SANFL plotting another Port Adelaide Football Club coup

[aneale]

This is your argument? Aneale's Anecdotes, while entertaining, are not evidence. In any case, faced with a choice between building on Port Adelaide's small base, or riding out a who-knows-how-long period of completely underwriting a club with no base, which would the AFL and SANFL see as the bigger risk? I have a feeling that they will need a little bit more convincing than "oh yeah, I'll go see the Pirates." Unless of course you think the AFL isn't going to think twice about sinking GWS amounts of money into supporting a club for an indefinite period in an established football market.

at this point in time, they're thinking Port given they are looking 50 years ahead and not 5.

 

[bomberclifford]

Exactly - People go on about Port not having enough supporters, which is actually billshit. Port probably have more supporters then (and I'm not having a go here as North, Bulldogs, Melbourne, (and of course GWS and GC) and similar to the middle tier Vic teams St Kilda, Hawthorn and Geelong. As pointed out above, Hawthorn got 27k on beautiful day for footy at a ground much loved by their supporters when their team is weeks away from a serious tilt on a flag. Shit we were doing that as well 5 years ago. We in fact got 37k to a match agianst Freo in the last minor round of 2007. How many Vic teams can claim that? Melbourne got 15k on the weekend but no one actually mentions that. Brisbane got 23k to their home derby. Oh but despite having more success than anyone over the last decade they are a still a "developing market"

Seriously, we are rock bottom. We are playing the worst a Port side has ever played in anybodies living memories. Those 20k that are rocking up at the moment deserve a medal - these people are the diehards. These are those that will rock up through thick and thin. These are the real "Port" people. Just like the 15-20 thousand real Carlton, St Kilda, Hawthorn, Geelong people who were rocking up to their games in the early part of the 2000's when they were absolutely pathetic.

Take away the Port name and you lose these people. Band wagoners from all clubs come and go, losing the diehards would be fatal.

Oh yeah, just one final point, the trolling from Freo supporters on this subject I find really curious. I personally like Freo, but seriously a few more supporters and a bit of money in the bank is a great financial base, culture and success can't always be bought.

Good post.

I love it when the crowd figures for Demons, Bulldogs and Roos are pointed out to them and they cry, "but that's against a low drawing opponent!"

It hasn't dawned on them yet that we, (by we I mean all non-victorian teams) play a "low drawing opponent" for all bar 1-2 home games.

 

[malph]

at this point in time, they're thinking Port given they are looking 50 years ahead and not 5.

Only five? Impressive. Let's shut up shop now. I have to admit, the weight of evidence you have provided is intimidating.

 

[Alberton]

Ok, the solution is obvious.

Constraints:
SANFL - want to keep milking 2 AFL licenses
Port - want to keep their revenue

Solution:
1. Port hand back their license to the SANFL so they can form a second generic team - make the crows south and the new one north or whatever

2. Hand Port a clean AFL license - 19th club - no SANFL appointed directors on our board

3. Hand the WAFL a license for a 3rd WA club - 20th club

4. Crows and new SANFL club keep playing at AAMI, Port play at AA (as is - 38k capacity)


Next problem?

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Port Adelaide from an outsiders point of view have been very hard done by from the AFL. Not sure Port have done all the right things either but the AFL has not helped.

Firstly Port should never of stayed in the SANFL, they should have moved that one entity from the SANFL to the AFL.
They should have stood firm and said we are black and white and will wear Black and White stripes at Home games V Collingwood and when we play the Pies away we will find and alternate jumper. The AFL did the wrong thing here by not allowing this. Changing their tag from magpies to Power was not such an issue.
The colours certainly are.
Their are numerous Blue and white sides so what the issue with two black and white sides still has me baffled.

Secondly when Port went into the AFL they should have been promoted by the AFL as to who they are, the AFL should have been promoting Port as the biggest and greatest Aussie rules football club in the country and should have been promoting the fact this great club was now in the AFL.

The AFL failed on this and failed Port in the meantime.

Their is obviously financial issues which I can't comment on as know little about it but Port need to withdraw from the SANFL, start wearing Black and White stripes at their home games. Get back their identity, get the AFL to promote them as to who this great club is.

To me Port are Black and White, I would think to their supporters they are also. Why can't they wear black and White? Why can't they wear their prison bar jumper?

Port need to be Port again. Until that happens and the AFL starts backing them in and promoting this clubs history then they will be in trouble.

This has nothing to do with Collingwood or any other club, Port are black and white. They were incepted into the AFL as Port.

What is the Problem?

 

[Jose Cruzeiro]

mate we are in a city of 1.1M and the AFL football going public comprises of about 65,000 people currently. You really think there are not 16-20,000 people out there that couldnt be found to replace all the 'die hards' that allegedly go watch Port. They don't, but thats another issue.

Well I go to see Port Power, and it couldn't be worse. So yeah, i'd probably get dragged along to see the Southern Pirates go round.

They've entertained a 3rd CLub in WA, surely the market is conrnered by the pseudo State team Eagles and the plucky alternative Freo by now tho'

So is that a 'yes' to becoming a fully paid up member of the Southern Power (or Pirates, whatever floats your boat)?

As for Perth they have a population that is 50% bigger than ours, an economy that makes ours look like a lemonade stand and a stadium that holds 10,000 less than AAMI. Unsurprisingly demand for footy there is much greater than current supply, which is why they have entertained the idea of a third team. It's still a fair way off though and the third team idea might struggle if/when the Burswood Stadium gets built allowing WCE and Freo to grow and soak up the extra demand.

We have almost the exact opposite situation here in SA. The two teams we already have arent at capacity so there is plenty of opportunity for people to get on board, but they're not. So once again why would these currently disinterested 'neutrals' suddenly change their mind when the Southern Pirates drop anchor?

Well thats GWS and Perth done. Where are we going next aneale.....Papua New Guinea?!

 

[Underdog]

So is that a 'yes' to becoming a fully paid up member of the Southern Power (or Pirates, whatever floats your boat)

Presumably there is a group of people that don't like Adelaide (like people didn't like West Coast) but felt alienated by Port Adelaide (unlike Freo).

 

[Larry the Liquidator]

By the time the second licence was offered for tender, the Adelaide Crows had already infiltrated the state of SA. The name "Adelaide", the state emblem, the state's colours, the catchcry "team for all South Australians", playing in a market without a competitor for 6 years, all pretty much shored up the majority of support from the state of SA. To make matters worse for the PAFC, just as they were trying to penetrate the market with its emergence into the AFL, and start the process of playing catch up to the Crows, the Crows win not one, but two premierships, which pretty much secures a further generation of kids as supporters.

But even before the second club was decided, it was going to be difficult for any club to come in and take market share. Be it Crows Mark II, or Port Adelaide, or the Norwood/Sturt merger or the other cartels, that second sub licencee would have been up against it from the start. Port was not just handed the licence, it had to go through the tender process along with its competitors. At that time, Port's bid was the only bid which was seen as a real alternative to the Crows. Port's marketing pitch was along the lines of "we're a real club with history, tradition and success, with a heart and soul". Aside from the other tenderers, the only other option for a second club to play out of SA was a second composite side starting from scratch, most likely to be based in the deep southern or northern suburbs. Would a second composite side been a better option than Port? Who knows, but I suspect a second composite side would have also struggled. It would have had to contend with the Crows' market share, the Crows' two premierships, it would not have been called "Adelaide [insert whatever nickname here]" because the AFC would have had something to say about the "Adelaide" bit, and they would most likely have been based in a region of Adelaide which in Adelaide terms, is light years away from AAMI Stadium.

I for one believe the Port decision was the right one. Obviously the current state of affairs will beg to differ, but you just can't say the decision was wrong without throwing up a viable alternative. At the time, Port was the viable option. Unfortunately, alot of bad decisions have been made along the way, which have been discussed previously in other threads. It's up to the PAFC and the SANFL to get it right. And therein lies a great deal of the problem: two orgs, one owns the other, yet two different agendas, not a common goal.

 

[Papa G]

Presumably there is a group of people that don't like Adelaide (like people didn't like West Coast) but felt alienated by Port Adelaide (unlike Freo).

So every non West Coast supporter barracks for Freo? If that's the case then Freo aren't all that well supported.

The point Jose makes still stands. Those that found the Crows un palatable and could never support Port either stuck with their SANFL and or/stuck with their old Victorian team.

So what you are suggesting is that these 2 groups will suddenly start supporting a side that is either the remenants of the old Port Adelaide or a Crows Mark II? Ditch their Vic team this time around, something that they couldn't do 20 years ago but some how mariculously would now even though they are more rusted on to their Vic team than they were propbably then....... Or maybe we can draw on this mythical group of people who currently have anything from miniscule to zero interset in the AFL to come along and support the South Australian Southern Right Whales? Is this your plan?

 

[Tas]

That is the thing about plots that are leaked, nobody admits to them existing, otherwise they wouldn't be plots.

North supporters understand what Port supporters are feeling, when people in and around your club are conspiring with the enemy, when you don't really have a voice or power to put an end to the garbage going on and when you are being lied to be everyone who has a vested interest in your demise. It is a sick position to be in and a lot of supporters can't deal with it.

Port deserves it's spot in the AFL and deserves to have it's place here as more than just a money making machine for the SANFL. AFL had the opportunity to force significant change for the better and chose the easy way out, which was to sign a cheque instead of free Port from the shackles.

AFL should force the SANFL to adopt an acceptable financial model which revolves around the SANFL sharing from the profitability of their clubs, not siphoning from the clubs. The clubs should pay for the running costs of games but all of the revenue generated should go to Crows and Port and the SANFL can take an agreed percentage of any overall profit figure from running the club so the SANFL has a vested interest in promoting their clubs and making them more successful.

The current model is garbage and the AFL bank rolling it hasn't done Port any favours. The BF vultures who would rather see Port die for their own amusement need to piss off.

 

[Underdog]

So every non West Coast supporter barracks for Freo? If that's the case then Freo aren't all that well supported.

I didn't say that. A lot will remain with their original clubs.

Freo also swayed a lot of West Coast fans across. If they were as unpalatable as Port then they otherwise mightn't have.

 

[Geoffa32]

I have read in this thread, more than once, how Port have 36,000 members.

Given the stick the club is copping this week it would make a big statement to those of us on the outside of solidarity amongst them if a large crowd went to this weeks game.

An even bigger statement if there were placards chastising the SANFL's coup, which may well be complete by then.

We keep hearing about tradition, history, real club etc, but when push comes to shove and the chips are down the majority of those 36,000 wont be there.

 

[saintal]

I have read in this thread, more than once, how Port have 36,000 members.

Given the stick the club is copping this week it would make a big statement to those of us on the outside of solidarity amongst them if a large crowd went to this weeks game.

An even bigger statement if there were placards chastising the SANFL's coup, which may well be complete by then.

We keep hearing about tradition, history, real club etc, but when push comes to shove and the chips are down the majority of those 36,000 wont be there.

I could be wrong, but I believe that the 36K includes Port Magpies members as well (under the whole "One Club" idea). So the true Power membership is actually closer to 30K.

Happy to be corrected on this though.

 

[Waspy79]

I could be wrong, but I believe that the 36K includes Port Magpies members as well (under the whole "One Club" idea). So the true Power membership is actually closer to 30K.

Happy to be corrected on this though.

Correct, the figure is closer to 32,000 after excluding Port Magpies members, and this figure includes financial members with no access to games.

 

[Waspy79]

I have read in this thread, more than once, how Port have 36,000 members.

Given the stick the club is copping this week it would make a big statement to those of us on the outside of solidarity amongst them if a large crowd went to this weeks game.

An even bigger statement if there were placards chastising the SANFL's coup, which may well be complete by then.

We keep hearing about tradition, history, real club etc, but when push comes to shove and the chips are down the majority of those 36,000 wont be there.

No different to your club then Geoffa, except we never hear about the camry's tradition and history as there is none.

 

[Geoffa32]

No different to your club then Geoffa, except we never hear about the camry's tradition and history as there is none.

All clubs start somewhere.

20 years not enough history for you?

Anyway your response is more suited to the Bay. I acknowledge our crowds are down also, but we are nit the subject of a hostile takeover in an attempt to destroy our identity.

You would think this weekend would be a fair indication of the real support you have out there. The rank and file members who care and want to do something, even just a token show of support. Port are at a cross roads right now. If only 15000 people are seen to care the powers to be could be justified in their actions.

AFL only have to point to Foostcray and suggest that a rebranding will work. If Southern/Adelaide Power start winning games, those people will be back, and the broader appeal generates more supporters. This will be Demetriou and Whickers reasoning for pushing for the name change Rooch has been fearing for a while now.

Lets not forget his "Adelaide Ravens" article. Said in jest, but some truth was weaved into his words...... .

FWIW I think a rebranding is a stupid idea, particularly to "Adelaide Power" it cheapens both our clubs and the natural rivalry that exists in this state.

 

[El_Scorcho]

AFL only have to point to Foostcray and suggest that a rebranding will work. If Southern/Adelaide Power start winning games, those people will be back, and the broader appeal generates more supporters. This will be Demetriou and Whickers reasoning for pushing for the name change Rooch has been fearing for a while now.

FWIW I think a rebranding is a stupid idea, particularly to "Adelaide Power" it cheapens both our clubs and the natural rivalry that exists in this state.

Are we talking 30 years from now or next year? If the name change ever happened you can bank on a boycotting campaign from Port people encouraging people to steer clear.

Starting from a base of ~30,000 members when we are at our absolute lowest ebb and slowly working to build up from there is a much better idea than alienating that ~30,000 and starting from scratch.

You can argue that the powerbrokers would be looking 30, 40 or 50 years into the future when making these decisions, but by then the old SANFL hatred of Port Adelaide will be gone. We wont have an SANFL administration who hates us because of 1990 and ideally we'll have people running the club making smarter decisions.

We just need Whicker and his generation to retire and die.

 

[Papa G]

I acknowledge our crowds are down also, but we are not the subject of a hostile takeover in an attempt to destroy our identity.

The SANFL is hardly going to have a hostile takeover of itself

 

[bomberclifford]

The SANFL is hardly going to have a hostile takeover of itself

I wouldn't put it past them.

 

[Waspy79]

All clubs start somewhere.

20 years not enough history for you?

Anyway your response is more suited to the Bay. I acknowledge our crowds are down also, but we are nit the subject of a hostile takeover in an attempt to destroy our identity.

You would think this weekend would be a fair indication of the real support you have out there. The rank and file members who care and want to do something, even just a token show of support. Port are at a cross roads right now. If only 15000 people are seen to care the powers to be could be justified in their actions.

AFL only have to point to Foostcray and suggest that a rebranding will work. If Southern/Adelaide Power start winning games, those people will be back, and the broader appeal generates more supporters. This will be Demetriou and Whickers reasoning for pushing for the name change Rooch has been fearing for a while now.

Lets not forget his "Adelaide Ravens" article. Said in jest, but some truth was weaved into his words...... .

FWIW I think a rebranding is a stupid idea, particularly to "Adelaide Power" it cheapens both our clubs and the natural rivalry that exists in this state.

A rebranding would be the end of the club and I think you know that. The majority of existing fans would not support some SANFL re-badged second team for all South Australians, and the number of fans that would return, well I could count them on one hand.

The focus on Port Adelaide is ridiculous. It's widely acknowledged we (together with Adelaide) have the worst stadium deal and that this is the main reason for our poor off-field position.

We have a strong membership base (32,000) and attract crowds comparable with several other clubs strangely not subject to the same scrutiny as we are. Melbourne got 14,000 to their game on the weekend, where are crys to re-brand them the Victorian Generics?

The pissant SA mentality is shining through and in football terms dates back to 1990 and will not dissapear whilst the SAFC, egged on by the SANFL and the unfortunate control they hold over the club, continues to comprise cronies with massive chips on their shoulder.

 

[Minotaur]

Whilst this is just trolling by Rucci, the whole situation reveals the lack of foresight shown during the formative years of the Power. Alienating the market with a consistently narcissistic message to the football world was never going to work - even in the halcyon days of their premiership, they could still never consistently top 35k attendances.

The interesting thing about it all is that the PAFC's arrogant approach was born out of a dominance of the local comp. Their entry into the AFL coincided with a changing of the guard in local footy here, together with a marked change in demographics and urban sprawl in Adelaide and it's surrounds. There are now large and growing populations to the north, east and south of the city, whereas an attempt to redevelop Port's heartland has largely failed.

Tying an AFL club to a small, old population in a small city was never going to work. It's going to take one hell of a change to get them out of their mess though. Re-branding the license and removing references to "Port Adelaide" may not be enough. It would be a gutsy move to remove the Port moniker from the second license, but it may be the only move that makes sense.

The point about the population centres in Adelaide is correct -but your argument assumes you need to live in Pt Adelaide to support Pt Adelaide. This is just not correct in the same way that Man U supports don't necessarily live in Manchester.

Why would anyone support Crows Mark II? Would it be the team for all other South Australians?

 

[Minotaur]

Looks better already.

You'd switch from the Crows to that then?

 

[thegreig]

Exactly - People go on about Port not having enough supporters, which is actually billshit. Port probably have more supporters then (and I'm not having a go here as North, Bulldogs, Melbourne, (and of course GWS and GC) and similar to the middle tier Vic teams St Kilda, Hawthorn and Geelong. As pointed out above, Hawthorn got 27k on beautiful day for footy at a ground much loved by their supporters when their team is weeks away from a serious tilt on a flag.

bit off topic but how is Hawthor a middle tier vic club? we have 56,450 payed up members.

 

[Stinger...]

...cronies with massive chips on their shoulder.

Oh the irony

FWIW, rebranding will not work and if it is even muted then the supporters need to come up with something to ensure it doesn't happen.

I don't think the SANFL would seriously consider it. Someone might have thrown the idea out there for the lulz in a meeting and some flog couldnt wait to tell the little flog all about it!

 

[Minotaur]

I think time will help us improve our supporter base.

I have many "Gen-Z" cousins who don't give a shit about SANFL footy because it's not the biggest game in town. For them it's just a question of supporting Port or the Crows and they either don't know or care about the history between Port and the rest of the SANFL. As time goes by it should become even less of an issue.
I'm not saying that time alone will fix our problems but I just think that too much is made of this issue, especially when many of the next generation of footy supporters will be largely indifferent to it.

That's the truth.

No one has given a shit about the SANFL since the crows entered the AFL 20 years ago. it is only old men who run the argument that the Port heritage in the SANFL turns off potential new supporters because you need to be about as old as me (35) to remember a time when the SANFL was a big thing. Where is this army of 35++ people who would suddenly start supporting the POwer if it dropped its Port heritage. Will KG and Kornsey senior start supporting us.