Helping the Doggies

[Z_K]

Let me firstly state that I do not begrudge the bullies any money/success etc.

However

Is anyone here slightly annoyed that of the two clubs that are in the most trouble financially, one of them seems to be getting favourable treatment in the media and from AFL heavyweights?

Eddie McGuire said he will give the bullies major sponser a free 10 minute plug on that 2 hour long self promotion crap he peddles out every Thursday. Wayne Jackson ambushed Richard Branson on radio to secure the doggies a major sponsor. And there is common theme in papers and TV news to "save the doggies" everytime there is an opportunity. This is all ok, and in a sense should happen more often, but I sense that it would not occur if North was involved.

My theory is that the footy world don't respond this way to us, because we basically slapped everyones arse in the 90's, and in doing so, shed the underdog tag, and envoked some jealousy and resentment amongst the rest of the comp.

Again, I will state that I have no problem with the bullies getting this type of help, but think it should be evenly spread. All of the sudden it is trendy to save the bullies, and leave North to fend for themselves with no assistance.

What are your thoughts? Am I being paranoid?

 

[Carlos]

NorthBhoy,

I dont think you're being paranoid mate. But i think it is also worth considering the perceptions that both clubs try to push of themselves.

Smorgan has no problem coming out and more or less getting on his hands and knees and admitting they are in all sorts.

Throughout the last 3 or 4 years, we, however, have always put up the facade that we are right. Miller always tried to give off the impression that everything was under control and almost tragically kept up the premise that we were a power, both on and off the field.

Add to that the fact that the Dogs are towing the line this year in that they have submitted their business plan and have been co-operating with the AFL in regards to meeting the criteria for assistance. We on the other hand haven't submitted our's (perhaps a key reason Easy is no longer at the club) and haven't exactly made it easy for ourselves.

I think it comes down to the fact that Smorgan is a better media performer and hasn't got a problem with teh possibility that the people outside his club might perceive him as being desperate and almost begging for help. We on the other hand, whether it be rightly or wrongly, are not.

 

[Z_K]

Carlos

All true.

I do think that North have a bigger supporter base than people think. The only way to get to these people is to get out there and tell them that their financial support will ensure the clubs future.

Smorgon has done alot for Footscray, but I fear they will stagnate in terms of their support, while I believe North have many more untapped supporters that I do not think have been sought out by the club as they could have been.

 

[Briedis]

Originally posted by NorthBhoy
I do think that North have a bigger supporter base than people think. The only way to get to these people is to get out there and tell them that their financial support will ensure the clubs future.

Agree with this statement on non-financial members. The club should spend a little bit of money and urge these Roos supporters to become members, through whatever media outlets that are available.

I don't begrudge the Doggies anything media-wise in their fight for survival. Good on them. Perhaps North should try and follow suit.

 

[spin]

Northbhoy,
I agree with your theory that we have more supporters out there, unfortunately though most of these people "say" they barrack for north but are casual tv supporters.
I know some of these people did attend some of our games in the mid 90's. This was a time when the team was continuously matching it against the top teams and alot of these games were on friday nights. I think most people remember this time, young team full of promise.....we just have to throw the new kids in, whether they are 100% ready or not. Carey,Longmire,Shwass,Rock,Crocker,Scoll and others were given there inductions while teenagers. The next group who have talent ready or not must be given their time.
We are not going to win another flag while the ageing players are still there. I love these players but the next group need a chance to provide some raw excitement back to the club.

 

[Carlos]

I think we are improving in this area, although it is very "slowly does it".

Self promotion has never really come naturally to our players or admin. We have always been a very "in-house" kind of club, despite have some of the most marketable players going around.

But having Doc Aylett, who is a very high-profile person for his various involvements in the VFL/AFL over time, back in charge is certainly a positive step towards improving this. You still get the feeling that the Glenn Archers and Anthony Stevens arent totally comfortable talking up the club in terms of trying to get the non-paid up supporter to become a member, but they still have a better crack, albeit a bit woodenly, whenever possible.

I think we really need to take advantage of the personalities of blokes like David King, who is a PR machine and an ultimate clubman, and Leigh Colbert and Adam Simpson, who are all very articulate and likeable characters.

 

[Briedis]

Originally posted by Carlos
I think we are improving in this area, although it is very "slowly does it".

