It's no surprise that Melbourne struggles for members and money

[Kimbo]

...self inflicted gunshot wounds take a long time to heal and this is the root cause of Melbourne's current woes.

And, yes, there may be some validity to the OP's points. Personally, I started supporting my team at the same time as the advent of colour TV and their halcyon years in the '70s. North had the Friday night thing going in the '90s which would have been useful, but by the same token perhaps haven't capitalised on membership as much if the social media and TV rights saturation was around then?

The equivalence of the eras the OP suggests re Melbourne, from my historical perspective is that Melbourne were propping up the ladder then, and now. So, maybe?

 

[TedDougChris]

And, yes, there may be some validity to the OP's points. Personally, I started supporting my team at the same time as the advent of colour TV and their halcyon years in the '70s. North had the Friday night thing going in the '90s which would have been useful, but by the same token perhaps haven't capitalised on membership as much if the social media and TV rights saturation was around then?

The equivalence of the eras the OP suggests re Melbourne, from my historical perspective is that Melbourne were propping up the ladder then, and now. So, maybe?

The importance of timing cannot be understated. Sometimes you are in the right place at the right time. Sometimes not. This is under discussed aspect of the drafting and priority pick issue. The Dogs have been (up until recently) looking for KPF talent through the draft for some time - but sometimes you don't get the access at the right time to the right players, or the ones that excel at the junior level aren't the ones that actually succeed. So you're in a damned if you do and damned if you don't trap - you go for the best available, because you're expected to... Rather than waiting for an opportunity that may not arrive. And if some clubs keep getting access to a priority pick - other clubs may miss out on their needs as a result.

But it is a bit rich to lay blame for all Melbourne's woes on social media and TV. If Melbourne had taken responsibility for some of it's own decisions and failings, they wouldn't have had to have the AFL come in to resolve the issues and the perception of the club would be different. Rebuilding a club from the ground up is getting harder, as the clubs become more and more professional.

 

[Micksy]

Chasing memberships from a billion Chinese was the biggest stuffup they've made recently.

Chinese despise demons? Goodbye Melbourne Demons, hello plain old Melbourne.

 

[Kimbo]

But it is a bit rich to lay blame for all Melbourne's woes on social media and TV. If Melbourne had taken responsibility for some of it's own decisions and failings, they wouldn't have had to have the AFL come in to resolve the issues and the perception of the club would be different. Rebuilding a club from the ground up is getting harder, as the clubs become more and more professional.

Not sure if you think that's what I was doing, or are referring to the OP. Personally I think the current version of the Go Dees have only themselves to blame.

 

[jack son 5]

Chasing memberships from a billion Chinese was the biggest stuffup they've made recently.

Chinese despise demons? Goodbye Melbourne Demons, hello plain old Melbourne.

Incorrect. Our relationship with the Chinese has never been stronger. China has created an Aussie rules team called the China Red Demons.

 

[Ian Dunross]

I get what the OP is getting at & think it has genuine merit.

For mine, this thread needs more Cameron Schwab bashing. That man single handedly derailed a train gathering good momentum.

In 2010, the Dees tied w & lost by a point in two games v Collingwood. They were playing an attractive brand of footy. Won 10? games of footy that year. In many ways doing what Hinkley's Port is doing now, dash through the corridoor w quick ball movement.

The board commissioned an external review. The review slated Schwab & Connolly (I understand). The review was presented to the board, nothing happened.

Pretty clear at this point the senior players gave up, why give our all when the executive puts itself before the club. The indefensible sacking of James McDonald didn't help.

Went to water in 2011 with Schwab still trying to act as recruiter, marketer, football department honcho.

Stand to be corrected by Dees posters.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Long premiership drought yes, but they're not alone there.

Was the club in that bad a shape before Neale Daniher departed? The team certainly wasn't.

 

[jack son 5]

Long premiership drought yes, but they're not alone there.

Was the club in that bad a shape before Neale Daniher departed? The team certainly wasn't.

No it wasn't. This still hold's over me. Why was Neale moved on? It went all down hill from this point.

 

[TedDougChris]

Not sure if you think that's what I was doing, or are referring to the OP. Personally I think the current version of the Go Dees have only themselves to blame.

Not directing it at your good self, apologies for any confusion !!

 

[theflea]

I actually think it a little easier to draft talent right now instead of 2010, purely because of diluted draft years.

 

[Fear Boner]

But yet the club seems to trump your mob. What is it now, 6 - 1 over the last 5 year's.

ehh still beats being melbourne since the norm smith era....

 

[Brock Machine]

I get what the OP is getting at & think it has genuine merit.

For mine, this thread needs more Cameron Schwab bashing. That man single handedly derailed a train gathering good momentum.

In 2010, the Dees tied w & lost by a point in two games v Collingwood. They were playing an attractive brand of footy. Won 10? games of footy that year. In many ways doing what Hinkley's Port is doing now, dash through the corridoor w quick ball movement.

The board commissioned an external review. The review slated Schwab & Connolly (I understand). The review was presented to the board, nothing happened.

Pretty clear at this point the senior players gave up, why give our all when the executive puts itself before the club. The indefensible sacking of James McDonald didn't help.

