The Cut the Teams/Too Many Teams in Victoria thread

Remove this Banner Ad

madmug

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 17, 2009
18,587
12,973
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
Well if he wants all "vfl" clubs gone why is Sydney exempt?
Dont ask me, I've not said get rid of all 'VFL' clubs in the AFL & start again. Its not going to happen anyway.

When It comes to an argument about the total number of clubs playing out of Melbourne, one could say their are too many. Perhaps at least that some of them have been very poorly performed for decades despite massive AFL support for them & the equalising factor of the salary cap & the Draft system. Those clubs could be held to account, & perhaps sent back to the VFL.

Maybe its not just a lack of player talent, maybe also a lack of good footy club Presidents & quality board members & managers in Melbourne for the shear number of clubs?
 

Rotayjay

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 28, 2014
9,351
16,673
Adelaide, South Australia
AFL Club
Adelaide
It ain't 50/50, but it ain't the oft quoted 70/30 either.
I've sometimes tried to guess the breakdown of footy supporters in South Australia (if the ones who don't support football are discounted). I'd say that about 5-15% support non-SA clubs. Hawthorn, Carlton and Collingwood seem to be the most popular. If those supporters are discounted too, I think it's around about Crows 60-65%, Power 35-40%. Probably more towards 60:40 these days to be honest.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

telsor

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2004
33,437
32,578
Here
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Habs
Dont ask me, I've not said get rid of all 'VFL' clubs in the AFL & start again. Its not going to happen anyway.

When It comes to an argument about the total number of clubs playing out of Melbourne, one could say their are too many. Perhaps at least that some of them have been very poorly performed for decades despite massive AFL support for them & the equalising factor of the salary cap & the Draft system. Those clubs could be held to account, & perhaps sent back to the VFL.

Maybe its not just a lack of player talent, maybe also a lack of good footy club Presidents & quality board members & managers in Melbourne for the shear number of clubs?
They can't be 'sent back to the VFL'. The VFL (as it was) is now the AFL. What is now called the VFL used to be the VFA, and just because they use the old name doesn't make them the old comp. (yes the clubs did come from the VFA, that was ~100 years ago so doesn't really count).

The other problem is that the VFL is a disaster...Mostly it's just the AFL reserves for Vic clubs, playing againsta couple of independents. (you complain about what AFLTas has done to local football down there, they've destroyed local 'state league' footy in Vic).
 

fabulousphil

Cancelled
Nov 29, 2001
10,927
3,083
perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
freo
I've sometimes tried to guess the breakdown of footy supporters in South Australia (if the ones who don't support football are discounted). I'd say that about 5-15% support non-SA clubs. Hawthorn, Carlton and Collingwood seem to be the most popular. If those supporters are discounted too, I think it's around about Crows 60-65%, Power 35-40%. Probably more towards 60:40 these days to be honest.
As a non Croweater i always understood that the Adelaide/Port split was around 70/30 or even worse for Port.

At a guess in WA (around where i live ) it would be 75/25 to the Eagles, however i live North of the River.
 

Rotayjay

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 28, 2014
9,351
16,673
Adelaide, South Australia
AFL Club
Adelaide
As a non Croweater i always understood that the Adelaide/Port split was around 70/30 or even worse for Port.

At a guess in WA (around where i live ) it would be 75/25 to the Eagles, however i live North of the River.
Nah, in reality it is getting somewhat even (especially when Port Adelaide are playing well). The youngsters in particular are attracted more to the Power, when parents let them choose either. Port are more trendy at the moment, and I blame our onfield performance and off-field marketing.
 

Roylion

Moderator
Oct 17, 2000
15,988
12,958
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
How was your lunch? Did you think up any new theories along the way?
New theories about what?

Would the profits have much chance of increasing to a level to pay off the 2.7million significantly? How were the profits derived? Sale of assets at higher than book value? Would they have had sufficient cash flow to compete with the bigger clubs?
See below.

I knew you would throw this one into the ring. Wasn't Michael Brennan the administrator? What's his view?
Michael Brennan passed away a few years ago in 2004.

Is this the same Greg Swann who is now looking down the barrel of a $8million+ debt (not of his fault) at Brisbane and couldn't get Carlton out of mediocrity after getting Judd?
The same Greg Swann who worked as an accountant for Ernst and Young in 1996 and was brought in by the administrator to look at Fitzroy's finances. The same Greg Swann that oversaw Collingwood's financial improvement.

Borrowing money from Nauru. Was this an unhedged loan or a hedged loan? Were the interest rates subject to changes in interest rates on Nauru or Australia? Were some of the profits caused by the change in exchange rates?
Nauru first lent money to Fitzroy in October 1994. That loan was $1.2 million for seven years and was to paid back by 2001. Unhedged. Australian interest rates.

