Eureka Stadium (Mars Stadium)

[Billy ray]

It allows anyone from the Western suburbs (& now districts) to identify with the club, it's possibly also why West Coast isn't just Perth or Subiaco etc.

But western suburbs of melb? Or adelaide? Or perth? Bris? Syd?

 

[BlueJet]

But western suburbs of melb? Or adelaide? Or perth? Bris? Syd?

The Dogs are clearly Melbourne based, though, I'm sure that they wouldn't say no to additional members or sponsors from the aforementioned cities.
Ultimately, the title "Western" would reflect that they represent the West of Melbourne.

 

[____]

Perhaps because at the time they were the only AFL team in WA when they raised and it was better to harness support from across the Aussie Rules community in WA for a start up team by giving them a name which cast the net as wide as possible but still identified them as being from the West. If they had called them the Perth Eagles then it would have isolated them to Perth and perhaps not garnered support from the 500,000 West Aussies who live outside Perth. It's only a thought.

There's also an existing WAFL team called Perth, there was no existing SANFL team called "Adelaide" when the Crows started

 

[Rob]

It allows anyone from the Western suburbs (& now districts) to identify with the club, it's possibly also why West Coast isn't just Perth or Subiaco etc.

It doesn't actually work like that. They've been Western for over 20 years now and remain one of the smallest clubs in Melbourne. The name change doesn't appear to have had any (or at best a negligible) impact on supporter numbers. Meanwhile the biggest clubs in Melbourne are those with suburb names where bugger all people reside.

 

[The_Wookie]

It doesn't actually work like that. They've been Western for over 20 years now and remain one of the smallest clubs in Melbourne. The name change doesn't appear to have had any (or at best a negligible) impact on supporter numbers. Meanwhile the biggest clubs in Melbourne are those with suburb names where bugger all people reside.

1996 (Footscray) Average Crowd: 18,073
2018 (WesternB) Average Crowd: 25,372 (+30%), Total League (+32%)


1996 (Footscray) Membership: 10,650
2018 (WesternB) Membership: 43,246 (+306%), Total League (+252%)

 

[Rob]

1996 (Footscray) Average Crowd: 18,073
2018 (WesternB) Average Crowd: 25,372 (+30%), Total League (+32%)


1996 (Footscray) Membership: 10,650
2018 (WesternB) Membership: 43,246 (+306%), Total League (+252%)

So roughly equivalent to the rest of the league's growth.

I gather they were playing out of the Whitten Oval in 1996?

 

[Broken]

So roughly equivalent to the rest of the league's growth.

I gather they were playing out of the Whitten Oval in 1996?

From memory they were trying to transition away (one home game at the 'G and Princes Park), leaving Fitzroy to play most Home games there.

 

[BlueJet]

It doesn't actually work like that. They've been Western for over 20 years now and remain one of the smallest clubs in Melbourne. The name change doesn't appear to have had any (or at best a negligible) impact on supporter numbers. Meanwhile the biggest clubs in Melbourne are those with suburb names where bugger all people reside.

Work like what?
I was merely pointing out what they had attempted to do, whether it worked or not is largely irrelevant to my point.

 

[Kwality]

At least you can go to the West Coast. "Western" without a somewhere is an abstract place.

Abstract or academic, either way its a nonsense. The people that count put their money where their mouth is.

I'm pro the Western Bulldogs name, the old days of inner suburban names is a hangover from the past era of State comps & it having a part in the team that punters supported.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Abstract or academic, either way its a nonsense. The people that count put their money where their mouth is.

I'm pro the Western Bulldogs name, the old days of inner suburban names is a hangover from the past era of State comps & it having a part in the team that punters supported.

Richmond, north, Bulldogs, Geelong, Melbourne, and carlton are all still based in their named suburb (and Collingwood is only half a click down the road)

 

[Kwality]

Richmond, north, Bulldogs, Geelong, Melbourne, and carlton are all still based in their named suburb (and Collingwood is only half a click down the road)

Too true, no different to Adelaide or Perth, but the Western Bulldogs looked to widen the catchment, North tried to run with the Kangaroos in name if nothing else.

 

[Ian Patche]

did they beeld a stadeam on mars??

 

[Seedsfan]

For the record, a very successful game. ARU Australia and Melbourne Rebels were pleased with the support from what is not a traditional Rugby Union community. They anticipated a crowd to this pre-season game of around 2000 and it seems that the numbers were slightly higher with the crowd definitely favouring the Rebels.

