Look here's another port flog posting about rumours and innuendo. Where are the fact and figures? You guys are great at blaming everyone else, but not good a producing facts to back up your arguments.
Adelaide Oval Review
- Thread starter 1970crow
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I never said anything like that at all on the main board so stop spinning BS
And as for Backtrack my comment was based on that exact comment turnover means jack, net profit is what matters, so don't try and change what I said I will continue to stand by the fact unless you can guarantee a % of turnover as net profit you can turnover $7 billion dollars for all I care it means nothing if you make a $1 Billion loss.
Servicing their debt. It appears there is $55m all up. Only $16m is attributable to the Power.
Yet they do an awesome job of running the local league.
It appears the SANFL clubs have $18m debt too. Why not tee off on the SANFL clubs' mismanagement?
I think it's time Port supporters and others had a bit of a think about their illogical hatred of the SANFL.
Lets put $16 million in assistance to one side and look at the grassroots.
Please read this with an open mind and with your love of football uppermost.
If we look at just one player's path from juniors to the AFL from a SANFL club's point of view.
A young 12 year old plays for his school. The West Adelaide people come out to conduct Auskick. The lad progresses to West's Under 13, 14 and 15 Development squads, where he's coached by West coaches, kicks footies paid for by West and the SANFL, wears guernseys paid for by West & the SANFL, with umpires paid by the SANFL and trains and plays on ovals paid for by the SANFL and their clubs.
He then plays for West's Under 17's, ditto expenditure, West's Under 19's, more expenditure, and after years of being looked after by West Adelaide, he plays a few League games, with West paying all the expenses involved. Those expenses are multiplied by the hundreds of kids treated similarly, but it's worth it as West will get a good player for their senior team..
Then there's a day in November when the Port Adelaide Football Club makes its first appearance in this lad's life.
"Player Number 1234567, Hamish Hartlett, West Adelaide.
Here's $25K, West (given to us by the SANFL to prop us up), now piss off, he's our player now.
Fair enough, they're the rules, but West have spent years on him and barely get a game out of him.
That's fine, but if you want to continue to get players that the SANFL have groomed for you, then it's going to cost you a lot of money. About what the SANFL spend, actually.
See how that system works for you when you're putting tarps over seats.
As for Adelaide players, there's stories about so many of our greats and their time at West Adelaide. I've seen them all at close quarters.
Don't denigrate, embrace the SANFL, it's your lifeblood.
Lets put $16 million in assistance to one side and look at the grassroots.
Please read this with an open mind and with your love of football uppermost.
If we look at just one player's path from juniors to the AFL from a SANFL club's point of view.
A young 12 year old plays for his school. The West Adelaide people come out to conduct Auskick. The lad progresses to West's Under 13, 14 and 15 Development squads, where he's coached by West coaches, kicks footies paid for by West and the SANFL, wears guernseys paid for by West & the SANFL, with umpires paid by the SANFL and trains and plays on ovals paid for by the SANFL and their clubs.
He then plays for West's Under 17's, ditto expenditure, West's Under 19's, more expenditure, and after years of being looked after by West Adelaide, he plays a few League games, with West paying all the expenses involved. Those expenses are multiplied by the hundreds of kids treated similarly, but it's worth it as West will get a good player for their senior team..
Then there's a day in November when the Port Adelaide Football Club makes its first appearance in this lad's life.
"Player Number 1234567, Hamish Hartlett, West Adelaide.
Here's $25K, West (given to us by the SANFL to prop us up), now piss off, he's our player now.
Fair enough, they're the rules, but West have spent years on him and barely get a game out of him.
That's fine, but if you want to continue to get players that the SANFL have groomed for you, then it's going to cost you a lot of money. About what the SANFL spend, actually.
See how that system works for you when you're putting tarps over seats.
As for Adelaide players, there's stories about so many of our greats and their time at West Adelaide. I've seen them all at close quarters.
Don't denigrate, embrace the SANFL, it's your lifeblood.
So you ignore the whole substance of the post and bring up an irrelevant side issue?
Yes, I'd guess that the top cats at the SANFL were paid far too much in the past, but I'd also be ceratin that it's chickenfeed compared to the excessive amounts paid for all sorts of things by the AFL clubs.
How about addressing the substance, not whinging about minor issues, or is it that what I've said is undeniable?
Yes, I'd guess that the top cats at the SANFL were paid far too much in the past, but I'd also be ceratin that it's chickenfeed compared to the excessive amounts paid for all sorts of things by the AFL clubs.
How about addressing the substance, not whinging about minor issues, or is it that what I've said is undeniable?
Here is his quote:
“We are pleased to have achieved this outcome after a very lengthy and detailed evaluation process,” Mr Olsen said.
