View Full Version : Expansion The AFL is to blame for Nth Melbourne’s predicament!
I don't care what bullshit stats or theories that you come up with, if the fixture was fair to all Melbourne clubs in terms of maximizing revenue, North would not be in this $h!t!
If we still had our fair share of Friday night footy (a tradition that we pioneered) and our fair share of games against the "big 4", then we would have 30,000 members and not be on the brink of extinction.
The CBF always has been a poor compensation for a crap draw. I liken it to death by a thousand cuts. Now Demetriou even has the gall of threatening to take that off us as well.
You've got a good draw this year. Your own club said so.
http://www.kangaroos.com.au/Default.aspx?tabid=4912&newsId=52804
When will the message to cancel the CBF payment for 2008 be sent?
You've got a good draw this year. Your own club said so.
Yeah right. Its all relative champ. We don't expect much to begin with.
Yeah right. Its all relative champ. We don't expect much to begin with.
It is all relative, and funny how it always seems to be relative to Collingwood.
How about you compare your draw to the league average and then come back and tell us how unfair it is?
Funkalicous
3 Nov 2007, 18:57
You may be right in terms of the Kangaroos financial situation, but the AFL is all about growth and money. If anything, the plight that is occuring in Victoria now is due to the VFL/AFL going national. In a national sport, clubs are spread geographically over major metropolitan areas. Most American sports understand this and relocate their teams willy-nilly.
So the AFL is to blame for the big 4 having such support, which you feel you rightly have the call to say "we want more games against them" so that NMFC can get more money
Wouldn't it be more reasonable for the AFL to get the big 4 to play more games against clubs with the biggest followings to generate dollars for all
How was the attendances for this season gone?
If Norths demise is because of lack of support and money coming into the club then it is upto NMFC to do something about it.
I for one dont want to see NM go to the Gold Coast and then get a golden handshake and thrown a premership lifeline at the expense of the BIG4.
NMFC have to try though to find a way to survive and not blame the AFL for their current situation
Why should the less popular clubs have to fight with a handicap? A fair draw for all Melbourne clubs, that’s all I want.
When has it ever been proven that maximizing attendances for a select few clubs was financially the best thing for the league anyway?
It's the best way to kill off Melbourne clubs, expand the league in other states and stroke a few egos.
campbell
3 Nov 2007, 19:22
Why is it that North have a lot of supporters, who refuse to actually pay money to be members? You speak to people who are Roo supporters, even up here, but they are not members? Why can't or wont make that cross over to financially secure their club?
Why is it that North have a lot of supporters, who refuse to actually pay money to be members? You speak to people who are Roo supporters, even up here, but they are not members? Why can't or wont make that cross over to financially secure their club?
We usually have the highest % in the AFL, in terms of converting supporters into members. The problem is we dont have enough supporters to begin with. This will never change if the AFL persist in showcasing only a select few Melbourne teams.
Errol Street
3 Nov 2007, 19:45
This sums it up really and also relates to the Bulldogs
This appeared on Crikey. A good North man is Charlie.
Charles Happell writes:
The AFL can bang on all it likes about the Kangaroos’ poor membership, and dire finances, but if it was serious about turning around the Roos’ fortunes – rather than just shunting them off to the Gold Coast – it would have given the club some meaningful help years ago.
And that means scheduling their games on free-to-air TV more than once in a blue moon, and handing back some of the prime Friday night games which the Roos helped pioneer in the 1980s. Only then, by increasing the club’s exposure and profile, can the Roos possibly hope to compete with the league’s big boys.
As it is, they’ve been left to die a death of a thousand cuts, ignored by the league and left to make up the numbers on Foxtel while Collingwood, Essendon, St Kilda and the like get the plum free-to-air gigs and big audiences. Little wonder that any Auskick clinic you see on Saturday morning has squadrons of little Magpie, Bomber and Saints running around but hardly any from the unfashionable Roos, Bulldogs or Demons. Why? Part of the reason is that they’re hardly ever seen on Channel 7 or 10.
The Kangaroos were given one Friday night match this year; Collingwood – to pick another team at random - had five plus the Anzac Day sellout against Essendon on a Wednesday. The Kangaroos will have two Friday night games in 2008; Collingwood eight.
The Kangas were given eight free-to-air games this season and will have 10 in 2008. Collingwood had 18 this year and will have 19 next season. By contrast, St Kilda get 16 in 2008; even poor old, down-at-heel Carlton manage 14. The Roos, who finished third in 2007, have little to show for their on-field success, just another low-rent draw.
Sure, the league throws money at the weaker clubs from its Special Distribution Fund to compensate them for their lack of "blockbuster" games and other injustices that relate to the hopelessly flawed draw, but that’s no solution for the deeper problems faced by the Kangaroos, Bulldogs and others. Money is only a BandAid treatment. What the Roos would really like is a level playing field in terms of exposure and big-ticket games. And, crazy I know, a sense they’re valued by the suits at HQ.
It is against this backdrop that the AFL has given the Kangaroos a 30-day deadline to make a decision about relocating to the Gold Coast. The league – led by its chief executive (and one-time Kangaroos player) Andrew Demetriou – has lost patience with the Roos’ increasingly pitiful hand-to-mouth existence and want to capitalise on the fastest growing area in Australia by installing a team there by 2010.
An ultimatum has been delivered to the Roos: if you don’t go up north, we’ll grant a licence for a 17th team. And the threat is implicit: if you don’t go, we’ll make life even harder for you down in Melbourne. Carrots are being offered to the Roos but, in the background, a big stick is being handled menacingly by the AFL, too.
But it should never have come to this. With some far-sighted planning and fair-minded treatment a decade ago, the Roos could have been allowed to build a half-decent membership base. So the AFL has been complicit in this sorry state of affairs at Arden St.
Now it seems inevitable that, following on from the death of South Melbourne and Fitzroy, North Melbourne – and its proud 138-year history - will be no more. If that is allowed to happen, the distance between the AFL and its fan base will widen some more.
The fabric of the competition, once so sturdy, will surely begin to fray at the edges. And the ties that bind the game to its community in Melbourne, once thought indestructible, will be loosened further still.
NimChief
3 Nov 2007, 19:55
You've got a good draw this year. Your own club said so.
http://www.kangaroos.com.au/Default.aspx?tabid=4912&newsId=52804
When will the message to cancel the CBF payment for 2008 be sent?
So they say publicly, ask them privately and they'll tell you they're disappointed.
Aylett atm is an AFL puppet. Even if he wanted to, he couldn't criticise them. They wield to much power within the Roos.
