Time the Roos moved North - Age 12/3/06

[Marstermind]

http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2006/03/11/1141701729812.html

Read this and hate Caroline Wilson more.

 

[Mailman]

How many times can the same story be recycled with tiny variances? She, and the Age, are a joke.

The story is on a heavier rotation than Die Hard or Star Wars.........

 

[deano1]

Someone should tell Caro there is at least one more debt ridden/cash strapped club based in Melbourne then the Roo's.

 

[gokangas]

Never thought I would say this but there is some sense in what she says.

Every year it is the same story - we live on the fincancial edge and if it wasn't for AFL TV rights we would probably be dead.

Successive administrations have all promised that their number one priority is to establish a sustainable fundinmg base for the club. They have all failed to do that although they have all kept the club alive (thank God).

I am a 40 year plus supporter who got married in the Social Club and have been a member over 40 years. I am a 100% NMFC person. I don't want to see us collapse or permanently move North.

But something has to give.

The AFL can take a big chunk of the blame. They had the chance to help us become the second Sydney side but did not deliver on their promises to support our endeavours in the harbour city - we were shafted by the AFL bigtime and that set us back at least 10 years. They promised us the world and then caved in to the rantings and whinges of the Sydney Swans so they had a chance to help us make a big change.

Not sure what the answer is but somewhere, someday in the future we need a brave administration to make an even braver decision.

I'm just not sure what the compromise is!

 

[Arden]

As much as I hate this mole, and the way she has used this article to slag us off at every opportunity, I found out last night she might be on the money.

I went to the Richmond-Sydney game at Carrara last night, and was talking to a mate who's old man is on the board at Southport. Apparently Southport's CEO has flown down to Melbourne this weekend for "urgent" talks with North and the AFL. I nearly spat my beer out when he told me. They only have a small window of opportunity to negotiate as the Canberra deal has come up, which I think is what someone posted yesterday that the Duffman had said.

Then about 10 minutes later I bumped into Kingy who was here with the Tiggers, and asked him when he was going back to North, and he replied, "when they come up here". I don't know if it was a throw-away line or not, but I felt sick hearing this on top of the other news.

I live on the Coast, and sure I would get to see the boys more often, but I am adamant I dont want them to play games here. The club that commits to playing some home games here will end up here permanently, and stuff that, we are North Melbourne. If we have to play games elsewhere, I want it to be Canberra, because I dont believe they could support a team full time, so there will be no pressure to move there.

Watch for this story to unfold.

PS: I still hate USC.

 

[deano1]

Never thought I would say this but there is some sense in what she says.

Every year it is the same story - we live on the fincancial edge and if it wasn't for AFL TV rights we would probably be dead.



I'm just not sure what the compromise is!

Without the tv rights there would probaly be 3 or 4 other Victorian clubs that would go over the financial edge, we are not the only one there.

As far as I'm concerned we offered to do our bit to allieviate the problem of to many Victorian club back in 1996, only to be shafted by the AFL and the other clubs.

Now its someone elses turn.

 

[choppy]

I despise the bitch as much as anyone but in this case she is correct. She has summed it up in her last paragraph.


Imagine the strength of the Shinboners' spirit with some old-fashioned financial strength behind it. The Kangaroos have been forced to settle for less for long enough.


Playing games in the depths of winter in Canberra in front of 8,000 people is a path to oblivion. Anyone who can't see that is living in fairyland, a couple of thousand members paying 60 bucks doesn't cut it.

Now is the time for Duff to live up to his reputation and do it on Norths terms. If we recommit to Canberra the club is doomed.

It requires some innovative and watertight agreements in terms of number of games played at Carrara, decent Melbourne based reciprocal game based membership packages (i.e a 12 game membership package in Melbourne).

Prime time coverage back into Melbourne from Carrara on a Sunday/ Monday / Thursday night is what is required. A choice b/w Canberra and Carrara is a no brainer.

I have been less than impressed with Duff thus far, its time for him to put up. The destiny of the club is still somewhat on our terms, if he continues in Canberra than in 5 years we will be shafted off anyway.

 

[windsock]

I despise the bitch as much as anyone but in this case she is correct. She has summed it up in her last paragraph.


Imagine the strength of the Shinboners' spirit with some old-fashioned financial strength behind it. The Kangaroos have been forced to settle for less for long enough.


Playing games in the depths of winter in Canberra in front of 8,000 people is a path to oblivion. Anyone who can't see that is living in fairyland, a couple of thousand members paying 60 bucks doesn't cut it.

Now is the time for Duff to live up to his reputation and do it on Norths terms. If we recommit to Canberra the club is doomed.

It requires some innovative and watertight agreements in terms of number of games played at Carrara, decent Melbourne based reciprocal game based membership packages (i.e a 12 game membership package in Melbourne).

Prime time coverage back into Melbourne from Carrara on a Sunday/ Monday / Thursday night is what is required. A choice b/w Canberra and Carrara is a no brainer.

I have been less than impressed with Duff thus far, its time for him to put up. The destiny of the club is still somewhat on our terms, if he continues in Canberra than in 5 years we will be shafted off anyway.

All fair enough points but your comment on Duff is a bit harsh. Hasn't he been the driver behind our new $6 million headquarters? No disrepect to Ronny Casey and the Doc, but since the Duffman joined the board, a project that has been talked about for years is finally on the go. Correct me if I'm wrong but I am assuming he has played a major part in that.

 

[Bondi]

I'd much rather fly up to the Gold Coast to watch a handful of home games played up there than fly up to Canberra and fly out the same day.

At least you can make a holiday out of a trip to Queensland as well.

 

[spurs]

I believe tasmania would be the best option as i have stated before. The Gold Coast would be the next best as they have all the facilities and a bigger support base for us to survive. The population is growing rapidly while Canberra is rugby league and it would take too long and has taken too long for membership growth.
Now Perth would be even better

 

[Groucho]

When I saw the headline and author I thought,well she's left us alone for a couple of years but now it looks like our turn again. I was ready to rip her to shreads but ,having read the article a couple of times, I must admit I didn't think there was too much wrong with it.
She's saying we'd be better off playing our 3 interstate home games at Carrara rather than Canberra because it's more of an AFL region than the Rugby biased ACT. That we should get in there and garner some real support before one of the bigger clubs does. That IF there is a rationalisation of Melbourne clubs somewhere down the track then Southport has great facilities and cash generating potential for an AFL club and would be the best place to go if it comes to that.
I certainly don't want a relocation but believe the Carrara option has far more benefits than Canberra for playing 3 home games.

 

[Tas]

AFL can't force us to move and can't create conditional support agreements where they help out some clubs and do not help us out so the only threat is if they do not help any clubs out.

I think playing games in Queensland is probably the best place to play games outside of Victoria because if the money dries up we have no other options playing games out of Manuka, if we are playing games out of QLD then there would be the scope to increase the number of games to cover what shortfall there is.

Yeah, it is not desirable but I'd rather see us relocate than be forced to merge or end up in NSW where they will only follow a side that is winning. But, i don't think we are in that position and are unlikely to be in that position. With the redevelopment of Arden Street I am sure everyone at the club has the desire to see us a melbourne based club and am sure the state government wouldn't want to see us go either so there would be pressure on the AFL for us to remain, especially if the government has kicked in millions to redevelop Arden Street.

I've been saying for a long time that while Canberra has been fantastic for us and the people of Canberra, it had to grow and provide a greater level of support for it to survive and if we ever left I doubt other clubs would be queuing up to play there.

 

[gokangas]

I believe tasmania would be the best option as i have stated before. The Gold Coast would be the next best as they have all the facilities and a bigger support base for us to survive. The population is growing rapidly while Canberra is rugby league and it would take too long and has taken too long for membership growth.
Now Perth would be even better

There will never be an AFL team in Tasmania as you cannot make money. You may get 12,000 people to a game but 10,000 get in on a family ticket.

 

[RooVegas]

A few issues in this one.
1) Arden St redevelopment: Business decisions should not be based on emotion, least of all business decisions regarding an investment of millions of dollars that our club simply cannot afford to get wrong. I've been nervous about this one since it was first proposed. The reality is we don't know if our club will be able to survive in our own rights, long term at Arden St. That's enough ambiguity for me to suggest that we shouldn't be pouring millions of dollars into something that might not last. The imperative is get our players into first class facilities. To do so, we should look around as to where we can train at that has professional standard facilities, not try to raise money from a membership base that year after year has already been giving above and beyond all that could be asked of it (mark my words, the club will soon be asking for volunteers amongst members to help physically rebuild Arden St - I'm betting they don't do that at Collingwood). Does it matter that Melbourne train at the Junction Oval? Of course not. Who cares where the bloody hell we train, or where we stick up our trophy cabinet? As long as our players are getting access to the best facilities.

