Show me anywhere in the NRL where teams get an advantage for losing.
Show me where some teams (in non heartland areas) get a higher salary cap than others.
Show me where newer team get the pick of the best young talent..
Compromised comp ,you bet..There is NO LEVEL playing field.
The NRL is far from perfect ,but at least if your team wins the GF its because they were the better team ,not because they had the pick of talent or had some bullshit excuse for a higher salary cap..
Put it this way..
If a Tasmanian RL team(wont happen but an example) entered the NRL & the IC said ,this new team will get a higher salary cap than others & can select the best un 20 players ,,there would be a massive reaction from RL fans ..
Your idea of a fair & even comp is a lot different to mine.
Ah - well, now you're touching on areas that go to the heart of the question of the dog wagging the tail or vice versa.
In the example of the pre-AFL Commission era - the clubs weilded all the power.
So, in the half hearted expansion scenario - - and let's be realistic here - the Swans went to Sydney as much as expanding the code as opening up VFL access to Sunday footy, both played in Melbourne and live footy on tv.
The Brisbane Bears was a disrespectful process and the lessons of that were at least learned.
So, if we accept that those two expansions into 'foreign' territory were under resourced, ill-concieved and poorly conducted.
Then, any future expansions had to be done somewhat differently.
This is important because the NRL has instituted it's own Commission now.
So - the Commission looks after the 'good of the game' rather than the self interest of the most powerful cartel of clubs.
SOme of the tools available include the Commissions own compromising of the draft. Yes - a massive irony.
However - 'start up' concessions via draft picks, salary caps etc isn't too astonishing I wouldn't have thought. However - I do believe that the level of concessions via draft picks was - - but, seemingly the clubs agreed to it (was it just in principle?? and not so much in that level of detail?? That I don't know).
Personally I thought both Giants and Suns would have traded their draft picks a bit more as a form of 'currency' to access more experienced players - but, both went young. It was interesting, very interesting. I guess they looks ahead to 2 years in and possible trading then?? Not too sure.
Anyway - compare to the NRL dropping of Storm into Melbourne, stuff all support, minimal good will from Sydney, seemed more like a sense of obligation. Financial support minimal, reliant on News Ltd ownership and reinvestment of their NRL dividend to keep afloat. One surely couldn't hold up the Storm as the blue-print for expansion clubs, just as the Bears and Swans (first 15 years) couldn't really be either.
The Tassie example you mention is exactly right - - without clubs buy in to permit the RL IC to give the club something to build with - - then why bother. The key is when the concessions end.
It's totally different to the AFL examples of expansion clubs in 'heartland' areas - Eagles, Dockers and Crows in particular show the way. Port was always a concern because it was too much associated with a single SANFL club - - far, far better to have something like a North of the river vs South of the river division with 'new' entity clubs created. So, the AFL at least has ensured that the Lions and Suns are distinct, and the Swans and Giants are distinct. Were a second NRL side to be dropped into Melbourne - - how do you make it distinct?? a bit like Heart vs Victory, but, there's at least grass roots soccer and those discontent with Victory become Heart fans.
The NRL is far from perfect ,but at least if your team wins the GF its because they were the better team ,not because they had the pick of talent or had some bullshit excuse for a higher salary cap..
I have no issue with salary cap levels varying as I said before - - just ensure it's transparant and reviewed. As a North supporter - we were gutted by the 'go home' factor with players like Peter Bell and Peter Mann from WA and Evan Hewitt and Scott Welsh from SA. That was during and immediately after a highly successful era. Did North need extra salary cap to retain the interstaters?? Perhaps. However, the move in recent times has seen clubs seek to draft more local talent to remove the 'go home' factor. However, for the Swans and now the Giants - even unlike QLD clubs - there's far, far less 'local talent' of sufficient standard. So, it's fair enough in the most expensive city that something should be done. I don't see why you resist the principle so ardently yet fail to acknowledge the real world realities.
Now - the Swans this year for example won the premiership with....well, let's have a look. For all the talk of salary concessions and draft picks - well, the Swans GF team included recent draft picks of:
2010 (Luke Parker #40, Alex Johnson #57, Mike Pyke #101 - rookie promotion after taken #57 in 2008 rookie draft as an international rookie - - i.e. the Canadian RU player)
2009 (noting #6 pick Gary Rohan out all year with busted leg - - Lewis Jetta #14, Sam Reid #38)
2008 (Dan Hannebery #30)
2007 (Craig Bird #59, NSW scholarship)
2006 (Josh Kennedy was #40 at Hawthorn, was traded in having limited opportunities at Hawthorn) (Nick Smith #15, rookie draft)
Adding to a GF team that included Ted Richards, now an all Australian defender who was pretty well rejected at Essendon, Marty Mattner from the Crows who couldn't get a game. Rhyce Shaw who was pretty well hated by Collingwood fans (despite his blood lines). Lewis Roberts-Thomson, a 2001 #29 draft pick from a junior RU background in Sydney, Kieran Jack #57 in 2005 Rookie draft from a junior RL background).
Even the one out and out star - dual brownlow medalist Adam Goodes (#43 in '97 draft) - -there's not many 'sexy' players on the list. 2012 Norm Smith medalist Ryan O'Keefe might not have been there had a trade been done 2 or so years back.
I look at that side and don't regard it as evidence of unfair draft concessions or unfair salary concessions.
What I'm more concerned about is the recent dominance of Collingwood and Geelong who have stand alone VFL teams and get got draws. Geelong can make $600,000 profit on a 25,000 crowd at Kardinia Park. North Melb a couple of years back hosted the Swans on Anzac day weekend at Docklands and drew 28,000 and lost $1000 on the day. The loss wasn't the issue - the $601,000 difference is the issue.
This to me is by far the bigger issue. The massive variation in ground deals and revenue.
Draft picks are only as good as the ability to develop talent. Likewise salary caps. The Swans have done a mighty job on developing some unlikely talent and I dip me hat to them. Collingwood and Geelong - well, Geelong took a gamble on a lot of father sons, and many of the players have stayed loyal and been paid 'unders' so good on them for that too.
Anyway - for a club like North - at least we 'stuck it up 'em' back in the '90s. And, for now, just hold on until the AFL assumes outright ownership of Docklands stadium and then, stadium deals should be far, far sweeter in the heartland of the game!!!!
This is where the NRL has benefitted in Melb with a 100% Govt funded AAMI Park with reasonable rents compared to say North stuck at Etihad, 100% privately funded, 25 years of AFL to pay it off. I'd like to see the state govt assist the AFL to buy it out early but that probably won't happen - - although, perhaps that could've been part of a FIFA WC package had Aust got it that might've seen the AFL as owners of Docklands waive any restrictions on Stadia of over 40K within 10km and allowed AAMI park to be fully expanded???? Ah well - we'll never know.
Anyway - sorry for the length - but, yes - - the idea of 'fair and even' from you to me does vary.
But, like anything - - we have to accept certain compromises because nothing exists in a vacuum and certainly not football codes in Australia (the worlds most competitive football marketplace). And, you've gotta pick your battles.
For me - I really struggle with private ownership and with the NRL I hated the corporate ownership. Right now - Melb Storm has finally marked itself in it's territory and won over a huge amount of respect. The News Ltd ownership model is breaking down and the club has weathered a significant storm so to speak and earned respect. 13-14 years in the making!!!! The last 2 has defined them. The AFL has a 20 year plus plan on Suns and Giants - I wonder how they will earn respect for themselves??