Yeah...what Charlie said ^^^^
So the AFL is to blame for the big 4 having such support, which you feel you rightly have the call to say "we want more games against them" so that NMFC can get more money
The whole problem is FTA vs Pay-TV. It is why we have a problem. Your club gets maximum FTA time, because the AFL schedule it that way. We accept the compromise in order to generate maximum revenue from broadcasting, however, that revenue is being retained and is not being returned to the clubs so we are suffering and gaining nothing.
As a result you get the best playing schedule which maximises what you can get from gate receipts, stadium deals, corporate, catering and sponsorship due to prime advertising time and best playing times.
However, Pay-TV generates a truckload of money via broadcasting rights. The problem with Pay-TV is they are live games against the gate which draw on what you get from gate receipts and less overall exposure, you play on a worse time schedule, you don't play the better drawing teams as much and you don't have the same opportunity to maximise your revenue.
Foxtel pays a lot of money for live and exclusive games and a handful of clubs have the burden of facilitating the arrangement yet everyone benefits from the revenue equally, it is a double standard. AFL should issue significantly more revenue to clubs who facilitate the Pay-TV agreement to have a fairer system.
Wouldn't it be more reasonable for the AFL to get the big 4 to play more games against clubs with the biggest followings to generate dollars for all
Reasonable for whom? AFL generates more money but that money doesn't get back to the clubs who miss out. The only ones that benefit are the clubs who get the games and the AFL's slush fund.
Tell me what the other clubs get out of it.
How was the attendances for this season gone?
For the 8 Melbourne games we officially averaged 34,656 but one of the gates wasn't working at the MCG for the round 1 game against Collingwood so it officially only had 44,760 go to the game (which is about 7k short on what we typically get and the crowded looked 50k+)
This also included 5 Sunday home games, we do not draw as well for Sunday games.
2006 was a poor year so not good to compare it with but 2005 we had a reasonable year on-field and averaged 38,164 with no hostile gold coast talk and had only 2 Sunday games.
If Norths demise is because of lack of support and money coming into the club then it is upto NMFC to do something about it.
We can help with money, that isn't a major issue. The problem is the lack of exposure and a significantly inferior opportunity to maximise our revenue earning capability. We are around $5 million worse off than say Collingwood before the season starts just based on scheduling differences. That is a lot to ask of supporters to make up the difference just because the AFL is chasing ratings.
I for one dont want to see NM go to the Gold Coast and then get a golden handshake and thrown a premership lifeline at the expense of the BIG4.
AFL want a foreign entity to survive on foreign soil, to do that they will have to give them significant advantages and significant financial support for a long time to come.
In essence, the fat cat clubs will have to concede that they will have to redistribute the wealth more evenly or else the AFL will make more mockery teams with significant artificial support, on and off-field.
NMFC have to try though to find a way to survive and not blame the AFL for their current situation
That is like saying the African American slaves had to find a way to survive as slaves without blaming their oppressors. We are not getting a fair slice of the pie and over a long period of time it has caused significant damage. You want us not to blame the AFL then they have to correct it.
You can't funnel the wealth of the AFL into a handful of clubs and then expect the rest to live off scraps.
Take a look at stats for crowds 2007... take a look at the top games and take a look at the worst games for 2007
Then go back and look at say 1972 and do the same
http://stats.rleague.com/afl/crowds/summary.html
MagooTheRoo
3 Nov 2007, 20:53
You may be right in terms of the Kangaroos financial situation, but the AFL is all about growth and money. If anything, the plight that is occuring in Victoria now is due to the VFL/AFL going national. In a national sport, clubs are spread geographically over major metropolitan areas. Most American sports understand this and relocate their teams willy-nilly.
If so then maybe it's about time to remove their tax exempt staus.
DarwinRoo
3 Nov 2007, 21:02
You may be right in terms of the Kangaroos financial situation, but the AFL is all about growth and money. If anything, the plight that is occuring in Victoria now is due to the VFL/AFL going national. In a national sport, clubs are spread geographically over major metropolitan areas. Most American sports understand this and relocate their teams willy-nilly.
Last time i checked we have a Prime Minister and not a President, we sing advance australia fair and not the star spangled banner and our country is alot bloody better than theirs.
We are Australians not Seppos and we dont have to follow their lead.
DarwinRoo
3 Nov 2007, 21:07
By the way we also want more games against the Big 4 because of this stat:
In the post Carey era, 2002 to 2007, North has played the Big 4, being Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond and Essendon, a total of 31 times. North has won 22 of them.
pies_this_year
3 Nov 2007, 21:09
Last time i checked we have a Prime Minister and not a President, we sing advance australia fair and not the star spangled banner and our country is alot bloody better than theirs.
We are Australians not Seppos and we dont have to follow their lead.
Yeah, lets not consider the way of the most popular sports leagues in the world, that would be just stupid!
Last time i checked, North were struggling off the field in Melbourne and the AFL are helping them out by giving them a town to themselves and money they never dreamed about.
Is it just me, or are North fans blaming everyone but themselves?
So they say publicly, ask them privately and they'll tell you they're disappointed.
So what particular parts of the draw could be made fairer for your club?
More Friday night home games? Well, you got more than the league average. So that's pretty fair.
You also get a 'blockbuster' home game on Easter Monday, as well as a pretty decent share of Saturday night home matches. Also, only 1 early start Sunday home game, below the league average.
I'm sure you can compare your draw with Collingwood's and point out how much better they've got it than you. But 14 other clubs aren't Collingwood either, and they don't all need the additional financial assistance than the Roos get. And I reckon if you compare your draw to a lot of other clubs, it would be much better.
DarwinRoo
3 Nov 2007, 21:18
Yeah, lets not consider the way of the most popular sports leagues in the world, that would be just stupid!
Last time i checked, North were struggling off the field in Melbourne and the AFL are helping them out by giving them a town to themselves and money they never dreamed about.
Is it just me, or are North fans blaming everyone but themselves?
They are not helping out North. They are helping out the Gold Coast. I dont think people quite understand but it is not the same football club.
By the way are you going to have a sook when the Gold Coast team win 3 flags in a row because of draft picks and salary cap concessions?
I don't care what bullshit stats or theories that you come up with,
well always nice to have input from a certified brain surgeon.
By the way we also want more games against the Big 4 because of this stat:
In the post Carey era, 2002 to 2007, North has played the Big 4, being Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond and Essendon, a total of 31 times. North has won 22 of them.
You only want to play those because their supporters stick it through during the good times and bad. Thats why they all still get big crowds - even when they play Freo.
If North supporters had been members and not just supporters over the "post Carey era" - you'de write your own ticket instead of constantly having your hand out to the AFL.
You may be right in terms of the Kangaroos financial situation, but the AFL is all about growth and money. If anything, the plight that is occuring in Victoria now is due to the VFL/AFL going national. In a national sport, clubs are spread geographically over major metropolitan areas. Most American sports understand this and relocate their teams willy-nilly.
