Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 68

Thread: Season 2021

  1. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wills View Post
    If read this thread there are a lot of self-interest posters who would love the competition to be only North Shore, Syd Uni, and UNSW. Maybe they could take in turns winning flags every 3 years.
    We haven't got there in 14 years (or made a gf for that matter), so I'd be very happy with just winning 1!!

    Academy trial game today takes 5 or 6 out for us this weekend, so won't get a proper read on how UTS are going, but it'll still be interesting. They've clearly improved.

  2. #50
    last 15 years flags or 14.5 years

    2020 Sydney University 8.6 (54) UNSW/ES 6.9 (45)
    2019 UNSW/ES 10.9 (69) Sydney University 6.15 (51)
    2018 UNSW/ES 8.10 (58) Sydney University 7.13 (55)
    2017 Pennant Hills 10.6 (66) Sydney University 7.18 (60)
    2016 East Coast Eagles 17.5 (107) St George 9.12 (66)
    2015 Pennant Hills 14.5 (89) East Coast 7.4 (54)
    2014 Manly Warringah 8.20 (68) Pennant Hills 2.10 (22)
    2013 Manly Warringah 11.14 (80) Pennant Hills 11.6 (72)
    2012 UNSW/ES 13.11 (89) Balmain 7.5 (47)
    2011 East Coast Eagles 17.12 (114) Balmain 10.11 (71)
    2010 East Coast Eagles 13.9 (87) Sydney University 10.10 (70)
    2009 East Coast Eagles 22.12 (144) UNSW-East Syd 13.12 (90)
    2008 Pennant Hills 20.12 (132) East Coast Eagles 3.10 (28)
    2007 North Shore 12.15 (87) St George 9.12 (66)
    2006 Pennant Hills 5.20 (50) East Coast Eagles 7.6 (48)

    Interesting though break up of the last 15 years for the teams in Prems men currently playing:

    Syd Uni Played in 5 GF's won 1 and lost 4
    UNSW Played in 5 Gf's won 3 and lost 2
    Penno played in 6 Gf's won 4 and lost 2
    East Coast played in 6 Gf's won 4 and lost 3
    Manly played in 2 Gf's and lost none
    North Shore played in 1 and won 1
    St George played in 2 and lost both

    UTS, wests and Camden havent been in one.

  3. #51
    Looks to me like a pretty well shared competition over the last 15 years apart from a few clubs.

    Seems a bit top heavy at present but don't all comps go in cycles.

    UTS haven't made one but have a lot of points, seems very top heavy.

    Camden same but new to the competition in a developing area.

    Wests with the club and the money apparently should be doing a lot better than they do.

    It seems from the list above though apart from North Shore and St George all have has some sort of go, but it goes in cycles and North Shore has been on the improve on and off the field it is only a matter of time there.

  4. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by saviour01 View Post
    PPA in prems;

    UTS - 56/56
    Camden - No team selected yet
    Penno - 31/42
    UNSW - 42/42
    Norths - 41/42
    Syd uni - No team selected yet
    ECE - 23/44
    St George - 22/44
    Manly - 23/44
    Wests - 39/49

    Out of interest, how do they adjust the PPA limit each year?
    Round 2

    UTS - 55/56
    Camden - 32/56
    Penno - 35/42
    UNSW - 40/42
    Norths - 38/42
    Syd uni - 42/42
    ECE - 24/44
    St George - 22/44
    Manly - 23/44
    Wests - 41/49

    Penno used to be a lot lower in previous years didn't they?

  5. #53
    Yep but recruiting a bit now i think so higher points. the 56-56-49 nuts only club who should of got more was a Camden IMO, start up. UTS and Wests way long enough to get house in order.

  6. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by saviour01 View Post
    Round 2

    Penno - 35/42
    UNSW - 40/42
    Norths - 38/42
    Syd uni - 42/42
    St George - 22/44

    Penno used to be a lot lower in previous years didn't they?
    if you look at last year's final 5, reinforces that the league was soft on reducing the cap - should be 38 and would only require UNSW and Syd Uni to manage 1 player ie working within how the system is meant to work.

    Does not solve the challenge for the bottom teams, but points were are never meant to be a strategy for a bottom team to get better. It's about stopping the best team from getting stronger.

