It’s a difficult draw but I legitimately fear no other side. It’s a weird feeling.

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Its worth remembering we are contracted to play only 9 Home games at the G. 

So the extra two 'Home' games will almost certainly be at Marvel Stadium.  Plus the two 'compulsory', 'Away' games there it totals 4.  Not so good for members.

 

They are the minimum number of contracted games. With the new Thursday night slot there is an ability for an increased number of games at the MCG which they would be happy to host.

Out of Docklands and the NT I suspect we know where most would like to play.

The damning thing about the NT is that no one else wants to play there. Even Tasmania has North, Hawthorn and formerly St Kilda fighting over Tassie money. It tells you something I suspect.

In years gone by we sold our soul to Brisbane and then the NT for the last eight years.

It's time to come home.

Edited November 2, 20186 yr by Diamond_Jim

On the NT games and our presence in NT, am I right In thinking that the MFC have an “academy”in the NT, and if so, what potential benefit does that give us? And are there any kids coming through our NT academy that are good? 

Would love to discover another Liam..!

Edited November 2, 20186 yr by PaulRB

22 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

On the NT games and our presence in NT, am I right In thinking that the MFC have an “academy”in the NT, and if so, what potential benefit does that give us? And are there any kids coming through our NT academy that are good? 

Would love to discover another Liam..!

Our academy is only for Alice Springs. Every club has an academy now and it has nothing to do with playing there.

For example Geelong has East Arnhem Land and Hawthorn has Katherine.

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Its worth remembering we are contracted to play only 9 Home games at the G. 

So the extra two 'Home' games will almost certainly be at Marvel Stadium.  Plus the two 'compulsory', 'Away' games there it totals 4.  Not so good for members.

Without NT members gain only  if there are more (total) games in Vic but lose because we will no longer get the 2 NT substitute games at the G.  It will be only the 9 contracted 'Home' MCG games.

What could be worse, the AFL could change other aspects of the fixture:  oh, gee whiz the Dees go i/state only 5 times lets even it up with other teams and give Dees extra 'Away' game(s) i/state'.  Two annual trips to Perth, anyone?  Lets be careful what we wish for.

Can we find out how many games that the tenants are contracted for to play at the "G".

35 minutes ago, MT64 said:

Can we find out how many games that the tenants are contracted for to play at the "G".

Collingwood is 14 I think, plus 3 at Marvel. Eddie doesn't like travelling I guess.

41 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

Collingwood is 14 I think, plus 3 at Marvel. Eddie doesn't like travelling I guess.

According to this article Collingwood played at the MCG 15 times during the home and away season. Of course they weren't all home games.

The issue with the MCG contracts is that they are an obligated minimum. Nothing stops a club from playing more.

Even if you don't play the minimum as was often the case with the old Docklands arrangements the contract usually has a clause stating the compensation to be paid.

https://www.sportingnews.com/au/afl/news/afl-grand-final-tickets-collingwood-mcg-melbourne-west-coast/1cvf8e6du0y1x178dflgtpo52v

6 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Don't forget to add from the other side of the ledger:

• sponsorship dollars from the NT Government
• membership money (if any) from NT locals
• "brand" exposure value (if any) from being physically present in Darwin and the Alice

I suspect only the first dot point has any meaningful value.

That is why I referred to “ the bottom line ,“ which would take into account all income and expenses.

https://www.footyology.com.au/afl-fixture-footyology-formula-names-winners-and-losers/

5 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

They are the minimum number of contracted games. With the new Thursday night slot there is an ability for an increased number of games at the MCG which they would be happy to host.

Out of Docklands and the NT I suspect we know where most would like to play.

The damning thing about the NT is that no one else wants to play there. Even Tasmania has North, Hawthorn and formerly St Kilda fighting over Tassie money. It tells you something I suspect.

In years gone by we sold our soul to Brisbane and then the NT for the last eight years.

It's time to come home.

What does it tell you? That the NT is further away? How many games does NM and Haw play down there? Twice as many as us - 4. 

What do we know that they don't.

And selling souls is a bit much - that Alice game was pretty life and club affirming from all reports - I don't think it is endangering the club to play these games up north.

10 hours ago, FarNorthernD said:

A reasonable summary and explanation of the draw by Jake Niall

https://www.watoday.com.au/sport/afl/afl-s-2019-fixture-punishes-clubs-as-much-as-it-helps-20181101-p50ddg.html

Niall and the rest of them can analyse the [censored] out of fixtures. It earns them a salary.

However, this competition will only be fair and just when each of the 18 clubs plays each other once, in order to qualify for the finals program - whatever that might turn out to be. 

Until then, the fixture is flawed and a money making venture more than it is a reflection of last years clubs performance. 

As noted by others, if we continue our upward projection we should be a strong contender for the flag no matter what the fixture deals out. The commercial side of it is great and a very important variable in club success so it’s pleasing to see the potential in that for season 2019. We need to perform for it to come into fruition however. 

11 hours ago, Redleg said:

Would love to know how much the same game at the G instead, plus less costs would work out at. In other words what is the bottom line difference?

Also taking away another 2 games from your fans has to be factored in, not to mention the travel for the players and the extra disruption to recovery etc.

The big clubs don’t do it for a very good set of reasons, I would hope that we have now entered the same set of circumstances and can get rid of one or both games. 

I agree but pretty sure it's in the ballpark of $1m a game - we'd have to get a crowd of 80k minimum at the G to come close (probably closer to 90k). And that's without factoring in these games would be played at Docklands which we'd never get close to that return

Plus we have to come up with extra dollars to make up for the lost revenue we were getting from the pokies (we wouldn't have made any profits in recent years without that).

 

I'd say we'll be playing there for the next few years at least.

 

Edited November 2, 20186 yr by Dr. Gonzo

4 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

https://www.footyology.com.au/afl-fixture-footyology-formula-names-winners-and-losers/

Better than most comparisons.  Funny to look at the 2018 analysis that had us as the equal 3rd most difficult draw!  Yet everyone else saying we had an easy draw by the end of the season. 

I don't mind our double ups and difficulty of the draw.  In 2018 Richmond, Geelong, and Hawthorn were handed ridiculously good schedules.  In 2019 all the top teams have tough schedules due to more Thursday night games.  I think the top end of the draw is fairer this year.  I also think it helps us as there is a lot of "veterans" in the other top teams that will be more injury prone than our younger list.

3 hours ago, McQueen said:

Niall and the rest of them can analyse the [censored] out of fixtures. It earns them a salary.

However, this competition will only be fair and just when each of the 18 clubs plays each other once, in order to qualify for the finals program - whatever that might turn out to be. 

Until then, the fixture is flawed and a money making venture more than it is a reflection of last years clubs performance. 

As noted by others, if we continue our upward projection we should be a strong contender for the flag no matter what the fixture deals out. The commercial side of it is great and a very important variable in club success so it’s pleasing to see the potential in that for season 2019. We need to perform for it to come into fruition however. 

As Garry Lyon apparently said, time for the afl to grow up and do the 17 round draw. 

Wont happen though, afl not likely to stomach the revenue loss, nor have the courage to do what is right 

 

5 minutes ago, KLV said:

As Garry Lyon apparently said, time for the afl to grow up and do the 17 round draw. 

Wont happen though, afl not likely to stomach the revenue loss, nor have the courage to do what is right

And in a 17-round season, when we still end up having to play Geel at Geel every year, and WCE in Perth every year, and Collingwood don't travel much, and Fri night games are still manipulated and favourites rewarded, will people still think it's right?

Being 17 rounds doesn't automatically make it right or fair. It's still wide open for fixing.

Top 6 teams, middle 6, bottom 6, from previous season. Play the teams in your bracket of 6 twice = 10 games. Play the others once = 12 games. 22 round season.

The 17 round draw assumes blindness to advantages; simply, every team plays every other once, and alternates hosting at home ground on a year on year basis 

Like the old days 

5 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Top 6 teams, middle 6, bottom 6, from previous season. Play the teams in your bracket of 6 twice = 10 games. Play the others once = 12 games. 22 round season.

