Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

General 2024/5 A League Men's thread

grazorblade said:
The alleged trade off is that to max the socceroos you need to have clubs develop youth and play and sell a lot of them. In terms of fraction of minutes given to youth we actually aren't remarkable, similar to the eredivisie,jupiler league and old nsl
Click to expand...
I suspect that there is a natural limit to the amount of minutes that you can give young players. Too many young players without experienced leadership on the pitch will limit their growth - although MC would prove the exception to that this season.
I think that clubs that invest on the physical and human infrastructure so that talent can be identified earlier and trained accordingly will have a conveyor belt production line. The complementary item is to have quality experienced players on the field to ensure that their confidence is enhanced.
 
WhatAmIWatching said:
I am not sure that there is a trade off. The more success the Socceroos are the more exposure Australian talent gets which benefits the AL because they don't have to do marketing, that is, the Socceroos are the marketing and advertising of the AL.

As far as transfer fees, a lot of clubs (if not most) have a lot of accumulated red ink. I suspect that most if not all of the transfer money will go towards plugging that hole. Let's not forget that PG, NJ, and maybe one other have been under PFA administration recently. And right now MVC are not in the healthiest position.

Well run clubs like AU, SFC will use that money to improve their physical and human infrastructure.

Finally, clubs have the option of including two players outside the salary cap, so no concession needed. The danger of relaxing the salary cap for clubs that are getting revenue from transfers is that the AL could become like the Scottish league, two clubs that win everything every year and the rest wither.
Click to expand...
As much as it sounds bad I almost feel like the league would be more likely to expand if there were so called "big clubs", I'd imagine once the domestic transfer system is brought in that will happen naturally, clubs like Melbourne City and Victory, as well as both of the Sydney teams will be able to throw around fees because of richer ownership.

The benefit of giving extra budget or cap space to clubs that make more profit through sales is that they don't necessarily have to use it, it's just an added incentive for signing longer deals for youth players and actually playing then in order to maximize profits when selling to European clubs.
 
AliG040803 said:
As much as it sounds bad I almost feel like the league would be more likely to expand if there were so called "big clubs", I'd imagine once the domestic transfer system is brought in that will happen naturally, clubs like Melbourne City and Victory, as well as both of the Sydney teams will be able to throw around fees because of richer ownership.

The benefit of giving extra budget or cap space to clubs that make more profit through sales is that they don't necessarily have to use it, it's just an added incentive for signing longer deals for youth players and actually playing then in order to maximize profits when selling to European clubs.
Click to expand...
The problem with the big club phenomenon is that you could end up like the Scottish League - just two big clubs and then dire daylight. In a sense that what is happening to the European leagues and why they wanted to establish a separate super league. The major difference is that the in Scotland or Europe they don't have alternative big sports like AFL & NRL. The MLS model is closer to what we have in Oz and perhaps that is something that the PFA should be looking at.
Personally, I feel that if the PFA could become something bigger by actually owning suitable stadiums across the country. This will provide football only pitches that the AL and NPL teams could use as well as relive the pressure on clubs to actually cough up a load of cash for almost empty stadiums.
As for expansion, I think that about 14 teams will suffice in the current environment.
 
AliG040803 said:
As much as it sounds bad I almost feel like the league would be more likely to expand if there were so called "big clubs", I'd imagine once the domestic transfer system is brought in that will happen naturally, clubs like Melbourne City and Victory, as well as both of the Sydney teams will be able to throw around fees because of richer ownership.

The benefit of giving extra budget or cap space to clubs that make more profit through sales is that they don't necessarily have to use it, it's just an added incentive for signing longer deals for youth players and actually playing then in order to maximize profits when selling to European clubs.
Click to expand...
I advocate a luxury tax - in leagues with a luxury tax there is a different winner every year. You can buy your way out of a wooden spook buy u can't buy your way to a premiership

But u can also have clubs grow as much as they want which over time will mean a better league. Importantly it is compatible with developing players since it is more flexible than a salary cap

The idea of a salary cap concession for a transfer fee is an interesting idea. It would mean that even if the tv revenue came back clubs wouldn't just go back to stacking their squad with journeymen
 
One phenomenon that has changed the AL for the better is all the young Aussies playing.

The disadvantage is that young players make a lot of mistakes, hence, often the better AL teams have many young players. This reduces Aus competitiveness in the ACL. Senior players don't make collective team mistakes, and individual mistakes as much and tend to be more consistent.

A few years back when Fox relinquished the rights for Aus football, I had less interest in the AL, because most teams had foreign 5 journeymen and the rest older Aussie players who would probably never be good enough for the Socceroos. There were few young Aussies playing.

There has been a metamorphosis. Covid increased young domestic Aussies playing. Now there are heaps of new Aussies playing who have had 10 years junior/youth development under the NC .

That means they are 'match ready' for international tournaments. This has enabled the Under 20s to win the Asian Cup. They've also qualified for the World Cup.

The Under 23s played well everywhere except for shooting for goal in last year's Olympic qualifiers.

I'd prefer this to ACL success. China has had a lot of ACL success by spending big money importing quality foreigners. Saudi are trying to do the same. Conversely, Australia's path has been to develop youth in preference.
 
Decentric said:
One phenomenon that has changed the AL for the better is all the young Aussies playing.

The disadvantage is that young players make a lot of mistakes, hence, often the better AL teams have many young players. This reduces Aus competitiveness in the ACL. Senior players don't make collective team mistakes, and individual mistakes as much and tend to be more consistent.

A few years back when Fox relinquished the rights for Aus football, I had less interest in the AL, because most teams had foreign 5 journeymen and the rest older Aussie players who would probably never be good enough for the Socceroos. There were few young Aussies playing.

