View Full Version : AFL dont have the balls to grant a 17th licence
littleduck
2 Nov 2007, 11:56
AFL do not have the balls to make such radical changes. The Super League debacle provide radical change is a backward step. Steady as she goes is the AFL mantra and means relocations NOT more licences.
Nothing is surer than the AFL will load up against North Melbourne and put a bullet to their head, but force them to make the final decision on relocation themself so as to give the "perception" of a voluntary relocation so that if it all goes pear shaped on the Coast the AFL can wipe their hands and say who what wasnt us they gambled their future on their own accord.
Most likely Kangaroos will voluntarily relocate under duress from an AFL loaded gun and the AFL will be left to fund a perennial struggler for decades to come.... not to mention the adverse impact on the Brisbane Lions... and it becomes patently clear that Queensland will be AFLs problem child for decades to come.
Funkalicous
2 Nov 2007, 12:59
Most likely Kangaroos will voluntarily relocate under duress from an AFL loaded gun and the AFL will be left to fund a perennial struggler for decades to come.... not to mention the adverse impact on the Brisbane Lions... and it becomes patently clear that Queensland will be AFLs problem child for decades to come.
Wow, you paint such a rosey picture... :p
But no, sorry, the AFL and Queensland government strongly believe that SEQ can become a strong AFL zone in time. And when the Fonz is determined on something, he sticks to it.
Subprime
2 Nov 2007, 13:01
littleduck - You seem to be viewing the Australian game's expansion into Queensland as 'glass half empty'.
I prefer to view it as glass half full. Sure the Lions made a loss recently but they've made some decent profits too, that far outweigh the losses.
And when you look at the number of players being drafted and invited to draft camp these days, well its been an outstanding success. More players attended draft camp from QLD this year than from SA. That would have been unheard of 20 years ago.
So with TV money funding further development, Queensland promises to be a great breeding ground for Aussie Rules talent for many years to come.
In meaningful ways the AFL is consolidating its place in the Sunshine state and we can all look forward to a bright future.:)
Funkalicous
2 Nov 2007, 13:05
Also, the Gold Coast side would likely receive zone concessions in the short term. Wasn't that your agenda only last week? :p
Chris who
2 Nov 2007, 22:37
AFL do not have the balls to make such radical changes. The Super League debacle provide radical change is a backward step. Steady as she goes is the AFL mantra and means relocations NOT more licences.
Nothing is surer than the AFL will load up against North Melbourne and put a bullet to their head, but force them to make the final decision on relocation themself so as to give the "perception" of a voluntary relocation so that if it all goes pear shaped on the Coast the AFL can wipe their hands and say who what wasnt us they gambled their future on their own accord.
Most likely Kangaroos will voluntarily relocate under duress from an AFL loaded gun and the AFL will be left to fund a perennial struggler for decades to come.... not to mention the adverse impact on the Brisbane Lions... and it becomes patently clear that Queensland will be AFLs problem child for decades to come.
It will be a bit late to relocate then wouldnt it
The television agreement says 16 clubs only
There will not be a 17th team
BlackDouglas
2 Nov 2007, 23:00
The television agreement says 16 clubs only
There will not be a 17th team
No AFAIK the agreement only stipulates that there must be a minimum of 8 games per round must be played; adding a 17th licence wont change that equation
No AFAIK the agreement only stipulates that there must be a minimum of 8 games per round must be played; adding a 17th licence wont change that equation
You may well be right, I seemed to recall discussion on here in regards to dropping teams and how the TV Rights affect that and thought it was a 16 team agreement and not an 8 game a week agreement
AFL do not have the balls to make such radical changes.
You hope.
FootyJunkie
2 Nov 2007, 23:43
No AFAIK the agreement only stipulates that there must be a minimum of 8 games per round must be played; adding a 17th licence wont change that equation
Rounds 1-17 = each club plays each other once, and gets one bye.
Rounds 18-23 = 6 return games, 6 clubs get a second bye. 176 games (8x22) is a minimum for the TV contract, but that is only 5 return games, and we need to end up on an even number, thus Round 23 (more footy :) )
Round 24 = the 6 clubs who have had a second bye get to play a game amongst eachother, while the other 11 clubs get their second bye. It is a short round of only 3 games (7, 10, and FOXTEL get a game each). Ideally you would move this particular short round sometime mid-season as a mid-season break by default for a majority of the clubs (see second half of Round 12 this year, something like that, only its a separate round with everyone else getting a bye).
Season starts just a week earlier than normal, either bring the NAB Cup forward a week (like they will do next year) or get rid of the week off between NAB Cup and Round 1.
As for NAB Cup, have a NAB Cup "qualifier" between the bottom two clubs from the previous season in early February.
Wouldn't surprise me that the TV contract had some fine print to deal with the possible inclusion of a 17th club. As long as there are 8 games for 22 rounds as a minimum, it shouldn't be a problem with the above set up.
yioughtta
3 Nov 2007, 00:37
littleduck - You seem to be viewing the Australian game's expansion into Queensland as 'glass half empty'.
I prefer to view it as glass half full. Sure the Lions made a loss recently but they've made some decent profits too, that far outweigh the losses.
.:)
This is true. However, the big profits they made were all on the back of Premierships- three in succession. It was at this time that the SEQers, true to form, turned out and supported the Lions.
However, true to form, when the Premierships dried up so too did the SEQers. And guess what? Premierships don't come around that often. When Brisbane aren't winning the flag (with the help of some good ol' fashioned AFL help I might add) they aren't making much in the dough department either.
Just a thought.
yioughtta
3 Nov 2007, 00:45
Sorry, I just realised that some elaboration might be useful on my earlier point.
You see, the AFL know as well as you or I that it takes on-field success (say... four consecutive Grand Finals) to get the 'fans' in SEQ really into it. That is why they are willing to compromise the entire competition and give the new Gold Coast team priority picks, salary cap concessions, maybe even exclusive drafting zones in order to help the team to a Flag or three- just like they did with Brisbane.
Why should you care? Well if your team doesn't have a hope of winning a flag from say 2010-2020 then you probably don't care. But if you would like to hope your club might have a chance to take home a flag in that window of the game's 'expansion' then you might want to consider just how much the AFL will throw at the Gold Coast to try to make it work. Because it will come at the expense of the rest of the competition.
And should the Gold Coast could somehow magically take off in that time and gain support from SEQ, then it would naturally impact negatively on the support of Brisbane (just as directors of that club have publicly stated) and given their already average financial situation, this may well see them struggling as they did back in their earlier days. You do realise who will be there to prop them up again, don't you?
And again, you realise who will suffer as a result?
This isn't just about the North Melbourne Football Club, my friends. This is about a fair and even competition- and the lack-thereof under this current 'expansionist' regime.
This isn't just about the North Melbourne Football Club, my friends. This is about a fair and even competition- and the lack-thereof under this current 'expansionist' regime.
When was the last truly untainted flag?
From salary cheats to CBF handouts etc etc?
Copernicus
3 Nov 2007, 06:45
When was the last truly untainted flag?
From salary cheats to CBF handouts etc etc?
2007?
You might want to point out to me where Geelong 'tainted' their flag at any point during the season?
Most flags of recent times would fall under that untainted category - or at least half of them.
2007?
You might want to point out to me where Geelong 'tainted' their flag at any point during the season?
Most flags of recent times would fall under that untainted category - or at least half of them.
Its not the season its the buildup. And apart from F/S Geelong have done it well
I was talking in an overall context of salary cap cbf and unknown performance enhancemnt properties .
Sydney Brisbane had concessions , whether that helped is moot
Copernicus
3 Nov 2007, 07:03
Its not the season its the buildup. And apart from F/S Geelong have done it well
I was talking in an overall context of salary cap cbf and unknown performance enhancemnt properties .
Sydney Brisbane had concessions , whether that helped is moot
I wouldn't say F/S is a concession that we've had - it was simply a rule the AFL had in place that we were able to take particular advantage of, perhaps due to a propensity for former players to be fruitful. I wouldn't think that taints our flag in any way (though perhaps you didn't mean to say that it would).
port_rule
3 Nov 2007, 08:53
Rounds 1-17 = each club plays each other once, and gets one bye.
Rounds 18-23 = 6 return games, 6 clubs get a second bye. 176 games (8x22) is a minimum for the TV contract, but that is only 5 return games, and we need to end up on an even number, thus Round 23 (more footy :) )
Round 24 = the 6 clubs who have had a second bye get to play a game amongst eachother, while the other 11 clubs get their second bye. It is a short round of only 3 games (7, 10, and FOXTEL get a game each). Ideally you would move this particular short round sometime mid-season as a mid-season break by default for a majority of the clubs (see second half of Round 12 this year, something like that, only its a separate round with everyone else getting a bye).
Season starts just a week earlier than normal, either bring the NAB Cup forward a week (like they will do next year) or get rid of the week off between NAB Cup and Round 1.
As for NAB Cup, have a NAB Cup "qualifier" between the bottom two clubs from the previous season in early February.
Wouldn't surprise me that the TV contract had some fine print to deal with the possible inclusion of a 17th club. As long as there are 8 games for 22 rounds as a minimum, it shouldn't be a problem with the above set up.
Wow, nice analysis :thumbsu:
Ever since the the 17th licence was flagged I have been trying to work out how a fair draw would work but your method makes sense.
17 is such a hard number to manage... think of the NAB cup for example with its 16 team knock-out format.
One issue is who would get the bye in Round 24... No doubt a big advantage going into the Finals.
It would make sense for the previous years Wooden-spooner to get it.
Also I like the idea of the reigning Premier getting the bye in Round 1.
retroparty
3 Nov 2007, 09:48
I think the AFL will put a 17th team on the Gold Coast if the Roos decide to stay at home. If the AFL do that, then the Roos will stop getting handouts so then the AFL will have killed them off so they will either fold or merge with the GC team.
I wouldn't say F/S is a concession that we've had - it was simply a rule the AFL had in place that we were able to take particular advantage of, perhaps due to a propensity for former players to be fruitful. I wouldn't think that taints our flag in any way (though perhaps you didn't mean to say that it would).
All supporters of every club that wins a flag which is 'tainted' would say that. Not that i'm suggesting Geelong's flag is, but there are always situations for every team where they were lucky in some way that contibuted to their success. i.e
06: Drugs
05: Salary cap
04: Came up against an opponent that shouldn't have had to travel the previous week + had an extra days break
03: Salary cap
02: Salary cap
etc etc.
