Merge with Casey, keep nothing from Casey except for history and players/admin: ditch the name and any branding associated with it. Completely eat Casey up. The club should not and better not pass up the opportunity to do this. Casey would be willing imo. Do it.

Merge with Casey, keep nothing from Casey except for history and players/admin: ditch the name and any branding associated with it. Completely eat Casey up. The club should not and better not pass up the opportunity to do this. Casey would be willing imo. Do it.

Jeez I'd be interested to hear what KC from Caesy would say to that. I'm not so sure Casey would want to do that, I mean this isn't as simple as rebrand and give them credit from their history, you would be wiping them off the football landscape. Casey may be VFL side but they are a football club with members and their own set of fans, how would you feel about a bigger Victorian club walking up to Melbourne and saying, "we want to merge with you, we won't have any part of you left in the brand, but we'll keep your history somewhere". You'd be [censored] and insulted.

As a club they've earned better than that, and as our affiliate they deserve better than that.

I'm not saying take the merger completely off the cards, but it has to be a way where they preserve some part of themselves otherwise it's not a merger it's a takeover, and we'd be essentially killing a football club.

Just because some clubs are going their own way with a VFL side, it doesn't mean it is successful. IF it was, then Collingwood VFL side would be sitting on top of the VFL ladder.

The costs of running a VFL level side are considerable. Melbourne based clubs voted to disband the reserves competitition years ago, because of the cost of keeping players on their lists. The AFL side has approx 46 players. That is not enough to field 2 teams.

The infrastructure around running a footy side is equally expensive. Ask anyone who is involved with junior footy for starters. The advantage of VFL affiliates is that these clubs come with their own infrastructure and support staff, who are usually unpaid. Go it alone, and you have to hire grounds, pay staff, build facilities etc, because they don't play at the AFL venues. No-one has "taken over" a VFL club because all this disappears.

Richmond want to get out of Coburg because that club is effectively insolvent, and the Toiyges have been financially holding them up for years. That is certainly not the case for Casey, who have a strong viable local support base in all aspects.

There is argument that stand alone helps players develop. Don't know about whether that is true, but as others have noted, you have to fill the list with essentially amateurs to be able to get a team on the ground. All the half decent players are playing and getting paid and locked into their respective clubs. The stand alone sides don't know how many players they will need each week to fill the gaps.

Result is: how does playing with a large group of non-VFL level players each week help a player develop?

Just because some clubs are going their own way with a VFL side, it doesn't mean it is successful. IF it was, then Collingwood VFL side would be sitting on top of the VFL ladder.

The costs of running a VFL level side are considerable. Melbourne based clubs voted to disband the reserves competitition years ago, because of the cost of keeping players on their lists. The AFL side has approx 46 players. That is not enough to field 2 teams.

The infrastructure around running a footy side is equally expensive. Ask anyone who is involved with junior footy for starters. The advantage of VFL affiliates is that these clubs come with their own infrastructure and support staff, who are usually unpaid. Go it alone, and you have to hire grounds, pay staff, build facilities etc, because they don't play at the AFL venues. No-one has "taken over" a VFL club because all this disappears.

Richmond want to get out of Coburg because that club is effectively insolvent, and the Toiyges have been financially holding them up for years. That is certainly not the case for Casey, who have a strong viable local support base in all aspects.

There is argument that stand alone helps players develop. Don't know about whether that is true, but as others have noted, you have to fill the list with essentially amateurs to be able to get a team on the ground. All the half decent players are playing and getting paid and locked into their respective clubs. The stand alone sides don't know how many players they will need each week to fill the gaps.

Result is: how does playing with a large group of non-VFL level players each week help a player develop?

Excellent Piece goto.

Where the hell would the MFC get the money?

I see no evidence that playing for Casey has held back any of our players.

I've heard a whisper that Western Bulldogs and Williamstown are going their separate ways too. Williamstown will be going alone.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/western-bulldogs-may-split-with-williamstown/story-e6frf9jf-1226435138339

Stevo, next time provide a Demonland link to your article and use your references.

The VFL cant be too far off toppling over ( in its current format )

shame

Just because some clubs are going their own way with a VFL side, it doesn't mean it is successful. IF it was, then Collingwood VFL side would be sitting on top of the VFL ladder.