“By securing an up-front payment of $10 million we have been able to extinguish our debt with the AFL, money we borrowed as part of the $16.25m we gave to Port Adelaide to keep the club viable ahead of the move to Adelaide Oval.
“The rest of the money is critical to our future, not only in terms of further lowering our debt profile – which now stands at $45m including SANFL club debt "
“We are pleased to have achieved this outcome after a very lengthy and detailed evaluation process,” Mr Olsen said.
“By securing an up-front payment of $10 million we have been able to extinguish our debt with the AFL, money we borrowed as part of the $16.25m we gave to Port Adelaide to keep the club viable ahead of the move to Adelaide Oval.
“The rest of the money is critical to our future, not only in terms of further lowering our debt profile – which now stands at $45m including SANFL club debt "
This is exactly where the problem lies, but everyone blames the SANFL, the SANFL and all leagues in Australia give the AFL their players, and why should the AFC and Power pay for the SANFL when Carlton for example could get that Westies lad.
The AFL receive over $1 Billion in TV rights they distribute very little in the scheme of things to the SANFL and expect leagues from around Australia to supply players and look after footy at grass roots. They are investing heavily into QLD or NSW not for the reason we are all talking about getting AFL players but purely for more revenue reasons. If they are ignorant to the fact the traditional states need funding in chasing after the Market share in those north Eastern states something is going to give.
There are two solutions to the AO saga, the AFL make a commitment to say the SANFL of 15 million a year and they leave the Oval to the Clubs or the AFL commit to more revenue to the clubs and leave the Oval to the SANFL.
There is only so much $$ to go around and its bloody evident who has the majority of it, looking at the SANFL debt and the Powers profit. It appears the AFL are sitting back and saying nothing whilst the plebs looking for the scraps are tearing each other apart. But what do you expect when you have an AFL which is effectively 60% run by Victorian clubs, they will always have the final say!
Exactly who is doing that? Don't fall into to the same trap as those flogs next door.
The development argument is bullshit. It doesn't take a big screen that a club can't afford to develop a young player. Or board member stealing club money.....
Yet the SANFL is everything that is good about grass roots footy........
If they paint a unrealistic rosy picture, I'm quite entitled to focus on the other side.
Try to understand it from a SANFL club's point of view, instead of just a kneejerk reaction which ignores the fact that if you accuse the SANFL clubs of living beyond their means, then you have to apply the same standard to the AFL clubs.
They post losses, they have trips to Dubai, pay their fitness people ridiculous amounts which are often more than a SANFL club spends on its whole football department and spend money without much thought. The AFL clubs also have enormous corporate and sponsor support, which isn't available to the SANFL clubs, who have to fight for every dollar. They also have massive media support, again not available to the SANFL clubs.
If you understand the hiostory of the game in SA, you'd know it's the SANFL which ran the game for over 100 years, it's the SANFL that took the risk of building AAMI Stadium, it's the SANFL which created the Adelaide Football Club, it's the SANFL who negotiated the Adelaide Oval scenario and it's the SANFL which takes all the risks. It's the SANFL which runs junior football, country football, umpires, school football, Auskick, coaching clinics and all the things that are necessary to run football in SA.
Why not embrace that fact instead of waging a vendetta against them over a negotiation which none of us know the actual details and figures?
It really is head in the sand stuff for just a debating point about which none of us know the outcome yet.
Your argument is backing you into an ever decreasing corner.
The decision to erect a new scoreboard at Richmond was a poor idea, so what?
A CEO taking funds isn't good, but it's hardly something that doesn't happen often. So what?
Perhaps a CEO costing Adelaide draft picks for 2 years might fall into the same category, or is that 'different'?
And I was calling for Trigg to be sacked.
Now I don't know who is actually to blame, but unsustainable practices seem to be all to common under the umbrella of the SANFL.
"But but but they develop young players...." doesn't excuse poor financial management.
My question is "Port got $4 million more than last year, got given another $1.5 million by the SANFL and will still lose $2 million".
Where does it all go?
Where does it all go?
Here's an interesting exercise.
Name a rough 'all-time best' Adelaide team.
Be fair and let's see the origin of the players.
Doesn't prove anything, but I'd be interested.
Name a rough 'all-time best' Adelaide team.
Be fair and let's see the origin of the players.
Doesn't prove anything, but I'd be interested.
It would be so that the AFL couldn't bully them with it over the stadium deal, I'd guess.
I never said they should not make a profit. The impression you and others are trying to give is that the PAP were sending the SANFL broke because they had to assist the PAP. What I'm saying is that the profit generated for the SANFL by the PAP was more than what the SANFL gave back to port.
The question that should be asked is "Why was The SANFL so eager to acquire the licence for the PAP"? Was that a bad mistake by the SANFL? They did not have to buy the licence, you know?
Lets be honest about it. The SANFL used the AFL clubs to prop up the SANFL clubs. Not the other way around.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
