Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 51

Thread: NEAFL - Thoughts on Year 1?

  1. #37
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    quakers hill
    Posts
    1,506
    Quote Originally Posted by unconfuseme View Post
    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.

  2. #38
    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!
    Last edited by unconfuseme; 24th August 2012 at 07:29 PM.

  3. #39
    A much more in depth and earnest response than I was expecting. Thank you for that.

  4. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by unconfuseme View Post
    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.....

  5. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Mug Punter View Post
    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.

  6. #42
    Commentary Team Captain BeeEmmAre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Nor-West Jets Football Club
    Posts
    2,509
    Quote Originally Posted by Mug Punter View Post
    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.
    "It's up to the rest of the players in the room to make a new batch of premiership players next year," Adam Goodes, triple Bob Skilton Medallist, October 7, 2011.

    YOU BETCHA!!!!!!

  7. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Mug Punter View Post
    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.

  8. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by BeeEmmAre View Post
    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...

  9. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by The Student View Post
    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.

  10. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by BeeEmmAre View Post
    I don't agree that it compromises the Sydney AFL at all.
    Surely you are joking....

    The interest and profile of the SFL is at an all-time low (and that is saying something)- people are just not interested. Ask Norris what his stats are for this site this year. The whole things is a three ring circus and typical of the idiots running the game in this state

  11. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Mug Punter View Post
    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...
    It might go hand in hand with coming to Sydney for work, a partner, a sea change or whatever. If a bloke comes over from the WAFL or whatever and is looking to continue on with his footy, could be interested in furthering his education etc. then of course SU would be a good fit. Likewise if he was living and working out west, I'm sure the Eagles would suit him perfectly.

  12. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Mug Punter View Post
    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.
    Fair enough, but I don't see how that would solve the problem of no support, volunteers or general interest from the wider community that Uni and to a lesser extent SHE are battling with. Sure people would say they would be more interested in the NEAFL and go and watch or whatever but let's be honest, nobody would. What sort of crowds do the Sydney AFL rep side get when they play up here? Tens of people?

    I would have thought someone who is passionate enough about footy to post on a Sydney AFL message board would be right behind the AFL's efforts to create an all inclusive community based club. Just don't get on the bandwagon when the Giants are unbeatable in about 5 years time!

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO