President Stynes

[beelzebub 23,382]

And the crowd yelled STYNES, STYNES everywhere STYNES!!

Stynes Stynes..everywhere Stynes

blocking out the members from knowing ahead of time,

Do this, dont do that , cant you read my mind !!!!!!!!!!!

[mo64 5,880]

So what is Stynes going to do to change the status quo and how is going to do better than the existing Board?

He is a figurehead that the club desperately needs at this time. He is someone that the general public can relate to, which can only help the Melbourne brand. We need to change our image of being a conservative, dormant club, that is unappealing to the masses. How many kids wear Melbourne jumpers at Auskick?

Clubs like West Coast, Adelaide and Essendon don't need a figurehead president. We do!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

He is a figurehead that the club desperately needs at this time. He is someone that the general public can relate to, which can only help the Melbourne brand. We need to change our image of being a conservative, dormant club, that is unappealing to the masses. How many kids wear Melbourne jumpers at Auskick?

Clubs like West Coast, Adelaide and Essendon don't need a figurehead president. We do!

I hope he is more than a figure head. We all need to get behind him and support him for the sake of the Club.

It would be nice that above the hoopla he can articulate substantive plans to match the aspirations of many on this Board.

[beelzebub 23,382]

A figurehead by definition is teh appearance of leadership without any ability to do so.. Is that what you want ?

[Demon Tragic 0]

Any chance we can give the guy time to prepare his submission and present it via the appropraite avenue eg: board meeting? I know we are all driven by a need to know everything and know it NOW, but we can't always get our own way. Jim has done a fantastic job at playing his cards to his chest and little information of any substance has been leaked to the press. That shows a little more dilligence than he has been credit for on this forum. I for one am looking forward to Fridays news to see the finer details of Jim's plans, then I will pass judgement. Seems like a few of you in this forum have already made your minds up.

[Sir Why You Little 37,120]

Stynes Stynes..everywhere Stynes

blocking out the members from knowing ahead of time,

Do this, dont do that , cant you read my mind !!!!!!!!!!!

That's good!!!! Made me laugh big time

[Deeoldfart 8,061]

The amount of negativity is frightening. Certainly no offence intended to any Melbourne supporter but no wonder MFC are where they are at. It appears a reasonable portion (if this site can be deemed a representative sample) of our members/supporters fear change. Whether you are scared or not the current president and administration have not done enough to secure our long term future.

If you think Jim Stynes does not have the clout or the required credentials to lead our club, then in my opinion your are deluded.

Keep the faith as the plan will be announced in the weeks to come. The AFL already are aware of it and from all rumoured reports are 100% happy with the new plan and Jim Stynes. Whether we like it or not we need the AFL to support us. They do not support our current administration and that has become a real concern

Paul Gardner would not hand over so readily if he felt the new phase would be detrimental to Melbourne

We need to embrace change and be brave moving forward.

Absolutely spot on! Stynes hasn't even been appointed and many of you seem to be writing him (or at least his methods) off. How bloody rude!

[TonyMelb 7]

I am, and probably everyone else is, going to hold off judgement until we have some concrete notion of what he is going to do, whether he has a plan, and who is coming onto the board.

But it does make me uneasy that these things will be known after Jim takes over, usually it's the reverse.

This is a coup. Let's hope they know what they are doing.

As MFC members we all welcome anyone who can help re invigorate our once great club and particularly now at the time of our greatest need! Jim Stynes is a solid citizen and loyalk MFC person post his days as a player as are some of those associated with him. It is vital that his administration (or whoever takes over) takes all necessary action to rebuild the MFC.

However - assuming control of the MFC Board without any reference to or laying out of the group's plans to the MFC members and community at large is not a good star and not the way to get everyone on side and working together for the MFC. It is also as noted not the usual or correct way of due process and that is whare the reticence of some current MFC Directors is to Jim becoming chairman this week. The current Directors owe a duty of care to all of us financial members and also under the Corporations Law which applies to the MFC (and other AFL clubs). They are obliged to ensure that any incoming Board has a sound plan for the club. The current Board owe us all at least that much! Jim has not provided the current Directors with his plans or disclosed to them who he intends bringing on as Directors. They are in no better position than us to assess the merits of what his ticket is offering.

That is of great concern to me ans should be to all paid up members. Anyone who wants to be a Director of the MFC must be prepared to provide the MFC members with an outline of what they offer and what their experience and credentials are. We are all entitled to form a view and decide who are best placed to direct our club in these perilous times and have a say at an AGM later in the year.

Whilst it is good that a smooth hand over is being implimented the risk is that if those who come in in this way are not satisfactory to the MFC members there would still need to be an election at the end of this year and everyone who is appointed to the Board this Thursday or subsequently will be required to submit themselves for re-election at the next AGM (late this year). That includes Jim Stynes. The MFC can not afford to put a foot wrong! The concern is there is absolutely nothing to give us any comfort before the changes on Thursday and that is not the way to get all members behind the new Board and involved in saving our club.

[grazman 7,451]

Any chance we can give the guy time to prepare his submission and present it via the appropraite avenue eg: board meeting? I know we are all driven by a need to know everything and know it NOW, but we can't always get our own way. Jim has done a fantastic job at playing his cards to his chest and little information of any substance has been leaked to the press. That shows a little more dilligence than he has been credit for on this forum. I for one am looking forward to Fridays news to see the finer details of Jim's plans, then I will pass judgement. Seems like a few of you in this forum have already made your minds up.

I don't think anyone's made up their minds, I'm sure most people are as interested as you are in relation to seeing the detail. What people were rightly upset with was the story hitting the papers on Sunday, before the candles had been blown out on the cake. If people are asking questions its because Jim chose to reveal it ahead of his submission to the board. Most will be happy to support him if he can deliver what he's promised.

[ChaserJ 5,157]

I was lucky enough to speak to Jimmy after a Reach Foundation presentation at work today. He was open and honest about his views on the club's situation (culture needs to be rebuilt from scratch, brand reestablished...he was a tad more severe than that, but that was the gist), which refreshingly didn't have any rose colored spin. He did spend a lot of time canvassing for alternatives to taking over himself (Garry?), and the only choice he felt he was left with was to step forward and take responsibility. Jimmy's clearly passionate and he seems like he has a clear strategy in place. And he was adamant that the role should be for a Melbourne man. A football person, not a business person. I can't helped but be excited by Jim taking charge. Good luck big fella.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I don't think anyone's made up their minds, I'm sure most people are as interested as you are in relation to seeing the detail. What people were rightly upset with was the story hitting the papers on Sunday, before the candles had been blown out on the cake. If people are asking questions its because Jim chose to reveal it ahead of his submission to the board. Most will be happy to support him if he can deliver what he's promised.

Exactly.

[Whispering_Jack 30,580]

Most will be happy to support him if he can deliver what he's promised.

That's self-evident. What we want to know ATM is what he's promising.

[mo64 5,880]

The current Directors owe a duty of care to all of us financial members and also under the Corporations Law which applies to the MFC (and other AFL clubs)...........

What a load of tripe!!! You make it sound as though we are investors in the club. Personally, my membership is a donation, and at the moment, I don't expect any return other than survival, and ultimately success.

You would have been rapt with Szondy's appointment, given his impeccable credentials?

Sometimes in business it requires intangible qualities, that aren't found in a business degree, to achieve success. Passion and the ability to promote change are a couple of qualities that Stynes has to offer.

If our members elect the board based on how many letters the candidates have after their name, we will continue to be a basket case.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

What a load of tripe!!! You make it sound as though we are investors in the club. Personally, my membership is a donation, and at the moment, I don't expect any return other than survival, and ultimately success.

You would have been rapt with Szondy's appointment, given his impeccable credentials?

Sometimes in business it requires intangible qualities, that aren't found in a business degree, to achieve success. Passion and the ability to promote change are a couple of qualities that Stynes has to offer.

If our members elect the board based on how many letters the candidates have after their name, we will continue to be a basket case.

Actually, its not.

The directors do have duties under the Corporations Act they need to be abide by during this period. Your assumption that the Board is full of business degree fogs that lack passion is silly and misguided.

A careful examination of the Board make up would show a diversity of backgrounds and experiences from both commerce and sporting bodies with a common interest.

You need passion to support what you do with a sensible commercial understanding to back it up. Arguing one over the other is trite and self serving. I hope Stynes and his board can show sufficient amounts of both in the future. They need to.

[mo64 5,880]

The directors do have duties under the Corporations Act they need to be abide by during this period. Your assumption that the Board is full of business degree fogs that lack passion is silly and misguided.

And where did I make mention of the current board's credentials?

I was responding to TonyMelb's desire to make an assessment of the candidates' credentials, and allow the members to vote accordingly at the AGM. Szondy is a case in point of someone with impeccable credentials, who was a lousy football club president. That's the point i'm making.

I trust that Paul Gardner's decision to stand aside mid-season, as being a ringing endorsement for Stynes and his proposed team. Gardner obviously believes that the Stynes board have a greater chance of dragging us out of the mire, than the current board.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

And where did I make mention of the current board's credentials?

I was responding to TonyMelb's desire to make an assessment of the candidates' credentials, and allow the members to vote accordingly at the AGM. Szondy is a case in point of someone with impeccable credentials, who was a lousy football club president. That's the point i'm making.

I trust that Paul Gardner's decision to stand aside mid-season, as being a ringing endorsement for Stynes and his proposed team. Gardner obviously believes that the Stynes board have a greater chance of dragging us out of the mire, than the current board.

You made two references to business degrees and implied that you need more and that Stynes had that without a scintilla of knowledge of what Stynes actually stands for and who is backing him.

And there is no evidence that Gardners move is a ringing endorsement at all and Gardner has made no such statement publicly nor is there any evidence to suggest he does so I dont know where the "obviously" you refer to comes from. What we do know is that Gardner had stated this was his last year and his mid season resignation is provide a smooth transition to the new president.

Tony Melb has made a rational and reasonable assessment of the need to have more information before the members which includes credentials that cover more than business degrees. You've reduced his assessment to an issue of business degrees and a sledge at Tony about Szondy was unreasonable and without any basis from Tony's stated point of view.

Tony like other posters has asked questions many others would reasonably ask after Stynes has taken out a blaze of publicity on "How I will save the Club?"

Stynes has not provided any concrete evidence of how he will do it but its seems more than enough depth for you.

So when you decide to label a post a "load of tripe" you might want to consider your offering against it. It comes up far worse.

[rpfc 28,736]

The current Directors owe a duty of care to all of us financial members and also under the Corporations Law which applies to the MFC (and other AFL clubs). They are obliged to ensure that any incoming Board has a sound plan for the club. The current Board owe us all at least that much! Jim has not provided the current Directors with his plans or disclosed to them who he intends bringing on as Directors. They are in no better position than us to assess the merits of what his ticket is offering.

But they can't ensure the sound plan because the AFL want it to be bloodless, so the board is folding.

I don't like the way they are doing this, and I really don't like the fact that members have not been finalised yet and neither has a plan been put forward.

I'll get behind Jimmy but we need some transparency and clarity.

[grazman 7,451]

That's self-evident. What we want to know ATM is what he's promising.

Well at this stage it amounts to a headline "I'll save the club" and rumours that members of his ticket are prepared to put 250K in to get on the board. All of which I'll take with a healthy dose of scepticism.

[grazman 7,451]

I was lucky enough to speak to Jimmy after a Reach Foundation presentation at work today. He was open and honest about his views on the club's situation (culture needs to be rebuilt from scratch, brand reestablished...he was a tad more severe than that, but that was the gist), which refreshingly didn't have any rose colored spin. He did spend a lot of time canvassing for alternatives to taking over himself (Garry?), and the only choice he felt he was left with was to step forward and take responsibility. Jimmy's clearly passionate and he seems like he has a clear strategy in place. And he was adamant that the role should be for a Melbourne man. A football person, not a business person. I can't helped but be excited by Jim taking charge. Good luck big fella.

As opposed to the realisation that the current board has made, hence the proposed move to Casey. I don't doubt his passion, but it won't be enough without a sound business plan. The next few days should provide more detail.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

"The amount of negativity is frightening."

"Whether you are scared or not the current president and administration have not done enough to secure our long term future."

"Keep the faith as the plan will be announced in the weeks to come. The AFL already are aware of it and from all rumoured reports are 100% happy with the new plan and Jim Stynes."

"Paul Gardner would not hand over so readily if he felt the new phase would be detrimental to Melbourne"

"We need to embrace change and be brave moving forward."

1. The amount of negativity is indeed frightening. As a new-comer to these boards I have already been surprised at the swiftness and harshness of the condemnation of some of our players by some of the posters. I guess I shouldn't be surprised then that this brand of knee-jerk vitriol is also applied to our current board. Which leads me to...

2. Perhaps you would like to provide your reasoning for this because when I look at the last 5 years I'm happy with our direction. I have to admit that Jim in a superman costume flying through the window sounds pretty good to me but given the good work of the current board and the paucity of knowledge about what Jim would do differently... well, I at least am not prepared to make up my mind about the best option yet. I'm certainly not willing to write off the hard work of our current board with such glib ease.

3. "Faith?" no thanks. I prefer reason, preferably based on information (not announcments that are yet to come). As for your rumoured reports, I'd like to know where you got them. The only "new plan" that I think the AFL would be happy with is a merger with North. Conspiracy theory? Yes, but you read it here first...

4. I'm not 100% on this but I thought Gardner was stepping down this year anyway (2009 at the latest)? Besides which, many people who have already inexplicably jumped on the Jim bandwagon have pointed out how this smooth transistion is good for the club. This does not mean that Gardner supports Jim's plans - I was of the understanding that Jim hadn't even bother to inform the current board (let alone the members) of his plans yet. It is for this reason that I was glad to read in the Age that some of the Board members plan to stick about in case the fairytale turns out to be just that. How Jim Will Save the Dees? Try: How Jim Will Try to Launch a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in the Media by Announcing a Coup and then Accusing any Board Member with the Temerity to Ask What His Plans Are of Putting Their Interests Ahead of the Club.