You obviously have no idea about American sport or American culture and American cities, its simple to relocate an NFL team from Boston to Phoenix, same fans, same game, same networks, but try and send a team from Melbourne to the Gold Coast totally different because you have to deal with different codes of football, that is the difference between Australia and American sport.
And what is this 'plight' you are talking about in Victoria, last time I checked AFL was a booming sport in a booming city in a booming country.
For the record - I want North Melbourne to stay North Melbourne not North Queensland.
So buy up your membership - Show up to the games - and stop blaming everyone else
For the record - I want North Melbourne to stay North Melbourne not North Queensland.
So buy up your membership - Show up to the games - and stop blaming everyone else
I agree, Its all Eddies fault.:D
pies_this_year
3 Nov 2007, 23:13
They are not helping out North. They are helping out the Gold Coast. I dont think people quite understand but it is not the same football club.
By the way are you going to have a sook when the Gold Coast team win 3 flags in a row because of draft picks and salary cap concessions?
Probably, but will you care? Your club just won three flags and you don't want to do it?
DarwinRoo
3 Nov 2007, 23:16
Probably, but will you care? Your club just won three flags and you don't want to do it?
My club is North Melbourne not the Gold Coast.
pies_this_year
3 Nov 2007, 23:22
My club is North Melbourne not the Gold Coast.
Your team currently is Kangaroos, no? The team will soon be Gold Coast. The club will always be North Melbourne.
Obviously not as passionate as I thought you were. Your "club" can't survive in its current location, so it moves north to give fans more success, and you disown it? Mate I follow a team that doesn't play within 600km of my home, and Im just as passionate as any other pie supporter.
FlyingCrow
3 Nov 2007, 23:22
AFL is a NATIONAL competition. North Melbourne is a suburb with very few people living in it. If you cant get 30,000 people, a tiny number when our population is 22mill, then you dont belong. Its simpe economics. A business does not stay open if no-one is buying the product.
Surely when the VFL became the AFL common sense would dictate the move from a Suburban League to a National League would mean the end of the Suburban clubs that are not financially viable.
DarwinRoo
3 Nov 2007, 23:42
Your team currently is Kangaroos, no? The team will soon be Gold Coast. The club will always be North Melbourne.
Obviously not as passionate as I thought you were. Your "club" can't survive in its current location, so it moves north to give fans more success, and you disown it? Mate I follow a team that doesn't play within 600km of my home, and Im just as passionate as any other pie supporter.
My team is the North Melbourne FC trading as the Kangaroos.
I am passionate about a club that has existed for the best part of 138 years. I have been a member since 1999 when i started earning an income. Dont question my passion because i choose not to follow the AFL owned Gold Coast FC. The Gold Coast are not my club and never will be my club.
We can win flags in Melbourne. 4 since 1975. Collingwood has only won 3 since 1936 so maybe the Pies should move to the Gold Coast. You might have more of a chance to win a flag as opposed to losing them ad nauseam.
We can survive in Melbourne but the AFL doesnt kiss our butts and give us a dream draw every year like some other clubs who in the last 30 odd years have been nothing but a rabble.
Al Scorcho
3 Nov 2007, 23:52
Your team currently is Kangaroos, no? The team will soon be Gold Coast. The club will always be North Melbourne.
Obviously not as passionate as I thought you were. Your "club" can't survive in its current location, so it moves north to give fans more success, and you disown it? Mate I follow a team that doesn't play within 600km of my home, and Im just as passionate as any other pie supporter.
just double checking...you are responding to DARWINroo...i think he beats you in distance :p
thats all...nothing i can add that hasnt been repeated constantly...face the facts people, the afl will do what it wants with who it wants, a bunch of wanks on BF arent gonna make vlad backflip
just double checking...you are responding to DARWINroo...i think he beats you in distance :p
thats all...nothing i can add that hasnt been repeated constantly...face the facts people, the afl will do what it wants with who it wants, a bunch of wanks on BF arent gonna make vlad backflip
But a bunch of presidents with some guts and morals might flip him on his back and send him packing to the Gold Coast where he is so keen to go?
This thread I thought was not about going to the Gold Coast but about the predicament North are in.
North have won how many flags since '75 and if they have not had the management to do something about the growth of the club during and since that period then the AFL is not to blame.
Collingwood for years have stocked up lesser supported clubs home grounds on our away games and for how many years did we fill the MCG with the magpie supporters when playing away games at the MCG and Waverly.
Collingwood were still playing at Vic Park for how long after the Roos left Arden st.
And since Melbourne has lost clubs North have still failed to gain enough ground to sustain themselves.
Now that we are playing home games at the MCG and breaking attendance records clubs who had or have the same equal chance to do so have not and are now whinging. Collingwood has now been given the opportunity to allow those members who have stood by their club to now attend in droves at both the MCG and the TD
And I as a magpie supporter will tell you that its all about winning flags in the end and thats what ALL Clubs strive for and Collingwood has had much less success in that field in the time frame I am talking about than the Roos.
I have been attending Collingwood games since 1964 when aged 12 and can look back and say that the years of the small community type club atmosphere are gone but I love our game just as much now if not more and this all gets down to the larger grounds and media access today.
Blame the AFL, blame Eddie and blame whoever you like other than your own club but it wont get bums on seats or sell more membership tickets while your clubs management have not been able to encourage enough supporter growth to sustain your club.
Well the Kangas may have been under performers in some areas of self promotion and economic sustainability as an organisation but the AFL has a lot to answer for. The AFL is doing more harm than good to the competition by promoting certain clubs over others.
The way this whole issue has been put on the agenda by that clown AD is pretty poor. Sure the Kangas are in trouble we all know that but AD wants a Gold Coast team and all of a sudden the Kangaroos are no longer sustainable in Melbourne. I think that 30 day notice was disgraceful. The way the AFL is handling this effects all clubs and supporters. I can't see how the Kangas will survive in Melbourne with low membership and now that the AFL is all guns blazing but they could show some bloody respect for over 130 years of history in the way they are going about it.
mcgarnacle
4 Nov 2007, 07:51
I don't care what bullshit stats or theories that you come up with, if the fixture was fair to all Melbourne clubs in terms of maximizing revenue, North would not be in this $h!t!
If we still had our fair share of Friday night footy (a tradition that we pioneered) and our fair share of games against the "big 4", then we would have 30,000 members and not be on the brink of extinction.
