Maybe they should look at options if the Nix get tossed from the A League. If so, we would need to ramp things up in Oceania.
National League review and future
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Personally the guest/import quota needs to be seriously looked at. You can have 3 non NZ eligible players (this is your imports) 1 OFC eligible player (this is the likes of Krishna) and 3 players who played their winter football outside of that 'club/franchise' federation area (assuming you stick with a franchise and summer model) Means you have to pick footballers that plied their trade in that area over winter and stops teams from stacking but allows you to get quality players with the few spots you have.
It may lower the quality of the product at the pointy end I accept but then it would create a more even competition which would actually be exciting. The flow on would probably be that qualifying for CWC would be incredibly difficult unless you bought in a completely different team.
I know it's counter-intuitive in a way, but does anyone wonder if we lose crouds by playing in Summer? I'm still not convinced that Summer football is a better watch
There's also just a lot more to do in the summer!
Is a reasonable question considering none of the ASBP teams get more of a croud than (say) Olympic vs Wests last weekend.
I'm in Auckland now. I live 5 minutes away from North Shore United. Haven't once thought about going to watch ASBP but suddenly as it starts to get a bit colder I've started thinking about watching some football and started looking at the draw etc.
The obvious counter is that, as the ASBP is/should be a development league, we need younger players to be in football for 12 months a year. So even if crouds are down, they need to be playing over summer.
The obvious counter is that, as the ASBP is/should be a development league, we need younger players to be in football for 12 months a year. So even if crouds are down, they need to be playing over summer.
Sure, comes back to the key question of what is the league for. I don't think there's any one answer to that, it's more that of the various goals how do you maximise the outcome for that (balancing, standards, player development, profile, media interest)
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
The obvious counter is that, as the ASBP is/should be a development league, we need younger players to be in football for 12 months a year. So even if crouds are down, they need to be playing over summer.
Sure, comes back to the key question of what is the league for. I don't think there's any one answer to that, it's more that of the various goals how do you maximise the outcome for that (balancing, standards, player development, profile, media interest)
I agree. Needs a "Strategy". Something that NZF has lots of good history with.
Oh wait, no that's completely bullshark.
Do any of Fred de Jongs mates need a job to perform a review?
Maybe Danny Hay and Chris Zoricich could do it. The key question is what would be in it for St Kents though?
I know there was rumours many years ago of the Franchises trying to gain control of NZFC off NZF.
Would it have merit. Could it achieve a better balance. It would have a vested interest in growing it.
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
If anyone at NZF wanted a truely competitive league, they would sort it out. We never said it would be an an easy task but it would seriously benefit football in NZ.
I can't comment on other teams but the majority of the football community down here think Southern United is a joke because they aren't competitive and they dont attract any support as a result.
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
If anyone at NZF wanted a truely competitive league, they would sort it out. We never said it would be an an easy task but it would seriously benefit football in NZ.
I can't comment on other teams but the majority of the football community down here think Southern United is a joke because they aren't competitive and they dont attract any support as a result.
Not just Southern. The whole league is a waste of time.
Canterbury United are in worse shape than you southern guys, look at angst on Canterbury U blog.
Take ACFC out of this comment/comp and not one team in the ASs [or what ever the next title is] Prem is performing any better than a club team at the top of a local league.
Revamp to be a better product over a longer time frame each season and don't do it if you can't get TV coverage sorted [prefer not on sky] or flag it full stop.
Get format of revamp done first up then TV package plus things like who will do the outside broadcast set up. tie this in with other sports being done near by by same provider. Once that is set and signed go and find a sponsor based on amount of air time on TV or give the package to the big ad agencies in the country to sell overall package to a client and make a nice profit for themselves as well.
So what has Martin done so far? Eh hum, why not just to start put out a media release that NZF are going to do a major revamp of the National league get it in all this idea media outlets Print, Radio and TV. Set the ball going.
Tekkers, if Southern were given the same amount of money as everyone else [under the model some are talking about here] how would they spend it? If they didn't buy players in,would they be competitive? If they bought players in, how would that benefit southern football?
So what has Martin done so far? Eh hum, why not just to start put out a media release that NZF are going to do a major revamp of the National league get it in all this idea media outlets Print, Radio and TV. Set the ball going.