  7. #55
    Almost Football Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Local footy venues
    Posts
    2,925
    Quote Originally Posted by 5yearplan View Post
    Yep but recruiting a bit now i think so higher points. the 56-56-49 nuts only club who should of got more was a Camden IMO, start up. UTS and Wests way long enough to get house in order.
    14 points differential between UTS and other clubs seems a big gap. While you could understand there being some difference, it seems excessive.

    Having said that, Camden haven't used their additional points allowance.
    Bad first couple of weeks for them - looks like it'll be a tough season.

    Follow me on Twitter - @tealfooty

  8. #56
    So let me get this straight;
    - 56 points is a lot - too much maybe but,
    - Some clubs that need to use high points aren’t able to use that many, so high points is an ineffective tool for them
    - we’ve reduced the points for top teams, but they’re still the top teams, so we want to reduce their points further, to stop them developing.
    - we have a competition that could really be developed, but want to stop development to contain the gap between the top and bottom

    Do we have any idea what we’re doing?

    North Shore already has about 10 players in the WAFL, SANFL and VFL and had 5 or so missing from Prems on Saturday due to Swans duties. On top of that we have 5 or 6 state league level players who just don’t play, partly because they struggle with the level of the competition here. Our situation isn’t unique either.

    The competition standard is already diminished compared to what it could be.

    We could take that a bit further though and introduce a restricted player list for the top 25 players in the club, so they can’t play Sydney AFL. Same for UNSW, Sydney Uni etc.

    That would even the comp up.

    Then what would we do with the good players we took out of Sydney AFL.....??

  9. #57
    Blah, Blah, Blah North Shore, North Shore, North Shore,Blah, Blah,
    Let's be honest bomber you are not interested in Sydney footy but only North Shore. Just own this position and don't try and camouflage it under a Sydney AFL fake position.

    Just to be clear see responses to your vail question below


    Quote Originally Posted by bomber. View Post
    So let me get this straight;
    - 56 points is a lot - too much maybe but,
    INCORRECT for the bottom teams

    - Some clubs that need to use high points aren’t able to use that many, so high points is an ineffective tool for them
    CORRECT - points is not a tool for making bottom teams better

    - we’ve reduced the points for top teams, but they’re still the top teams, so we want to reduce their points further, to stop them developing.
    Call Bullsxt- 1 point players = development. Anything above a 1 point player is called recruiting. Based on the last round St George at 22 points is developing not North Shore at 38 - that's called recruiting.


    - we have a competition that could really be developed but want to stop development to contain the gap between the top and bottom
    Ha Development or recruiting - self interest.

    Do we have any idea what we’re doing?
    Obviously you don't - self interest.

    North Shore already has about 10 players in the WAFL, SANFL and VFL and had 5 or so missing from Prems on Saturday due to Swans duties. On top of that we have 5 or 6 state league level players who just don’t play, partly because they struggle with the level of the competition here. Our situation isn’t unique either.
    Blah, Blah, Blah North Shore, North Shore, North Shore.

    The competition standard is already diminished compared to what it could be.
    Diminished compared to what - the Competition standard is at a high level

    We could take that a bit further though and introduce a restricted player list for the top 25 players in the club, so they can’t play Sydney AFL. Same for UNSW, Sydney Uni etc.
    ?????????

    That would even the comp up.

    Then what would we do with the good players we took out of Sydney AFL.....??
    Again I don't understand you Bomber - all I see is ignorant self interest.

  10. #58
    Well retired, still sore Pekay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    In The Goalsquare
    Posts
    2,134
    Dragged out of retirement on Saturday due to Masters receiving a forfeit. Played on the very fancy new Gore Hill Oval - has come a long way since the old SFL days.

    Not much give in it when shifting laterally, knees and ankles are still hurting! Lucky I don't give much output naturally I guess.

  11. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wills View Post
    Blah, Blah, Blah North Shore, North Shore, North Shore,Blah, Blah,
    Let's be honest bomber you are not interested in Sydney footy but only North Shore. Just own this position and don't try and camouflage it under a Sydney AFL fake position.

    Just to be clear see responses to your vail question below




    Again I don't understand you Bomber - all I see is ignorant self interest.
    New to this so not sure who is right, but points where i come from bring the top teams down. Bottom teams do nothing and stanard drops

    Great to see a bit of banter. Didn't think was any in Sydney until I saw this. Nothing at all on the local comp any where - bit boring

    Just quitely how happy with yourself would you need to be to call yourself Tom Wills on a footy forum

  12. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post
    Just quitely how happy with yourself would you need to be to call yourself Tom Wills on a footy forum
    Ha

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 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