The CBF always has been a poor compensation for a crap draw. I liken it to death by a thousand cuts. Now Demetriou even has the gall of threatening to take that off us as well.
you should really source your opinions if they arent your own.
mcgarnacle
4 Nov 2007, 07:54
Last time i checked we have a Prime Minister and not a President, we sing advance australia fair and not the star spangled banner and our country is alot bloody better than theirs.
We are Australians not Seppos and we dont have to follow their lead.
didnt you realise the afl's ideas are pilfered from the nfl??:rolleyes:
memberforever
4 Nov 2007, 11:17
Wouldn't it be more reasonable for the AFL to get the big 4 to play more games against clubs with the biggest followings to generate dollars for all
Don't you understand that by putting on blockbusters and rigging and doctoring the draw to generate so called more income leads to the demise of the smaller clubs. How you ask? More exposure means more members for the so called big 4, more sponsorship, and more revenue for them. It is a short term fix for smaller clubs (ie sharing some extra revenue), but in the long term means goodbye to smaller clubs.
If the game existed for revenue then lets just have Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond and Essendon play each other every week at the MCG and the dollars will roll in.
So I agree the AFL is to blame for Norths plight and maybe its been deliberate.
The recent handouts to the Kangaroos, Bulldogs and Melbourne via the CBF is miniscule compared to the historical and inherent benefits received by other clubs, all of which have had a detrimental impact on the bottom line of these clubs. The net effect has been that these clubs have had to sell home games to generate additional revenue, which makes it an easy target for the AFL's hidden agenda of relocating the Kangas to the Gold Coast, and the Bulldogs to West Sydney. Allow me to outline some of these historical 'sweetheart deals' received by other clubs:
Carlton - In the '90s, the AFL signed an agreement which guaranteed X amount of games at Princess Park. AFL schedules Kangas, Bulldogs and Dees to play home games at PP, yet allowed Carlton to shift games away from PP to the MCG. Go figure!
St.Kilda/Hawthorn - AFL compensates for shift away from Waverley and underwrites membership.
Collingwood - AFL guarantee X amount of games at the MCG to shift from Vic Park
Collingwood/Essendon - Extensive free to air coverage and Friday night games.
Brisbane/Sydney - Demetriou has stated that the AFL will plough $100m over next 5 years into Qld/Nsw for game development which enhances the brand of the Lions and the Swans, and impacts the dividend to all clubs to the tune of $1.25m per year.
coopers pale
4 Nov 2007, 14:09
The issue for me is that the AFL commission doesn't show consistency in its commitment towards the goal of equity.
It loudly proclaims the benefits of equity in relation to our draft system, including the controversial priority draft picks, like equity is the holy grail.
It then goes out and (year in, year out) produces hideously inequitable draws in relation to free-to-air coverage, blockbuster game allocation and friday night games. :confused::confused:
Surely if the AFL commission belongs to the 16 clubs then they should work towards providing a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD for them to compete???? Not just compete on the field, but off field as well - to compete for sponsorship dollars, corporate support and the hearts and minds of the next generation.
*off my soap box I hop* :o
Don't you understand that by putting on blockbusters and rigging and doctoring the draw to generate so called more income leads to the demise of the smaller clubs. How you ask? More exposure means more members for the so called big 4, more sponsorship, and more revenue for them. It is a short term fix for smaller clubs (ie sharing some extra revenue), but in the long term means goodbye to smaller clubs.
So what you're saying is that there are too many Victorian clubs.
http://www.bluoz.com/blog/uploads/captainobvious.jpg
memberforever
5 Nov 2007, 22:16
So what you're saying is that there are too many Victorian clubs.
No, I am making a point that why do the AFL keep pushing the likes of Essendon, Collingwood etc at the expense of other clubs. If its just for money then we should all pack up (including your club) and let them play each other every week at the MCG.
No, I am making a point that why do the AFL keep pushing the likes of Essendon, Collingwood etc at the expense of other clubs. If its just for money then we should all pack up (including your club) and let them play each other every week at the MCG.
The AFL don't. TV do, the media do. i.e it's being driven by commercial realities. And in a 9/10 team town, there are going to be clubs that get squeezed out.
The problem is there are too many clubs in Melbourne.
It amuses me to see supporters of other Victorian clubs try and save 1 from leaving the city. I'm not sure if they actually realise that the less there are, the more likely it is that their team prospers.
Brilliant
6 Nov 2007, 01:59
North Melbourne is to blame for the Kangaroos predicament.
The AFL is just taking advantage of their incompetence.
The dominant team of the 90's and they complain that lack of exposure through an unfair draw is the problem. Do you remember the 90's, you got the exposure and a flag or two. Where's the support, it was'nt that long ago.
Actually you should blame Carey not the AFL, he was carrying the club on and off the field.
Since Carey who have you had that would attract supporters or even attention? Your team is like Archer. Boring, no flair, no character, just keep to themselves and expect to make new friends.
Get some characters or some stars that can attract attention.
thebaxters
6 Nov 2007, 02:45
I would have thought it was more the fault of the emergence of Aussie Rules as a professional sport.
As soon as you have players becoming full-time sportsmen, you have expectations associated with huge salaries (like soccer, seppo sports, etc). You have the teams forced to seek sponsorship, you have media deals for TV coverage, you invent "blockbuster" games, you find yourself "needing" to build bigger and better facilities; you look at a myriad number of ways to generate income to meet expenses (changing jumper designs, etc). On the flipside you have a growing (footy loving) population, but not growing commensurate with the income required.
I think in the long run a national competition will end up following a US model - teams will be located where the population and sporting tastes dictate, because to pay the players and keep the club solvent, you need bums on seats, preferably as members. The more teams continue to be based in Melbourne, the more likely it is that some will prosper and some will fail. It's just not a sustainable position to have 9 Melbourne based clubs - there aren't enough punters to pay the $ required, no matter how footy mad the Vics are.
As players trend towards getting paid a million bucks per season, this will only become a bigger issue, because the costs are going up at a rate out of proportion to our population base and members. And increasing membership or gate prices isn't the answer - a basic tenet of this game is that it should be accessible to all Australians; all kids should be able to go along to the footy with their folks at least a few times a year without having to resort to watching it at home because of the exorbitant cost.
Another don't - no more "blockbuster" ideas; it seems there is a couple of blockbuster games every week... they just lose their impact.
The whole idea of free agency and no salary caps would only serve to make this worse... as would adding teams to the league.
So, shift some teams. Cull from 16 to 12 if you have to. Continue the salary cap. Let contracts grow with CPI, in line with the wages of the majority. Put some guidelines around player managers to keep them in line; Jerry Maguire is not the model we should be following. Make players understand they're not going to earn $1M+ a year - if they want that, they're in the wrong game, and remind them that they're playing for the fans. Make footy accessible to the average punter from a scheduling and $ perspective. If you're going down the path of pay TV, don't make it $$$ per month to watch footy - charge $2 per game watched.
