Changes to relegation/promotion

[S Demon]

What's everyone think about the proposal to change the relegation/promotion system to just the PREMIERS being promoted and the WOODEN SPOONERS being relegated?

Sounds ok for clubs higher up, (Portland raised it) but makes it even harder for clubs trying to climb the ranks. From our point of view, we haven't won an A grade flag since 1994, but have and were in Div 7 in 2005. We managed to get ourselves into Div 5 by making 2 grand finals (lost both). IMO, promotion is a pretty good silver medal after losing a GF and under this new system we could potentially still be in Div 7.

One of the arguments put forward is that it makes it hard for clubs who get relegated to attract players and sponsors, so why make it harder than it already is to go back up?

[S Demon]

PROPOSED ALTERATION TO RELEGATION SYSTEM
The proposal is to alter the basic structure of the SAAFL relegation system to only one team up and down each year rather than two.

 This request is to ask Clubs to consider, discuss and vote on this proposal with the view to make the required changes to enable the change to happen. It is suggested that discussion be allowed (agenda item) at the next delegates meeting with a view to vote on and approve the change at the next delegates meeting.

 Below are some suggested thoughts and reasons for this proposal:

 1. The current change of teams within Grades each year is 40% (4 out of 10) which is too high.
 
2. We believe most players and clubs primarily play footy to win a premiership. For this reason we think only the premier team should be promoted each year, this way there is a better chance the teams that don’t win but are close can still have a reasonable chance the next year.
 
3. At the other end it can be tough on a club being relegated just because they have a poor year. Understandingly, the bottom side will need to go down for one to come up. However, we feel only one club going down is fair when the 2nd bottom side may still have been reasonably competitive during the year. For example, if a club wins 5 or more games, they have beaten at least three teams during the year, meaning they were not uncompetitive in that Grade. A recent example was Woodville South who went down after winning eight games. We also remember Adelaide University who had been in the one Grade for all their existence till one poor year. There are many more examples.
 
4. We believe there is more transition of players from clubs caused by teams going up or down.
 
5. Clubs find it difficult to raise funds as it is, without the added pressure when going up a Grade or losing sponsors when going down.
 
6. Clubs that get on the roller coaster of regularly changing Grades can be adversely affected.  

7. Div.1 sides don’t need to go up when they win a premiership therefore their Club can potentially remain more stable.
 
8. Apart from the A Grade at clubs, when teams go up, the B Grade can also be adversely affected and not be as competitive. The B Grade may not have had the benefit of having won a premiership like the A Grade.
 
9. We believe this proposed change could strengthen the longer term viability of the Clubs and the SAAFL in total.
 
10. We would presume there could still be the current options of teams not changing for extenuating circumstances as is currently the case.
 
11. The current relegation system of 2 teams up and down was originally founded when there were 12 teams in each Grade prior the 80’s which caused a greater difference between the top and bottom sides than is currently the case with 10 teams.
 
Whilst we are sure there are other justifications we hope the above promotes the positive thinking to make the change. We believe the benefits far outweigh the negatives

[Executive Member]

What's everyone think about the proposal to change the relegation/promotion system to just the PREMIERS being promoted and the WOODEN SPOONERS being relegated?

Sounds ok for clubs higher up, (Portland raised it) but makes it even harder for clubs trying to climb the ranks. From our point of view, we haven't won an A grade flag since 1994, but have and were in Div 7 in 2005. We managed to get ourselves into Div 5 by making 2 grand finals (lost both). IMO, promotion is a pretty good silver medal after losing a GF and under this new system we could potentially still be in Div 7.

One of the arguments put forward is that it makes it hard for clubs who get relegated to attract players and sponsors, so why make it harder than it already is to go back up?

I think it has a shelf life for as long as the Portland delegate talks about it and then that will be that

It was raised earlier in the year to reward the Minor Premier as one of the 2 to go up if they missed out on the GF
Had very little support

The majority seem happy with the 2 sides that play in the GF

Good on them for raising it though as it never hurts to explore new and different ideas

[Yank Man]

Interesting debate, I'm sure there are many instances but hypothetically, Adel Uni could still be in Div 1, Mitcham in Div 5, (who went from 5 to 3 without a flag) and Glenunga in Div 7, all strong clubs now who have benefited from the 2 team system. I am sure there's plenty on the other side of the ledger also, so dont fire back, but the current system is not broken so why try and fix it. It does become a little flawed when clubs fold or change leagues, and in the lower Div's go from 2 teams to 1, so maybe that is worthy of discussion. When Paralowie folded and Smithfield went to 1 team only, Div 7 became a 50% C grade competition. Not sure how you would fix that but.

