Play Nice North Melbourne - 2018 and beyond

[Better Loosen Up]

Fitzroy were a historic foundation club who were very successful in the early part of the 20th century and that did not prevent their eventual fate. I realise North are much stronger but getting a sponsor first and suggesting friday night games isn't a solid reason to stay in Melbourne.

I also don't think many want North to stay down the bottom of the ladder, nor to relocate because of hate. If North can gain a bigger fan base in Melbourne then most AFL fans would welcome that. A lot of people feel as though representing a region of 500,000 people would be a fine way to grow the club. It seems unlikely that North will ever grow into a sizeable club in Melbourne as there is 8 other clubs there already so going to Tassie and having a region of passionate footy fans get behind your club might be a better way to grow the size of the footy club.

It's very easy to talk about re-locating a football club when it is not your own isn't it?

Imagine if we had have taken up the deal to go to the Gold Coast... we eould be no different to the souless shambles they are today.

We are now supposedly debt free... not a bad position to be in after being in significant debt 10 years ago plus significantly upgrading our home at Arden Street during that time.

Check out our membership numbers year on year! 10 years ago, if it was suggested that North would have over 40k memberships, everyone would have pissed themselves laughing!

Maybe rather than taking the easy and uneducated option of taking a dig at our club over and over again, perhaps there is also some credit to be due if you want to be fair about things.

The population in Melbourne continues to grow... i don't think we ever need to see another Fitzroy situation again. There was nothing good about that and with the money involved in the game these days from tv rights, etc, there's no excuse for it either.

 

[MaddAdam]

Rumours of an Arden St stadium package in the next State Governments election pitch, it will be inncorporated into North's town planning application to seize 2 square blocks of a mixture of council and private land, including the abolishment of 2-3 current streets, part of the complete $7billion redevelopment of the Arden Precinct with the new Arden Station.

Watch this space.

They are certainly throwing a lot of money around for stadia.

Having the AFLW team helps heaps.

 

[Malifice]

It's very easy to talk about re-locating a football club when it is not your own isn't it?

Imagine if we had have taken up the deal to go to the Gold Coast... we eould be no different to the souless shambles they are today.

Except you would have AFL backing and considerably more members than Gold Coast do (more than a few North Melbourne supporters would continue to support the club even if they moved).

The AFL have a vested interest in Gold Coast succeeding. The AFL have demonstrated that they don't mind trying to push North into relocation.

Your members chose not to relocate and to stay in Victoria as a successful local club. I completely understand them choosing that. The risk was though that if you are not successful and go belly up you could find ourselves in a bad position facing relocation or possibly folding.

It's happened to South Melbourne and it happened to Fitzroy.

I'm not saying it's going to happen to North, but it's certainly a risk that was taken on board when the decision was made not to relocate to the Gold Coast.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Except you would have AFL backing and considerably more members than Gold Coast do (more than a few North Melbourne supporters would continue to support the club even if they moved).

The AFL have a vested interest in Gold Coast succeeding. The AFL have demonstrated that they don't mind trying to push North into relocation.

Your members chose not to relocate and to stay in Victoria as a successful local club. I completely understand them choosing that. The risk was though that if you are not successful and go belly up you could find ourselves in a bad position facing relocation or possibly folding.

It's happened to South Melbourne and it happened to Fitzroy.

I'm not saying it's going to happen to North, but it's certainly a risk that was taken on board when the decision was made not to relocate to the Gold Coast.

Yep. And look where we are now. Pretty happy with the decision tbh.

You might have to put up with us for some time yet

 

[Jade]

I'm not saying it's going to happen to North, but it's certainly a risk that was taken on board when the decision was made not to relocate to the Gold Coast.

I highly doubt that the current version of North (which is substantially better run than 10-15 years ago) will fold, or get in a state that seriously warrants the question.

However, they haven't had several lean years in a row in that time, which I think they are probably likely to have for at least the next 2-3 - so a lot will depend on the level of support they get, both from fans and it's sponsorship network.

 

[Malifice]

I highly doubt that the current version of North (which is substantially better run than 10-15 years ago) will fold, or get in a state that seriously warrants the question.

However, they haven't had several lean years in a row in that time, which I think they are probably likely to have for at least the next 2-3 - so a lot will depend on the level of support they get, both from fans and it's sponsorship network.

I absolutely agree with this.