[quote=Global Game]
Of relevance to this discussion, from the Andy Martin Angst thread...
March 10, 2015 3:38pm
http://www.nzfootball.co.nz/guiding-our-game-march...
Signalling a shake up of InsertSponsorNameHere Premiership...
Mid-year, the creation and consultation around a refreshed blueprint for our national competitions structure is a vital piece of work as we aim to hit on the winning formula for our domestic game which will provide stable, sustainable products which appeal to everyone with an interest in this critical step of our pathway; from players and supporters through to sponsors and broadcasters.
Canterbury United are in worse shape than you southern guys, look at angst on Canterbury U blog.
I feel that might be a result of people actually caring about CU
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
So you the sum total of money NZF would be granted would be equal or close to the total that the franchises receive? Or do you not consider that important?
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
So you the sum total of money NZF would be granted would be equal or close to the total that the franchises receive? Or do you not consider that important?
I don't understand what you mean?
NZF could centralise the pokie funding quite easily I'd imagine. They would have to get a few trusts to go along with the idea, but I can't see any major hurdle. Then sign up franchises and distribute the coin just like the A-League.
In fact, the whole model we're talking about is basically the A-League model except with pokie money in the place of TV rights money.
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
So you the sum total of money NZF would be granted would be equal or close to the total that the franchises receive? Or do you not consider that important?
I don't understand what you mean?
NZF could centralise the pokie funding quite easily I'd imagine. They would have to get a few trusts to go along with the idea, but I can't see any major hurdle. Then sign up franchises and distribute the coin just like the A-League.
In fact, the whole model we're talking about is basically the A-League model except with pokie money in the place of TV rights money.
not sure why you dont understand.
Say Akld City get 700k pa from Trillion, Waitak 400k form Pegasus,.. = 2million across the league. My point is that the central pool would attract a fraction of that amount due to the nature of the grant system. Agree?
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
So you the sum total of money NZF would be granted would be equal or close to the total that the franchises receive? Or do you not consider that important?
I don't understand what you mean?
NZF could centralise the pokie funding quite easily I'd imagine. They would have to get a few trusts to go along with the idea, but I can't see any major hurdle. Then sign up franchises and distribute the coin just like the A-League.
In fact, the whole model we're talking about is basically the A-League model except with pokie money in the place of TV rights money.
not sure why you dont understand.
Say Akld City get 700k pa from Trillion, Waitak 400k form Pegasus,.. = 2million across the league. My point is that the central pool would attract a fraction of that amount due to the nature of the grant system. Agree?
I see what you're saying.
I'm saying NZF would have to go out to all of the currently contributing trusts, and ask them to continue to contribute but to a central fund.
There is nothing technically preventing that (they do it currently with the Whole of Football funding).
Hmm, would take major reversal of stated policy from most funding organisations. For example the Lion Foundation states:
Our policy is to return 90% of the funds available for grants to their community of origin. The remaining 10% supports major and highly effectual national causes like St John, Plunket, Coastguard and Surf Life Saving that save, nurture and protect kiwi life around the clock and across the country.
I honestly think a decent review will start with this premise: what national competition structure will best support the development of football in NZ? Answer: 9-10 months competitive football. With that goal, given the 'community of origin' nature of trust funding, there are only two commercial models to support this: centralised and decentralised approach. The latter is fraught with a litany of wrecked, broken clubs and people. However some will still be willing to raise a minority percentage of the overall budget. This leaves, in my humble opinion, NZF to deliver a commercial means of supporting the clubs/franchises/entities who are willing and able, having met certain criteria, for a 9 month season.
Assuming they have the will, they need to find and pay the people who can make it happen - because they don't currently work at NZF.
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
So you the sum total of money NZF would be granted would be equal or close to the total that the franchises receive? Or do you not consider that important?
I don't understand what you mean?
NZF could centralise the pokie funding quite easily I'd imagine. They would have to get a few trusts to go along with the idea, but I can't see any major hurdle. Then sign up franchises and distribute the coin just like the A-League.
In fact, the whole model we're talking about is basically the A-League model except with pokie money in the place of TV rights money.