The Fitzroy board decided to open merger discussions with another club because Nauru at the end of 1995 reneged on their agreement to advance $500,000 sponsorship to Fitzroy they had previously agreed to. This was due to a change of government in Nauru on 28th November 1995.

Subsequently North Melbourne and the AFL, conspired to short change Nauru in any North-Fitzroy merger and Nauru appointed an administrator to Fitzroy to recover their $1.25 million, before that could take place.

How did they conspire? Because the AFL proposed that under the terms of the AFL merger agreement with North Melbourne, Fitzroy Football Club Ltd. would cease to exist., thereby negating any debt and leaving creditors high and dry. The AFL had already done that with the Sydney Swans, when they formed a new company to hold their licence and had already proposed that a new company run by the AFL called "Fitzroy Lions Pty. Ltd" would take over Fitzroy's licence for the express purpose of winding the club up. Nauru were furious when Fitzroy informed them of the AFL proposal, because that would have left them without any recourse to reclaim their loan. When North subsequently refused to pay any more than $550,000 to Nauru in settlement of the $1,25 million debt. Nauru called in an administrator to recover their money before the merger was signed, sealed and delivered.

Playing games at Princes Park (twice).
Well let’s take a look at each of these in turn. Princes Park is below.

Not upgrading Brunswick Oval (not thinking long term).
Fitzroy left Brunswick Street Oval because the ground facilities became unfit for VFL football and it had no power to fix said facilities.

Unfortunately it was the Fitzroy Cricket Club that controlled the ground...not the Football Club. While the local council refused to spend any money on the ground, the far wealthier Fitzroy Cricket Club also refused to spend any money.

Fitzroy Football Club paid the cricket club to use the ground and about a thousand cricket club members got into the ground for free every weekend to watch football.

The football club proposed a number of initiatives to try and stay at the BSO which was still their heartland. They suggested that the Fitzroy Cricket Club and the Fitzroy Football Club form one club, which the cricket club rejected. (this happened at Carlton). An offer by Fitzroy Football Club to borrow $400,000 from the council to upgrade the ground was also rejected by the Cricket Club. The football club also wanted a forty year lease which was opposed by the Council, although the council had agreed to give them a 21 year lease with no funds for subsequent improvement, which the football club found unacceptable, given tht the Cricket Club still controlled the ground.

Meanwhile of course players didn’t want to play for Fitzroy because of the poor facilities and often went to neighbouring clubs Carlton and Collingwood because of their better facilities and ground arrangements, and according to Billy Stephens, their better ability to find them jobs from industry and other places located in their larger geographical area . Note that when Fitzroy was on or close to the bottom of the ladder in 1963-66, this co-incided with the worst disrepair of Brunswick Street in its history.

After the Brunswick Street football rooms were finally condemned by the local council health officer, which made them unusable, Fitzroy made a number of approaches to share grounds with Northcote and Preston in the VFA. But these came to nothing.

Fitzroy would have moved to the Junction Oval for the 1967 season where the St Kilda Cricket Club wanted them as a tenant, but a large number of St Kilda Cricket Club members and supporters opposed the move and it was quashed. Fitzroy instead had no choice but to go to Princes Park instead for the 1967, 1968 and 1969 seasons, when it finally negotiated a successful move to the Junction Oval for the 1970 season.

Interestingly when the Fitzroy City Council heard that Fitzroy were set to leave Princes Park they made an approach to the Fitzroy to return to the Brunswick Street Oval. Fitzroy Football Club agreed to return if ground works, including extensive improvements to the outer were carried out and new player rooms and public toilets were built. Unfortunately no agreement could be reached between the Council, the Cricket Club and the Football Club over what ground improvements were needed.

Finally Fitzroy went to the Junction Oval for the 1970 season. It was a far better deal than what was on offer at Carlton. At the Junction Oval Fitzroy got a third of the car-parking money for the first ten years and received a non-repayable loan from the Albert Park Trust to spend on the Junction Oval to upgrade it to a VFL standard ground. Not to mention the Junction Oval had one of the best surfaces of all VFL grounds.

Fitzroy stayed at the Junction Oval until 1984 when they were forced by the VFL into a ground sharing arrangement with first Collingwood and then Carlton, due to the VFL’s ground rationalisation policy. The reason for this is that while the Junction Oval had quite good facilities, it wasn’t quite up to what the VFL wanted in terms of reserved seating corporate boxes, private boxes and catering. The VFL weren’t prepared to put in extra money and ground sharing was thought the way to go, where the VFL would put money into only a few venues. Fitzroy would have liked a move to the MCG, but North, Richmond and Melbourne were already sharing the ground. Victoria Park was first chosen because of its close proximity to Fitzroy and better access to public transport, but the poor deal and the treatment by Collingwood who had the upper hand, meant that Princes Park became the only other option for a while.