That creates far too much difference between 6th and 7th, and 12th and 13th.  The current system for all its faults is a more equitable version of that.

2 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

That creates far too much difference between 6th and 7th, and 12th and 13th.  The current system for all its faults is a more equitable version of that.

Exactly what I was going to say. Pretty well word for word.

The current system is much more fair. Supposedly 3 from your group of 6 and 1 from each of the other 2 groups (mucked up by rivalries and blockbusters a bit). Something of an equaliser without going over the top.

What screws it up is the scheduling that favours certain teams. We know WC and Freo travel more miles than anyone (their shortest journey is to Adelaide while the Crows longest journey is to Perth (to standard home/away venues)) but that is a function of locality. Where they do get screwed is consistently getting Tassie games, and NT games, and Canberra games. What is also not fair is that Eddiewood consistently travel less than anyone (while whingeing more) and certain games seem to always end up a certain way. Geelong get 9 home games and that gets stacked with interstate teams and 'lower' Melbourne teams (read - screw you Melbourne). Melbourne get to travel to Perth to play WC but if there is a second game WC don't get to visit the G, they get Alice Springs or Docklands. And so on.

At the end of the day the AFL is a dictatorship and as in any dictatorship, some teams are more equal than others.

I used to hate the idea of selling home games in the NT.

However, we’ve finally started to win games there to the point where we went 2-0 there this year. And they were both dominant performances.

We’ve also mastered the recovery component of NT games as we’ve won our last 4 games the week after NT games.

Hopefully we can make the NT a fortress gong forward whereby we get an automatic 4 points, the opposition dread the trip up there and we cash in financially.  And we still get our 11-12 games at the G.

North will play finals next year due to playing 4 games at their ‘fortress’. And hopefully we’re too good for West Coast Adelaide with those 2 extra wins getting us into the top 2 after rd 23.

Edited November 2, 20186 yr by Bring-Back-Powell

2 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

 

However, we’ve finally started to win games there to the point where we went 2-0 there this year. And they were both dominant performances.

We’ve also mastered the recovery component of NT games as we’ve won our last 4 games the week after NT games.

 

Well, they are very important factors. Someone else posted that we make $1m a game in NT. Not sure that is correct, but if it is, it will be hard to walk away from.

Then again, if correct figures, we should be seeking less other interstate games, as we already have more than other Victorian clubs and we are promoting the game in the NT by playing there.

11 hours ago, KLV said:

The 17 round draw assumes blindness to advantages; simply, every team plays every other once, and alternates hosting at home ground on a year on year basis 

Like the old days 

I'm tending to favour the seventeen round draw. Throw in two split rounds (Half the comp get a bye) and you are at a 20 week season.

If you have to have the remaining five rounds for $ purposes then a simple random draw for the last five rounds is probably the most logical and fair.

The compromised draw has simply become just that... compromised.

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Well, they are very important factors. Someone else posted that we make $1m a game in NT. Not sure that is correct, but if it is, it will be hard to walk away from.

Then again, if correct figures, we should be seeking less other interstate games, as we already have more than other Victorian clubs and we are promoting the game in the NT by playing there.

$1 million per game? Wow. 

I can recall a figure of around the $400k mark for some reason and that was a few years ago. 

What sort of gate would we get from a blockbuster home game at the G?

24 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

I'm tending to favour the seventeen round draw. Throw in two split rounds (Half the comp get a bye) and you are at a 20 week season.

If you have to have the remaining five rounds for $ purposes then a simple random draw for the last five rounds is probably the most logical and fair.

The compromised draw has simply become just that... compromised.

Indeed, hopelessly compromised. Doesn’t matter how you cut an 18-team comp into 22 games, it will always lack integrity and be inherently unfair and unequal. 

Teams should either play each other (i) once in regular season (17 game season, alternating home and away each year) or (ii) twice (34 game season).

Of course, neither scenario is likely to happen, for different reasons.