What a sad thread.

Poor arguments.

Which club plays 40 Sunday games in 3 years and little or no Friday night games, which club doesn't have a stadium deal, blah blah blah.

Whatever. The issue remains that, in league terms we are a minnow. I have no problem with that as I don't have an inferiority complex like others on this site. I just think that throwing stones at North when they are struggling is really poor form considering our position, especially our position 3 short years ago. It's like the guy who gets bullied turning around and bullying the smaller kids, it just doesn't sit well with me.

Whatever. The issue remains that, in league terms we are a minnow. I have no problem with that as I don't have an inferiority complex like others on this site. I just think that throwing stones at North when they are struggling is really poor form considering our position, especially our position 3 short years ago. It's like the guy who gets bullied turning around and bullying the smaller kids, it just doesn't sit well with me.

But Roost, don't you think North had their chance 3 years ago & turned their back on it?

We were in a similiar position yes, But our supporters & Club have rallied, as we must continue to do.

By staying in Melbourne North are only going backwards...sad but true.

It's like the guy who gets bullied turning around and bullying the smaller kids, it just doesn't sit well with me.

pft it is not like that all, are you high or what? We are talking about the survival of our football club in a tough competitive climate, your schoolyard comparison is utter BS.

do you think 7200 members is a lot? Because I don't, and if we had that many more we would have the 3rd biggest Victorian membership base ahead of so-called superpower, Essendon. This is coming off two spoons then 14th then 13th. Our attendances are 8th in the comp. I have stated this so many times but not one of you North-sympathisers with inferiority complexes have acknowledged it.

as pointed out above, the playing field is obviously not even. Our commercial prospects are at a disavantage compared to other clubs, which the AFL evens up through use of THE COMPETITIVE BALANCE FUND any idea what that is smart guy?

let's imagine North went totally under and folded. Then let's say we didn't grow as a club as we hoping to. You don't agree that the AFL would be doing more to ensure our survival if a traditional club has just gone under. If North and Melbourne were to both fold in quick succession there would be outrage, so yes, their death ensures our survival to a degree. Also, there are only 9 teams sharing the membership pie instead of 10, that one is pretty obvious.

But Roost, don't you think North had their chance 3 years ago & turned their back on it?

You honestly think that this was a viable option for those who love North Melbourne and wanted it to remain as their club?

If that were offered to the Dees 3 years ago, I would've rather have risked death in Melbourne.

If North and Melbourne were to both fold in quick succession there would be outrage, so yes, their death ensures our survival to a degree. Also, there are only 9 teams sharing the membership pie instead of 10, that one is pretty obvious.

Since when does a death of a club "ensure" anyone's survival including ours ?

Has Fitzroy's death ensured anyone else's survival ? There's no guarantees. Clubs must do their utmost each year to keep the doors open and make sure they are financially viable for the long term survival in the AFL.

You honestly think that this was a viable option for those who love North Melbourne and wanted it to remain as their club?

If that were offered to the Dees 3 years ago, I would've rather have risked death in Melbourne.

Maybe you are right 45...and yes North are slowly dying. With the 2 new clubs taking all the money North are going to be a distant 3rd in the handout stakes.

The AFL would be stoked at the turnaround in Melbourne, not only have we cleared our debt, but it was done by the supporters.

Stage 1 complete.