How can the sole reason a club exists be to win something that didn't exist when it was formed?

Obviously the key is when it becomes part of a competition.

The Fitzroy Football club is a legal entity today with a membership base. Obviously it doesn't exist to win premierships.

Now my turn; why would a club join or become part of a competition - which insinuates 'competing', if its sole goal wasn't to win the competitions highest honour ?

Edited July 29, 200916 yr by Hannibal

Branding and marketshare has always exited in AFL/VFL footy, I feel like I'm going around in circles here.

In the 50's the MFC had both in spades, mostly due to the MCC and the strengths and connections it brought to the club.

Once again, to suggest that people do these things purely out of the goodness of their hearts is naive.

Edit: Everyone knows the Collingwood brand and it's always been like this.

I did not say people do these things simply out of the goodness of their heart, obviously everything has underlying motiving factors behind it, that does not mean any act done by the MFC or its representatives is done purely to for the purpose of winning a premiership though. To think like that is being cynical, if not verging on conspiracy nut.

When Cam Bruce visits a kid in hospital do you think all he is thinking is gee this'll be good for memberships? No.

When Aaron Davey helps out an up and coming player from a remote NT community do you think all he is thinking is gee I can see this kid playing on a wing in an MFC premiership? No.

Whether or not the marketing manager at MFC is sitting in the board room rubbing his hands toghether is irrelevant.

Yes, that would be circular logic. I never said that though. Perhaps try reading the thread before putting words in my mouth?

I read it.

"a flag is the sole reason of a competing club existing"

And you are arguing against that by saying that existing is the sole reason the club exists.

That is circular.

"The club" is made up of many parts including the members and supporters. Some members have clearly stated in the thread that they believe that the club exists for other reasons other than winning the flag therefore the answer is self evident.

There is a difference between a football clubs "existence" and its "goals" . Of course the clubs goal is to win the premiership but it can't be its sole goal because there are a number of other goals that need to be met to make that possible.

Its an impossible question to answer in any simplicity.

The sole purpose of the thread has been achieved. Hannibal, you are in the majority.

Not true. I'm often in the minority and it's a place I feel very comfortable. Ask posters like Fan if I mind being in the minority.

Also, I tried to make the 3 choices very fair, which is reflected in the voting.

Most topics are done to death. I don't remember one quite like this. And that was the "purpose" of the thread.

Winning flags is the raison detre of footy clubs.

Simple as that.

Edited: 'For' or 'of'....

To me following the MFC is not a social pastime it's about winning flags and more flags. I was 12 yrs when we won the last premiership and I still remember it to this day. Oh! What a feeling.

I feel like I've just been marking time since then. Dissapointment, followed by dissapointment. Poor recruiting, lack of finances, poor facilities and second rate administrations.

The journey has been long and the only thing that keeps me barracking for my beloved demons is another flag It's really not so much for me now, it's for my kids. I made them follow the demons or I would not take them to the footy.

They now love Melbourne as much as I do and I want a flag for them.

In the meantime, what keeps me going is seeing new players like Liam Jurrah, attending training at Casey and reading the supporter forums. I live for the MFC and the snippets of joy it sometimes gives.

Bye the Bye, the MFC rang me yesterday wanting to sell raffle tickets as part of the debt demolition. I've financially supported the club for many years, however on this occassion I said that I would prefer to wait and see if the club gets a priority pick this year before I contibute more funds. Although a priority pick may not be a major ingredient in winning a premiership it MUST help and I am getting tired of waiting for our next flag. I'm becoming very impatient.

"The club" is made up of many parts including the members and supporters. Some members have clearly stated in the thread that they believe that the club exists for other reasons other than winning the flag therefore the answer is self evident.

What would the club's sole goal have been in 1896 ? I've got a sneaking suspicion that they were only concerned about winning the flag. Nothing else.

Nothing has changed in my mind.

And you are arguing against that by saying that existing is the sole reason the club exists.

That is circular.

I have never said that. As I said, read the thread.

No doubt some supporters would love a flag, but it's not the be all and end all. It is to me, as I wouldn't follow a club if I unequivocally knew that Melb. wouldn't win a flag in my lifetime. It's the only thing that keeps me going.

