Western Bulldogs and their partnership with Ballarat a success

[TiAn_]

We played in Darwin and Tasmania last year with the 2 Ballarat games

You can’t control where your away games are.

 

[CarnTheScray]

We played in Darwin and Tasmania last year with the 2 Ballarat games

Obviously we are talking about home games.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

We are already having trouble winning games, how is the location of VIC finals (which we aren’t currently making or even being competitive in) the main concern?

Willing to bet a lot of supporters that complain about the Ballarat games would not even attend those same match ups at Marvel, considering that it is fact that the teams we play in Ballarat are matchups that would rank as our lowest attended matches, usually around 20,000. Not sure “80-90%” of our supporters are missing out if they’re not attending these games in Melbourne anyway.

Sick to death of people complaining about playing 2 games in Ballarat. One of the best decisions the club has made. Means we do not have to play in Cairns, or Darwin, or Tasmania, or ******* Shanghai.

Yep this is the key point people make about ground access or whatever.

Our three Docklands crowds vs. Gold Coast - 21,373 in 2011, Gold Coast's 2nd ever game, first in Melbourne, some novelty value, Dogs still considered a chance to win the flag.

22,499 in 2019

Covid-impacted slightly 18,920 in 2021.

Vs. GWS: 18,301 2022, 30,672 2017 (first home game after the Prelim), 16,395 2015 (the Minson suspension game), 14,725 2014 (the infamous game).

Vs. Port Adelaide? 23,110 2023, 20,590 2015, 16,036, 2012.

We also had three sub-20k crowds - including one sub-15 - in four Docklands games vs. Fremantle from 2011-2015.

Obviously our crowds have increased after winning a flag and generally being a winning team and we should expect to see 20+k crowds consistently against any opponent right now, but that isn't always true if we're a bad team (as shown above), so we can't assume a post-premiership, finals making team glow, and accept that the Ballarat deal also exists in place for the Docklands crowds we should expect if we were a bad team that wasn't making finals over a stretch of time, like North are right now.

Even ignoring the Ballarat redevelopment that will see the capacity increase, it's not as if masses of fewer people are going to the Ballarat games - in many cases, for equivalent matchups as a bad team, literally only a few thousand fewer.

And what makes it even more significant is that these very fans not turning out for the games are the very fans that necessitate the need to sell home games to Ballarat. It has been stated ad naseum here that our financial situation inevitably means we can't afford to host two low-drawing games at Docklands simply because the stadium rent is too high if you don't get at least a 20-25kish crowd in. Well, if those people had shown up to a random 16k crowd in 2012 or 2013 against Fremantle or Port Adelaide, and turned it into a 20k crowd, then, all these years later, we would have more likely to strategically accepted 11 home games at Docklands. But we didn't. Because those members and fans didn't show up. So stop complaining.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

West Coast round 3 will be an interesting crowd. Possible to be worse than the 23,000 last year.

People need to show up. Less talk more action.

 

[huddo#9]

There is nothing positive about the first home game being at Ballarat, then the following home game over the Easter weekend. The sooner the club scraps the Ballarat disaster the better it will be for the members.

 

[lachy]

We are already having trouble winning games, how is the location of VIC finals (which we aren’t currently making or even being competitive in) the main concern?

Willing to bet a lot of supporters that complain about the Ballarat games would not even attend those same match ups at Marvel, considering that it is fact that the teams we play in Ballarat are matchups that would rank as our lowest attended matches, usually around 20,000. Not sure “80-90%” of our supporters are missing out if they’re not attending these games in Melbourne anyway.

Sick to death of people complaining about playing 2 games in Ballarat. One of the best decisions the club has made. Means we do not have to play in Cairns, or Darwin, or Tasmania, or ******* Shanghai.

We played those interstate games as we do in Ballarat for the money. Nothing more nothing less so to say playing in Ballarat means we don't have to play home games in Cairns or Darwin may have been valid 5 plus years ago, but now it is total rubbish, an absolute false equivalency, we are financially strong.

Short term thinking worrying about our start this year and playing games at the G. Cost us big time in 2015 where Adelaide had actually played more games at the G than us. If we want to stop being a small club who has to continually compromise we need to act like a medium sized club and make it worth while or as many of our supporters to attend.

Or we can continue to behave like the club of 10 years ago and drift back to mediocracy.

There are a Significant number of areas the club needs to work out what it what it wants to be, this is merely one of them and really this is not only about on the playing field this is off it to.

 

[lachy]

And what makes it even more significant is that these very fans not turning out for the games are the very fans that necessitate the need to sell home games to Ballarat. It has been stated ad naseum here that our financial situation inevitably means we can't afford to host two low-drawing games at Docklands simply because the stadium rent is too high if you don't get at least a 20-25kish crowd in. Well, if those people had shown up to a random 16k crowd in 2012 or 2013 against Fremantle or Port Adelaide, and turned it into a 20k crowd, then, all these years later, we would have more likely to strategically accepted 11 home games at Docklands. But we didn't. Because those members and fans didn't show up. So stop complaining.

Have you noticed what our balance sheet looks like now.

Also the arrangements at Docklands have changed significantly since the time periods mentioned.

These arguments were once relevant, they are no longer, so yes I will complain when the facts presented are so far out of date

 

[threenewpadlocks]

We played those interstate games as we do in Ballarat for the money. Nothing more nothing less so to say playing in Ballarat means we don't have to play home games in Cairns or Darwin may have been valid 5 plus years ago, but now it is total rubbish, an absolute false equivalency, we are financially strong.

I would argue that our financial results over the last few years has left us 'financially strong' but in any case the argument can be made that we only remain so because of the consistent selling of home games over several years. We would cease to be financially strong if we had to write a cheque of several hundreds of thousands of dollars for ground operations costs every time a crowd of only 19,000 rock up to a Docklands (or MCG) game, as opposed to flipping that and profiting hundreds of thousands of dollars for playing in Ballarat.

Short term thinking worrying about our start this year and playing games at the G.

I actually do beileve we do have a preference to play home games at the G. We played 9 home games there from 2003-2009. Inevitably, an AFL desire to change contracts with the stadiums, maximise revenue for the league, enforce their fixturing etc. meant that the AFL put a stop to it. Keep in mind that we were competing with complaints about Carlton and Essendon home games at Docklands selling out when they would play another Melbourne game. We get screwed by the AFL for being a 'small club', nothing new. This further means that we have to sell home games.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Also the arrangements at Docklands have changed significantly since the time periods mentioned.

These arguments were once relevant, they are no longer, so yes I will complain when the facts presented are so far out of date

They changed a bit when AFL took ownership. They also had existing contracts and maintenance of contracts with suppliers, operations staff etc. and the like. All news reports suggested that clubs would lose a bit less money with small crowds but the change wouldn't be significant, nor would the breakeven point reduce significantly.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

You also have to consider the AFL funding we get. (While reasons do vary.)

 

[huddo#9]

West Coast round 3 will be an interesting crowd. Possible to be worse than the 23,000 last year.

People need to show up. Less talk more action.

What your saying is, people should cancel their Easter holidays and attend a game? This is when the Ballarat game should have been scheduled, if the club must schedule one. Absolute farce to start the season with this fixture.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

What your saying is, people should cancel their Easter holidays and attend a game? This is when the Ballarat game should have been scheduled, if the club must schedule one. Absolute farce to start the season with this fixture.

The club doesn't get to pick and choose when specifically we play our Ballarat games. We can have a dialogue with the AFL but the AFL would also be going over our heads to speak directly with the operators of the stadium.

For example it's not ideal, and wasn't fully intended, for us to play home games vs. Brisbane there (given their existing Melbourne presence). However we have had to simply to make the fixture "work".

