Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion 2018 Non-Crows Discussion Thread

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
From what I hear on the tv, they are the bloods when winning and the swans when they lose
Lol, I haven't noticed this before.

You would have to agree that Sydney have embraced being the old South Melbourne... So no reason why the same can't happen for North Melbourne in Tasmania...
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

"Bloods culture" during premiership years. I'd never heard of it before in the previous 25 years while they were rubbish
Sure, but would you not agree Sydney have embraced the Swans & the bloods culture of South Melbourne with the relocation...
 
BREAKING: COLLINGWOOD have released footage to police and media proving that it was in fact DeGoeys dog driving the vehicle at the time of the alleged incident.
460396_5641d4a722ac20c66bf64a52824c0acf.JPG
 
Membership & crowds are still important, but are not the major revenue source... however, what I'm saying is Tasmania would get more support than the 9th Melbourne team, Gold Coast & GWS.

As 1970crow wisely points out, relocating North Melbourne is the logical option, as they would still play many games in Melbourne for their dwindling supporter base there & gain a whole state.

With 22 home games, they could have something like:
9 Tasmania home games
2 Melbourne home games
7 Melbourne away games
4 non-Melbourne away games

Should be able to a deal with other Melbourne clubs to sell membership to their away games, given never sold out.

Effectively end up with good supporter base at most games, except outside Melbourne & Tasmania... & increase overall membership.
Given North Melb have just agreed to spend $10M on ground redevelopment at Arden Street ......relocation will not be in NM's medium term future
 
Given North Melb have just agreed to spend $10M on ground redevelopment at Arden Street ......relocation will not be in NM's medium term future
Which imo is a mistake by the AFL... As these lesser clubs are taking more than their fair share of the AFL distribution to clubs.
 
Which imo is a mistake by the AFL... As these lesser clubs are taking more than their fair share of the AFL distribution to clubs.
Think all the Vic clubs are looking at how much money Geelong makes from their small capacity regional ground .....they all follow the leader

Carlton also looking to redevelop their oval & move away from Etihad .......didn't everyone s****** & laugh at John Elliot for suggesting this 10 years ago .....would have been a gold mine for Carlton if they had of followed the Geelong ground model
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Sure, but would you not agree Sydney have embraced the Swans & the bloods culture of South Melbourne with the relocation...
Not sure what the 'bloods cumture' was actually about but 3 flag in 100 years - I'd say the bloods culture was how the Swans were playing pre2000s and it's the Swan's culture when they were successful
 
From the article ...

"Flat-track bullies … it's right, because the numbers would suggest we were far better against the lower teams and weren't as strong against the better teams," Hinkley told AFL.com.au this week.​

"We won a few games, but we lost a lot of close ones, and that's where our finish was important. [The term] does annoy you because you think your team is pretty competitive. We managed to beat Sydney in Sydney (in round one) and went down to Geelong (round 10) and lost by two points in a nail-biter - they're the two hardest games you can probably play in AFL football when you're away from home, and we beat West Coast in Perth (round 16). But we lost to West Coast at Adelaide Oval (round seven and the elimination final), we lost to Richmond at Adelaide Oval by two or three goals (round 15) and had dominant entries, we just didn't score as well as we should (have)."​

He does seem to leave one opponent that smashed his team out of his review ... see if you can spot the top 8 team that didn't have many problems with his squad last year :)

The article also mentions the other end:

The Power's record against bottom-nine sides in 2017 saw them register 12 wins from as many starts. And they won each game convincingly, with a percentage over 200 and six of seven matches against bottom-five sides by over 70 points.
That's a lot of percentage and premiership points from some pretty crappy opponents.

I'm still not sold that they have improved over the off-season enough to improve on the one-final of 2017. They have a potentially much tougher fixture in 2018, which I this will take it's toll.

In 2018 they double up on: Adelaide, Essendon, Fremantle, Western Bulldogs, West Coast.

Compare that to the 2017 teams they played twice: Adelaide, Brisbane Lions, West Coast, Gold Coast, Collingwood
 
If this were the case, why do clubs go to such great lengths to increase their memberships each year & strive to get crowds at grounds

Fagan has stated a few times, as others, that the relative success of clubs winning footy games, translates to bums on seats, merchandise sales ......and is the difference to us finishing in the black versus the red

Why then push to move from West Lakes to Adelaide Oval, if everything comes from National Sponsorship and AFL Rights Distribution?
The Tasmanian Government is a major sponsor currently of TWO teams. They - plus Federal Group and others - could clearly support a team.
 
Am I really being snide, or just being a jerk? Is it the same thing, or is there a subtlety to it that we're all unaware of?

Only time won't tell.

Either way, don't dress it up. We screwed the pooch. It's bloody amazing we have a team as good as we do at this point, given the sanctions. Also given our reaming from the players that have left.

Imagine if we'd recruited as well as we have... without all the obstacles. We'd be in a 5 year premiership streak.
You're misinterpreting as well as misrepresenting my opinion on this matter. Our views on the severity of the costs to our own club associated with that drama are the same, where they diverge is in our appraisal of the costs to Sydney.

I happen to believe the loss of their cost of living allowance outweighs all our draft pick losses combined. This is because in an age of free agency where clubs can poach players by bidding for their services without spending a cent in trade currency, the value of having an extra million plus to work with is of immeasurable value. Just think of all the draft picks they could have saved themselves going forward into the future by outbidding other clubs, but they lost that advantage because they chose to flaunt it with Bondi Billionaire one and two right after winning a premiership and playing in a prelim the year after. Heck they probably saved an amount in picks similar to what we lost in sanctions on the Franklin deal alone.

So yes, we did shoot ourselves in the foot, absolutely. But the Swans did the same with a cannon.;)
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The Tasmanian Government is a major sponsor currently of TWO teams. They - plus Federal Group and others - could clearly support a team.
I don't think it's a State Governments responsibility to keep sporting team afloat ......is that how you want you your tax dollars spent ?

There's a Tourism impact for the Gov in sponsoring Hawthorn primarily, much the same as the Australian Grand Prix ......but that's different to propping up a local team for local supporters & only one group of opposition team supporters
 
Magpie's RBT shame: Onballer loses licence - http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-02-18/magpies-rbt-shame-onballers-licence-suspended

Classy kid. Another fine coming his way and maybe a suspension for thenfirst 2 JLT games
From that article...

De Goey was hit with a club suspension on the eve of last season after telling the club he suffered a broken hand while playing with his dog.

It emerged shortly after that the injury occurred as a result of a bar fight, with the club then suspending him for three weeks after his hand healed and fining him $5000.

What kind of amateurs does Collingwood have running that place? As Port showed with Krakouer you're supposed to suspend them while they're still injured, that's how you do it.
 
From that article...



What kind of amateurs does Collingwood have running that place? As Port showed with Krakouer you're supposed to suspend them while they're still injured, that's how you do it.
And Impey
 
Goldstein has been one of the AFL’s most durable players, managing at least 19 games in each of the past eight seasons. That’s what he has always done, through injury and patchy form, just plough on.

But rumours began to circulate on social media about Goldstein’s family situation and even a potential trade from the Kangaroos.

Some opponents even taunted the 190-gamer on the field about personal matters.

Once incident against Port Adelaide in Round 16, 2016, in particular stung him.


“Yeah it did. It surprised me,” he said.

“Personally I didn’t think you could go there but they did and I think it was more that they didn’t give me the chance to get off the leash.

“Every time I thought I was free I had someone else come at me, so I think that was why I struggled in that game.”

ac31fc9d6eb560b3ab974b403240307c
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top