Probably see them host a few of the Melbourne Rising games in the NRC

 

[Kwality]

For the record, a very successful game. ARU Australia and Melbourne Rebels were pleased with the support from what is not a traditional Rugby Union community. They anticipated a crowd to this pre-season game of around 2000 and it seems that the numbers were slightly higher with the crowd definitely favouring the Rebels.

Guesstimate of what the JLT game needs to be classed as a success?

 

[Roogal]

Guesstimate of what the JLT game needs to be classed as a success?

Going by average JLT crowd figures ... probably anything north of 4000. They did get just shy of 6000 in Shepparton last weekend and that was to watch Richmond. But crowds for JLT can be lower because they really are just friendlies with no trophy or prize at the end, but the AFL does charge considerable entry fees. At the other end of the spectrum North Melb and Melb drew only 1800 to their game in Hobart last year.

 

[BlueJet]

The State Budget last night authorised the $6.6 million promised in the last State Election to fix many of the gripes and grumbles with the first stage of Mars Stadium. It won't address issues such as parking, PT access or lighting, but the $6.6 million will be used to:

• Build a new covered entrance with ticket booths and check in points at Gate 2.
• Build new permanent toliets at the Southern and South-eastern portions of the ground.
• Provide more available covered seating in the Eureka and Eastern Stands.
• Provide improved catering facilities.

These are mainly fixes to mainly improve conditions for spectators who occupy the standing areas of the ground. As I said, they won't increase capacity, address issues with lighting, improve parking access or enhance public transport access. Those are the bigger ticket items which may have to wait for another politically opportune time, i.e. as part of a lead up to an election/bi-election or perhaps when the Western Bulldogs have to decide if they will commit to Ballarat beyond 2021. The State Government funded the Ballarat Council to commission a report though Price Waterhouse Cooper to conduct a full review and study of the ground's future needs and development. Their report was fianlised last August just in time for the State Election. The rport is believed to have addressed immediate concerns and fixes as well as strategically looking at the longer term bigger ticket items. It is believed that the $6.6 million allocated addresses the first part of that report.

It's a question of priorities. The Ballarat Council already has an extensive wish list of major projects ahead of this one for which they are seeking Government funding and the Federal Election outcome certainly did not help as Ballarat rarely (if ever) comes up on the Liberals radar. The Council and Committee for Ballarat seek to have the city's historic Her Majesty's Theatre restored (for which there is a $5 million shortfall, to have the city's airport main runway re-built and lengthened to 1800m (Costing $14 million) along with the building of an Emergency Services Hub (another $50 million), an outer Western bypass road (Stage 1 built) and which will cost another $100 million to complete the second and final stage, a new all-purpose waste treatment centre, a new Health Research Centre to add on to the local Base Hospital's already extensive building programe and the list goes on.

Good post RG, very informative. [emoji106]

On SM-G965F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Kwality]

Well put Rood
given I'm influenced by the WA / Optus argument on tourism, the airport upgrades interest me. AImed at the non Vic clubs clearly, does it suggest an acceptance the venue won't pull Melbournisns in the numbers needed ?

 

[Our Game]

5000 out of a population of 110,00 is a very small % of Ballarat and dosent justify much more spent on this white elephant!

As for the WB supporters how hard is it to drive 1 hour or so from Melbourne to Ballarat?They do claim after all to have 42,000 members of is that BS?

 

[Dogs till i die]

If it has escaped your notice, not all 42,000 members turn up to their games in Melbourne either. Ballarat is not about drawing supporters and members out of Melbourne, but is about getting on the front foot over Soccer and reclaiming Aussie Rules in the West and growing the Western Bulldogs support base West of Melbourne.

As I said, the grounds limitations are well known by the decision makers and they now have the decisions to make as to whether to spend more money to develop it further and to consolidate 2 permanent AFL home and away seasonal games being played there or to leave it as it is. If they choose to do the latter, then the Western Bulldogs will no doubt return to Melbourne and remain Melbourne's smallest (and continue to struggle) club. Ballarat, would still be left with a first class AFL standard 12,000 capacity facility which would benefit regional football, cricket, soccer and rugby.

