News NMFC AFLW 2019

[Hearts to hearts]

How about just "Kangaroos"? There is precedent, and probably a shitload or merchandise that could go round again. Or seriously the Southern Kangaroos, or something similarly broad that includes Tasmania without seeming to exclude Victoria? I really want the team so I'll go along with it anyway, but they could do better to open their arms wider for supporters.

It's kind of trivial - the team would have North's father-daughters and be linked in so many ways - but symbolism matters so I hope they think it through carefully.

I know lots of you aren't fussed, but I'm excited about North's prospects looking up. I really want my team to be in this to barrack for and if it takes compromise, that's life.

 

[Snake_Baker]

If there isn't a team playing under our name it won't have the marketing impact.

I doubt it has little impact whatsoever.

Additionally, just because some have expressed wariness it doesn't make it "chicken little". More like well-placed suspicion. "Let's keep watching that sky" not "the sky is falling".

Honestly, where would I be without your wisdom to guide me.

 

[Snake_Baker]

It's kind of trivial - the team would have North's father-daughters and be linked in so many ways - but symbolism matters so I hope they think it through carefully.

I expect we would get our own side when Tassie broke away.

 

[Kimbo]

Honestly, where would I be without your wisdom to guide me.

No need to take it so personally S_B.

It was merely a different view in response to what I saw as unnecessary denigrating hyperbole.

 

[Kimbo]

How about just "Kangaroos"? There is precedent, and probably a shitload or merchandise that could go round again. Or seriously the Southern Kangaroos, or something similarly broad that includes Tasmania without seeming to exclude Victoria? I really want the team so I'll go along with it anyway, but they could do better to open their arms wider for supporters.

It's kind of trivial - the team would have North's father-daughters and be linked in so many ways - but symbolism matters so I hope they think it through carefully.

I know lots of you aren't fussed, but I'm excited about North's prospects looking up. I really want my team to be in this to barrack for and if it takes compromise, that's life.

NMFC: We've decided to put off contract talks on our future (name) until later on in the process.
Tassie: It's happening!

But seriously, I'm sick of North Melbourne having to compromise.

 

[Royal Flush]

I hope we do not get a license under the banner Tasmania Kangaroo for obvious reasons.

Secondly a top tier women's completion will not have enough numbers to sustain it as a watchable form of football. The research is already out, teenage girls get decimated by injuries significantly more so then boys. The pool of players will not be there. It will not evolve into a product worthy of a TV rights deal.




Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Hearts to hearts]

I hope we do not get a license under the banner Tasmania Kangaroo for obvious reasons.

Secondly a top tier women's completion will not have enough numbers to sustain it as a watchable form of football. The research is already out, teenage girls get decimated by injuries significantly more so then boys. The pool of players will not be there. It will not evolve into a product worthy of a TV rights deal.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

It's AFLW, and I can't believe the rest of what I just read.

 

[Royal Flush]

It's AFLW, and I can't believe the rest of what I just read.

Fair enough if your shocked, Its the underlying "Sexism" belief system that probably contributes to that. I have no intention of that.
There is lots of evidence in girls being more susceptible to Joint injury in Knees and ankles.
Parents most likely will not encourage their daughters to participate in AFLW as they would in other sports, not just joint injury which occurs in netball, but added to that further injuries in a contact sport like AFL. There is an abundance of research in this area on the web on Joint injury and more.

Punters have been critical of the standards of AFLW. If the novelty wears off, and people are not viewing it, then how will they achieve their financial and expansion objectives through broadcast rights?

Clubs want in, because they believe in the AFLs vision.

From a Business perspective, I dont buy into it one bit, and If North dont get a team, which we will not as North Melbourne, I dont see it as such a big deal.

Im happy top be proven wrong in 3 years time.

 

[Dodecahedron]

My youngest daughter is in Grade 6.
From her group of 10 friends, HALF now play AFL. They all support the Bullldogs or Collingwood teams...
North needs an AFLW team NOW.

It needs to be properly affiliated with Tassie to have any chance considering the biased, agenda-hungry, AFL tossdom.

We've submitted what the AFL friggin' wanted, so they should just stop r00ting around and award the license already.

(See what I did there?)

 

[Quivorir]

Grade six and already playing afl eh.

 

[Ry009]

Why should sports be restricted to genders? Why would anyone expect the competition level to equal that of the mens comp straight off the bat, with a limited foundation to build upon? Need to start somewhere.

Jesus christ.