Went to water in 2011 with Schwab still trying to act as recruiter, marketer, football department honcho.

Stand to be corrected by Dees posters.

Pretty good summary. Add Jim's illness causing a dysfunctional board unable to rein in Schwab and cuddles.

 

[Matt Stevic]

Melbourne is going to great lengths to get itself back on track both on and off the field, but I remain skeptical: I think that the league has changed the past 3-4 years, and it's harder to come back from years at the bottom than it was, say, in 2010. I think the league's changed a LOT, especially with free agency. The club has to make inroads in 2015 and if it doesn't, I remain skeptical that it can in the near future.

I always wondered how a team that essentially dominated the league in the 50s and 60s, created the game, and was so firmly embedded in the inner-city 'burbs and eastern area, could continuously struggle with support, members, money and interest.

Now, the obvious answer is of course that, well, they're not a very good football club: no one wants to watch or buy a crappy brand. I get that. Trust me, I watch them every week and I know how hard it can be to support a bad club.

But let's look at Melbourne's two worst eras: the period between 1965 and 1986, and the period between 2007 and 2015.

These eras are important, because they represent important cultural shifts in the ways in which we engage with, share and embrace information: the rise of television, and the rise of social media.

1965-1986
In this period, Melbourne never made the finals.
Melbourne won 4 wooden spoons
My dad and his brothers often tell me that this period was far worse than anything we've seen from the club during any other "down" time
100-point beltings were frequent

2007-2015
No wins at Etihad
No wins against Geelong, Hawthorn, North
No wins in Perth
No finals appearances
2 wooden spoons
Five seasons with only 4 or fewer wins (2008: 3, 2009: 4, 2012: 4, 2013: 2, 2014: 4)

In 1965, we were starting to see a rise of the television, and by the 70s, it was expanding and networks were moving out into regional areas. Football's reach was expanding but Melbourne was always at the bottom of the ladder and interest rankings.

In 2007, we started to see the growth in social media, Facebook and Twitter: since then, during a time when people share stories and videos, the good stories are shared and spread at an intense pace...but so are the bad stories.

Is it viable to consider that Melbourne could very well be the unluckiest club in the land, to have not just bottomed out, but bottomed out during two of the most important eras of technology and media?

More appropriately:
1967- sacking of Norm Smith
2007- sacking of Neale Daniher

Unlucky? You make your own luck.

 

[wowlace]

I get what the OP is getting at & think it has genuine merit.

For mine, this thread needs more Cameron Schwab bashing. That man single handedly derailed a train gathering good momentum.

In 2010, the Dees tied w & lost by a point in two games v Collingwood. They were playing an attractive brand of footy. Won 10? games of footy that year. In many ways doing what Hinkley's Port is doing now, dash through the corridoor w quick ball movement.

The board commissioned an external review. The review slated Schwab & Connolly (I understand). The review was presented to the board, nothing happened.

Pretty clear at this point the senior players gave up, why give our all when the executive puts itself before the club. The indefensible sacking of James McDonald didn't help.

Went to water in 2011 with Schwab still trying to act as recruiter, marketer, football department honcho.

Stand to be corrected by Dees posters.

Yep, I thought the wheel had finally turned that year. Then, 186. Hard for a coach to come back from that. Conspiracies about players not putting in etc probably have 0.5 truth to them. Just a rabble from then until PJ entered the frame. PJ is our No.1 pick. Dude hasn't made a wrong move yet. I truly believe we are on the right track now. Just coming from a long way back, still a few years away from relevancy.

 

[jack son 5]

ehh still beats being melbourne since the norm smith era....

As of the last 24hrs. I have nothing

 

[Adzam]

they should probably just try and be better at football

 

[Fear Boner]

As of the last 24hrs. I have nothing

haha you'll beat us later in the year ....just wait a few weeks mate

 

[jack son 5]

2007: Daniher gone.

2008 - 2015:

Dean Bailey appointed coach.
Melbourne went bad for 08-10.
Bailey showed signs for 2011 until the Geelong defeat.
Jim Stynes backed Bailey. (Schwab and Co had to go).
Garry Lyon and Co stepped in. Sacked Bailey, appointed Neeld.
Neeld.
Neeld.

More names could be mentioned (Connolly). We have appointed the wrong people.
Don't get me started on DRAFT picks. Cringe.

It's not bad luck, but poor decisions.

 

[Dazb86]

I know Richmond is a huge club regardless of the last 30 years but I think they had the potential to be the largest club had they not fallen off a cliff for so long. They've got a lot of 20-30 year old followers that don't really give a * about the football. The majority of my mates who follow Richmond have only just started paying attention to football now that they are winning because Richmond have been so shocking during my lifetime.

Having very lean drawn out periods definitely affects your future supporter base pretty badly.

It's no wonder the clubs with the most premierships generally have the most supporters. Neutrals bandwagon by nature and halfhearted supporters jump on when you are playing well.

 

[Abomination]

We've had our fair share of rotten luck (still ongoing, see Petracca this year, Hogan last year, Clark the year before) but I think it's magnified by the godawful recruitment, drafting and development from the pre-Roos era.

