Crows reserve side

[Pietmans]

It's interesting reading about this topic here. I always knew the non Port supporters didn't like us but the hate is unbelievable.............I'm sure you can justify it but at what expense.

I'm assuming you all have your sanfl sides you follow as well as the crows, so I was wondering if both SA AFL clubs became there own entity ie break away from the sanfl, as a result of this non-merger, how would you feel about this.
Your team and mine (AFL) would become stronger financially being free to re-negotiate with the sanfl or the SACA or whoever for a better stadium deal etc etc. The down side for my sanfl club is that it dies and for your sanfl club is the comp it plays it will become a lesser comp without the money generated by the AFL clubs and hence not be able to pay decent money to attract the better players etc etc.

A natural consequence would be that state leagues like the WAFL and the VFL become stronger than the sanfl. Not to mention that overall crowd numbers will reduce without the Port Adelaide Magpies competing.

I certainly don't expect any of you to suddenly not hate Port but I think it may be a case of cutting of your nose to spite your face.
Not that any of you have any real say in what happens but I'm just interested to hear your opinion if the above were to happen.

As a Crows fan I think that breaking away from the SANFL licence/ownership would be a big positive. What was a good idea in 1990 is now different. In 1990 we all (except Port people) saw the SANFL as the be all and end all of SA football but now I think the AFL clubs are.

Also, I think that having Hawthorn for example make a profit of $2M and putting it in their back pockets whilst we make a similar profit and pay a divident out of it to the SANFL is a real competitve disadvantage. It could be argued that the SANFL uses those funds to develop football and therefore footballers in this state. However, that means we are helping to pay for the development of AFL players for all 16 (soon 17) clubs, not just the Crows and Power.

Collingwood, Hawthorn etc don't pay extra to develop the youth of Victoria, in fact all clubs support the U18 competition via AFL funding.

Can anyone imagine Manchester United paying a share of its profits to maintain a local Manchester league, simultaneaously taking funds it could have used to shore up its squad?

In the long term, I think the AFL has the right policy for the future of both AFL clubs - they should be divorced from the SANFL.

That definitely spells disaster for the local comp, including my beloved Norwood. But sometimes you just have to accept that the past was great but now its gone, and get on with the future. The future is AFL footy, not SANFL. It could be even greater than the illustious past!

 

[Papa G]

Dont delude yourself mate that we all hate port, you guys are a bit of a non-factor these days, we only want whats best for the crows.

Don't delude yourself and think that the biggest benefactor from these Port issues will be the Adelaide Football Club whether it be moving to the Adelaide Oval (or new city stadium), getting a reserves team in the SANFL or breaking away from the SANFL which has been mooted. Maybe none of these things will happen but I have no doubt all would benefit the AFC, not hinder it. Port are a big factor in the Adelaide Football clubs future. Triggy and co are sitting on the sidelines watching with great interest. Sure the Crows will be fine with the status quo, but the Port situation will only help in improving the position of the AFC.

 

[Alex99]

Don't delude yourself and think that the biggest benefactor from these Port issues will be the Adelaide Football Club whether it be moving to the Adelaide Oval (or new city stadium), getting a reserves team in the SANFL or breaking away from the SANFL which has been mooted. Maybe none of these things will happen but I have no doubt all would benefit the AFC, not hinder it. Port are a big factor in the Adelaide Football clubs future. Triggy and co are sitting on the sidelines watching with great interest. Sure the Crows will be fine with the status quo, but the Port situation will only help in improving the position of the AFC.

Yeah, Na.

With or without Port Adelaide, our future is so bright, we need to wear shades.

Once again, the only thing Port Adelaide have done, is quicken up the process. You won’t have influenced anything that ultimately would not have happened by natural progression.

So stop pretending your club holds all the aces, you have a pair of 10’s and are trying to bluff everyone.

The only thing Port Adelaide would do, is kill off a few SANFL clubs by keeping your profits that the other 9 clubs helped create. The Adelaide Crows were not born in a board room; they were born by 130 years of history, traditional and success of South Australian football, just as your club was granted the honour of moving from one league to another.

Without that 130 year of South Australia football, the Port Adelaide football club would be nothing as you cannot achieve anything again yourself.

 

[Papa G]

Yeah, Na.

With or without Port Adelaide, our future is so bright, we need to wear shades.

Once again, the only thing Port Adelaide have done, is quicken up the process. You won’t have influenced anything that ultimately would not have happened by natural progression.

So stop pretending your club holds all the aces, you have a pair of 10’s and are trying to bluff everyone.

The only thing Port Adelaide would do, is kill off a few SANFL clubs by keeping your profits that the other 9 clubs helped create. The Adelaide Crows were not born in a board room; they were born by 130 years of history, traditional and success of South Australian football, just as your club was granted the honour of moving from one league to another.

Without that 130 year of South Australia football, the Port Adelaide football club would be nothing as you cannot achieve anything again yourself.

I'm not pretending we hold any aces, nor am I pretending that that anyone owes us any favours, just saying that the situation that Port is in and potential changes to be made will only help the AFC. Again, the status quo is okay for you guys as well, you'll still get your crowds, your memberships, your sponsors, your beigeness and your bill from the SANFL.

 

[CharlieM]

Dont delude yourself mate that we all hate port, you guys are a bit of a non-factor these days, we only want whats best for the crows.

Ohh good.........but you might want to check that with other posters on here that make it pretty clear it is hate. By your thinking the next time you beat us won't be a little more sweet than beating the other clubs..............who's ******* deluded .

 

[CharlieM]

The only thing Port Adelaide would do, is kill off a few SANFL clubs by keeping your profits that the other 9 clubs helped create. The Adelaide Crows were not born in a board room; they were born by 130 years of history, traditional and success of South Australian football, just as your club was granted the honour of moving from one league to another.

I understand your passionate about your club and that is something I share with you and admire and respect.
But your statement is way off the mark. The crows are building a tradition as we speak but it aint 130 years worth.

 

[Alex99]

I understand your passionate about your club and that is something I share with you and admire and respect.
But your statement is way off the mark. The crows are building a tradition as we speak but it aint 130 years worth.

I didn’t say that. But football in South Australia is. Without those 130 years of history, tradition and success, when the Adelaide Crows started in 1991, we would have been like the Brisbane Bears. Starting from scratch, however due to the fact that so supporters from the 9 clubs already had the passion, desire and willingness to make the game work in this state, gave us a strong starting point.

And that is where we were born, from that tradition, history and success. Not a corporate boardroom as so many of you like to imply.

 

[Alex99]

I'm not pretending we hold any aces, nor am I pretending that that anyone owes us any favours, just saying that the situation that Port is in and potential changes to be made will only help the AFC. Again, the status quo is okay for you guys as well, you'll still get your crowds, your memberships, your sponsors, your beigeness and your bill from the SANFL.

And this is why the Port Adelaide Football Club will never fully gain the respect from the average support.

Perception is reality and the perception around most other clubs is, the Port Adelaide Football Club would rather keep all of the money and potentially allow the other SANFL clubs to die. The status quo is respecting the game in this state and allowing things to remain normal as long as possible.

Hypothetical - why do Port Adelaide deserve to stay afloat and someone like Norwood die? Because this is the perception floating around by your club continually saying they want to break any ties with the SANFL.

 

[Papa G]

And this is why the Port Adelaide Football Club will never fully gain the respect from the average support.

Perception is reality and the perception around most other clubs is, the Port Adelaide Football Club would rather keep all of the money and potentially allow the other SANFL clubs to die. The status quo is respecting the game in this state and allowing things to remain normal as long as possible.

Hypothetical - why do Port Adelaide deserve to stay afloat and someone like Norwood die? Because this is the perception floating around by your club continually saying they want to break any ties with the SANFL.

I don't particularly care if the Magpies die. They are not the real PAFC and as I have said in previous posts there seems to me to be little advantage to the PAFC taking over the Magpies. I have no problem with Norwood surviving and prospering on their own 2 feet as well. But these clubs actually survive on the back of the Crows and Port. This nonese in the Sunday Mail yesterday where an unnamed SANFL club source said ..."We are prepared to financially support one Port Adelaide but not two".... excuse me? Who supports who? By all means let Norwood control their own destiny and finances, but let us control ours. Right now we are forced to play where the SANFL tells us we have to play and pay the SANFL what they tell us we have pay. You might well say, well that's the way it is set up, you signed up for this blah blah blah, but this middle man impediment clearly isn't working for us, and it constricts the AFC. Not in a highly visible way, but it does.

 

[screech]

Because those kids will still have to be drafted and it’s a clubs responsibility to know who is and who isn’t the most talented kids.

Sometime, somewhere that talented kid, who is being hidden, will have to play football. If he doesn’t play football between the age of 15 and 17 – his skills won’t develop. If football clubs don’t do their due diligence by investigating these kids, they don’t deserve them.

