Sando wants a Crows reserves team in the SANFL

[Geoffa32]

touche

If the wife would let me I would be at Footy Park every weekend..........

 

[Us against the rest]

Good post apart from (IMO) the hostile takeover part. IMO it was a hostile split that should never have happened and it certainly wasn't because of the club, they were the ones prepared to go to court over making sure the Magpies remained in the SANFL not the other way around.

Also IMO something will happen in the future regarding the Magpies being the Power's reserves team with more favourable conditions.
Keith Thomas seems to be fighting a good fight and he is one person that would have more than a fair idea about what is good for both parties long term, it is hard to see him getting behind something that would have a bad outcome for Norwood or the SANFL.

Well said, why can't they see it, it's so simple.

 

[*PAF]

That is the SANFL that has been covering your bl----y $$$$$$$ losses for so long .
...

Have they really?
Geelong is on record saying they make $750k profit from just 22,000 spectators.
Now I am not saying that Port should as we do not own the stadium but the combined profit should be a conservative 2/3 of that, at least 500K per game given it is a bigger stadium with more lights to turn on, more toilets to flush etc.

That means $500k profit a game with an average of 22,000 spectators, how that profit is split up is another story. Well given we need 27,000 and you lot need 32,000 to break even it is not hard to see how the profit is split up. It is also hard to see why the SANFL is running at a loss.

 

[Team DJ]

Port Adelaide have been pumping more $$$$ into the SANFL than any other club for years, so much so that the SANFL would not exist today if not for Port Adelaide. Better go through the history books and your facts right before you mouth off.

I think he needs to pull out some books and do some reading. The Power guys on here are actually aking some of the most sense.
Far better then the Lolz at the Port Powas type stuff we're getting.

 

[*PAF]

I think he needs to pull out some books and do some reading. The Power guys on here are actually aking some of the most sense.
Far better then the Lolz at the Port Powas type stuff we're getting.

To be fair it is only from a few.

 

[Team DJ]

To be fair it is only from a few.

None of your guys are though. Whom he was having a dig at

 

[Us against the rest]

I think he needs to pull out some books and do some reading. The Power guys on here are actually aking some of the most sense.
Far better then the Lolz at the Port Powas type stuff we're getting.

All Port want is our AFL players at the Magpies and the Crows to have their 2nds side so we both as SA clubs can at least be on a level playing field as the Vics. Let's see sense and get on with what needs to be done, so we can compete at the highest level with success.

 

[*PAF]

None of your guys are though. Whom he was having a dig at

If we would be having this discussion on the Port board there would be one or two there as well from time to time. All part of being on BF.

 

[jackster83]

That deal looks horrific. Better off putting a side in the VFL. I would give it five years at most before the AFL takes over the SANFL as many people would lose interest. Too bad for the boys club of Olsen, Kerin and however many failed SA premiers who got a cushy job with the SANFL.

 

[Team DJ]

All Port want is our AFL players at the Magpies and the Crows to have their 2nds side so we both as SA clubs can at least be on a level playing field as the Vics. Let's see sense and get on with what needs to be done, so we can compete at the highest level with success.

Agreed. I reckon you should even keep your whole zone to be honest. Keep your zone but not allow any transferred players to come across.

Therefore the Juniors, Maggie 2s and the "top up" senior boys would've all come through the system.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

All Port want is our AFL players at the Magpies and the Crows to have their 2nds side so we both as SA clubs can at least be on a level playing field as the Vics. Let's see sense and get on with what needs to be done, so we can compete at the highest level with success.

My understanding is Port want all their AFL players at the Magpies & keep their Magpies reserves, underage teams & recruiting zones. The bolded part is the sticking point with the SANFL.

 

[Geoffa32]

Have they really?
Geelong is on record saying they make $750k profit from just 22,000 spectators.
Now I am not saying that Port should as we do not own the stadium but the combined profit should be a conservative 2/3 of that, at least 500K per game given it is a bigger stadium with more lights to turn on, more toilets to flush etc.

That means $500k profit a game with an average of 22,000 spectators, how that profit is split up is another story. Well given we need 27,000 and you lot need 32,000 to break even it is not hard to see how the profit is split up. It is also hard to see why the SANFL is running at a loss.

Everything was not always rosy at Geelong. They nearly moved from Kardinia Park
http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2013/05/31/366181_gfc.html

Of course they rent their ground from a city council and control the stadium. Much like Freo/WCE who pay a flat rent and control all revenue streams on match day.

Our scenario is more like Docklands. Where most of the tennants are not happy with the stadium deal.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ad-gets-qualified-support-20110511-1eix9.html

A clean stadium will always be more profitable.

 

[*PAF]

My understanding is Port want all their AFL players at the Magpies & keep their Magpies reserves, underage teams & recruiting zones. The bolded part is the sticking point with the SANFL.

Port want to keep the SANFL structure as is and are prepared to give some minor concessions such as a reduced recruiting zone.
In other words the PAFC wants to remain a SANFL club that has a team in the AFL.

 

[Us against the rest]

Agreed. I reckon you should even keep your whole zone to be honest. Keep your zone but not allow any transferred players to come across.

Therefore the Juniors, Maggie 2s and the "top up" senior boys would've all come through the system.

Good post. Crows and Port need to do what is best for them selves as individual clubs as our needs are a little different but we also have to protect our clubs because we play in the AFL and some times i think the SANFL do not have us as a priority as we are AFL clubs and that could blur their decision making when comes to the AFL clubs, besides the clubs that do the the voting have their own SANFL club as a priority and the AFL clubs as a secondary.

