49 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

Ok .... I'll try to spell it out for you
If we got everyone that called themselves Collingwood supporters and everyone that that called themselves Melbourne supporters and lined them up side by side.

Their line would be at least 2 times longer than ours.
Probably 3.
 

side-by-side is the only way a filth supporter can stay upright, hence why they put it in their dopey song

8 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

They're a proper sleeping giant.

 

Will take at least 10 years of sustained success to capitalise in another 15 when the kids are old enough to buy their own memberships.

 

You watch them all come out of the wood work after a premiership win and improved fixtures eg. Friday and sat nights we will top 50k in memberships guaranteed? mark my words.

14 minutes ago, Win4theAges said:

You watch them all come out of the wood work after a premiership win and improved fixtures eg. Friday and sat nights we will top 50k in memberships guaranteed? mark my words.

It will be great. Don't knock it..

9 hours ago, Chris said:

Surely going by your logic that the crowd on the weekend is an indication of how big our club is then the same logic would suggest that they are an even smaller club.

I don't for a second suggest we are the size of Collingwood, but we are bigger then people think. I was simply pointing out the error in linking the crowd at one game with the size of the club. 

My logic?
You're the one trying to say that we're a bigger club than Collingwood on the strength of one game from one year.
Turnouts for our games have been poor for decades.
There's a reason we have a reputation for going to the snow.
Collingwood supporters rep is that they turn out regardless.
That's why every club in the league requests the AFL to give them home games against them.

8 hours ago, Chris said:

Agreed, but the example you used fails to show this in any way shape or form. 

8 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

My logic?
You're the one trying to say that we're a bigger club than Collingwood on the strength of one game from one year.
Turnouts for our games have been poor for decades.
There's a reason we have a reputation for going to the snow.
Collingwood supporters rep is that they turn out regardless.
That's why every club in the league requests the AFL to give them home games against them.

Actually Fork it was you who said that based on one weeks attendance we aren't a sleeping giant. I pointed out, along with others, that this logic is very flawed by saying that based on your logic Collingwood is smaller, obviously a ridiculous suggestion which was used to show the complete lack of logic in you initial post. 

Nice try at swinging it around though. 

Pfft ... I'm done.
We aint no sleeping giant DH.






 

lyon sucking up to his great mate eddie. embarrassing stuff.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/collingwood/collingwood-considering-reclaiming-share-of-queens-birthday-blockbuster-from-melbourne/news-story/b3c78c1b9ed41f64d99727c3bcc28a0c

 

Quote

 

MELBOURNE champion Garry Lyon says the Demons will be eternally grateful for the generosity Collingwood has shown over their Queen’s Birthday arrangements.

Lyon said the Demons should thank the Pies “from the bottom of our hearts” for being allowed to host the annual blockbuster since 2001.

 

 

56 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

Pfft ... I'm done.
We aint no sleeping giant DH.






 

I never actually said we were. Maybe try re reading what has been said and see if you can grasp the concept of what I have said. 

On 26/07/2017 at 6:41 AM, Diablo Deemon said:

Like many others I'm happy for them to alternate or share the gate. I'll also love to see home games against Essendon, Carlton, Hawthorn and Geelong on a regular basis in any slot other than Sunday twilight. 

Time for the dees to get a somewhat fair and productive fixture. 

Looking forward to 90k at Anzac eve next year. 

Hopefully the Richmond supporters do rock up to ANZAC Eve next year - I've got a feeling the crowd was so big because it was their home game. A lot may not attend if it's their away game next year/we may not fill as much of our reserved seat areas.

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Hopefully the Richmond supporters do rock up to ANZAC Eve next year - I've got a feeling the crowd was so big because it was their home game. A lot may not attend if it's their away game next year/we may not fill as much of our reserved seat areas.

I didn't realise that prison authorities approved day leave only if your team is playing a home game. 

On 26/07/2017 at 4:06 PM, Fork 'em said:

Ok .... I'll try to spell it out for you
If we got everyone that called themselves Collingwood supporters and everyone that that called themselves Melbourne supporters and lined them up side by side.

Their line would be at least 2 times longer than ours.
Probably 3.
 

Probably 5

On 7/26/2017 at 4:06 PM, Fork 'em said:

Ok .... I'll try to spell it out for you
If we got everyone that called themselves Collingwood supporters and everyone that that called themselves Melbourne supporters and lined them up side by side.

Their line would be at least 2 times longer than ours.
Probably 3.
 

Kind of you to spell it out. You were saying we weren't a sleeping giant because we got 27k to a game against an interstate side.

Yet Collingwood that has 5.72 gazillion supporters - and is clearly a giant - only got 22k to a game on the same weekend.

Doesn't that mean we did well with our  crowd? The second highest home and away crowd between the two clubs?

22 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Probably 5

Yep, but these other clowns aren't getting it.

8 hours ago, daisycutter said:

lyon sucking up to his great mate eddie. embarrassing stuff.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/collingwood/collingwood-considering-reclaiming-share-of-queens-birthday-blockbuster-from-melbourne/news-story/b3c78c1b9ed41f64d99727c3bcc28a0c

 

That's actually sickening to hear from Lyon. We wouldn't need to be grateful if there were true commercial equalisation. More FTA coverage = more exposure for sponsors. More exposure for sponsors = more sponsors knocking on your door with better deals. 

Yes we should be grateful for them agreeing to give us the full profits from the QB. But eternally grateful? Thank them from the bottom of our hearts? Get f---ed Gary. 

There has been inequity for a very long time and Collingwood have been the major beneficiaries of it. They helped us with this one thing because they knew it would be easier to claim better FTA coverage and timeslots, Eddie would not have done something that was not commercially beneficial to the Pies. He has now recognised that the pendulum is swinging and so he want shared profits. I don't begrudge him of that, I think it's fair. But it also means we are more entited to request better FTA coverage including more Friday/Saturday night games. 

Stick them in the 4:20pm Sunday slot week in week out and see how they go. 

Time to argue against the compromised draw.

Teams should play home and away in strict rotation.

TV companies nominate Friday night games six weeks out based on ratings and interest.

Won't happen because there are too many special interest groups but the problem is MFC isn't special and is unlikely to be so ever again. The good news is that we are at the top of the also rans and just might give the likes of Hawthorn and perhaps Richmond a run for the sponsorship dollar over the next 5-10 years.

The bad news is that Collingwood and Essendon will only get bigger as will the Crows and West Coast. Watch these boys push for special stadium and media deals as the years go by. In years to come we will regard the last few years of equalization as the high water mark of that practice.

Taking back the Queens Birthday match on alternate years is the first salvo... it's low hanging fruit and we are an easy mark. Practically it dents our budget and makes it more likely that we will have to sell more home games ... something we must resist.

44 minutes ago, Pates said:

That's actually sickening to hear from Lyon. We wouldn't need to be grateful if there were true commercial equalisation. More FTA coverage = more exposure for sponsors. More exposure for sponsors = more sponsors knocking on your door with better deals. 

Yes we should be grateful for them agreeing to give us the full profits from the QB. But eternally grateful? Thank them from the bottom of our hearts? Get f---ed Gary. 

There has been inequity for a very long time and Collingwood have been the major beneficiaries of it. They helped us with this one thing because they knew it would be easier to claim better FTA coverage and timeslots, Eddie would not have done something that was not commercially beneficial to the Pies. He has now recognised that the pendulum is swinging and so he want shared profits. I don't begrudge him of that, I think it's fair. But it also means we are more entited to request better FTA coverage including more Friday/Saturday night games. 

Stick them in the 4:20pm Sunday slot week in week out and see how they go. 

Lyon lost his way years ago.

On a personal basis that's his to deal with...all well and good.

Opening your mouth in a public tome...well ...what a nuff nuff.

Dead to me

It should be noted that Collingwood already make a stack of $$$$'s as the away team for the QB clash (the same argument often stands for any of their away games at the MCG)

That's based on their club selling upwards of 14-18 thousand* of their premium 18 game memberships (their premium memberships sell for about $900 a pop)   They also have a virtual mortgage on the Western stand for all their matches (both home & away) at the MCG to boot.  Another money-spinner.

So, as the home team for the QB clash they get to win-out financially twice (the extra would be the hefty cheque written out to them by the MCC if they were the home team for the QB clash. 

Like others, I have no real problem with the game having alternate home & away status.  When we play them twice in a season we'd get a well attended home game against them anyway (maybe we could push for that?)

 

*The figure of 14-18 thousand premium members is based on the figures available in their annual reports. 

 

2 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Time to argue against the compromised draw.

Teams should play home and away in strict rotation.

TV companies nominate Friday night games six weeks out based on ratings and interest.

Won't happen because there are too many special interest groups but the problem is MFC isn't special and is unlikely to be so ever again. The good news is that we are at the top of the also rans and just might give the likes of Hawthorn and perhaps Richmond a run for the sponsorship dollar over the next 5-10 years.

The bad news is that Collingwood and Essendon will only get bigger as will the Crows and West Coast. Watch these boys push for special stadium and media deals as the years go by. In years to come we will regard the last few years of equalization as the high water mark of that practice.