Saying, what’s stopping Port Adelaide from doing it now by hiding Jimmy X in some country team on the York Peninsular?

Yes, they do have to get drafted - but they would have an advantage knowledge-wise, remember, potential draftees are not allowed to train with AFL clubs leading up to the draft - Port could potentially have them playing for them for 6 or more years up until drafting age!

Imagine all the testing and training you could perform if you had unlimited access to the kids.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

I understand your passionate about your club and that is something I share with you and admire and respect.
But your statement is way off the mark. The crows are building a tradition as we speak but it aint 130 years worth.

Richmond has a long tradition too.

It will be interesting to see which way the SANFL votes. If they vote against the merger, they effectively kill the Port Magpies. Whereas if they vote for the merger, they effectively kill the SANFL. If you don't think having one club aligned to a much stronger club in a more financial/stronger competition isn't a huge advantage then you are seriously deluded. As a supporter, would you handover your heard earned to support your team in competition where one team has a huge advantage over its rivals?

Isn't funny how when things were look rosey down at Alberton 5 years ago and Chocco and co were still suffering their premiership hangover, the Power couldn't give a sh*t about the long suffering Magpies. Now when things aren't so rosey at the Power, the Magpies suddenly become relevant again.

This club couldn't give a rats about the future of SANFL football. Make no mistake, it's all about them it always has been.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

So wait, we have the chance for the Magpies to stay afloat, the Power to be sustainable & for both to end nearly 15 years of an identity crisis?



Logical? Never?!




Well no, lets let them die. They stabbed the SANFL in the back! Why should we help the PAFC (whose profits (if they are profitable) flow through to the SANFL an grassroots football), and if they are losing does the exact opposite!!??? Infact the SANFL will be better off without the Port Magpies (Biggest membership/crowds/following in the SANFL) anyway!


Logic!!! KILL EM!

Ahhh cry me a river. Your breaking my heart. I can hear the trumpets as Port Power comes charging into save the Port Magpies and inturn save SANFL football and all for the good of SA footy.

Your Logic - Save Port Magpies at the expense of the other 8 clubs in the competition.

Your Logic - A SANFL club aligned to an AFL club does not have an advantage over its SANFL rival clubs, even though they have more assets, more revenue, better people, better facilities.

So you have no problem if the Roosters setup a similar aliance with the Crows?

 

[Cap]

I understand your passionate about your club and that is something I share with you and admire and respect.
But your statement is way off the mark. The crows are building a tradition as we speak but it aint 130 years worth.

it seems the only argument Port people put up is this tradition thing

lets face it in 100 years time no one will remember and the Crows and Power will both have 100 year histories...

what does that mean? nothing, because existing for 100 years doesn't make you more or less relevant today.

 

[jo172]

What I love is the cascade of Port Adelaide legends rushing to the Magpies cause such as Ginever and Ebert claiming it'll be the end of a proud history.

I was under the impression the club they played for is in the AFL? Seems a few people know where the real Port plays!

Either way Cappy is right. To quote our recently departed Prime Minister "those who prattle on about the past are merely proclaiming their embarassment about the present and the fact they have nothing to say about the future."

Sums up Port Power to a tee

 

[Huntercrow]

As a Crows fan I think that breaking away from the SANFL licence/ownership would be a big positive. What was a good idea in 1990 is now different. In 1990 we all (except Port people) saw the SANFL as the be all and end all of SA football but now I think the AFL clubs are.

Also, I think that having Hawthorn for example make a profit of $2M and putting it in their back pockets whilst we make a similar profit and pay a divident out of it to the SANFL is a real competitve disadvantage. It could be argued that the SANFL uses those funds to develop football and therefore footballers in this state. However, that means we are helping to pay for the development of AFL players for all 16 (soon 17) clubs, not just the Crows and Power.

Collingwood, Hawthorn etc don't pay extra to develop the youth of Victoria, in fact all clubs support the U18 competition via AFL funding.

Can anyone imagine Manchester United paying a share of its profits to maintain a local Manchester league, simultaneaously taking funds it could have used to shore up its squad?

In the long term, I think the AFL has the right policy for the future of both AFL clubs - they should be divorced from the SANFL.

That definitely spells disaster for the local comp, including my beloved Norwood. But sometimes you just have to accept that the past was great but now its gone, and get on with the future. The future is AFL footy, not SANFL. It could be even greater than the illustious past!

Good Post!

Forgetting for one moment state loyalties.

The Crows/Power licenses pump money back into our state league but for what purpose?

