great idea about one University team. The model mentioned could be extended to the 18s.

[unconfuseme]

Unconfuseme, if I may be so bold, what are your current and ongoing actions to improve the code in Sydney and the SFL?

Further, if you were in a position to guide the actions of either NEAFL clubs, what course of action would you have the clubs take to improve the code / SFL at every level?

I can tell that you are not involved in the administration or planning with the AFL in NSW, Shotties! ... in all the years that I have been involved in AFL in Sydney, as a volunteer and club administrator, from Auskick all the way through, with kids involved at every level of rep football, I have never been asked those questions, and I don't know anyone who has!?

That should answer a good portion of your question (see consultation)!

I have been involved in some capacity in Sydney AFL, on and off from the 70's, and I have seen things done very well, opportunities lost, good ideas butchered, the lot!

I don't pretend to have all of the answers, and I don't have time to elaborate anyway (unless I was being paid!), but the basics are not rocket science, and since you asked, I will throw my 2 bobs worth in..

CULTURE

AFL is the 3rd or 4th choice football code in Sydney. We need a point of difference. It is our culture. However, it needs to be defined and it needs to be consistent. Generally speaking, at junior level it is clear for all to see, with well run competitions, zero tolerance policy, participation focus, clean fun games (when you can keep the parents out of it that is). Compare it to what you get at a lot of junior soccer and league games, it is a clinically clean family environment ... so that is being done well. But culture goes beyond that, and is also about your whole AFL community structure, allegiances and tribalism, which is the next point.

FULL ENGAGEMENT

From Auskick to Swans/GWS, we need to have clear pathways and alliance for all clubs/teams, junior, senior, NEAFL, AFL. Every club needs to be given direction to build strong relations with all clubs in their line, and that includes the 2 AFL clubs. So, for example, if you are a kid who starts out playing Auskick at Holsworthy, currently, you will be aligned with say Moorebank at the u/18's and lower divisional level, Campelltown at Prem Div., SHE (or whatever that NEAFL team should be identified as) and ultimately GWS. Every club in that line needs to have a formalised relationship, with defined joint activities, designed to assist each others development, which will equally benefit themselves. On the other side of the boundary, it would be, say, St Ives Auskick/St Ignatious or Penno 18's/Pennant Hills/Sydney City (not Sydney Uni, but something representative)/Swans.

CONSULTATION

As I touched on before, the greatest wasted resource (same with most organisations) are the people at the coal face. They actually know what is going on, they are volunteers, so they are passionate about it, and in many cases they are far more qualified than the people telling them what to do! With all due respect, many of the people who have been involved in the running of AFL in this state have been ex-pat administrators who come up here trying to run our game like a country association (or more recently they have just been auditioning for another position with a new AFL club ). So it is no surprise that the code has not shown much growth. We need to align what we do with what works in Sydney, because it is totally different to any traditional AFL market. By all means, tell people what you want to achieve, tell them what you think is the best way to do it, but ask for their experiences, and thoughts ... and LISTEN!

STRONG DIRECT MANAGEMENT.

The AFL is a dictatorship. It is hugely successful. Every time Demetriou speaks about a decision it is "... endorsed by all of our clubs!". AFL administration in NSW has been too "PC". It's like parenting ... you have to be able to say NO!
Once the direction and plan is formulated, unless you as a club buy into the overall plan, you are out! You want to start up a new club, and it doesn't strictly meet every requirement ? ... sorry, no. Go down the road, take your resources to this club that is struggling, and get them where they need to be, we don't need another club.


These are just general overview points i know, but implemented properly, they would have a huge impact on growing the code.

NEAFL - specifically here, my preferred model is 2 representative teams, say age limit u/23's, with full funding from the AFL, and support from the SAFL Senior clubs, as well as the Swans and GWS. They need to be identifiable with their 2 zones - Sydney Hills, probably works, but Sydney Uni needs to be City or something iconoc. With the best young players from across the two Sydney AFL zones, who are not part of the 2 Academies, and not just from 2 clubs, they would be more than competitive. With unilateral input (player/coaching/admin) from their Senior Feeder clubs, they would receive much more grass roots support at games, and a realistic chance of exposure. Another defined pathway level for young players to aspire to can only strengthen the proposition that the code offers.