 

[BallaratBulldog]

What your saying is, people should cancel their Easter holidays and attend a game? This is when the Ballarat game should have been scheduled, if the club must schedule one. Absolute farce to start the season with this fixture.

It’s just an example, one that other clubs still have a crowd turn up too when they get it.

 

[lachy]

I would argue that our financial results over the last few years has left us 'financially strong' but in any case the argument can be made that we only remain so because of the consistent selling of home games over several years. We would cease to be financially strong if we had to write a cheque of several hundreds of thousands of dollars for ground operations costs every time a crowd of only 19,000 rock up to a Docklands (or MCG) game, as opposed to flipping that and profiting hundreds of thousands of dollars for playing in Ballarat.


I actually do beileve we do have a preference to play home games at the G. We played 9 home games there from 2003-2009. Inevitably, an AFL desire to change contracts with the stadiums, maximise revenue for the league, enforce their fixturing etc. meant that the AFL put a stop to it. Keep in mind that we were competing with complaints about Carlton and Essendon home games at Docklands selling out when they would play another Melbourne game. We get screwed by the AFL for being a 'small club', nothing new. This further means that we have to sell home games.

Given most of our revenues no longer come from Gameday, in fact a very small percentage does can't see this being an issue.

You are correct there have been times when we played at the G for home games and drew quite well. Though it may be dreaming the only way to get away from being a small club is to grow to a medium club.

My concern stems from how we got to Ballarat in the first place and the fact these are still the only arguments for staying their and it is a decade ago.

We got there when North pulled out of their Ballarat experiment. The State government was looking to provide favors to Ballarat (Cynical I know)so we had an offer put to us that was at least the equivalent of what we were getting interstate possibly more.

The club sold it at the end of the McCartney era where we still had a fair amount of debt, that up to that stage we had not utilised our name change to Western well so brought this in as a way of expanding the brand. (Factually an absolute nonsense. There has not been a single Melbourne based club that has not grown at least as much as us even up to now, keeping their suburban name and in a lot of cases being less successful on the field than we have been)

2016 came along and in the years after that merchandise alone nearly paid off the debt so this was not really needed but the money was good.

I have attended a few presidents lunches at Ballarat where it is clear we do receive money but rightfully so have to put a fair back into the community. The issue with this is we have limited resources to grow, so whilst we are perusing our limited opportunity in Ballarat nearly every other Victorian club is making in roads in our actual patch, the Western Region of Melbourne (population just hitting 1 million population of Ballarat just hitting 100,000). Ask anyone involved in local schools, Auskick and Junior football if you do not believe this is happening.

We may get up to $2 million to play the 2 games down there and the AFL may link our distribution to games played in Ballarat so we may have limited choices. If this is not the case why are we continue doing it.

If we want to look at potential look at our friends the saints. Never won a flag since I have been on earth, a long time.

After many years selling games brought all their games back to Melbourne (and their base back to Moorabbin), including 1 at the G. In the last 20 years their membership has outgrown ours and on and off the field they have been poorly run.

 

[geoffjennings79]

Given most of our revenues no longer come from Gameday, in fact a very small percentage does can't see this being an issue.

You are correct there have been times when we played at the G for home games and drew quite well. Though it may be dreaming the only way to get away from being a small club is to grow to a medium club.

My concern stems from how we got to Ballarat in the first place and the fact these are still the only arguments for staying their and it is a decade ago.

We got there when North pulled out of their Ballarat experiment. The State government was looking to provide favors to Ballarat (Cynical I know)so we had an offer put to us that was at least the equivalent of what we were getting interstate possibly more.

The club sold it at the end of the McCartney era where we still had a fair amount of debt, that up to that stage we had not utilised our name change to Western well so brought this in as a way of expanding the brand. (Factually an absolute nonsense. There has not been a single Melbourne based club that has not grown at least as much as us even up to now, keeping their suburban name and in a lot of cases being less successful on the field than we have been)

2016 came along and in the years after that merchandise alone nearly paid off the debt so this was not really needed but the money was good.

I have attended a few presidents lunches at Ballarat where it is clear we do receive money but rightfully so have to put a fair back into the community. The issue with this is we have limited resources to grow, so whilst we are perusing our limited opportunity in Ballarat nearly every other Victorian club is making in roads in our actual patch, the Western Region of Melbourne (population just hitting 1 million population of Ballarat just hitting 100,000). Ask anyone involved in local schools, Auskick and Junior football if you do not believe this is happening.

We may get up to $2 million to play the 2 games down there and the AFL may link our distribution to games played in Ballarat so we may have limited choices. If this is not the case why are we continue doing it.

If we want to look at potential look at our friends the saints. Never won a flag since I have been on earth, a long time.

After many years selling games brought all their games back to Melbourne (and their base back to Moorabbin), including 1 at the G. In the last 20 years their membership has outgrown ours and on and off the field they have been poorly run.

I don't disagree with the rest of your post, but the population of Ballarat area was already in excess of 120,000 when I moved to the region over 10 years ago, so not just hitting 100k.

 

[Pocket Terrace]

Isn't it all just about the State Gov's investment into the Whitten Oval upgrade and the rezoning of adjacent land to the club?
The club would never vocalise this, but surely two games per year into regional Victoria was the trade off for the millions we received for Whitten Oval. I refuse to believe that our partnership in Ballarat just happened to magically coincide with infrastructure and land-grant announcements for Whitten Oval.

When placed in that context, the club simply would not care about members losing two home games. They've got new sheds for the boys. As such, I expect we are in this for the long haul.

 

[lachy]

I don't disagree with the rest of your post, but the population of Ballarat area was already in excess of 120,000 when I moved to the region over 10 years ago, so not just hitting 100k.

I used ABS statistics from 2020 ,you are correct will hit 120,000 in 2024, and the Western Suburbs well over 1 million

The City of Ballarat population forecast for 2024 is 119,086, and is forecast to grow to 142,624 by 2036. The City of Ballarat population and household forecasts present what is driving population change in the community and how the population and age structure will change each year between 2021 and 2036.
On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Dogs 13]

We are already having trouble winning games, how is the location of VIC finals (which we aren’t currently making or even being competitive in) the main concern?

Willing to bet a lot of supporters that complain about the Ballarat games would not even attend those same match ups at Marvel, considering that it is fact that the teams we play in Ballarat are matchups that would rank as our lowest attended matches, usually around 20,000. Not sure “80-90%” of our supporters are missing out if they’re not attending these games in Melbourne anyway.

Sick to death of people complaining about playing 2 games in Ballarat. One of the best decisions the club has made. Means we do not have to play in Cairns, or Darwin, or Tasmania, or ******* Shanghai.

I'd be a definite starter if we played the Suns and Giants at Marvel.
Ballarat most likely not, especially after what was served up this week.
IF we needed to win that last game of the year at Ballarat to make finals I might be tempted.

 

[Roogal]

Have you noticed what our balance sheet looks like now.

Also the arrangements at Docklands have changed significantly since the time periods mentioned.

These arguments were once relevant, they are no longer, so yes I will complain when the facts presented are so far out of date

Say the word ... and North Melbourne will be more than happily take back Ballarat. A far better option for them than Hobart. After all, North Melbourne and North Ballarat had a perfectly happy arrangement until the Western Bulldogs demanded that they wanted it (without any support or association to the North Ballarat VFL franchise) effectively destroying Ballarat's VFL franchise in 2015. Sorry lachy but your team demanded it back then and took it from another team who were making a success of it. So your team owes a hell of a lot back to the Ballarat football community whether you agree with me on this or not! So to all the rest of the nay-sayers stop your damn beefing, moaning and whinning. It's now on the Western Bulldogs to keep Ballarat growing and working for them as an asset. I personally hope that the Dogs thrive in Ballarat, but if they decide to up stumps, just remember that teams like North and St Kilda will happily fill the void while your team gets penalised with Sunday twillight games at Marvell.

 

[Roogal]

Isn't it all just about the State Gov's investment into the Whitten Oval upgrade and the rezoning of adjacent land to the club?
The club would never vocalise this, but surely two games per year into regional Victoria was the trade off for the millions we received for Whitten Oval. I refuse to believe that our partnership in Ballarat just happened to magically coincide with infrastructure and land-grant announcements for Whitten Oval.

When placed in that context, the club simply would not care about members losing two home games. They've got new sheds for the boys. As such, I expect we are in this for the long haul.

At the end of the day the premium redevelopment of the VUWO was always about the AFLW and the reward to the WBFC as a foundation team of womens AFL. The ALP government have been generous to any clubs or venues that promote elite womens sports. Even Mars Stadium's last 2019 upgrade included a $1 mil state funded rebuild of player and umpire facilities to accommodate AFLW and womens cricket.

I am not sure why the then ALP opposition back in 2014 chose to run a wrecking ball through the then highly successful in-place arrangement between North Melbourne and North Ballarat that had been in place for ten years, to announce that they would financially support the WBFC from 2016 in Ballarat. Why didn't they back the Roos? Who knows. Some questions are apparently never meant to be questioned much less answered under Labor governments.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

At the end of the day the premium redevelopment of the VUWO was always about the AFLW and the reward to the WBFC as a foundation team of womens AFL. The ALP government have been generous to any clubs or venues that promote elite womens sports. Even Mars Stadium's last 2019 upgrade included a $1 mil state funded rebuild of player and umpire facilities to accommodate AFLW and womens cricket.

I am not sure why the then ALP opposition back in 2014 chose to run a wrecking ball through the then highly successful in-place arrangement between North Melbourne and North Ballarat that had been in place for ten years, to announce that they would financially support the WBFC from 2016 in Ballarat. Why didn't they back the Roos? Who knows. Some questions are apparently never meant to be questioned much less answered under Labor governments.

Was there ever a commitment by the Roos to play actual AFL games there though at any stage?

It can be debated but I think it's also an entirely fair viewpoint that North can't demand exclusivity over both Tasmania (from an academy etc. POV but Hobart as well) and Ballarat, if Ballarat was indeed the Vic Government's regional city of choice for any future AFL games to be played.

 

[lachy]

Say the word ... and North Melbourne will be more than happily take back Ballarat. A far better option for them than Hobart. After all, North Melbourne and North Ballarat had a perfectly happy arrangement until the Western Bulldogs demanded that they wanted it (without any support or association to the North Ballarat VFL franchise) effectively destroying Ballarat's VFL franchise in 2015. Sorry lachy but your team demanded it back then and took it from another team who were making a success of it. So your team owes a hell of a lot back to the Ballarat football community whether you damn well agree with me on this or not! So stop your damn beefing, moaning and whinning. It's now on the Western Bulldogs to keep Ballarat growing and working for them as an asset. I personally hope that the Dogs thrive in Ballarat, but if they decide to up stumps, just remember that teams like North and St Kilda will happily fill the void while your team gets penalised with Sunday twillight games at Marvell.

Roogal, thanks for perfectly summing up the current situation.

Yes it was our decision back then, and yes North Ballarat were not happy at all, know someone who was close to the club, but what you have said is we owe Ballarat football, where in this arrangement are we putting back to the majority of our supporters? Whilst we are putting resources in Ballarat it is nice to see your club putting resources into the city of Wyndham so I am not sure they would revert back to Ballarat given the growth the Kangaroos have got from our backyard. But we take the money from Ballarat we are definitely obligated there.

How many in the local football community are happy with the current arrangement? Only a couple of years ago they were still not happy with Saturday afternoon games at all.

The oblique reference to Sunday afternoon is a downside. However, this is much more a reflection of on field performance than anything to do with where we play our home games. History shows that.