 

[astrovic]

My youngest daughter is in Grade 6.
From her group of 10 friends, HALF now play AFL. They all support the Bullldogs or Collingwood teams...
North needs an AFLW team NOW.

It needs to be properly affiliated with Tassie to have any chance considering the biased, agenda-hungry, AFL tossdom.

We've submitted what the AFL friggin' wanted, so they should just stop r00ting around and award the license already.

(See what I did there?)

Pretty much the same here - eldest daughter in grade 6, started playing footy this year as did half her team. The club this season has 3 under 12 teams where last year it had 1.

And in case anyone is thinking it's a fad and they'll lose interest - that's looking pretty bloody unlikely. They love it.

 

[giantroo]

 

[Limerick]

I'm involved with female football at the junior level. Most of the injuries we have experienced have happened at other sports our girls are playing e.g. basketball plus school ground incidents. We have experienced less injuries than North has this year.

 

[True North]

Junior girls footy is here to stay. Pretty sure the first AFLW game had a bigger crowd than the first men's game back in 1858. Can't believe the mens game wasn't cancelled right then and there. Free entry, no tv rights and no sponsors, debacle! Lets give the women's game 50 years to establish itself and then comment.

 

[Bati_18]

Any other name then NMFC is unacceptable. Calling the female team Tasmania Kangaroos might be the AFL testing the water to see if they can eventually shift our club to Tasmania.

North fans must fight this. Let the club know we only want one name.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Any other name then NMFC is unacceptable. Calling the female team Tasmania Kangaroos might be the AFL testing the water to see if they can eventually shift our club to Tasmania.

North fans must fight this. Let the club know we only want one name.

Maybe they are testing the water to see if we could play all women in our AFL team. It's about as relevant. I'm still delighted every time I can call our senior AFL team "North Melbourne" and I never take it for granted. I will be beyond happy to see our VFL team do the same - no need to demote our actual name to the lower competition like Western. The AFLW is not a canary down the coal mine for the AFL clubs - it's a unique and distinct competition. The fact Melbourne is considered a power there tells you all you need to know.

 

[Kimbo]

Maybe they are testing the water to see if we could play all women in our AFL team. It's about as relevant. I'm still delighted every time I can call our senior AFL team "North Melbourne" and I never take it for granted. I will be beyond happy to see our VFL team do the same - no need to demote our actual name to the lower competition like Western.

The AFLW is not a canary down the coal mine for the AFL clubs - it's a unique and distinct competition. The fact Melbourne is considered a power there tells you all you need to know.

I very rarely have cause to disagree with you H2h - and on the Tassie issue have very much been with you in the 'be alert but not alarmed' group - but I struggle to see why you're so dismissive of this as a risk issue.

Whether it's feeding the media trolls and wider community who believe them (diluting the strength and attractiveness of our brand), right through to the worse conspiracy theory realized, it raises alarm (alert?) bells for me. The biggest challenge is not knowing what the 'end game' is with Tasmania. We know, or can reasonably conclude:

The AFL's own (Simon Garlick?) report recommended one team for Tassie. (fact)
In the face of the AFL not rejecting it, it would seem they support this recommendation. (safe conclusion)
It'd be silly to think that's not us given we're one of two teams already there. (safe conclusion)
Report the Hawks deal wasn't appreciated. (conclusion)
A motion to restrict the number of games played in Tassie was fought by the club and ultimately rejected. (fact)
We've been allocated the Indigenous and Multicultural Academy for Tassie. (fact)
If North Melbourne's bid for a AFLW license is successful, it may be called the 'Tasmanian Kangaroos'. (pending 'fact' for this purpose)

In short, the ties with Tassie are being strengthened and the avenues to have us be 'the Tasmanian team' (in whatever form) have been put in place. No problem if this is only ever in the form of a 'secondary market' for us, even if we end up being the only team playing home games there.

Surely, however, the question is what limitations, if any, will be placed on the number of home games? At what point do we shift from NM 'who play a few games in Tassie' to 'co-location' to 'relocation'? While I don't think relocation is currently on the agenda, diluting our Victorian links and membership offer has the potential to weaken our position in the longer term. Personally, I'd be okay with up to four games (2 each in Hobart and Launceston) but if it goes to five or six, that's half the home games.

Back on the AFLW, I also think, the biggest advantage to having a team - aside from simply being part of providing it, in and of itself - is to add to our brand and strengthen our overall club position. Not having North Melbourne as its name weakens the whole commercial venture, surely?

So, for me, it has to be North Melbourne or we have to get very slick and consistent at communicating the 'second home' concept which is easy to do now, but will get harder in future if the AFLW team is the Tasmanian Kangaroos and if the men's team ends up playing over four games in Tassie.

 

[FastLife]

I Support a North Melbourne AFLW Bid
I Don't support a Tasmania Kangaroos bid at all.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

I very rarely have cause to disagree with you H2h - and on the Tassie issue have very much been with you in the 'be alert but not alarmed' group - but I struggle to see why you're so dismissive of this as a risk issue.

Whether it's feeding the media trolls and wider community who believe them (diluting the strength and attractiveness of our brand), right through to the worse conspiracy theory realized, it raises alarm (alert?) bells for me. The biggest challenge is not knowing what the 'end game' is with Tasmania. We know, or can reasonably conclude:

The AFL's own (Simon Garlick?) report recommended one team for Tassie. (fact)
In the face of the AFL rejecting it, it would seem they support this recommendation. (safe conclusion)
It'd be silly to think that's not us given we're one of two teams already there. (safe conclusion)
Report the Hawks deal wasn't appreciated. (conclusion)
A motion to restrict the number of games played in Tassie was fought by the club and ultimately rejected. (fact)
We've been allocated the Indigenous and Multicultural Academy for Tassie. (fact)
If North Melbourne's bid for a AFLW license is successful, it may be called the 'Tasmanian Kangaroos'. (pending 'fact' for this purpose)

In short, the ties with Tassie are being strengthened and the avenues to have us be 'the Tasmanian team' (in whatever form) have been put in place. No problem if this is only ever in the form of a 'secondary market' for us, even if we end up being the only team playing home games there.

Surely, however, the question is what limitations, if any, will be placed on the number of home games? At what point do we shift from NM 'who play a few games in Tassie' to 'co-location' to 'relocation'? While I don't think relocation is currently on the agenda, diluting our Victorian links and membership offer has the potential to weaken our position in the longer term. Personally, I'd be okay with up to four games (2 each in Hobart and Launceston) but if it goes to five or six, that's half the home games.

Back on the AFLW, I also think, the biggest advantage to having a team - aside from simply being part of providing it, in and of itself - is to add to our brand and strengthen our overall club position. Not having North Melbourne as its name weakens the whole commercial venture, surely?

So, for me, it has to be North Melbourne or we have to get very slick and consistent at communicating the 'second home' concept which is easy to do now, but will get harder in future if the AFLW team is the Tasmanian Kangaroos and if the men's team ends up playing over four games in Tassie.

I'm not arguing that we shouldn't stay alert. I was specifically saying that AFLW is such a small part of the total picture that, whatever decisions are made, it needs to be kept in perspective. It's like saying Collingwood netball team's uniform logo is paving the way for the club to rebrand itself. It's so small by comparison - in our case, if from next year we double the number of men's teams competing every week as North Melbourne, that will (or should) send much stronger signals to all stakeholders than the name of the AFLW team.

I've spent most of my adult life stressed about the viable future of my footy club. Right now it's as strong as it's ever been, next year it gets stronger, and I'm not keen to see North miss the boat on women's footy at this level just because Hutchy and his ilk might venture some puerile opinions on the Tasmanian link.

 

[Kimbo]

I'm not arguing that we shouldn't stay alert. I was specifically saying that AFLW is such a small part of the total picture that, whatever decisions are made, it needs to be kept in perspective. It's like saying Collingwood netball team's uniform logo is paving the way for the club to rebrand itself. It's so small by comparison - in our case, if from next year we double the number of men's teams competing every week as North Melbourne, that will (or should) send much stronger signals to all stakeholders than the name of the AFLW team.

I've spent most of my adult life stressed about the viable future of my footy club. Right now it's as strong as it's ever been, next year it gets stronger, and I'm not keen to see North miss the boat on women's footy at this level just because Hutchy and his ilk might venture some puerile opinions on the Tasmanian link.

"not keen to see North miss the boat..." implies the success of the bid rests on the team being branded as Tasmania. I'd like to think that's not the case, and if so, then surely we'd retain NMFC? If it is the case, then it further 'alerts me' as to any AFL agenda.

As for the "small part of the total picture", my view is that it's a small part now, but will only grow. Regardless, the media presence and the grass roots impact among girls, is and will be disproportionately bigger than, for example, its significance in revenue. That is, the 'picture' in the minds of the current and prospective audience. Forgive me for thinking of this largely in marketing terms.