I'm open to any other suggestions too ...

[tara]

I have been involved in some capacity in Sydney AFL, on and off from the 70's, and I have seen things done very well, opportunities lost, good ideas butchered, the lot!


FULL ENGAGEMENT

From Auskick to Swans/GWS, we need to have clear pathways and alliance for all clubs/teams, junior, senior, NEAFL, AFL. Every club needs to be given direction to build strong relations with all clubs in their line, and that includes the 2 AFL clubs. So, for example, if you are a kid who starts out playing Auskick at Holsworthy, currently, you will be aligned with say Moorebank at the u/18's and lower divisional level, Campelltown at Prem Div., SHE (or whatever that NEAFL team should be identified as) and ultimately GWS. Every club in that line needs to have a formalised relationship, with defined joint activities, designed to assist each others development, which will equally benefit themselves. On the other side of the boundary, it would be, say, St Ives Auskick/St Ignatious or Penno 18's/Pennant Hills/Sydney City (not Sydney Uni, but something representative)/Swans.

As you said you have been around since the 70 - Southern District (aka Moorebank) were the PD team before Campbelltown and there are alot of people who intend to see that again including a number of former SD players who ended up representing CT with distinction.
They have had plenty of time over the past 20 years to form relationship rather than looking to poach players - too late now even though their have been strong whispers of this being a possibility. We will continue to slowly build and put our structures in place and from a financial point of view they have nothing to bring that we dont already have so what is there to gain.

[unconfuseme]

We can't live in the past tara, its eyes ahead or we are all going backwards!

Certainly, based on recent history, and practices, and if nothing changes, I have no doubt that the Holsworthy Auskick pathway example will change. This is just an illustration and based on where the clubs are today.

All clubs should be encouraged to aspire to their highest possible level. Mind you, the clubs that grasp the overall concept, and run with it will be the ones to flourish ... I know that Moorebank fits in that category.

Keep in mind that engaging, means co-operation with focus on the greater good - what is good for the code, rather than chest bumping. I know it takes two to tango, but under a strong leadership, those who don't come along to dance lessons, should be cut adrift ... a bit of tough love will be required.

On the other hand, if an otherwise struggling club happens to "see the light", they need and should be able to expect, help from the whole AFL Community, particularly their close neighbours.

This will take some serious attitudinal changes ... they need to show willingness and capacity to help themselves and co-operate, or they can keep sinking to oblivion!

If that happened, I'm sure you would be able to accommodate a South Moorebank Div 6 team playing out of ... wait, you can't say that!

[Shotties]

A much more in depth and earnest response than I was expecting. Thank you for that.

[Mug Punter]

NEAFL - specifically here, my preferred model is 2 representative teams, say age limit u/23's, with full funding from the AFL, and support from the SAFL Senior clubs, as well as the Swans and GWS. They need to be identifiable with their 2 zones - Sydney Hills, probably works, but Sydney Uni needs to be City or something iconoc. With the best young players from across the two Sydney AFL zones, who are not part of the 2 Academies, and not just from 2 clubs, they would be more than competitive. With unilateral input (player/coaching/admin) from their Senior Feeder clubs, they would receive much more grass roots support at games, and a realistic chance of exposure. Another defined pathway level for young players to aspire to can only strengthen the proposition that the code offers.

Rep style NEAFL teams where players still train and are affiliated with their SFL clubs, and play when form dicatates, could well work. Each NEAFL team could have a 30 player squad a la the pathway, with those players being paid from central funding. They traing twice a week with their NEAFL club and once a week compulsory with their SFL club.

Other points are good too....

Agree that the players on GF night won't think it's a second rate medal around their neck but the reality is it will be.....

[justabaraker]

My point is that as a pathway next to no players will get drafted from the NEAFL.

MP, I reckon you're a pretty hard marker on NEAFL. It only started last year and has only had one selection time to put up strong players for the draft. This season, my guess is that prob 20 guys from the SFL have played NEAFL footy and then gone onto play for the Swans or Giants reserves - I reckon that's impressive.
And go out to Blacktown today and you can see probably five SFL players playing for Swans reserves....it's called the 'pathway'.

Remember that Swans reserves and Giants reserves are part of the NEAFL, so the way to go is SFL > NEAFL then you're in the Swans/Giants system.