 

[*PAF]

Everything was not always rosy at Geelong. They nearly moved from Kardinia Park
http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2013/05/31/366181_gfc.html

Of course they rent their ground from a city council and control the stadium. Much like Freo/WCE who pay a flat rent and control all revenue streams on match day.

Our scenario is more like Docklands. Where most of the tennants are not happy with the stadium deal.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ad-gets-qualified-support-20110511-1eix9.html

A clean stadium will always be more profitable.

Docklands is not a good analogy as the owners only have a limited time to make enough money to pay for the stadium and make a profit from the venture. They will be giving the stadium away in a few years for a peppercorn of sorts.
The SANFL own and will keep owning the stadium and thus are in a similar situation to Geelong.
Yeah I know about the AO move but that doesn't change the position they have been in since 1990.

wrt clean stadium deal I don't disagree at all, I was referring to the "combined" profit from games and the SANFL crying poor. They have made it sound as if there was no profit more than once.

 

[Us against the rest]

My understanding is Port want all their AFL players at the Magpies & keep their Magpies reserves, underage teams & recruiting zones. The bolded part is the sticking point with the SANFL.

That's correct, we don't understand why this is a problem, it would be like saying to Collingwood wipe out all of your history, the Collingwood history is now only since the introduction of the AFL and the same would go for the rest of the Vic teams.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Port want to keep the SANFL structure as is and are prepared to give some minor concessions such as a reduced recruiting zone.
In other words the PAFC wants to remain a SANFL club that has a team in the AFL.

No they don't - otherwise you wouldn't need to change anything from what is happening today!

Port want to change so all Port Power players not playing in the AFL, play at the Magpies & keep all the other teams & zones.

ie. Port want their cake & eat it too.

 

[Tex Support]

Port want to keep the SANFL structure as is and are prepared to give some minor concessions such as a reduced recruiting zone.
In other words the PAFC wants to remain a SANFL club that has a team in the AFL.

Which I think the average footy fan doesnt have an issue with, including myself.

But just to clarify, is it the SANFL or the (majority of the) other 8 SANFL clubs specifically that are opposed to Ports model? Or is it both? I'm not heaps clear on how the SANFL operates (i.e. who has control)...

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

That's correct, we don't understand why this is a problem, it would be like saying to Collingwood wipe out all of your history, the Collingwood history is now only since the introduction of the AFL and the same would go for the rest of the Vic teams.

I keep getting told by Port supporters that your history resides with PAFC - the Power not the magpies... but now you are one. Any way, if the magpies still exist in the SANFL, so does your history. How does losing your magpie reserves, underage & zones delete your history?

 

[ozaddy]

No they don't - otherwise you wouldn't need to change anything from what is happening today!

Port want to change so all Port Power players not playing in the AFL, play at the Magpies & keep all the other teams & zones.

ie. Port want their cake & eat it too.

There will be players from the Port Magpies who are not in the Power AFL squad that will get picked up for the Crows and play back in the Crows reserves team, so it's not one-way traffic, unless the Crows choose not to pick local youngsters?

 

[*PAF]

No they don't - otherwise you wouldn't need to change anything from what is happening today!

Port want to change so all Port Power players not playing in the AFL, play at the Magpies & keep all the other teams & zones.

ie. Port want their cake & eat it too.

Yeahh-ish. Not too different to what I said.
Yep the only part Port wants to change is to have all Port AFL players in the Magpies. To do that there will need to be some concessions made and so far they have offered reduced zones.
IMO they will need to spell out further details such as what Team DJ proposed in his post. Just adding the Port players to the existing Magpies teams would not work and SANFL clubs would be mad to accept it.

 

[craig crowing]

Have they really?
Geelong is on record saying they make $750k profit from just 22,000 spectators.
Now I am not saying that Port should as we do not own the stadium but the combined profit should be a conservative 2/3 of that, at least 500K per game given it is a bigger stadium with more lights to turn on, more toilets to flush etc.

That means $500k profit a game with an average of 22,000 spectators, how that profit is split up is another story. Well given we need 27,000 and you lot need 32,000 to break even it is not hard to see how the profit is split up. It is also hard to see why the SANFL is running at a loss.

So what your club been making a profit then . You have to be from out of space . You have regularly lost millions yearly and only still owned by SANFL due to those massive losses and debt holding up Crows sale as well.
Anyway pretty simple if want join you accept terms or dont as same as Crows.

 

[Us against the rest]

No they don't - otherwise you wouldn't need to change anything from what is happening today!

Port want to change so all Port Power players not playing in the AFL, play at the Magpies & keep all the other teams & zones.

ie. Port want their cake & eat it too.

I can understand it may look that way to none Port supporters but if it was Norwood or Sturt in our shoes today, there is no way i would expect them to give up what they have built of many years and valuable commitments to junior football and i could well understand what that would mean to their supporters, in particular their older supporters that grew up with their club and what it stands for.

 

[*PAF]

Which I think the average footy fan doesnt have an issue with, including myself.

But just to clarify, is it the SANFL or the (majority of the) other 8 SANFL clubs specifically that are opposed to Ports model? Or is it both? I'm not heaps clear on how the SANFL operates (i.e. who has control)...

That is a big part of the problem. There really is no such thing as the SANFL. The SANFL is the SANFL clubs.
Since one club was approved it has become the SANFL clubs minus Port as that was one of the conditions for the approval.

The SAFC (South Australian Football Commission) reports to the SANFL not the other way around.

 

[*PAF]

So what your club been making a profit then . You have to be from out of space . You have regularly lost millions yearly and only still owned by SANFL due to those massive losses and debt holding up Crows sale as well.
Anyway pretty simple if want join you accept terms or dont as same as Crows.

Who said Port have made a profit, the games have made a profit => the SANFL has made a profit from the games and a good one at that.