Time will tell where this goes, yes I do hope we get away from the deal, but genuinely do appreciate your passion and information you provide though I am of a differing opinion.



On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[BallaratBulldog]

I personally can’t see the Dogs leaving and will go through until 2027/8.

 

[Roogal]

Roogal, thanks for perfectly summing up the current situation.

Yes it was our decision back then, and yes North Ballarat were not happy at all, know someone who was close to the club, but what you have said is we owe Ballarat football, where in this arrangement are we putting back to the majority of our supporters? Whilst we are putting resources in Ballarat it is nice to see your club putting resources into the city of Wyndham so I am not sure they would revert back to Ballarat given the growth the Kangaroos have got from our backyard. But we take the money from Ballarat we are definitely obligated there.

How many in the local football community are happy with the current arrangement? Only a couple of years ago they were still not happy with Saturday afternoon games at all.

The oblique reference to Sunday afternoon is a downside. However, this is much more a reflection of on field performance than anything to do with where we play our home games. History shows that.

Time will tell where this goes, yes I do hope we get away from the deal, but genuinely do appreciate your passion and information you provide though I am of a differing opinion.



On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

If members of the Bulldogs are not happy with the current Ballarat arrangement, then NOW, and I emphasise "now" is the time for them to speak up in writing to the Club expressing their views and concerns. If you believe that the deal has run its course, or you believe that the membership packages supporting the deal aren't reasonable or too expensive, or you believe that Mars Stadium is unfit for purpose, then now is the time to definitely speak up.

The club is currently in negotiations with the City of Ballarat and State Government over the extension of the current contract which is due to expire at the end of this season. If the club is armed with good feedback (in the form of constructive criticisms) and practical suggestions from the supporters and members then it puts the club in a much more informed and stronger position to seek better conditions, perhaps a better financial deal, or to ultimately decide that it's just not worth it and walk away altogether.

I understand that there are some people who will never accept anything less than playing all home games at the primary home venue, but unfortunately for smaller clubs that is simply not a reality. That said, circumstances have indeed changed for many of the clubs who have adopted the second home venue strategy. The Bulldogs membership has increased significantly and club debts have effectively been wiped out since 2015. The same has occurred at Melbourne although they do still do have some red ink on the ledger. Saint Kilda certainly do have a considerable amount of red ink but for reasons known only unto GOD they have a thriving membership base despite an atrocious finals record since 1966. North Melbourne have similar membership numbers to the Dogs despite consistent poor on-field performances since their mid-season collapse of 2016, but they have no debts. Their books are frankly being kept in the black because of very frugal spending and selling games to Hobart is an important part of their business plan overall. If the Tassie Team actually gets off the ground North are going to have to develop an alternative plan ... and very quickly. We might consider whether Hawthorn needs Launceston anymore? Their circumstances have changed dramatically since the late 90s having won 4 Grand Finals, trebling their membership and becoming one of the wealthiest clubs in the League.

In 2024 do the Bulldogs need Ballarat financially? I would say no. Does the club want Ballarat as its expansion hub that creates an umbrella over all of the new expanding western suburbs and existing townships between Footscray and Ballarat? The answer is probably "yes". Does the club want to ultimately dominate and claim all of Western Victoria from Footscray out to Horsham? The answer is a definite "yes". If that is the club's primary driver behind the Ballarat strategy then it needs good feedback from its members and supporters in order to make it succeed, but equally as important, to make Ballarat advantageous for its members and supporters. It's all well and good for the club to have a "Ballarat" strategy, but not at the expense of the members overall.

 

[geoffjennings79]

Does the club want to ultimately dominate and claim all of Western Victoria from Footscray out to Horsham?

Even if that is the aim, will take years to even make a dent in decades of rusted-on allegiance to other clubs. More realistic to aim for achievable foot hold and steadily increase support in Western Vic communities. Ballarat is hard enough, many of the people I know in Ballarat, Golden Plains and out to Creswick, Springbank, etc have generations of supporting a club. Very hard to change that family tradition.