Jarman Impeys ACL is done according to every news channel sports report.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They won't do that. it's 22 games that the AFL can sell to broadcasters, 11 of which are away games which the opponents earn money from at the ground. It's also another club to write articles about, and the games are still worth 4 points and percentage, which attracts a neutral viewership particularly towards the end of the season. You could make that argument about literally any team, but at the end of the day the AFL would rather field a team of root vegetables than not have an 18th team.True
The AFL need to admit they f’ed up and close GC and then the talent gets spread over the 17 teams
They won't do that. it's 22 games that the AFL can sell to broadcasters, 11 of which are away games which the opponents earn money from at the ground. It's also another club to write articles about, and the games are still worth 4 points and percentage, which attracts a neutral viewership particularly towards the end of the season. You could make that argument about literally any team, but at the end of the day the AFL would rather field a team of root vegetables than not have an 18th team.
They could be relocated, but the AFL won't do anything to fold or merge them unless they have a new 18th team lined up (at which point their mouths will water at the idea of 19 teams).
On the other hand...
GC have the lowest average home game attendances in 2019, but are only slightly behind GWS. Their average away game attendances are greater than both Brisbane and Adelaide, they're third last on that one. Combined attendances they're dead last, behind GWS. Compared to their own attendances in previous years, their away attendances this year are the highest they've ever been, home game attendances are the lowest they've ever been, and combined H&A attendances are third highest after 2011 and 2014.
2011 was their inaugural year, but 2014 is interesting, it was the year they won 10 games and finished 12th, which is their best result to date, it's also the year they sacked Bluey because they didn't make finals in their first 4 years, he left with a 25% win record. Kind of funny, because GWS didn't make finals in their first 4 years either, they were 11th in their 4th year, but jumped into the top 4 in their fifth year. GWS also only won 20 games in their first four years, compared to 24 for GC. So really, GC were more successful if we compare them at the end of four years in the league.
Sacking McKenna seemed to be a rash decision at the time and their sink into the mire under Eade (who always struck me as a very odd appointment) made it even more so.
I dont know if McKenna would have made much of a difference had he stayed. The issues around facilities, staffing amd welfare means the place was a ticking time bomb for implosion.Sacking McKenna seemed to be a rash decision at the time and their sink into the mire under Eade (who always struck me as a very odd appointment) made it even more so.
Hindsight confirms it. I dunno if Sheeds is the difference for GWS or if GC were doomed from the start, lots of strange decisions early on by the AFL and the GC upper management that haven't worked out so well. I don't see why the location would make much difference though, if you're happy to foot the bill without grassroots membership then the location is moot. It's the Ablett vs. Buddy vs. a bunch of solid leaders, the initial list build concessions and how they were used, Cochrane putting his foot in it with ridiculous frequency. Recruiting Karmichael Hunt as well.Sacking McKenna seemed to be a rash decision at the time and their sink into the mire under Eade (who always struck me as a very odd appointment) made it even more so.
This is kind of how I feel about it. The thing Sheeds brought to GWS was an old-fashioned fake it til you make it morale and confidence sorta thing, in an environment where that was allowed and encouraged. Sacking the coach the way they did, and blaming his performance (rather than Sheedy leaving after two years under a succession plan type arrangement) sends a massive message to the players, supporters, and everyone else. The board has lost confidence, your coach (confident or otherwise) isn't here, and your captain then stuffs his shoulder and has one foot out the door.That changed with two events - Gazza doing his shoulder and sacking McKenna. They werent the cause of their issues, but rather the fuses that were lit to begin the implosion.
I read somewhere that Southport Sharks used to send their financial reports down to the VFL to boast how well they could run a club. Perhaps the league would've done better to "promote" the known brand up to the big league than to create a new identity?
Google tells me the sharks have a 12 year "patron partnership" with the suns which is in its 10th year.
I would have done what they did with Port Adelaide and given Southport s licence instead of the Suns.I read somewhere that Southport Sharks used to send their financial reports down to the VFL to boast how well they could run a club. Perhaps the league would've done better to "promote" the known brand up to the big league than to create a new identity?
Google tells me the sharks have a 12 year "patron partnership" with the suns which is in its 10th year.
Southport is part of the Gold Coast - it's the next suburb up from SurfersI would have done what they did with Port Adelaide and given Southport s licence instead of the Suns.
They already have a membersip of 30,000+ which is more than both Gold Coast and GWS and they are only a NEAFL.
If they were going to neglect them like they did the Gold Coast in their earlier stages, at least Southport would have known how to run themselves until the AFL got their act together.
Southport is also only lile 30mins from Gold Coast so it essentially the same demographic and you could have them play at Carrara with 2 or so home games at Southport
Southport is part of the Gold Coast - it's the next suburb up from Surfers
I don't know if it accords with academy or rep team inclusion, but there's certainly a recruiting assumption that key forwards without elite physical traits won't have what it takes to match AFL defenders and defensive setups so are left to slide (and conversely those with the tools go very early). I don't think that's necessarily wrong though - for every Lewis or Larkey who blossom after a few years of seconds there are plenty who wash out of the system, though that's the case with all types.
They won't do that. it's 22 games that the AFL can sell to broadcasters, 11 of which are away games which the opponents earn money from at the ground. It's also another club to write articles about, and the games are still worth 4 points and percentage, which attracts a neutral viewership particularly towards the end of the season. You could make that argument about literally any team, but at the end of the day the AFL would rather field a team of root vegetables than not have an 18th team.
They could be relocated, but the AFL won't do anything to fold or merge them unless they have a new 18th team lined up (at which point their mouths will water at the idea of 19 teams).
On the other hand...
GC have the lowest average home game attendances in 2019, but are only slightly behind GWS. Their average away game attendances are greater than both Brisbane and Adelaide, they're third last on that one. Combined attendances they're dead last, behind GWS. Compared to their own attendances in previous years, their away attendances this year are the highest they've ever been, home game attendances are the lowest they've ever been, and combined H&A attendances are third highest after 2011 and 2014.
2011 was their inaugural year, but 2014 is interesting, it was the year they won 10 games and finished 12th, which is their best result to date, it's also the year they sacked Bluey because they didn't make finals in their first 4 years, he left with a 25% win record. Kind of funny, because GWS didn't make finals in their first 4 years either, they were 11th in their 4th year, but jumped into the top 4 in their fifth year. GWS also only won 20 games in their first four years, compared to 24 for GC. So really, GC were more successful if we compare them at the end of four years in the league.
Remember, some of our posters are only happy when we're losingYeah let's compromise the competition again to try and gift this pile of s**t club some fake success at the expense of everyone else. I'm all for another few years of busting our arses for nothing in the football wilderness to make it happen. Yay! Footy!
Is that too cynical?
The raw athletes have those traits though. Even if your underage year is sketchy, if you're an athletic freak (like, say, Balta) you'll go early enough. If you're a manchild and as slow as a wet week, it doesn't matter if you can bully your fellow kids and top the U18 goalkicking (as Gown nearly did, behind such household names as Jake Gasper, Hudson Garoni and Charlie Wilson) - you'll slide, if not go undrafted. And if you're a freak and can football, you're a top 5 pick.It often seems to be the opposite. The raw athletes are the ones that work and their being overlooked because they dont kick 7 a game but then no one does.
Yeah let's compromise the competition again to try and gift this pile of s**t club some fake success at the expense of everyone else. I'm all for another few years of busting our arses for nothing in the football wilderness to make it happen. Yay! Footy!
Is that too cynical?
This.Yep.
He may mean the grounds?