Princes Park

Remove this Banner Ad

Dogs - Ballarat, Whitten Oval or just stay at the Dome and have it half full
Melbourne - no thanks, rather stay at the G with 25,000 (achievable when we are winning), it's our home
North - Hobart makes sense for them, as does Etihad. If kicked out of Tassie I guess they could consider it.
Saints - if they chased a boutique stadium they'd want it South East of the city
Hawks - happy with Tassie, again would rather something to the East I'm sure

Geel, Ess, Coll, Rich - nope.

The only team who wants Princes park is Carlton, with North a possibility I guess, everyone else would be a flat GAGF if scheduled there.

It's the same for any boutique stadium.

It's not ideal but the financial and atmosphere problems caused by small crowds at big stadiums can be alleviated.

At Etihad it's pretty easy. The AFL take control, they get a better deal for the clubs, they allow clubs more freedom for match day experience and ticket prices and if there's 20,000 there it can have a good atmosphere. Pricing tickets and created an efficient medallion club resale system to get more people on the first 2 levels would do wonders for match day experience. Especially with the roof closed it doesn't need a full house.

The MCG is bigger but Coll, Rich and Hawthorn will tell you they aren't worried about drawing crowds and Melbourne supporters don't want to move. It only takes 30,000 congregated mainly in the lower levels and mostly in the members/reserved seats/cheersquad to produce a good atmosphere and profit. For our survival we have to start bringing 30,000 of our own fans more often but if we can't get close to that we are stuffed anyway.
 
Last edited:
It's sad that all Carlton have to hang their hats on now is that they have a (s**t) stadium that someone may be able to use. Very sad indeed.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

SumTingWong said:
It's sad that all Carlton have to hang their hats on now is that they have a (s**t) stadium that someone may be able to use. Very sad indeed.
Click to expand...
With the AFL likely to take over Etihad within the next several years (and therefore better contracts for clubs like Saint, Bulldogs and North Melb), there isn't much need for clubs to play at Princes park. Spending money on doing it up to host proper AFL games will just result in a white elephant that won't be used by anyone (except perhaps Carlton. But even then it will quickly become redundant for them if they build up their crowds).
 
If the AFL is footing the bill then the money is much better spent buying out the remaining contract on Docklands and giving better ticketing deals to the resident clubs.
 
If you want to go and watch footy at suburban venues, go and watch local or VFL footy. MCG or Etihad are adequate, playing games at venues like Princes Park would be a step backwards.
 
It must be used again, it was a terrible decision forcing Carlton away from it in the first place. Far cheaper to bring it up to standard with a 22k - 24k all seated boutique stadium for matches against Interstate sides. Carlton should play there at least 5 or 6 times a year.
 
JackFlash said:
It must be used again, it was a terrible decision forcing Carlton away from it in the first place. Far cheaper to bring it up to standard with a 22k - 24k all seated boutique stadium for matches against Interstate sides. Carlton should play there at least 5 or 6 times a year.
Click to expand...

Carlton were awful last year and still managed to draw over 30,000 to a game vs Gold Coast in Melbourne, why would you put those games in a stadium that holds far less? Carlton will eventually improve (unfortunately) and crowd numbers will increase as a result.

Ridiculous to invest a significant amount of money into a stadium that would essentially cap the amount of people that can attend the games, particularly as Melbourne's population increases so rapidly.
 
robertg22 said:
Carlton were awful last year and still managed to draw over 30,000 to a game vs Gold Coast in Melbourne, why would you put those games in a stadium that holds far less? Carlton will eventually improve (unfortunately) and crowd numbers will increase as a result.

Ridiculous to invest a significant amount of money into a stadium that would essentially cap the amount of people that can attend the games, particularly as Melbourne's population increases so rapidly.
Click to expand...
They don't make any money.
 
beerbandit said:
We are talking about a billion dollar industry, I think they could find the money to get it up to standard quite easily if they wanted, but obviously the AFL are happy with the G and the dome as well as playing games around the country I.e tassie, cairns, Darwin, Canberra
Click to expand...

This.

IF the AFL want it done they will pay but who knows if it will happen.

10 Million would do it and this is small change for the league as it currently stands and Vlad was on 60k a week or 3 Million a season in his last 2 years and you do the math! ;)
 
JackFlash said:
They don't make any money.
Click to expand...

So essentially locking fans out of games is the solution? You would hope that this changes for clubs when the league owns Etihad.

North are primarily an Etihad team who has a historically lower supporter base, post profits AND don't have to rely on dirty gaming money to supplement revenue. It can be done.
 
Clubs are in s**t stadium deals now then get extra $$ from the AFL to make up the shortfall. If they could make more $$ from playing games in a less expensive stadium then the AFL would also not have to then top up those clubs?

And where is the iron-clad guarantee that the Etihad situation will be infinitely better once the AFL control it? Do people really trust AFL HQ that much?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

If you want an antiquated reminder of VFL's past you just trott down to Geelong right
 
Being 100% selfish I want more games at Etihad as I live a 5 minute stroll from there
:p
 
The AFL will own Docklands soon. When it does, most clubs will get a better deal. There's nothing wrong with 25,000 people at Etihad Stadium, provided you have them on the bottom two levels.

I am hoping that when the AFL does own Docklands, it opens up the second level for low drawing matches to the public at affordable prices. If it does, it will make going to the footy an attractive proposition.
 
master bate said:
Dogs - Ballarat, Whitten Oval or just stay at the Dome and have it half full
Melbourne - no thanks, rather stay at the G with 25,000 (achievable when we are winning), it's our home
North - Hobart makes sense for them, as does Etihad. If kicked out of Tassie I guess they could consider it.
Saints - if they chased a boutique stadium they'd want it South East of the city
Hawks - happy with Tassie, again would rather something to the East I'm sure

Geel, Ess, Coll, Rich - nope.

The only team who wants Princes park is Carlton, with North a possibility I guess, everyone else would be a flat GAGF if scheduled there.

It's the same for any boutique stadium.

It's not ideal but the financial and atmosphere problems caused by small crowds at big stadiums can be alleviated.

At Etihad it's pretty easy. The AFL take control, they get a better deal for the clubs, they allow clubs more freedom for match day experience and ticket prices and if there's 20,000 there it can have a good atmosphere. Pricing tickets and created an efficient medallion club resale system to get more people on the first 2 levels would do wonders for match day experience. Especially with the roof closed it doesn't need a full house.

The MCG is bigger but Coll, Rich and Hawthorn will tell you they aren't worried about drawing crowds and Melbourne supporters don't want to move. It only takes 30,000 congregated mainly in the lower levels and mostly in the members/reserved seats/cheersquad to produce a good atmosphere and profit. For our survival we have to start bringing 30,000 of our own fans more often but if we can't get close to that we are stuffed anyway.
Click to expand...

Achievable? Low bar. Rd1 last year we got 27k against the Suns fcs
 
I was there on Sunday, and I was quite impressed. The playing surface was exceptional, the location is great. Money would need to be spent on updating the ammenities, raising the capacity to circa 30,000 and a car park, but id imagine its in much better shape than Windy Hill, Vic Park or any other suburban hovel. Dont see why it couldnt be a similar facility to Kardinia Park.
 
robertg22 said:
So essentially locking fans out of games is the solution?
Click to expand...
Wouldn't this then create a supply and demand scenario which will force fans to purchase memberships?
 
Stopher said:
One thing I didn't get was the complaints about how bad the traffic was around the ground afterwards.

Have any of these people never tried getting out of Yarra Park?!
Click to expand...

Even if you decided to drive (ignoring the 3 tram routes, 8 platform train station plus another station within 500 metres, plus a 10 minute walk to the city centre and a design that allows foot traffic to disperse 360 degrees) and park in the 3500 car park on Melbourne's main arterial road within a few kms of the two major freeways, it really isn't too bad. You should have been in the Waverley car park back in the day.....
 
Blackas87 said:
What's the standard? Not every stadium needs to super modern world class.

Would be good to see Carlton play back there for a few games. Wouldn't want Melbourne playing there for a home game.
Click to expand...

That's 'the standard'....Good enough (both financially and facilities) to have small clubs want to play home games there.
 
telsor said:
That's 'the standard'....Good enough (both financially and facilities) to have small clubs want to play home games there.
Click to expand...
I don't want to play there because it's not Melbournes home ground, great for Carlton though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top