Currently, the Tassie government is putting up the next contract up for tender from 2011 for another 5 years. Hawthorn are getting $3m a year to play 5 games in Tassie (1 NAB & 4 home games).

Why dont we bid for the next contract in Tassie?

We can offer 5 games (1 NAB & 4 homes games) for $2m a year?

I'm wouldn't be in favour of this Tassie have already adopted the Dorks. We need a 'greenfields' location of our own, where there are serious opportunities to grow our supporter / membership base.

I'd be a happy with a maximum of 2 home games in Darwin, and 6 total interstate trips per season.

I think 4 home games in NT is too many. The travelling and heat would take its toll on the players.

Agree with you completely. 2 home games in NT, 4 other interstate trips during the home and away season and our opening NAB cup match up there each year would be ideal. Three games a year up there should be enough. Unlike the Hawks who are playing 4 games in Tassie, Tassie's a lot closer then NT, 4 games there would take to much out. 1 NAB cup match and 2 home & away matches will be good and will hold us in good stead financialy.

Personally, I would like to see that game at the 'G'. <_<

You could have an Indigenous Round with Port Adelaide in NT.

Ha you're right HT. Would be good either way I suppose.

Port Adelaide is also a great idea.

The AFL apparantly make up for the hawthorn games sold to tassy, by giving them extra away games at the G...therefore, surely we could do this and maybe they can let melbourne members in for free to do these games like they did on the w/e agaisnt hawks

If Melbourne can position itself as the club:

- with the closest ties to remote Aboriginal communities,

- leading the way in developing Aussie Rules in those communities, and

- investing in non-football related community projects in those communities,

such a reputation can potentially be used in the club's favour. I'm thinking, in particular, benefits could include:

- Corporate branding during sponsorship negotiations,

- Positive news pieces in the media regarding the club's involvement in such projects, and

- Negotiations with the AFL.

Melbourne can position itself as 'The Club with a Heart.'

Would the AFL ever allow Melbourne to hang out to dry, when it is the club investing most in remote Aboriginal communities? Imagine the harm to the AFL's public image.

Adopting a presence in Darwin, where the club apparently has good support (according to above posts), seems like a good opportunity for the club to begin working towards developing such an image.

Also, although I'm not an expert on the issues that surround Aboriginal communities, I would have thought that the club would bring about some positive change to the area, so I think the locals would benefit too. I add this because upon re-reading my post, I realised that it sounded like I was suggesting that the club should exploit the seriousness of the issues facing Aboriginal communities for the club's own gain, which was definitely NOT my intention. I see this as a win-win scenario for the Club and the locals of the area.

I know we need to do stuff like this, but the D's away from the G, it is so hard to swallow, plus it give the TV stations more reason to put us on F@$#'in Foxtel.

I think this has to be done.

For the security of the club long term. We need to money, and Darwin is a great place to do it - unlikely to be big enough to support an AFL team alone so we can't be forced there (i.e. Kangaroos & Gold Coast).

Melbourne needs to grow its supporter base - so surely this is one of the best ways to achieve this.

Get on the front foot Dees and get Darwin on board ASAP.

I'd be a happy with a maximum of 2 home games in Darwin, and 6 total interstate trips per season.

I think 4 home games in NT is too many. The travelling and heat would take its toll on the players.

4 games in Darwin and 2 games elsewhere each year

I think this has to be done.

For the security of the club long term. We need to money, and Darwin is a great place to do it - unlikely to be big enough to support an AFL team alone so we can't be forced there (i.e. Kangaroos & Gold Coast).

Melbourne needs to grow its supporter base - so surely this is one of the best ways to achieve this.

Get on the front foot Dees and get Darwin on board ASAP.

Fair enough, but why has this come out now? Is the Footy club just wanting to signal their intentions to the AFL now? Or has some media hound dog sniffed out this case?

how would it be us on the front foot? havnt the dogs been playing there for a few years?

It's easier for the Dorks to sell FULL memberships in Tassie, because the trip to the G from there is cheaper than it would be from Darwin for us. We would need to create some NON GAME DAY type membership packages if we were to play 2-3 permanent games there.

It's easier for the Dorks to sell FULL memberships in Tassie, because the trip to the G from there is cheaper than it would be from Darwin for us. We would need to create some NON GAME DAY type membership packages if we were to play 2-3 permanent games there.

sweet, good thinking..

An extra 6 millon over a 5 yr deal - when we like every team, play interstate anyway.. as long as it doesn't mean extra interstate games, I'd be wrapped!

Think how the Daveys an Wona an jurrahs would play up there.. they'd be extra inspired to perform!

I'm very happy with this idea.

I don't mean to sound selfish but us premium members need to be compensated for losing our social club facilities every time we play a home game interstate. All we get now is a ticket to get in up with the plebs.

3) The change rooms and facilities must be upgraded because the current change rooms look very very ordinary-

Those are not the change rooms. They are in an airconditioned interchange/dugout area.

Those are not the change rooms. They are in an airconditioned interchange/dugout area.

oh ok sorry my fault

It would seem the majority here are for the proposal. I think that it would be good for Jim/ Cameron to hear from the grass roots that they have our support and also hear of some of the great ideas that some have here. No one has mentioned that the current Labour Government is very happy to move monies into Aboriginal areas ie sporting arenas so maybe we could come up with some ideas how to gently relieve the Crudd Government of its/our well earned money. The other obvious plus is that we would be expanding the game for Demetriou so there would have to be some good negotiating points for the Demons - reduce other away games/increase reciprocal games like recent Hawk game. I like the idea of Demons doing a deal with Tiger Airlines etc for members and maybe a sponsorship deal as well. All in all if it means the survival of the club we all have accept the good with the bad. To say that we should be playing all our games at MCG then thats all well and good if we were living in a perfect world but look at Nth Melbourne and their future. They have none, despite all the good will that everyone has for the club. In hindsight they did the wrong thing by not moving to GC. I know that this is going to rub a few up the wrong way but can we at least discuss!

It would seem the majority here are for the proposal. I think that it would be good for Jim/ Cameron to hear from the grass roots that they have our support and also hear of some of the great ideas that some have here. No one has mentioned that the current Labour Government is very happy to move monies into Aboriginal areas ie sporting arenas so maybe we could come up with some ideas how to gently relieve the Crudd Government of its/our well earned money. The other obvious plus is that we would be expanding the game for Demetriou so there would have to be some good negotiating points for the Demons - reduce other away games/increase reciprocal games like recent Hawk game. I like the idea of Demons doing a deal with Tiger Airlines etc for members and maybe a sponsorship deal as well. All in all if it means the survival of the club we all have accept the good with the bad. To say that we should be playing all our games at MCG then thats all well and good if we were living in a perfect world but look at Nth Melbourne and their future. They have none, despite all the good will that everyone has for the club. In hindsight they did the wrong thing by not moving to GC. I know that this is going to rub a few up the wrong way but can we at least discuss!

add my tick of approval too.... when do we hear yay or nay ?????

4 games in Darwin and 2 games elsewhere each year

There's no way the AFL would allow us to only have to play 2 away interstate games a year. The minimum they normally allow is 4.

I think its a fantastic idea...

However, as it stands at the moment, the MFC

- train part time at the junction

- are developing state of the art facilities in Casey, where we also have our affiliate VFL side

- building community relationships in Melbournes biggest growth area

- have the MCG as our 'home' ground, where we at present also have our offices

- setting up a new administration home in the new rectangle sporting precinct

and now we want to play home games in the NT and develop a community following there as well.

Is anyone else confused where our 'home' actually is?

Against the flow, I'll say it's not a good idea.

MFC needs to have a clear strategic focus, and I don't think the scattergun effect as rusty outlined is too strategic.

Go for short term $, or go for longer term membership development in Casey. I don't think MFC can appeal to all sectors concurrently.

$300-$400,000 for a game in Darwin instead of a loss at the MCG sounds great, but what would the outcome be if the same match was played at Casey Fields? Reportedly Geelong make around $700,000 from a home game at SS. Obviously CF doesn't have the same standard of amenity (yet?) that SS has, but if the objective is to stamp a footprint on a city with a long term population of close to half a million, it may be better to focus efforts in that direction.

How can we play home games at Casey though?

Against the flow, I'll say it's not a good idea.

MFC needs to have a clear strategic focus, and I don't think the scattergun effect as rusty outlined is too strategic.

Go for short term $, or go for longer term membership development in Casey. I don't think MFC can appeal to all sectors concurrently.