As Pietmans pointed out, why should the Crows/power have the responsibility of propping up a competition that supplies players only to the AFL Draft?
Does it help the Crows and Power to have a strong SANFL? Surely there are other ways to have their reserves play without having to pay millions for the privilege.An expensive privilege that does not allow either club a say in their players development.
Does the SANFL competition actually have any relevance to the Crows/Power? I know that they own both licences but only because it was prudent for the AFL to allow this in the first place.The AFL needed a suitable venue in Adelaide, as their was only one at the time (Football Park) the AFL had to grant both licences via the SANFL.

But If the Adelaide Oval redevelopment takes place, the SANFL no longer fully controls the only AFL venue in SA.

The SANFL would have to be very careful as they could become redundant as licence holders.

 

[Cap]

I think you'll find that the money paid to the SANFL goes to the betterment of football statewide not just in the SANFL.

the SANFL does more for Football in this state than any other organisation and I wouldn't be surprised to see a rapid decline in participation if moneys stop flowing through.

While Collingwood don't put money into the development of footy in Victoria the AFL do and a shitload of it, none which will come to SA if the SANFL stop providing the services.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

What I love is the cascade of Port Adelaide legends rushing to the Magpies cause such as Ginever and Ebert claiming it'll be the end of a proud history.

I was under the impression the club they played for is in the AFL? Seems a few people know where the real Port plays!

Either way Cappy is right. To quote our recently departed Prime Minister "those who prattle on about the past are merely proclaiming their embarassment about the present and the fact they have nothing to say about the future."

Sums up Port Power to a tee

Didn't Ginever also say they will be rocking up to the SANFL in force tonight. Seems Port people think they can intimidate both on and off the field.

As far as their history goes, so to preserve that supposed proud history the other 8 clubs have to suffer. If the other clubs give the go ahead for a merger than they have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[Papa G]

I think you'll find that the money paid to the SANFL goes to the betterment of football statewide not just in the SANFL.

the SANFL does more for Football in this state than any other organisation and I wouldn't be surprised to see a rapid decline in participation if moneys stop flowing through.

While Collingwood don't put money into the development of footy in Victoria the AFL do and a shitload of it, none which will come to SA if the SANFL stop providing the services.

What a load of crap. Basically your saying the AFL, if the SANFL wasn't there would not put a proportionate amount into grassroots football in this state? That grassroots footy would wither without the benevolence of the SANFL? The AFL want to kill off the 2nd/3rd largest source of talent for their competition? Man didn't walk on the moon. Crop Circles are the work of aliens? The world is run by the Elders of Zion?

The AFL don't give SA as much of the pie that every team creates because of the SANFL. As it stands the SA teams are literally taxed by the SANFL so they can be the ones who can redistribute the wealth to their own largest salary cap comp outside the AFL and ofcourse to grassroots footy. A tax/cost that the likes of Collingwood or Hawthorn don't have to pay. How is that good for the SA clubs?

 

[Pietmans]

I think you'll find that the money paid to the SANFL goes to the betterment of football statewide not just in the SANFL.

the SANFL does more for Football in this state than any other organisation and I wouldn't be surprised to see a rapid decline in participation if moneys stop flowing through.

While Collingwood don't put money into the development of footy in Victoria the AFL do and a shitload of it, none which will come to SA if the SANFL stop providing the services.

You have of course outlined the big risk, but would the AFL abandon SA with reduced funding? There are 16, soon to be 18 AFL clubs who want to recruit out of this state and who will bring pressure to bear if the quality of junior football and the number of draftees drops away.

In fact, this has already been happening with the SANFL at the helm. According to a Kevin Sheehan interview I saw just around draft time last year, this has been a major concern to the AFL and they had injected a further sum (I think it was $0.5M?) into the realms of junior identification and development this year in SA as a result.

WA football has its problems but seems to be going forward OK and certainly in the junior development area they have been superb over the past couple of years. I'm pretty sure from reading these boards that that is all funded by the AFL but please correct me if I'm wrong.

From what I can see the SANFL losing control of the AFL clubs would be detrimental only to the SANFL clubs, depending on how it was done.

If the SANFL sold AAMI stadium for a minimum $200M (I'm told) they could have a pretty impressive investment portfolio to fund ongoing activities. They only get around $4.2M in total now in distributions which would be just over a 2% return from such a fund. The rest of the earnings could be used to grow the fund further over time.