Geelong were lucky in that they benefited from a rule that, arguably, shouldn't be there. Welcome to the premiership club. ;)
littleduck
4 Nov 2007, 11:18
But no, sorry, the AFL and Queensland government strongly believe that SEQ can become a strong AFL zone in time. .Yeah, I agree, but the issue is how it happens and to what extent will there be short/mid-term pain.
littleduck
4 Nov 2007, 11:20
littleduck - You seem to be viewing the Australian game's expansion into Queensland as 'glass half empty'.
I prefer to view it as glass half full. Sure the Lions made a loss recently but they've made some decent profits too, that far outweigh the losses.
And when you look at the number of players being drafted and invited to draft camp these days, well its been an outstanding success. More players attended draft camp from QLD this year than from SA. That would have been unheard of 20 years ago.
So with TV money funding further development, Queensland promises to be a great breeding ground for Aussie Rules talent for many years to come.
In meaningful ways the AFL is consolidating its place in the Sunshine state and we can all look forward to a bright future.:) Yes, I mostly agree with that, but 99% of BF members think its all upside and overnight success and that couldnt be further from the truth..
Messenger
4 Nov 2007, 11:21
The television agreement says 16 clubs only
There will not be a 17th team
Channels 7 and 10 won't quibble over an extra fortnight on AFL football.
There will be no 17th team.
I've got 2 words to say...
Fitzroy. Lions.
It's happened before and it will happen again.
If the Kangaroos aren't proactive on this, The AFL will grant a licence to Southport, and let nature take it's course.
AFL have no balls? :confused:
I would have thought the opposite to be true. The competition has increased from 12 teams twenty years ago to the current 16 with the AFL being the most proactive football code in the country.
Although their preferred number is 16 with the Roo's making the relocation up north (pardon the pun), they won't have any hesitation in introducing a 17th club and letting the Roo's die if they choose to remain in Melbourne.
I think the AFL will put a 17th team on the Gold Coast if the Roos decide to stay at home. If the AFL do that, then the Roos will stop getting handouts so then the AFL will have killed them off so they will either fold or merge with the GC team.
I would back North to hold out longer than Melbourne or the Bulldogs if the CBF is pulled. This garbage that North is worse of financially and membership is about to be seriously exposed.
People forget that we had 26,000 members in 2006 and it dropped back to 22.5 after a shit onfield performance, continual negative publicity off field pulicity about relocation.
Norths memebership will be beyond 30,000 in 2008 after they call the AFL's bluff and remebrace the North Melbourne supporters in Melbourne.
littleduck
4 Nov 2007, 11:40
I would back North to hold out longer than Melbourne or the Bulldogs if the CBF is pulled. This garbage that North is worse of financially and membership is about to be seriously exposed.
People forget that we had 26,000 members in 2006 and it dropped back to 22.5 after a shit onfield performance, continual negative publicity off field pulicity about relocation.
Norths memebership will be beyond 30,000 in 2008 after they call the AFL's bluff and remebrace the North Melbourne supporters in Melbourne.
Brisbane Lions have 16,000 Qld-based members. If North Melbourne are struggling at mid 20's in Melbourne, what do they hope to achieve membership-wise after a permanent relocation???????????
FootyJunkie
25 Nov 2007, 02:06
With North pretty much telling Andy and the AFL to get stuffed with their offer....do the AFL still have balls of steel to bring in SOUTHPORT SHARKS AFC?
DeadlyAkkuret
25 Nov 2007, 02:11
With North pretty much telling Andy and the AFL to get stuffed with their offer....do the AFL still have balls of steel to bring in SOUTHPORT SHARKS AFC?
I think they should. I'd love to see the Sharks belt the Roos a few times, would make for some interesting conversation around here lol.
Hodge2Franklin
25 Nov 2007, 03:23
I honestly get sick in the stomach at the thought of the AFL relocating the Kangaroos. I personally don't believe they will move because they are an incredible club that hold a lot of that stuff that makes our game great. I get so annoyed at the pro-relocators...
I've got 2 words to say...
Fitzroy. Lions.
It's happened before and it will happen again.
If the Kangaroos aren't proactive on this, The AFL will grant a licence to Southport, and let nature take it's course.
I hope they do grant Southport the licence....they should be the natural choice for the Gold Coast.....the only ones I can see succeeding up there..,Have been a huge rap for Southport to come in to the AFL for approx. 15yrs now.....a very strong club and would get the local support, simply because they are a genuine local team....
finders
25 Nov 2007, 05:27
AFL do not have the balls to make such radical changes. The Super League debacle provide radical change is a backward step. Steady as she goes is the AFL mantra and means relocations NOT more licences.
Nothing is surer than the AFL will load up against North Melbourne and put a bullet to their head, but force them to make the final decision on relocation themself so as to give the "perception" of a voluntary relocation so that if it all goes pear shaped on the Coast the AFL can wipe their hands and say who what wasnt us they gambled their future on their own accord.
Most likely Kangaroos will voluntarily relocate under duress from an AFL loaded gun and the AFL will be left to fund a perennial struggler for decades to come.... not to mention the adverse impact on the Brisbane Lions... and it becomes patently clear that Queensland will be AFLs problem child for decades to come.