I'd say most of our woes have been self inflicted and that's the reason we're in this position. It will take a lot more than 3 years with Roos to get this team into finals.

 

[J_Moore]

This was a good post about 40 times more thoughtful than the usual shite that gets slapped up on the main board. And half the replies are idiots slagging it off.


It's an interesting idea, Cudi_420 . It would be interesting of some economist/data type went trawling for the membership/revenue figures for all clubs during those eras, crunched the numbers, and tried to establish the exact nature of the link between results & +/- changes in support.

 

[Damon_3388]

Also look no further than Fitzroy - who if they weren't deliberately driven out of the league may have thrived in a more enlightened time.

Obviously the club wouldn't be playing right out of Brunswick St if they were still around, but you couldn't help but think with how hip and popular the Fitzroy/Brunswick area has become over the past decade or so, that people might want to jump on the bandwagon of a club that represents that area, too.

 

[wowlace]

This was a good post about 40 times more thoughtful than the usual shite that gets slapped up on the main board. And half the replies are idiots slagging it off.


It's an interesting idea, Cudi_420 . It would be interesting of some economist/data type went trawling for the membership/revenue figures for all clubs during those eras, crunched the numbers, and tried to establish the exact nature of the link between results & +/- changes in support.

You can't discuss Melbourne on the MB without it becoming shitfest by the end of the first page. Guaranteed you'll get a troll within the 1st 5 posts.

 

[Timewaster]

Chasing memberships from a billion Chinese was the biggest stuffup they've made recently.
Chinese despise demons? Goodbye Melbourne Demons, hello plain old Melbourne.

I made a comment supporting the OP's theory that it was timing, and I do think that's true. What's also true is that Melbourne is a difficult team to sympathise with. The members voted for a merger and the club dumped the Demon for a pipedream of relevance in mainland China.

I'm not trying to bag out Melbourne, the comp is better if all clubs have cycles of success. The Dees would be easier to love if they seemed to stand for something. Robbie Flower and Jimmy Stynes can't carry the club on their own...

(inb4 someone talking about Carlton's off-field issues, but this is a Dees thread.)

 

[Sprout]

Melbourne struggles for everything because every year they decide to tank. Why would fans turn up to see that? They're never going to get out off the ground until they decide to go for it.

It's a stupid cycle they've gotten themselves into, it goes like this:

Phase 1: Melbourne's crap so they tank to get the best youngsters for the next few years.
Phase 2: Youngsters take time to develop so they're crap for a few years.
Phase 3: When the youngsters are supposed to have developed, some of them leave, some don't turn out as good, some develop serious injuries, the older players are still crap.
Phase 4: ...therefore... because they're still struggling, the coach gets sacked. Few board members get sacked and things change in order to "turn over a new leaf".
Phase 5: Melbourne now has to go through another re-building phase so they tank again. Back to Phase 1.

I hereby proclaim this the "cyclical tanking theory".

What's great is two people read this and thought, "yep, sounds spot on to me".

I get what the OP is getting at & think it has genuine merit.

For mine, this thread needs more Cameron Schwab bashing. That man single handedly derailed a train gathering good momentum.

In 2010, the Dees tied w & lost by a point in two games v Collingwood. They were playing an attractive brand of footy. Won 10? games of footy that year. In many ways doing what Hinkley's Port is doing now, dash through the corridoor w quick ball movement.

The board commissioned an external review. The review slated Schwab & Connolly (I understand). The review was presented to the board, nothing happened.

Pretty clear at this point the senior players gave up, why give our all when the executive puts itself before the club. The indefensible sacking of James McDonald didn't help.

Went to water in 2011 with Schwab still trying to act as recruiter, marketer, football department honcho.

Stand to be corrected by Dees posters.

On the whole, I agree. It's not fair to heap it on one bloke, and the theories as to when and why it went so badly wrong are varied and most have some degree of merit. But there is certainly a strong argument to suggest that the wrong person was sacked in 2011. What's almost funny is the running and attacking brand that Bailey had the team playing in 2010 is the way the game is trending now. It wasn't acountable, but it was at times good to watch and could've been developed further if given time. What he ultimately lacked was the cattle. Bails basically couldn't polish the turd, so he rolled it in glitter instead.

All pathes for me lead back to the recruiting. Disastrous drafting choices with a raft of players who could not or would not win the hard ball. They were mainly skinny, outside types who stumbled at the first hurdle and never recovered. When you attempt a youth driven rebuild and get that sized chunk of players wrong in consecutive years, it not only leaves a black hole in your list, it royally *s your club and we are still knee deep in the recovery. Yes there were cultural and development issues at the same time (an example being set by McLean, Sylvia and Moloney..nough said), but there were also just outright bad choices. For that, Schwab can't really be held accountable, despite his interference in FD matters and general shitfulness.

It is no surprise that the signs of life are just starting to show as a result of getting a few picks correct. There is a group of players forming that you can have some faith in for future success. What remains to be seen is if the derth of senior players to guide them has been sufficiently addressed with the ones brought into the club. That remains a big IF. It has been countered somewhat by the quality of development coaches in Goodwin and Macca, but it remains a big IF.