5. How's this for change: Bailey, Connolly, McNamee, Casey Relocation. You can thank the "current president and administration" for those.

Cheers

[mo64 5,880]

2. Perhaps you would like to provide your reasoning for this because when I look at the last 5 years I'm happy with our direction. I have to admit that Jim in a superman costume flying through the window sounds pretty good to me but given the good work of the current board and the paucity of knowledge about what Jim would do differently... well, I at least am not prepared to make up my mind about the best option yet. I'm certainly not willing to write off the hard work of our current board with such glib ease.

5. How's this for change: Bailey, Connolly, McNamee, Casey Relocation. You can thank the "current president and administration" for those.

Cheers

$4 million dollars in debt with another projected loss of around $1.5m, and you're happy with our direction.

As for Bailey, Connolly, and McNamee, aren't you jumping the gun a bit in lavishing praise on their appointments? I'm not being critical of them, but they haven't achieved anything as yet.

As for the Casey relocation, it's come with the same bells and whistles as our proposed new training facility at that old Olympic Park. A move to Casey doesn't guarantee us of anything.

[Rogue 585]

$4 million dollars in debt with another projected loss of around $1.5m, and you're happy with our direction.

Ignoring the projected loss this year, the debt has been substantially reduced, hasn't it? $4 million sounds bad, but I believe it was almost double that not too long ago ($7 rings a bell). How quickly will Stynes' business plan allow us to wipe off the remainder?

As for the loss, anyone know why we are losing so much money this year? Have we put more into our football department? I know we made several new appointments. It's very disappointing. I believer we budgeted for 30,000 members, which was strange considernig our 2007 (an opinion our new CEO shares).

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

$4 million dollars in debt with another projected loss of around $1.5m, and you're happy with our direction.

As for Bailey, Connolly, and McNamee, aren't you jumping the gun a bit in lavishing praise on their appointments? I'm not being critical of them, but they haven't achieved anything as yet.

As for the Casey relocation, it's come with the same bells and whistles as our proposed new training facility at that old Olympic Park. A move to Casey doesn't guarantee us of anything.

You are obviously so star struck that you have amnesia.

Coglin, Phillips and Starkins, the 3 board members who would at least like to hear what Stynes has to say before hitching up their skirts, joined the board in 2003, 2003 and 2004 respectively.

They inherited a basket case.

As per the "Media Watch" pinned post:

1999-2003: aggregate losses of $8.52 million

Since then? 4 years of profit followed by an admittedly dissapointing projected loss for of $1.5m this season - which, by the way, is the same amount by which the current board have increased football operations spending by - remember that when we win the 2010, '11 and '12 premierships.

Membership? (as per wikipedia today)

2003: 20,555

Since then? Club record membership of 28,077 in 2007, and 26,250 in May this year.

Whilst these figures shows some serious improvement since 2003, you might point out that 2008 has been a bit of a step back for the club in these terms, and you'd be right. I suspect that lower memberships and profits might have something to do with our poor on-field performace in 2007. Our 2008 fixture probably hasn't helped much either. So what else have the board been up to?

Casey relocation, 150th fundraising/celebrations, new coach, new CEO, new operations manager...

I agree it is too early to judge these new appointments accuratley, but if anyone is jumping the gun it is the people who have jumped on the Stynes bandwagon before even finding out what his plans are. I raised the matter of the new appointments because some people on this site have been citing the need for "change." Going by the spate of new appointments, it seems to me that nobody understands this better than the current board. And if you don't believe me then how's this from Board Member Michael Coglin (Stynes poised for peaceful takeover):

"If I hear Jim tomorrow night, meet his team, see what they can bring to the club and I believe that the club would be the better for all that, then what a terrific day for the Melbourne footy club." Coglin also says that if he thinks it is in the best interests of the club, that he would stand down "in a heartbeat."

What a selfless and gracious comment for the man to make after pulling this club out of financial ruin only to be completely ignored by Jim and disparaged by the unthinking groupies on this site. A man who just like you or I, or indeed, big Jim Stynes himself, simply wants to see the club do well, and who has been successfully working to acheive that end.

Over the next couple of years, when our increased football operations spending starts taking effect, when our new coach starts notching up some wins, when our young side is enjoying the new training and management facilities, when Cranbourne VicKick Kids start asking for their mums to iron "2" and other numbers on their new Melbourne footy jumpers, when memberships start to go up again due to increased on-field success, when our club is still in existence, I will not have forgotten the contributions made by the Board from 2003-8.

You and others like you, have forgotten them already.