GWS Giants...

[WonnaJurah 5]

Rubbish.

* Delhi Giants - Indian Cricket League est 2007 (CRICKET)

* Gold Coast-Tweed Giants - Australian Rugby League 88-89 (RUGBY)

North Melbourne/Coburg Giants in NBL

[two sheds jackson 3]

... we have a real cultural cringe in this country. Why couldn't they think of something culturally Australian to call them.

Out of all the traditional AFL clubs, the Kangaroos are the only one whose moniker is "culturally Australian". Interestingly, the only other team who comes close to having an "Aussie" nickname is a "franchise club" in Fremantle, whose moniker is a tribute to the towns working class, port heritage (although they stopped short at calling themselves the "Wharfies"). The rest are named after abtsract concepts ("Blues", "Power", etc), religious icons ("Demons", "Saints"), or animals not indigenous to Australia.

This whole argument is silly. Even if we go back 100-150 years ago, when clubs started getting their names, the "Giants" would have been a perfectly accetable one. If Checker Hughes had told our players to "lift your heads and show them you have the hearts of Giants!", we could just as easily be called the Giants. If that had happened, and if GWS had called themselves the "Demons", then we'd probably have a thread here, on Giantland.com, with everyone talking about what a soulless, Americanised name the "Demons" is.

This whole thing has that peanut sheedy's fingerprints all over it.

Clearly as coach of the senior playing list, this is the sort of stuff he's paid for.

Edited November 17, 2010 by two sheds jackson

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

Out of all the traditional AFL clubs, the Kangaroos are the only one whose moniker is "culturally Australian". Interestingly, the only other team who comes close to having an "Aussie" nickname is a "franchise club" in Fremantle, whose moniker is a tribute to the towns working class, port heritage (although they stopped short at calling themselves the "Wharfies"). The rest are named after abtsract concepts ("Blues", "Power", etc), religious icons ("Demons", "Saints"), or animals not indigenous to Australia.

This whole argument is silly. Even if we go back 100-150 years ago, when clubs started getting their names, the "Giants" would have been a perfectly accetable one. If Checker Hughes had told our players to "lift your heads and show them you have the hearts of Giants!", we could just as easily be called the Giants. If that had happened, and if GWS had called themselves the "Demons", then we'd probably have a thread here, on Giantland.com, with everyone talking about what a soulless, Americanised name the "Demons" is.

That is an extremely good point there Two Sheds, i have to agree with you, i can even handle their new jumper, at least it is different and distingtive, but where they are situated, has just got problems written all over it. But i am down here and will probably not ever see a live game from GWS Headquarters so i will observe the progress with interest.

My Bet says the AFL is too greedy on this one. B)

[Chook 15,013]

That is an extremely good point there Two Sheds, i have to agree with you, i can even handle their new jumper, at least it is different and distingtive, but where they are situated, has just got problems written all over it. But i am down here and will probably not ever see a live game from GWS Headquarters so i will observe the progress with interest.

My Bet says the AFL is too greedy on this one. B)

Did you even read what he wrote? Because your response doesn't seem to have anything to do with Two Sheds' post.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

Did you even read what he wrote? Because your response doesn't seem to have anything to do with Two Sheds' post.

Sure i did, we will get used to the name. Two Sheds is correct. I doubt Australia will get used to the location

[Guest Thomo]

I don't want ownership of their club, but i see nothing wrong with Paid up members of ALL clubs at least having a voice as to whether they should be in the comp.

This is going to be Bad Business-The AFL are stubborn. It will look good initially because of the Broadcast rights, but down the track it will be as successful as the Myki Ticketing Fiasco.

Should paid up members of all AFL clubs have a voice as to whether Melbourne should be in the comp? What if the AFL wanted to reduce the Vic clubs by one, and it was put to the fans, the Dees would more than likely come last. I suppose you would think that is ok?

A large percentage of Melbourne’s funding comes from the AFL, they generate a large part of it from TV rights. Currently, the population of NSW is about one third of the Australian population, NSW and Queensland represents about half of the Australian population. Do you think that the revenue currently coming in will be sustainable into the future with competition from other sports that are aggressively marketing their product into these markets if the AFL is not adequately servicing half of the country? It’s either move forward, or go backwards.