$300-$400,000 for a game in Darwin instead of a loss at the MCG sounds great, but what would the outcome be if the same match was played at Casey Fields? Reportedly Geelong make around $700,000 from a home game at SS. Obviously CF doesn't have the same standard of amenity (yet?) that SS has, but if the objective is to stamp a footprint on a city with a long term population of close to half a million, it may be better to focus efforts in that direction.

Obviously,do we have confirmation of development of a ground/amenities at Casey at a level that AFL would allow games to be played. If so what is the timeline of that development. Why can't we have both. Isn't this part of what Jimmy wants the club to be that is a part of a wider community rather than the exclusive club we have been seen to be in the past.

How can we play home games at Casey though?

Two step process:

1 only a little infrastructure investment - poor spectator amenity, but very cheap to run

2 infrastructure investment to the standard of Carrara, Manuka etc - improved spectator amenity, but still very cheap to run and home to a couple of matches a year such as MFC v Gold Coast, Western Sydney, Port Adelaide, Freo etc

A 3rd step could see an upgrade to Skilled Stadium standard, but that would require a significant investment. You would not want to justify such investment by taking too many MFC home games away from the MCG, but if it was developed as the 3rd Melbourne “boutique” stadium (15-25,000 people with reasonable amenities) it could in fact pick up the additional demand across a range of Melbourne-based clubs generated by the additional clubs in the national comp.

And MFC could be in the driving seat, as the key associated AFL club because of its association with Casey Council and the Casey Scorpions.

Obviously,do we have confirmation of development of a ground/amenities at Casey at a level that AFL would allow games to be played. If so what is the timeline of that development. Why can't we have both. Isn't this part of what Jimmy wants the club to be that is a part of a wider community rather than the exclusive club we have been seen to be in the past.

Clearly, lots of works needs to be done. But there are AFL matches at Carrara. I went there last year for St KFC v NM, and I'm going on Saturday. It's not too flash, and is something that Casey Fields could easily become.

As far as the wider community goes, how wide do you go? It's a question that needs to be strategically considered because there may well be greater benefits in concentrating in Casey than relatively brief and a small numberr of visits to Darwin. MFC supporting people from Casey are far more likely to become regular footy going members than people in Darwin - it's a long drive from Darwin to the MCG, but it's not far from Casey.

Two step process:

1 only a little infrastructure investment - poor spectator amenity, but very cheap to run

2 infrastructure investment to the standard of Carrara, Manuka etc - improved spectator amenity, but still very cheap to run and home to a couple of matches a year such as MFC v Gold Coast, Western Sydney, Port Adelaide, Freo etc

A 3rd step could see an upgrade to Skilled Stadium standard, but that would require a significant investment. You would not want to justify such investment by taking too many MFC home games away from the MCG, but if it was developed as the 3rd Melbourne “boutique” stadium (15-25,000 people with reasonable amenities) it could in fact pick up the additional demand across a range of Melbourne-based clubs generated by the additional clubs in the national comp.

And MFC could be in the driving seat, as the key associated AFL club because of its association with Casey Council and the Casey Scorpions.

The unknown is public transport and what plans has the State Government to improve public transport to the Casey area. Games could not be played there without an upgrade to rail system. Obviously a complex situation but if it and any Darwin experiment is put in the too hard basket we will return to the basket case that we were before Jimmy! I know that Jimmy has surrounded himself by some very clever people who I am sure will look at the proposals. We will not be second guessed or left behind whilst other clubs take up ideas and opportunities like has happened in years past. While this is the case we need to support the club and its board but that doesn't mean blindly accepting everything. We obviously have some talent here on the forum (brains, I mean) (although there seems to be some discussion about some IQ's on other threads - grow up) and the whole reason to get together last year was to gather ideas so put those ideas to the club. Email Cameron or Chris Connolly - make them aware of what is discussed here. I think you maybe surprised how receptive they are to what members are thinking. The only way the Club will get strong and remain strong is for the supporters to retain their passion throughout these coming years. It is not going to be much better next year but if we continuously snipe like some here do, without offering alternatives, then we open ourselves to ridicule from the media which will undermine all the good work that Jimmy and the Board have put in this year. It is not just the Board but all the effort that the supporters have put in. Let's be constructive and innovative. It will only make our Club that much stronger!!!!!