How the small Melbourne clubs saved footy

[telsor]

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.

Not so easy when it's your club on the chopping board?


After all, it's "for the good of the comp" and to supporters clubs are fungible...aren't they?

 

[bzparkes]

Not so easy when it's your club on the chopping board?


After all, it's "for the good of the comp" and to supporters clubs are fungible...aren't they?

I'm not advocating for anyone to get the chop but if it was going to happen they wouldn't choose the biggest and most profitable club.

 

[HTT]

I'm not advocating for anyone to get the chop but if it was going to happen they wouldn't choose the biggest and most profitable club.

In this situation getting the chop is to make way for two more teams to enter, rather than to just bring in one team in a different area, or just to cull numbers. For that I would’ve thought a club which is highly profitable and a waiting list for its membership (I.e. potentially more income) would be the best option. Like any option involving folding a club, some supporters will be lost to other clubs, some to other sports altogether. The rest will likely pick one of the two newer sides and follow them. Which clubs have enough market share to make that feasible? Not the ones that get brought up most when it comes to reforming the league that’s for sure.

 

[telsor]

I'm not advocating for anyone to get the chop but if it was going to happen they wouldn't choose the biggest and most profitable club.

Profitable club, maybe...but what about what's best for the competition as a whole?

 

[bzparkes]

Profitable club, maybe...but what about what's best for the competition as a whole?

Probably reducing the number of clubs in Melbourne I'd says. Would certainly equalise the comp.

Not that I'm advocating that, like I said.

 

[bzparkes]

In this situation getting the chop is to make way for two more teams to enter, rather than to just bring in one team in a different area, or just to cull numbers. For that I would’ve thought a club which is highly profitable and a waiting list for its membership (I.e. potentially more income) would be the best option. Like any option involving folding a club, some supporters will be lost to other clubs, some to other sports altogether. The rest will likely pick one of the two newer sides and follow them. Which clubs have enough market share to make that feasible? Not the ones that get brought up most when it comes to reforming the league that’s for sure.

We're not Freo supporters who will jump ship mate.

Most WCE supporters would just go back to watching WAFL and the majority of the rest probably wouldn't watch AFL at all.

Perfect way for the AFL to shoot themselves in the foot.

Not that the WAFC would ever let it happen to either WA club. Don't forget that Freo and WCE aren't owned by the AFL, so even if there was a huge push for it, the WAFC would never agree to lose either cash cow.

 

[HTT]

We're not Freo supporters who will jump ship mate.

Most WCE supporters would just go back to watching WAFL and the majority of the rest probably wouldn't watch AFL at all.

Perfect way for the AFL to shoot themselves in the foot.

Not that the WAFC would ever let it happen to either WA club. Don't forget that Freo and WCE aren't owned by the AFL, so even if there was a huge push for it, the WAFC would never agree to lose either cash cow.

The great majority of any supporter base is pretty casual, and they all share more or less the same demographics, as much as we all love to use stereotypes formed in years gone by. My view is that any club merged/relocated/folded is a major loss and really shouldn’t happen. But there are plenty of posters who will happily suggest other clubs be merged for the good of the league, but when similar suggestions are thrown at their club, they jump.

 

[bzparkes]

The great majority of any supporter base is pretty casual, and they all share more or less the same demographics, as much as we all love to use stereotypes formed in years gone by. My view is that any club merged/relocated/folded is a major loss and really shouldn’t happen. But there are plenty of posters who will happily suggest other clubs be merged for the good of the league, but when similar suggestions are thrown at their club, they jump.

Of course they do, nobody wants to be the sacrificial lamb, which is why I personally don't want to see any more clubs merged or relocated.

Can't really see it happening anyway though.

 

[The_Wookie]

Profitable club, maybe...but what about what's best for the competition as a whole?

so lets split Richmond in half and send half to Perth.

 

[telsor]

so lets split Richmond in half and send half to Perth.

Unlikely to get traction in the Perth market.

My solution would lead to 3 roughly equal sized teams there.

 

[telsor]

Probably reducing the number of clubs in Melbourne I'd says. Would certainly equalise the comp.

Not that I'm advocating that, like I said.

As I've said, there is a greater imbalance in the west (~1.3m people per club compared to the ~820k average in football states) than in Vic (~640k average).

If we're trying to equalise, then surely the greater imbalance should be a higher priority.

 

[bzparkes]

As I've said, there is a greater imbalance in the west (~1.3m people per club compared to the ~820k average in football states) than in Vic (~640k avergae).

If we're trying to equalise, then surely the greater imbalance should be a higher priority.

It's only an 'imbalance' because there's so many teams competing for support in Melbourne.

As a previous post said, there's only 3 NFL teams in California, which has a population of 39 mil.

It's not the western states that have the disparity.

Going off your suggestion of 'splitting clubs', then Richmond, Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton should all be split with one going to Perth, one to NT, one to Tas and one to ACT and remove the 4 melbourne teams with the least support.

Those big 4 teams have enough supporters who will apparently split off and follow the new teams whilst increasing support for the bigger Melbourne teams when the small ones are abolished.

Great logic huh?

 

[The_Wookie]

Unlikely to get traction in the Perth market.

My solution would lead to 3 roughly equal sized teams there.

Your solution would achieve nothing except 2 teams with no supporters, 100,000 former west coast people who hate the AFL even more than they do already, and make Fremantle the powerhouse of WA football. Be a bonza year for the WAFL when that happens.

 

[Kwality]

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

& the national comp saw all the best players in the one comp, turns out no one told Victorians who not only needed players from interstate, they needed money too.
Take Carlton how many Victorians have held up a premiership cup since WW2?

 

[Kwality]

They don't exist anymore, they are Cockburn now

Is that the best you've got, it is pathetic.

 

[Kwality]

Not so easy when it's your club on the chopping board?


After all, it's "for the good of the comp" and to supporters clubs are fungible...aren't they?

WA footy followers know exactly how it* felt as the local comp was sacrificed to get a national comp viable. It needed players & money and got both & the WAFL comp became a feeder comp that puts more players into the player pool than it takes out.

* "for the good of the comp"

I still follow my WAFL comp put its talent is cherrypicked at U19 level with its kids going everywhere. Liam Baker is an example of talent that wasnt picked up in the national draft & spent a season at Subi playing in a WAFL flag before Richmond drafted him. Another example is Sam Menaglio who was delisted from the AFL, spent a season at Subi and was picked up by the Cats.

Put it down as you need but the WAFL today is a second tier comp that is successful., a concept that 30+ years later the east coast second tier is work in progress due a massive decent dose of egomania & the bombastic nature of Victorian footy.

With only 3% of Australias land mass, it is unsurprising Victorians battle to comprehend WA with 33%, & see WA as a smaller version of Victoria, even in footy terms.

 

[telsor]

Your solution would achieve nothing except 2 teams with no supporters, 100,000 former west coast people who hate the AFL even more than they do already, and make Fremantle the powerhouse of WA football. Be a bonza year for the WAFL when that happens.

How can that be when we keep getting told that killing off Vic clubs will just mean the fans change clubs...

 

[telsor]

WA footy followers know exactly how its felt as the local comp was sacrificed to get a national comp viable, it needed players & money and got both & the WAFL comp became a feeder comp that puts more players into the player pool than it takes out.

I still follow my WAFL comp put its talent is cherrypicked at U19 level with its kids going everywhere. Liam Baker is an example of talent that wasnt picked up in the national draft & spent a season at Subi playing in a WAFL flag before Richmond drafted him. Another example is Sam Menaglio who was delisted from the AFL, spent a season at Subi and was picked up by the Cats.

Can it you need but the WAFL is a second tier comp that is successful.

WA footy followers *chose* to sacrifice their local league and move their support to the VFL.

Their old clubs are still there, still playing in the same comp, against their traditional opponents. The vast majority of their WA 'fans' just ignore them.


Vic clubs would have nowhere to go. The competition they've played in for a century IS the AFL.

 

[HAPPY BUDDHA]

Should just relegate clubs who continually underperform until they show stark improvement in a lower level comp.

 

[B4Bear]

Should just relegate clubs who continually underperform until they show stark improvement in a lower level comp.

Be grateful you were even allowed to play this year after the fuss of your government.

 

[Kwality]

Be grateful you were even allowed to play this year after the fuss of your government.

You would find McGowan returned the same contempt displayed by McLachlan in negotiations over the new stadium.

 

[BigBreakfast]

This is poor posting, but I won't report it as a troll, even though it clearly is.

Why can't you just discuss the matter at hand - the tenant clubs at Docklands disproportionately paid to get an asset in AFL hands that's now saved the comp?

This us a simplistic view. Played a role but, so did every club that helped to secure massive media deals, including the two most recent expansion clubs by bringing in another game per round to bargain with.

Nothing this large can be attributed to one single albeit significant factor.

 

[BigBreakfast]

I think it should be a combination of club supporter base and on field success. I thought it was beyond stupid and incredibly irritating when a few years ago every second Friday night game was Carlton as Carlton were an awful team, and despite their supporter base they should have been no where near the prime time spots.

If the Bulldogs are playing well and are a very good team they should get some prime time spots, but not as many as lets say Hawthorn should get if Hawthorn was just as good on the field simply because Hawthorn has a lot more supporters.

We didn't want those games either. We were so bad...

 

[BigBreakfast]

Has a slight point. That 4pm Timeslot is a graveyard but probably added another 20-30M to the Ratings. We all like to kick North, Saints and Freo when they are down. but Probably why middle tier souless clubs like Port, Essendon, Geelong, Carlton can go back to daddy and get a loan.

Middle tier soulless:

Being completely disingenuous in claiming a side who have been a recent premier, 10 years plus in the finals and a grand final side in 2020 is mid tier. And a massive home ground advantage.

We have the most premierships in AFL/VFL history, in a tie with another soulless club. And top 5 membership by numbers.

Port has a massive SA history, premiership credentials and great home ground.

You come across as one eye troll with this commentary.

 

[BigBreakfast]

I believe in socialism, I really do. I think socialised democracies are great for countries and people, where the poorest of the poor are still able to eat and have a roof over their heads due to a strong social safety net.

I do not really believe in corporate socialism though, where governments prop up companies that do not really provide a direct benefit to society.

That is what the AFL is, the AFL is the government and the clubs are corporations. Now the AFL may want to prop up Gold Coast as they are like the only airline in an entire city, and that city needs the airline. However, I would not be a fan of the AFL propping up an airline that is failing in a city where there are already 8 other airlines, 5 of which are really successful. What benefit does the city of Melbourne have in propping up a clearly unprofitable airline that should it not exist would not hurt the people of Melbourne in any way.

Do you remember what your club was like in the formative years? Private ownership, crappy facilities, no one wanted to go there, regular spankings, no crowd. Ease up turbo.

The AFL is a not for profit which has a core priority of supporting the development of the code and constituents. Bottom line.