View Full Version : Sheehan Article about a Gold Coast club?
bulldogtragic
5 Apr 2006, 13:05
Demetriou has said time and time again that he wants a club up on the coast.
To create some healthy debate, the article says North or the Dogs should saddle up to the boardroom table and ask for the following:
All debt is wiped,
Get a massive amount of cash,
An extra swag of top draft picks,
Salary Cap concessions
A contract promising a minimum of 8 games in Melbourne a year for the next 25 years.
Plus cash from QLD govt and paid up Gold Coast members -
Plus preserve the colours, logo, mascot and naming rights.
If the club was promised every one of these things,
(1) What should the club do?
(2) What would you as a fan think?
No ********ing chance in hell.
How about we seen Sheahan to the Dubai Tribute. I'm sure they could do all the above for him.
John Gent
5 Apr 2006, 14:19
Demetriou should concern himself with shoring up support for the game in Brisbane now that the Lion's era has finished.
Watch them jump off the bandwagon in their droves now that they're not winning premierships
footscray1973
5 Apr 2006, 14:44
Demetriou should concern himself with shoring up support for the game in Brisbane now that the Lion's era has finished.
Watch them jump off the bandwagon in their droves now that they're not winning premierships
Good point John, and Sydney will be the same in a few years. I still can't see how two teams can be supported in either market until they can generate substantial long-term support for the Lions and Swans.
This AFL puppet has been running this line for yonks. Whatever the AFL's take, Sheahan says 'yes'. I wouldn't be surprised if Demetriou shouted him a lunch and asked him to write such an article.
We all know what we think of this idea. But I think they are eyeing the Kangas for this. Wonder how their fans feel about it.
Spiritof82
5 Apr 2006, 15:17
This AFL puppet has been running this line for yonks. Whatever the AFL's take, Sheahan says 'yes'. I wouldn't be surprised if Demetriou shouted him a lunch and asked him to write such an article.
Sheahan is the biggest tool in the press who spends more time bent over Demetrious desk than he does watching football, he supports a non existant club and still tries to convince everyone that South Melbourne still exists. He then thinks that every other club should give into the AFL's greed for money and sell out their supporters and sole and move interstate. Go away Sheahan and find something that you may be good at, because you are about as talented at football writing as Stevie Wonder is at race car driving.:cool:
Sheahan is the biggest tool in the press.
That's all I needed to read to know that I agree with you.
John Gent
5 Apr 2006, 16:22
Any team that goes to the Gold Coast had better get used to having this on their jumper
محاكمةأسفها لمنع مساعد الأمين
like every other sign in the place.
Any team that goes to the Gold Coast had better get used to having this on their jumper
محاكمةأسفها لمنع مساعد الأمين
like every other sign in the place.
What the hell is that???
John Gent
5 Apr 2006, 17:04
What the hell is that???
Arabic writing -
usually accompanied by Japanese writing -
on every Cavell Ave street sign.
murphy2bedabest
5 Apr 2006, 18:05
Demetriou should concern himself with shoring up support for the game in Brisbane now that the Lion's era has finished.
Watch them jump off the bandwagon in their droves now that they're not winning premierships
i senced this last year when i went 2 the gabba, there was no passion, not like u get at the dome or the G.in saying that i can see a team on the gold coast in the next 10 years be it a relocated side or a 17th team.
for us the next 10 years is important for us both on and off the feild.
cam rose has done a fantastic job with increased sponsorship, membership plans and whitten oval redevelopment,ect
we need a premirship thats saying a lot we have one of the best young side going around and a style of play that is very marketable, and a flag will bring on more members and sponsors.
wen need to be at 30000 members year in and year out come 2016 to stay in melb.
if we went to the gold coast we would demand
-all debt wiped
-the first 3 years of number 1 draft picks plus the picks we get ie if we finish last with less the 5 wins we get picks 1 plus 2 priority pick and the first rd pick 3
plus the next 2 years an extra rd 1 pick. or for the first 5 years the chance to pick the best young QLD player like a father son pick.
-keep whitten oval as our melb base for development and training.aim for 20000+melb base members
-8 melb games for atleast 25 years all of which can be used for members
-afl to get better tv rights in to QLD
-afl to put more money in to junior and grass roots footy in QLD maybe having the TAC CUP a national comp???
-keep all name rights and playing colors
-partner up with a club in QLD(southport) and have atleast 3 years before setting up, ie playing games gettimg local sponsorship and membership up and running.
-extra cash for salary cap and melb based vs qld based player
-keep playing list!!!!
now my views haven't changed for 20 years keep in melb
Pembleton
5 Apr 2006, 23:24
I hadn't read the article, so when i saw the reaction in this thread i thought i would go and see it for myself. Very few people in this thread have even addressed the content of the article at all. I am suprised the way some of you have attacked the man rather than the content. An argument isn't defined by who makes it. Only its content matters.
