Analysis What is it with Eddie and plans?

[Tas]

While I like Eddie thinking outside the box but it annoys me when this type of thing comes up for a few reasons:

• North Melbourne members won't vote for it. This is probably the number one reason why I can't see a plan like this getting off the ground.

This is the major issue everyone who comes up with us fails to take into consideration.
a) We wont vote for it.
b) AFL doesn't have the power to force us to relocate.
c) We aren't under any financial pressure, we have no debt and made a "profit" even during covid no crowds period.
d) The new stadium post AFL acquisition deal is a lot more favourable to clubs.
e) Other clubs are in a worse financial position than us and they are not under any pressure.
f) membership based increased despite winning the spoon and people expecting a tough rebuild.
g) AFL retains far too much of the broadcasting rights, we get $946m for 2023 and 2024, $473m per year. Broadcasting rights is 50% of the AFL revenue, they should run the competition with the 50% non broadcasting revenue and return all the broadcasting revenue to the clubs, that would be $26.27m, per club, per year. That would lead to higher salaries for players, clubs retaining bigger profits and have more scope for well paid assistants and money to spend on more community programs. We get about half of that.

Fox estimated the 10 year AFL distributions between 2012-2021 to be:
GWS $203m
GC $198m
Brisbane $160m
St Kilda $156m
Bulldogs $139m
North $134m

The top 4 only received $93-96m. Everyone is getting screwed in the current scenario, Whilst the teams who currently get a lot less from the AFL directly, they are often generating a significant amount thanks to a contrived system of inequitable access to FTA time slots which over a long period of time helps to promote support base growth, advertising and sponsorship revenue, etc. This isn't how other major sports are handled around the world.

AFL policy is to move away from cycles of boom and bust, they know it is more desirable to have any given team being able to win, it draws larger crowds, it generates more viewers but the current free agency system makes it easier to lose players as a struggling club and harder to acquire good quality players at the same time the AFL forces clubs to spend all their salary cap every year and expect a team to spend the same amount on assistants when their list is full of kids who need development as clubs who have mature teams that don't need as much development work.

IF Tasmania is economically viable with their own team then awesome, give them a license if it wont impact the existing clubs. But, the Tasmanian government should underwrite them that they will make up the shortfall between what they project and what become actual takings because the batshit metrics the AFL pushed to justify GWS and GC were pure fantasy and the rest of the clubs are footing that bill now.

We are doing fine, everyone who isn't a member should piss off and stop telling us what we should do, if you want to sell off your own clubs then have at it. All we want to see is the AFL to distribute all the broadcasting revenue equally to all the clubs, then they can get rid of this loaded system of handouts which they use to be able to manipulate clubs and force them to put up with unfair access to the FTA market which impacts all aspects of the commercial business.

 

[GWT6]

You’re either very simple or you are a comedian. Given those on Bigfooty are geniuses, you must be a comedian.

Quilty post. I like how you added no rational thought to the discussion. My favorite part was the insults.

10/10 - would waste my time responding to you again.

 

[Leeda]

startling revelations. but we know this, it is about whether Norf are going to be swept to the apple isle or else that it is a completely new franchise.
of course teams have to be able to win a few games or else they will just fracture and burn in the first year. Is it about the Tassie people, or about
getting a finger in every pie,, state.. etc.. I am of course only able to gloss over the surface but Gil doesn't have any greater idea about a Tassie
franch9se.. But they aren't McDonalds yet...

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

I've used some of the inspiration from Eddie's latest plan last night and heavily considered the thoughts of many posters in this group in regards to mergers/relocation/rationalisation. As per the McGuire method of project planning and idea selling I've also come prepared with a graphic to explain to the real dimwits.

Current State
It has come to my attention that the AFL competition is bloated with too many teams in a very small country with a stagnating population that no longer care for the game.

This is further emphasised in the state of Victoria where there are 10 teams all competing for market share.


Future Plan
RATIONALISE!

I cannot stress this enough, we need to get rid of multiple AFL teams!

