- Thread starter
- Banned
- #176
Okay.. you are going to talk about rational behind marketing?
Do you realize that the rational between Ford sponsoring Geelong and Skoda sponsoring GWS could not be more different?
Do GWS have a bright future?
- Thread starter blaze036
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Okay.. you are going to talk about rational behind marketing?
Do you realize that the rational between Ford sponsoring Geelong and Skoda sponsoring GWS could not be more different?
mcgarnacle
Norm Smith Medallist
- Dec 2, 2003
- 9,812
- 4,213
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Or how about 'The Showgrounds' or 'Showgrounds Stadium' which is what more folks in Sydney know it by, rather than another new and confusing name.
From the ridiculous 'GWS' name, to ensuring the club's colours are differentiated predominantly from interstate AFL clubs rather than their crosstown rival, the AFL has set up this club with the differentiation from the wider AFL league rather than a focus on its actual target market.
An understanding of the market would've been a good idea. Most folks in Sydney don't understand the long-term AFL cycle of building a team via the draft with kids, developing them for 5-6 years before they're maybe competitive, and then perhaps challenging within a decade. No other sport in the world has such a long-term cycle of getting into the game, not even the NFL who have have shorter-term options at their disposal to improve the fortunes of clubs.
Seriously, all for what? That they MAY be good one day? For GWS to survive, they're going to have to have at least two decades of sustained success of challenging for finals or winning them. Just look at the Swans since '96. The folks at that club realise what is required for this town, and even with the predominantly winning records it has had since the mid-90s, it has by no means got to the stage where they are a safely sustainable operation.
So what to the AFL do for the Giants? Bring SOS to manage the Giants list, and implement his and the AFL's victorian methodology of building a football team.
They need a rebranding for any chance at all to be around 50 years from now. Pretty sure they love orange and charcoal as a combination as much as anyone else in the country.
Suns and Giants are both pretty transparently ripping off American names with the naming, and Greater Western Sydney? That's what you bloody decided would fit in best? It was so you could put a G on the jumper, wasn't it!? From the AFL's perspective they'll be getting cold feet, but they'll also stick with it for years and years like a gambling addict. Because they've already put so much money in, gotta recoup that investment.
With all due respect to Sydney residents on this forum, it's always seemed to me that Sydney as a city is kind of like LA or Miami sporting wise, absolutely ice cold when the team is losing (even with the Lakers as rare as it is) and a bit warmer when the team is successful and constantly competitive.
The damage done to the Greater Western Sydney Giants image (lol) problem is not helped when the "team" has been about 40 kids for the past few years, not competent AFL players.
As a Hawthorn fan I'm glad it didn't happen but significant trade concessions to the Giants would have been waaay more effective than draft concessions. I'm talking drastic full FA for the Giants with every player for their first year (not TOO big a salary cap) with draft pick reparation to the clubs affected, unfair but probably effective. The clubs miiiight have approved it. Too late now.
By the time they have a good team the impact will likely be very meh on the Sydney sporting landscape. Look at the West Sydney Wanderers and with a lot less money they got a hell of a lot more right, albeit with a more receptive public to the code.
Suns and Giants are both pretty transparently ripping off American names with the naming, and Greater Western Sydney? That's what you bloody decided would fit in best? It was so you could put a G on the jumper, wasn't it!? From the AFL's perspective they'll be getting cold feet, but they'll also stick with it for years and years like a gambling addict. Because they've already put so much money in, gotta recoup that investment.
With all due respect to Sydney residents on this forum, it's always seemed to me that Sydney as a city is kind of like LA or Miami sporting wise, absolutely ice cold when the team is losing (even with the Lakers as rare as it is) and a bit warmer when the team is successful and constantly competitive.
The damage done to the Greater Western Sydney Giants image (lol) problem is not helped when the "team" has been about 40 kids for the past few years, not competent AFL players.
As a Hawthorn fan I'm glad it didn't happen but significant trade concessions to the Giants would have been waaay more effective than draft concessions. I'm talking drastic full FA for the Giants with every player for their first year (not TOO big a salary cap) with draft pick reparation to the clubs affected, unfair but probably effective. The clubs miiiight have approved it. Too late now.
By the time they have a good team the impact will likely be very meh on the Sydney sporting landscape. Look at the West Sydney Wanderers and with a lot less money they got a hell of a lot more right, albeit with a more receptive public to the code.