Most of the points made are pretty sensible.
1. The AFL is keen to get a team to the Gold Coast.
2. The AFL is unlikely to go with a 17 team competition.
3. This means relocation of a Melbourne club could be on the agenda some time soon.
4. The Bulldogs and Kanagaroos are the most likley candidates.
5. Fitzroy would have ended up with a much better deal at the end of '96 had a deal been made when they were in a greater position of power.
Then he throws up the idea that us or the roos would be better served by making a strong deal for ourselves whilst we have relatively strong bargaining power. Given his reference to the Roos membership levels, one gets the feeling he sees them as more vulnerable than us.
Like all of you, i disagree with his idea. The fact is that not that long ago the list of most vulnerable clubs included Hawthorn and St. Kilda (and Richmond not too long before that). So turning things around IS geniunely possible. Collingwood and Geelong also faced major financial problems in relatively recent times. With the redevelopment of WO and better times ahead in terms of playing performance (and the financial benefits that will flow from those things), the Bulldogs position is strengthening rather than weakneing. This undermines the view that we should make a pre emptive deal to relocate whilst we still have some bargaining power.
catters05
5 Apr 2006, 23:32
18 Team Comp.
Gold Coast Sharks out of Carrara.
If it would work a Tassie Team, but probably wouldn't work so West Sydney Team. Would need a winning lotto ticket from the US to work IMO.
Dogs play 3 in Darwin and Kangas play 3 in Canberra.
No one has to move, 9 Games per Round...Monday night Footy could be included in the fixturing or 2 Friday Night Games. More TV money.
Cheers,
LondonBulldog
6 Apr 2006, 00:16
End of the day for me is all about being able to go to the footy.
Preferred Choices
1. Stay as the dogs
2. Merge with north, at least seeing lots of games in melb
3. Interstate is not an option with me, would change to my brothers team.
tassiedog
6 Apr 2006, 10:09
End of the day for me is all about being able to go to the footy.
Preferred Choices
1. Stay as the dogs
2. Merge with north, at least seeing lots of games in melb
3. Interstate is not an option with me, would change to my brothers team.
I think eveyones first option is to stay the dogs.....I have to agree with London that a merge with North is the next best option. I seem to remember a proposal back in '95 (I think) that had "Footscray and North Melbourne" merge into the Northern Bulldogs. We were to be based at Whitten Oval and the colours would be red, white and blue. The Bulldog remained. (Not all that different to who we are today).
Having said that, I think we are in a better position now to hold our ground as a single entity and I beleive that the pressure is well and truly on North to relocate. I read an article the other day which stated that this decision will be left to about 6 individuals as the members have no voting rights. North is a privately owned club whos fate is in the hands of only a few. Of course members thoughts will be taken into account by this 6 will see the writting on the wall well before the members do.
The Western Bulldogs geographically and demographically represent 15% of Melbourne and about 500 000 people and growing (Councils of Maribyrnong, Brimbank, Hobsons Bay, Wyndham and Melton). This in Melbourne, AFL heartland.
The Gold Coast also as around 500 000 people, where support for AFL is split with Rugby League and Union The point being, nothing is achieved from relocating the Western Bulldogs, to South East Queensland, the numbers from that angle don't make sense.
This asian, middle eastern and african communities that are located in the western suburbs will come around in the future to support AFL and the dogs, it usually takes 2-3 generations for this to happen (how many Italian carlton supporters and Greek Collingwood supporters are there today? plenty) In the west we are just seeing the 2nd generation come through the school system.
Just give the dogs another 10-15 and watch the support for our club boom.
... I am suprised the way some of you have attacked the man rather than the content. An argument isn't defined by who makes it. Only its content matters...
Unashamedly I am not a fan of Mike Sheehan.
Pembleton
6 Apr 2006, 14:05
Unashamedly I am not a fan of Mike Sheehan.
We all have journo's we like or dislike, but this thread isn't about who likes or doesn't like Mike Sheahan, its about an idea of his. The two things are very distinct.
Well perhaps one of the moderators can delete my irrelevant posts then.
footscray1973
6 Apr 2006, 14:14
We all have journo's we like or dislike, but this thread isn't about who likes or doesn't like Mike Sheahan, its about an idea of his. The two things are very distinct.
About as distinct as Mike Shehan and an idea I'd say. Mike comes from the Robert Walls "borrow someone else's idea/comment and make it sound like your own" school, and also boasts the presidency of the "I'm an AFL-sycophant" society.
This thread isn't about who likes or doesn't like Mike Sheahan, its about an idea of his. The two things are very distinct. No they're not. An argument is undoubtedly defined by the person who makes it.
Pembleton
6 Apr 2006, 16:13
About as distinct as Mike Shehan and an idea I'd say. Mike comes from the Robert Walls "borrow someone else's idea/comment and make it sound like your own" school, and also boasts the presidency of the "I'm an AFL-sycophant" society.