I'd prefer that those at the AFL with the qualifications, knowledge and vision to make decisions on behalf of the league, are given the power to do so, rather than giving a voice to the average narrow minded and uneducated (in football administration terms) fan of rival clubs.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

Should paid up members of all AFL clubs have a voice as to whether Melbourne should be in the comp? What if the AFL wanted to reduce the Vic clubs by one, and it was put to the fans, the Dees would more than likely come last. I suppose you would think that is ok?

A large percentage of Melbourne’s funding comes from the AFL, they generate a large part of it from TV rights. Currently, the population of NSW is about one third of the Australian population, NSW and Queensland represents about half of the Australian population. Do you think that the revenue currently coming in will be sustainable into the future with competition from other sports that are aggressively marketing their product into these markets if the AFL is not adequately servicing half of the country? It’s either move forward, or go backwards.

I'd prefer that those at the AFL with the qualifications, knowledge and vision to make decisions on behalf of the league, are given the power to do so, rather than giving a voice to the average narrow minded and uneducated (in football administration terms) fan of rival clubs.

Fair Comment Thomo. I have always said over the last 30 years that if the MFC got to the stage where it could not pay the bills then we are no more. No Mergers for me. MFC or nothing.

It almost happened 3 years ago, but i am glad all that stuff happened because we have now a much stronger more focused club. May we never forget the first decade of this century and learn from it.

The TV rights should be around a $Billion next year, so yes money does talk, BUT how much of it are western sydney going to watch when they already have 3 Rugby league to follow? That's what doesn't fit to me.

In Melbourne the storm games are on TV at Midnight often, its just not a big deal. Are the AFL going to do a better job?

The Swans still struggle after 30 years, Sydney people only talk about them after a win. The AFL are going to have to pump truckloads of cash up there for probably all my life. Is that good business? i don't know the answer but it doesn't sit well, something fishy is going on.

I go back to the night the "16 presidents" all voted unanamously for the 17th & 18th teams. It was all done so quickly-too quickly for me. I think there should have been some debate over a period of time.

The grass Roots Footy supporter deserves to be looked after, after Etihad stadium i do not always trust an AFL decision. I want to, because i love the game. But its hard.

Edited November 17, 2010 by why you little

[volders 22]

Giants seems alright to me, I do like the Wolves better though.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Fair Comment Thomo. I have always said over the last 30 years that if the MFC got to the stage where it could not pay the bills then we are no more. No Mergers for me. MFC or nothing.

It almost happened 3 years ago, but i am glad all that stuff happened because we have now a much stronger more focused club. May we never forget the first decade of this century and learn from it.

Just for your information, MFC has been technically insolvent for most of the past 30 years and have only been "saved" during that period by the AFL support. During this period MFC would not have been able to meet its commitments on its own without AFL support and at times guarantee. This position was the same for a number of clubs during this period as well eg St Kilda, Bulldogs and Richmond.

And we are not out of the woods financially by any stretch.

I can handle expansion, it has to be done, but the Market they have chosen here is just Wrong. Maybe by the time i am 95 GWS may be an accepted part of Australian culture. Just Maybe.

Your comments suggest otherwise.

West Sydney and Gold Coast are the only plausible financially viable markets left in Australia with sufficient demographic to expand. Tassie is already won by AFL and the Northern Territory has no real economic base to justify an AFL club despite being a wonderful source of AFL footballers.

I am not sure what other markets are right if GWS is wrong. Its more riskier that GC and Tassie but the upside is significantly and if they can generate sufficient TV and supporter appeal then it will valuable to the value of the TV rights.

My Dad spent many years working in india, so i have a fair idea on how far the race will bend over for a dollar or two.

Gambling is not a race based issue but thanks for the generalisation.

And for what its worth the majority of Indians have greater respect for the game than most non Indians. But that might clash with your generalisation.

Should paid up members of all AFL clubs have a voice as to whether Melbourne should be in the comp? What if the AFL wanted to reduce the Vic clubs by one, and it was put to the fans, the Dees would more than likely come last. I suppose you would think that is ok?

A large percentage of Melbourne’s funding comes from the AFL, they generate a large part of it from TV rights. Currently, the population of NSW is about one third of the Australian population, NSW and Queensland represents about half of the Australian population. Do you think that the revenue currently coming in will be sustainable into the future with competition from other sports that are aggressively marketing their product into these markets if the AFL is not adequately servicing half of the country? It’s either move forward, or go backwards.

I'd prefer that those at the AFL with the qualifications, knowledge and vision to make decisions on behalf of the league, are given the power to do so, rather than giving a voice to the average narrow minded and uneducated (in football administration terms) fan of rival clubs.