False logic. The success of the solo VFL side is measured by where the AFL sides sit on the ladder, not where the VFL sides sit. If even Footscray are now separating it can't be too far off where everyone has their own reserve sides. MFC needs to get on to this quick smart however considering our 30-year agreement with Casey who knows what effect this will have.

Abandoning Casey would I believe be very short sighted and in the end detrimental to our long term survival. It has long been accepted that the MFC has struggled to attract supporters because the Club grew out of a ground rather than a Suburb. Without success we simply flounder and our supporter base stalls and eventually declines. We need to supplement on field success by connecting with people where they live and hopefully establish life long associations. The Casey corridor has the fastest growing population in the state and we have a foothold.

Abandoning Casey would I believe be very short sighted and in the end detrimental to our long term survival. It has long been accepted that the MFC has struggled to attract supporters because the Club grew out of a ground rather than a Suburb. Without success we simply flounder and our supporter base stalls and eventually declines. We need to supplement on field success by connecting with people where they live and hopefully establish life long associations. The Casey corridor has the fastest growing population in the state and we have a foothold.

Which is why there is a 30 year deal in place. In for the long haul.

False logic. The success of the solo VFL side is measured by where the AFL sides sit on the ladder, not where the VFL sides sit. If even Footscray are now separating it can't be too far off where everyone has their own reserve sides. MFC needs to get on to this quick smart however considering our 30-year agreement with Casey who knows what effect this will have.

I tend to agreee its something of a misnomer in suggesting the Pies ought to be top of the VFL etc. Thats not why they are there. Its so they can completely control how the Non-1st-22's are trained, developed and played. They have total control . So does Geelong.

I think if we can create a very close relationship with Casey then its about as good as we will get in the near future.

I tend to agreee its something of a misnomer in suggesting the Pies ought to be top of the VFL etc. Thats not why they are there. Its so they can completely control how the Non-1st-22's are trained, developed and played. They have total control . So does Geelong.

I think if we can create a very close relationship with Casey then its about as good as we will get in the near future.

If we had a Melbourne VFL team over the past 4 years it wouldn't change a thing, we still would be sitting in the bottom quarter of the ladder in the AFL, having a VFL team doesn't make up for having an extremely poor list and little to no senior players. The best part about Casey being second on the ladder is we are playing 10-16 Melbourne listed players every week, of these 10-16 most are under 23 years old. If we turn the clock back to when we had Sandy, that relationship certainly hindered our players on two counts, most Melbourne listed players had been in the system for 5-10 years good VFL players no good at AFL, the Sandy players were good and kept our young players in the twos.

Abandoning Casey would I believe be very short sighted and in the end detrimental to our long term survival. It has long been accepted that the MFC has struggled to attract supporters because the Club grew out of a ground rather than a Suburb. Without success we simply flounder and our supporter base stalls and eventually declines. We need to supplement on field success by connecting with people where they live and hopefully establish life long associations. The Casey corridor has the fastest growing population in the state and we have a foothold.

I don't think AnyOne is talking about abandoning Casey.. The region. If we had a standalone VFL side we would still have to play out of Casey Fields. No question at all.

Jeez I'd be interested to hear what KC from Caesy would say to that. I'm not so sure Casey would want to do that, I mean this isn't as simple as rebrand and give them credit from their history, you would be wiping them off the football landscape. Casey may be VFL side but they are a football club with members and their own set of fans, how would you feel about a bigger Victorian club walking up to Melbourne and saying, "we want to merge with you, we won't have any part of you left in the brand, but we'll keep your history somewhere". You'd be [censored] and insulted.

As a club they've earned better than that, and as our affiliate they deserve better than that.

I'm not saying take the merger completely off the cards, but it has to be a way where they preserve some part of themselves otherwise it's not a merger it's a takeover, and we'd be essentially killing a football club.

How long is Casey's history anyway - didn't it in turn swallow up Springvale VFA??

If we had a Melbourne VFL team over the past 4 years it wouldn't change a thing, we still would be sitting in the bottom quarter of the ladder in the AFL, having a VFL team doesn't make up for having an extremely poor list and little to no senior players. The best part about Casey being second on the ladder is we are playing 10-16 Melbourne listed players every week, of these 10-16 most are under 23 years old. If we turn the clock back to when we had Sandy, that relationship certainly hindered our players on two counts, most Melbourne listed players had been in the system for 5-10 years good VFL players no good at AFL, the Sandy players were good and kept our young players in the twos.

