Booney wrote:johntheclaret wrote:Booney wrote:johntheclaret wrote:Or better still change Ports rules to match Adelaide and get rid of the academy side altogether, no home games and a £50k contribution.
That would solve the issue of playing completely different teams.
As for limiting AFL listed players, that should be a given anyway. No more than 14 max, assuming we re going to be stuck with the AFL Reserves.
Your arrogance is that you think Port has the right model and Adelaide should get it too.
You still don't get it, do you?
If neither side has a team in the reserves competition then when Port v South takes place, who does South's two's play if Port has no SANFL reserves side? Who does West's two's play if the league is playing Adelaide, kapish?
I do get it. I just don't agree with you and that's the bit you don't get. The reserves would be 8 teams, 4 games a week.
Ports academy should be disbanded with those players moving to SANFL clubs
Creating an Adelaide academy will dilute the SANFL even further. How long before you start asking for an Academy Rerserve squad to provide top ups for the Academy side who are providing top ups for the Reserves side who are providing top ups for the AFL side.
At that point Port and Crows will be renting out whole suburbs so they can claim little Ricky is resident in their zone and the SANFL won't even be a feeder league anymore.
Kapish
Yes, the reserves will be 8 teams, 4 games per week. Excellent maths.
Hopefully you can add up that one team, per week, will have the league and the reserves playing at different locations. Meaning support staff can't be at both. Now, that won't work, will it?
Anyway, it's all piss in the wind here. The two sides aren't going anywhere soon and unless people are willing to look at the happiest medium possible they'll be disappointed for some time.
[b][b]*EDIT - LOL, yes, Port and Adelaide will move families from one suburb to another to ensure they get the right type of top up player. 
You blokes make me laugh[/b][/b]
What is so funny at that. Man U, Chelsea, Arsenel etc do it all the time. How do you think Beckham ended up at Man U. And Chelsea was investigated for doing the exact same only 2 or 3 years ago.
Give it another 5 years or so when AFL clubs have expanded their squads to include U18's and the draft has lost its value, you will all want to keep who you sign up and you'll put new rules in place to prevent one club from stealing young talented players from another clubs' zones. With the $billions rolling In the value of young talent to AFL Clubs will grow exponentially and the idea (and comparative cost), of renting a flat or a house in your zone so you can move in and sign up a potential star player on the basis that they are resident in you zone, won't be so far fetched.
(For "you & you'll" I mean the AFL and AFL Clubs)
The AFL doesn't give a shit about the SANFL, WAFL or any other so called "feeder" leagues and neither do the Adelaidd Crows or Port Adelaide. Whilst the state leagues serve a purpose, as now with the 2 AFL Reserves, then the status quo will be left alone.
But once the AFL decides it is more beneficial for its clubs to develop U18 squads by signing young talent directly and cutting out the middle man, they will do it in a heartbeat and at that point the state leagues such as the SANFL will lose their U18, U16 squads as the talent is picked up by the AFL Clubs.
State leagues will be reduced to little more than ammo status as they will attract only players who won't make the AFL grade and players returning once their AFL career is finished. There might well still be some structure between the ammo's and the state leagues but by then the state league clubs will be so shafted it won't mean anything and the days of the likes of Walker etc starting their career in the SANFL will be well and truly over.