I'm not arguing with the value of having a reserves side, or with the view on the likes of Hutchy. More those that absorb the words and repeat them, so that it becomes part of the NM narrative. The less of this crap, the better is what I'm saying.

Not stressing, just sayin'.

 

[Reverend Shinboner]

"not keen to see North miss the boat..." implies the success of the bid rests on the team being branded as Tasmania. I'd like to think that's not the case, and if so, then surely we'd retain NMFC? If it is the case, then it further 'alerts me' as to any AFL agenda.

As for the "small part of the total picture", my view is that it's a small part now, but will only grow. Regardless, the media presence and the grass roots impact among girls, is and will be disproportionately bigger than, for example, its significance in revenue. That is, the 'picture' in the minds of the current and prospective audience. Forgive me for thinking of this largely in marketing terms.

I'm not arguing with the value of having a reserves side, or with the view on the likes of Hutchy. More those that absorb the words and repeat them, so that it becomes part of the NM narrative. The less of this crap, the better is what I'm saying.

Not stressing, just sayin'.

Good discussion - especially appreciate H2H and Kimbo's robust points.

Just a note that Ben Buckley spoke with ABC Grandstand on the AFLW concept on Saturday (as well as a few other points) here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/sport/pr...he-press-room:-round-19/8756902?section=sport
Interview is at the end of the podcast - from 1:16 or around then.

Basic points raised by BB in the discussion re: AFLW:

• “In certain circumstances, integrating the Tasmanian identity into the AFLW team is absolutely something we can consider”
  
• HOWEVER, it was not part of the pitch to the AFLW - certainly not "to the extent it has been reported"
• The AFLW pitch DID include:
  • Playing a significant number of games in Tasmania - not just Hobart - but also Launceston and the NW coast
  • Elite training facilities in Tasmania
  • A certain quota of players from Tasmania

Buckley was also on the front foot to differentiate the AFLW team and the men's team, and point out that the strong Tasmanian component of the AFLW pitch is not a precursor to the men's team playing more games in Hobart/Tasmania, and he does not buy into the scaremongering around that.

 

[Reverend Shinboner]

Good discussion - especially appreciate H2H and Kimbo's robust points.

Just a note that Ben Buckley spoke with ABC Grandstand on the AFLW concept on Saturday (as well as a few other points) here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/sport/pr...he-press-room:-round-19/8756902?section=sport
Interview is at the end of the podcast - from 1:16 or around then.

Basic points raised by BB in the discussion re: AFLW:

• “In certain circumstances, integrating the Tasmanian identity into the AFLW team is absolutely something we can consider”
  
• HOWEVER, it was not part of the pitch to the AFLW - certainly not "to the extent it has been reported"
• The AFLW pitch DID include:
  • Playing a significant number of games in Tasmania - not just Hobart - but also Launceston and the NW coast
  • Elite training facilities in Tasmania
  • A certain quota of players from Tasmania

Buckley was also on the front foot to differentiate the AFLW team and the men's team, and point out that the strong Tasmanian component of the AFLW pitch is not a precursor to the men's team playing more games in Hobart/Tasmania, and he does not buy into the scaremongering around that.

What I took out of this is that, I think NMFC/Buckley is trying to find a way of positioning (in marketing/branding terms) the AFLW team very much as a North Melbourne franchise, but with Tasmania integrated within it (the AFLW). Ie. Trying to have our cake and eat it.

I'm not sure what this actually means. The "North Melbourne-Tasmanian Kangaroos" AFLW team sounds clumsy and weak, with a foot in both/neither camps. The "Tasmanian Kangaroos" sounds a bridge too far for Buckley (along with 98% of BF posters). And "North Melbourne" on its own may not get the deal done from an AFLW viewpoint. Only time will tell.

Personally I think gaining an AFLW license is a must for NMFC, but would feel a little robbed if it was the Tasmanian Kangaroos. But I applaud the Board for putting forward what, from the outside, seems an extremely strong bid, and have confidence that Buckley will balance the competing priorities to reach an outcome we can all be proud of.

 

[lockheed]

Just listened to this week's Age podcast - http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ssendon-supplements-saga-20170815-gxwkxl.html. According to Caro, North / Tassie will be one of four teams to be granted AFLW licences from 2019.

 

[horse&duck]

Just listened to this week's Age podcast - http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ssendon-supplements-saga-20170815-gxwkxl.html. According to Caro, North / Tassie will be one of four teams to be granted AFLW licences from 2019.

Good one.