That's pretty much it for me. If I was told right now that Melbourne wouldn't win a premiership in my lifetime, I'd find something better to do with my weekends. The MFC has to satisfy supporters allright - by winning premierships! It's interesting when you look at the thread headline - "What is the 'essence' of a football club's existence?" I'd say the essence of a club is largely based on how many flags won. I'd say the essence of the St. KFC is one of abject failure, along with the Dogs. The Dockers simply have no essence, they are a non-entity. There are subplots and stories and greats and controversies, but the great clubs became great and famous largely because they were winners.

Supporters with the same view as Hannibal would struggle following English Soccer, as only 4 teams have any chance to win. The strange thing to consider is even teams that rarely even make the top league still have thousands of loyal and passionate financial members.

And S_T, that is one of the reasons I don't care whatsoever for EPL or international club soccer in general.

I agree that if the MFC doesn't win a premiership this era we are in deep [censored].

The Doggies haven't won a premiership in 55 years and they are still here though. Why? The Doggies are the most community based club in the AFL. People want them to exist, whether they are winning premierships or not.

Meanwhile you have North Melbourne who clearly show that premiership success does not equate to longevity.

The MFC recognise the importance of a strong community base, hence Casey, which primary purpose is about forming a stronger football club and ensuring it is still around in decades to come, not to win a premiership.

To me, you are trying to argue that the club employs these iniatives to make sure it is still around in decades to come, but that, considering the question posed by H, would imply that the 'sole reason for the club to exist' is to ensure its own existence.

You may not think you are arguing a circlular argument, but when applied to the question asked - you are.

What would the club's sole goal have been in 1896 ? I've got a sneaking suspicion that they were only concerned about winning the flag. Nothing else.

Nothing has changed in my mind.

Don't know you would have to ask all the suppoters, players comittee of that era. In 2009 "the club" made up of its many arms have stated in your poll that it is not its "sole" aim.

You can't do a poll then ignore the evidence because it doesnt suit your conclusion.

Its far too complex a question to give a simple answer.

I voted A but it isn't quite as simple as that.

Our supporter base is dwindling and we need success to attract new members, our prolonged period without a flag has hurt this club more than anyone could imagine. It may well be too late and the position may be irretrievable; we used to have a big supporter base in the 50's and 60's but now we have one of the worst member levels in the competition. We are treated like a joke, we are a minnow like the Bullies and North.

Clubs like Hawthorn that started 20 lengths behind us are now streaking away and why is that? They have won flags, in fact they have won 9 since we won our last. It is all well and good to say that we should get satisfaction and warmth from supporting a club that has high ideals but if we are watching Melbourne play for the last time because they are folding what good is that?

If we are clever and can win a premiership or two and have a sustained period of success then we will continue on into the future but without it we will wither and die. How hard is it to convince a kid to follow a side like Melbourne when we languish at the bottom of the ladder. Kids of 5 and 6 don't have ideals they just like to win.

Winning and Flags are all they care about, losing sucks.

I voted A but it isn't quite as simple as that.

Our supporter base is dwindling and we need success to attract new members, our prolonged period without a flag has hurt this club more than anyone could imagine. It may well be too late and the position may be irretrievable; we used to have a big supporter base in the 50's and 60's but now we have one of the worst member levels in the competition. We are treated like a joke, we are a minnow like the Bullies and North.

Clubs like Hawthorn that started 20 lengths behind us are now streaking away and why is that? They have won flags, in fact they have won 9 since we won our last. It is all well and good to say that we should get satisfaction and warmth from supporting a club that has high ideals but if we are watching Melbourne play for the last time because they are folding what good is that?

If we are clever and can win a premiership or two and have a sustained period of success then we will continue on into the future but without it we will wither and die. How hard is it to convince a kid to follow a side like Melbourne when we languish at the bottom of the ladder. Kids of 5 and 6 don't have ideals they just like to win.

Winning and Flags are all they care about, losing sucks.

You Said it Robbie, its all there.....Losing Sucks.

Edited July 29, 200916 yr by why you little

I did not say people do these things simply out of the goodness of their heart, obviously everything has underlying motiving factors behind it, that does not mean any act done by the MFC or its representatives is done purely to for the purpose of winning a premiership though. To think like that is being cynical, if not verging on conspiracy nut.

When Cam Bruce visits a kid in hospital do you think all he is thinking is gee this'll be good for memberships? No.

When Aaron Davey helps out an up and coming player from a remote NT community do you think all he is thinking is gee I can see this kid playing on a wing in an MFC premiership? No.

Whether or not the marketing manager at MFC is sitting in the board room rubbing his hands toghether is irrelevant.

The majority of times a player does these types of things because it's in their contract.

Most topics are done to death. I don't remember one quite like this. And that was the "purpose" of the thread.

"But I might be in the minority, and I want to find out, which is the reason for the poll."

"But I might be in the minority, and I want to find out, which is the reason for the poll."

Partly, otherwise why bother doing a poll ? I was also interested in expressing my view. Funny about that.

I had a healthy suspicion that a flag wasn't the be all and end all for a number of supporters. As staggering as that is to a number of us.

Partly, otherwise why bother doing a poll ? I was also interested in expressing my view. Funny about that.

I had a healthy suspicion that a flag wasn't the be all and end all for a number of supporters. As staggering as that is to a number of us.

I could only go by your stated reason at the time of my post.

However, now you're conflating views on whether, by definition, football clubs are solely about premierships with posters views on premierships in general? I think that's a long, mischievious, bow.

Wow. MONSTER thread evolving here. Nice work H.

I have trouble with the word "sole". If it was "primary" I'd agree, a flag is what we strive for and every decision we make is directed towards it.

This is the closest one to the mark, I think.

The question is just not that simple, I reckon. Saying a premiership is the SOLE reason? What happens if you recruit EVERY good 28 year old in the land, drop every penny you have and trade away all your picks and youth? You end up with a great chance at a flag with an entirely mature side, but give it a year or two, and even if you DO win a flag, your list is going to be shot and if you're MFC NMFC or WBFC then you'll likely fold in a couple of years time.

I'm a long time MFC member, and personally, I have long held the view that I would turn completely away from Australian rules football if I couldn't watch the Melbourne club run around in red and blue colours. It really is that simple. I'd cease to have that "love." I don't really watch any other clubs with any enthusiasm. I'm not a fan of AFL like so many are, I'm more a fan of Melbourne Football Club. I don;t get excited watching Friday night footy unless it's my side playing.

Am I willing to risk the long term future of the club for that desire? Yes, but only to a point. Hence the fact that I went option three. It's just not as simple as saying a flag is the "be all and end all" of following your club.

Looking at it from another point of view, is it reasonable to suggest that we should be winning the flag EVERY year? The draft is designed so that everyone gets a flag every 16 years, so how would we manage to get our hands on a flag in 16 out of 16 years? It's not reasonable to expect this. So what happens in the years we DON'T win flags?

I'm interested in subtext here. Something brought this thread on, H. Was it the years and years at 'ology and 'land that have caused this? Or was it something more recent? Perhaps a choice the club has made where they sold out a flag chance for an opportunity to consolidate our place in the league? (I'm thinking you'll be ropable if we win a 5th)

It crosses my mind from time to time too, but mostly when I read fans on here saying they want to win a few games to regain respect. I think almost EVERY die-hard MFC supporter, certainly 95% of the long-time and regular posters here are willing to go through WHATEVER AMOUNT OF [censored] IT TAKES to get a hold of the list that will take us past mediocrity. To them, watching Neitz, Johnstone, Yze, Robbo, Brown, White, Whelan, JMac and others run around and get us only moderate respect was worse than, well, being Richmond.

So to sum up, you're not right, but you're not wrong IMHO. How' that for fence sitting?

Great thread. I'm up to my nuts in people over at ology who think that mediocrity is just cop it sweet.

A lot of these kids have only seen a 2000 GF or a few finals series under Danidud, and think they are common place. Ive waited all my life for a flag and have been there both in 88 and 2000 to watch us get walloped.

Born in 69 - never seen my team win a flag in 40 years. If that's the case that i fall off me perch in the next few years, then you can live and die - and never see your team win a flag.

There are already a few doggies, saints and dees fans that have met that sad end.....

Another 20 years of this and I'm probably cactus as well......

GG

I would like us to win one just to see my old man's face, he like many endured the pain of the 70's, through to now.....

Also i would be missing on a 2week bender somewhere spectacular....