I'm just not see the potential elite talent coming through other than Brown. And they still have a few older blokes to get rid of in Waite and Daw, plus a few others.

Carlton have Weitering, Cripps, Docherty, Curnow plus SPS as players that all have very high ceilings. Others like Marchbank, Pickett, Fisher, Williamson, JSOS, Cunningham, Plowman and Kennedy have all shown signs. We also have picks 3 and 10 this year and an extra second rounder next year.

I get that we are three years in advance of our rebuild than North Melbourne, but I just can't escape the next few years being anything other than very lean for them.

 

[Jade]

I absolutely agree with this.

I'm just not see the potential elite talent coming through other than Brown. And they still have a few older blokes to get rid of in Waite and Daw, plus a few others.

Carlton have Weitering, Cripps, Docherty, Curnow plus SPS as players that all have very high ceilings. Others like Marchbank, Pickett, Fisher, Williamson, JSOS, Cunningham, Plowman and Kennedy have all shown signs. We also have picks 3 and 10 this year and an extra second rounder next year.

I get that we are three years in advance of our rebuild than North Melbourne, but I just can't escape the next few years being anything other than very lean for them.

As an aside, has anyone started the annual Essendon v Carlton dick measuring thread yet?

Yeah their list looks pretty lean.

To be fair though, I don't blame them in the slightest for that - they made list management decisions designed to have a crack at a flag, and ultimately it didn't work. They had a dip at it though.

I'd much rather my club actually set themselves to try winning a flag, as opposed to being in a perennial rebuild mode because they're too worried about hitting that lean patch if it doesn't work.

 

[Jesslc]

Lol every year. "Irrelevant" but people never stop talking about us. People dont know what irrelevant means

 

[Ry009]

Ah the old "your team has no potential, but my club does" argument....

AFL operates to maximize profit, not produce an environment to create an equitable competition with self sustainable clubs. As a result, the smaller clubs have to work harder than ever for exposure. That's not a whinge, it's just the way it is now.

I think there's been enough well constructed posts here to counter the 'poor performance - relocation link' that has been sprouted here, but if posters feel the need to ignore it, that's their prerogative. Reasonable discussion suffers as a result which is to be excepted on a board frequented by posters of different clubs.

 

[MaddAdam]

Except you would have AFL backing and considerably more members than Gold Coast do (more than a few North Melbourne supporters would continue to support the club even if they moved).

The AFL have a vested interest in Gold Coast succeeding. The AFL have demonstrated that they don't mind trying to push North into relocation.

Your members chose not to relocate and to stay in Victoria as a successful local club. I completely understand them choosing that. The risk was though that if you are not successful and go belly up you could find ourselves in a bad position facing relocation or possibly folding.

It's happened to South Melbourne and it happened to Fitzroy.

I'm not saying it's going to happen to North, but it's certainly a risk that was taken on board when the decision was made not to relocate to the Gold Coast.

Using your logic, there's also a risk a wedge tailed eagle might fly out of my arse and carry off Magic Billy The Fifteen Inch Man who has befriended The Holy Unicorn that bestows premiership on sides in the AFL* and then no team will ever win a flag again, and they'll have to wind up the comp.

* Talking about footy makes this post as on topic and relevant as anything else in the bullshit thread. You're not allowed to delete it now.

 

[MaddAdam]

I get that we are three years in advance of our rebuild than North Melbourne, .

More than three years sport.

When you started your rebuild Saddam was kicking back in his summer palace.

You're like 15 years ahead of us.

 

[NZ_Tiger]

The government forked out money to Geelong, sure, why not.

Come on Percy, we both know you wear special glasses when you read threads on North.

I never claimed North had more members than Melbourne. You've got the MCC to fall back on, which was fortunate for you guys a few years ago, as you were close to the edge without the MCC and the mere fact that you were one of the foundation clubs.

Gelong is a swing seat.

 

[Le Grille]

Except you would have AFL backing and considerably more members than Gold Coast do (more than a few North Melbourne supporters would continue to support the club even if they moved).

The AFL have a vested interest in Gold Coast succeeding. The AFL have demonstrated that they don't mind trying to push North into relocation.

Your members chose not to relocate and to stay in Victoria as a successful local club. I completely understand them choosing that. The risk was though that if you are not successful and go belly up you could find ourselves in a bad position facing relocation or possibly folding.

It's happened to South Melbourne and it happened to Fitzroy.

I'm not saying it's going to happen to North, but it's certainly a risk that was taken on board when the decision was made not to relocate to the Gold Coast.

I definitely subscribe to the theory that if North went to GC it would be a worse situation than what GC are facing now. I maintain there is insufficient appetite there for AFL.

In terms of ladder position, yes of course North will be likely to have at least a couple of lean years, I generally feel that there is some encouraging talent in the forward and backlines but we need more in the midfield.

That said, financially we really shouldn't be the club that is constantly saddled with the dreaded r word. We do have less AFL funding, debt and more profit than StK, Mel and WB.

I'll will accept that the crowd/membership numbers need to be rectified but I will put it to you that that is cyclical with results. Would WB be miles ahead without the flag?, would Stk/Mel be as attractive if they were cellar dwellers? Ultimately winning games is the best advertisement for any club.

The frustration from North supporters is that every time Ralphy, Hutchy, Robbo et al spout their opinions without highlighting the full story, it becomes the fact. I do wish the club was more aggressive in putting some of these journos straight.

 

[Dr Tigris]

North aren't that bad. But neither are they that good.

Right at the moment no team looks really awful IMHO. Even Brisbane has straightened their act out. GC look like clowns, but seem to have actually worked out pragmatic approach to the future. They still have heaps of talent and AFL support. If they can get professional and pragmatic they will do very well into the future.

North rolled the dice on a premiership and missed. In doing so they left a big hole in their list. Injuries have hurt, but poor medium term management of the list is a problem. North will come out of this fairly easily with good drafting and development. Trades can help, but often cost more than they are worth when you are in the down phase. I reckon missing Dusty and Kelly was a very good thing. North has to face its reality and build out of it. I know from personal experience (RFC that is) thrashing about trying to escape the hard work of rebuilding a list from base essentially doesn't work and causes longer term damage.

North should stay financially viable, and rebuild their list to be finals contenders in 3ish years I'd reckon. Whether they are just likely to play September or genuinely contend is a matter of good management and luck. Suck up the fact that North has to rebuild and focus on that. Trade in cheap good characters to act as player coaches, draft a balanced squad of good footy character (Dusty is a good footy character, but maybe not an angel), and work hard not to waste your opportunities.

it'll be interesting to see if North still tries the short cut, or just grinds out a solid rebuild to have the team that contends for 5+ years.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

I absolutely agree with this.

I'm just not see the potential elite talent coming through other than Brown. And they still have a few older blokes to get rid of in Waite and Daw, plus a few others.

Carlton have Weitering, Cripps, Docherty, Curnow plus SPS as players that all have very high ceilings. Others like Marchbank, Pickett, Fisher, Williamson, JSOS, Cunningham, Plowman and Kennedy have all shown signs. We also have picks 3 and 10 this year and an extra second rounder next year.

I get that we are three years in advance of our rebuild than North Melbourne, but I just can't escape the next few years being anything other than very lean for them.

If you are going to cite guys like Fisher, JSOS and Cunningham then I can cite guys that are ahead of them at this stage like Pruess, Simpkin, Clarke, McDonald and Durdin.

Curnow, Williamson (I really rate him) and Kennedy have all shown excellent signs, but that's it, signs. I can rattle off similarily rated young names at north who have shown just as much, guys like Garner, Wood and Pruess.

To suggest that Carlton is massively ahead of north is far from a certainty. A lot of kids never fill their potential, a trait often seen at clubs such as ours and Melbourne in particular. I fear for the media attention that Curnow copes.

 

[Malifice]

More than three years sport.

When you started your rebuild Saddam was kicking back in his summer palace.

You're like 15 years ahead of us.

Actually we underwent a rebuild post salary cap penalties and draft sanctions. Sadly we did a half arsed job of it and never rose above 5th place on the ladder, despite spending a few years in the finals.

We got in the 3 number 1 picks, and added Judd and thought we were done. The issue was we lacked the required depth to truly compete. This problem was exacerbated by losing Fevola at the wrong time (had to happen) and then a succession of failed draft picks (Bootsma, Lucas, Watson, Menzel, Yarran) that are no longer with us. Good players left for greener pastures (Betts, Waite) and we were left with a list with some good players at the older end of the spectrum (Murphy, Gibbs, Kruezer) and a total lack of talent underneath them.

Accordingly, at pretty much this exact time 3 years ago, we committed to a rebuild.

In that time we have traded out Henderson, Yarran, Touhy, Gibbs and Bell for some decent draft picks (5 extra 1st rounders, and two extra seconds), and hit the draft heavily, getting in some good young talent. We have increased our depth by raiding GWS and getting good players (Marchbank, Pickett, Plowman, Kennedy) for cheap.

The rebuild will be largely complete in 13 months when Docherty and Cripps will be leading a side comprised of (Weitering, SPS, Curnow, McKay, Cuningham, Fisher, Pickett, Williamson, Byrne, Kennedy, JSOS, Marchbank, Plowman, [2017 pick 3, pick 10, pick 30] and 2018's picks, plus a F/A).

90 percent of our list this time next year will be aged 18-24.

North have brought some kids in last year, but they arent coming in fast enough for mine, and none of them are really standing out as potentially elite (barring Brown of course - you can build a side around him). Weirdly North threw big money after Dusty this year as well, which doesnt really mesh with a team rebuilding.

North might add some gun talent with pick 4 this year, but that talent simply isnt coming in fast enough to cover the players that are retiring or being moved on. In addition, there is a crapload of discontent with the Coach, and the ever present spectre of relocation and financial problems (that require North to still sell a lot of games interstate).

I see some dark times coming for North, and Im not seeing a coherent plan for dealing with it.

 

[Le Grille]

Actually we underwent a rebuild post salary cap penalties and draft sanctions. Sadly we did a half arsed job of it and never rose above 5th place on the ladder, despite spending a few years in the finals.

We got in the 3 number 1 picks, and added Judd and thought we were done. The issue was we lacked the required depth to truly compete. This problem was exacerbated by losing Fevola at the wrong time (had to happen) and then a succession of failed draft picks (Bootsma, Lucas, Watson, Menzel, Yarran) that are no longer with us. Good players left for greener pastures (Betts, Waite) and we were left with a list with some good players at the older end of the spectrum (Murphy, Gibbs, Kruezer) and a total lack of talent underneath them.

Accordingly, at pretty much this exact time 3 years ago, we committed to a rebuild.

In that time we have traded out Henderson, Yarran, Touhy, Gibbs and Bell for some decent draft picks (5 extra 1st rounders, and two extra seconds), and hit the draft heavily, getting in some good young talent. We have increased our depth by raiding GWS and getting good players (Marchbank, Pickett, Plowman, Kennedy) for cheap.

The rebuild will be largely complete in 13 months when Docherty and Cripps will be leading a side comprised of (Weitering, SPS, Curnow, McKay, Cuningham, Fisher, Pickett, Williamson, Byrne, Kennedy, JSOS, Marchbank, Plowman, [2017 pick 3, pick 10, pick 30] and 2018's picks, plus a F/A).

90 percent of our list this time next year will be aged 18-24.

North have brought some kids in last year, but they arent coming in fast enough for mine, and none of them are really standing out as potentially elite (barring Brown of course - you can build a side around him). Weirdly North threw big money after Dusty this year as well, which doesnt really mesh with a team rebuilding.

North might add some gun talent with pick 4 this year, but that talent simply isnt coming in fast enough to cover the players that are retiring or being moved on. In addition, there is a crapload of discontent with the Coach, and the ever present spectre of relocation and financial problems (that require North to still sell a lot of games interstate).

I see some dark times coming for North, and Im not seeing a coherent plan for dealing with it.

I think originally the aim was to get Dusty and Kelly together (not just one), once it fell through plan B was to go to the draft. I think we have a list of young players that have promise (Garner, Simpkin, Pruess, McKay, Durdin, Wood, Vickers-Willis, Neilson, McDonald, Dumont) and a few too soon to tell (J Williams, Mountford, Larkey) It is imperative that we augment that with true A grade midfielders (easier said than done). We gave 11 debuts so coming off two prelims and a campaign cruelled by injury I think we are bringing the youth through as fast as possible. In terms of dark times I'd expect with good drafting we would expect to be in the bottom 8 or so teams for probably 2-3 years. I see enough in the club to avoid a 10 year stretch at the bottom.

Im not convinced Scott and Joyce are the right people to take us through this rebuild but hopefully im proved wrong.

 

[Malifice]

I think originally the aim was to get Dusty and Kelly together (not just one), once it fell through plan B was to go to the draft.

The plan should have always been 'go to the draft.' Thats regardless of Dusty or whatever.

Instead of trying to bring in a 26 year old F/A on 1.2 million a year in year 1 of a rebuild, you perhaps should have been looking at prizing loose young (22/23 and under) players from GWS and elsewhere that you can get for cheap, and trading to improve your draft position.

And not just a swap of third rounders so you have a few more points in next years draft.

I think we have a list of young players that have promise (Garner, Simpkin, Pruess, McKay, Durdin, Wood, Vickers-Willis, Neilson, McDonald, Dumont) and a few too soon to tell (J Williams, Mountford, Larkey) It is imperative that we augment that with true A grade midfielders (easier said than done).

I would have made a call on Higgins, Ziebell and/or Tarrant (and maybe a few others) and moved them out to improve your draft position. Before you cry foul, remember we moved out Henderson, Touhy, Yarran, Menzel, Bell and Gibbs to do just this.

GCS just gave over pick 2 for Lachie Weller. Adelaide have been screaming out for a mature mid for 2 years now, paying 10 and 16 for Gibbs. You would find a side out there that would bite.

You're probably going to hold onto these blokes too long, and lose them for nothing, when you could be using them to obtain the currency to find that A grade player you need.

We gave 11 debuts so coming off two prelims and a campaign cruelled by injury I think we are bringing the youth through as fast as possible.

The problem is that you're not bringing them in as fast as possible. The reality is you actively tried to bring in a 26 year old F/A, when you really want to be trading out 26+ year olds and improving your draft position.

 

[Le Grille]

The plan should have always been 'go to the draft.' Thats regardless of Dusty or whatever.

Instead of trying to bring in a 26 year old F/A on 1.2 million a year in year 1 of a rebuild, you perhaps should have been looking at prizing loose young (22/23 and under) players from GWS and elsewhere that you can get for cheap, and trading to improve your draft position.

And not just a swap of third rounders so you have a few more points in next years draft.



I would have made a call on Higgins, Ziebell and/or Tarrant (and maybe a few others) and moved them out to improve your draft position. Before you cry foul, remember we moved out Henderson, Touhy, Yarran, Menzel, Bell and Gibbs to do just this.

GCS just gave over pick 2 for Lachie Weller. Adelaide have been screaming out for a mature mid for 2 years now, paying 10 and 16 for Gibbs. You would find a side out there that would bite.

You're probably going to hold onto these blokes too long, and lose them for nothing, when you could be using them to obtain the currency to find that A grade player you need.



The problem is that you're not bringing them in as fast as possible. The reality is you actively tried to bring in a 26 year old F/A, when you really want to be trading out 26+ year olds and improving your draft position.

I agree that we had an opportunity to be more aggressive to obtain more picks, I would have kept Zeibell and Cunnington so not to expose the youngsters.

I felt Tarrant, Wood, Dumont, Durdin, Clarke, Goldy (we absorb 100% salary) all good players and will help the club but also could've been tradeable (you need to give something) and give us an opportunity to balance our list better.

100% agree that it is disappointing that we cant seem to get any returns for our players, whether that is due to our interest in trading them out or others to trade in those guys.

Dusty and Kelly wouldn't have replaced any of the youth, they would have replaced Swallow, Gibson types.

 

[mick500]

Actually as there is no tax paid on earnings it's not a business.

Yes, they try and maximise revenue, but given the stated aim of the afl is game development it's not a business

Interesting take you have on it there.

Why do they have an ABN number then? You do realise ABN stands for Australian BUSINESS number right? Don’t bother replying. It’s rhetorical. They are a business.

https://abr.business.gov.au/SearchByAbn.aspx?abn=97489912318

 

[the big lebowski]

View attachment 431467

Interesting take you have on it there.

Why do they have an ABN number then? You do realise ABN stands for Australian BUSINESS number right? Don’t bother replying. It’s rhetorical. They are a business.

https://abr.business.gov.au/SearchByAbn.aspx?abn=97489912318

The trustee company of my family trust also has an ABN. But it isn't a business.

Is the church a business? Are charities business's

Maybe just look at the afls mission statement

Its mission is to actively support all levels of football from juniors to the elite level. Operating as a non-profit organisation, it distributes the great proportion of its operating surplus – after administration and game development costs – to its constituent clubs.

Don't bother replying.

You obviously have no idea

 

[BLERN]

Do the members have the final vote on relocation? If so, they will never relocate unless the club becomes a financial basket-case again and the AFL intervenes, which is the main solution they have fixed. Just because they aren't relevant atm or never draw heaps of interest, doesn't mean there aren't thousands of people in Melbourne who love them and want to see them play.

I think after gil's lovechild of 'move north to gc' didnt work for reasons i dont know enough of to comment.

They changed it so issues as big as this (relocation), require a huge % of votes from members. I think it was like 70% or so in order to accept the change. Im sure you can get a better answer from some of the better north supporters.

It seems highly unlikely that a vote like that would ever happen without the AFL forcibly trying to make them move/merge which would likely just end up in the court system anyways.

But this is the off season so people need someone to upset on BF. Despite it being so far from the reality of the situation

 

[Malifice]

They changed it so issues as big as this (relocation), require a huge % of votes from members. I think it was like 70% or so in order to accept the change.

Instead of writing into the Constitution: 'North Melbourne football club can never relocate.'

The choice was made to allow for it in the future, if a 70 percent majority is reached.

It seems highly unlikely that a vote like that would ever happen without the AFL forcibly trying to make them move/merge which would likely just end up in the court system anyways.

Not sure how such votes are called on, but if they were struggling (millions in the red, bottoming out, future bleak etc) and the AFL presented the following two options:

1) 'You agree to move to Tassie/ the NT and we give you an extra 1st and 2nd round PP for the next 3 years, a generous Academy zone (Tassie and the entire NT), 10 percent extra cap player retention allowance (because those areas suck), and 10 million a year cash from the equalisation/ expansion fund for the next decade,' or
2) We pull the plug and you fold.

You call a vote.

**** it. Im not particularly connected to Carlton the actual geograpic area myself, and I watch most games on the telly. The club is the club no-matter where it's physcially based. Id want us to at least consider such an offer.

Of course, there are some that say 'it's better to die on your feet, than on your ****ing knees begging'

Like that preacher dude from Alien 3.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

I think after gil's lovechild of 'move north to gc' didnt work for reasons i dont know enough of to comment.

They changed it so issues as big as this (relocation), require a huge % of votes from members. I think it was like 70% or so in order to accept the change. Im sure you can get a better answer from some of the better north supporters.

It seems highly unlikely that a vote like that would ever happen without the AFL forcibly trying to make them move/merge which would likely just end up in the court system anyways.

But this is the off season so people need someone to upset on BF. Despite it being so far from the reality of the situation

Wiki covers the details:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_relocation_of_the_North_Melbourne_Football_Club

Basically, north's shareholders wanted to move north (they had the power under the club's old constitution). The north members cracked the shits and mobilised to stop any move. The club's constitution was amended after that.

 

[BLERN]

Instead of writing into the Constitution: 'North Melbourne football club can never relocate.'

The choice was made to allow for it in the future, if a 70 percent majority is reached.



Not sure how such votes are called on, but if they were struggling (millions in the red, bottoming out, future bleak etc) and the AFL presented the following two options:

1) 'You agree to move to Tassie/ the NT and we give you an extra 1st and 2nd round PP for the next 3 years, a generous Academy zone (Tassie and the entire NT), 10 percent extra cap player retention allowance (because those areas suck), and 10 million a year cash from the equalisation/ expansion fund for the next decade,' or
2) We pull the plug and you fold.

You call a vote.

**** it. Im not particularly connected to Carlton the actual geograpic area myself, and I watch most games on the telly. The club is the club no-matter where it's physcially based. Id want us to at least consider such an offer.

Of course, there are some that say 'it's better to die on your feet, than on your ******* knees begging'

Like that preacher dude from Alien 3.

I dont know how or have the patience to do the multi quote reply thing that all the cool kids do. So ill just respond in one message. Sorry

Yeah i dont know how they would go about the member vote either. I mean alot of complicated things would be changing in the instance of a relocation. But you would expect the members are only voting on a bare minimum of those changes. Maybe only the obvious one of "do you want to move? Yes or no". But it would need to be a pretty dire situation to get to this stage. North are far from these circumstances.


I cant see many teams surviving the relocation process to the remaining areas without a team for the many reasons they dont have a team yet already + the problems a whole list feels about it and how that population feels about it.

I cant see any team folding/moving in the near term. Say 5 years.