The 2015 fixture thread

[Whispering_Jack 31,143]

Yes, I know it's one of those feel good nothing much stories but we feature in more than our share of these games so while we haven't been promised a rose garden, it's up to us to perform and win games not only that we might have a reasonable expectatation of winning but the ones where nobody thinks we have a chance.

The 21 games you won't want to miss in 2015

The financial bottom line is important and we showed this year that you can break even with a financially unfriendly programme but to most of us the football bottom line - winning games - is even more important. The programme gives us every chance to do just that. Let's embrace it. I'm expecting to be 4-0 after the first month.

[Demoneyes 562]

Or downgrade from that expensive shiraz to cleanskins

Wash your mouth out boy!

[Macca 17,113]

Yeah because they have lots of supporters that are also members of the public that turn up to their home games.

We don't have these things because at the moment we are [censored].

Congratulations for editing and therefore taking one comment I made about one team totally out of context.

Us being a poor team shouldn't therefore mean we receive a fixture that hurts us financially. Off field effects on field and vice-versa but we shouldn't be conspired against.

Anyone who believes we're getting a fair crack at things with regards to the fixture is not looking at things closely enough.

We should all want what is best for the club.

You and others sound like you want the club and our supporters to be further punished for being a poorly performed team. Isn't being down the bottom of the ladder enough for you?

Edited October 31, 2014 by Macca

[hardtack 10,861]

Wash your mouth out boy!

I hope for your sake, Mohammed Ali doesn't frequent these forums.

[Macca 17,113]

AFL ... "If you're a big club with lots of supporters then we're going to give you lots of home fixtures where you can make a great deal of money"

"But, if you're a smaller club with not many supporters, don't expect to get the same deal. In fact, we're going to give you as bad a fixture as we can think up and if you don't like it, bad luck"

"We're interested in maximising crowds"

That's the truth of it and it's been that way for close on 20 years ... the fixture is not necessarily performance based either. When we were playing finals, we continually received the same type of fixture that we've been receiving in recent years.

If they ever bring in any sort of fair equalisation measures, we need to be well catered for. However, I'm not expecting that to happen - the equalisation measures probably won't be done properly.

But that doesn't mean we should roll over and give up.

[PaulRB 6,432]

Its a myth that fixtures are doled out to big clubs only.

Footy is an entertainment business, and the MFC has played unwatchable footy for several years and crappy footy for a decade.

If we start playing some quality football and look capable of making finals the AFL will fall over themselves to reward us commercially (as they did this year with the Tigers).

All rests on our ability to entertain. We put on a good show and the slots will be given (earned).

Edited October 30, 2014 by PaulRB

[hardtack 10,861]

I would have thought that the AFL being a business (which it most definitely is) is interested in getting as many bums on seats as possible and so the clubs with the largest memberships and supporter bases are always going to be advantaged. That is simply put, good business sense.

As much as it would be welcome to be given the home game against some of these clubs, how fair is it that we reap the benefits of their ability to attract a crowd as opposed to our inability to do same?

Now that we have possibly the best coaching panel in recent memory in place at the club, performances should start to improve, and with that improvement, memberships and a "motivated" supporter base (bandwagon jumpers) should start to grow, and with that growth, AFL fixtures in years to come should start to swing in our favour.

There is no great conspiracy against our club... we simply do not have the membership or supporter base that is able to make a big enough impact through the turnstyles.

[nutbean 8,838]

It's the chicken and the egg.

Play crap football so you don't get rewarded with big crowds, struggle financially because of attendances and sponsorship. Therefore you don't primo fixturing, therefore you don't get big crowds, you struggle financially....and on it goes...

The AFL won't change this pattern on fixturing so we need to break the cycle by playing decent football.

[rpfc 28,912]

I would have thought that the AFL being a business (which it most definitely is) is interested in getting as many bums on seats as possible and so the clubs with the largest memberships and supporter bases are always going to be advantaged. That is simply put, good business sense.

