News NMFC & Tassie (the mass debate re our future there, the academy, attending advice)

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Roogal said:
I really don't believe that Tassie are that interested in us as a long-term proposition. The relationship is one of convenient bed-fellows while Tassie lacks its own AFL team. If granted an AFL licence from 2025, Tassie will likely tell North Melbourne and Hawthorn that their contracts are not going to be extended beyond season 2024. This of course leaves North with a significant planning dilemma. Do we finally hedge our bets and play all 11 home games per season at Marvel Stadium and seek to fully reclaim our Melbourne base, or do we look for an alternate venue to sell games as the Bulldogs have done with Ballarat?

I would consider that if this option is pursued that Bendigo possibly might be a hidden solution. Being similar in size to Ballarat and located roughly 130 km NW of Melbourne, Bendigo has a very good AFL oval in its city heart and if North were to bid early, we might convince the State Government to invest $30 million upgrading the Queen Elizabeth Oval which is earmarked for use as a T20 venue for the 2026 Commonwealth Games. Our pitch would be that we would use it for 3 AFL football games per-season after the Commonwealth Games. $30 mil would upgrade the lighting, put in a new video scoreboard and build a grandstand on the Northern flank (the non-historic side) of the oval to seat 10-12,000. The ground would then have a capacity of around 16-18,000. I would imagine that the Bendigo Council might be eager to get a stadium to rival Ballarat's Mars Stadium, which has been a rub point in the Bendigo football community.

Consider that the Western Bulldogs get sponsored by both the Ballarat Council and the State Government for playing two games and an AFLW game in Ballarat each season.

The benefit of pushing for Bendigo may offer the same benefits to us to fill the void created by loss of sponsorship and some Tasmanian membership that would result from separating from Hobart. The other advantage of Bendigo is that our Melbourne based supporters can access the Bendigo games far easier than Hobart with Bendigo being accessible by both car and train.

It's food for thought.
Click to expand...
No room for a Grandstand on the Northern side without encroaching on the pool or getting ride of the netball courts. Neither of which will happen.
 
Mr Lloyd Christmas said:
My apologies.

This "Boomer Roo" has no idea and it's annoying.
Click to expand...
Saintly/Choppy or whoever you want to be now, whatever you think you know, fine! But I think it's time you got someone to tuck you back into your bed, mummy perhaps?

You've embarrassed yourself so many times here before, so please, don't stop now!
 
I do not see why everyone needs to get on north because we are currently bottom dwellers. There are a lot of kids and not the best set of senior players going around to show the way. Not all our senior players are duds, but I mean there aren't many great ones on the deck with cunners off. Is that our fault, yeah it is.

I don't really want to entertain a nightmare scenario where north can't pay the bills, nor do I think that is fair or reasonable. I will say though that I don't hold quite as much spite at the prospect of tassie as I did with GC. GC represented the antithesis of North Melbourne.
 
Hojuman said:
Any Tassie team is going to need concessions, esp.player wise. Since the introduction of GWS & G.C.;
. Hawthorn 13, 14, 15.
. Tigers 17, 19, 20.
. Cats, Weagles, Swans, Flogs x 1 each.
They all had their lists basically in place before the the two expansion teams came in.

I can't see the majority of clubs conceding to that again. Would we ? I bloody hope not.
Click to expand...
Unless we time it perfectly. (Ie Our list is fixed the year before expansion concessions start.)
 
Mr Lloyd Christmas said:
The North/Tassie (outside our current partnership) is no more than that.

Is it ideal? Depends who you ask.

Our admin love it as brings in certain $$, our mainland supporters of course hate it.

I get it. Completely understandable.

If you listen to Eddie or Caro well that's on you for being stupid enough to believe it.

(i don't mean that disrespectfully but North will always stay in Melbourne)
Click to expand...

Would love to see the sort of crowds at home games that makes the club believe they can go with 11 home games in Melbourne.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
The Anvil said:
Would love to see the sort of crowds at home games that makes the club believe they can go with 11 home games in Melbourne.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
Well start playing 4 quarters of football. Have a game plan. Stop making basic skill errors. And stop throwing in the towel as soon as the opposition get physical.
 
The Anvil said:
Would love to see the sort of crowds at home games that makes the club believe they can go with 11 home games in Melbourne.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...

