MCG tenants on Grand Final day

[Ghost Patrol]

You picked a blinder of a player (cant think of his name - bloke with the mo) to back nank up in the ruck.

i remember before that game pencilling in either a draw or a small win in the ruck - instead old mate mustache flogged hickey like a red headed stepchild.

Soldo. He set the record for the most hit-outs (42) in a debut game.

 

[kranky al]

Soldo. He set the record for the most hit-outs (42) in a debut game.

Hes a find and a half.

noone can resist the power of that mo!!

 

[Demontim275]

Nope. It wasn't a spending problem, it was a revenue problem because the base associated with a state league was too small.

Sounds exactly like a spending problem. You just said, no assets, not enough income and spending was through the roof.

so you’re saying that the league didn’t have the support, and that was the problem. I mean division 4 ammos cna have 10 people rock up to a game and still function, but you’re trying to sell the VFLs cash issue as “it wasn’t spending they just had no fans”

you don’t even know what you’re discussing. You’ve literally agreed wuth what I’ve said then gone “nah but ur wrong”

 

[FreeTK]

Sounds exactly like a spending problem. You just said, no assets, not enough income and spending was through the roof.

so you’re saying that the league didn’t have the support, and that was the problem. I mean division 4 ammos cna have 10 people rock up to a game and still function, but you’re trying to sell the VFLs cash issue as “it wasn’t spending they just had no fans”

you don’t even know what you’re discussing. You’ve literally agreed wuth what I’ve said then gone “nah but ur wrong”

It's not about attendance at games.

It was and always is about money attached to a TV rights deal. Obviously a state league doesn't have national interest, therefore the product quality to command big bucks to keep the league going at the time.

As soon as Brisbane and West Coast (and then Adelaide) joined the competition audience expanded by many millions. Following on from that TV ratings (and therefore the deal for TV rights) increased significantly creating a sustainable economic model for the competition to sustain the clubs and pursue its agenda of continued expansion.

If it wasn't for that initial expansion, VFL would not have survived in its current form. That is not a contrarian view, that is stated fact by all those who were in the know at the time.

 

[Demontim275]

It's not about attendance at games.

It was and always is about money attached to a TV rights deal. Obviously a state league doesn't have national interest, therefore the product quality to command big bucks to keep the league going at the time.

As soon as Brisbane and West Coast (and then Adelaide) joined the competition audience expanded by many millions. Following on from that TV ratings (and therefore the deal for TV rights) increased significantly creating a sustainable economic model for the competition to sustain the clubs and pursue its agenda of continued expansion.

If it wasn't for that initial expansion, VFL would not have survived in its current form. That is not a contrarian view, that is stated fact by all those who were in the know at the time.

Um... I clearly said it wouldn’t have been a professional league

You’re literally just describing over spending and corporate greed. Then saying exactly what I said about without expansion it just being another local league, while simultaneously saying “nah but ur wrong”

You’ve quite literally repeated my point. Then claimed my point is wrong. I think you need to calm down and read.

 

[FreeTK]

Um... I clearly said it wouldn’t have been a professional league

You’re literally just describing over spending and corporate greed. Then saying exactly what I said about without expansion it just being another local league, while simultaneously saying “nah but ur wrong”

You’ve quite literally repeated my point. Then claimed my point is wrong. I think you need to calm down and read.

Sounds exactly like a spending problem. You just said, no assets, not enough income and spending was through the roof.

so you’re saying that the league didn’t have the support, and that was the problem. I mean division 4 ammos cna have 10 people rock up to a game and still function, but you’re trying to sell the VFLs cash issue as “it wasn’t spending they just had no fans”

you don’t even know what you’re discussing. You’ve literally agreed wuth what I’ve said then gone “nah but ur wrong”

You just mentioned 3 things. 2 of them are revenue issues, but you mentioned them as being "spending problems".

Revenue = money coming in
Expenditure/Spending = money going out.

National competition = more people watching on TV = more Revenue = no more money problems.

 

[Roachy8]

Of all the grounds used ‘regularly’, I’m interested in opinions on which would be the most neutral??

 

[Demontim275]

You just mentioned 3 things. 2 of them are revenue issues, but you mentioned them as being "spending problems".

Revenue = money coming in
Expenditure/Spending = money going out.

National competition = more people watching on TV = more Revenue = no more money problems.

Except finances aren’t split into the two. If you don’t have the revenue, you don’t spend.
The VFL didn’t do that. They continued to increase player payments in an attempt to try to buy flags and make the comp bigger and bigger.
The issue was nothing to do with the size of the supporter base. It was the ludicrous spending of clubs and the league.
you’d be a terrible financial manager. You don’t just allow untapped spending and then hope for a Hail Mary to buy you out of debt. The spending is the issue (and the supporter base logic is garbage considering there’s still 20 or so leagues with multiple divisions all in this state alone. When clubs struggle it’s because player payments are doing what they did in the vfl back then.Getting higher at uncontrolled rates)

 

[kranky al]

Of all the grounds used ‘regularly’, I’m interested in opinions on which would be the most neutral??

Too small obvs - but the most neutral ground would have to be adelaide oval.

1) all bar 2 teams have a fairly equal flight to get there

2) only a 2/17 chance of meeting a tenant in a gf there as opposed to <1/3 at the mcg

3) very little circadium rhythm disruption as its the central timezone +- 1 hour

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Of all the grounds used ‘regularly’, I’m interested in opinions on which would be the most neutral??

MCG. Because it can fit the most neutral fans

 

[kranky al]

The MCG is neutral for all Victorian clubs. As is Marvel. There is no travel for them or their supporters and they arent wandering around aimlesslessy in a foreign city getting their bearings.

If the bigger clubs draw bigger crowds then thats good for them. But it doesnt guartantee success, and it has no influence on "home ground advantage".

Yeah nah - marvel is a lot skinnier than the g - richmond especially dont play the skinny grounds as well as the wide expanses.

we struggled on the wide fields when we were at subi - i thank f we have a wider ground at optus.

 

[kranky al]

MCG. Because it can fit the most neutral fans

Look up the definition of neutral sporting ground.

 

[Demontim275]

Move the grand final to Shanghai and only allow locals to attend. That way you only have to worry about it if port make it. That’s surely the most neutral ground.

it’s only fair.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Look up the definition of neutral sporting ground.

MCG is also the most carbon neutral venue, especially in terms of travel.

 

[kranky al]

MCG is also the most carbon neutral venue, especially in terms of travel.

If you have a car - on the middle of the mcg and you dont put it in gear

vs one at adelaide in gear

clearly the mcg is the most neutral venue!!

 

[Ghost Patrol]

If you have a car - on the middle of the mcg and you dont put it in gear

vs one at adelaide in gear

clearly the mcg is the most neutral venue!!

Look, if Greta had her way you would be sailing across the bite

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[kranky al]

Look, if Greta had her way you would be sailing across the bite

Be careful what you wish for.

Wrong person - my lotto dream is to buy a big cat and do exactly that

 

[Do the Dew]

Lol - richmond wasnt beating anyone away from their safe space.

Richmond lost to teams that didnt make the 8 because it was down the road at etihad.

I’ve already rebuked this crap you put out that Richmond were garbage away from the G in 2017 many many pages back. It’s just not true. Maybe in ‘18 you have a point, but not ‘17. Clearly you just ignore anything that doesn’t confirm your idiot thoughts


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Do the Dew]

Too small obvs - but the most neutral ground would have to be adelaide oval.

1) all bar 2 teams have a fairly equal flight to get there

2) only a 2/17 chance of meeting a tenant in a gf there as opposed to 3 at the mcg

3) very little circadium rhythm disruption as its the central timezone +- 1 hour

There’s no jetlag in Aus flights cause you’re not crossing multiple time zones, so 3 is irrelevant


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Ghost Patrol]

There’s no jetlag in Aus flights cause you’re not crossing multiple time zones, so 3 is irrelevant


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

He also thinks daylight savings makes his curtains fade quicker

 

[FreeTK]

There’s no jetlag in Aus flights cause you’re not crossing multiple time zones, so 3 is irrelevant


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Actually travelling from Perth to the East Coast jet lag is a thing as you are crossing two (ie. multiple) time zones.