The logic of your post will be missed where it is needed most.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

Just for your information, MFC has been technically insolvent for most of the past 30 years and have only been "saved" during that period by the AFL support. During this period MFC would not have been able to meet its commitments on its own without AFL support and at times guarantee. This position was the same for a number of clubs during this period as well eg St Kilda, Bulldogs and Richmond.

And we are not out of the woods financially by any stretch.

Your comments suggest otherwise.

West Sydney and Gold Coast are the only plausible financially viable markets left in Australia with sufficient demographic to expand. Tassie is already won by AFL and the Northern Territory has no real economic base to justify an AFL club despite being a wonderful source of AFL footballers.

I am not sure what other markets are right if GWS is wrong. Its more riskier that GC and Tassie but the upside is significantly and if they can generate sufficient TV and supporter appeal then it will valuable to the value of the TV rights.

Very well aware of how close we were to going under RR, as i said with 2007 i am glad the Big Hurt happened then, because it seems the right people are building the foundations properly this time. and yes we are still in a precarious position, but at least now we can make our own decisions again, now the debt has gone. The Fight begins right now. I think Vlad & co have given the Demons a good draw lately because of what the board has done.

Winning big games will ultimately save us.

I understand why the AFL has gone to the central east coast as in per capita, but i have my doubts we will ever be accepted there. My step dad & mum lived up that way for 10 years and they just laugh at this whole idea-sydney people do not care for AFL, and if they do it is only for 5 minutes, so i do not see how TV coverage is going to safe that-unless they continually WIN. How successful do the AFL intend these little monsters to be???

We will stick by our club thick & thin, but they won't-AFL is still a novelty up there. Like the storm is here.

By moving up the east coast is the AFL going to kill off some of its heartland supporters as the Premiership drought continues for many clubs? Is that growing or just shifting?

I am cynical yes, but only because i love the game and i am worried the AFL has spread it self way to thin this time-if i am wrong-Good.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Very well aware of how close we were to going under RR, as i said with 2007 i am glad the Big Hurt happened then, because it seems the right people are building the foundations properly this time. and yes we are still in a precarious position, but at least now we can make our own decisions again, now the debt has gone. The Fight begins right now. I think Vlad & co have given the Demons a good draw lately because of what the board has done.

Winning big games will ultimately save us.

Your earlier note suggests otherwise. There was not a single point where we were at the financial edge. We have been there throughout. We have always had the power to make our own decisions. Too often MFC have made dumb ones. The AFL has not dictated a better draw based on the work of the Board/ At this point MFC is a 2nd ary consideration in the overall scheme of fixturing. Winning premierships with a sustained period of success based on a financially profitable business model with save us. Nothing else.

I understand why the AFL has gone to the central east coast as in per capita, but i have my doubts we will ever be accepted there. My step dad & mum lived up that way for 10 years and they just laugh at this whole idea-sydney people do not care for AFL, and if they do it is only for 5 minutes, so i do not see how TV coverage is going to safe that-unless they continually WIN. How successful do the AFL intend these little monsters to be???

We will stick by our club thick & thin, but they won't-AFL is still a novelty up there. Like the storm is here.

By moving up the east coast is the AFL going to kill off some of its heartland supporters as the Premiership drought continues for many clubs? Is that growing or just shifting?

I am cynical yes, but only because i love the game and i am worried the AFL has spread it self way to thin this time-if i am wrong-Good.

The problem is you dont understand at all WYL. Whether it will be accepted time will tell. The AFL has learnt from the Brisbane Bears and Swans implementation that unless you make new entrants competitive and successful you wont develop interest.

AFL is at saturation point in the Southern Australian states. When the AFL moved up the East Coast with Brisbane and Sydney, the AFL club memberships, attendances and TV audiences have increased substantially. So your concern does not hold water at all. MFC, WBFC and StKFC have all increased their memberships. And despite their best efforts to do otherwise, RFC have also maintained high membership.

But your comment that GWS is not the right market, what is then? If the game is to survive, it needs to continue to grow. The debacle that is NRL has created a wonderful vacuum for other football codes. And if AFL is not prepared to commit to this mosr financial and populous demographic, other codes will.

And I dont know why you continue to use a family member's view as dictating the mood, thoughts and views of greater Sydney. They dont and it only highlights how narrow your perspective is.

You need to move through the superficial negatives you harbour on most innovations and think it through more.

[deefuture 1]

I agree, we have a real cultural cringe in this country. Why couldn't they think of something culturally Australian to call them. This whole thing has that peanut sheedy's fingerprints all over it.

It would nt surprise me at all if it was a marketing ploy by Sheedy to get publicity for the club.

I agree that a green jumper would have been more logical. We have the North Albury Hoppers here. Green and Gold with wings or a V. Other posters would be familiar with this in their own leagues.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I agree that a green jumper would have been more logical. We have the North Albury Hoppers here. Green and Gold with wings or a V. Other posters would be familiar with this in their own leagues.

Gee, that must be popular during the locust plague in the country.

[Demonland 72,217]

For Whispering Jack's slant on the name and the colours, see his editorial GREATER WESTERN SYDNEY GIANTS - A COMPROMISE

[deefuture 1]

Gee, that must be popular during the locust plague in the country.

A new slant on being eaten alive!

GWS wont have to worry about the cost of replacing the jumpers their not short of a dollar!

Edited November 17, 2010 by deefuture

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

The problem is you dont understand at all WYL. Whether it will be accepted time will tell. The AFL has learnt from the Brisbane Bears and Swans implementation that unless you make new entrants competitive and successful you wont develop interest.

AFL is at saturation point in the Southern Australian states. When the AFL moved up the East Coast with Brisbane and Sydney, the AFL club memberships, attendances and TV audiences have increased substantially. So your concern does not hold water at all. MFC, WBFC and StKFC have all increased their memberships. And despite their best efforts to do otherwise, RFC have also maintained high membership.

But your comment that GWS is not the right market, what is then? If the game is to survive, it needs to continue to grow. The debacle that is NRL has created a wonderful vacuum for other football codes. And if AFL is not prepared to commit to this mosr financial and populous demographic, other codes will.

And I dont know why you continue to use a family member's view as dictating the mood, thoughts and views of greater Sydney. They dont and it only highlights how narrow your perspective is.

You need to move through the superficial negatives you harbour on most innovations and think it through more.

we continue to have different viewpoints...but then this is a discussion board. I think the AFL is going to get burnt badly going to GWS, you don't. So lets just wait and see.

Edited November 17, 2010 by why you little

[beelzebub 23,378]

Well one way or another its going to be quite intereting to watch how the great Western Sydney experiment pan out. Its so different from GC whom you expect to give serious curry out of the starters box. Giants ...well...might take a lot of coaxing. I do understand the WHY of going there. its a heartlan. its a tactical move. Its necessary as you couldnt leave it to reamin a stronghold unchallenged as that just serves the NRL. Its really a question of just how much of a drain on the rest of the competition in order to do so.

GC will become competitive and seriously so in only a matter of years. its impossible to crytal ball GWS in any way as it is hard to hang a hat on anything to do with it. GC is substance whilst GWS is smoke and mirrors ( and seagulls...and martians !! )

There is of course the notion that the western Stdney of 20 years hence may be a very different beast from the WS of today and its entirely possible that the AFL might influence a grassroots change of culture. possible...but how likely ?

64, 64000 or even the 64 million dollar question begs an answer and none will be available save we all watch.

All I can figure is the comp now has a new whipping boy !! Not a Giant...just a lumbering boofa of a boy

[John Crow Batty 8,869]

I think the new strip of the GWS cunningly pays homage to the Westie hoon culture. The colours are almost identical to that of the legendary standard livery E49 Valiant Charger which was every hoons dream muscle car in the 1970's. The thick black stripy "G" which looks more like a "C" confirms this.

But then Chargers would have been a more appropriate name than Giants.

Perhaps the powers of the club decided to look out the window and pick the colours of the first hoon car that drove by? Just like the Old Indian "two dogs" joke or the famous South American club Boca Juniors who despite having a predominantly Italian fan base wear the colours of the Swedish flag. Story goes they lost a playoff with a rival for the honour of wearing black/white stripes and chose the flag of the next ship to sail into harbour.

If not, the blandness of the uniform and moniker is entirely what is to be expected in this modern age. There is no room for risk taking with originality and creativity.

Edited November 18, 2010 by america de cali

[rpfc 28,473]

The risk is the initiative itself, but inertia is a pervailing wind in the world at the minute.

I have said this before but I will reiterate:

NSW should have two (at least) AFL teams.

The AFL is in the best shape to get this done.

Go for it.

And I don't care whether they want it - they don't know it, let's teach it to them, show them the truth, and if they reject it still...

We'll wait for their kids to reject their English rubbish...

We're doing God's work here, people.

In a heathen's land.

But we will prevail.

We must prevail.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I think the AFL is going to get burnt badly going to GWS, you don't.

Its a pity you cant understand/comprehend/grasp anyone else's point of view while struggling to substantiate your own position.

Edit: I just saw rpfc's posts and its right on the money.

Enjoy the inertia breathing all that sand. B)

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

Its a pity you cant understand/comprehend/grasp anyone else's point of view while struggling to substantiate your own position.

Edit: I just saw rpfc's posts and its right on the money.

Enjoy the inertia breathing all that sand. B)

RR for the sake of Football in general i hope this project works, because if it doesn't it is going to cost truck loads of money to repair.

I can see the arguements i just do not think its going to work. Sydney are not interested-'tis my opinion.

But as i have said, for the sake of Australian football i hope it does work.

[John Crow Batty 8,869]

I think the AFl are [censored] in the wind with GWS. I suspect this will be looked upon as a bad mistake eventually. To get extra TV fodder they are diluting the game further and will bleed the AFL coffers for a decade or more. We have a small population, we don't need as many teams as the NFL or Premier League. I prefer quality over quantity. Once the NRL gets its act together any local interest in Greater Wasteland Sydney will disappear. All their problems are the fault of Rupert Murdoch. If they can get rid of his piracy they will regenerate. I just hope he doesn't take an interest in our game.

Edited November 18, 2010 by High Tower
unnecessary poor language

[beelzebub 23,378]

I do think it is prudent of the Giants/AFL to Immediately embrace the ACT . This may well prove the cleverest positioning with respect to this franchise . Vic teams playing Manuka only really provides a spectacle but GWS playing there offers those locals something to invest themselves in. That's smart leveraging . No need to convert them so much to footy, just to a team. I can see that happening .The Giants like GC need early success but I just sense a vastly differing abilty. Clayton has proven he has nous and genius when approaching the build of his charge . You get the impression there's real bricks and mortar about the Suns. I only get the idea of paper and wire regarding the Giants. it's all a facade, well seemingly.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I think the AFl are pissing in the wind with GWS. I suspect this will be looked upon as a bad mistake eventually. To get extra TV fodder they are diluting the game further and will bleed the AFL coffers for a decade or more. We have a small population, we don't need as many teams as the NFL or Premier League. I prefer quality over quantity. Once the NRL gets its act together any local interest in Greater Wasteland Sydney will disappear. All their problems are the fault of Rupert Murdoch. If they can get rid of his piracy they will regenerate. I just hope he doesn't take an interest in our game.

Well done. You have missed the point on both the AFL and NRL.

The AFL's move into GWS is about seeking to expand the game beyond the limited areas that it is in. They need to consolidate the game in Australia particularly given the damaged brand of NRL. And NRL have effectively disenfranchised 50% of the population with their off field antics. And for the record if you havent figure it out, News Corp "owns" NRL. If Murdoch pulls the pin it deflates in a second.

And Murdoch already has a stake in AFL via Foxtel.

[John Crow Batty 8,869]

Well done. You have missed the point on both the AFL and NRL.

The AFL's move into GWS is about seeking to expand the game beyond the limited areas that it is in. They need to consolidate the game in Australia particularly given the damaged brand of NRL. And NRL have effectively disenfranchised 50% of the population with their off field antics. And for the record if you havent figure it out, News Corp "owns" NRL. If Murdoch pulls the pin it deflates in a second.

And Murdoch already has a stake in AFL via Foxtel.

Incorrect, New Ltd owns about half. Murdoch's meddling over the past thee decades is the root cause of all the [censored] off fans and shambles they have now. NRL and Super League merger was a marriage made in hell. I still don't see the logic of pushing into a market which has not even fully accepted the Swans. I think the move is far too premature. Ask any Sydney siders. The cultural barriers are huge. In NSW they are as parochial as us. They will never take up our game with a passion just like we reject rugby. I prefer the AFl consolidates areas of neglected core support first. The GC is a good move. But I'd like to see Tasmania, ACT, Southern NSW and NT considered for more of a national presence first.

The AFL supplies games for broadcast on Fox. They'll lose half their subsriptions without AFL. He has no ownership of the league or clubs. And thank God for that. I hope the AFL is wary of keeping the likes of him at arms length. The AFL should also be wary of over reaching themselves as has Murdoch.

Edited November 18, 2010 by america de cali