Wayne Jackson

[footyfreak]

Yes, you have virtually no support. Little more than 200,000 fans Australian wide. The only reason you have 34,000 members, is because your survival has been threatened and a laerge proportion of that tiny supporter base has become members.

Yes, you have limited value to the AFL. Did the AFL skip a beat when Fitzroy merged? No. In fact, the AFL became stronger the next year, with one weak club gone, and Port entering the S.A market which needed a second team.

North play in front of low TV ratings, low crowds, and have limited appeal to the AFL and sponsors.

Look at Fitzroy and South Melbourne. Struggling clubs, both of them. They both now have a presence in the bigest and third biggest citues in the country and accoring to Roy Morgan are the two heaviest supported teams. They have good facilities, the support of a state, and are infinitely bigger and more powerful than what they would be if they were still in Melbourne.

You had the opportunity to be like this. You had the opportunity to do a "South Melbourne" and retain your histroy, and keeping your supporter base like they did. You could have had your existing Melbourne supporter base (and yes they'd stll support them, with South Melbourne being an example of that) plus the support of the biggest non-capital cuty in the country.

You could have had 100 million dollars, fantastic facilities, whilst retaining your history. You'd have been the same club playing out of a different city.

You would have been 5 times bigger and more influential than you are now.

So, why didn't YOU support it? Why didn't you do what's best for your club and support it? I know why. Because YOU are selfish. You want what's best for YOU so you can physically attend games in Melbourne. What about what's best for the club and their long term survival? What will make them thrive? Playing out of Melbourne? LOL! Yeah, right as if they will ever thrive in Melbourne.

It would best for North to be playing out of the Gold Coast. The fans want what's best for them (i.e to still be able to go to games) not what's best for the club. If they wanted what was best for the club, they'd support the move to the Gold Coast, which would see North both survive and thrive.

People that put what's best for them, before what's best for the cub are among the lowest form of footy fans.

That's a really good post

being an Adelaide based pies supporter I get a really good understanding of this coz i see my team once a year or whenever i head to Melbourne.

If the pies were broke and were looking to relocate to Darwin or Cairns or wherever, it would hardly make a difference to me. Sure I'd prefer it if they didn't but if it was that or potentially not existing in 5 years, i'd support it. If North relocated to GC, supporters would still see their team 5 times more than i do. I know it would suck big time and i understand why you would fight it to the death but Sydney are a great example of it not being the end of the world.

I went to my first Sydney game in Melbourne 2 weeks ago and i was staggered with how many Melbourne based supporters they had and how passionate they were. having never been before, i was always under the impression everyone jumped off coz the club was not south Melbourne relocated bla bla bla and they only had 100 supporters in Melbourne. I was very impressed!!!!

 

[feenix67]

A moronic interview by yet another homogenised theatre going soul from interstate. Trying to take every bit of passion and culture out of our game to suit these franchise clubs that are interstate.

They have no understanding of passion,no understanding of 100-150 years of history, of blood sweat and tears,good times and bad.

Rip rip woodchip is the only culture they know.

Sorry but I can't pass this one up. Go have a look at WJ's background. And while you're at it, go check out the histories of the WAFL, SANFL.

Just another ill informed comment from a supporter of a club who forgot how to win long before the comp went "national".

 

[feenix67]

Seriously, why does it matter where your team is based? The days of the tribal suburban football culture are well and truly behind us - isnt it more important that your club survives and prospers over the long term, rather than eke out another year or two just for the sake of being parked in the suburb in which they started?

Im sure not many of us barrack for the team that has the name of the suburb or area in which we grew up. In the SANFL I barrack for Sturt and Ive never lived in that area. It's strange that people are willing to risk the permanent demise of their club just for the sake of wanting it to keep training at the same oval - is it really that important? Should the rest of the comp be supporting you financially just for that??

 

[daicos4ever]

I think there is a pretty simple solution to all of this - no expansion.

Personally I think we can go without a soulless franchise based on the Gold Coast and playing out of Brisbane....

 

[rainman06]

Seriously, why does it matter where your team is based? The days of the tribal suburban football culture are well and truly behind us - isnt it more important that your club survives and prospers over the long term, rather than eke out another year or two just for the sake of being parked in the suburb in which they started?

Im sure not many of us barrack for the team that has the name of the suburb or area in which we grew up. In the SANFL I barrack for Sturt and Ive never lived in that area. It's strange that people are willing to risk the permanent demise of their club just for the sake of wanting it to keep training at the same oval - is it really that important? Should the rest of the comp be supporting you financially just for that??

If you have to ask these questions then you seriously misunderstand our game and the place it holds in the psyche of our nation.

 

[jacko57]

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11955227&postcount=176

as obvious as claiming to have an undergraduate degree - and then not knowing what one is? that kind of obvious?

What a total joke you are. That's the second time you've called me a liar for saying I have a university degree. I got mine 30 years ago ; maybe 'undergraduate degree' is a term in use these days, but it wasn't when I was a student. You sneer at my qualifications, yet clearly have none of your own. I guess claiming I'm lying is easier than admitting you're wrong.

If you typify the local population, it's no wonder 'Bad Boy Bubby' was set in Adelaide.

 

[kaysee]

Let's all sit back and have an educated look at this:

1st) WJ was interviewed on radio. Dare I say it not by his own calling but merely accepting an invitation to answer some questions on AFL issues. WJ was asked for his opinions (RE: AFL expansion and number of Melbourne teams) to which he has no doubt given considerable thought to over the last 10 years. WJ provides a totally unbiased business focused answer in the best interests of the game he actually loves. These comments come from a business administrator who's creditials and history in the business community are extremely strong and lengthy.

2nd) Jacko57's opinions were never asked for by anyone but he offered them anyway. Jacko57's opinions are unqualified, apart from mere heresay, for he has no public profile. Jacko57 provides a biased 'don't bag my club' opinion which, whilst passionate and supportive to his beloved NMFC, has no business value and whilst is good for NMFC it is not in the best interest of the overall game.

3rd) Apparently it is quite acceptable for Jacko57 to take WJ to task for his comments and come out calling WJ a "goose", lieing about WJs retirement, and to "just STFU"... but Jacko57 has can't accept people criticising his comments.

4th) Apparently Jacko57 is a B.Ec.,albeit from 30 years ago. Jacko57 stated a piece of paper doesn't mean we should automatically value your opinions... I agree! However, I rather value the opinions of a person, WJ, who has used that piece of paper to forge a career high up in some of Australia's leading businesses higher then a person, Jacko57, who in his 30 years now fills his days posting on an online forum.

5th) Again Jacko57 advertises his tertiary 'education' but the content of his posts convey that he is anything but:

"I heard this goose..."
"... how about you just go back under your rock..."
"...and just STFU?"

and my personal favourites:
"Some of us don't want to see the AFL become ... a bunch of wannabe-American franchises."
"... if someone tries to diss you as a fool whos"

What are you trying to be... some 50yo wannabe-American gangsta?

Then there is the whole backflip on the undergraduate remark, but that's been covered.

For the record WJ's word isn't gospel, he isn't immune to questioning, but at the very least his thoughts deserve respect which an 'educated' Jacko57 clearly lacks. This last part is astounding since it was WJ who initiated saving his beloved NMFC.

 

[jacko57]

Let's all sit back and have an educated look at this:

1st) WJ was interviewed on radio. Dare I say it not by his own calling but merely accepting an invitation to answer some questions on AFL issues. WJ was asked for his opinions (RE: AFL expansion and number of Melbourne teams) to which he has no doubt given considerable thought to over the last 10 years. WJ provides a totally unbiased business focused answer in the best interests of the game he actually loves. These comments come from a business administrator who's creditials and history in the business community are extremely strong and lengthy.

2nd) Jacko57's opinions were never asked for by anyone but he offered them anyway. Jacko57's opinions are unqualified, apart from mere heresay, for he has no public profile. Jacko57 provides a biased 'don't bag my club' opinion which, whilst passionate and supportive to his beloved NMFC, has no business value and whilst is good for NMFC it is not in the best interest of the overall game.

3rd) Apparently it is quite acceptable for Jacko57 to take WJ to task for his comments and come out calling WJ a "goose", lieing about WJs retirement, and to "just STFU"... but Jacko57 has can't accept people criticising his comments.

