How the small Melbourne clubs saved footy

[Leeda]

I can't like this post enough

hah because it likes you well enough as well.. cross eyed and demanding and uncooperative

 

[telsor]

Got it I know how much the debt from the Legends Stand still impacts Carlton FC today. It's a shame the AFL don't play games at these grounds anymore with minor upgrades eg play a heritage round Ess v Suns at Windy Hill or Pies v Giants at Vic park once a year. But the dollar rules at the end of the day I guess.

Yes and no.

It'd be nice on some levels, but partly it's the $$$, and partly that with the GF being at the MCG, all clubs deserve the opportunity to play on it as often as practicable, even if it means the home club takes a bit of a loss on the game.

 

[The Passenger]

That means

Victoria - 1 team per 640,000 people
Western Australia - 1 team per 1.3 million people
South Australia - 1 team per 850,000 people
New South Wales - 1 team per 3.75 million people
Queensland - 1 team per 2.5 million people

There really should have been a third WA team but the horse has probably bolted on that one - not sure how it would pick up any strong support now.

 

[Freshwater]

There really should have been a third WA team but the horse has probably bolted on that one - not sure how it would pick up any strong support now.

Why has it bolted? If WA is really ready for a third team, which makes much more sense than reducing teams in the heartland, then anytime will be a good time.

 

[Rob]

Not sure if this. info. has been included in this Thread before- can anyone confirm both points?

. Several BF posters in this other Thread have said that J. Dunstall, in 2014, said that GC "can break even financially with crowds of only 7k" at Metricon.
Is this true? Links?
(I vaguely recall a similar MSM claim that GWS can also break even if GWS gets a 7k crowd at Giants Stadium. Is this correct? Links?

Break even with what though?

Most of these break even figures are invented by cherry picking what income and expenses you want to include.

 

[Dogs till i die]

I agree with this post. Yes there's the same handful of clubs contending in winning the league.

Saying that I look at a team like Bournemouth that was recently relegated.

10 years ago, they nearly were bankrupt. They slowly fought their way up to the upper leagues. 2015-6 season was the 1st year of them in the EPL. They got 80-90 million in tv money alone just to stay up. Show how much money is in the sport.

If Bournemouth remained with their structure back in those days they'd be gone by now. The club were "bought" by wealthy, shrewd owners and this resulted in their improvement. Good luck to them but don't be fooled that the club itself fought back - lots of private money was involved.

If I was a cynical type, I would say your club has benefited most over there by private ownership and money. You'd have to agree that City, whilst a big club with some glory moments, were under achievers for a long time, being in the 3rd tier only 15 years or so ago.

I'm not anti-City or Bournemouth, just how money now dictates success in the big European leagues. Thank goodness for the AFL' s salary cap and draft measures for providing an even and interesting competition. I've seen a Dogs premiership but almost certainly will never see a Crystal Palace one. Rather sad not seeing any hope.

 

[Freomaniac]

If Bournemouth remained with their structure back in those days they'd be gone by now. The club were "bought" by wealthy, shrewd owners and this resulted in their improvement. Good luck to them but don't be fooled that the club itself fought back - lots of private money was involved.

If I was a cynical type, I would say your club has benefited most over there by private ownership and money. You'd have to agree that City, whilst a big club with some glory moments, were under achievers for a long time, being in the 3rd tier only 15 years or so ago.

I'm not anti-City or Bournemouth, just how money now dictates success in the big European leagues. Thank goodness for the AFL' s salary cap and draft measures for providing an even and interesting competition. I've seen a Dogs premiership but almost certainly will never see a Crystal Palace one. Rather sad not seeing any hope.

Yeah thats true, Bouremouth had to run in a different way or else they would of been broke. I wont deny Bournemouth had money poured into them when Eddie Howe was their manager in the lower leagues and slowly working their way up to the higher and wealthier leagues. They have spent money, but to way near as much as Chelsea under Roman Abramovich since mid 2002 or Man City under Sheikh Mansour since 2009.