Roogal, have been a big supporter of Mars and have attended and largely enjoyed my 2 visits there. It does need some immediate improvements to facilities as you suggest. I hope the Bulldogs persist and grow their presence in Ballarat and footy remains the no.1 tenant there.

In reality though, the Bulldogs will survive with or without Ballarat.

The Bulldogs are not struggling or will "continue to struggle" as you suggest. They have accumulated profits of around $10m in the last 6 seasons, are now in a "net asset" position, they have won 4 premierships since 2014 (AFL, AFLW and 2 VFL) and are a much improved entity on and off the field since the last century.

The smallest Melbourne club? Depends on what statistic you can pull, the year you pull it from and in any case, being smallest does not necessarily mean the "worst" or most vulnerable.

 

[Kwality]

The Bulldogs are not struggling or will "continue to struggle" as you suggest. They have accumulated profits of around $10m in the last 6 seasons, are now in a "net asset" position, they have won 4 premierships since 2014 (AFL, AFLW and 2 VFL) and are a much improved entity on and off the field since the last century.

They seek to move 2 games out of Melbourne for money reasons only IMHO - what sort of dollars go the Dogs away for this FIXture, who pays.
As one who acknowledges that the number (supply) of AFL games in Melbourne exceeds the demand for bums on seats, I support the Dogs admin pursuing these games.

I trust you've based your comments on your clubs viabiliy on your review of the financials not the PR puff piece commentary.

 

[Rob]

My understanding is that the Ballarat Deal is worth around an extra $1.5 million into the coffers of the WBFC per season.

Not a bad earner given that's roughly $110 for every person that attended the venue for the 2 games there in 2018.

Who does pay that anyway? Ballarat council?

 

[The Punter]

Not a bad earner given that's roughly $110 for every person that attended the venue for the 2 games there in 2018.

Who does pay that anyway? Ballarat council?

Not to mention the compulsory acquisition and other associated legal costs.

All because of a Sharon Knight thought bubble, implemented without the knowledge of the NBFC Board, who wanted pre-season games and nothing more.

 

[Kwality]

My understanding is that the Ballarat Deal is worth around an extra $1.5 million into the coffers of the WBFC per season. It is less than what North and the Hawks get for playing in Tassie, but the Roos and Hawks play three to four games in Tassie per season too. Also the WBFC do not pay a cent back to the Ballarat Council for using Mars Stadium whereas they pay a percentage (of the gate as all clubs do) for usage of Marvel. Clubs like NMFC, HFC, and MFC make good coin out of travelling to regional centres where they are sponsored generously for playing there. Certainly North's bottom line would not be as healthy today without Hobart (remember that back in 2008, North were carrying $8 million of debt and nobody thought that they had a future in Melbourne much less the AFL). When the Bulldogs committed to playing football in Ballarat in 2015, they still had only won one Premiership (61 years earlier), they were still in debt and their membership was hovering around 32,000. Yes what a difference a Premiership in 2016 made. Their membership has jumped to a smidgin over 44,000 of which some 4000 are attributed to Ballarat and their club has gone back into the Black on the balance sheets.

They are to be applauded for turning it all around, and I am glad that they did.

Who is paying, do we know?

 

[The_Wookie]

Who is paying, do we know?

Vic Gov.

The Western Bulldogs have landed a multi-million-dollar sponsorship deal with the Victorian government that could lead to Ballarat hosting a home-and-away game as soon as 2017, and the Dogs play as many as three matches annually at transformed Eureka Stadium in future.

Considered a coup by the Bulldogs – not to mention a significant financial windfall - believed to be worth $3million-$5 million over five years – the deal was sealed quietly in Ballarat on Friday. It will be writ large, however, when the eyes of the football world turn to the MCG on Saturday night and the Dogs play their first final for five years wearing shorts emblazoned with "Ballarat" logos.

Western Bulldogs seal government Ballarat deal

The Western Bulldogs have landed a multi-million dollar sponsorship deal with the Victorian government that could see Ballarat host a home-and-away game as soon as 2017, and the Dogs play as many as three matches annually at Eureka Stadium in future.

www.theage.com.au

 

[aCunningPlan]

Not to mention the compulsory acquisition and other associated legal costs.

All because of a Sharon Knight thought bubble, implemented without the knowledge of the NBFC Board, who wanted pre-season games and nothing more.

Get your hand off it, The Courier were pushing this for years and years even before it was Labor policy. It had, still has, popular support among the Ballarat voting public.