Merge them, relocate them, kill them off. All strategies that I would advise until the competition is small but strong like Mighty Mouse.

So here's what we do.

Graphic for dimwits below....


Stage 1 - 2025

We go back to 2 clubs. Think about it, every week is a derby.


Club #1 - NORTH
Based out of Arden St, North Melbourne, playing home games at Marvel.

Using the metric of the club with the most media commentary in 2022 I can only assume that this is the largest Victorian club and therefore they shall remain in their current format as a merged entity created out of existing teams North Melbourne, Carlton, Western Bulldogs, Richmond, Hawthorn, St Kilda, Melbourne, Geelong, Collingwood.

You may notice that Essendon is not listed above. That's because North have turned the tables on the 1921 merger and offered them entry into the new league but instead took all of their players and reneged on the merger, so unfortunately Essendon is no longer.

Also North have survived mergers and relocation around a dozen times so we know they aren't going anywhere.


Club #2 - SOUTH
Based out of Sydney, playing home games at the SCG

A merged entity created out of existing team Sydney, GWS, Brisbane, Gold Coast, Adelaide, Port Adelaide, West Coast and Fremantle.

Reverting to their old name, South will be a worthy adversary of North and the TV ratings for the derby 22 rounds a year plus finals will be massive. It is a little concerning that South have already relocated once in their past, North will have to subsidise them for the first 30 years of the competition to ensure their survival.



Stage 2 - Estimated ~2040 onwards


Club #3 - WEST
Potentially if South remain viable for the first 15 years of the competition, we may think about de-merging the SA and WA teams and sending them back over to Perth to form a 3rd entity.

Unfortunately this would create a bye, not great for TV ratings.


Stage 4 - Estimated ~2050 onwards


Club #4 - NORTH 2
Obviously this requires the success of West but given the undeniable success of North 1, why wouldn't we create North 2 up there in the territory?

Sure there aren't many TV viewers up there but we've eliminated the bye now and the competition is still small enough to be at maximum strength......like Mighty Mouse.

 

[perplexed]

Like Eddie, I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately.

Traditionally the Melbourne clubs were named after the suburb in which they were based and this inter-suburban rivalry was an important part of the game’s popularity. I think a lot has been lost in the clubs moving yet retaining the names of suburbs they are no longer connected to. Clubs in other sports like the NFL don’t retain the name of the town they have left. Not sure why AFL clubs do. I think it is time to embrace new suburban rivalries based on the clubs’ new homes.

Here is a list of the updated club names. They sound better to me. I think it would avoid a lot of confusion too.


Carlton North Blues

Footscray Bulldogs

Jolimont Demons

Jolimont Tigers

Melbourne Magpies

Mulgrave Hawks

North Melbourne Kangaroos

Moorabbin Saints

Tullamarine Bombers


I would love to hear the thoughts of people who agree with me.

 

[Roylion]

Fitzroy which owed large amounts of money to creditors.

Fitzroy owed $1.25 million to one secured creditor which was not due to be paid back until 2001. Fitzroy was also servicing that debt.

 

[SBYM]

Wasn't the entire Richmond Station precinct supposed to be underground by now?? Or was it supposed to be on top of a giant pole??

I can't remember.

 

[Leeda]

Like Eddie, I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately.

Traditionally the Melbourne clubs were named after the suburb in which they were based and this inter-suburban rivalry was an important part of the game’s popularity. I think a lot has been lost in the clubs moving yet retaining the names of suburbs they are no longer connected to. Clubs in other sports like the NFL don’t retain the name of the town they have left. Not sure why AFL clubs do. I think it is time to embrace new suburban rivalries based on the clubs’ new homes.

Here is a list of the updated club names. They sound better to me. I think it would avoid a lot of confusion too.


Carlton North Blues

Footscray Bulldogs

Jolimont Demons

Jolimont Tigers

Melbourne Magpies

Mulgrave Hawks

North Melbourne Kangaroos

Moorabbin Saints

Tullamarine Bombers


I would love to hear the thoughts of people who agree with me.

daggers at twenty paces...can't you be more f.... writing on the wall..
it aint gonna happen..

 

[Leeda]

daggers at twenty paces...can't you be more f.... writing on the wall..
it aint gonna happen..

North is the target... and the collateral damage..

 

[perplexed]

daggers at twenty paces...can't you be more f.... writing on the wall..
it aint gonna happen..

Don't worry. Mulgrave will become Dingley soon enough, as long they manage to decontaminate Jeff's swamp.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Look at the size of this strawman!

Bigger than Ed's own ego.

Oh, so you reckon that proposing a club be relocated isn't disrespectful to their fans? Should they be thanking anyone who proposes moving their club somewhere else?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Fitzroy owed $1.25 million to one secured creditor which was not due to be paid back until 2001. Fitzroy was also servicing that debt.

So as I said, Fitzroy owed large amounts of money.

 

[windyhill]

isnt the fat bastard planning for the republic ?

 

[The 747]

For example, it’s no coincidence that shortly after Ed floated his “$1 Billion stadium next to the MCG” idea, that the AFL acquired what was then Etihad stadium for a good price.

Do tell how that amazing dumb plan to put Richmond station underground has anything to do with the AFL buying an asset - that they were always going to buy - early.

 

[Cleavy]

not saying they're good ideas...

 

[windyhill]

Multi millionaire talking about gas prices and lettuces. Arrogant *.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I remember that new stadium plan, for me it was the first time that he kinda publicly lost the plot.

I mean everybody knew he was always trying to get everything for Collingwood - that's ok - but his "plan" was just so nakedly stupid and self-serving that he really had to take everybody for idiots to suggest it publicly. He'd lost touch.

I mean let's not bullshit, the placement of a stadium right there - where the train lines and the basketball stadium already are - was the most stupid, expensive and crazy plan possible. There's other, far less developed land in the precinct. And even putting that aside, looking at the precinct, it's just about the worst spot for a new stadium - it's as far as you can get from existing transport infrastructure at Richmond and Jolimont stations.

Of course, what he wouldn't admit is that it was purely an idea to build Collingwood their ultimate home for the next hundred years. The single reason he placed it there was to create a perfect Collingwood precinct with the training centre, new stadium (60k for games against interstate opposition) and the G (for games against Melbourne clubs) all in a perfect row.

And he tried to sell it as his kinda "gift" to Melbourne. FFS Eddie, pull the other one. How stupid do you think people are?

It certainly wasn’t the most crazy stadium proposal. (Qatar World Cup? Beijing Bird’s nest?)

I don’t think it had anything to do with Collingwood. And it clearly wasn’t credible in the context of an Australian Infrastructure project. He was clearly doing it for other reasons.

 

[The 747]

It certainly wasn’t the most crazy stadium proposal. (Qatar World Cup? Beijing Bird’s nest?)

I don’t think it had anything to do with Collingwood. And it clearly wasn’t credible in the context of an Australian Infrastructure project. He was clearly doing it for other reasons.

It was an incredibly dumb proposal. That you have to go worldwide to find worse is not a great sign.

 

[Cool Kangas]

He has to come up with discussion points for Footy Classified, it gets people talking. And while he used North Melbourne as the example he did explain any struggling Victorian club could seek such an arrangement.

Define struggling? We’re not in 2007. Soooo he can basically **** off very very quickly. (But I’m not sure he can run that fast).

 

[parano1a]

Define struggling?

Drawing regular crowds of less than 15k for starters.

 

[Cool Kangas]

Drawing regular crowds of less than 15k for starters.

Don’t let our poor form hindering crowd numbers get in the way of a good story. Any team playing badly for a sustained period of time would be down on crowds.

But yeah you’re a Collingwood supporter so you’re ace and of course you’d support Eddie everywhere’s ideas.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

 

[RichLeMonde]

Just for this one , sure why not .

I thought maybe Bailey Smith was such a prolific hoover that he’d inspired a new colloquialism

 

[theyellowsash]

comes across as a guy who thinks hes smarter than he is.

 

[safeandsound]

It got so real it is now referred to as a Cokeleeism .