You are only living in hope Mate. The AFL will have a team on the GC wether its North or not!Thugby getting a bit worried are we?
FootyJunkie
25 Nov 2007, 11:31
I hope they do grant Southport the licence....they should be the natural choice for the Gold Coast.....the only ones I can see succeeding up there..,Have been a huge rap for Southport to come in to the AFL for approx. 15yrs now.....a very strong club and would get the local support, simply because they are a genuine local team....
they are a like a Port Adelaide type club on the Gold Coast, you either love them or hate them...let them in i say. All this talk about how "not everyone at GC supports the Sharks"...if they don't barrack for an AFL club already, get on the Lions as an alternative. Brisbane and Gold Coast will merge into one big metropolis and could claim "largest city in Australia" tag in about 30 years anyway.
You are only living in hope Mate. The AFL will have a team on the GC wether its North or not!Thugby getting a bit worried are we?
If the AFL are willing to dangle a $100 million carrot (and stick) in the face of the Roos then I think it would be relatively to redirect this money and energy into setting up a new GC club . If the Roos then fail finantually then there will be no mercy and they will go cap in hand to Western Sydney .
There is still a chance for $100 million a club will go voluntarily .
Collingwood have already put forward a proposal .
They also put a proposal to move to Sydney .
Everyboy laughed it off because they'd play all their '"away" games at the MCG , but they play all their games there anyway, so it's not so ludicous .
.
Brisbane Lions have 16,000 Qld-based members. If North Melbourne are struggling at mid 20's in Melbourne, what do they hope to achieve membership-wise after a permanent relocation???????????
For all those stating that the gold coast team will be bad for the lions have you seen the success that the titans brought the bronco's? Why wouldn't this happen with the lions, its just like a typical liberal terrorist campaign; "change is going to come in Queensland and its bad for you".
Typical rubgy league crap, sounds like Roy Masters who is the most bias journalist in Australian history. Preaching that a game from Victoria will destory all sport in the region, besides the point that it's the most Australian sport of all and encourages Australian sportsmen to play sport in Australia.
I hope soutport gets a licience and shows that it can work with the titans on the one region, it would prove that all the shit that the NRL talks is not justified. If anything it would bring more growth to the gold coast as a benefit from a national audience to the growing SEQ region. Hopefully the Queensland government sees the benefit in this and gives them money for a stadium for cricket and footy, and the gold coast in the future can be a place to see future champions play.
If the AFL are willing to dangle a $100 million carrot (and stick) in the face of the Roos then I think it would be relatively to redirect this money and energy into setting up a new GC club . If the Roos then fail finantually then there will be no mercy and they will go cap in hand to Western Sydney .
There is still a chance for $100 million a club will go voluntarily .
Collingwood have already put forward a proposal .
They also put a proposal to move to Sydney .
Everyboy laughed it off because they'd play all their '"away" games at the MCG , but they play all their games there anyway, so it's not so ludicous .
.
More than half of that $100m is in normal distributions that would go to us here in Melbourne. About $20m or so is in the form of redirected benefits, which either wouldn't be needed here or would are generated here. That leaves about $30m and that is over a 7 year period, so about $4.3m additional support per year.
AFL clubs would buy that, but they wont buy a blank cheque from the AFL, a new entity would have to a) have the resources to purchase a new licence, which wont be cheap and b) show the capability to generate significant revenue from the word go.
AFL no doubt are willing, but there are a lot of other factors.
Gold Coast Council not prepared to sink any funds into a GC stadium is a monumental let down for the AFL, this has caused the QLD government to also think twice about the prospect of sinking a lot of money into what is already seen as a white elephant.
It would be great to see a GC side but the AFL will have a significantly harder job selling a new team than it would have moving one.
As to Collingwood's 22 home game proposal, they are taking the urine out of the AFL. The AFL wouldn't accept it and the other clubs wouldn't allow it.
Our club gave a reasonable 8 GC home game co-location proposal and the AFL flat out refused, that offer is off the table now. In their greed to get everything, they may end up with nothing.
Our club gave a reasonable 8 GC home game co-location proposal and the AFL flat out refused, that offer is off the table now. In their greed to get everything, they may end up with nothing.
FFS make up your mind , you either want to go or not .
It's that simple . The Roos failed in Sydney and Canberra because they
went in half hearted . Supporters only support clubs that support them .
.
Doctor Jolly
26 Nov 2007, 09:59
When it comes to discussion on a GC 17th licience, there are two types of posters corrupted by their own bias:
1) North Supporters
2) Littleduck
Read them at your peril.
littleduck
26 Nov 2007, 12:04
FFS make up your mind , you either want to go or not .
It's that simple . The Roos failed in Sydney and Canberra because they
went in half hearted . Supporters only support clubs that support them .
.
Long may the BigFooty gods help us all, but I agree with you for once.
littleduck
26 Nov 2007, 12:08
When it comes to discussion on a GC 17th licience, there are two types of posters corrupted by their own bias:
1) North Supporters
2) Littleduck
Read them at your peril.Your view on this issue depends on whether you are biased towards what is best for AFL national expansion (a Gold Coast team, regardless whether its a full relocation or start up; but not a half-hearted co-location) and North Melbourne Football Club (not a Gold Coast team and should not vote to become one). Both biases have their merits.
