Training Ground?

[kev martin 10,703]

1 hour ago, monoccular said:

Great in theory, but will never happen. 

Of course will not happen.

Gee, it would make a big difference to the eastern area and one of the worst roads (Punt) in Melbourne. 

Would still like to see that artery buried underneath the existing road.

Edited August 24, 2021 by kev martin

[titan_uranus 25,176]

3 hours ago, MadAsHell said:

If only there were a ground close to the city which we could make our own that has room for the facilities we're after!?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Fitzroy+North+VIC+3068/@-37.7890644,144.9814254,17z/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x6ad6433d900971e5:0xe2ded60bf54b72f0

Of course the true answer to this question is the land that is now the Holden Centre.

We should underwrite a redevelopment of Victoria Park on the basis that Collingwood moves there and we can then use the Holden Centre oval and land.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 17,016]

Compare and contrast. Our redevelopment (whatever, wherever and whenever it might be) compared with The Star in Texas. (The three minute video is quite compelling).

[DeeSpencer 26,274]

23 hours ago, dpositive said:

Well its a short term low cost option. It's not worth throwing any large amount of money at.

I would like to see an MFC option that addresses the long term requirement for a sustainable stadium entertainment area for the expanding fishermans bend site.

This are close to existing CBD has the potential for total infrastructure development including private sector investment.

The population demands will be well served by all of the community related facilities that can be included in a well planned and developed sporting ground which will add to the existing stock of world class facilities.

This emerging population will also provide a new membership market as they would be attracted to their local Melbourne club representing them in the National competition. The AFL should be encouraged to join this development to supplement and complement their docklands development.

It's far too close to the city and Docklands to really justify it's own small stadium and if it did they'd probably just use North Port anyway.

The existing plans only really add a little bit of open space and my guess is the planners want it to be exactly that - open space. Not taken over by an AFL team.

The population leading to new members just wouldn't happen. It's going to either be people from other parts of Melbourne or Australia who mostly have teams or overwhelmingly immigrants and students like Docklands who just aren't that interested in Aussie Rules. Clubs grew their fanbases in the post war years when people arrived and had no option but to follow the footy. The people move here now might have a bit of curiosity but they can easily follow their favourite soccer, cricket, basketball or whatever team without leaving home.

Gosch's is a great option for us, particularly with the oval expansion. But we have to make sure it gets built on the right car park, not overlooking the Pies!

[damodees 14]

As much as all this chat about other possible sites is interesting, I think the fact that government has provided us with $$$ to upgrade Gosch’s and that the the board has confirmed they want to stay within the shadow of the MCG means we are not moving anywhere else.

My only concern is from the fox sports article a few weeks ago is that Car Park E has been chosen as the site to construct the home base. This is the worst option and located away from the roads and wedged between AAMI Park and Collingwoods training centre.  Not to mention our oval is also on the other side of the park

There are soo many better sites in the area that can be chosen other than Car Park E. We need to make sure Car Park E plan never amounts. 

Edited August 26, 2021 by damodees

[Supreme_Demon 3,916]

On 8/20/2021 at 12:12 PM, damodees said:

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-news-2021-melbourne-demons-new-training-base-facilities-goschs-paddock-casey-fields-tom-morris/news-story/cdafa95cfe3fa4d6c4e204be43d56942

As much as I understand we are less likely to receive government handouts due to reasons previously mentioned I would be incredibly disappointed if our home base ends up being in Car Park E. The three options were are Car Park E (In Between Holden Centre and AAMI Park) Car Park F (In between our training oval and AAMI Park) and the empty land across the road from our oval.

Clearly from just looking at my image below, Car Park E is the worst outcome of the three. Although I would be happy if we eventually got our home base we need one that can capitalize from both a marketing and long term point of view. 

I hope the recent article released is wrong, the empty land would be my first preference and if not that Car Park F. 

Even from an advertisement perspective it would be difficult to get sponsorship for the base as the building will be basically hidden from sight. 

Melbourne can do better than Car Park E.

 

 

I agree with your comments.

Car Park E would be not only stupid but hinder us severely. That area is far too small!

It needs to be Car Park F or the Empty Land. Or even better both Car Park F and the Empy Land! That would be the best option.

Not only do we need a large space of land to build upon next to Gosch's Paddock but room for future development.

 

The only possible way Car Park E could possibly work is if Collingwood moved out of the Holden Centre and went back to Victoria Park where they belong! Then itcould be plausible. We would also need to enlarge Olympic Park. Anyway, I don't see that happening. Besides, would we really want to move into the Holden Centre? They are getting pretty cramped in there themselves apparently with both the AFL and AFLW teams and the Magpies netball team too.

