On 10/09/2025 at 11:09, Fritta and Turner said:

Also note that the multi purpose ovals x 2 and fields x 1 were originally proposed to be in sections 8 and 9.

I believe that's where they still will be.

Correct. (Someone stated that they were going to be in Sections 4 &6. Not yet anyway).

Btw if a cruel wind is blowing it is impossible to get out of it. And whilst the interior is currently grassed it is not much more than uneven gravel. Not so much of an upgrade as starting from scratch.

Prob announce something after we make a mess of the trade period in hopes we all forget ha ha 😁

Edited Tuesday at 00:022 days by Gorgoroth

This needs to get announced very soon, as it will assist with Trading in players.

11 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This needs to get announced very soon, as it will assist with Trading in players.

Agreed. But the fact that is hasn't been means something must be holding things up?

2 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

Agreed. But the fact that is hasn't been means something must be holding things up?

Maybe the ground has changed it’s mind and now wants to be the Dockers new Training ground.

41 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This needs to get announced very soon, as it will assist with Trading in players.

It's a myth that facilities help you get players. Players look at how good the contract is, chance of a premiership and sometimes the ability to play in their home state.

3 hours ago, lorn said:

It's a myth that facilities help you get players. Players look at how good the contract is, chance of a premiership and sometimes the ability to play in their home state.

I don't believe it's a huge factor either and those points you've made no doubt carry the major bulk of weight in terms of decision making.

But there's no sure things in life Iorn.

If it did play a part, even a minor to moderate one, wouldn't you rather have this side ticked off as a neutral factor in the decision making process?

Or Caulfield goes go ahead and it happens to be leading edge vs all other clubs or say better than 70% - 80% of them.

Even if that edge only lasts 5 years or so.

Surely that could provide a minor advantage / tipping point on occasions if a player is weighing up coming to us vs one or more other clubs in the lessor (70% - 80%) facility clubs.

And if that one player (or more) ends up becoming a fairly big star of the game and helps us pull in another cup or two during his tenure?

Of course none of that might happen either but just putting it out there.

Edited Tuesday at 06:281 day by Demon Dynasty

4 hours ago, lorn said:

It's a myth that facilities help you get players. Players look at how good the contract is, chance of a premiership and sometimes the ability to play in their home state.

Not sure you're entirely right about this. Even the ex coach gave a backhander to having to drive out to Casey. A two hour drive per training day. I'd be pretty confident that is a factor. McLean certainly cited it as a reason for leaving the club. Lets not revisit him for anything other than he is a direct example.

6 minutes ago, Its Time Again said:

Not sure you're entirely right about this. Even the ex coach gave a backhander to having to drive out to Casey. A two hour drive per training day. I'd be pretty confident that is a factor. McLean certainly cited it as a reason for leaving the club. Lets not revisit him for anything other than he is a direct example.

Yep the drive out to Casey cant be good for the players, meanwhile Danger drives an hour to Geelong every day for training, cant see him playing much longer past 30 with all that extras time spent sitting in a car???

4 minutes ago, BangBnagBang said:

Yep the drive out to Casey cant be good for the players, meanwhile Danger drives an hour to Geelong every day for training, cant see him playing much longer past 30 with all that extras time spent sitting in a car???

Can't really equate the two situations. He chooses that drive (which incidentally is one of the most beautiful in the country) so that he can live at Moggs Creek where the Dangerfield extended clan live.

I honestly cannot believe this is happening! I haven't been on this thread for so long because it felt like the play Waiting for Godot - actors on stage but the story is stuck with no progression.

IF this comes to pass (sorry, I've been a supporter and member for too long and seen so many false dawns etc...) I will ecstatic! But I am hesitant to begin celebrating until I see a club announcement.

This almost makes me hopeful that one day there will be a train to Tullamarine airport too!

13 hours ago, lorn said:

It's a myth that facilities help you get players. Players look at how good the contract is, chance of a premiership and sometimes the ability to play in their home state.

Chris Judd says hi.

Having the worst facilities in the AFL actually hinders your recruitment.

If it’s us or them that can be a tipping point.

18 hours ago, Redleg said:

This needs to get announced very soon, as it will assist with Trading in players.