We get 3 men and a dog at Hobart games at the moment anyway, not sure what difference it would make (cash injection aside)
 
Mr Taswegian said:
I mean do you think North will continue to play there or do you think they will come up with something else?
Click to expand...
Fk it, play 4 consecutive games in LA and/or Texas (same colors as the Dodgers and the Cowboys). Pretty obvious during Covid, when AFL was being played and virtually no other sport globally is AFL got a lot of exposure and our American friends loved it. Dunno if there is even a suitable ground over there, but hell think of the exposure, potential sponsorship dollars etc. If could nail the US fk who needs Tassie!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I’m honestly just sick of hearing this nonsense relocation talk, we wouldn’t be hearing about it if North were playing well and pushing for finals. Just so unfair how we’re always targeted by the media and the general afl community. Why doesn’t St.Kilda ever get mentioned to relocate? One flag in their entire history and years and years of consistently poor on field performances. We’re always getting singled out when we’re experiencing a bit of a hard time.
 
RazielsoulR said:
I’m honestly just sick of hearing this nonsense relocation talk, we wouldn’t be hearing about it if North were playing well and pushing for finals. Just so unfair how we’re always targeted by the media and the general afl community. Why doesn’t St.Kilda ever get mentioned to relocate? One flag in their entire history and years and years of consistently poor on field performances. We’re always getting singled out when we’re experiencing a bit of a hard time.
Click to expand...
They’re also millions in debt and we’re not..
 
RazielsoulR said:
I’m honestly just sick of hearing this nonsense relocation talk, we wouldn’t be hearing about it if North were playing well and pushing for finals. Just so unfair how we’re always targeted by the media and the general afl community. Why doesn’t St.Kilda ever get mentioned to relocate? One flag in their entire history and years and years of consistently poor on field performances. We’re always getting singled out when we’re experiencing a bit of a hard time.
Click to expand...
We would still be hearing about it, unfortunately. It's an ingrained narrative, just listen to talk back callers saying we are broke and the least successful team of the last twenty years.
 
From Caro in today's Age.

The AFL has moved to road-test its bold bid to fast-track the on-field success of a Tasmanian team with a select group of club football bosses, in a concerted attempt to win over the clubs and create a competitive 19th side from as soon as 2026.
The AFL plan, which involves giving all 18 clubs access to high draft picks in exchange for experienced players, will be unveiled in the coming days to Richmond’s Blair Hartley, Sydney’s Charlie Gardiner and the Western Bulldogs list manager Sam Power.

The complex list build has been overseen by AFL trio Sam Graham, Brad Scott and Ned Guy, and also involves granting the Tasmanian team priority picks that the team would be forced to trade for players, and long-term access to Tasmanian-born or based players via a state football academy.
Rather than provide long-term salary-cap relief, the AFL is proposing to provide signing-on bonuses in a bid to attract mature talent from other clubs, including potentially players from Tasmania who are at other clubs.

The AFL’s view is that signing bonuses would attract players in the short term but would not provide the long-term cost to the competition caused by long-term salary-cap relief.
As the AFL approaches the August deadline to deliver its Tasmanian strategy to the clubs, league chief Gillon McLachlan has this week accelerated the work of the list-build committee in order to sound out the hand-picked club list bosses.
The unveiling of the list-build and player-retention plan helps Tasmania’s bid for a 19th AFL licence move a step closer to reality.
In a series of developments recently it has emerged that:
  • Tasmanian Premier Jeremy Rockliffe has lobbied some club presidents in writing, saying that a 19th team would create additional annual revenue for the AFL estimated at $18 million.
  • The AFL will push the Tasmanian government to increase its opening gambit of a 10-year financial commitment to at least 15 years at a cost of an annual estimated $12 million-$13 million, up from the government’s initial bid of an annual $10 million.
  • Macquarie Point on Hobart’s waterfront is the league’s preferred venue for the new stadium with a capacity of 25,000. Negotiations have begun with the private and public sector with AFL bosses of the belief that even with a retractable roof, the stadium could be built for significantly less than previous estimates of $750 million.
  • The list-build group is looking at a venue in the Hobart precinct that could house the Tasmanian team’s younger players in similar fashion to the Breakfast Point development that housed young Giants players in their early years.
  • Although the new team would be given priority high draft picks – many of which it would be forced to trade – McLachlan remains determined to protect the No.1 draft pick for that year’s wooden spooner.
  • Fixture planning around a 19-team competition remains unclear with the timing of weekly byes seen to disadvantage certain clubs. All are keen to avoid byes in the early rounds of the season.
  • A Tasmanian AFLW team would be introduced either immediately after the men’s debut season or the year before.