SweetLeftFoot
6 Nov 2007, 02:47
You may be right in terms of the Kangaroos financial situation, but the AFL is all about growth and money. If anything, the plight that is occuring in Victoria now is due to the VFL/AFL going national. In a national sport, clubs are spread geographically over major metropolitan areas. Most American sports understand this and relocate their teams willy-nilly.
Yes, let's become like America.
What a smashing idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keele http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=9399244#post9399244)
Wouldn't it be more reasonable for the AFL to get the big 4 to play more games against clubs with the biggest followings to generate dollars for all
Don't you understand that by putting on blockbusters and rigging and doctoring the draw to generate so called more income leads to the demise of the smaller clubs. How you ask? More exposure means more members for the so called big 4, more sponsorship, and more revenue for them. It is a short term fix for smaller clubs (ie sharing some extra revenue), but in the long term means goodbye to smaller clubs.
The length of the season and number of clubs means that teams do not play every team twice, thats logical. If the AFL is to exist and grow then it has to like the TV stations generate income.
The smaller teams have been drawing poor crowds for years.. just look back at the stats pre AFL and pre night and Sunday games. By spreading the playing field and widening the gap between game times etc has enabled TV broadcasts to reach a wider audience and allow football fans to attend more than one game on a weekend
During this period of the last 30 years I ask why for the likes of the Roos who had so many Friday night games and won Grandfinales that they failed to sustain themselves and grow from the 90's?
Someone else here showed figures as to clubs like Collingwood being favoured in regards to moving from Vic Park to the MCG... rubbish. Take a look at what was given to the Roos when they moved from Arden street and I have already pointed out that some clubs have been filling the lesser clubs outers for years and in the case of Carlton Collingwood and Essendon they filled the MCG on away games, Waverly and now TD.
It is not a matter of feeding the top four from the AFL it is a matter of Clubs being successfull in putting bums on seats and getting the ratings up on the TV prime time telecasts.
I see no reason why if your club is successfull in drawing crowds and generating revenue that you should be told to hold back and wait another 30 years for the rest of them to catch up, or told that the draw must be doctored in a manner which gives the lesser clubs a bigger slice of the revenue that is generated by the top four by making all crowd drawing clubs play the lesser crowd drawing clubs twice and especially on Blockbuster games.. so the AFL and footy can go backwards and maybe return to Glenferrie, Arden and Vic Park days
medusala
6 Nov 2007, 04:13
I don't care what bullshit stats or theories that you come up with, if the fixture was fair to all Melbourne clubs in terms of maximizing revenue, North would not be in this $h!t!
How were North going in terms of finances and support pre expansion?
You are kidding yourself.
Other clubs like Hawthorn and Richmond get screwed via the draw and have to play home games away from their home ground. There is no suggestion either of them is about to go broke.
The CBF is far more than compensation for a bad draw. Its welfare.
The AFL might treat North badly but thats hardly the entire reason for their lack of cash and support
Don't you understand that by putting on blockbusters and rigging and doctoring the draw to generate so called more income leads to the demise of the smaller clubs
Why not make ANZAC day
North v Doggies at the MCG
Hawthorn v Brisbane at TD
Sydney v Freo at Telstra Stadium Sydney
Carlton v Melbourne at Princess park
and Collinwood versus Essendon at Canberra or Hobart.
This would share the Blockbuster day around... or is it that teams and not the AFL make a Blockbuster?
I don't care what bullshit stats or theories that you come up with, if the fixture was fair to all Melbourne clubs in terms of maximizing revenue, North would not be in this $h!t!
If we still had our fair share of Friday night footy (a tradition that we pioneered) and our fair share of games against the "big 4", then we would have 30,000 members and not be on the brink of extinction.
The CBF always has been a poor compensation for a crap draw. I liken it to death by a thousand cuts. Now Demetriou even has the gall of threatening to take that off us as well.
While I empathise with your position you have no one to blame but yourselves.
giantroo
6 Nov 2007, 07:42
You only want to play those because their supporters stick it through during the good times and bad. Thats why they all still get big crowds - even when they play Freo.
If North supporters had been members and not just supporters over the "post Carey era" - you'de write your own ticket instead of constantly having your hand out to the AFL.
Blame the board. Till now they are pussing out and trying to see if the GC is their best option. They have never done the hard work. Why did we move to play games outside Vic? To make money? Why are we trading as the Kangaroos now? To make money?
Well that hasn't worked out. It all has been a waste of time. Stop trying to blame supporters for the problems. The AFL and our own board are to blame. We should currently be a top 4 team off the field if the board did the ahrd work to advertise, to make Melbourne its true home.
Your team currently is Kangaroos, no? The team will soon be Gold Coast. The club will always be North Melbourne.
Obviously not as passionate as I thought you were. Your "club" can't survive in its current location, so it moves north to give fans more success, and you disown it? Mate I follow a team that doesn't play within 600km of my home, and Im just as passionate as any other pie supporter.
Yes it sure can survive. The board just has to do the bloody hardwork. If they move, they are pussing out. Who cares if you live there, you're not having your team relocated. I'm not a supporter who follows an interstate club. I'm Melbournian and so is my club!
Well the Kangas may have been under performers in some areas of self promotion and economic sustainability as an organisation but the AFL has a lot to answer for. The AFL is doing more harm than good to the competition by promoting certain clubs over others.
The way this whole issue has been put on the agenda by that clown AD is pretty poor. Sure the Kangas are in trouble we all know that but AD wants a Gold Coast team and all of a sudden the Kangaroos are no longer sustainable in Melbourne. I think that 30 day notice was disgraceful. The way the AFL is handling this effects all clubs and supporters. I can't see how the Kangas will survive in Melbourne with low membership and now that the AFL is all guns blazing but they could show some bloody respect for over 130 years of history in the way they are going about it.
Give us the 2 years and we will surpass 30k members. That's only if the board are willing to put in the hardwork. If we get our way. JB, Archer and Pagan will do their job.
North Melbourne is to blame for the Kangaroos predicament.
The AFL is just taking advantage of their incompetence.
The dominant team of the 90's and they complain that lack of exposure through an unfair draw is the problem. Do you remember the 90's, you got the exposure and a flag or two. Where's the support, it was'nt that long ago.
Actually you should blame Carey not the AFL, he was carrying the club on and off the field.
Since Carey who have you had that would attract supporters or even attention? Your team is like Archer. Boring, no flair, no character, just keep to themselves and expect to make new friends.
Get some characters or some stars that can attract attention.
You have no ****ing clue you imbecile. Read the first bit of my post. And show your club you wuss.
Carl Spackler
6 Nov 2007, 07:44
Well the Kangas may have been under performers in some areas of self promotion and economic sustainability as an organisation but the AFL has a lot to answer for. The AFL is doing more harm than good to the competition by promoting certain clubs over others.
Agree. The clever marketing and engineering of the draw has taken the game as far as it can. Whilst it is done with the best of intentions - to maximise ratings and profits - I actually feel it is having a handbrake effect. The game is putting all its eggs in the Collingwood/Essendon basket, trying to squeeze every last cent out of their supporters.
All the other clubs fall behind in terms of profile and sponsorship. What gets their supporters excited? No Friday night games, no blockbusters, no nationally televised matches, no Anzac Day... and the gap widens.
I think there is a huge untapped market out there that have either switched off the AFL because they've become disillusioned with the game or support the game only passively, attending a few matches here and there, owning a scarf rather than a jumper etc. They know their clubs probably aren't going to win a flag and have the odds stacked against them from the start.
An even competition with each club given equal access to blockbuster games would release this handbrake on the game. Even if they just kept the same 15 round draw which just rolled on from one season to the next that would be preferable.
Whilst clever marketing might create a slight increase here and there I feel the actual game itself could absolutely explode nationally if it was allowed to.
The only reason the AFL can be blamed is because they continually prop up the struggling clubs when they should be disolved to even the competition up.
giantroo
6 Nov 2007, 09:11
The only reason the AFL can be blamed is because they continually prop up the struggling clubs when they should be disolved to even the competition up.
Give us friday nights back, the big games, TV exposure and take the CBF back. You'll see a big difference, idiot!
Give us friday nights back, the big games, TV exposure and take the CBF back. You'll see a big difference, idiot!
TV is the number one determiner of Friday Night particpation. You guys dont rate as well as most teams. Simple.
Big games cant be legislated. If North are in the game, the chance of it being a "big game" is seriously diminished over say Collingwood, Essendon, Adelaide, West Coast etc etc. For example, North v Bulldogs on ANZAC day just doesnt have the same appeal as maybe 20 other fixtures one could name. Even if both of you happened to be Top 4 around late April, it would have less TV viewing appeal outside Melbourne than many alternate fixtures. Big games are a function of the clubs involved not the AFL.
The CBF is being "taken back", thats why the Kangas are shitting themselves.
North have had years to get their house in order and those years have simply confirmed that as a business you dont stack up. Passion, backs to the wall us against the worldism is a North trait, it has been since inception. I mean your original entry into the league was delayed due to 2 factors, the primary one was that you couldnt pay your way and the secondary one was a reputation for holliganism - not much has changed ;)
JB, Arch and Brayshaw as saviours is hilarious. 3 blokes without an ounce of business experience or acumen will save the club when numerous passionate north supporting businessman (many with excellent credentials) have failed and realised that you have no workable business while based in Melbourne.
Regardless, all the best with your passionate denialism.
Angry Dragon
6 Nov 2007, 09:50
North have themselves to blame for being nomadic instead of staying put in Melbourne and being generic with their name.
If they had been like Carlton or Collingwood and made a bold statement that "We are North Melbourne stuff changing for anyone". They would have earned a lot more respect and built on the success and growing crowd numbers they had around 1996.
medusala
6 Nov 2007, 18:28
Give us friday nights back, the big games, TV exposure and take the CBF back. You'll see a big difference, idiot!
yes, to the amount the tv networks are prepared to pay for the rights.
And North would still be struggling.
Sir_Adrian84
6 Nov 2007, 19:22
yes, to the amount the tv networks are prepared to pay for the rights.
And North would still be struggling.
maybe cut the TV rights back to $20m a year and give North most of the Friday Nights.
Unfortunately for North it is no longer 1996 when FNF didn't have the same "prestige" that it does today.
Give us friday nights back, the big games, TV exposure and take the CBF back. You'll see a big difference, idiot!
So you're saying that they should make the fixturing fair by giving North a huge bias in the draw?
2 out of your 7 Victorian home games are Friday nights. Given only 1/8th of all games are Friday night games, you're clearly getting a good run there.
You're getting a 'blockbuster' - playing on Easter Monday against Essendon. TV - I don't know what your exposure is like, but all your Gold Coast games are going to be shown live or near live in Queensland on FTA, irrespective of whether it's a Foxtel game. Something the AFL has probably engineered. So you're getting artificial exposure there.
What more do you want? A draw hugely biased in your favour? You can't argue for a fair draw and then still whinge when you get a favourable one.
SweetLeftFoot
6 Nov 2007, 21:35
How were North going in terms of finances and support pre expansion?
You are kidding yourself.
Other clubs like Hawthorn and Richmond get screwed via the draw and have to play home games away from their home ground. There is no suggestion either of them is about to go broke.
Yes, but you have both faced the real possibility of going broke and pulled your socks up.
This is what we are doing now.
greennick
6 Nov 2007, 22:32
AFL is a NATIONAL competition. North Melbourne is a suburb with very few people living in it. If you cant get 30,000 people, a tiny number when our population is 22mill, then you dont belong. Its simpe economics. A business does not stay open if no-one is buying the product.
Surely when the VFL became the AFL common sense would dictate the move from a Suburban League to a National League would mean the end of the Suburban clubs that are not financially viable.
Exactly, it will never be totally fair, 10 in Melb just can't compete with 2 from WA, 2 from SA, 1 from Sydney and 1 from Qld.
This thread I thought was not about going to the Gold Coast but about the predicament North are in.
North have won how many flags since '75 and if they have not had the management to do something about the growth of the club during and since that period then the AFL is not to blame.
Collingwood for years have stocked up lesser supported clubs home grounds on our away games and for how many years did we fill the MCG with the magpie supporters when playing away games at the MCG and Waverly.
Collingwood were still playing at Vic Park for how long after the Roos left Arden st.
And since Melbourne has lost clubs North have still failed to gain enough ground to sustain themselves.
Now that we are playing home games at the MCG and breaking attendance records clubs who had or have the same equal chance to do so have not and are now whinging. Collingwood has now been given the opportunity to allow those members who have stood by their club to now attend in droves at both the MCG and the TD
And I as a magpie supporter will tell you that its all about winning flags in the end and thats what ALL Clubs strive for and Collingwood has had much less success in that field in the time frame I am talking about than the Roos.
I have been attending Collingwood games since 1964 when aged 12 and can look back and say that the years of the small community type club atmosphere are gone but I love our game just as much now if not more and this all gets down to the larger grounds and media access today.
Blame the AFL, blame Eddie and blame whoever you like other than your own club but it wont get bums on seats or sell more membership tickets while your clubs management have not been able to encourage enough supporter growth to sustain your club.
