Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine....

[bloodsports]

http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=263270

But the fact is that the weak clubs in Melbourne are not generating enough income becuase not enough viewers are watching them each week either on the TV nor at the game.


How Smorgan the leader of one of the most struggeling clubs in the league IE: the Bulldogs got the job of addressing the press is beyond me. his credentials surley must be called into question.

But the fact remains, the AFL could pay these clubs 4 miilion each a year and in 10 years time we will still have a number of struggeling clubs in Melbourne who will still be trying to get hand outs from the AFL.

If the AFL do not force a relocation within the next 3 years, they are as week as pi$$ and they deserve to have there strategic advances swallowed up by a more aggressive NRL administration.

Make no mistake, that is what is a stake. You either maintain every club in the state that it would like to be for the next 10 years, or you opt to have a truely national competition.

despite their current windfall, in the long term the AFL can only afford the latter option.

 

[bloodsports]

When are the AFL going to bite the bullet and stop morons with no economic sense emotionaly highjacking the argument ???

 

[catters05]

9 clubs in 2 Stadiums in Melbourne CBD......enough said.

Geelong playing out of Kardinia Park = Good money.

AFL should invest in ground/s in outer melbourne for more market share. Don't destroy the heart of a city by taking out clubs. Melbourne Footy Culture is unreal, relocating/merging will start to kill it. Also AFL will own Telstra Dome and can use this as a really nice investment and footy ground.

Gold Coast should have a new license.

 

[FrangaRoo]

The fact that this person answered their own thread because no one had yet taken the bait, shows that they have some sort of obsession with this subject.

Which is kind of sad...obviously not much going on in their life.

 

[Flag Man]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

Strange that you bothered to post this article, as it'hardly troll-worthy.

PRESIDENTS DEMAND MORE

With the dissection of the AFL's biggest-ever revenue pie on the table, all 16 club presidents were united in their demand for an increase in annual revenue distribution at a meeting with league executives on Thursday.

The AFL is currently going through the process of deciding how to distribute approximately $1.4 billion over the next five years, and the clubs' representatives left the AFL in no doubt as to how they thought the money should be spent.

"We believe that the 16 clubs have all contributed to the health of the game … but the only area of vulnerability at the moment when you look at the competition is the financial health of some of the clubs and the 16 clubs said today that that needs addressing," Bulldogs president David Smorgon said on behalf of the presidents.

"We've all got the interests of the game at heart, but we've also got our own interests to protect, and the 16 clubs are the shareholders of the AFL and there's obvious concerns with the financial state of some of the clubs and that's the issue that needs to be addressed."

West Coast president Dalton Gooding echoed those sentiments and emphasised the importance of 16 financially viable clubs to the ongoing health of the AFL.

"I think what we've got at the moment is a very strong parent company in the AFL and we've got 16 subsidiaries, some of which are not strong and I think that will eventually drag down the parent company," he said.

"So, if we can get the subsidiaries all strong or breaking even, that helps the parent company, which helps the competition, which helps the game."

At the heart of the clubs' proposal is an increase of $2 million in the annual revenue distribution from the AFL which will, in effect, see each clubs' total player payments (TTP) bill paid by the league each year.

"At the moment there's a gap between the base TPP and what we receive from the AFL - we want that equated," said Gooding.

The presidents agreed with the concept of the AFL's proposed 'future fund' which will be used to generate income streams for the league down the track and also made it clear that they want to see an increase in prize money for the eventual premiers each year.

Smorgon said the relocation of any of the 10 Victorian clubs had not even been tabled for discussion and that the funding increases - along with the continuance of the current Annual Special Distributions scheme - would allow poorer clubs like his own to "get their house in order" and bridge the gap between themselves and the stronger clubs.

He admitted the fund distribution was a difficult balancing act for the AFL and the commission to pull off, but argued it was high time the clubs were looked after.

"I think on balance you could say that the players have been well looked after and yes they're entitled to another increase - no club is denying that - but it's the extent of that increase, the extent of the increase in game development, the extent of the new creation of the future fund - that's the money we're looking at and we believe we've got to put the clubs first," he said.

"The competition will thrive if 16 clubs are profitable and running effectively and efficiently. The majority of the clubs are - there's been a big improvement over recent years - but the challenge for all of us as an industry is to make sure that we all remain healthy."


All sounds good to me.

 

[raman]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

AFL should invest in ground/s in outer melbourne for more market share. Don't destroy the heart of a city by taking out clubs. Melbourne Footy Culture is unreal, relocating/merging will start to kill it.

Did taking away South and Fitzroy kill it?

 

[campbell]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

Did taking away South and Fitzroy kill it?

They didn't care about that.

If they are given this money now. I assume that the CBF is squashed.

 

[Flag Man]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

They didn't care about that.

If they are given this money now. I assume that the CBF is squashed.