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,234
- 42,071
- AFL Club
- GWS
Skoda (like opal) are leaving our shores. We picked up Virgin though, not exactly small time
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,234
- 42,071
- AFL Club
- GWS
boncer34
Formerly "Dos23"
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,234
- 42,071
- AFL Club
- GWS
Yeah i know, the way its going with a few people commenting on things without facts and basically trolling the club (Incl a mod) maybe this thread should go to the bay that way the next "should the giants die" thread can be created, again, for the 1000th time.... Facts dont seem to be important here.
Flukey!
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 23, 2005
- 10,268
- 10,960
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Arsenal, Toronto BlueJays
The AFL have significant money invested in both Sydney franchises.
They will just keep pumping money into them until they are successful on and off the field.
They will just keep pumping money into them until they are successful on and off the field.
boncer34
Formerly "Dos23"
Any chance you want to address the membership numbers comparison and jumper sales numbers for us?
Or you just going to ignore those and keep on with the anti-GWS agenda?
Remember you said GC are streets ahead in any way you can measure success.
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,234
- 42,071
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,234
- 42,071
- AFL Club
- GWS
Yes they do, but it also has brought in allot of money having 2 teams in the biggest city.
In time it will also bring in a whole new batch of juniors and rookies
- Banned
- #187
If anything, that is an understatement.
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,234
- 42,071
- AFL Club
- GWS
Yeah but if I said a ton of money and rookies I would of been shouted down by the mexicans
- Banned
- #189
One of reasons South Melbourne came to Sydney is that they would play out of the SCG on a Sunday and inject a huge amount of money into the VFL. One of the criticisms that was often heard from Sydney is that the VFL/AFL wasn't injecting enough money into Sydney. That changed with the proposed introduction of GWS.
Both GWS and the Swans have benefitted from the introduction of GWS and Australian Football is much the better for it.
- May 3, 2007
- 36,528
- 21,169
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Man City, Valencia, Lazio, Panthers
Again a bit harsh on Wona. I still remember his best game. Ironically against freo.
Why dont we compare the Giants and Suns to the likes of Brisbane, West Coast, Crows, Freo and Port shall we?
Brisbane Bears were made up of Misfits, Rejects and has beens. Name one decent kid from the bears 1987 squad? They were under funded. They were a joke for 5 years with bad recruiting but they eventually got there.
West Coast of 1987: Scarily enough, similar to GWS. Out of the 35 players they had only 5 or 6 of them played for another club, rest were all teenagers.
Crows of 1991: Near perfect of youth and experience...Some of those rookies: Mark Bickley, Nigel Smart, Ben Hart, Shaun Rehn, David Pittman all played in the 1997 and 1998 sides. They also had a few mature aged picks aged 21-25 from the SANFL. They also had a few players from other VFL/AFL clubs like Tony Guinness, Bruce Linder and Mark Mickan. Still got 10 wins in their 1st season.
Freo: For all the stupid drafting and trading, they still fielded a competitive side. Got at least 10 players from other clubs. Won 8 games in the 1st season.
Port Power: Traded most of their picks away. Got 10 players from other clubs and eventually won the 2004 flag.
Nothing wrong with what GWS is doing, sure they will improve. But they are not certain for the flag. I noticed your a geelong fan as well. Considering your mob has won 3 flags recently, your team has to find a way to ease out the veterans. Lucky for the cats they didnt have to do It like Carlton in 2002-3.
- Jan 17, 2013
- 7,590
- 8,279
- AFL Club
- GWS
Are you going to answer the query to 'GC are streets ahead....'?
- Aug 17, 2006
- 23,303
- 21,604
- AFL Club
- Geelong
It was like he took 10,000 spoons out on to the ground that day.
Under funded? They had plenty of players who had been with other VFL teams before Brisbane and many of them had been successful at their previous clubs. Of the 42 players on their inaugural list, 29 of them were recruited from other VFL clubs, with Choco Williams, Brad Hardie, Geoff Raines, Phillip Walsh, Stephen Reynoldson, Michael Richardson, Mark 'The Fridge' Roberts and Bernie Evans among others. A lot of those players would not have come cheap. So what did they do in year 2? Recruited Warwick Capper, Roger Merrett, Scott McIvor, Rodney Eade and Rod Lester-Smith. Again, plenty of those players would have been on serious coin.
Anyway, I must be missing something. How does bemoaning a lack of kids at Brisbane in the early days actually help your argument? You started out by saying that instead of exciting young players like Tom Scully, who commanded top dollar, GWS should have filled the list with a bunch of hacks in the twilight of their careers. Isn't that pretty much what the Bears did?
Number of teenagers in West Coast's inaugural team: 3 (Lewis, Peos and Worsfold). 4 if you want to be generous and include Dean Laidley, who turned 20 two days before their first game.
Adelaide played Hawthorn (that eventual premiers that season) in their first ever game. And Adelaide's team had a higher average age.
If it takes GWS nine years to make its first finals series, that will be considered an unqualified failure of epic proportions.
The thing about Port Adelaide is look at some of their mature age zone selections. Lade, Francou, James, Mead, Wilson. There's no way you would get that much ready-to-go talent from zone/territorial picks these days, because all of those players would have already been in the AFL for 2-3 years (or more, if Port Adelaide had come along in the 2010s. And you wouldn't find that much talent in potential zone players in the NEAFL in a decade.
The issue here is that you're comparing apples with oranges in every instance. As far as the previous expansion clubs go, you've either got clubs that were set up in established football states during a time when there was more than enough talent in the SANFL and WAFL to field a competitive team to play against the VFL/AFL teams (Adelaide and West Coast and to a lesser extent Port Adelaide and Fremantle). You've got a club that was set-up in a non-football state by a bunch of cowboys who had no idea what they were doing on or off the field, so they just spent big bucks on importing some high profile names and hoped for the best (Brisbane). And you've got teams that were hurt by the draft being an absolute crapshoot until the late 90s (at the earliest); it was a time when you couldn't realistically build through the draft (Brisbane, Port Adelaide, Fremantle).
Thanks for that news flash. Where did I say they were?
Here we go...
First question: WTF does that have to do with anything?
Second question: How is it luck? Carlton cheated; Geelong didn't. And Geelong has 'eased out' premiership players since 2007.
2007: King, N.Ablett
2009: Harley
2010: Rooke, G.Ablett
2011: Mooney, Ottens, Milburn, Ling, Blake
2012: Wojcinski, Scarlett, Byrnes
2013: Corey, Chapman, Podsiadly, Hunt, West
A starting 18 of players who have been 'eased out' since Geelong started winning premierships, at an average of 2.57 per year. With eight of them finding homes at other clubs, suggesting they still have/had something left in the tank when they left.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
GC are ahead with the on field performance, they are ahead in off-field structures and financial performance. They are also ahead in local community recognition and profile. This ticks all the main boxes so yes they are streets ahead.
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,234
- 42,071
- AFL Club
- GWS
Ok lets look at this, and let me preface by saying i have no dislike for the Suns at all.
Performance - Yes in their 2nd year they won 3 to our 1. Will be very interested to see how this year goes a tick to the suns
Structures - Um im fairly certain we have seen Suns fans complaining their training centre is a shed so Im sure we are ahead there. Both have great little stadiums so equal there. so would say a tick to us.
Financial position - Umm and how the hell would you know this?? I did read somewhere we didnt have that much of a loss in our 1st year, less than what they thought. Dont know the financials of the Suns or our 2nd year.
Recognition and Profile - I dont know how you would say they are well ahead here, we are well known throughout Sydney, consistently on radio with our sponsorship partners, attending schools and benefits. Im fairly certain it would be the same for the Suns up there as well (since both are building). A tick to both
Let me add
Memberships - We have more, yes we have a bigger population but the point still stands. Tick to us
Jumper sales - as has been stated we are ahead here as well. Tick to us
So over all I would have us in front, just. But both are doing a great job in bringing Australia's Game to large areas of this country.
So your next troll is??
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
On Memberships, this is an interesting dilemma because GWS has two structures of memberships to cater for the Canberra games it does not provide an accurate and meaningful comparison thus why I didn't include it.
The whole AFL membership numbers are heavily bastardised, until the AFL & Clubs release a full breakdown by class of membership then I won't believe the bs that they sprout about record membership numbers because it is not a pure number to compare clubs and historically because it incorporates all classes of membership, baby members, pet members, 3 game members, interstate members, etc.
Jumper sales numbers I've only seen the figures as a percentage of total sales for 2013, I don't know the 2012 figures (which is what we have to compare to for GC) or what the physical numbers were. Hypothetically if 100,000 jumper sold for all clubs and GWS has 4% = 4,000, if in 2012 150,000 jumpers were sold and GC had 3.2% = 4,800. We therefore have two statistics that tell two very different stories, both are techincally correct though.
- May 13, 2012
- 15,812
- 5,965
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
I don't know if pet memberships exist, but what's wrong with baby memberships? it's still money
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,234
- 42,071
- AFL Club
- GWS
But wouldnt that confirm that your comment about us not being recognised etc is bs? Surely, no matter the membership, this means we are "known" so to speak.
Only game access membership counts, supporter and pet memberships aren't counted, they are just there to ad revenue.
Most clubs don't even count interstate memberships (outside of Melbourne) even though they guarantee a seat.
Or do you believe the clubs just lie and say they don't when secretly they do?
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