As much as it would be welcome to be given the home game against some of these clubs, how fair is it that we reap the benefits of their ability to attract a crowd as opposed to our inability to do same?

Now that we have possibly the best coaching panel in recent memory in place at the club, performances should start to improve, and with that improvement, memberships and a "motivated" supporter base (bandwagon jumpers) should start to grow, and with that growth, AFL fixtures in years to come should start to swing in our favour.

There is no great conspiracy against our club... we simply do not have the membership or supporter base that is able to make a big enough impact through the turnstyles.

Who is talking about conspiracies? We understand the reasons for our terrible fixture - we disagree with them.

Most of what I would say - Macca has already mentioned, but I will add that equalisation is not something that is easy, it is not something that goes hand-in-hand with making 'The Most Amount of Money' - it has to be a holistic approach for any league that wants to ensure its future by galvanising the clubs and supporter bases of ALL clubs.

Everything is connected and the fixture is a big cog in the crusade for equalisation. It affects crowd numbers, members, marketability, sponsor exposure, and, indirectly, anything that flows out those aspects, including the most important - player retention, recruitment, revenue, and support.

I don't disagree with the fixture because it is 'trying to make the most amount of money and bums on seats' - I disagree with the fixture because that's the wrong, short term perspective.

[hardtack 10,861]

Who is talking about conspiracies? We understand the reasons for our terrible fixture - we disagree with them.

To quote Macca (and this isn't having a go at Macca... simply addressing your question): "Us being a poor team shouldn't therefore mean we receive a fixture that hurts us financially. Off field effects on field and vice-versa but we shouldn't be conspired against."

I'm confident that our club will be making inroads with regards to improved memberships and attendances and we will be rewarded in due course... so as to the rest of your comments, we can just agree to disagree.

Edited October 30, 2014 by hardtack

[PaulRB 6,432]

There are two separate elements to the fixture: commercial and football.

From a commercial perspective its an average fixture, but from a football perspective its a ripper.

So the AFL is acknowledging that the football comes first, and gives lowly clubs a hand in two phases, firstly lowly clubs get an easier football draw (and early draft picks), then if clubs can improve their football, the AFL then rewards them with more exposure (Friday nights, blockbusters) which results in a better commercial draw.

Its a see-saw, as we rise our football draw will get harder (i.e. playing twice against top 8 teams), but our commercial draw will get better (more friday nights)... I think its a well crafted mechanism that makes sense. The AFL is responsible for promoting the best games played in a season, at the moment we don't put these on reliably enough to push other teams from these slots... in the meanwhile we get the benefit of playing other strugglers.

Edited October 30, 2014 by PaulRB

[Dr. Gonzo 24,448]

What has "deserve" got to with anything? Have people here been so brainwashed that they're now believing the carp that comes from the AFL and the media? The AFL has the most "fixed" fixture in world sport. Fact.

It's quite embarrassing to see people fall for the propaganda of the AFL and the big clubs that has them brainwashed into believing that being severely disadvantaged by the AFL's unfair policies is their own fault.

[timD 994]

No, it's not 'rocket science' to deliver an even draw for teams to make money.

We have had to sell games to another area of the country, otherwise we would have two games that we would make some decent coin out of.

30k isn't making money, praha - it's purely keeping heads above water.

A fixture of a well run league should be 'fairer' - a club should not have to earn 'fairness' with performance, equalisation of the AFL can't stop at beverages, but it seems to have.

This is just wrong. Listen to Jackson.

We are so bad that other team's supporters don't turn up to watch their team beat us. So the league doesn't penalise other teams for playing melbourne at the MCG and losing heaps of money. It is fair - just not to us. The thing that will turn it is getting better.

And this is where everything comes down to selection and development. The only way we get better is to (a) select the best and (b) make them better. In every area of the club. If our people strategy is not the best, then we are stuffed. Everything else stems from that. All judgements, policies, plans etc.

Now, we have demonstrated that, as a club, we cannot get the right people in the right positions without the AFL installing the two most senior leaders (Jackson and Roos). Let's hope that their strategy works. And that they replace themselves adequately.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,448]

Well...as a Melbourne supporter my interest in the game of football is sustained by Friday night football. Like a lot of us we watch our club but don't get a real payoff from that, it's what we do.

Looking at the fixture the only Friday night game that interests me is not until round 21.

Collingwood, Richmond and Carlton have a mortgage on Friday night in 2015 and all 3 teams are average at best.

As has been pointed out numerous times Mike 'conflicted' Fitzpatrick is a disgrace and brings the game in to disrepute again. Mike 'I leave the room' Fitzpatrick, Mike 'I see no tanking at my old club, Schulz Fitzpatrick.

Watch the Friday night ratings drop this year.

As far as I can see there are only TWO Friday night games that don't involve Carlton, Collingwood, Richmond or Essendon - Geelong v Port and Hawthorn v Port. I'm not suggesting Melbourne should be getting any of these games but if I were a Port, Freo or North supporter I would be furious. What happened to "deserving" the big games? How did Carlton, Richmond or Collingwood "deserve" all their Friday night games? By having mediocre to poor 2014 seasons? The Absolute Farce League strikes again.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,448]

This is just wrong. Listen to Jackson.

We are so bad that other team's supporters don't turn up to watch their team beat us. So the league doesn't penalise other teams for playing melbourne at the MCG and losing heaps of money. It is fair - just not to us. The thing that will turn it is getting better.

You do realise this makes absolutely no sense - if other teams were so disadvantaged by playing us as a home game then where is the problem in letting us be the home team when we play Essendon, Carlton and Richmond? It's because they get the benefit of playing a home game against a Vic club who on their worst day will still provide at least 15-20k people towards their bottom line while we get stuck with dross like GWS, GC, Freo etc who don't draw any supporters to the games and negatively impact the home clubs bottom line.

[beelzebub 23,390]

This is just wrong. Listen to Jackson.

We are so bad that other team's supporters don't turn up to watch their team beat us. So the league doesn't penalise other teams for playing melbourne at the MCG and losing heaps of money. It is fair - just not to us. The thing that will turn it is getting better.

And this is where everything comes down to selection and development. The only way we get better is to (a) select the best and (b) make them better. In every area of the club. If our people strategy is not the best, then we are stuffed. Everything else stems from that. All judgements, policies, plans etc.

Now, we have demonstrated that, as a club, we cannot get the right people in the right positions without the AFL installing the two most senior leaders (Jackson and Roos). Let's hope that their strategy works. And that they replace themselves adequately.

Tim I cant disagree with much but in reality its pandering to the masses...its not fairness

[The Chazz 4,077]

Who is talking about conspiracies? We understand the reasons for our terrible fixture - we disagree with them.

Most of what I would say - Macca has already mentioned, but I will add that equalisation is not something that is easy, it is not something that goes hand-in-hand with making 'The Most Amount of Money' - it has to be a holistic approach for any league that wants to ensure its future by galvanising the clubs and supporter bases of ALL clubs.

Everything is connected and the fixture is a big cog in the crusade for equalisation. It affects crowd numbers, members, marketability, sponsor exposure, and, indirectly, anything that flows out those aspects, including the most important - player retention, recruitment, revenue, and support.

I don't disagree with the fixture because it is 'trying to make the most amount of money and bums on seats' - I disagree with the fixture because that's the wrong, short term perspective.

RPFC, I think I'm on your ignore list, but I'll throw this out there anyway.

You are making good points about the fixture being an important cog in equalisation, but you are only looking at it from one perspective, which, as you often point out, is too black and white for a matter that has many shades of in between.