Do you trample over a proud clubs culture and historical links in the name of the greater AFL good, or is a proud North Melboure club culture worth preserving???
Your answer to this question is your bias in this whole debate.
HitEmHardFreo
27 Nov 2007, 00:12
To suggest a new Gold Coast club would spell disaster for the Brisbane Lions is non-sensical and shows a genuine lack of understanding of the common man (and woman) as football supporters. It's akin to dismissing current Lions supporters/members as little more than wishy-washy theatregoers ready to jump ship.
History shows that support for founding clubs tends to solidfy when a newcomer comes along. I've seen it in Perth and in Brisbane.
There was a great line in a weekend newspaper that said something along the lines of:
Now this will burn the ears of Queenslanders but the coach (or manager) of (I can't remember the name of the QAFL club) said, "In a lot of ways, we're like a Victorian club in that we love our footy but we train hard. Why would you come here for anything else?"
Beautiful.
On a side note, I see that little fat duck Michael Searle of the NRL Titans stepping up his campaign everywhere in the media rubbishing everything Gold Coast-AFL. Ease up on the paranoia (and, obviously, the cheeseburgers), big fella.
FFS make up your mind , you either want to go or not .
It's that simple . The Roos failed in Sydney and Canberra because they
went in half hearted . Supporters only support clubs that support them .
.
I didn't agree with the board giving the offer, just saying they refused an offer of 8 games so can't see them accepting 6 for collingwood plus a lot of baggage (22 home games).
The club "failed" in Sydney because the Swans ran a hate campaign, the AFL did not support the concept and the Melbourne supporters refused to fund a relocation to Sydney. The club had no other option.
Canberra was not a failure, we never went there with the view of relocating, just playing low drawing games there back when we had about 10k members so we wouldn't suffer a large loss playing at TD. The only reason we are not playing there now is because the AFL wanted us to play on the GC and not in Canberra, so the failure is the AFL's who wouldn't assist the ACT government make the games more viable but were happy to cut a cheque to give the Swans two extra home games.
The club gave the opportunity for people to see football in Canberra where they otherwise wouldn't have had the opportunity, is Melbourne or Bulldogs doing anything better playing games all over the country but not committing to anywhere other than Melbourne?
It is a simple matter of support AFL football when it comes to your neck of the woods because if you have enough support you will get more games and eventually your own team, do not support it and you may end up with nothing.
You can't blame the clubs if the people don't go out and support teams that bring the games there. You can't get your own team until you prove there is enough support to warrant it. Tasmania is probably the only place that has shown that kind of support of the development regions and Hawks are not committing anything more than we have. The difference is the Tasmanian public are not morons, they know their only chance to one day get their team is to come out and support the game no matter who is playing and I hope they get a side before these twits on the Gold Coast who demand their own side after bankrupting their last side.
They have done nothing to warrant their own side, still can't fill a 14k stadium with the AFL more or less giving the tickets away.
The arguments put foward by NRL grugs are just scare tatics, its the same as what happened to the ACT 25 years ago with rugby league and aussie rules. The AFL must be pragmatic about the issue and take make the discissions fast to sure up the talent (e.g. Rewoilt, Raines, Pettard) which is produced from the region on a regular basis.
The ACT was once a fertile ground for the VFL producing class players from year to year, but the NSWRL proceeded to expand to grow its fortunes. This adept dicission allowed the NSWRL to gain a stronghold in southern NSW and eventually led to the changing of the guard in Canberra with much of the rich history of the indigenous sport remaining defunct and dormant.
It is obvious that the formation of a new club will present problems but the more national the AFL becomes the greater the appeal to sponsors and everyday Australians the league becomes, this demonstrated in the previous broadcasting deal (the NRL paid dearly with the East coast appeal). Sitting and waiting will only cause a "Peter Costello moment", aussie rules will always have a presence in the region but it can't afford to be the bridesmaid with various clubs playing there part time to bump up the coffers.
Soutport present as a suitable candidate because they have been planning for this moment since 1995 and will retain a rich history of over 40 years in the region, trumping the spandex and surfboard glitz of the titans. They have over 40k 10$ social club members and even keeping 20% of them in the inuagural year will give the the club a compeditive advangtage over the titans (due to the fact that NRL clubs don't have members for the fact they don't have any democratic rights).
The most imperative issue is the stadium at Cararra; which is the most signicant avantage that the titans would hold over a incumbent footy team. The initial plans of the "Gold coast stadium" was a riverbound venue which touted the idea of cruise ship entry onto the inbult marina, a wave shape roof similar to telstra stadium in Sydney and a botique seating arrangement of approximately 30k - that would be great but it appears that a skilled stadium like ground is more likely. The problem is that the Queensland government, which seem to be struggling to build hospitals at the moment let alone stadiums, have been hesitant to cough up money with the idea of a half hearted team. Hopefully the kangaroo's will make their decision next week and the government will agree to the proposed contracted stadium allowing the formation of the 17th team at the next commision meeting.
With the investment of 100M into SEQ a Gold Coast club is certain, the only questions remaining is when the team will come about and and how much potency has been lost by the diluted gold coast sport market (similar to the plans of the gold coast stadium). The disapointing thing is that the only reason why the gold coast region is the "holy grail" of sporting leagues is because of its large population growth and not its passionate supporter base for footy. If the AFL were serious about the supporters of the game they could fast track a hobart club or a club in darwin which would show a instant supporter base which consolidates the talent produced from the region, unfortanately money is what runs sport now - not passionate support. Proof of this can be seen via David Beckam, a washed up hack which sells perfume can get 80k to a game to check out his haircut and that gets a live national audience, not a club which has a dedicated group of supporters that have turned up through generations for over 130 years.
The AFL should just introduce 6 new teams set up 2 divisions with relagation and promotion, where the top 12 teams play in the premier competition, with a fair draw, If you are not finacially equiped to support a Top AFL side then you are destined to play second division - what's the problem?
The AFL should just introduce 6 new teams set up 2 divisions with relagation and promotion, where the top 12 teams play in the premier competition, with a fair draw, If you are not finacially equiped to support a Top AFL side then you are destined to play second division - what's the problem?
Got it wrong there - Carlton, Essendon who are very financially sound would have played in the second division the last few years right?
Got it wrong there - Carlton, Essendon who are very financially sound would have played in the second division the last few years right?But they are not destined to. You know that they'll will be a top side again.
The club "failed" in Sydney because the Swans ran a hate campaign, the AFL did not support the concept and the Melbourne supporters refused to fund a relocation to Sydney. The club had no other option.
It's always someone else's fault isn't it .
You failed in Sydney because you wouldn't commit to Sydney .
You were too lazy to promote and find your own supporters.
Instead you tried to pinch existing Sydney Swans members .
You didn't (and still don't) have the nouse to play one group off against another .You could have said if you don't support us in Melbourne were off to Sydney , Canberra , GC etc . But ,No, you just torpedo the the ship outright by saying your not moving . No sympathy from me .
.
littleduck
27 Nov 2007, 11:23
On a side note, I see that little fat duck Michael Searle of the NRL Titans stepping up his campaign everywhere in the media rubbishing everything Gold Coast-AFL. Ease up on the paranoia (and, obviously, the cheeseburgers), big fella.You must concede that the Gold Coast has been a major cross-code battleground for the past few years and both sides have been championing their cause long and hard in the media. No side of the fence is guilt-free of cross-code sniping.
AFL do not have the balls to make such radical changes. Steady as she goes is the AFL mantra and means relocations NOT more licences.
Let's see you were ...................wrong.
:cool:
Chasing the Dream
6 Jun 2008, 20:42
Let's see you were ...................wrong.....again
:cool:
edited for accuracy:D
Sebastian Balboa
6 Jun 2008, 21:20
Let's see you were ...................wrong.
:cool:
Good bump, cos....:D
Good bump, cos....:D
I'll have to introduce you to ld's alter ego ! :D
FootyJunkie
6 Jun 2008, 23:14
Not convinced until we see the club play its first game.
Wouldn't surprise me if a Vic club relocates there. This is what Vlad wants.
Sebastian Balboa
6 Jun 2008, 23:46
I'll have to introduce you to ld's alter ego ! :D
Fair dinkum, mate :D And I'll have to introduce you to his 'other' alter ego.
Good to see the 'absolute authority' of this clown's OP shown up.
Not only a 17th licence, but strong moves towards an 18th in the 'heartland', where two clubs, one from Sydney, the other with a fair percentage of its players also from that city, drawing a paltry 6,800 in western Sydney on a Sat'dee night! Geez it must suck to be in NRL right about now...
jackmac7
7 Jun 2008, 14:55
GC17 raised 120,000 at a function the other night and reports from Demetrio on radio today say GC17 is looking the goods.
Do I recall you saying Little duck that a Gold Coast club will happen and will be successful?:D
It's going to happen so take a deep breath and stop posting CRAP Threads that say otherwise. You average a thread a week on either the lions or new GC team with your desperate ploy to inform us that nothing good will happen for the AFL in SEQ.
Get over it because No-one wants to put up with this rubbish up until 2011 on a weekly basis.
STOP, It's F^#King Pathetic.
fairdinkum
7 Jun 2008, 15:59
Let's see you were ...................wrong.
:cool:
How was he wrong? Do you mean in regards to the awarding of a 17th license? If so, where is this 17th license? When was it awarded?
You are an idiot, cos. Littleduck might struggle a fair bit, but at least he has some sort of grasp on reality. You, sir, do not.
How was he wrong? Do you mean in regards to the awarding of a 17th license? If so, where is this 17th license? When was it awarded?
You are an idiot, cos. Littleduck might struggle a fair bit, but at least he has some sort of grasp on reality. You, sir, do not.
See what I mean ? . Ah ha , AH HA , ah HA .
Sorry , private little joke .
How was last nights game , Awesome was it not ?
It was a really great advertisement for Australian Football .
All credit to the Roos . You must me so proud of them .
Cudos to guys like you sticking by the Roos and not
letting them fold .
I can't say it enough . Thank you .
.
fairdinkum
7 Jun 2008, 16:53
See what I mean ? . Ah ha , AH HA , ah HA .
Sorry , private little joke.
Between yourself and Doctor Jolly? Gee, what intellectual and insightful PM's you two must share :rolleyes:
Back to the point - who has the 17th license? When did the AFL award it? Or have you made a complete arse off yourself once again?
Back to the point - who has the 17th license? When did the AFL award it? Or have you made a complete arse off yourself once again?