There has been a metamorphosis. Covid increased young domestic Aussies playing. Now there are heaps of new Aussies playing who have had 10 years junior/youth development under the NC .

That means they are 'match ready' for international tournaments. This has enabled the Under 20s to win the Asian Cup. They've also qualified for the World Cup.

The Under 23s played well everywhere except for shooting for goal in last year's Olympic qualifiers.

I'd prefer this to ACL success. China has had a lot of ACL success by spending big money importing quality foreigners. Saudi are trying to do the same. Conversely, Australia's path has been to develop youth in preference.
Click to expand...
If there isn't at least 1 player born 2004 or later in the starting xi I have trouble being interested in the match
 
HappyGuus said:
If CFG departed tomorrow, would City be dead? Who would take over their Casey base, if anyone?

Click to expand...
I don't think CFG will depart, as much they don't have a large fan base they bought in the infrastructure for a sport doesn't have in spades so its all that bad with CFG.
Maybe they better off playing away from AAMI Park but apparently they had a 30 year lease so unless there is an appetite for creating a new stadium I don't see it changing anytime soon.
 
Barca4life said:
I don't think CFG will depart, as much they don't have a large fan base they bought in the infrastructure for a sport doesn't have in spades so its all that bad with CFG.
Maybe they better off playing away from AAMI Park but apparently they had a 30 year lease so unless there is an appetite for creating a new stadium I don't see it changing anytime soon.
Click to expand...
To be honest with everyone CFG out right don't care about supporters they just want us to spit out young players
 
Barca4life said:
I don't think CFG will depart, as much they don't have a large fan base they bought in the infrastructure for a sport doesn't have in spades so its all that bad with CFG.
Maybe they better off playing away from AAMI Park but apparently they had a 30 year lease so unless there is an appetite for creating a new stadium I don't see it changing anytime soon.
Click to expand...
Yeah they've been great for those facilities. CFG are only good for us when they're spending. So, when they stop spending, they're no good for us.
 
when does a corporate care about its minnions below.
Not many haha
The time will come IF and when CFG will pull up stumps thats a given considering we're such a small market here.
As long as they can offload some players and get a small ROI it will survive but for how long.
I'm actually surprised they have even bothered dipping their bucks in this small back water but I suppose its pittance when you have around 5.5B.
Will be interesting the loss's that will encur as MCity are out of the title race - possibly out of CL.
The ROI will be dented some but the portfolio has such a mix the lost revenue will be recovered some.
Yer as long as they keep spending - we shall see HG.

Re that link
Anyway its riverting and imo pre mature to carry on about 1 hugely successful VNPL sell out game comparing to a long time known lack of support MelbCity club vs another lowly supported Bulls away might I add.
It would have been more interesting IF it was MCity vs MV same night and we knew some at the NPL game were regular AL Melb supporters but they couldn't help themselves not attending due to the history of the NPL let alone the clubs.
This shows NPL is deep rooted in many despite many being endoctranated to be against it due to the ethnics.
Let this NSD/Championship get some legs I feel it will test some loyalties in years to come, this I do agree with regards to that article/link posted by HG.
Reading the comments was interesting, Waz comeback here and join us mate, that Cameron as well.
 
What does success mean in CFG books? And some people seem to have forgotten that MC did win both trophies in the last five years.
Also there are other clubs in the CFG stable which are in bigger strife (Troyes). In any case football success comes in cycles unless you are in Scotland or England.
Yes they ought to do more for supporters but as far as being a football factory that is working and being in the top 6 is also working. BTW Lawrence Wong, admittedly a work in progress, is tremendous PR for the club as he started with the City Football School program.
 
melbcityguy said:
To be honest with everyone CFG out right don't care about supporters they just want us to spit out young players
Click to expand...
Which poses bigger questions about them and their motives going forward.

By the way I don’t have any problems on them focusing on developing young players as it’s their business model but questions regarding building up their supporter base is a valid question also.
 
Last edited:
Barca4life said:
Which poses bigger questions about them and their motives going forward.

By the way I don’t have any problems on them focusing on developing young players as it’s their business model but questions regarding building up their supporter base is a valid question also.
Click to expand...
Well do Adelaide's owners care about them winning the league? They were second and haven't got any investment it's actually quite likely none of the owners give a shit about winning the league (no prize money) and just want to make money from selling young guns
 
melbcityguy said:
Well do Adelaide's owners care about them winning the league? They were second and haven't got any investment it's actually quite likely none of the owners give a shit about winning the league (no prize money) and just want to make money from selling young guns
Click to expand...
this is like a double edged sword reading and from a owners perspective.
and your right MCG, AU and BR owners don't seem to give a toss, Charlesworth is struggling to sell, or won't low balled of late.
Jets isn't flushed with new owners.
Seriously what is the point owning anything that really keeps costing you more than return.
Even selling off young guns isn't enough to recover your costs.
How many clubs actually end up selling some players abroad of the 13 ?
Maybe a handfull ?? who can provide a list.
The silverlake funds have been reduced to 500k for the season.
Seriously how does it work in the end in the meantime some clubs struggle getting crowds despite the recent climb recovery post covid.
Doesn't make much business sense.
 
CFG and those companies that have sport as their core business may have a different business model. Probably more like the music industry was prior to the rise of Spotify. Record labels would sign heaps of contracts with bands or artists knowing full well that some will never sell a record but then some will and occasionally there would be a monster signing such GnR who made over a billion dollars in profit for the label (Universal?). If you are an investor but sports is not the core expertise area, then they are better off not getting into the business. Finally, there are investors that love the game and invest only to lose but although it hurts they carry on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LFC
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top