 

Having a proper sized home base and training facility for the Melbourne Football Club must be done right! There cannot be any compromises! 

[dpositive 1,819]

On 8/25/2021 at 2:20 PM, DeeSpencer said:

It's far too close to the city and Docklands to really justify it's own small stadium and if it did they'd probably just use North Port anyway.

The existing plans only really add a little bit of open space and my guess is the planners want it to be exactly that - open space. Not taken over by an AFL team.

The population leading to new members just wouldn't happen. It's going to either be people from other parts of Melbourne or Australia who mostly have teams or overwhelmingly immigrants and students like Docklands who just aren't that interested in Aussie Rules. Clubs grew their fanbases in the post war years when people arrived and had no option but to follow the footy. The people move here now might have a bit of curiosity but they can easily follow their favourite soccer, cricket, basketball or whatever team without leaving home.

Gosch's is a great option for us, particularly with the oval expansion. But we have to make sure it gets built on the right car park, not overlooking the Pies!

Well if Goschs isn't too close not sure how a greenfield site is. A new multi functionould replace North 

We need an enclosed space for all weather training etc.

 

increasing members follows from engaging families. Next generation are fertile market

[La Dee-vina Comedia 17,016]

25 minutes ago, dpositive said:

Well if Goschs isn't too close not sure how a greenfield site is. A new multi functionould replace North 

We need an enclosed space for all weather training etc.

 

increasing members follows from engaging families. Next generation are fertile market

Not sure what you meant here. North Melbourne? Making predictions about that club's relocation to Tassie or its demise once a new Tasmanian team joins the competition?

[george_on_the_outer 7,843]

I think this conjecture is simply a journalists stuff up confusing one car park with another. 

The logical solution is carpark F.  It is bigger, on the right side and is easy to access for redevelopment.

The redevelopment will be a consequence of the 2023 Womens soccer world cup.  I suspect they will need indoor warm up facilities, press rooms, team meeting rooms etc.  At the end of the competition, we will take up residence..  Only my conjecture, but.... .....

[dpositive 1,819]

6 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Not sure what you meant here. North Melbourne? Making predictions about that club's relocation to Tassie or its demise once a new Tasmanian team joins the competition?

Sorry difficulty with input. was response to deespencer which got duplicated.

He raised North Port, which I assumed was he meant Port Melbournes

sorry still issues responding

 

[damodees 14]

2 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

I think this conjecture is simply a journalists stuff up confusing one car park with another. 

The logical solution is carpark F.  It is bigger, on the right side and is easy to access for redevelopment.

The redevelopment will be a consequence of the 2023 Womens soccer world cup.  I suspect they will need indoor warm up facilities, press rooms, team meeting rooms etc.  At the end of the competition, we will take up residence..  Only my conjecture, but.... .....

Your idea does make sense regarding 2023 World Cup. Might be the only time government would be willing to provide us with some decent $$

I hope the article has it wrong. 

Melbourne can do better than Car Park E.

[Longsufferingnomore 1,670]

2 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

I think this conjecture is simply a journalists stuff up confusing one car park with another. 

The logical solution is carpark F.  It is bigger, on the right side and is easy to access for redevelopment.

The redevelopment will be a consequence of the 2023 Womens soccer world cup.  I suspect they will need indoor warm up facilities, press rooms, team meeting rooms etc.  At the end of the competition, we will take up residence..  Only my conjecture, but.... .....

A response to a question I put to a Board member re the possibility of Collingwood moving back to Victoria Park was an emphatic highly unlikely. Obviously with all the development at Victoria Park I would have thought it would be the best outcome for us and financially for them (presuming they are have a "lease" with the state government).

My understanding is that it is the Carpark opposite Gosch's that is being considered so can someone put out a tweet to Tom Morris and ask him to reconfirm his information? 

[daisycutter 29,892]

42 minutes ago, longsuffering said:

A response to a question I put to a Board member re the possibility of Collingwood moving back to Victoria Park was an emphatic highly unlikely. Obviously with all the development at Victoria Park I would have thought it would be the best outcome for us and financially for them (presuming they are have a "lease" with the state government).

My understanding is that it is the Carpark opposite Gosch's that is being considered so can someone put out a tweet to Tom Morris and ask him to reconfirm his information? 

you can't tweet or email,  tom?

[Longsufferingnomore 1,670]

2 hours ago, daisycutter said:

you can't tweet or email,  tom?

I haven't got a Twitter account and thought if someone else could send out a tweet it would illicit a quicker response. I have however now emailed him and hopefully will get a response from him. 

[Half forward flank 1,022]

On 8/24/2021 at 7:03 PM, titan_uranus said:

Of course the true answer to this question is the land that is now the Holden Centre.