4th) Apparently Jacko57 is a B.Ec.,albeit from 30 years ago. Jacko57 stated a piece of paper doesn't mean we should automatically value your opinions... I agree! However, I rather value the opinions of a person, WJ, who has used that piece of paper to forge a career high up in some of Australia's leading businesses higher then a person, Jacko57, who in his 30 years now fills his days posting on an online forum.

5th) Again Jacko57 advertises his tertiary 'education' but the content of his posts convey that he is anything but:

"I heard this goose..."
"... how about you just go back under your rock..."
"...and just STFU?"

and my personal favourites:
"Some of us don't want to see the AFL become ... a bunch of wannabe-American franchises."
"... if someone tries to diss you as a fool whos"

What are you trying to be... some 50yo wannabe-American gangsta?

Then there is the whole backflip on the undergraduate remark, but that's been covered.

For the record WJ's word isn't gospel, he isn't immune to questioning, but at the very least his thoughts deserve respect which an 'educated' Jacko57 clearly lacks. This last part is astounding since it was WJ who initiated saving his beloved NMFC.

How dare I offer an opinion on BF! No-one else ever does this.

I'll leave aside the grade-6 level of literacy in your post, and address just a few points.

You were the one who said that WJ should be respected because he was qualified, unlike his uneducated critics. Was it you or the other nuffy who added that he has been a corporate executive, and therefore should be respected?

I pointed out that I have a tertiary degree ; I don't think it's the be-all and end-all, doesn't make me OR WJ infallible. You and Slow-crow want to argue that WJ's qualifications make him the oracle, but mine either don't exist or are worthless. Nice logic, professor.

I also added that being a former corporate executive doesn't make you the font of all wisdom either, otherwise John Elliott would be a respected commentator ; a point that you have chosen to ignore.

By the way, you have no idea of my standing in the community or professional achievements. I won't bother posting details, as it really isn't relevant, and you would probably claim I invented it all.

As to the real point of this thread : some sections of the football community, like WJ, believe it is desirable to reduce the number of teams based in Melbourne. Many, myself included, disagree strongly, on both emotional and economic grounds.

 

[kaysee]

How dare I offer an opinion on BF! No-one else ever does this.

I never stated you couldn't have an opinion. Just your hypocrisy in suggesting WJ isn't allowed to have his when asked for.

I'll leave aside the grade-6 level of literacy in your post...

Apparently you can't 'leave them aside' otherwise why highlight them?

You were the one who said that WJ should be respected because he was qualified, unlike his uneducated critics. Was it you or the other nuffy who added that he has been a corporate executive, and therefore should be respected?

I pointed out that I have a tertiary degree ; I don't think it's the be-all and end-all, doesn't make me OR WJ infallible. You and Slow-crow want to argue that WJ's qualifications make him the oracle, but mine either don't exist or are worthless. Nice logic, professor.

"Oracle","Kowtowing"... your versions of repsecting are only just a teeny bit exagerated.

I am quite happy to respect well measured opinions, even yours. If my logic is flawed then by your own explanation yours is too. You expect your opinions to be respected based on self-proclaimed qualifications and yet you show total disrespect for WJ opinions.... may I quote you, 'Nice logic, professor.'

Remove the emotion, remove the state parochialism, re-read your OP, and think again if it deserves respecting.

I also added that being a former corporate executive doesn't make you the font of all wisdom either, otherwise John Elliott would be a respected commentator ; a point that you have chosen to ignore.

I will leave your age aside for the moment... grab your glasses and re-read my replies.

By the way, you have no idea of my standing in the community or professional achievements. I won't bother posting details, as it really isn't relevant, and you would probably claim I invented it all.

Well atleast you're learning a few new tricks. It is totally pointless reeling off personal qualifications unless we can factually back them up, hence why it was pointless to even think about listing mine.

As to the real point of this thread : some sections of the football community, like WJ, believe it is desirable to reduce the number of teams based in Melbourne. Many, myself included, disagree strongly, on both emotional and economic grounds.

Now if your OP had a similar more balanced tone to the above you might have saved yourself some embarrassment.

 

[jacko57]

You expect your opinions to be respected based on self-proclaimed qualifications and yet you show total disrespect for WJ opinions.... may I quote you, 'Nice logic, professor.'

