Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion Suban

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kunna17
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

Should Suban play more Midfield than D.Pearce?

  • Yes

    Votes: 33 51.6%

  • No

    Votes: 31 48.4%
  • Total voters
    64

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

sij1981 said:
As long as the team plays good footbal;l, the AFL will support them its when they are Penny broke, dont attract crowds to games and play poor brand of football when folding comes up.

North aint that bad
Click to expand...

They're probably the best team outside the eight.
North is a club who can't hold members and they're getting scorched by the Etihad ground deal.
 
sij1981 said:
What ethiad ground deal?
Click to expand...

The one the AFL signed with the owners of Etihad with an exorbitant amount to be paid for each game there.
The dividend doesn't get realized til the conclusion of the deal when ownership of the ground then becomes the AFL's.
Basically pain now, but eventually own the ground. It means clubs who don't get high attendances there, lose coin.
It ostensibly means those clubs are assisting the more powerful clubs being AFL stakeholders who will reap the rewards when the ground deal concludes.
That is what the whole argument about club equalization has been based on.
 
Fred Ziffel said:
The one the AFL signed with the owners of Etihad with an exorbitant amount to be paid for each game there.
The dividend doesn't get realized til the conclusion of the deal when ownership of the ground then becomes the AFL's.
Basically pain now, but eventually own the ground. It means clubs who don't get high attendances there, lose coin.
It ostensibly means those clubs are assisting the more powerful clubs being AFL stakeholders who will reap the rewards when the ground deal concludes.
That is what the whole argument about club equalization has been based on.
Click to expand...

But to counter that, the clubs who are suffering because of it now, (North, Bulldogs etc), surely should have seen the writing on the wall if they did due diligence on the contract before signing off on it with the AFL.

They rolled over very meekly and now continuously piss and moan over it.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

whiteoak said:
But to counter that, the clubs who are suffering because of it now, (North, Bulldogs etc), surely should have seen the writing on the wall if they did due diligence on the contract before signing off on it with the AFL.

They rolled over very meekly and now continuously piss and moan over it.
Click to expand...

They may not have had any control over it.
I don't know all the details of it but it was basically a case of doing big bucks every time they played there.
They've got an argument no doubt about it but it always shits me North could have gone to Gold Coast and received $250 mil assistance from the AFL and knocked it back to effectively wither away in Melbourne.
 
sij1981 said:
As long as the team plays good footbal;l, the AFL will support them its when they are Penny broke, dont attract crowds to games and play poor brand of football when folding comes up.

North aint that bad
Click to expand...

How many members do they have.

What are the crowd numbers at games when they play interstate teams .

How much money is the AFL giving them to keep the doors open.
 
Melb vs Gold Coast a classic example of what I'm saying.
It wasn't that long ago the Kangaroos where selling games out of Melb to Synney and Tasmania.
I may be wrong but I think they are still playing games in Tassie .

Western Bulldogs are in a similar position RE membership and AFL subs
 
Sman-21 said:
Yep Eddie has been telling everyone Shaw was the one screaming .... he punched me in the nuts.
Watched the replay of the game on fox footy, After the game he was saying Shaw said it to the umpire.
Then on AFL 360 they showed him on some other show once again saying Ballantyne hit Shaw in the nuts.

Replays clearly show it was Ballantyne saying it to the umpire and the one who copped the whack.
To really piss Eddie off the club should demand an on air apology from him.
His comments were broadcast to a big audience, many may still believe his words.
If someone made comments like that in the media about 1 of his players and were proven wrong, Eddie would demand an apology.

I still cant see the AFL letting any clubs fold.
More teams = more games which then = more money for tv rights.
Hope im wrong because there is just too many clubs in vic and i cant see them ever being able to support this many teams.
Plus the overall standard of competition drops imo with too many teams.

Suban ehh, needs to lift.
Click to expand...
 
couldhavebeen said:
Melb vs Gold Coast a classic example of what I'm saying.
It wasn't that long ago the Kangaroos where selling games out of Melb to Synney and Tasmania.
I may be wrong but I think they are still playing games in Tassie .

Western Bulldogs are in a similar position RE membership and AFL subs
Click to expand...

Hawthorn are also doing this.

The Bulldogs have a different population distribution with the expansion of western Melbourne and may well be ok. But North and Melbourne are pretty much screwed. Give it 10 years and they will have merged or been relocated imo.
 
I messed that one up sorry
The AFL had to find over 100 new players over the last few years so the hunt for quality young players or players of any age that are ready to play league football has become that much harder and the top clubs have the financial clout to have the best . that's how Gelong got Caddie
 
Hawthorn get paid by the Tassie government to play in Tassie not the AFL.
They are getting a lot of money as well as increasing their membership base as well, now over 40,000
 
couldhavebeen said:
Hawthorn get paid by the Tassie government to play in Tassie not the AFL.
They are getting a lot of money as well as increasing their membership base as well, now over 40,000
Click to expand...

Yes they do. And I am reasonably sure that the AFL subsidises this to an extent.

But with 15,000 or less fronting up to games, can you see the Tassie Government renewing the contract?
 
whiteoak said:
But to counter that, the clubs who are suffering because of it now, (North, Bulldogs etc), surely should have seen the writing on the wall if they did due diligence on the contract before signing off on it with the AFL.

They rolled over very meekly and now continuously piss and moan over it.
Click to expand...

The past president of the AFL Collins signed the deal and then became manager of the stadium .
I think that he wrote the deal guaranteeing the developers so much for every game and the AFL then bank rolled the clubs that didn't get the numbers for the first couple of years.
Then the clubs where on their own for the shortfall and the Kangaroos have not always got the crowd .
To limit their loses they sold games to Sydney ,Canberra and Tassie .
I'm not certain of all the facts , its been quite awhile since this all happened but the gist of it would be right
IT was handed to the clubs as a done deal to secure another ground other than the MCG and Princess Park ( which had a lot of money spent on it but needed a lot more and the AFL said no and stopped using it) with the sale of Waverley Park I'm pretty sure that's how it came about but quite prepared to be corrected
 

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

yakka man said:
Agree. The SCG is a ground that suban should be perfectly suited to. Hopefully he has a monster game.
Click to expand...

And come to think of it, it's more than just Subes. We have many players suited to this size ground, including Sutcliffe and Crozier.
Our small, speedy forward brigade is going to be a real handful for Sydney.
I said last week that I considered Collingwood the least able defence to handle Ballantyne and Walters. Really, no team in the comp has our two small fwds covered and that definitely includes Sydney.

I'm just not sure whether I prefer a dry day there or wet.
 
whiteoak said:
If only he'd stop plagiarising everyones opinions.

Going to an ugly game on Saturday.

And the uglier it is, the more it suits Suban.
Click to expand...

Suban is an unfashionable footballer. Has nothing that really endears him to the viewer, just does everything fairly well, plays a steady game. He also has a farmers bowl cut, a real man's haircut, not some ghey undercut like every other footballer has.

I like him.
 
stormee said:
Suban is an unfashionable footballer. Has nothing that really endears him to the viewer, just does everything fairly well, plays a steady game. He also has a farmers bowl cut, a real man's haircut, not some ghey undercut like every other footballer has.

I like him.
Click to expand...

His kicking is first class.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom