North Melbourne to Tasmania

[robaba]

FFS - North and Hawthorn have far more in common.

Sorry, SLF, I beg to differ.
No comparison there.
I'd rather follow Sokher than Hawthorn.

 

[jacko57]

What have Hawthorn been given over you ... in fact - you were given inside knowledge of the transfer arrangements of the VFL which allowed you to secure a host of stars and win a few flags.

I take it you are referring to the '10 year rule', introduced in 1973?

North had no 'inside knowledge' compared to the other 11 VFL clubs. In fact, North voted against it. When they were outvoted, they assessed the situation, and moved faster and smarter than the other clubs.

(I'm guessing this was before your time).

 

[Beckers]

Oh. My. God.

Its clear your understanding of Melbourne (the city) in terms of football culture is cigarette paper thin.

I could not think of two teams MORE opposed in terms of culture, make up, support than us and the Dees.

FFS - North and Hawthorn have far more in common.

Its not about colours or geographic location.

I have only followed footy in this city for 30 years, and these 2 teams have not been high on my interest radar for about 10 years. Why is that? Because they are small clubs and fairly insignificant to the general AFL public. To tell you the truth, i still cannot see why these 2 clubs would not merge?.

There are more than just 'cultural' reasons to consider when deciding which fork in the road the clubs need to take for the future. Besides the precarious financial and membership issues of both clubs, they also have to consider that they will NEVER be able to compete with the big 4 powerhouses in WCE, Crows, Collingwood and Essendon as far as football departments and resourses are concerned. Yes, i know that Arden Street is being redeveloped and the facilities will be a similar quality to Waverley, but even Hawthorn struggle to compete with the big 4 powerhouses! Even with 40k members, we will still struggle to compete with them in the future!

Don't get me wrong, the Roo's and Dee's are not alone. St.Kilda, Western Bulldogs, Richmond and Hawthorn will always face an uphill battle against those big clubs. Its just that the Roo's and Dee's are on the bottom of the pecking order at this crucial time in the AFL's history as Hawthorn and the Dee's were in 1996!

I fully expect the AFL to start turning the screws very soon in their endeavour to keep a 16 team comp while introducing 1 and maybe 2 new teams. Its not a good time to be vunerable!

 

[Mario the Lothario]

I have only followed footy in this city for 30 years, and these 2 teams have not been high on my interest radar for about 10 years. Why is that? Because they are small and insignificant. To tell you the truth, i still cannot see why these 2 clubs would not merge?.

Perhaps it's because one of those clubs just knocked back 100 million to relocate? Perhaps its because the AFL has clearly stated that mergers are off the table? Take my word for it as a person that intimately knows the North demographic. North will never merge, nor can they be forced to do that.

There are more than just 'cultural' reasons to consider when deciding which fork in the road the clubs need to take for the future. Besides the precarious financial and membership issues of both clubs, they also have to consider that they will NEVER be able to compete with the big 4 powerhouses in WCE, Crows, Collingwood and Essendon as far as football departments and resourses are concerned.

You place too much emphasis on money. At the end of the day this is a game where 22 opposing players kick a leather conveyance through some big sticks.

Yes, i know that Arden Street is being redeveloped and the facilities will be a similar quality to Waverley, but even Hawthorn struggle to compete with the big 4 powerhouses! Even with 40k members, we will still struggle to compete with them in the future!

That is the smartest statement you have ever typed.

Don't get me wrong, the Roo's and Dee's are not alone. St.Kilda, Western Bulldogs, Richmond and Hawthorn will always face an uphill battle against those big clubs. Its just that the Roo's and Dee's are on the bottom of the pecking order at this crucial time in the AFL's history as Hawthorn and the Dee's were in 1996!

For the billionth time, North aren't "on the bottom".

North has record membership levels, good debt management, the best infrastructure in its history coming along, and on the field we are level pegging with the team that won the premiership.

If that is "on the bottom" then i'd hate to see what would happen if we hadn't made the finals 5 times this decade.

BTW

at this crucial time in the AFL's history

What is so "crucial" about this "time in the AFL's history"?

 

[Mario the Lothario]

I have only followed footy in this city for 30 years, and these 2 teams have not been high on my interest radar for about 10 years. Why is that? Because they are small and insignificant. To tell you the truth, i still cannot see why these 2 clubs would not merge?.

Perhaps it's because one of those clubs just knocked back 100 million to relocate? Perhps its because the AFL has clearly stated that mergers are off the table? Take my word for it as a person that intimately knows the North demographic, North will never merge, nor can they be forced to do that.

There are more than just 'cultural' reasons to consider when deciding which fork in the road the clubs need to take for the future. Besides the precarious financial and membership issues of both clubs, they also have to consider that they will NEVER be able to compete with the big 4 powerhouses in WCE, Crows, Collingwood and Essendon as far as football departments and resourses are concerned.

You place too much emphasis on money. At the end of the day this is a game where 22 opposing players kick a leather conveyance through some big sticks.

Yes, i know that Arden Street is being redeveloped and the facilities will be a similar quality to Waverley, but even Hawthorn struggle to compete with the big 4 powerhouses! Even with 40k members, we will still struggle to compete with them in the future!

That is the smartest statement you have ever typed.

Don't get me wrong, the Roo's and Dee's are not alone. St.Kilda, Western Bulldogs, Richmond and Hawthorn will always face an uphill battle against those big clubs. Its just that the Roo's and Dee's are on the bottom of the pecking order at this crucial time in the AFL's history as Hawthorn and the Dee's were in 1996!

For the billionth time, North aren't "on the bottom".

North has record membership levels, good debt management, the best infrastructure in its history coming along, and on the field we are level pegging with the team that won the premiership.

If that is "on the bottom" then i'd hate to see what would happen if we hadn't made the finals 5 times this decade.

BTW

at this crucial time in the AFL's history

What is so "crucial" about this "time in the AFL's history"?

 

[Beckers]

For the billionth time, North aren't "on the bottom".

North has record membership levels, good debt management, the best infrastructure in its history coming along,

I think that 2009 will tell a clearer picture on the membership and debt management.

and on the field we are level pegging with the team that won the premiership.

Not the smartest thing you have ever typed!!! Once again, 2009 may tell a different story!

What is so "crucial" about this "time in the AFL's history"?

Really If you are unaware of the 2 teams the AFL are trying to invent out of thin air, then you need to get out from under your Arden St rock and start paying attention!!!!