Taking back the Queens Birthday match on alternate years is the first salvo... it's low hanging fruit and we are an easy mark. Practically it dents our budget and makes it more likely that we will have to sell more home games ... something we must resist.

Why isn't the MFC Special? We were decades ago and can be again if we are a well run club

you say we can only be as good as the also rans. I disagree. 

This city is growing enormously right now, if we had a 10-15 year run up near the top 4 then the MFC would be viewed entirely differently. 

 

13 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Why isn't the MFC Special? We were decades ago and can be again if we are a well run club

you say we can only be as good as the also rans. I disagree. 

This city is growing enormously right now, if we had a 10-15 year run up near the top 4 then the MFC would be viewed entirely differently. 

 

no the growth period has gone.

Hawks had 20 years of success and their hold is tenuous. Five years of limbo and watch the golden threads disappear.

We have had fifty years of irrelevancy with a stuttered respite in the 90's and early 00's

We have lost our number 1 discriminator .. the MCG ....(home to 6 or is it 7 or 8 clubs these days .. hell even Geelong uses it when they care to.)

For us to make our mark we need a game changer ... not sure what that is but funnily enough our best chance was Jurrah but it wasn't to be. Perhaps it will be Daisy P ... who knows but the old ways no longer work that well.

 

 

I'll give Collingwood a tip after watching Melbourne for the last 11 years.

FIGJAM is not your major problem. Neither is recruiting.

Culture, player development, fitness and cohesion are where you suck.

The Queens birthday is like a grand final for Collingwood they probably should take every second gate receipt.

10 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

no the growth period has gone.

Hawks had 20 years of success and their hold is tenuous. Five years of limbo and watch the golden threads disappear.

We have had fifty years of irrelevancy with a stuttered respite in the 90's and early 00's

We have lost our number 1 discriminator .. the MCG ....(home to 6 or is it 7 or 8 clubs these days .. hell even Geelong uses it when they care to.)

For us to make our mark we need a game changer ... not sure what that is but funnily enough our best chance was Jurrah but it wasn't to be. Perhaps it will be Daisy P ... who knows but the old ways no longer work that well.

 

 

Disagree. We are the name of the City, where over a 1000 people are moving to each week. 

Success from this point on can change a lot. 

By 2050 Melbourne will be around 9 Million people...

the growth period has only just begun...

12 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

no the growth period has gone.

Hawks had 20 years of success and their hold is tenuous. Five years of limbo and watch the golden threads disappear.

We have had fifty years of irrelevancy with a stuttered respite in the 90's and early 00's

We have lost our number 1 discriminator .. the MCG ....(home to 6 or is it 7 or 8 clubs these days .. hell even Geelong uses it when they care to.)

For us to make our mark we need a game changer ... not sure what that is but funnily enough our best chance was Jurrah but it wasn't to be. Perhaps it will be Daisy P ... who knows but the old ways no longer work that well.

 

 

Nah , the Dawks have a sheet load of support out there.
All those kids who jumped onto the topside during their rein in the 80's are buying memberships and having kids of their own.
And those kids have enjoyed watching their team kick arze over the last 10-12 years and more kids have jumped onto the top side bandwagon during that time.

And Jurrah wasn't gonna be any magic bullet or is Daisy Pearce.
Only sustained success can pull us out've this slump now.

I agree with your sentiments on our irrelevancy over the last 50yrs and the home ground advantage of the MCG lost to the  competition though.

 

Edited July 28, 20178 yr by Fork 'em

7 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

Nah , the Dawks have a sheet load of support out there.
All those kids who jumped onto the topside during their rein in the 80's are buying memberships and having kids of their own.
And those kids have enjoyed watching their team kick arze over the last 10-12 years and more kids have jumped onto the top side bandwagon during that time.

And Jurrah wasn't gonna be any magic bullet or is Daisy Pearce.
Only sustained success can pull us out've this slump now.

I agree with your sentiments on our irrelevancy over the last 50yrs and the home ground advantage of the MCG lost to the  competition though.

 

Yes, but nobody except Jeelong have a true home ground advantage in Victoria anymore

16 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

Yep, but these other clowns aren't getting it.

hahahahahaha. I am yet to see a person argue that Collingwood isn't big, but I have seen a few, including me, argue that the argument you used failed the logic test. It is in fact you who isn't getting it.

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes, but nobody except Jeelong have a true home ground advantage in Victoria anymore

And our other hope is that migrants decide to support the city they moved to.
Melbourne.