I think one of the main beefs about this whole argument is exactly that we do NOT play our extras / leftovers / recoverers every week, due to the structure of the VFL competition and all those bloody byes!!!!!!!!!

I don't think AnyOne is talking about abandoning Casey.. The region. If we had a standalone VFL side we would still have to play out of Casey Fields. No question at all.

But maybe only until the proposed - haven't heard much for a very long time - second boutique stadium in North Docklands comes into play. When / if that happens it would be logical to play MFC reserves - if and when that happens too - there.

But maybe only until the proposed - haven't heard much for a very long time - second boutique stadium in North Docklands comes into play. When / if that happens it would be logical to play MFC reserves - if and when that happens too - there.

IMO docklands will be a big mistake. Yes it will be a new area.

But I think it would just be the club moving further away from it's heartland. Further Exclusion.

IMO the club should strengthen it's Heartland, & buy somewhere central to the suburbs near Bentleigh, Carnegie, & all our stronger suburbs. Build a training facility & Social Hub there. (The Elsternwick) + Football Oval & Bowling Club straight across the Road.

http://maps.google.c...ed=0CKoBEPwSMAA

All needed public Transport in easy access.

And just get involved at Dockland as an occasional training facility.

IMO docklands will be a big mistake. Yes it will be a new area.

But I think it would just be the club moving further away from it's heartland. Further Exclusion.

IMO the club should strengthen it's Heartland, & buy somewhere central to the suburbs near Bentleigh, Carnegie, & all our stronger suburbs. Build a training facility & Social Hub there. (The Elsternwick) + Football Oval & Bowling Club straight across the Road.

http://maps.google.c...ed=0CKoBEPwSMAA

All needed public Transport in easy access.

And just get involved at Dockland as an occasional training facility.

I'm confused. If as you suggest the MFC were to field a standalone VFL side playing out of Casey, why would the good people of Casey bother to support a club that they have no attachment too. As for the Bentleigh suggestion why would the club locate in old established suburb with little or no real chance of expanding it's supporter base. This would solve absolutely nothing and cost a mint. This is the exact same reason Hawthorn moved out of Glenferrie and engaged the people of the outer eastern suburbs to great success.

How long is Casey's history anyway - didn't it in turn swallow up Springvale VFA??

Reading about their history on wikipedia and on their website it's kind of confusing. They still seem to have held on to the history of Springvale and relocated to Casey (ala South Melb/Sydney). That's at least how their website has written it, it could be a case of the winners writing the version of history.

In any case they have held on to the name of Springvale football club, in fact they retain the SFC on the back of their gurnseys.

In my mind us taking over that club would be detrimental to the relationship we are trying to build out in that area. If we were to go down a path of merging I would like to see us taking the name the Casey Demons in the VFL/reserves league (which ever happens) and making sure their history is recognised.

And I still see Casey as our best chance of developing a local foothold. We're in there, the next step is to become a team kids will actually want to support, in other words WINNERS!

Do people really think we are all of a sudden going to get a heap of kids/families supporting us because we train every so often at Casey and have a few players in their VFL side each week? If Collingwood started training down the road from me as a kid it probably wouldn't change anything except that I'd probably head down every so often to throw rocks at them. What is the demographic of Casey? In my head it's a relatively white suburban demographic with few immigrants/new residents moving there, though I could be wrong as I have never been there. If this is the case though then I don't think we have much hope of recruiting new supporters who probably already have a family allegiance to a club. I'm disappointed that the MFC doesn't do more to engage/recruit immigrants to the country particularly the wave of immigrants from China/India but also those from the Mid-East & Africa. They've done a couple of token things like throwing out some free passes to international students once a year but other than that haven't done much to target these key growth demographics.

Do people really think we are all of a sudden going to get a heap of kids/families supporting us because we train every so often at Casey and have a few players in their VFL side each week? If Collingwood started training down the road from me as a kid it probably wouldn't change anything except that I'd probably head down every so often to throw rocks at them. What is the demographic of Casey? In my head it's a relatively white suburban demographic with few immigrants/new residents moving there, though I could be wrong as I have never been there. If this is the case though then I don't think we have much hope of recruiting new supporters who probably already have a family allegiance to a club. I'm disappointed that the MFC doesn't do more to engage/recruit immigrants to the country particularly the wave of immigrants from China/India but also those from the Mid-East & Africa. They've done a couple of token things like throwing out some free passes to international students once a year but other than that haven't done much to target these key growth demographics.