2) Canberra vs Carrara vs Tassie (as proposed by someone else): Tricky one. We're just starting to make good inroads into Canberra, and it'd be a shame to lose out on that. That said, SE Qld is the fastest growing region in Australia, compared to ACT's slow growth (including the fact that much of the population there is transient, having come from somewhere else to work for Govt), while Tasmania's growth is close to negative. Gold Coast wins on that. Big negatives include the new rugby stadium building built there, right on the trainline. Compare that to Carrara which is out in the middle of (former) paddocks halfway between the Pacific Freeway and the Gold Coast Highway. The only way in and out is by road (bad ones at that), and it's now surrounded by new property estates. Think Waverley, only worse, and you're close to the money. The new NRL team being located on the Coast will take a lot of the dollars and attention away from any AFL team there (once again, like ACT, the AFL have been caught napping).
Other negatives: Southport is a very rich and powerful club (probably more so than us), and will want to have a decent amount of input into North if we were to enter an arrangement with them. And I don't think they'd settle for a temporary solution. I think both Southport and the AFL are looking for a team to be based there permanantly.
It's a tough one, and although it would mean I would see more games during the year, I don't know where I sit on that one. But a Gold Coast move is definitely workable (but will require some changes to the current set-up), so purely for selfish reasons, I'd say let's go with it.

3) Caroline Wilson: You're all correct. Silly hag.

 

[sutcliffe's hotel]

As much as I would love the mighty Kangas to follow me up here to Brisbanistan (having already followed me to Sydney and Canberra) I reckon we need to commit to getting a great deal at Manuka.

I would hate to think Canberra based Roo fans would just be shunted aside - unlike in Sydney where I doubt we were a chance of developing a support base.

It makes sense to threaten to leave Manuka to secure a better deal but we do not want to become a franchise where we up camp every several years in search of a dollar and a few more bums on seats.

Canberra is also a better deal to guarantee we never move permanently with the Carrara Kangaroos I would not be so sure. The Gold Coast gets a team in the NRL form next year so the AFL is wanting to get in now to secure an AFL base.

 

[sutcliffe's hotel]

As long as our players are getting access to the best facilities.

Best facilities does not mean success. Refer Collingwood & Carlton.

 

[spurs]

There will never be an AFL team in Tasmania as you cannot make money. You may get 12,000 people to a game but 10,000 get in on a family ticket.

Look for the scars on there neck in Tassie

As for North going to Tassie instead of the Gold Coast, i am looking at:

1. The travelling for our players to go to our "home game" ie. fatigue for our next game in Melbourne. If we play in Tassie the travelling is only 30 mins.

2. Whenever we play the Lions they will feel that its a "home" game for them.

3. They are also an AFL state and the support we would get there would be great.

 

[db_006]

A few issues in this one.
1) Arden St redevelopment: Business decisions should not be based on emotion, least of all business decisions regarding an investment of millions of dollars that our club simply cannot afford to get wrong. I've been nervous about this one since it was first proposed. The reality is we don't know if our club will be able to survive in our own rights, long term at Arden St. That's enough ambiguity for me to suggest that we shouldn't be pouring millions of dollars into something that might not last.

I don't think the redevelopment involves us pouring in millions. From what I understand the majority of the funding will come from the AFL, council and state government.

 

[RooVegas]

Look for the scars on there neck in Tassie

As for North going to Tassie instead of the Gold Coast, i am looking at:

1. The travelling for our players to go to our "home game" ie. fatigue for our next game in Melbourne. If we play in Tassie the travelling is only 30 mins.

2. Whenever we play the Lions they will feel that its a "home" game for them.

3. They are also an AFL state and the support we would get there would be great.

Some good points, Spurs. One thing to keep in mind is the north/south divide in Tassie. From what I've heard, there's a fair ol' rivalry between Hobart & Launceston. If we got to Hobart, then Launceston won't support us, and vice versa, so you only get half of a small state at best. On the plus side, (someone else might know this better), I think from memory we've got a nice little bit of existing support in Hobart (and Launceston's where Hawks play anyway, isn't it?).

The other thing that I can't help but think is that wherever we set up a partnership, we need to realistically keep in the back of our mind the consequences of some form of permanancy there. I don't think Tassie could sustain an AFL team full time, but might be able to do a 50-50 thing between Melbourne and Hobart, with say, half our home games there. I think the Canberra option might be similar in the long-term. Potential for a 50-50 split of games, as ACT probably can't sustain an AFL team outright. So those two partnerships would allow us to have one foot in Melbourne and one foot elsewhere. A long term partnership on the Gold Coast can only result in one thing: relocation down the track or having to pull out, as the AFL most likely want a team based there. Mind you, I wouldn't be too fussed about the "Lion's home game" thing, as we have to play in Brisbane most years anyway, so it would be just the same, only we get the gate receipt.