 

[Crow-mo]

Errr Chalmers? The bloke is the perfect example of what I'm talking about. Despite his reputed talent (and the fact he was a pretty nice bloke) the man played at 3 AFL clubs.

At some time regardless of perceived injustices in the development stage you're either good enough or not. Chalmers was not

if he wasn't good enough, he'd not be at 3 clubs.

 

[Cap]

That is what Cameron Cloke is hoping as well.

 

[Macjoe]

I didn’t say that. But football in South Australia is. Without those 130 years of history, tradition and success, when the Adelaide Crows started in 1991, we would have been like the Brisbane Bears. Starting from scratch, however due to the fact that so supporters from the 9 clubs already had the passion, desire and willingness to make the game work in this state, gave us a strong starting point.

And that is where we were born, from that tradition, history and success. Not a corporate boardroom as so many of you like to imply.

I strongly agree, C98. That is how it happened from my perspective.

Unfortunately, the other (a corporate boardroom) is also true.

From the AFC website, club history page:

"On May 21st, 1986, the SANFL formed a company, Adelaide Football Club Incorporated, with all issued shares in the said company owned by the league.
...
At the Australian Football League meeting held on 19th September 1990, directors voted in favour of the Adelaide Football Club application. The Adelaide Football Club was well and truly alive."
​

While your interpretation is IMO a more real view of the times and events, the cold, hard facts relating to the ownership of the AFC will surely get in the way of what I think would be the best future path - breaking the link with the SANFL, and becoming an autonomous, preferably member owned football club.

Desirable outcome, but I just can't see how it could come about under current business/commercial realities.

Unless Andrew Demetriou waves the "we control who holds the licence, and we can help fund the AO redevelopment, thereby freeing up AAMI Stadium for subdivision and development, creating a huge cash cow for the SANFL" stick.

S..t, that achieves an outcome I would like to see: an independent AFC, but leaves us at AO, which I'm not so keen on.

Wait and see, I guess. Interesting times.

 

[malph]

Didn't Ginever also say they will be rocking up to the SANFL in force tonight. Seems Port people think they can intimidate both on and off the field.

As far as their history goes, so to preserve that supposed proud history the other 8 clubs have to suffer. If the other clubs give the go ahead for a merger than they have no one to blame but themselves.

Did we just wake up in 1996 this morning? Centrals and their pokie-loving progeny have just spent the last ten years butt-f***ing the league, with no end in sight, and you're worried about what effects a merger of the two Port Adelaide businesses is going to have? If you really care that much, how about you petition the SANFL to create another club to encroach on the Dogs' area in the North - really mess them up, you know, West Torrens style.

No, there's nothing quite like your first hate.

But they have the opportunity to be viable with the merger? BTW, we all know the stupid history involved in how the two clubs were formed, or split or created (whichever you believe), its not as if the situation they are in right now was brought on upon by themselves.

This isn't about the past either. The Port Magpies are needed in the SANFL because they still are the biggest draw card. To kill off the biggest club in any competition would seen to be unthinkable. Yet we are contemplating that very fact right now

Yes, it is a stupid history. The tender was approved, on conditions imposed that the PAFC never wanted to include. The PAFC accepted it as the price of admission, yet attracts 100% of the blame for the "strategic" mess it is in. Fair? It doesn't matter. There is 'a' solution on the table, which may, or may not work well for everybody. But, it is a good thing that such decisions are not made on internet forums.

 

[birdmanptr]

Errr Chalmers? The bloke is the perfect example of what I'm talking about. Despite his reputed talent (and the fact he was a pretty nice bloke) the man played at 3 AFL clubs.

At some time regardless of perceived injustices in the development stage you're either good enough or not. Chalmers was not

My point is we wanted him as a CHB when he went back and played for Port adelaide he was in the ruck.Had we had a 2's he could have learnt CHB at SANFL which is what having a second side is all about

 

[birdmanptr]

What I love is the cascade of Port Adelaide legends rushing to the Magpies cause such as Ginever and Ebert claiming it'll be the end of a proud history.

I was under the impression the club they played for is in the AFL? Seems a few people know where the real Port plays!

Either way Cappy is right. To quote our recently departed Prime Minister "those who prattle on about the past are merely proclaiming their embarassment about the present and the fact they have nothing to say about the future."

Sums up Port Power to a tee

Thats what makes me laugh with some of their posters and people i know away from BF that claim

Port Power is the real Port and Port Adelaide SANFL have no claim to nothing are getting very upset at the thought of the SANFL version falling over.Cause a insignificant person from a insignificant club will vote against it