Agree, you just centralise costs and then get gaming funding for that. So expand the entry fee to cover much more of what it takes to run a franchise
Tekkers, if Southern were given the same amount of money as everyone else [under the model some are talking about here] how would they spend it? If they didn't buy players in,would they be competitive? If they bought players in, how would that benefit southern football?
I'm not involved with the running of the club, but some money would need to be spent on ensuring training grounds are up to standard. Some practices thius season were on fields that aren't even used during the winter because they are that bad. Other training / team basics could also be purchased / used with the extra money.
Some moneys could be spent on getting the team involved / advertised within the community as there is practically nothing other than word of mouth. Those who are involved in winter football are not exposed to anything regarding Southern during the winter and then when the summer comes around support is minimal. Might not be necessary but this is where the most costs were cut when money is short.
Southern has also had a policy that involves only having players that have a link to Southern Football. Even if players were bought in to strengthen the team, they would be familiar faces. The players this season who didn't play winter football down here have done so in the past 3 years. So that would benefit southern football by bringing these players back to the region and maybe keeping them here.
It may also help if the players got some sort of game / win bonus, which provides an incentive that winter football does not give. I understand that even WaiBop, the least funded team was able to provide win bonuses for the team. In other regions it seems to be a given, but here it would be a luxury. But that will never happen down here unless more money comes in.
Agree, you just centralise costs and then get gaming funding for that. So expand the entry fee to cover much more of what it takes to run a franchise
Centralising costs is exactly what is needed to level the financial playing field. Teams could acquire funding for luxuries but no team should be restricting basics due to costs. What those basics are would have to be discussed but that would be the idea
Hmm, would take major reversal of stated policy from most funding organisations. For example the Lion Foundation states:
Our policy is to return 90% of the funds available for grants to their community of origin. The remaining 10% supports major and highly effectual national causes like St John, Plunket, Coastguard and Surf Life Saving that save, nurture and protect kiwi life around the clock and across the country.
I honestly think a decent review will start with this premise: what national competition structure will best support the development of football in NZ? Answer: 9-10 months competitive football. With that goal, given the 'community of origin' nature of trust funding, there are only two commercial models to support this: centralised and decentralised approach. The latter is fraught with a litany of wrecked, broken clubs and people. However some will still be willing to raise a minority percentage of the overall budget. This leaves, in my humble opinion, NZF to deliver a commercial means of supporting the clubs/franchises/entities who are willing and able, having met certain criteria, for a 9 month season.
Assuming they have the will, they need to find and pay the people who can make it happen - because they don't currently work at NZF.
So Lion - 10% of the available funding is available National. ACFC could not live off that.
So Lion - 10% of the available funding is available National. ACFC could not live off that.
So Lion - 10% of the available funding is available National. ACFC could not live off that.
Just because NZF is the recipient organisation doesn't mean the funding isn't returning to its community of origin.
Honestly, some of you folks have some solid blinkers on here.
Look at how much the pokie funding allocation process/rules have changed over the last 5 or 10 years. Enormous change happens in this space pretty quickly. So if your starting position is "the rules today make this idea impossible tomorrow" then you're starting from the wrong place.
yeah though it does make it all theoretical until the processes and rules change.
Having said that it's still an interesting and worthwhile discussion to have.
NZF cannot redistribute national money as it sees fit, because football will never meet national criteria for funding, as it stands. It COULD raise a bigger slice of pie nationally which is then distributed pro rata to community of origin. Regardless if any if that, we're talking semi pro football here. That cannot exist without commercial sponsorship AND the ability to take some gate money; ie controlled ground entry.
One thing I do agree with is the starting place; which I think bottom line will be 9-10 months of football.
NZF cannot redistribute national money as it sees fit, because football will never meet national criteria for funding, as it stands. It COULD raise a bigger slice of pie nationally which is then distributed pro rata to community of origin. Regardless if any if that, we're talking semi pro football here. That cannot exist without commercial sponsorship AND the ability to take some gate money; ie controlled ground entry.
It exists now without commerical sponsorship.
Why can't NZF redistribute money? It does it now.
Hmm, would take major reversal of stated policy from most funding organisations. For example the Lion Foundation states:
Our policy is to return 90% of the funds available for grants to their community of origin. The remaining 10% supports major and highly effectual national causes like St John, Plunket, Coastguard and Surf Life Saving that save, nurture and protect kiwi life around the clock and across the country.