That's why cos is only a 2nd rate troll and not a 1st rate one.
Surely it would be better to wait for the license to be issued and then shove it down littleduck's throat?
I seriously hope the mods look closely at cos' trolling because it really is hurting this forum.
fairdinkum
7 Jun 2008, 17:04
Surely it would be better to wait for the license to be issued and then shove it down littleduck's throat?
I seriously hope the mods look closely at cos' trolling because it really is hurting this forum.
Totally agree. He is clearly an idiot, and I honestly put his age at between 13 and 15 years old.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - if Chief wants this place to lose its 'FlogFooty' tag, he needs to delete the accounts of serial pests like cos and jackmac7.
mediumsizered
7 Jun 2008, 17:16
Totally agree. He is clearly an idiot, and I honestly put his age at between 13 and 15 years old.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - if Chief wants this place to lose its 'FlogFooty' tag, he needs to delete the accounts of serial pests like cos and jackmac7.
Are they trolls because they support the granting of a 17th AFL license to a Gold Coast based team? Cos' point about littleduck regularly starting anti-AFL threads or making anti-AFL posts is on the money. LD has the temerity to list himself as a supporter of the Brisbane Lions, yet all he does is run down anything to do with AFL in SEQ. Hardly the behaviour of a passionate Lions' supporter.
Totally agree. He is clearly an idiot, and I honestly put his age at between 13 and 15 years old.
His heart is in the right place, but trolling the alleged trolls only makes it worse.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - if Chief wants this place to lose its 'FlogFooty' tag, he needs to delete the accounts of serial pests like cos and jackmac7.
I wouldn't go that far as it is only a few words, but I'd seriously look at some for editing of cos' excuses and dying posts.
I can't help but feel he gets away with it as form of get square for what happens on leagueunlimited. At least (over there) they demand some form of link to outlandish claims such as NRL crowds in Perth of 1710 etc.
fairdinkum
7 Jun 2008, 18:33
Are they trolls because they support the granting of a 17th AFL license to a Gold Coast based team? Cos' point about littleduck regularly starting anti-AFL threads or making anti-AFL posts is on the money. LD has the temerity to list himself as a supporter of the Brisbane Lions, yet all he does is run down anything to do with AFL in SEQ. Hardly the behaviour of a passionate Lions' supporter.
I said they were serial pests, not trolls.
They offer nothing intelligent to the discussion, and consistently clutter threads with useless non-AFL-sport bashing and other childish behaviour.
Cos also seems somewhat illiterate, which detracts from the quality of the board.
Between yourself and Doctor Jolly? Gee, what intellectual and insightful PM's you two must share :rolleyes:
Back to the point - who has the 17th license? When did the AFL award it? Or have you made a complete arse off yourself once again?
Seriously . I aplogise for not sharing that .
We got off to the wrong start .
But your team has been under a lot of pressure and
you must be really relieved that the North Melbourne
Australian Football club is finially travelling well .
That way that have conducted themselves with strength and resolve
is an inspiration to the game .
Guys like you who have stuck by them through thick and thin
are really to be congratulated .
And now we have the bonus of two extra AFL teams from scratch
to bolster the strength and the image of the AFL .
..
mediumsizered
7 Jun 2008, 19:10
I said they were serial pests, not trolls.
They offer nothing intelligent to the discussion, and consistently clutter threads with useless non-AFL-sport bashing and other childish behaviour.
Cos also seems somewhat illiterate, which detracts from the quality of the board.
I know you didn't directly refer to Cos as a troll, but you posted in agreement with Auckmel's post, which accused Cos of trolling.
fairdinkum
7 Jun 2008, 19:25
I know you didn't directly refer to Cos as a troll, but you posted in agreement with Auckmel's post, which accused Cos of trolling.
With all due respect, have a look at the part of Auckmel's post that I quoted. Note the sentence which I left out of my quote.
Perhaps I should have been more specific with what I meant. The mods need to take a serious look at cos' posts full stop - be they 'trolling' or otherwise, they are rubbish.
I know you didn't directly refer to Cos as a troll, but you posted in agreement with Auckmel's post, which accused Cos of trolling.
That's the thing though, he is a troll.
I've asked him to substantiate only one claim in one of his posts and guarantee you we will not see it.
North will be back on the skids in 18 months then we can move them there.
No one else will care
North will be back on the skids in 18 months then we can move them there.
No one else will care
Historically teams rotate through the doldrums and North have had their
fair share of exposure in that position . But we have seen strong turn
arounds by a number of teams . Thanks to hard work , good management
and tireless supporters like fairdinkum through the troubled times I think
their future is assured for a bit longer than 18 months .
So we can't say it often enough , thanks for supporters like fairdinkum
for supporting our AFL teams through the tough times .
:thumbsu:
.
jasonwilde
8 Jun 2008, 12:57
That's the thing though, he is a troll.
I've asked him to substantiate only one claim in one of his posts and guarantee you we will not see it.
And the pot said to the kettle?
Help me out with this one, Mel.
fairdinkum
8 Jun 2008, 13:08
North will be back on the skids in 18 months then we can move them there.
No one else will care
Another idiotic Sydney fan. These are the people we are trying to attract to our game? :rolleyes:
Another idiotic Sydney fan. These are the people we are trying to attract to our game? :rolleyes:
Keep up the good work . Go away disbelievers .