[HH3]

I reckon it would hurt more sides in the lower grades than it would help. Whos gonna wanna go to a team thats likely to be stuck in Div 6 or 7 for a decade.

Theres nothing wrong with the system. The Woody South examples a good one, but at the end of the day, they were the 9th most competitive team in the league, hence being relegated. What they're saying is if theres good competitive footy and a close, exciting league all year, and it comes down to a blockbuster at the end of the year, its a bad thing.....um, no, its not a bad thing. Last year was great in Div 5.

They also say that the runner up should stay down, so they can have another crack at the Premiership the next year and remain competitve in the lower division. Thats all well and good, but wheres that leave the team that finished 9th and received floggings all year. They have to stay up and keep getting pumped, unless they purposefully have an even worse year just to get relegated to be competitive the next year.

[Footy Smart]

Interesting debate, I'm sure there are many instances but hypothetically, Adel Uni could still be in Div 1, Mitcham in Div 5, (who went from 5 to 3 without a flag) and Glenunga in Div 7, all strong clubs now who have benefited from the 2 team system. I am sure there's plenty on the other side of the ledger also, so dont fire back, but the current system is not broken so why try and fix it. It does become a little flawed when clubs fold or change leagues, and in the lower Div's go from 2 teams to 1, so maybe that is worthy of discussion. When Paralowie folded and Smithfield went to 1 team only, Div 7 became a 50% C grade competition. Not sure how you would fix that but.

SHOC went from Div 3 to 1 with out a flag I believe.... look what they did last year

[Easy Miss]

PROPOSED ALTERATION TO RELEGATION SYSTEM
The proposal is to alter the basic structure of the SAAFL relegation system to only one team up and down each year rather than two.

 This request is to ask Clubs to consider, discuss and vote on this proposal with the view to make the required changes to enable the change to happen. It is suggested that discussion be allowed (agenda item) at the next delegates meeting with a view to vote on and approve the change at the next delegates meeting.

 Below are some suggested thoughts and reasons for this proposal:

 1. The current change of teams within Grades each year is 40% (4 out of 10) which is too high.
 
2. We believe most players and clubs primarily play footy to win a premiership. For this reason we think only the premier team should be promoted each year, this way there is a better chance the teams that don’t win but are close can still have a reasonable chance the next year.
 
3. At the other end it can be tough on a club being relegated just because they have a poor year. Understandingly, the bottom side will need to go down for one to come up. However, we feel only one club going down is fair when the 2nd bottom side may still have been reasonably competitive during the year. For example, if a club wins 5 or more games, they have beaten at least three teams during the year, meaning they were not uncompetitive in that Grade. A recent example was Woodville South who went down after winning eight games. We also remember Adelaide University who had been in the one Grade for all their existence till one poor year. There are many more examples.
 
4. We believe there is more transition of players from clubs caused by teams going up or down.
 
5. Clubs find it difficult to raise funds as it is, without the added pressure when going up a Grade or losing sponsors when going down.
 
6. Clubs that get on the roller coaster of regularly changing Grades can be adversely affected.  

7. Div.1 sides don’t need to go up when they win a premiership therefore their Club can potentially remain more stable.
 
8. Apart from the A Grade at clubs, when teams go up, the B Grade can also be adversely affected and not be as competitive. The B Grade may not have had the benefit of having won a premiership like the A Grade.
 
9. We believe this proposed change could strengthen the longer term viability of the Clubs and the SAAFL in total.
 
10. We would presume there could still be the current options of teams not changing for extenuating circumstances as is currently the case.
 
11. The current relegation system of 2 teams up and down was originally founded when there were 12 teams in each Grade prior the 80’s which caused a greater difference between the top and bottom sides than is currently the case with 10 teams.
 
Whilst we are sure there are other justifications we hope the above promotes the positive thinking to make the change. We believe the benefits far outweigh the negatives

They're saying it's tough on a side who's been competitive all year to get relegated by finishing 9th but what about if you had a cracker of a year won every game but lost the Grand Final? So they get penalized and effectively have had as good of a year as a side who's only won 3 or 4 games? It aint broke so don't fix it!!

[Easy Miss]

What's everyone think about the proposal to change the relegation/promotion system to just the PREMIERS being promoted and the WOODEN SPOONERS being relegated?