From a football/results perspective, we have been given a dream draw, probably the "easiest" in the league. We need to get this part right, first and foremost. The AFL know that, Peter Jackson knows that, I know that, I'm amazed that you don't. We start winning, and all those factors you mentioned, ie marketability, increase in crowds and members, player retention, it all has a positive impact based on winning games of footy.

As far as I can see it, the AFL are being quite generous in the first stage of equalisation for a club like ours. If we take advantage of this, then find ourselves with a similar commercial draw in three years time, then I'd be questioning their views.

Until then, I thank the AFL for giving us the opportunity to win more games, and in particular, giving our supporters/members more family friendly time slots.

[rpfc 28,912]

This is just wrong. Listen to Jackson.

We are so bad that other team's supporters don't turn up to watch their team beat us. So the league doesn't penalise other teams for playing melbourne at the MCG and losing heaps of money. It is fair - just not to us. The thing that will turn it is getting better.

They are 'penalising' teams by having them play us at the G - just not with us as the home team.

I understand the desire to not play irrelevant teams but that is the curse of football codes that are run well - they will have some games that are not the best spectacle or be the biggest draw, have the biggest stage.

I didn't have this much of a whinge after our 2012 and 2013 debacle but this isn't just something I want for the MFC - but the AFL.

Equalisation, if it ever occurs, must include the fixture.

[Macca 17,113]

Hardtack

Conspiracy theories are usually underneath the surface

We're being conspired against in quite an open fashion

To me, the sort of fixturing we see can hurt a club in the short term and the long term.

We'll no doubt survive but I'd rather see us prosper

[hardtack 10,861]

Hardtack

Conspiracy theories are usually underneath the surface

We're being conspired against in quite an open fashion

To me, the sort of fixturing we see can hurt a club in the short term and the long term.

We'll no doubt survive but I'd rather see us prosper

I suppose it depends on how you view it... in terms of the actual fixture, we are the most advantaged while the top clubs have the toughest fixture. Financially we may be disadvantaged by the fixturing of home and away games, but as I have already stated, why should we take money purely on the back of the opponents ability to draw crowds? An easier fixture in terms of opponents will see us hopefully rise up the ladder and consequently see us improving our supporter/member base and result in better draws in a financial sense. If it is given to us on a silver platter, then where is the incentive to improve on the field?

[PaulRB 6,432]

It's quite embarrassing to see people fall for the propaganda of the AFL and the big clubs that has them brainwashed into believing that being severely disadvantaged by the AFL's unfair policies is their own fault.

Its school yard stuff to accuse people who don't agree with you of falling for propaganda and being brainwashed, as if you don't fall for propaganda nor are brainwashed. i.e. Melbourne problems are not our fault, but a result of an AFL's unfair policies ...

Edited October 31, 2014 by PaulRB

[DubDee 26,306]

The last couple of years have proved that easy fixtures don't help us, though. Most of our worst recent games have been against interstate sides at the G

So you think a tougher fixture would mean we might win more games??

[InVINCEable 358]

We are Melbourne, we should get more games at the MELBOURNE cricket ground then Richmond or Collingwood.

Don't care who's more popular.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,448]

To quote Macca (and this isn't having a go at Macca... simply addressing your question): "Us being a poor team shouldn't therefore mean we receive a fixture that hurts us financially. Off field effects on field and vice-versa but we shouldn't be conspired against."

I'm confident that our club will be making inroads with regards to improved memberships and attendances and we will be rewarded in due course... so as to the rest of your comments, we can just agree to disagree.

Your just assuming that based on nothing when the evidence points in the complete opposite direction. Where is North and Ports reward for performing well? Where is Carlton and Collingwoods punishment for performing poorly? Why do Richmond get a dream fixture when at the best they've been mediocre for two seasons and a rabble for the decade before that?

[Bring-Back-Powell 15,257]

Round 23 - Melbourne v GWS - Etihad Stadium, Sunday.

Anyone like to take a guess of the crowd number for this one? 8,000?