I wont deny my Team man City has benifited on private ownership and wealthy owners. I wont deny Man city have had their period of underachievement. When Man utd won that famous treble in 1998-99 when they got the FA cup, EPL title and champions League title, Man city were either in the championship or in League 1 (3rd tier of english football).

I am not an Anti Bourenmouth fan. If Anything, I admire and respect the way they rose up the ranks to the Premier League, Similar how Fulham did from 1996-2001 when they too rose from football league 2 in the 4 tier to the EPL.

Yeah you do have the recent superpower clubs that Reached the top Via rich Owners such as Chelsea, Man City, PSG and RB Leipzieg.

Since you are a Crystal Palace fan, you know your team was nearly broke in 2010? One of the main reasons it was saved was due to a few local business owners bought the club. They too slowly recovered. Palace are in the EPL now are they?

 

[Freomaniac]

Funny that.

You did nothing in the first 6 billion years in this universe.

LoL that's funny.

bh90210fan , Numero Uno , DanWA, Captain_Bender Forward Press ......

How many flags will Fremantle Dockers win in 6 billion years time? LoL.

 

[DanWA]

LoL that's funny.

bh90210fan , Numero Uno , DanWA, Captain_Bender Forward Press ......

How many flags will Fremantle Dockers win in 6 billion years time? LoL.

They don't exist anymore, they are Cockburn now

 

[BF Tiger]

They don't exist anymore, they are Cockburn now

Is cockburn why the b***h**t?

 

[Freomaniac]

They don't exist anymore, they are Cockburn now

you didnt answer my question. lol

6 billion years from now, How many cockburn flags will be at the trophy cabinet?

 

[DanWA]

you didnt answer my question. lol

6 billion years from now, How many cockburn flags will be at the trophy cabinet?

zero

 

[Freomaniac]

zero

Thats the spirit.

Classy as usual

 

[Rich01]

The best outcome for Tasmania is they get a Victorian team, for the sake of argument North Melbourne to do a partial relocation where the AFL relocates North Melbourne to Tasmania to become the Tasmanian Kangaroos or something like that, with Tasmania playing 11 games in Tasmania, but getting an agreement with the AFL to play the other 11 games in Victoria, so North Melbourne fans still see their team in Victoria just as much, but Tasmania also now has a full time team. That could potentially work.

I came up with that idea as Carlton made a similar request to the AFL in the 90's when they attempted a hostile take over of the Swans, basically them trying to merge the Carlton and Sydney lists into one team, playing half their games in Victoria and the other half in Sydney.

Yeah that will go down well. The 8 non Vic clubs never play this team at home (and most likely play them in Tas only) even in the seasons they are drawn to play them twice.

Not well thought out.

 

[megadeth86]

Meh. We play the Sunday afternoon timeslot more than most. Hosting more interstate sides than you do. Still pull a crowd. Poor excuse from poor clubs.

Yes because you all abandoned the WAFL clubs your families had between supporting loyally for four generations.

 

[telsor]

There really should have been a third WA team but the horse has probably bolted on that one - not sure how it would pick up any strong support now.

Break WCE in two.

I'm sure all the people who argue for dropping Vic clubs 'for the good of the game' would be on board.

 

[telsor]

In terms of averages Victoria has way too many teams

Victoria (6.4 million) - 10 teams
Western Australia (2.6 million) - 2 teams
South Australia (1.7 million) - 2 teams
New South Wales (7.5 million) - 2 teams
Queensland (5.0 million) - 2 teams

That means

Victoria - 1 team per 640,000 people
Western Australia - 1 team per 1.3 million people
South Australia - 1 team per 850,000 people
New South Wales - 1 team per 3.75 million people
Queensland - 1 team per 2.5 million people

Now, cutting out NSW and QLD for a moment since both are very much outliers I think 1 team per 650,000 is not enough. Really it should be closer to South Australia at a minimum. Even 850,000 probably isn't enough but lets go with it.

If Victoria had one team per 850,000 people that is 7.5 teams.

So even if you are very generous with the rounding Victoria should have no more than 8 teams, realistically should only have 7 teams as that would mean one team per 914,000 people which is much more healthy.