Sounds ok for clubs higher up, (Portland raised it) but makes it even harder for clubs trying to climb the ranks. From our point of view, we haven't won an A grade flag since 1994, but have and were in Div 7 in 2005. We managed to get ourselves into Div 5 by making 2 grand finals (lost both). IMO, promotion is a pretty good silver medal after losing a GF and under this new system we could potentially still be in Div 7.

One of the arguments put forward is that it makes it hard for clubs who get relegated to attract players and sponsors, so why make it harder than it already is to go back up?

I agree S Demon

[Jetters]

Doesn't the current system work really well?

This may lengthen a clubs unnecessary domination (dominating seasons with a couple of GF losses) or at the other end extend slumps where teams scrape 9th for a couple of years with no relief.

Also, traditionally wouldn't the lower grade Runners-up be a stronger club than the higher Divs 9th?

[Yank Man]

Interesting debate, I'm sure there are many instances but hypothetically, Adel Uni could still be in Div 1, Mitcham in Div 5, (who went from 5 to 3 without a flag) and Glenunga in Div 7, all strong clubs now who have benefited from the 2 team system. I am sure there's plenty on the other side of the ledger also, so dont fire back, but the current system is not broken so why try and fix it. It does become a little flawed when clubs fold or change leagues, and in the lower Div's go from 2 teams to 1, so maybe that is worthy of discussion. When Paralowie folded and Smithfield went to 1 team only, Div 7 became a 50% C grade competition. Not sure how you would fix that but.

SHOC went from Div 3 to 1 with out a flag I believe.... look what they did last year

Reckon the last 2 years they have played in the Div 1 GF, Footy Smart, and that strength gave them Div 7 and Div 7 res flags last year. Do you think that would have happened if they were still in Div 3?

[Jimmy_041]

I'lll wait for Yardy Lard's sensible views before I even think about it

[Yank Man]

Make sure you talk to you club delegate and committee if you think it should remain as is. Sometimes not enough advice is taken from the players within the clubs inner sanctum. Just sayin'

[marbles]

If its decided it must be locked in now so then when the leagues love child side adelaide uni finishes runner up theyll hav to endure another season in div 2

And to further that all the delegates currently in favour of the change are likely in it to save their clubs standing at this point in time but what happens next year when tides turn and ur club is set to evolve but the rule change that u yourself a year ago initiated is now coming bak to bite ur club on the butt

[Mr Beefy]

If its decided it must be locked in now so then when the leagues love child side adelaide uni finishes runner up theyll hav to endure another season in div 2

And to further that all the delegates currently in favour of the change are likely in it to save their clubs standing at this point in time but what happens next year when tides turn and ur club is set to evolve but the rule change that u yourself a year ago initiated is now coming bak to bite ur club on the butt

Out of the 6 (or is it 7) clubs likely to finish in 9th spot on the ladder, how many would actually think it is a good thing to change the system? In any case it wouldn't be enough to get this over the line.

I think it has a shelf life for as long as the Portland delegate talks about it and then that will be that
It was raised earlier in the year to reward the Minor Premier as one of the 2 to go up if they missed out on the GF
Had very little support

The majority seem happy with the 2 sides that play in the GF

Good on them for raising it though as it never hurts to explore new and different ideas

I agree with EM.

[Gatt_Weasel]

why fix something that is not broken....

[Jimmy_041]

Nothing wrong with sensible debate Gatt
They have provided their reasoning, and so should be considered by the clubs.

I still prefer the concept of Premier and Minor Premier in each grade going up.
The final 5 system works against the Minor Premier.
But that got voted down and so we move on

[The Ash Man]

I think it should be left as is.

You look across the tightness of most grades and it proves the system works.

Makes me wonder what is their angle?

[heater31]

Makes me wonder what is their angle?

Places greater importance on winning the Grand Final than rather the weeks before in the 2nd Semi & preliminary finals.....

[HH3]

Makes me wonder what is their angle?

Places greater importance on winning the Grand Final than rather the weeks before in the 2nd Semi & preliminary finals.....

Do they think players and clubs dont think winning the Grandys that important now?

[heater31]

Makes me wonder what is their angle?

Places greater importance on winning the Grand Final than rather the weeks before in the 2nd Semi & preliminary finals.....

Do they think players and clubs dont think winning the Grandys that important now?

Well in the SAAFL to progress in the system you only need to make the Grand Final. I'm sure some clubs committee see promotion as a measure of success.