Self promotion has never really come naturally to our players or admin. We have always been a very "in-house" kind of club, despite have some of the most marketable players going around.

But having Doc Aylett, who is a very high-profile person for his various involvements in the VFL/AFL over time, back in charge is certainly a positive step towards improving this. You still get the feeling that the Glann Archers and Anthony Stevens arent totally comfortable talking up the club in terms of trying to get the non-paid up supporter to become a member, but they still have a better crack, albeit a bit woodenly, whenever possible.

I think we really need to take advantage of the personalities of blokes like David King, who is a PR machine and an ultimate clubman, and Leigh Colbert and Adam Simpson, who are all very articulate and likeable characters.

That's an interesting point Carlos. I hadn't really thought about that before. Arch and Stevo are terrific on-field leaders, but they do not really lead the club off-field. I'm not saying it's a bad thing at all, and it probably isn't their job, but every club does have it's off-field stars as well and many of them are club captains. Hird, Buckley, Bickley, Kelly, Crawford etc. all spend many valuable hours promoting their clubs.

Hopefully our marketing/media department ask some of our boys to become more prominent in the media. David King has always been great and Carey did a great job for the club in that regard. Perhaps Shannon Grant, Spider Burton, Colbert and Simmo could all get out there now that duck is not there....

 

[tashibatts]

yeah hte Doggies do seem to be getting favored, but it doesnt help us trying to go "independently" or having Easy not make a business plan or nething.. I am glad Easy has gone.. I think it was the absolutely correct decision!

Go Roos

 

[mighty mick]

david king is the man for the job.

after his many appearances on the footy show , as an interviewer on kanga corner on fox footy, i have come to the decision that david king is the man to promote the club.

many players do thier media pr courses and kingy has done this,

along with his good sense of humor and is not easily phased when the footy show blokes try to put him off.

i might be living in the past on this one but the fridge is also a good media type.

when comes to the serious stuff leave it to allen aylett its all in those eyes they demand repect when he speaks..

 

[GoRoos]

Honesty and Transparancy

I'm very disappointed that Doc Aylett put the Kyber on the "Beware" campaign. I think this approach with people is perhaps the only way to get the barrackers to become supporters. I really believe in Honesty and Transparancy when it comes to the future of our club. I think the Beware compaign was a good way of publicly saying that "if you don't buy a membership now and support the club financially, you may not have a club to support at all".

I commend Smorgon for coming out and saying that the Doggies are in the financial sh_t. It's fairly apparent that this is the case anyway, with no major sponsor and other sponsors jumping off.
I believe it is better to "tell is how it is", than to try and paint a rosey picture and say everything is going to be OK; when this certainly isn't the case.

We have fewer members this year than any other club, this is the first time this has happened (in my short and vague memory).
Like the Doggies, we need to come out and say "For God's sake, buy a membership, we need the money to not only survive, but to be competitive."

The positive spin that the Doc has put on everything hasn't done it's job. I like the Doc, I think he has been terrific in tough times, but WE NEED MORE MEMBERS.

I'm not asking the Club to be super negative about everything, I'm just suggesting that they publish the costs of running the club versus our income, and people will be shocked and amazed. If this doesn't encourage people to buy a membership, then nothing will. Perhaps the reality of shocking people with where we are at financially, is the only way?

I don't know, but we need to try something new.

When it's all said and done..............Go Roos!

 

[mighty mick]

persistance pays off

sounds like the doggies may of snared virgin name brand as a half a million dollar sponsor for 11 games i think.

we have to keep working at it

 

[The Hippie]

Originally posted by Carlos

Add to that the fact that the Dogs are towing the line this year in that they have submitted their business plan and have been co-operating with the AFL in regards to meeting the criteria for assistance. We on the other hand haven't submitted our's (perhaps a key reason Easy is no longer at the club) and haven't exactly made it easy for ourselves.

This was in todays Hun regarding Richmond getting their $2m from the Waverly fund, part of which reads: 'All clubs are able to access $2 million from the sale of Waverly provided that the money is used for capital works or debt retirement and not absorbed into operating revenue.'

Why aren't we able to get our share of that money, isn't our $2+ million dollar deficit mainly from a bad debt regarding a loan to the social club? Something smells about this and it ain't fish.