I'm interested in subtext here. Something brought this thread on, H. Was it the years and years at 'ology and 'land that have caused this? Or was it something more recent? Perhaps a choice the club has made where they sold out a flag chance for an opportunity to consolidate our place in the league? (I'm thinking you'll be ropable if we win a 5th)

I don't want to put words in H's mouth but I think he is equating those that want to win only one more game this year to wanting a flag over any other concern.

Tanking or list managing gets us closer to that flag than not, so H sees it as a no-brainer.

It would interesting to see if anyone voted A but hopes we don't tank from here on in.

I don't want to put words in H's mouth but I think he is equating those that want to win only one more game this year to wanting a flag over any other concern.

Tanking or list managing gets us closer to that flag than not, so H sees it as a no-brainer.

It would interesting to see if anyone voted A but hopes we don't tank from here on in.

We'll leave it to him to confirm, but yes, that's what I was hinting at.

In that case, I concur with his over-all sentiment. If people want to win 2-3 more games, hollow victories against other tanking clubs, effectively giving your opposition an advantage on the second most important day of the football calendar... Then I'd be questioning their knowledge, and priorities as an MFC supporter and member too. In fact, I believe I have on this site all year.

A quick side note that others can confirm or deny... I read this over at bigfooty:

As we know, when a side wins less than 16.5 premiership points two years running, at the end of the second year they qualify for a PP BEFORE the first round. ie Scully.

What I didn't know, is that apparently if you do the same thing a third year running, you actually only qualify for a PP at the END of the first round. In other words, after you get pick 1 and 2, the year afterwards the BEST you can do, even if you win zero games, is picks 1 and 17.

Did anybody else know this? The reason I bring it up is that EVERYONE decries the rd 22 Blues game (and the preceeding Bulldogs game) as a dark day in our history. But the truth is, over the 3 seasons 2007-09 the BEST draft position you can get is a SOLE PP before the first round.

ie:

If we had lost to the Blues in rd 22 of 2007, and 2008 and 09 had played out as they have:

2007 draft: Picks 2 (Cotchin) and 18 (Rance)... Richmond were spooners that year.

2008 draft: Picks 1 + 2 (Watts and Naitanui)

2009 draft Picks 1(ish) + 17(ish)

So, in reality we got Morton, Maric, Watts, Blease... and hopefully Scully and Trengrove.

Had we lost that game, we would instead have Cotchin, Rance*, Watts, Naitanui, Scully and whatever we'd have taken with pick 20ish.

*We may have taken Maric here anyway, since we got him only 3 picks later.

As far as I'm concerned, that's not as big a difference as I'd imagined. Here I was thinking with that result that we missed out on TWO PPs before the first round.

If anyone can deny this officially, I'd love to hear it.

I could only go by your stated reason at the time of my post.

However, now you're conflating views on whether, by definition, football clubs are solely about premierships with posters views on premierships in general? I think that's a long, mischievious, bow.

I think you're trying to argue for the sake of it. Please yourself.

Is winning a flag the be all and end all for you as a supporter ? That's the topic question.

Now explain where I've been naughty ?

I want to see a premiership desperately but lets put it another way. I have great memories of Robbie Flower, Todd Viney, Gary Lyon, Jim Stynes and others playing. Watching them was a big part of my growing up.

Likewise those guys love the club. Granted that a premiership would have been awesome but it doesn't make my experience as a supporter or thier experience as players obsolete because a flag wasn't won.

The flag is the Holy Grail, but it doesn't mean you can't enjoy the pursuit of same.

A quick side note that others can confirm or deny... I read this over at bigfooty:

As we know, when a side wins less than 16.5 premiership points two years running, at the end of the second year they qualify for a PP BEFORE the first round. ie Scully.

What I didn't know, is that apparently if you do the same thing a third year running, you actually only qualify for a PP at the END of the first round. In other words, after you get pick 1 and 2, the year afterwards the BEST you can do, even if you win zero games, is picks 1 and 17.

Just off the topic of the thread here but: you should have stopped when you said "I read this over at BF."

There is no reference, that I can see, to a third year. If you have two years, in a row, of 4 wins or less, you will get a PP before the draft.

That may be complicated by the compromised drafts coming up but BF is often wrong, and I believe they are wrong here.