Others have already attacked Sheahan in this thread. I reckon you have just borrowed their ideas/comments and made them sound like your own. :)
Well perhaps one of the moderators can delete my irrelevant posts then.
I think that would be a bit of an over reaction. As i said, i was just suprised that so many of the responses in this thread were direct attacks on the writer without at all addressing the article itself at.
Pembleton
6 Apr 2006, 16:42
No they're not. An argument is undoubtedly defined by the person who makes it.
Depending on what you mean by defined, i may actually agree with you on that part.
I reckon you have probably misunderstood what i mean by distinct because to suggest an abstract thing like an argument is not distinct from a human is pretty crazy. :cool:
footscray1973
6 Apr 2006, 16:45
Others have already attacked Sheahan in this thread. I reckon you have just borrowed their ideas/comments and made them sound like your own. :)
Please check my history of posts, and you will see a consistent theme in my comments on the Hun in general and Sheahan in particular - I make a habit of attacking Mike Sheahan. Derivative journalism is a given, as there is only so much news to go around, but talented football journos can take existing ideas and add a twist of their own, or ex-footballers (e.g. Brent Crosswell) can provide a unique perspective that deviates from the standard ex-player garbage that we are usually served up in most media outlets (e.g. Gary Lyon, Michael Voss, and now Chris Judd). I formed my opinion of the worth of anything that comes from the head, mouth, pen of Mike Sheahan years ago when he was on the panel at a selector's night at Whitten Oval during a final's series.
Pembleton
6 Apr 2006, 17:37
Please check my history of posts, and you will see a consistent theme in my comments on the Hun in general and Sheahan in particular - I make a habit of attacking Mike Sheahan. Derivative journalism is a given, as there is only so much news to go around, but talented football journos can take existing ideas and add a twist of their own, or ex-footballers (e.g. Brent Crosswell) can provide a unique perspective that deviates from the standard ex-player garbage that we are usually served up in most media outlets (e.g. Gary Lyon, Michael Voss, and now Chris Judd). I formed my opinion of the worth of anything that comes from the head, mouth, pen of Mike Sheahan years ago when he was on the panel at a selector's night at Whitten Oval during a final's series.
My comment was just a gag mate.
I reckon you didn't really form your opinion on everything he says in the future years ago. You seem too smart to let your bias against him totally define your opinion of anything he may say. I mean, even the journo's that i think are rubbish i can acknowledge that they may at least fluke it every now and then and say something sensible.
footscray1973
6 Apr 2006, 17:53
My comment was just a gag mate.
I reckon you didn't really form your opinion on everything he says in the future years ago. You seem too smart to let your bias against him totally define your opinion of anything he may say. I mean, even the journo's that i think are rubbish i can acknowledge that they may at least fluke it every now and then and say something sensible.
Sorry, I should have stuck a smiley on the end of my comment - I was aware of the humourous intent in your previous post, apologies if my response sounded too "straight-laced", it wasn't meant that way - although re-reading it now, it sounds like that, doesn't it? I was typing in a hurry in between trying to do some work, while following the discussion on several threads. Damn work, always gets in the way of BF posting....:D
Pembleton
7 Apr 2006, 14:14
Sorry, I should have stuck a smiley on the end of my comment - I was aware of the humourous intent in your previous post, apologies if my response sounded too "straight-laced", it wasn't meant that way - although re-reading it now, it sounds like that, doesn't it? I was typing in a hurry in between trying to do some work, while following the discussion on several threads. Damn work, always gets in the way of BF posting....
No worries. :thumbsu: :cool: Smileys can be very useful in setting your tone. :) :)
Though some poeple do go over the top with using them. ;) :D
NOTE: I had to delete your smiley from the quote because apparently you are only allowed to have 6 smileys in a post. I would do a sad face here if i could.
footscray1973
7 Apr 2006, 15:49
No worries. Smileys can be very useful in setting your tone. :) :)
Though some poeple do go over the top with using them.
NOTE: I had to delete your smiley from the quote because apparently you are only allowed to have 6 smileys in a post. I would do a sad face here if i could.
:( There you go Pembleton, I've done it for you. I thought the limit used to be 2 per post. Anyway go Dogs for tonight :thumbsu:
I've also had to delete the smileys from your post as now I'm over the limit :eek: !
:( There you go Pembleton, I've done it for you. I thought the limit used to be 2 per post. Anyway go Dogs for tonight :thumbsu:
I've also had to delete the smileys from your post as now I'm over the limit :eek: !
But we don't play until tomorrow. Why tease like that? :(
footscray1973
7 Apr 2006, 18:23
I'm not having much luck on this thread Sporty - should have read "tomorrow", just getting excited, b/c tomorrow can't come soon enough.......
SonOfScray
7 Apr 2006, 18:25
No chance, Sheehan is a nob.