It’s not the worst idea. Y-League counts for pretty much nothing these days. Personally, I reckon the A-League clubs will be happy to be completely rid of it, if it’s possible.
Also, NPL doesn’t allow for A-League clubs to have anyone over 23. I personally think that 1 or 2 should be allowed, as young players need at least a couple of experienced players to guide them on the park, at least. You could even limit them to the NPL1 squad. Plenty of experienced players in NPL1 out there who could be valuable.
It is debatable how useful the existing NPL limits have been for Sydney FC youngsters. Only this year have we seen a few players from the NPL squad actually be given some game time and actually show something to make them worth keeping.
My preference would be just to alter the NPL rules as described above. Travel costs are problematic as it is.
I seem to remember reading an article about Barcelona’s B Team at some point a few years back. This was one of the core things they did there - bring in some solid players for that level who were in their mid to late 20s and then use them as a backbone around which you can fit your younger players. It makes for better development because the younger players can learn to play not just against experienced players but also alongside guys who have spent longer learning to read the game, etc.
Apparently no longer a pipe dream according to this. No more “manufactured franchises” or “new consortiums” either. The motivation here is pretty clear and the self interest of former big fish in small pounds continues to hold Australian Football back.
Mmm… mighty big piece … probably more than 50% of the puzzle?
Especially in an environment where Foxtel will be looking to drive down the next contract negotiations? What are these guys smoking? And where can I get some?
Perhaps it is also used as a political tool to make sure the independent A-League goes ahead? Seems like the only way the state federations get onboard with this.
If it doesn’t work, and there’s absolutely nothing to suggest it will, which clubs fold? Or does it drag the whole league, first and second division, down with it? That’s a mighty big risk to take with little to no assurances.
My main question is, will there be minimum infrastructure requirements by the clubs to play in the second division? You’d assume they would need minimum requirements for seating, field, changing rooms, amenities, lighting as well as broadcasting.
If the ultimate aim for these clubs is to get promoted to the a-league, I can’t see them spending a few million to upgrade the stadiums they play in, to allow for use in the a-league. You also don’t want to see a-league teams playing out of Lambert Park and the likes. Even if they were to accept the minimum requirements and splash the cash, what happens if they get relegated the next season? They’re stuck with a stadium that they can’t afford.
It’s a smaller issue in Sydney as you have shark park, Kograh, Leichardt etc. but I’d think Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide etc will have issues.
My statement was more in reference to the second division and less in relation to pro/rel. I don’t see a massive risk for the A-League if a second tier starts up and in fact I see numerous advantages.
We’ll see what ends up being announced, but my suspicion is that with AAFC at the wheel we’ll have Promotion/Relegation into A-League cemented as a pipedream.
They’ll want an open pyramid below the second division, they’ll be reluctant to be too aggressive with investment or spending requirements, and it will end up a mostly semi-pro comp that APFCA and PFA would never accept linking with HAL.
Hilly, I’m sorry, but once a player in another code in this country reaches their twenties, that code is generally where they stay. Of course there are exceptions, but it’s quite rare for a budding young NRL player to decide they have to move to Europe to have the best sporting career they can, because the spots for professional players in this country are taken up by middling journeymen or international talent.
It’s even more the case about competition for supporters and infrastructure in this country. If we could get the stadiums filled with every person who currently supports or is involved in a semi-pro or amateur club, and cares passionately about a top European club, but rarely goes to A-league games, then we would be sweet. We are the largest participation grassroots sport in this country, but at the professional level we are third string, because all of these people are atomised into their own little fiefdoms. Giving them something to aim and play for with this second division would mean they suddenly have a reason to turn up, even more than the FFA cup has.
I’m aware that both of these points aren’t directly addressing your criticism of pro/rel. I’ll talk about what I think pro/rel will actually do in my next post. But here I’ll just say - whether for romantic or small-minded reasons, a lot of the people in the above category deeply believe in pro/rel. They want it with a passion. And a lot of them are abstaining from connecting with the professional game until they have it.
To me these two points get to the heart of the problem. There are a swathe of club with ambition waiting in the wings - South Melbourne have been trying to get a license harder than Tony Abbott negotiated to try and form a minority government - and there are clubs that have been perennial underperformers for half a decade, as their owners can’t or won’t compete. Never mind that the Mariners have been dragging down the league, Charlesworth can keep pumping his money into facilities and not into a competitive squad.
I would point out, though, that we do, in fact, already have a model for pro/rel. That model has been, the FFA can promote whoever they want by expanding the league or taking back a license, and they can relegate a team under certain conditions. It’s completely in their grubby corporate hands. For example: they (finally) threatened to relegate the Mariners.
What people are arguing for is a model that is actually defined, understood, and (dare I say it) democratic.
Of course, you missing that point doesn’t explain the original point I made in this thread.
If the NRL, AFL, Cricket and Basketball et al can manage to survive without the so-called problems that the A-League apparently has due to the lack of promotion & relegation, why does the A-League need promotion & relegation?
If top flight American pro-sports can survive without the so-called problems that the A-League apparently has due to the lack of promtion & relegation, why does the A-League need promition & relegation?
And to pre-empt your answer: Talent opportunity is bullshit. Talent has opportunity.
The USA is just as relevant as Europe. If everyone else can go , ooohhh they have promotion and relegation in Yoorope so we need to have it here, than I can say they don’t have it in the USA and we don’t need it here.
No one has addressed the geographic issue. You can get away with it in Russia and China because they’re not competing with other national level sports.
And not one issue has been raised that would be addressed by promotion & relegation.
There is one, but none of you will identify it in any serious P&R conversation because it’s frivolous bullshit.