Moving to Western Oval.
This has already been explained already, but I’ll do it again. The reason for the move to the Western Oval, was because Fitzroy wasn’t making any money out of Princes Park, leading to significant overall losses.

Fitzroy’s existing six year lease of Princes Park from 1987-1992 was unsatisfactory compared to what the Western Bulldogs offered. Over the head of Fitzroy, the AFL had guaranteed Carlton 22 matches at Princes Park from 1993-2000 irrespective of whether Fitzroy played there or not. Therefore Fitzroy had no bargaining power to negotiate a better ground deal with Carlton. When Carlton presented Fitzroy with a poorer deal than the 1987-1992 lease in 1993, Fitzroy had to either accept a deal in which they would make no ground revenue or consider a move. The negotiations dragged on so long that in 1993, Fitzroy played at Princes Park without a lease and received a bill for $6,000 from Carlton as their 1993 revenue from the home ground. Yet Fitzroy still made a profit that year due to other new sources of revenue they had developed.

In terms of making money from home grounds, there were three areas that were lucrative at the time: ground advertising, catering and income from reserve seating.

Princes Park lease: Fitzroy gained a small amount of income from perimeter fence advertising, nothing at all from other ground advertising, none from catering and a small amount from reserve seating. No wonder Fitzroy made losses every year – they were gaining very little income from their home ground and hadn’t done so – since they were forced to leave the Junction Oval in 1984.

Western Oval lease: For their home games, Fitzroy received all revenue from nearly all advertising space at the ground as well as all reserve set revenue, all car-parking revenue, as well as having free access to all corporate facilities and all outer ground catering rights. Just by moving to the Western Oval, Fitzroy made an extra $400,000 per year.

Playing games in Tasmania.
This was rather innovative actually.

Fitzroy was given no financial assistance to play home games in Tasmania (despite pioneering the move), paying all associated expenses out of its own pocket.

Now of course, the AFL pays all airfares and costs for clubs selling their home games.

Allowing membership to grow old without the following generation.
See the info above on the move from Brunswick Street Oval.

How is it Richmond and Footscray, who went to supporters for donations able to get out of trouble but your lot couldn't. Given Richmond is inner city like Collingwood and Carlton.
Footscray would also be gone if not for AFL support – especially the tidy sum of $8.4 million extra gifted to the Bulldogs between 2002-2009. Peter Smorgon has admitted as such as far back as 2001 and again in 2006.

And in fact Fitzroy went to their supporters twice, in 1985 and also again in 1991, when over $800,000 was raised. Both times the money raised, allowed the club to continue in the AFL.

You have proof the AFL commission told sponsors not to support Fitzroy? How do you know these organisations didn't come to that conclusion on their own using their own projection models?
Dyson Hore-Lacy has told me that personally on at least two occasions. Not only were the AFL leaking Fitzroy’s financial details to the press (hello Mike Sheahan), who would then write a negative story about Fitzroy, the AFL were also showing Fitzroy’s finances to prospective sponsors and telling them that sponsoring Fitzroy wasn’t worth their while. The AFL certainly didn’t want a “White Knight” in the mold of Bernie Ahern, coming along and ruining their ‘five year plan’. Over fifty of Australia’s largest companies were approached by Fitzroy in 1995 and 1996 for sponsorship, but none agreed.

The AFL were also serving insolvency notices to Fitzroy and leaking that to the press. ASIC, after an investigation in 1996, found that Fitzroy was in fact solvent. All the legal advice taken by the Fitzroy directors indicated that while they did have cash flow problems, the company was solvent (and indeed making a small annual profit). Still as a result of the AFL's actions, a number of Fitzroy sponsors cut their sponsorship or reduced it, making their task of staying in the AFL competition even more difficult.

Canberra. My recollection is that Fitzroy planned to play in the rugby dominated suburb of Bruce (the stadium is a narrow cake tin), next to the AIS. Home of the Brumbies and Raiders. Having lived in Canberra, the northern suburbs are dominated by the rugby codes and they would have benefited from playing out at Manuka on the south side.
As I’ve already said, playing 4-7 home games in Canberra, Fitzroy's projections were they could have made $1 million extra per season. Fitzroy's application to play home games in Canberra had the support of 'AFL for Canberra' organisation, the Canberra Raiders, the Ainslee Football Club and the ACT chief minister who had offered for the ACT government to upgrade Bruce Stadium as the home-ground of Fitzroy and the Raiders. Located adjacent to the AIS, it would have had further benefits for Fitzroy’s players. Bruce Stadium also had a capacity of 25,000 compared to Manuka’s 15,000.