You're still missing the point (or choosing to). I never said my opinions should be respected because of my qualifications. I only mentioned the fact to rebut your line about WJ's critics being uneducated.

I did say that WJ's qualifications don't make him infallible.........obviously, logic says I wouldn't make the opposite claim for myself.

 

[NeXus_Helen]

I heard this goose interviewed on the radio today, droning on about how it would look ridiculous if there are still 10 Victorian clubs in the national competition in 4 years time ; and it is inevitable that 2 or 3 Vic clubs will relocate.

You had your chance to kill off a few clubs, you weren't able to do it, how about you just go back under your rock and enjoy your retirement on the bloated payout you received without earning it, and just STFU?

You still don't get it, do you jacko57. Let me spell it out for you. When the CBF or whatever the stupid thing is called now is stopped, 2 clubs in Victoria will immediately cease operations. I'm not going to say who I think they will be, that really doesn't matter. I'm just stating the facts IMHO.

 

[Roylion]

Look at Fitzroy and South Melbourne. Struggling clubs, both of them. They both now have a presence in the bigest and third biggest citues in the country and accoring to Roy Morgan are the two heaviest supported teams. They have good facilities, the support of a state, and are infinitely bigger and more powerful than what they would be if they were still in Melbourne..

No, Fitzroy has a very limited presence in the city of Brisbane.

The Brisbane Lions are regarded by the AFL as merely the continuation of the Brisbane Bears and all records of the club are regarded by the AFL as beginning in 1987, not in 1883 (or 1897 for the VFL-AFL)

The Fitzroy Football Club (that once held a licence to compete in the AFL) is still an independent entity in Melbourne and has a closer relationship with the amateur Fitzroy Reds than they do with the Brisbane Lions. Indeed the Reds next year (2009) will be rebranded as the Fitzroy Football Club, and may even be known as the Lions. In effect if, and when, this happens the Fitzroy Football Club competing in D1 must be regarded as the true successors of the Fitzroy Football Club that once competed in the AFL.

Having said that, there is no doubt that the Brisbane Lions have an important connection to Fitzroy in the VFL-AFL. I have written about that connection on many occasions in the past. And indeed it is because of that connection I now support the Brisbane Lions in the AFL.

However it is still drawing a very long bow to suggest that Fitzroy is "infinitely bigger and more powerful than what they would be if they were still in Melbourne..". Fitzroy are not in Brisbane and indeed they have never been in Brisbane. South Melbourne / Sydney is a different matter and had Fitzroy relocated and kept their own identity..... history, players, administration etc., I would tend to agree more with your above statement.

However for Fitzroy the above did not happen.

 

[jacko57]

You still don't get it, do you jacko57. Let me spell it out for you. When the CBF or whatever the stupid thing is called now is stopped, 2 clubs in Victoria will immediately cease operations. I'm not going to say who I think they will be, that really doesn't matter. I'm just stating the facts IMHO.

Bloody hell, who resurrected you Neckless?

I have to admit, I used to find your incessant posts about NMFC's demise annoying, but now I just find you amusing. Remember last year, when you kept telling us the GC move was a done deal?

 

[NeXus_Helen]

Bloody hell, who resurrected you Neckless?

I have to admit, I used to find your incessant posts about NMFC's demise annoying, but now I just find you amusing. Remember last year, when you kept telling us the GC move was a done deal?

You are completely deluded if you think North are out of the woods jacko. Next year when you lose 5000 members, (that's how many joined up from opposition clubs), what will happen to your bottom line. And don't forget, there will be no GC money coming in either. How is North going to recoup all of that money? Then add in the salary cap increase the year after and then probably the demise of the CBF and................????????

This a questio not a troll.

 

[jacko57]

You are completely deluded if you think North are out of the woods jacko. Next year when you lose 5000 members, (that's how many joined up from opposition clubs), what will happen to your bottom line. And don't forget, there will be no GC money coming in either. How is North going to recoup all of that money? Then add in the salary cap increase the year after and then probably the demise of the CBF and................????????

The war is not over, but the club is making many positive moves in the right direction.

Your simplistic predictions of the club's demise are simply amusing. You were wrong last year, you're wrong now, you'll probably spend the rest of your life being wrong.

 

[medusala]

You are completely deluded if you think North are out of the woods jacko.

its not just North

4 clubs dont have sponsors for next year supposedly

the asd agreements ends next year as does the canberra $ for home games

Quite a few dots to join.

 

[raff23]

As long as a club can financially stand on its own two feet then I have no problem. I can also understand why Victorians don't want to see the demise of their own clubs.

But if you are continually bailing out certain clubs because of a myriad of reasons, then its inevitable that some clubs will disappear. Sad but true, like a lot of things in life.

Um has it occured to you and all the other naive drongos from SA, WA etc that the reason some melbourne clubs are short on money is because the AFL has shipped their share of the money to all the interstate clubs? That d**khead Jackson tried to destroy the heart and soul of our game because he felt that the interstate clubs deserved more to prop them up and make them the richest clubs in Australia robbing melbourne clubs of valuable money which they could have used to avoid being in debt and now having to sell games interstate. He was also responsible for The waverley debacle. Low and behold 10 years on and all of a sudden Demetriou who has followed in Jacksons horrible footsteps has decided that their has to be 3 grounds in melbourne in which to play footy on. Well dummies, if you hadn't been so hasty into knocking down waverley then we wouldn't be in this predicament would we?

 

[kaysee]

Um has it occured to you and all the other naive drongos from SA, WA etc that the reason some melbourne clubs are short on money is because the AFL has shipped their share of the money to all the interstate clubs? That d**khead Jackson tried to destroy the heart and soul of our game because he felt that the interstate clubs deserved more to prop them up and make them the richest clubs in Australia robbing melbourne clubs of valuable money which they could have used to avoid being in debt and now having to sell games interstate. He was also responsible for The waverley debacle. Low and behold 10 years on and all of a sudden Demetriou who has followed in Jacksons horrible footsteps has decided that their has to be 3 grounds in melbourne in which to play footy on. Well dummies, if you hadn't been so hasty into knocking down waverley then we wouldn't be in this predicament would we?

This is just wrong on so many levels

1) AFL is a national competetion. You want on Victorian clubs to receive money then starting following your VFL.

2) The inclusion of interstate clubs and maintaining a 16 club competition has meant more $$$ flowing into the AFL (due to TV sponsership, increased attendances) and therefore more $$$ being distributed to Melbourne clubs.

3) Some of the richest clubs in the AFL are still based in Melbourne, unfortunately so are the poorest clubs. Interstate clubs (except Port and Fremantle) are 'richer' due to lack of market comeptition.

4) WJ realised and valued the economic strengths of the AFL having and maintaining 16 teams. Under his administration the fund to keep struggling Melbourne clubs (and Sydney and Brisbane clubs) afloat was introduced.

5) Waverley's future was under debate before WJ took over as AFL CEO in 1996. It is almost identical to AAMI stadium (except AAMI is more modernised)... both are dinosaurs from the 70s era, poorly constructed for football viewing, Waverly lacked facilities, lacked shelter, poorly located geographic (ie it sat in the middle of a 'rain-belt') hence the nickname "arctic park", difficult to access via public transport at the time (not sure on now), lacks nearby pre and post match facilities/entertainment. Those bleating on about Waverley are sounding like backwards thinking South Australians wanting to keep AAMI stadium.

 

[KingsCrow]

The war is not over, but the club is making many positive moves in the right direction.

Your simplistic predictions of the club's demise are simply amusing. You were wrong last year, you're wrong now, you'll probably spend the rest of your life being wrong.

If you survive its only going to mean the death of another AFL club.


Put Melbourne, Western Bulldogs and North to a death match I say.

The last one standing survives, horah!

 

[Hawkk]

How would you get more sponsers if you played more games in Melbourne.

Well considering we'd be without a major sponsor and naming rights sponsor, I'm sure both would be replaceable ($1m)

And why would you gain more members if you played more games in Melbourne

Even if we didn't increase the membership past 38,000, playing more games in Melbourne gives way to increasing membership prices, which increases membership revenue

Playing more game in Melbourne also gives us a chance to renegotiate/establish a stadium deal with the MCG, given our average MCG crowds have gone from: 29,000 (2004) 35,000 (2005) 37,000 (2006) 44,000 (2007) to 53,000 (2008) over the previous 5 years. You'd imagine we'd have sizable clout with regards to establishing a lucrative stadium deal.

I only named your club because in the past you have gotten in to troubles, and even at the present moment you are selling games.

How many other clubs are recording $4m+ profits?

 

[Hawkk]

What a BS scenario... North Melbourne playing games over in the Eastern suburbs. Even fewer North supporters would travel half way across the Melb metro then they do to TD. And I would presume that community is already entrenched into existing clubs like Hawthorn, St Kilda and Richmond. Also close off portions of the ground... then why have it?

Anyway, there were other factors in the waverley sell off then gameday. The VFL/AFLs HQ was based out there and wouldn't have been the ideal location out in the Western suburbs. Relocating to a central CBD location made business sense for the AFL administration (and they couldn't goto the MCG).

Regardless of whether or not they currently have heartland support out there, its only 20-25km from the CBD of Melbourne to get out there.

Whether or not its Waverley (which is close to the population base of Melbourne anyway) or another venue, its just logicial that if they were more then 2 venues split between 9 or 10 clubs, it would give more clout to the individual clubs to negotiate a contract with the MCG, TD or other venue, instead of, in many cases, being pigeon holed to the TD (which has a lower BE point for the low supported clubs) purely because the MCG doesn't want nor need them.

With another venue, the competition for the clubs increases, meaning the individual venues are willing to give more to the clubs instead reaping the majority of profits, that in the vast majority of other sports, would reap substantial profits for the individual clubs.

The problem with most other potential 3rd venues, is that due to their substandard facilities, most supporters refuse to roll up to the games (ie. Princes Park)

With Waverley we already had a venue that drew respectable crowds, was cheap to run and was in the middle of a huge (and still growing) population base.

For clubs like North Melbourne and St Kilda, losing inner city corporate support is a non issue, given the vast majority of corporate support is taken up by the cashed up Victorian clubs anyway, leaving the struggling clubs with the scraps.

By moving games out there, they'd be in a position to capitalise on the large number of small to medium sized buisnesses that exist out that way

 

[kaysee]

Regardless of whether or not they currently have heartland support out there, its only 20-25km from the CBD of Melbourne to get out there.

Only 20-25km from the CBD. Not being a local I would presume that in Melbourne traffic conditions travelling that distance would take on average 45-60 mins using the main freeways/tollways... even longer when forced to use the other major roads. I honestly can't see NMFC supporters willing to travel that distance in todays econonmic climate.

Whether or not its Waverley (which is close to the population base of Melbourne anyway) or another venue, its just logicial that if they were more then 2 venues split between 9 or 10 clubs, it would give more clout to the individual clubs to negotiate a contract with the MCG, TD or other venue, instead of, in many cases, being pigeon holed to the TD (which has a lower BE point for the low supported clubs) purely because the MCG doesn't want nor need them.

With another venue, the competition for the clubs increases, meaning the individual venues are willing to give more to the clubs instead reaping the majority of profits, that in the vast majority of other sports, would reap substantial profits for the individual clubs.

The problem with most other potential 3rd venues, is that due to their substandard facilities, most supporters refuse to roll up to the games (ie. Princes Park)

With Waverley we already had a venue that drew respectable crowds, was cheap to run and was in the middle of a huge (and still growing) population base.

I agree with all this, except that apart from capacity Waverley's facilities were just as substandard. Again Waverley might have suited clubs like Hawthorn, St Kilda and Melbourne... but I have my reservations over how beneficial it would have been to NMFC and Western Bulldogs.

For the record Waverley averaged about 4k less spectators per game then TD even though Waverley had almost double the capacity.

For clubs like North Melbourne and St Kilda, losing inner city corporate support is a non issue, given the vast majority of corporate support is taken up by the cashed up Victorian clubs anyway, leaving the struggling clubs with the scraps.

But isn't this the actual issue? Too many teams in Melbourne saturating the market and struggling to survive without the cash injections? Being a fan of the game I can certainly appreciate how people don't want to see 'their' club be one to booted out or relocated... but unfortunately VFL/AFL has now turned into a business. Unless you can remain viable you will be at risk.