On what logic do you base that assumption?

 

[campbell]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

If the dividend goes up by 2 million a year, are you saying you still want the 1.5 million as well. So that would be and extra 3.5 million plus the normal dividend as well.

Seriously you are kidding if you think you can keep the CBF money as well.

 

[go dogs 05]

http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=263270

But the fact is that the weak clubs in Melbourne are not generating enough income becuase not enough viewers are watching them each week either on the TV nor at the game.


How Smorgan the leader of one of the most struggeling clubs in the league IE: the Bulldogs got the job of addressing the press is beyond me. his credentials surley must be called into question.

But the fact remains, the AFL could pay these clubs 4 miilion each a year and in 10 years time we will still have a number of struggeling clubs in Melbourne who will still be trying to get hand outs from the AFL.

If the AFL do not force a relocation within the next 3 years, they are as week as pi$$ and they deserve to have there strategic advances swallowed up by a more aggressive NRL administration.

Make no mistake, that is what is a stake. You either maintain every club in the state that it would like to be for the next 10 years, or you opt to have a truely national competition.

despite their current windfall, in the long term the AFL can only afford the latter option.

How can you question D Smorgan credentials. He is an extremely successful business man (one of the richest in the country) and has done a wonderful job keeping the club viable in the past few years (you can go on about the 1M handout, but how does the club raise its other 19M in revenue)

Pull your head out of the sand and look at the facts:
Bulldogs currently have record membership and sponsorship
Finally have a side that is going to play regular finals football in the next few years
Spending 20M redeveloping their ground (which includes function centres etc that will bring new revenue streams to the club)
Drawing big crowds at Dome this year (over 40K at both Rich and Geel and clearly out numbered opposition supporters in the crowd)

Our supporters are as proud and as passionate as any and are sick to death of the dribble served up by people like yourself

by the way lets see what the swans crowds would be like in Sydney WHEN you have 2 seasons like we did in 2003-2004

 

[bloodsports]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

If the dividend goes up by 2 million a year, are you saying you still want the 1.5 million as well. So that would be and extra 3.5 million plus the normal dividend as well.

Seriously you are kidding if you think you can keep the CBF money as well.

This is exactly what these morons want. Nothing short of 4 million dollars a year to keep their difunctional teams afloat as long as possible until the enevitable happens.


Please please please AFL do something before these morons take over the competition completely.

You can not have teams functioning at million dollar loses year in year out and expect the league to flourish.

Get real.

 

[Flag Man]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

.........You can not have teams functioning at million dollar loses year in year out and expect the league to flourish...........

Get real.

And yet the league still flourishes.

 

[go dogs 05]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

This is exactly what these morons want. Nothing short of 4 million dollars a year to keep their difunctional teams afloat as long as possible until the enevitable happens.


Please please please AFL do something before these morons take over the competition completely.

You can not have teams functioning at million dollar loses year in year out and expect the league to flourish.

Get real.

The government and AFL would continually invest in the Bulldogs (and other clubs) if they didn't believe that they have a viable future

All clubs contribute to TV money and don't give me this rubbish that no one watches certain clubs on TV. Friday football rates in Melb/Adel/Pert top 20 programs each week regardless of who is playing

8 games each allow the AFL to program games in all parts of Aust

The game has never been healthier - attendances, tv ratings and $$. What is your problem

And to think I was glad the Swans won the flag for its long suffering supporters! and we cop this attitude

 

[Andrew Mc]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

And to think I was glad the Swans won the flag for its long suffering supporters! and we cop this attitude

Please don't associate this fool with the Swans - a supporter of them he is not.

 

[catters05]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

Did taking away South and Fitzroy kill it?

There are currently about 4 games a weekend in Melbourne, you take another couple of teams out that drops down. AFL will lose its market share in Melbourne which means less money, also means the cost of hosting games at TD and MCG will increase causing more problems for the clubs next in line as you say to be chopped, because they are not as rich as Collingwood.

Western Bulldogs and the Kangaroos in todays time are not in as bad situation as Fitzroy or South melbourne. Also the old VFL/AFL did not have any money compared to what today's AFL has to look after these clubs.

Remember Collingwood were in the crapper too, but they were able to rebuild thanks to the great drawing power they have. Geelong was in the crap as well, but thanks to the these legends that took over the club they are looking more healthy then ever.

Should we of scrapped then?

THE BIG PROBLEM for these smaller clubs is that they all are trying to be run like Collingwood. The AFL should invest some money into outer Melbourne, build it and they will come. Hawks back in the East. Doggies in the West....etc.

Look at Geelong and Kardinia Park, some of these smaller clubs should be looking at how to do this and not how to run like the COLLINGWOOD FC. They don't have Collingwood drawing power.

I am all for expansion of the game, but not at the cost of a club that only costs the AFL $1m - $1.5 to look after each season. This could change if the AFL invested into outer Melbourne.