Travelling West to East (i.e. Perth to Melbourne) also increase the likelihood and severity of jet lag.

 

[Carringbush2010]

OMG, you are so wrong it isn't even funny.

You actually don't know what you are talking about.

The VFL was literally on it's knees before West Coast and Lions joined.

West Coast joined only because if the VFL went under, the WAFL would also go under. The WAFL's economic model relied on transfer payments from VFL clubs for WAFL players. Essentially no VFL meant no WAFL.

I literally answered that question in the last post. I think your use of the term conflict of interests confuses your post a bit, but I'll try and get to the bones of it the best I can.

The only reason they are financially viable is due to AFL's model of financial distribution which money to clubs who need it most. Without those funds they would be generating operating losses or very small profits.

The expansion to an 18 team competition meant that there was football every weekend in every state and meant that the AFL could generate a TV rights deal based on the fact each state has football on each week for local markets.

Essentially, Brisbane, GWS, Gold Coast (and to a lesser extent swans) do cost the AFL money if AFL distributions, however they retrieve that money through the extra value of a TV rights deals which has football in 5 different states each week, which creates the potential to reach every household in every mainland state. The small victorian clubs don't do serve any of those purposes, and are far less important from a strategic point of view.

You should have a read of the article I posted above.

You are literally agreeing with me. I get all that what you've posted here about the wafc salvaging the VFL (which it would've been revived in some way shape or form anyway).

Regardless of whatever reason you think they are viable, guess what they're viable. They're fan bases are actually needed.

If they weren't needed then they wouldn't be there because that would reduce the amount of teams in vic - moving closer to what looks like a national competition. You know the AFL's intent - a national comp. If a national comp wasn't HQ's wish then we wouldn't have money pits like GC and GWS.

It's simple stuff and you're looking at in too finer detail to see what's right in front of you.

At the end of the day those fan bases are part of the bums on seats and couches that keep the comp running.

If you believe those small clubs don't serve the purposes of tv ratings and gate attendances, then you have to ask yourself why are they there.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Was never ever about being the base, Victoria always was going to be.

And as Victoria is / was always going to be the base, that pretty much sums up why we have the comp we have and why we have the GF at the G.

But posters like FreeTK don't want to accept that in the desperate hope that someday the comp and the GF venue will be to their liking.

 

[kranky al]

There’s no jetlag in Aus flights cause you’re not crossing multiple time zones, so 3 is irrelevant


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Well now

 

[kranky al]

I’ve already rebuked this crap you put out that Richmond were garbage away from the G in 2017 many many pages back. It’s just not true. Maybe in ‘18 you have a point, but not ‘17. Clearly you just ignore anything that doesn’t confirm your idiot thoughts


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

What did you do that rebuked(sic) the fact that you beat noone bar the bottom five and port?


Were you the one that whined that you only missed beating gws by a few points?

I cant remember - ive seen so much backwards arse brainfart logic by richmond fans trying to justify the fact that they couldnt even beat bottom ten teams a hop skip and a jump down the road at etihad - its hard to keep track.


In 2018 if the eagles only beat the bottom five and port interstate - we’d have finished 11th and missed finals.

But yeah - go ahead - knock yourself out -


Heres some data for you :

Richmond ladder who they lost to away from the mcg:


LLLL= lost ****= win


Adelaide LLLL

Geelong. LLLL

Richmond

GWS LLLL

Port adelaide ****

Sydney (LLLL at mcg)

Essendon

West coast





Melbourne

Western bulldogs. LLLL

St kilda. LLLL

Hawthorn

Collingwood

Fremantle **** (LLLL at mcg)


Bottom 4


North ****

Carlton ****

Gold coast ****

Brisbane ****