With tireless supporters like you fairdinkum for North
fighting through the troubled times and securing North's their future
and laying the foundations for the introduction of two new AFL teams
from grassroots up , the future of AFL looks even stronger .
So we can't say it often enough , thanks for supporters like fairdinkum
for supporting our AFL teams through the tough times .
:thumbsu:
fairdinkum
8 Jun 2008, 13:55
Cos, I don't know if you are in the midst of some pathetic attempt at sarcasm, or something else altogether. But I can assure that your last four posts along those lines have added nothing to either the threads they are in, or your tattered credibility on this forum.
Cos, I don't know if you are in the midst of some pathetic attempt at sarcasm, or something else altogether.
Seriously , you've been there through the troubled times and now
see North with a secure future . it's a great result for all concerned
because as a benefit we see the introduction of two new AFL teams
from grassroots up , the future of AFL looks even stronger .
So we can't say it often enough , thanks for supporters like fairdinkum
for supporting our AFL teams through the tough times .
:thumbsu:
Beaussie
8 Jun 2008, 14:52
Cos' point about littleduck regularly starting anti-AFL threads or making anti-AFL posts is on the money. LD has the temerity to list himself as a supporter of the Brisbane Lions, yet all he does is run down anything to do with AFL in SEQ. Hardly the behaviour of a passionate Lions' supporter.
Sums littleduck up well.
And the pot said to the kettle?
Help me out with this one, Mel.
What help do you need, jw?
cos' trolling of RL fans is hurting this forum. I'm merely calling him out on some of his lies and misrepresentation of the true facts.
Sebastian Balboa
8 Jun 2008, 22:54
What help do you need, jw?
cos' trolling of RL fans is hurting this forum. I'm merely calling him out on some of his lies and misrepresentation of the true facts.
Not really, just a counter-balance to the NRL Propagandists, of which this board attracts many.
Not really,
Yes, really.
just a counter-balance to the NRL Propagandists, of which this board attracts many.
LoL
Those big bad nasty bullies huh?
Sebastian Balboa
9 Jun 2008, 09:27
Yes, really.
Compelling counter-argument there.
LoL
Those big bad nasty bullies huh?
(Insert whatever text speak abbreviation riposte here in reply...)
jackmac7
9 Jun 2008, 16:51
Fairdinkum.
You idiot. Littleduck brings the same meaningless shit to this forum as an expert on the lions and GC17. He obviously doesn't want AFL up there and is searching for any pathetic excuse to cut them down to their knees despite claiming to support the lions.
If you track back all of his threads you will clearly see he has a problem with AFL in SEQ.
If your happy to continue bashing your head against the wall on this thread which is nothing new to Littleducks others then have fun, it's been done to death you muppet if you haven't noticed.
Sad but true. Sorry you couldn't see that Boy Genius, but some one has to point it out.:thumbsu:
fairdinkum
9 Jun 2008, 16:58
You idiot... (snip) Sorry you couldn't see that Boy Genius, but some one has to point it out.:thumbsu:
I'm not too sure what you were trying to say with that post, except that you have some sort of problem with littleduck.
Regardless of whether or not he is a troll, you and cos are still fools in your own rights.
Compelling counter-argument there.
I've argued it for days. Posting lies only inflames the problem.
(Insert whatever text speak abbreviation riposte here in reply...)
Lying because you think someone is trolling is wrong.
Fairdinkum.
You idiot. Littleduck brings the same meaningless shit to this forum as an expert on the lions and GC17. He obviously doesn't want AFL up there and is searching for any pathetic excuse to cut them down to their knees despite claiming to support the lions.
If you track back all of his threads you will clearly see he has a problem with AFL in SEQ.
If your happy to continue bashing your head against the wall on this thread which is nothing new to Littleducks others then have fun, it's been done to death you muppet if you haven't noticed.
Sad but true. Sorry you couldn't see that Boy Genius, but some one has to point it out.:thumbsu:
Funny thing is he thinks somehow his repitious postings will somehow change
future outcomes . As Auckmal pointed out nothing on BF is going to influence the future . We all thought that the Roos were going to be relocated but through sheer determination and the strength of supporters like fairdinkum
we have see North survive and gain strength with the bonus of two
homegrown teams entering the AFL . Further enhancing the AFL's position .
.
fairdinkum
9 Jun 2008, 17:14
Funny thing is he thinks somehow his repitious postings will somehow change
future outcomes . As Auckmal pointed out nothing on BF is going to influence the future . We all thought that the Roos were going to be relocated but through sheer determination and the strength of supporters like fairdinkum
we have see North survive and gain strength with the bonus of two
homegrown teams entering the AFL . Further enhancing the AFL's position .
.
Does your stupidity know no bounds?
Does your stupidity know no bounds?
As Auckmal pointed out nothing on BF is going to influence the future .
We all thought that the Roos were going to be relocated but through sheer determination and the strength of supporters like fairdinkum
we have see North survive and gain strength with the bonus of two
homegrown teams entering the AFL . Further enhancing the AFL's position .
As Auckmal pointed out no words written on BF is going mean anything .
So I cling to the actions rather than words of people , actions of supporters like fairdinkum see now North survive and gain strength
and can see the bonus of two homegrown teams entering the AFL .
Further enhancing the AFL's position .