It is why Tasmania can't have a team as the entire state only has 515,000 people, meaning their people to team ratio is even lower than Victoria. Tasmania should only get a team if they increase in size to a minimum of 700,000 people, but again, ideally increase to 914,000 people.

A few points.

1. You'll really annoy the Tas team zealots with this...they don't like facts and hard numbers...especially when the projections have things getting worse for them.

2. In a way, Vic has self righted to a degree by selling games to smaller markets. (yes, inc Tas).
Doing this brings games to markets that wouldn't have games otherwise (nb 'state' pop figures are limited when distance renders people unlikely to reach the games).
You can call this increasing the the pop base for 'Vic' clubs, or reducing the number of Vic clubs (really games) by 'in effect' having only 9 teams worth of home games, but either way, it does improve the average.

3. If you split the 14 clubs in Vic/WA/SA evenly between the 'football states' of Vic, WA, SA, Tas & NT (leaving NSW/QLD as is because as you note, they're outliers), then it'd be about 820K per club.

8 Vic
3 WA (only viable if you break up WCE)
2 SA
1 ??? ... Tas + NT would be roughly right, but that doesn't really seem like a viable option, so add one Vic club to these numbers (making 9, still 1 down on current) and have two Vic/Tas (one nth, one sth...not unlike like now, but more formally done) and another Vic/NT.


Of course, killing off one Vic club, 'semi-relocating' 3 more, and breaking WCE in two would probably upset quite a number of people.

 

[Freomaniac]

Break WCE in two.

I'm sure all the people who argue for dropping Vic clubs 'for the good of the game' would be on board.

Not so much breaking West coast eagles in 2.

Obviously base the club in Perth. Also training at East Perth, west Perth or perths home WAFL ground.

Joondalup area would be ok.

Peel wouldn't of been a bad idea either.

 

[The_Wookie]

Break WCE in two.

Im not even sure this can be accomplished. They have one football team. You can split the players and staff and assets but it wont split west coast as a team supported entity.

 

[telsor]

Im not even sure this can be accomplished. They have one football team. You can split the players and staff and assets but it wont split west coast as a team supported entity.

I admit it wont be easy, but having only 2 teams for 2.6m people in WA is a far bigger anomaly than 10 in Vic (especially as the distribution is so unbalanced), so if the latter 'must' be dealt with, it follows that the former needs to be addressed as well.

 

[The_Wookie]

I admit it wont be easy, but having only 2 teams for 2.6m people in WA is a far bigger anomaly than 10 in Vic (especially as the distribution is so unbalanced), so if the latter 'must' be dealt with, it follows that the former needs to be addressed as well.

Its one thing to merge clubs and have those follower have to make a choice. Its quite another to split an existing club - the half that splits off is going to be no better off than having a new club from scratch

 

[bzparkes]

Yep, let's split the biggest club in the league rather merge or relocate a couple of the minnows.

Claremont Tigers has a good ring to it. Already got a feeder club with the same name set up.

 

[Freomaniac]

Not quite the same thing though, SPL clubs, like most around the world are privately owned, there is also no salary cap. The AFL owns all 18 clubs, so whilst some run at a loss, the AFL as a business still operates profitably.

Well that's because teams like west coast, Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond have massive fan bases and draw big crowds in their home states.

Lookin' at North for example, don't have a big fan base. Yet financially are run well because the AFL is like a government. The AFL hands out north cash but in the condition they stick under a strict budget.

Any spare cash north has left is used to pay off some debt.

 

[Freomaniac]

Yep, let's split the biggest club in the league rather merge or relocate a couple of the minnows.

Claremont Tigers has a good ring to it. Already got a feeder club with the same name set up.

While you are at it, move the Melbourne demons to Perth and they become Perth demons lol

 

[telsor]

Its one thing to merge clubs and have those follower have to make a choice. Its quite another to split an existing club - the half that splits off is going to be no better off than having a new club from scratch

Close it down entirely and create 2 'new' clubs from the ruins then.