I honestly think a decent review will start with this premise: what national competition structure will best support the development of football in NZ? Answer: 9-10 months competitive football. With that goal, given the 'community of origin' nature of trust funding, there are only two commercial models to support this: centralised and decentralised approach. The latter is fraught with a litany of wrecked, broken clubs and people. However some will still be willing to raise a minority percentage of the overall budget. This leaves, in my humble opinion, NZF to deliver a commercial means of supporting the clubs/franchises/entities who are willing and able, having met certain criteria, for a 9 month season.
Assuming they have the will, they need to find and pay the people who can make it happen - because they don't currently work at NZF.
So Lion - 10% of the available funding is available National. ACFC could not live off that.
May be ignorant here, but if every club had less, doesn't that just mean they'd pay players less? Would the player pool (Aucklands foreigners aside) really suffer that badly as a result? These players probably aren't good enough to get paid to play anywhere else, it may even mean a few more youngsters get a go. A more even playing field would dangle the carrot of the club world champs to more players who may then want to take part as a result - instead we have a bunch of foreigners paid to 'coach' representing us every year.
This is probably simplistic thinking, so feel free to rip it to bits. But would less money, distributed more evenly really be the end of the world? Would it really be so bad if a few journeyman (or foreigners) who are only playing in the league to take money out of the game leave, and those who actually want to play in the league or youngsters who will use the league as a pathway end up taking their place? (If many even drop out at all).
FYI: I don't know enough to have a strong opinion, just throwing the questions out there out of interest.
gees there's some major crap being talked here about NZF possibly allocating trust funding
Makes heaps of sense. Would be a true franchise league then.
Pretty unlikely.
That's what I'm saying - it's impossible so mere pie in sky talk
Not impossible at all. Just a lack of will to do it.
So you the sum total of money NZF would be granted would be equal or close to the total that the franchises receive? Or do you not consider that important?
Feverish has accused me of not answering his questions, so here goes:
I have no idea what the total pool would be if it was centralised. I would hope that it would be at least as much. But who knows. The only similar situation I can think of was when Whole of Football was established. It is partly pokie funded, and many doom mongers said that when NZF applied for that funding it would suck funding from local clubs and federations. That never happened, they just got more money for club development officers. So speculating about how centralised national league funding might affect the total pool of funding is fairly tricky.
And as for the second (very passive-aggressive) question. Of course I consider the amount of funding to be important because, contrary to popular opinion, I am not a retard.
last sentence debatable
NZF cannot redistribute national money as it sees fit, because football will never meet national criteria for funding, as it stands. It COULD raise a bigger slice of pie nationally which is then distributed pro rata to community of origin. Regardless if any if that, we're talking semi pro football here. That cannot exist without commercial sponsorship AND the ability to take some gate money; ie controlled ground entry.
It exists now without commerical sponsorship.
Why can't NZF redistribute money? It does it now.
A 16 match 3-4month league with minimal coverage exists. Balls-out, bottom line will be 9 month season. This requires commercial support.
NZF distribution for WOF is a different sell to "we want money for a a 9 month semi pro football league"
not knowing the original employment arrangement of FDO's but I thought they were NZF employees during at least the first year.
Assumed from original roll out meeting. May be way off.
A quick check of Gaming trust application forms most still carry a clause similar to the No Third Party Distribution of funds.
Must admit it is 5-7 years since I read DIA guidelines/rules. As Smithy says change happens.
One thing I do agree with is the starting place; which I think bottom line will be 9-10 months of football.
But not a 9-10 month national league surely?
I personally still think it has to be something people want to watch. If you can get crouds of around 1000 I think it's worth people time, effort and money.
how did the old Winfield/Rothmans league draw such big crouds and big names to the games. Was it generational and the times have moved on.
how did the old Winfield/Rothmans league draw such big crouds and big names to the games. Was it generational and the times have moved on.
The clue is in the sponsor
how did the old Winfield/Rothmans league draw such big crouds and big names to the games. Was it generational and the times have moved on.
The clue is in the sponsor
They were big smokers to.