FWIW - If forced out of Melbourne, I wouldn't object to Perth. We've always had good support there, and I think it's our largest interstate supporters group by a long way, isn't it? But probably missed the chance with 2 teams there already.

 

[RooVegas]

Look for the scars on there neck in Tassie

As for North going to Tassie instead of the Gold Coast, i am looking at:

1. The travelling for our players to go to our "home game" ie. fatigue for our next game in Melbourne. If we play in Tassie the travelling is only 30 mins.

2. Whenever we play the Lions they will feel that its a "home" game for them.

3. They are also an AFL state and the support we would get there would be great.

Some good points, Spurs. One thing to keep in mind is the north/south divide in Tassie. From what I've heard, there's a fair ol' rivalry between Hobart & Launceston. If we got to Hobart, then Launceston won't support us, and vice versa, so you only get half of a small state at best. On the plus side, (someone else might know this better), I think from memory we've got a nice little bit of existing support in Hobart (and Launceston's where Hawks play anyway, isn't it?).

The other thing that I can't help but think is that wherever we set up a partnership, we need to realistically keep in the back of our mind the consequences of some form of permanancy there. I don't think Tassie could sustain an AFL team full time, but might be able to do a 50-50 thing between Melbourne and Hobart, with say, half our home games there. I think the Canberra option might be similar in the long-term. Potential for a 50-50 split of games, as ACT probably can't sustain an AFL team outright. So those two partnerships would allow us to have one foot in Melbourne and one foot elsewhere. A long term partnership on the Gold Coast can only result in one thing: relocation down the track or having to pull out, as the AFL most likely want a team based there. Mind you, I wouldn't be too fussed about the "Lion's home game" thing, as we have to play in Brisbane most years anyway, so it would be just the same, only we get the gate receipt.

FWIW - If forced out of Melbourne, I wouldn't object to Perth. We've always had good support there, and I think it's our largest interstate supporters group by a long way, isn't it? But probably missed the chance with 2 teams there already.

 

[Z_K]

I genuinely can't believe what I am reading.

Don't have time to go into it right now, but as soon as passionate supporters start folding the club will die.

And moving to freaking Queensland is death.

Unbelievable.

 

[Flag Man]

I genuinely can't believe what I am reading.

Don't have time to go into it right now, but as soon as passionate supporters start folding the club will die.

And moving to freaking Queensland is death.

Unbelievable.

Ditto, NB.

I posted this on the main board but it would pretty much sum up my response for this thread:

Want some big thinking?

Try this on:

All funds generated fron the game should be pooled and distributed equally amongst all the clubs.

And, I mean all funds.

Let's stop the dollar destroying the game. Let's see how fair dinkum people like Maguire and Sheedy REALLY are about the 10 victorian clubs.

The fact that the clingons have the most fans is historically fortuitous anyhow.

It's not as if there has been some type darwinistic purity responsible for the clingons having larger supporter bases.

The way some of their supporters crap on you would think that their teams ran out on the ground and played against themselves for 100 years.

Why should the bottom line decide history in sport? Do we let our game become a joke like English soccer, whereby a few fortuitous clubs become the playthings of bored billionares?

I live in a country that has a Foreign Queen as it's head, no independance day, is ruled by foreign laws, and has a foreign flag.

My/our football clubs are far more relevant cultural symbols than most things.

Our game is one of the few things that we can claim to be truly ours.

This is my bloody culture you people are talking about for crissakes!!!

Don't you people get it?

IT'S MORE THAN A GAME!!!

 

[RooVegas]

I genuinely can't believe what I am reading.

Don't have time to go into it right now, but as soon as passionate supporters start folding the club will die.

And moving to freaking Queensland is death.

Unbelievable.

No passionate supporter is folding here, NorthBhoy. It's precisely stopping the club from dying that we're all trying to do. We already play 3 home games interstate in order to stay alive. What this post is discussing is the hypothetical of where we play them, given the ACT contract is up for renegotiation.

 

[deano1]

If anything the Carrara oportunity gives us a strong bargaining tool. If we play our 3 games at Carrara or stay at Canberra either way we will get a better financial deal.

 

[The Zebra]

It may seem like no big deal - Carrara, Canberra - what's the difference? It is only 3 games. When it is presented in a nice article talking about multi-milion dollar facilities (wouldn't we only be using these facilities for our recovery 3 times a year Caroline?) and financial strength to match on field strength - it could almost sound tempting.

But ******** that. Carrara is relocation. It is ********ing relocation - no doubt.

If they want to relocate us, let them drag us kicking and ********ing screaming.

Don't fall for it.