Gold Coast will cost a lot more then that to keep running and with Carrara requiring upgrades, it will be expensive. Definately worth it, and thats why they should get a new license.

Also, unless you win Lotto, you got to be in debt to get rich.....

 

[medusala]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

West Coast president Dalton Gooding echoed those sentiments and emphasised the importance of 16 financially viable clubs to the ongoing health of the AFL.

Didnt mention the importance of the location of the 16 clubs.

Smorgon said the relocation of any of the 10 Victorian clubs had not even been tabled for discussion and that the funding increases - along with the continuance of the current Annual Special Distributions scheme - would allow poorer clubs like his own to "get their house in order" and bridge the gap between themselves and the stronger clubs.

How is giving all clubs $2m extra going to bridge the gap between rich and poor?

So Smorgon is aqrguing for $2m extra on top of $2m CBF by the looks of it.

AFLPA sure to be impressed.

 

[bloodsports]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

And yet the league still flourishes.

Only at the moment on the back of Swans and Lions premierships in recent years.

Should both those teams fall down the ladder for a prolonged period, and should 10 teams remain in Melbourne, with the AFL paying out massive dividends to the clubs, a turn around for the negative would very very quickly arise.

Wake up !!!

 

[Flag Man]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

Only at the moment on the back of Swans and Lions premierships in recent years.

Should both those teams fall down the ladder for a prolonged period, and should 10 teams remain in Melbourne, with the AFL paying out massive dividends to the clubs, a turn around for the negative would very very quickly arise.

Wake up !!!

Your arguments get more pathetic by the post.

 

[Flag Man]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

How is giving all clubs $2m extra going to bridge the gap between rich and poor?

So Smorgon is aqrguing for $2m extra on top of $2m CBF by the looks of it.

AFLPA sure to be impressed.

Ask Chad Morrison how much clout the AFLPA has.

BF has more punch than the AFLPA.

 

[catters05]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

Only at the moment on the back of Swans and Lions premierships in recent years.

Should both those teams fall down the ladder for a prolonged period, and should 10 teams remain in Melbourne, with the AFL paying out massive dividends to the clubs, a turn around for the negative would very very quickly arise.

Wake up !!!

New licenses for these areas, NSW and QLD people will follow a team from their home, AFL cannot afford to wait for 25 years for support like the Sydney Swans/South Melbourne. New licenses.

If the AFL were smart, they would get two new licenses ready for the next bargaining agreeement 2012 or whatever it is, so the TV market will look after these 2 new clubs.

Brisbane have invested in readiness for this with all the cash in the bank, will be interesting to see when there crowds will drop below 30K. Must of been a while for that.

Massive dividends.....hardly in the big scheme of things. I think Sydney get looked after a bit too.

First you want to get rid of the Bulldogs and Kangas, then that will cause financial strain on Demons....to whoever else. Get rid of them too. What happens if Port have financial problems again, get rid of them? and if the Swans are making no money??? Its a poor way of trying to run a comp, something is a little hard, so get rid of it!!!

It is a challenge for the AFL, to hold onto the culture of Melbourne/Victoria and expand the Competition into NSW and QLD. It can be done and removing teams is not the way to do it.

 

[bloodsports]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

Your arguments get more pathetic by the post.

Your an idiot and your team is the first one to go, so get back to me in 10 years and we will see how your logic is going sweet-heart.

Your team is gone and for all the right reasons , so get used to it.

 

[bloodsports]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

New licenses for these areas, NSW and QLD people will follow a team from their home, AFL cannot afford to wait for 25 years for support like the Sydney Swans/South Melbourne. New licenses.

If the AFL were smart, they would get two new licenses ready for the next bargaining agreeement 2012 or whatever it is, so the TV market will look after these 2 new clubs.

.....
It is a challenge for the AFL, to hold onto the culture of Melbourne/Victoria and expand the Competition into NSW and QLD. It can be done and removing teams is not the way to do it.

I don't think the AFL are that smart.

But even if they were there are still too many teams in melbourne.

 

[Flag Man]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

Your an idiot and your team is the first one to go, so get back to me in 10 years and we will see how your logic is going sweet-heart.

Your team is gone and for all the right reasons , so get used to it.

What solid logic do you have to back up your stance?

The NMFC, AFL and some club presidents, don't support your views.

 

[catters05]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

But even if they were there are still too many teams in melbourne.

WHY?

 

[FrangaRoo]

Re: Listening to Smorgans Rhetoric, one would think that the weak clubs will be fine.

Your an idiot and your team is the first one to go, so get back to me in 10 years and we will see how your logic is going sweet-heart.

Your team is gone and for all the right reasons , so get used to it.

You will be in a mental institution or a ditch in 10 years, so probably no point getting back to you.