However the AFL point blank refused to entertain the idea. An AFL commissioner (guess who?) later admitted on 21st November 1995 that the reason why the AFL knocked Fitzroy’s proposal back was because they wanted Port Adelaide in the competition and therefore wanted to keep the pressure on Fitzroy to merge. They knew that the Canberra proposal, given the widespread support for it in Canberra, was an AFL life-line to Fitzroy…another “White Knight” so to speak, that the AFL didn’t want.

Well they gave money in 1996 so that you could get through the season.
Bollocks.

The AFL told Fitzroy in January 1996, that no financial assistance would be forthcoming unless Fitzroy was prepared to guarantee a merger by 31st October 1996. The club was told quite unequivocally by Ross Oakley that supporting Fitzroy was not part of their ‘five year plan” which was to remove at least one Melbourne club. In fact the AFL proposed the winding up of Fitzroy Football Club Ltd., issuing Fitzroy’s licence to new entity called Fitzroy Lions Pty. Ltd, owned and run by the AFL, which would then be underwritten by the AFL to then tune of $650,000 and would merge with whoever the AFL decided at the end of the year. The members and shareholders of Fitzroy would get no say. The proposal had to be accepted by April 30th or otherwise would be withdrawn.

Only after engineering the Brisbane Bears ‘merger’ and that was a condition of the merger agreement did the AFL 'fund' Fitzroy. Michael Brennan the administrator made it quite clear that Fitzroy would not take the field on Saturday July 6th. The AFL threatened to pull Fitzroy’s licence on July 4th unless the administrator approved a merger with Brisbane that night, despite earlier giving North and Fitzroy until 5 pm on July 5th to agree on a merger (which they had).

Only when the AFL’s approved merger had been affected, did the AFL agree to fund Fitzroy…sort of. In fact Article 4.1 of the Deed of Arrangement said that the Brisbane Bears would procure the AFL to pay Fitzroy monies to get it through the AFL season up to $1 million. Any amount larger than this would be advanced to Fitzroy by a Brisbane Bears loan. Guess where all that money came from? Yep…the $6,000,000 merger fund, granted by the AFL to any two clubs who wished to merge. That went from the AFL to the Brisbane Bears who then funded Fitzroy. Brisbane received far less than their $6 million in the end.

They were just so supportive, the AFL, weren’t they? Bless their little hearts.

Supported the Footscray merger.
Not out of the goodness of their hearts. They wanted a club out of Melbourne. Footscray were told to agree or face immediate withdrawal of their licence. Fitzroy were approached as a possible merger partner and given the favourable terms they agreed.

I grow tired. I have other threads that are more interesting to spend another 10 minutes on.
That’s nice. Away you go then.
 
Last edited:

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Jul 2, 2010
34,686
32,500
Scamander
AFL Club
Carlton

Proof or GTFO
There isnt proof. Gold Coast recieved 2 million more than the Western Bulldogs, and are decreasing every year. GWS took almost 8 million more than the Western Bulldogs. The Western Bulldogs are the clubhouse leader for AFL distributions amongst every other club.

That said, the $200 million budget is probably going to be exceeded. Although it depends on the accounting and whther it means 200 million in addition to the standard AFL distribution per club or not.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Demz

All Australian
Suspended
May 12, 2015
737
183
New South Wales
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Box Hill Hawks
Um no.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Yes there is, the AFL have stuffed it up by introducing 2 more teams that wont be able to frinancially support themselves, when you got teams in Victoria that are struggling here comes the AFL with the bright idea to install 2 more, , without Buddy Franklin in Sydney even the Swans were struggling. , Port Adelaide are struggling . Geelong arent to good either. the AFL have a lot to answer for. , even st.kilda are struggling , the BrisbANE Lions are how Much in debt? all due to the fact that the Gold Coast Suns are now there thats hurt the Lions
 

General Giant

Hall of Famer
Apr 12, 2012
41,419
34,899
AFL Club
GWS
Yes there is, the AFL have stuffed it up by introducing 2 more teams that wont be able to frinancially support themselves, when you got teams in Victoria that are struggling here comes the AFL with the bright idea to install 2 more, , without Buddy Franklin in Sydney even the Swans were struggling. , Port Adelaide are struggling . Geelong arent to good either. the AFL have a lot to answer for. , even st.kilda are struggling
I repeat. No

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad