2003 maybe the Bulldogs last

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by The Ewok
"Another 12 months as we've just had and there is no club." - Dogs CEO
And that would be tragic.
It's happened before. There was the merger in 1989 when the supporters raised the money to keep the club going. Then there was the Year of the Dogs, which saw the club become the Western Bulldogs. But if this is going to be an ongoing 7-year cycle, that's bad news for the Bulldogs. As a club they've been succesful for most of the years in between, but after just 1-2 bad years they're in major trouble. Which shows how competitive the Melbourne football market is.
The TV rights deal and everything else the AFL is doing is based around having a 16-team comp. Take that away and there's a bye and 1 less game every week. So it would be in the AFL's interests, unless another club is waiting in the wings to come in, for them to find some way to keep the Bulldogs alive in some form.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Relocation is the only solution.

There is NO WAY the victorian footy market can support 10 teams. Many teams have struggled during times of economic boom, i wonder how they will fare in times of economic recession, which is bound to hit sooner or later.

Bulldogs should seriously consider moving interstate. I know this would be a horrible thing for their supporters, but even they would have to agree relocation is better than a merger or bankrupcy.
 
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
Relocation is the only solution.

There is NO WAY the victorian footy market can support 10 teams. Many teams have struggled during times of economic boom, i wonder how they will fare in times of economic recession, which is bound to hit sooner or later.

Bulldogs should seriously consider moving interstate. I know this would be a horrible thing for their supporters, but even they would have to agree relocation is better than a merger or bankrupcy.
Where would they relocate to?
IMHO the option that has the most potential would be Western Sydney and playing their home games at Stadium Australia; but it would take a lot of work to develop that market. The AFL would need to contribute a lot of marketing and development money, but it could work.
There were some good crowds for the games at Stadium Australia this year. The majority of Swans members would probably prefer to play their games at the SCG, but the appears to be a fairly solid base of supporters who don't have Swans memberships and won't go to the SCG but will go to Homebush. If the Bulldogs can identify and develop those people, there's potential there. But it would take a lot of work, and the Kangaroos fiasco could turn potential supporters of a second team in Sydney away. It would need to be full-time and permanent or nothing.
 
I hate to say it but, as an old Royboy, I hear the wings of the vultures descending to start picking over the list. It's all so depressing.

AFL Management is like Military Intelligence - a contradiction in terms.
 
When Fitzroy merged with Brisbane and you looked at the unreasonable demands of the AFLPA on the clubs it was inevitable that more clubs will merge. Fitzroy was the first the Bulldogs maybe next but they certainly will not be the last to go inside the next 5 years.

What out Roos & Saints you too are on the brink.
 
I am a Bulldogs member and a realist.
If the Dogs ceased to exist thousands of football people would be lost to the game. Congratulations to the Fitzroy people who have embraced the Brisbane team, at least it is something.
The Kangas and Saints could possibly be next. I hope not, the less pain for football fans the better.

Remember one thing, less teams means less members, supporters, players, revenue, games, loss of rivalries. etc. etc.

Would I follow a merged or relocated team? No.
 
Originally posted by Bomber Spirit
Where would they relocate to?
IMHO the option that has the most potential would be Western Sydney and playing their home games at Stadium Australia; but it would take a lot of work to develop that market. The AFL would need to contribute a lot of marketing and development money, but it could work.
There were some good crowds for the games at Stadium Australia this year. The majority of Swans members would probably prefer to play their games at the SCG, but the appears to be a fairly solid base of supporters who don't have Swans memberships and won't go to the SCG but will go to Homebush. If the Bulldogs can identify and develop those people, there's potential there. But it would take a lot of work, and the Kangaroos fiasco could turn potential supporters of a second team in Sydney away. It would need to be full-time and permanent or nothing.

Interesting scenario for the afl.

$1m a year to keep them going in melbourne

$3-4-5m a year (or more) to establish them in sydney

And could the doggies trust the AFL to keep the support up when the going got tough ?

At least in melbourne they have the die-hards to fall back on.
 
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
There is NO WAY the victorian footy market can support 10 teams.

There is actually a way. The AFL has got to start controlling the ever increasing costs involved in running a football club. Start with player salaries, then to stadium management costs and go on from there.

Next they have to have a rethink about how much money they are spending on the beaurocracy that is the AFL, and start to channel it more toward the club.

The competition is not sustainable in it's current form and it is not just Melbourne based clubs that are struggling to cope. The AFL needs the Bulldogs, and they have a duty to everything they can to assist them through the next few years until they can get themselves sustainable in there own right.

Moomba
 
Originally posted by moomba


There is actually a way. The AFL has got to start controlling the ever increasing costs involved in running a football club. Start with player salaries, then to stadium management costs and go on from there.

Next they have to have a rethink about how much money they are spending on the beaurocracy that is the AFL, and start to channel it more toward the club.

The competition is not sustainable in it's current form and it is not just Melbourne based clubs that are struggling to cope. The AFL needs the Bulldogs, and they have a duty to everything they can to assist them through the next few years until they can get themselves sustainable in there own right.

Moomba

Excellent post Moomba. Surely the AFL should be looking at why clubs are losing money (and not just the Victorian clubs) and identify where the costs are blowing out. Is it player payments? Match day returns? Travelling costs?

Then at least some proper strategies could be put in place to make all clubs profitable whether it is through the salary cap, playing games at smaller venues, etc. But until a thorough investigation is conducted on why clubs are losing money, I fear more clubs will end up in dire financial straits.
 
The problem is that player salaries are based on the players wanting a % of the game income.

There will always be problems in Victoria while Victoria pays a higher % of the games salaries etc than the % australia wide of the income they produce.

Victoria will struggle to pay out 63% of the football payouts if they only produce say 50% of the income (which is a figure pulled out of my arse along the lines of the players they produce, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is reasonably accurate).
 
Originally posted by moomba


There is actually a way. The AFL has got to start controlling the ever increasing costs involved in running a football club

I almost fell off my seat when I read this hypocritical post. The AFL told the Kangaroos for years and years to stop paying their assistant coaches and football staff so high salaries. But they never listenend until it was to late.

The Bulldogs will get no sympathy from me. Even their own fans admit their business plan is very unrealistic.

The buck stops at the clubs, not the AFL.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Originally posted by Rohan_


I almost fell off my seat when I read this hypocritical post. The AFL told the Kangaroos for years and years to stop paying their assistant coaches and football staff so high salaries. But they never listenend until it was to late.

The Bulldogs will get no sympathy from me. Even their own fans admit their business plan is very unrealistic.

The buck stops at the clubs, not the AFL.

What rubbish!
Which Bulldogs fans admitted the plan was unrealistic? From the board maybe 2 out of the 40 or so there have been critical of Smorgan. The AFL approved the plan as well!

How can you say the AFL is not even partly to blame when the facts say 10 out 16 clubs are recording losses?
 
Originally posted by Chops


Which Bulldogs fans admitted the plan was unrealistic? From the board maybe 2 out of the 40 or so there have been critical of Smorgan.

Was a few more than that. I noticed a few people who were critical of Smorgon and rightly so. Quite simply he is putting in plans (such as the education facility) that ensure they are living beyond their means.


How can you say the AFL is not even partly to blame when the facts say 10 out 16 clubs are recording losses?

Partly being the operative word. The buck stops at the club, not the AFL. The AFL don't force the club to hire coaches who leave the club and have to pay him out.
 
Originally posted by Rohan_


Partly being the operative word. The buck stops at the club, not the AFL. The AFL don't force the club to hire coaches who leave the club and have to pay him out.

We payed Wallace out did we?
 
sad

It's sad. Very sad.

One of the clubs who have tried to change the way footy revenue is generated, who have tried to get connected to the community is the club that's in the worst position...

I always enjoy barracking against the doggies- and sometimes passionately for them (against Essendon in 2000 when you ended their streak)- and it'll be a tragedy if i don't get to anymore...

But it seems inevitable that one of these teams is doomed, doesn't it.
 
Originally posted by Rohan_
I almost fell off my seat when I read this hypocritical post. The AFL told the Kangaroos for years and years to stop paying their assistant coaches and football staff so high salaries. But they never listenend until it was to late.

Where is the hypocrisy Rohan. My post was my point of view, and whatever my football club may or may not have done is irrelevent. I believe North for the last few years have been running one of the lower costing football departments in the league, that will be cut even further this year but I would hardly say it's too late.

For what it's worth clubs are forced to match spending with the likes of Collingwood, Crows, Essendon, West Coast in order to remain competitive. You cuold give all clubs $5 million dollars today and the likes of North and the Bulldogs will have to spend $4 million of it so that they don't fall further behind. Control spending at all levels, and you will get a more sustainable competition.

The Bulldogs will get no sympathy from me. Even their own fans admit their business plan is very unrealistic.

The buck stops at the clubs, not the AFL.

I wouldn't expect you would have any sympathy for the Bulldogs, and I also expect that the vast majority of their supporters don't give a toss what you think.

Moomba
 
Originally posted by SCRAY72
I am a Bulldogs member and a realist.
If the Dogs ceased to exist thousands of football people would be lost to the game. Congratulations to the Fitzroy people who have embraced the Brisbane team, at least it is something.
The Kangas and Saints could possibly be next. I hope not, the less pain for football fans the better.

Remember one thing, less teams means less members, supporters, players, revenue, games, loss of rivalries. etc. etc.

Would I follow a merged or relocated team? No.

I don't see how someone can call themselves a supporter of a club and say they'd stop supporting it just because it's moved. If the Bulldogs (or North or the Saints) moved to Western Sydney the team would still play 4 - 7 matches each year in Melbourne against the remaining Victorian clubs. Plus Sydney (or Canberra if say North relocated there) aren't so far away that supporters realistically couldn't travel there two or three times in a season to see them play. That's 6 - 10 games a year. Not the same as 16 - 22, but a lot better then watching your club scrap each year, slowly dying till eventually it passes beyond the point of no return and the club dies.

You'll hear people here and elsewhere talk about the club is bigger then the individual yet they consider their seeing them almost every weekend more important then the clubs chances of long term survival.

Moving one of the struggling clubs to Western Sydney has enough advantages for the AFL for them to be willing to prop. the club up in the medium term (2 - 10 years). A game each weekend in the most populous city will :

1) Get more AFL coverage into NSW
2) Ensure more youngsters over time follow the game there and play it
3) From more youngsters playing the game in the long term more players available for drafts and hence a deeper talent pool. A deeper talent pool gives better quality games, which we all want.
4) Tackles rugby more as the premier winter sport in one of two Rugby heartland states
5) By having less games in Victoria, you get more on TV (the bulldogs matches out of Sydney). Hence more TV figures which will placate the TV stakeholders. And more TV figures means the rights are worth more hence the AFL recoups some or all of what support they have to provide initially. So the case isn't as simple as $1 million a year required in Vic. , $2 million a year in NSW (for example).
6) Since the club relocated will be attracting mostly sponsors from a previously untapped area the remaining nine victorian clubs will have it slightly easier trying to get sufficient Victorian based sponsors with one less competitor.

So :
The AFL wins out in the long run by getting a club providing increased support in NSW, plus TV rights worth more.
The club gets survival and potentially in the long run becomes a strong club.
The game as whole in the long run wins out by more NSW youngsters playing it, increasing talent depth (Victoria, SA and WA are already as fanatical as they are going to get).
The other Victorian clubs win by less competition for victorian sponsors.

The only people who could gripe are those supporters who believe their right to see the team as often as possible is more important then the club surviving and the AFL in general being as strong as possible. And since when should everyone else suffer for their selfiness ?
 
Originally posted by Andre
I don't see how someone can call themselves a supporter of a club and say they'd stop supporting it just because it's moved.

I don't see how someone who is not a supporter of one of the struggling clubs can presume to tell people how they should feel if their football club merges or relocates.

The only people who could gripe are those supporters who believe their right to see the team as often as possible is more important then the club surviving and the AFL in general being as strong as possible. And since when should everyone else suffer for their selfiness ?

How exactly are you suffering.

Moomba
 
Originally posted by Rohan_


Quite simply he is putting in plans (such as the education facility) that ensure they are living beyond their means.


Usually gives them a tidy profit this is the first year it hasn't.Helping out the community is part of the agreement with the afl over the special assistance money.I think you will find 95% of doggies fans are happy with Smorgon.He has possibly the toughest job in the league and I am not sure many other people could have got us past 96.
 
I don't think that S.A could support 3 teams in the AFL, but it's better than not existing anymore, how about relocating to Adelaide Oval???, i mean they are desperate to get some AFL football, and the place is going to undergo redevelopment soon, otherwise if hte club doesn't relocate and try something else, then the club will have to merge with the kangas i think otherwise your club will become extinct soon, because this club can't continue that way it has been going over the last few years.
 
Originally posted by Michele
It is high time the the AFL looked at its spending and they way in which it conducts its business.

Maybe it is about time the AFL started to run lean and mean.
Absolutely.
The competition that the AFL has built is unsustainable. The AFL keeps too much of the money generated by the clubs. The best way to fix this is for clubs to regain control of their own revenue streams. Merchandising would be a good start.

Cut the AFL's revenue and they will be forced to cut costs. As it stands now, the AFL take the clubs money and make them grovel to get it back.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

2003 maybe the Bulldogs last

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top