Cue "We are making serious inroads in the Chinese market and any moment now will be announcing a massive sponsorship deal with China southern Airlines" posts, and/or "Why hasn't Schwab secured a massive sponsorship deal through our fantastic connections and relationships with the Chinese market" posts.

IMO, the VFL shouldn't be scrapped, but the sooner the AFL brings back a true reserves league, plays these games as curtain raisers prior to the seniors, the better all clubs and supporters will be. The AFL can bump ticket prices up by a couple of dollars, the spectator gets to see 2 games of decent footy (on decent grounds), the reserves players (or those dropped senior players) get their opportunity to get form playing on a decent ground, and it also gives us, the paying public, a chance to see the kids that are developing.

Expand Club lists to 50, and if a team is riddled by injuries, they can go back to the VFL affiliate and give some of those players the opportunity. Obviously that will rape the be-jesus out of the VFL teams at times, the players will return better players. Make the season 4 weeks less than the main league, so that at the start of teh AFL finals, all participating teams have as many players available as possible. Also gives non-finals teams a chance to send players for end of season operations.

I have no doubt attendences to home and away games will increase = more money for Vlad.

Love the idea....but it just won't happen......The AFL won't let kids on the MCG or Etihad after the game because it MAY harm the playing surface....Imagine if they played the reserves prior to the firsts on the same ground....The AFL would have a fit....

Whilst we had a few teething problems with Casey things are going very well at the moment. The addition of the extra development caoches at Melbourne have had a lot to do with that. Brett Lovett is not a full-time coach, which is why he was given the flick fron Sandy. His impact on Casey has been immense. If you bothered to go and watch Casey play, you would see a game plan that is exactly the same as the one Melbourne is trying to play. All of the Melbourne listed players are being played in the positions that they would most probably play in should they get a call up to Melbourne. As the development coaches spend a lot of time at Casey, it is their input that accounts for much of that.

We should not just slavishly follow what the other clubs are doing. We should look into the reasons why they are making their decisions and examine our own situation accordingly. If these reasons do not apply in our situation, note them and move on.

In short, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Love the idea....but it just won't happen......The AFL won't let kids on the MCG or Etihad after the game because it MAY harm the playing surface....Imagine if they played the reserves prior to the firsts on the same ground....The AFL would have a fit....

Yeah, I know. Doesn't make sense how they can play the 2 games at Kardinia Park though?!

I'll go back to my coffee with Alice in Wonderland...

Whilst we had a few teething problems with Casey things are going very well at the moment. The addition of the extra development caoches at Melbourne have had a lot to do with that. Brett Lovett is not a full-time coach, which is why he was given the flick fron Sandy. His impact on Casey has been immense. If you bothered to go and watch Casey play, you would see a game plan that is exactly the same as the one Melbourne is trying to play. All of the Melbourne listed players are being played in the positions that they would most probably play in should they get a call up to Melbourne. As the development coaches spend a lot of time at Casey, it is their input that accounts for much of that.

We should not just slavishly follow what the other clubs are doing. We should look into the reasons why they are making their decisions and examine our own situation accordingly. If these reasons do not apply in our situation, note them and move on.

In short, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Would you feel the same if Casey were on the bottom?

Whilst we had a few teething problems with Casey things are going very well at the moment. The addition of the extra development caoches at Melbourne have had a lot to do with that. Brett Lovett is not a full-time coach, which is why he was given the flick fron Sandy. His impact on Casey has been immense. If you bothered to go and watch Casey play, you would see a game plan that is exactly the same as the one Melbourne is trying to play. All of the Melbourne listed players are being played in the positions that they would most probably play in should they get a call up to Melbourne. As the development coaches spend a lot of time at Casey, it is their input that accounts for much of that.

We should not just slavishly follow what the other clubs are doing. We should look into the reasons why they are making their decisions and examine our own situation accordingly. If these reasons do not apply in our situation, note them and move on.

In short, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Like everything else off-field the situation we have with the affiliation with Casey puts us at a disadvantage compared to clubs fielding stand alone sides. The success or otherwise of Casey is irrelevant. It's a neverending football arms race. It's why we upgraded our facilities. It's why we invested in our FD and hired more line & development coaches. And it's why we need to field a stand-alone VFL or reserves side.