Well said.
Don't you understand that by putting on blockbusters and rigging and doctoring the draw to generate so called more income leads to the demise of the smaller clubs. How you ask? More exposure means more members for the so called big 4, more sponsorship, and more revenue for them. It is a short term fix for smaller clubs (ie sharing some extra revenue), but in the long term means goodbye to smaller clubs.
If the game existed for revenue then lets just have Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond and Essendon play each other every week at the MCG and the dollars will roll in.
So I agree the AFL is to blame for Norths plight and maybe its been deliberate.
It does not necessarily lead to the demise, but it probably contributes.
I would have thought it was more the fault of the emergence of Aussie Rules as a professional sport.
As soon as you have players becoming full-time sportsmen, you have expectations associated with huge salaries (like soccer, seppo sports, etc). You have the teams forced to seek sponsorship, you have media deals for TV coverage, you invent "blockbuster" games, you find yourself "needing" to build bigger and better facilities; you look at a myriad number of ways to generate income to meet expenses (changing jumper designs, etc). On the flipside you have a growing (footy loving) population, but not growing commensurate with the income required.
I think in the long runa national competition will end up following a US model - teams will be located where the population and sporting tastes dictate, because to pay the players and keep the club solvent, you need bums on seats, preferably as members. The more teams continue to be based in Melbourne, the more likely it is that some will prosper and some will fail. It's just not a sustainable position to have 9 Melbourne based clubs - there aren't enough punters to pay the $ required, no matter how footy mad the Vics are.
As players trend towards getting paid a million bucks per season, this will only become a bigger issue, because the costs are going up at a rate out of proportion to our population base and members. And increasing membership or gate prices isn't the answer - a basic tenet of this game is that it should be accessible to all Australians; all kids should be able to go along to the footy with their folks at least a few times a year without having to resort to watching it at home because of the exorbitant cost.
Another don't - no more "blockbuster" ideas; it seems there is a couple of blockbuster games every week... they just lose their impact.
The whole idea of free agency and no salary caps would only serve to make this worse... as would adding teams to the league.
So, shift some teams. Cull from 16 to 12 if you have to. Continue the salary cap. Let contracts grow with CPI, in line with the wages of the majority. Put some guidelines around player managers to keep them in line; Jerry Maguire is not the model we should be following. Make players understand they're not going to earn $1M+ a year - if they want that, they're in the wrong game, and remind them that they're playing for the fans. Make footy accessible to the average punter from a scheduling and $ perspective. If you're going down the path of pay TV, don't make it $$$ per month to watch footy - charge $2 per game watched.
Well said, though stuff holding back the professionalism of the game so a few shit clubs can keep up. Stay up with the pace of the game or you are moved off or killed off.
medusala
6 Nov 2007, 22:39
Yes, but you have both faced the real possibility of going broke and pulled your socks up.
This is what we are doing now.
I dont have an issue with that nor with North staying in Melbourne
I believe its counterproductive for your supporters to simply blame the AFL rather than acknowledge you have major issues re support.
greennick
6 Nov 2007, 22:58
The length of the season and number of clubs means that teams do not play every team twice, thats logical. If the AFL is to exist and grow then it has to like the TV stations generate income.
The smaller teams have been drawing poor crowds for years.. just look back at the stats pre AFL and pre night and Sunday games. By spreading the playing field and widening the gap between game times etc has enabled TV broadcasts to reach a wider audience and allow football fans to attend more than one game on a weekend
During this period of the last 30 years I ask why for the likes of the Roos who had so many Friday night games and won Grandfinales that they failed to sustain themselves and grow from the 90's?
Someone else here showed figures as to clubs like Collingwood being favoured in regards to moving from Vic Park to the MCG... rubbish. Take a look at what was given to the Roos when they moved from Arden street and I have already pointed out that some clubs have been filling the lesser clubs outers for years and in the case of Carlton Collingwood and Essendon they filled the MCG on away games, Waverly and now TD.
It is not a matter of feeding the top four from the AFL it is a matter of Clubs being successfull in putting bums on seats and getting the ratings up on the TV prime time telecasts.
I see no reason why if your club is successfull in drawing crowds and generating revenue that you should be told to hold back and wait another 30 years for the rest of them to catch up, or told that the draw must be doctored in a manner which gives the lesser clubs a bigger slice of the revenue that is generated by the top four by making all crowd drawing clubs play the lesser crowd drawing clubs twice and especially on Blockbuster games.. so the AFL and footy can go backwards and maybe return to Glenferrie, Arden and Vic Park days
Well said, it is not a recent phenomona, back when the draw was fairer, the Kangaroos still were not big drawers. The Kangaroos need to start looking more internally than externally for the reasons for their demise.
How were North going in terms of finances and support pre expansion?
You are kidding yourself.
Other clubs like Hawthorn and Richmond get screwed via the draw and have to play home games away from their home ground. There is no suggestion either of them is about to go broke.
The CBF is far more than compensation for a bad draw. Its welfare.
The AFL might treat North badly but thats hardly the entire reason for their lack of cash and support
Exactly, North may not get the best deal, but other clubs have done much better with similar or worse, so there are obviously many other factors.
Agree. The clever marketing and engineering of the draw has taken the game as far as it can. Whilst it is done with the best of intentions - to maximise ratings and profits - I actually feel it is having a handbrake effect. The game is putting all its eggs in the Collingwood/Essendon basket, trying to squeeze every last cent out of their supporters.
All the other clubs fall behind in terms of profile and sponsorship. What gets their supporters excited? No Friday night games, no blockbusters, no nationally televised matches, no Anzac Day... and the gap widens.
I think there is a huge untapped market out there that have either switched off the AFL because they've become disillusioned with the game or support the game only passively, attending a few matches here and there, owning a scarf rather than a jumper etc. They know their clubs probably aren't going to win a flag and have the odds stacked against them from the start.
An even competition with each club given equal access to blockbuster games would release this handbrake on the game. Even if they just kept the same 15 round draw which just rolled on from one season to the next that would be preferable.
Whilst clever marketing might create a slight increase here and there I feel the actual game itself could absolutely explode nationally if it was allowed to.
The game will not explode with 10 teams in Melbourne, even if you make it an "even" draw! People need more local teams for the game to explode. The interstate teams will further dominate if you try and spread all the cash evenly around Melbourne. Futher, blockbuster games are determined by who is playing. If North v Bulldogs had Anzac day you probably would not even come close to selling it out.
Yes it is everyone elses fault. You sound like a spoilt child who didn't get their way
Agree. The clever marketing and engineering of the draw has taken the game as far as it can. Whilst it is done with the best of intentions - to maximise ratings and profits - I actually feel it is having a handbrake effect. The game is putting all its eggs in the Collingwood/Essendon basket, trying to squeeze every last cent out of their supporters.