We should underwrite a redevelopment of Victoria Park on the basis that Collingwood moves there and we can then use the Holden Centre oval and land.

Zero chance of even taking Public land in Collingwood or North Fitzroy. Waste of breath.

[Half forward flank 1,022]

4 hours ago, longsuffering said:

A response to a question I put to a Board member re the possibility of Collingwood moving back to Victoria Park was an emphatic highly unlikely. Obviously with all the development at Victoria Park I would have thought it would be the best outcome for us and financially for them (presuming they are have a "lease" with the state government).

My understanding is that it is the Carpark opposite Gosch's that is being considered so can someone put out a tweet to Tom Morris and ask him to reconfirm his information? 

Collingwood left Victoria park because the Council wanted the land back for Public use. It is an outstanding public open space. Move on . 

[Longsufferingnomore 1,670]

1 hour ago, longsuffering said:

I haven't got a Twitter account and thought if someone else could send out a tweet it would illicit a quicker response. I have however now emailed him and hopefully will get a response from him. 

Tom has just emailed back to say the following:

"Both are options but Carpark E is favoured at this stage. Which is closer to Collingwood F.C."

So there we are confirmed from the horses mouth so to speak.,

[damodees 14]

4 minutes ago, longsuffering said:

Tom has just emailed back to say the following:

"Both are options but Carpark E is favoured at this stage. Which is closer to Collingwood F.C."

So there we are confirmed from the horses mouth so to speak.,

I’m generally shocked that Car Park E is favoured over the other 2 locations. I honestly can not see any benefits in Car Park E.

[Demon Disciple 12,452]

19 minutes ago, longsuffering said:

Tom has just emailed back to say the following:

"Both are options but Carpark E is favoured at this stage. Which is closer to Collingwood F.C."

So there we are confirmed from the horses mouth so to speak.,

That would be a horrendous result if it were to eventuate.

Carpark F is clearly the better site as is the triangle space of land next to the freeway. I’d rather wait another 10 years for a proper facility than end up accepting a sub-standard site.

[DeeSpencer 26,274]

On 8/27/2021 at 5:51 PM, Demon Disciple said:

That would be a horrendous result if it were to eventuate.

Carpark F is clearly the better site as is the triangle space of land next to the freeway. I’d rather wait another 10 years for a proper facility than end up accepting a sub-standard site.

Being completely surrounded by the free way and off ramp isn’t a great plan. Doubt it’s functional.

The club has to know the best car park is the one facing Gosch’s. There has to be a reason why is isn’t preferred.

- expanding aami stadium?
- foundations, pipes etc?
- access to the medical centre?
- access to the rugby field or public access to aami 

Theres got to be reasons. How valid they are we clearly don’t know.

[dpositive 1,819]

On 8/27/2021 at 5:33 PM, damodees said:

I’m generally shocked that Car Park E is favoured over the other 2 locations. I honestly can not see any benefits in Car Park E.

 

On 8/27/2021 at 5:51 PM, Demon Disciple said:

That would be a horrendous result if it were to eventuate.

Carpark F is clearly the better site as is the triangle space of land next to the freeway. I’d rather wait another 10 years for a proper facility than end up accepting a sub-standard site.

 

On 8/28/2021 at 11:22 PM, DeeSpencer said:

Being completely surrounded by the free way and off ramp isn’t a great plan. Doubt it’s functional.

The club has to know the best car park is the one facing Gosch’s. There has to be a reason why is isn’t preferred.

- expanding aami stadium?
- foundations, pipes etc?
- access to the medical centre?
- access to the rugby field or public access to aami 

Theres got to be reasons. How valid they are we clearly don’t know.

Shocking, horrendous,  not great plan

Has there been any examination of Fishermans Bend?

 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 17,016]

On 8/27/2021 at 5:33 PM, damodees said:

I’m generally shocked that Car Park E is favoured over the other 2 locations. I honestly can not see any benefits in Car Park E.

Trojan Horse approach to gain eventual access to the Holden Centre?

[Lucifers Hero 40,519]

 

On 8/27/2021 at 5:28 PM, longsuffering said:

Tom has just emailed back to say the following:

"Both are options but Carpark E is favoured at this stage. Which is closer to Collingwood F.C."

So there we are confirmed from the horses mouth so to speak.,

Can't imagine why we would want to be "closer to Collingwood FC"?  Baffling.

[Roger Mellie 4,173]

12 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

 

Can't imagine why we would want to be "closer to Collingwood FC"?  Baffling.

I suspect Morris mucked up his letters and is just covering himself by saying both.

 

[Lucifers Hero 40,519]

3 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

I suspect Morris mucked up his letters and is just covering himself by saying both.

True, but why would he say being closer to Collingwood FC.  Can't see its relevance.