Determined to create a side that would be competitive from year one and capable of winning a flag by year five, the working group’s philosophy has been to avoid repeating the Gold Coast-Greater Western Sydney scenario in which both teams were incapable of creating genuine home-and-away contests in their early years.
While the Suns, who are midway through their 12th season, have still not contested finals, the significantly more successful Giants were allowed to stockpile high draft picks in their early years but effectively created a bye for their opponents in the club’s first three years.

Former club boss Geoff Walsh, who quit the list-build committee last week to review North Melbourne’s ailing football operation, initially suggested Tasmania gain access to all but 10 so-called “untouchables” from each of the 18 clubs. That recommendation was rejected because league bosses are unwilling to lock out any player keen to play for Tasmania. Such a rule would have prevented Gary Ablett’s move to the Gold Coast. The list-build group is also looking at granting Tasmania short-term priority access to key 17-year-old talent.
While the creation of a new stadium remains a potential deal-breaker as the AFL finalises its pitch to the club presidents, the competition bosses and the Tasmanian government are increasingly optimistic the venue can be designed, funded and built over the next five years.

It is not known whether the AFL would introduce the team before the stadium was completed or to what extent the federal government would help fund the stadium.
The creation of a Tasmanian team’s playing list is one of 11 streams surrounding the state government’s bid for a 19th licence, which also includes infrastructure, membership and sponsorship along with the creation of a stadium.

While the majority of clubs have indicated they either support the Tasmanian campaign or remain open to the concept, a handful of presidents have been outspoken in their opposition including Gold Coast’s Tony Cochrane and outgoing Hawthorn chairman Jeff Kennett. Sydney’s Andrew Pridham has voiced his preference for a relocated teamand Collingwood’s Jeff Browne remains concerned that the competition’s expansion would come at a heavy cost to the clubs in terms of dollars and playing talent.
Outside of Victoria, Tasmania appears to have significant support from the West Australian and South Australian teams along with GWS and Brisbane. Geelong, Richmond, Carlton, the Western Bulldogs, St Kilda and Essendon all appear either cautiously or more strongly supportive. McLachlan has indicated he does not want to put Tasmania to a vote but rather persuade the clubs that a 19th team based in Tasmania would enhance the competition.

The respected trio of Hartley, Gardiner and Power have been hand-picked to run their collective expertise over the potentially historic Tasmanian strategy given their diverse levels of list-building and football experience.
 
shimaburnsgrieg said:
From Caro in today's Age.

The AFL has moved to road-test its bold bid to fast-track the on-field success of a Tasmanian team with a select group of club football bosses, in a concerted attempt to win over the clubs and create a competitive 19th side from as soon as 2026.
The AFL plan, which involves giving all 18 clubs access to high draft picks in exchange for experienced players, will be unveiled in the coming days to Richmond’s Blair Hartley, Sydney’s Charlie Gardiner and the Western Bulldogs list manager Sam Power.

The complex list build has been overseen by AFL trio Sam Graham, Brad Scott and Ned Guy, and also involves granting the Tasmanian team priority picks that the team would be forced to trade for players, and long-term access to Tasmanian-born or based players via a state football academy.
Rather than provide long-term salary-cap relief, the AFL is proposing to provide signing-on bonuses in a bid to attract mature talent from other clubs, including potentially players from Tasmania who are at other clubs.

The AFL’s view is that signing bonuses would attract players in the short term but would not provide the long-term cost to the competition caused by long-term salary-cap relief.
As the AFL approaches the August deadline to deliver its Tasmanian strategy to the clubs, league chief Gillon McLachlan has this week accelerated the work of the list-build committee in order to sound out the hand-picked club list bosses.
The unveiling of the list-build and player-retention plan helps Tasmania’s bid for a 19th AFL licence move a step closer to reality.
In a series of developments recently it has emerged that:
  • Tasmanian Premier Jeremy Rockliffe has lobbied some club presidents in writing, saying that a 19th team would create additional annual revenue for the AFL estimated at $18 million.
  • The AFL will push the Tasmanian government to increase its opening gambit of a 10-year financial commitment to at least 15 years at a cost of an annual estimated $12 million-$13 million, up from the government’s initial bid of an annual $10 million.
  • Macquarie Point on Hobart’s waterfront is the league’s preferred venue for the new stadium with a capacity of 25,000. Negotiations have begun with the private and public sector with AFL bosses of the belief that even with a retractable roof, the stadium could be built for significantly less than previous estimates of $750 million.
  • The list-build group is looking at a venue in the Hobart precinct that could house the Tasmanian team’s younger players in similar fashion to the Breakfast Point development that housed young Giants players in their early years.
  • Although the new team would be given priority high draft picks – many of which it would be forced to trade – McLachlan remains determined to protect the No.1 draft pick for that year’s wooden spooner.
  • Fixture planning around a 19-team competition remains unclear with the timing of weekly byes seen to disadvantage certain clubs. All are keen to avoid byes in the early rounds of the season.
  • A Tasmanian AFLW team would be introduced either immediately after the men’s debut season or the year before.

Determined to create a side that would be competitive from year one and capable of winning a flag by year five, the working group’s philosophy has been to avoid repeating the Gold Coast-Greater Western Sydney scenario in which both teams were incapable of creating genuine home-and-away contests in their early years.
While the Suns, who are midway through their 12th season, have still not contested finals, the significantly more successful Giants were allowed to stockpile high draft picks in their early years but effectively created a bye for their opponents in the club’s first three years.

Former club boss Geoff Walsh, who quit the list-build committee last week to review North Melbourne’s ailing football operation, initially suggested Tasmania gain access to all but 10 so-called “untouchables” from each of the 18 clubs. That recommendation was rejected because league bosses are unwilling to lock out any player keen to play for Tasmania. Such a rule would have prevented Gary Ablett’s move to the Gold Coast. The list-build group is also looking at granting Tasmania short-term priority access to key 17-year-old talent.
While the creation of a new stadium remains a potential deal-breaker as the AFL finalises its pitch to the club presidents, the competition bosses and the Tasmanian government are increasingly optimistic the venue can be designed, funded and built over the next five years.

It is not known whether the AFL would introduce the team before the stadium was completed or to what extent the federal government would help fund the stadium.
The creation of a Tasmanian team’s playing list is one of 11 streams surrounding the state government’s bid for a 19th licence, which also includes infrastructure, membership and sponsorship along with the creation of a stadium.

While the majority of clubs have indicated they either support the Tasmanian campaign or remain open to the concept, a handful of presidents have been outspoken in their opposition including Gold Coast’s Tony Cochrane and outgoing Hawthorn chairman Jeff Kennett. Sydney’s Andrew Pridham has voiced his preference for a relocated teamand Collingwood’s Jeff Browne remains concerned that the competition’s expansion would come at a heavy cost to the clubs in terms of dollars and playing talent.
Outside of Victoria, Tasmania appears to have significant support from the West Australian and South Australian teams along with GWS and Brisbane. Geelong, Richmond, Carlton, the Western Bulldogs, St Kilda and Essendon all appear either cautiously or more strongly supportive. McLachlan has indicated he does not want to put Tasmania to a vote but rather persuade the clubs that a 19th team based in Tasmania would enhance the competition.

The respected trio of Hartley, Gardiner and Power have been hand-picked to run their collective expertise over the potentially historic Tasmanian strategy given their diverse levels of list-building and football experience.
Click to expand...
Where have I seen this before let me think 🤔
 
Chris Rowbottom from ABC Hobart. interviewed Geelong President, Craig Drummond, regarding his clubs thoughts on a Tassie team, was a good listen.

Local Grandstand - ABC listen

Local sport and so much more.
www.abc.net.au

2:10m in till 16:30m
 
Mr Lloyd Christmas said:
Caro can't be professional enough to even spell the Tasmanian Premier's name right.

It's Rockliff.

I think that says it all in a nutshell about her.
Click to expand...
Next she’ll be referring to The Rockford Files as one of her sauces 🙄
 

Remove this Banner Ad

News NMFC & Tassie (the mass debate re our future there, the academy, attending advice)


Write your reply...

Similar threads

Only Forwards
Competitions NMFC GiantRoo Poster of the year
2 3 4 5
Replies
124
Views
7K
Zondor
Z
hsquid
NMFC and principled positions
2 3
Replies
71
Views
2K
Gasometer
Gasometer
Gasometer
Review 2024 Nmfc Highlights amongst the Lowlights
Replies
17
Views
645
leighlee13
leighlee13
ansonholt
Prediction The Jack Darling 2025 NMFC goalkicking tally and nude runs prediction thread
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
DuckYeah
DuckYeah
Z
Opinion So who is our next Wayne Carey? The guy that is a dominant force in the competition that leads us to our next Flag?
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
3K
Devil Fish
D
The Other Dean
Injury Life Update - Get Well Soon TOD & McGooley - NMFC BF's behind you
2 3 4 5
Replies
117
Views
2K
nicko74
nicko74
Gasometer
Game Day 2024 Brownlow - AFL & Nmfc
17 18 19 20 21
Replies
505
Views
13K
Krakouer Bonar
Krakouer Bonar

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top