All the other clubs fall behind in terms of profile and sponsorship. What gets their supporters excited? No Friday night games, no blockbusters, no nationally televised matches, no Anzac Day... and the gap widens.
I think there is a huge untapped market out there that have either switched off the AFL because they've become disillusioned with the game or support the game only passively, attending a few matches here and there, owning a scarf rather than a jumper etc. They know their clubs probably aren't going to win a flag and have the odds stacked against them from the start.
An even competition with each club given equal access to blockbuster games would release this handbrake on the game. Even if they just kept the same 15 round draw which just rolled on from one season to the next that would be preferable.
Whilst clever marketing might create a slight increase here and there I feel the actual game itself could absolutely explode nationally if it was allowed to.
Good post.
SweetLeftFoot
6 Nov 2007, 23:58
I dont have an issue with that nor with North staying in Melbourne
I believe its counterproductive for your supporters to simply blame the AFL rather than acknowledge you have major issues re support.
I certainly acknowledge we have major issues re: support, but I also acknowledge that many, not all, of those issues can be laid at the feet of the AFL re: sceduling etc.
Our so-called board must take plenty of blame too.
Carl Spackler
7 Nov 2007, 07:54
Futher, blockbuster games are determined by who is playing. If North v Bulldogs had Anzac day you probably would not even come close to selling it out.
How many would you get though? 50,000 for an "event" game like this?
How many do the Roos v Bulldogs draw usually for their matches? 20,000?
Collingwood v Essendon might get 80,000+ to Anzac Day. How many would they draw usually for their matches? 70,000?
shintemaster
7 Nov 2007, 08:10
Agree. The clever marketing and engineering of the draw has taken the game as far as it can. Whilst it is done with the best of intentions - to maximise ratings and profits - I actually feel it is having a handbrake effect. The game is putting all its eggs in the Collingwood/Essendon basket, trying to squeeze every last cent out of their supporters.
All the other clubs fall behind in terms of profile and sponsorship. What gets their supporters excited? No Friday night games, no blockbusters, no nationally televised matches, no Anzac Day... and the gap widens.
I think there is a huge untapped market out there that have either switched off the AFL because they've become disillusioned with the game or support the game only passively, attending a few matches here and there, owning a scarf rather than a jumper etc. They know their clubs probably aren't going to win a flag and have the odds stacked against them from the start.
An even competition with each club given equal access to blockbuster games would release this handbrake on the game. Even if they just kept the same 15 round draw which just rolled on from one season to the next that would be preferable.
Whilst clever marketing might create a slight increase here and there I feel the actual game itself could absolutely explode nationally if it was allowed to.
POTM.
At what point did 85k (up from 70k)for a blockbuster with Ess v Coll become amazingly better than a 55k (up from 28k) for a normal North vs Hawthorn for example?
The grounds are not going to get any bigger than the MCG is. We need to find ways of building up other crowds... this will not be done by a focus on big games and exposure going to only a select few clubs. Do people ever stop to think that maybe supporters who are part of huge crowds as a once off might be more likely to come back for the smaller games?
I don't expect preferential treatment for specific clubs. I expect a simple rolling draw and big dates rotated. Pick a weekends games and roll it constantly until the end of time. The big games will be even bigger events if they're not guaranteed.
POTM.
At what point did 85k (up from 70k)for a blockbuster with Ess v Coll become amazingly better than a 55k (up from 28k) for a normal North vs Hawthorn for example?
The grounds are not going to get any bigger than the MCG is. We need to find ways of building up other crowds... this will not be done by a focus on big games and exposure going to only a select few clubs. Do people ever stop to think that maybe supporters who are part of huge crowds as a once off might be more likely to come back for the smaller games?
I don't expect preferential treatment for specific clubs. I expect a simple rolling draw and big dates rotated. Pick a weekends games and roll it constantly until the end of time. The big games will be even bigger events if they're not guaranteed.
Very good post. I think Anzac Day is a moot point, surely Collingwood and Essendon have established a tradition there? But as for new 'blockbusters' (how many more can there be?) and Friday night football, Monday night football, etc, these events need to be fair.
Why should the less popular clubs have to fight with a handicap? A fair draw for all Melbourne clubs, that’s all I want.
When has it ever been proven that maximizing attendances for a select few clubs was financially the best thing for the league anyway?
It's the best way to kill off Melbourne clubs, expand the league in other states and stroke a few egos.It may be what you want but it isn’t what your club wants. The draw has evolved out of your club and others not being able to survive in competition with a fair draw and anything resembling eat what you kill. If you want a fair draw and no CBF then ask your club why it does not push for that? As it is, you can’t really have a fair draw though and sell games. Take away the CBF, take away the GC money and add the fair draw differential and where would you be?
Personally I wish the AFL would operate a rolling draw with an even match timing schedule and allow all clubs to own their home games. Given the AFL want a cull at least it would be decided fairly. That doesn’t actually solve many of the problems though.
medusala
7 Nov 2007, 21:55
But as for new 'blockbusters' (how many more can there be?) and Friday night football, Monday night football, etc, these events need to be fair.
You cant expect tv broadcasters to pay top $ and then televise games that dont rate.
You cant expect tv broadcasters to pay top $ and then televise games that dont rate.
Friday night footy always rated, regardless of who played.
At what point did 85k (up from 70k)for a blockbuster with Ess v Coll become amazingly better than a 55k (up from 28k) for a normal North vs Hawthorn for example?At the point where profitability got taken into account - 10k on top of 70k make more money than 10k on top of 40k. More revenue spread over fixed costs. Ignoring that, at the point where bankability became important. Ground deals and catering rights depend on big crowds and bankable numbers. Ok ignoring both of these issues at the point where TV ratings became worth tens and hundreds of millions.
I don't care what bullshit stats or theories that you come up with, if the fixture was fair to all Melbourne clubs in terms of maximizing revenue, North would not be in this $h!t!
If we still had our fair share of Friday night footy (a tradition that we pioneered) and our fair share of games against the "big 4", then we would have 30,000 members and not be on the brink of extinction.
The CBF always has been a poor compensation for a crap draw. I liken it to death by a thousand cuts. Now Demetriou even has the gall of threatening to take that off us as well.
I'm not sure Friday Night Helps Saints play Fridays all the time and I think we average bigger crowds during the weekend
Friday night footy always rated, regardless of who played.
Right thats why the TV stations want to pick which game, you'd think they know what thay're doing when the cough up 100's of millions
I'm not sure Friday Night Helps Saints play Fridays all the time and I think we average bigger crowds during the weekend…and operate with a small budget on a low revenue base.