The AFL's McClelland Trophy contradicts itself, and the league needs to make one of two changes to ensure the AFL landscape understands its purpose.
Just two weeks out from the AFLW Grand Final, reigning premiers, Brisbane are back in the preliminary final, with a first-ever men-women premiership double on the cards. Since the AFLW's inception, no club has won both the men's and women's grand final in the same year.
Whatever the result of the AFLW's upcoming preliminary final weekend, there is without a shadow of a doubt that the Lions have been the most successful club in 2024. An emphatic AFL men's premiership 12 months after a heartbreaking defeat, and a women's team on the cusp of a third consecutive appearance in the big dance.
So, it would be safe to assume that the AFL's reward for the most successful club, a prize of $1 million, would be in Brisbane's hands right now, right? Wrong.
The key catch to the McClelland Trophy is that it is awarded to the best team throughout the home and away season only. Finals have no impact on the winner, as four points are added for every men's win in the regular season, whilst eight are added for every win in the AFLW due to its short 11-game fixture.
Enter Hawthorn. Both the men's and women's Hawthorn sides have uncannily risen up the ladder in similar fashion this season, with a youthful exuberance - or arrogance, depending on one's perspective - highlighting the Hawks meteoric soar back into finals football. The Hawks finished seventh in the men's competition, whilst the women placed second; combining for 24 wins in the home and away season. Despite neither side earning a minor premiership, the combination of regular season success led Hawthorn to a tight six-point victory in the McClelland Trophy race over Brisbane, who won a combined 23 games and one draw, thus marginally falling short of the major prize.
Eventually, both Hawthorn sides bowed out in the semi-finals, again in uncanny fashion, with single-digit losses to Port Adelaide. To sour the blow to Brisbane further, the women's Hawks team lost to the Lions in the qualifying final en route to their straight sets exit, ultimately proving Brisbane's superiority. Yet, Hawthorn walk away with the money.
According to the AFL, the McClelland Trophy is to reward the "champion club" across both competitions. Hawthorn are not the champion club though, they are purely the more consistent organisation across two separate leagues. A champion club would be a team that surpasses all their rivals, as Brisbane have done this year in the men's competition, and last year in AFLW.
On the surface, the award seems unfair, and there is a growing voice to alter the McClelland Trophy to reward deep finals runs. A brief glance at last weekend's AFLW results, and it seems completely necessary.
But, a deeper look into the AFL's awarding of funds suggests Brisbane haven't missed out at all.
Don't get it twisted. Brisbane haven't walked away with nothing in the process of their latest flags. Despite the heavy media coverage of the McClelland Trophy's tight conclusion, Brisbane haven't finished their men's and women's season with just a medal and premiership cup.
In addition to the silverware, the Lions were rewarded with the gold. $1.2 million was won by the Lions after their 2024 win over Sydney, whilst the women's Lions have already earned a split of $1.1 million between the top eight sides of the AFLW. The $1.1 million is on par with the AFL men's top four prize money, which increased from $623,922 in 2022.
Brisbane haven't walked away empty-handed. In fact, they've essentially walked away with more prize money than any other club, although the media coverage of this fact has been minimal.
Thus, including finals into the McClelland Trophy won't amend Brisbane missing out, as they've already been sufficiently rewarded for their top eight finishes and a premiership win.
The only blight in Brisbane's case for the McClelland Trophy is how the money is divvied up. The premiership-winning money goes directly to the club, whilst the McClelland Trophy specifically allocates half of the $1 million to the players - $250,000 in bonuses for each of the men's and women's squads. The other $500,000 is allocated to the club.
How important then is it to differentiate the home and away and finals periods of the football season? Evidently, for Brisbane and many logical fans, it would be ideal if the season was viewed as a whole, rewarding the real "champion" teams, or at the least, the club that goes furthest in the finals for both men and women.
Hawthorn's women's team were a good side this season, evidently so with their finals losses by a combination of just seven points. However, the Hawks played just three eventual top eight teams in their 11 games this season, highlighting the imbalance of the short AFLW fixture.
So, is it okay to recognise the team that was successful for the major portion of the year, even if they couldn't achieve the ultimate goal? As a club, Hawthorn were technically the best team in the home and away season overall. But in their separate competitions, the Hawks still weren't the top team, again reflecting the imbalances in the McClelland Trophy.
Because of the amalgamated nature of the award, the true dominant sides of the home and away season also miss out on the prize money. Sydney were considered miles better than the rest of the men's AFL in 2024, at one stage three games clear with the minor premiership. Yet, the women's team faltered and finished bottom four, ending any chance of a McClelland Trophy win.
Similarly, yet for opposing reasons, North Melbourne went undefeated in the AFLW this season, and are unsurprisingly premiership favourites. However, the men's side continued their long rebuild and finished second last, realistically ending any chance of a McClelland Trophy win before the AFLW season had even begun.
The AFL needs to overhaul one of the two characteristics of the McClelland Trophy to clarify its purpose in the league. If the AFL want to reward home and away success, the "champion club" motto must be ditched. Both cannot exist mutually.
The AFL could consider a split award instead, rewarding the minor premier of either competition.
Before 2023, the McClelland Trophy was rewarded to the winner of the minor premiership in the AFL, although no prize money was attached to it. $500,000 to each minor premier in the AFL and AFLW would still allow for $250,000 to be allocated to one women's squad and one men's squad, and eliminate the imbalance of a combined award.
Premiers and runners-up are already fairly compensated in the AFL (Sydney received a $660,000 consolation bonus after this year's efforts), as are top four and top eight finishes in both leagues. If the AFL are aiming to reward home and away success, simply removing the "champion club" slogan will make its purpose clear.
However, should the league want to reward a club across both men's and women's competitions, and thus deem it the "champion club", it must include their efforts in the finals.
Brisbane finished one AFLW win shy of winning the award. Had finals been included this year, the Lions' qualifying final win would have ultimately been the sealer and the club would be $1 million richer.
The "champion club" characteristic is most likely the main objective of the McClelland Trophy. In its announcement in 2023, AFL Commission chairman Richard Goyder specified how it was intended to reward a club succeeding in both competitions.
"We want to encourage and incentivise our clubs to support the AFL and AFLW programs and recognise the achievement and challenges in driving high performance across both elite competitions," Goyder said.
If you need a snapshot of what high performance across both the AFL and AFLW looks like, go no further than the Brisbane Lions. Three premierships and two runners-up performances in four years suggest the Lions are undoubtedly the AFL's overall champion club.
And whilst it means the Lions would have earned approximately $2.3 million in prize money this year, with the next highest earner in Sydney at $660,000, perhaps it could be the lucrative reward needed for clubs to foster high-quality AFLW programs and drive the growth of elite football in the AFLW.
Contrary to public belief, the Lions haven't missed out on a massive payday despite their premiership success. However, they have wrongfully not been deemed the champion club of the AFL's competitions, unless the McClelland Trophy is to reward purely home and away success. Which, in turn, would also wrongfully not deem Sydney and North Melbourne the champion home-and-away clubs.
Hence, the AFL must amend the terminology used around the McClelland Trophy to provide greater clarity for fans on what its purpose is, and end the debate for future seasons.