I hope it’s announced soon but even if it is it’s not going to be built for years so hardly going to help assist with trading in players anytime soon.

18 hours ago, Redleg said:

This needs to get announced very soon, as it will assist with Trading in players.

Relevant player managers would be let into the tent on progress, wouldn’t worry too much about an announcement in relation to impact on trade period.

5 hours ago, Redleg said:

Chris Judd says hi.

Having the worst facilities in the AFL actually hinders your recruitment.

If it’s us or them that can be a tipping point.

Facilities had nothing to do with Judd not going to Melb, him actually touring our facilities was just for show, he was only ever going to one place .

1 minute ago, BangBnagBang said:

Facilities had nothing to do with Judd not going to Melb, him actually touring our facilities was just for show, he was only ever going to one place .

Agree but they were still mentioned at the time.

On 02/09/2025 at 11:49, poita said:

Don't all MCG tenants share the rooms? I don't think any club has designated rooms, so I would be very surprised if there were honour boards there. I agree that these are most likely cricket related.

That said, it would be great to have a place that members can access to see all of this kind of memorabilia.

Having toured the MCG I can tell you that the rooms are characterless, uniform and dull - how exciting can it be inspecting an empty, tiled ice bath? Anything installed there is done on the day for the benefit of TV viewers and sponsors. Even the (removable) team names installed over the door are boring.

54 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Agree but they were still mentioned at the time.

As a contrivance. Not the real issue or cause.

Wasn't any lack of facilities...more a lack of factories... ones making brown paper bags 😉

16 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

I don't believe it's a huge factor either and those points you've made no doubt carry the major bulk of weight in terms of decision making.

But there's no sure things in life Iorn.

If it did play a part, even a minor to moderate one, wouldn't you rather have this side ticked off as a neutral factor in the decision making process?

Or Caulfield goes go ahead and it happens to be leading edge vs all other clubs or say better than 70% - 80% of them.

Even if that edge only lasts 5 years or so.

Surely that could provide a minor advantage / tipping point on occasions if a player is weighing up coming to us vs one or more other clubs in the lessor (70% - 80%) facility clubs.

And if that one player (or more) ends up becoming a fairly big star of the game and helps us pull in another cup or two during his tenure?

Of course none of that might happen either but just putting it out there.

Definitely need it is as a trump card.

Imagine a situation where a player is deciding between us and another Vic team.

Better to have it than not.

It could be announced tomorrow... ( it won't be )

No one's training in it for 2 years.

Right atm its irrelevant to anyone playing in 26/27

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

It could be announced tomorrow... ( it won't be )

No one's training in it for 2 years.

Right atm its irrelevant to anyone playing in 26/27

Be amazed if it was finished in two years. Four minimum is my guess

55 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Be amazed if it wI think you could build a couple of ovals in 2 yearsas finished in two years. Four minimum is my guess

I think you could build a couple of ovals in 2 years but bricks and mortar is sometime off

6 hours ago, ANG13 said:

I hope it’s announced soon but even if it is it’s not going to be built for years so hardly going to help assist with trading in players anytime soon.

Wrong IMO. Naturally some people like on D/L are going to be critical when the final product is built but still in favour of the facility.

Naturally some players will be satisfied by the official announcement that our facility will proceed but others NOT until the finish and they can inspect it first hand as completed.

By then our new Pres and CEO will have gained considerable kudos and brownie points for our Club to be given the benefit of doubt again in credibility and culture standings plus on field success hopefully adding to this AFL opinion of destination and near prime movers back again.

19 hours ago, Fritta and Turner said:

I think you could build a couple of ovals in 2 years but bricks and mortar is sometime off

The design of drainage is critical design then of the oval surface and walking tracks can proceed slower But total design COULD be completed within 6 months. Construction of two ovals might take 9 months but the laying and consolidation if the turf to an acceptable standard is dependant on weather , soil type, grass type and could be left to consolidate without use for 6 months easily.

None of this is difficult , design of buildings and facilities much harder, but two ovals pretty simple by comparison . Depends on how much cash is tossed in that direction. But it’s possible though doubtful that preseason 2027 could be partly there.

If they start tomorrow