Give it a chance and see how many NEAFL guys get picked up at end-of season (excluding Craig Moller who has been picked up by the Freo Dockers as a rookie). I'm tipping there will be six or seven.

[BeeEmmAre]

Of course he was, and the ACTAFL have a greater darfting record than the Sydney market which is 15+ times its size.

My point is that as a pathway next to no players will get drafted from the NEAFL.

Take the best two teams out of any comp at the top level and that comp is compromised. Sure it will mean everything to the players on the field but dress it up any way you like and they are playing for the title of the third best team in Sydney. Totally cheapens the SFL Premiers tag don't you agree?

Good post by noodle, it may be good for Sydney Uni (I doubt it long term but that remains to be seen) but it sure as hell isn't good for the game in Sydney. Isn't it about time we put Sydney football first and not one or two clubs?

I don't agree that it compromises the Sydney AFL at all. Yes, it does lower the standard in the short term, but in the long term I believe it will be stronger because more quality footballers will stay in Sydney or come to Sydney to play in the NEAFL clubs, which will feed back into the Sydney AFL and further down the divisions eventually. Short term pain for long term gain.
By your theory, wouldn't that make the Sydney AFL premier the seventh best team in Sydney? (Swans' seniors and reserves, Giants seniors and reserves, Eagles, Students).
Would the Students be better than the Premier League premiers? Not a crack at them, but they didn't make the Grand Final last year and the team that did is sitting fourth this season. Things change from season to season, but I would have thought Balmain 2012 is at least as good, if not better, than Balmain 2011, when you take into account their average age.

[The Student]

Rep style NEAFL teams where players still train and are affiliated with their SFL clubs, and play when form dicatates, could well work. Each NEAFL team could have a 30 player squad a la the pathway, with those players being paid from central funding. They traing twice a week with their NEAFL club and once a week compulsory with their SFL club.

Other points are good too....

Agree that the players on GF night won't think it's a second rate medal around their neck but the reality is it will be.....

Whilst it seems fairly obvious that having two rep teams comprised of east / west players running around in the NEAFL representing Sydney would be the ideal scenario on-field, the reality of it is that it takes a lot of work to get a team on the park. Unless the AFL were willing to provide administrative and support staff, a training venue, a home ground and so on, I just don't see how it would work... unless it was steered by a club with those structures already in place. I can't speak for other clubs and their resources, but SU has two paid staff members plus the support of SUSF which is a big help - and we are still battling to attract big sponsors, recruit players, manage football operations and so on at a level comparable to the big boys like Ainslie and Eastlake. I'm not sure if we had a Sydney City side consisting of, say, UTS, UNSW, Balmain and SU that it would make a cracker of a difference in terms of volunteers, supporters and everyone else who makes up a footy club even if the AFL was pouring in enough cash to keep it afloat.

[Mug Punter]

I don't agree that it compromises the Sydney AFL at all. Yes, it does lower the standard in the short term, but in the long term I believe it will be stronger because more quality footballers will stay in Sydney or come to Sydney to play in the NEAFL clubs....

Whatever you are on I want some of.....

Yeah, as if decent footballers from a decent football comp would need to come and play for Sydney Uni or Baulko...

[Mug Punter]

Whilst it seems fairly obvious that having two rep teams comprised of east / west players running around in the NEAFL representing Sydney would be the ideal scenario on-field, the reality of it is that it takes a lot of work to get a team on the park. Unless the AFL were willing to provide administrative and support staff, a training venue, a home ground and so on, I just don't see how it would work... unless it was steered by a club with those structures already in place. I can't speak for other clubs and their resources, but SU has two paid staff members plus the support of SUSF which is a big help - and we are still battling to attract big sponsors, recruit players, manage football operations and so on at a level comparable to the big boys like Ainslie and Eastlake. I'm not sure if we had a Sydney City side consisting of, say, UTS, UNSW, Balmain and SU that it would make a cracker of a difference in terms of volunteers, supporters and everyone else who makes up a footy club even if the AFL was pouring in enough cash to keep it afloat.

Of course the AFL should fund it if they want it to be successful.

They should completely fund the East/West rep sides and cover all expenses. They have no problem throwing $20M a year down the drain for that mob of jokers at Brekky Creek so they should be able to fund two semi-pro teams.