Jump to content

Featured Replies

 
4 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

https://apple.news/A0lAM3pr4RJeGYO9gqQeZFA
 

I don’t think North are going to survive the Map of Tassie Expansion….

McGuire is an [censored] but I don’t disagree on most points. The league doesn’t need 19 teams. But just because Norf are a scraping the barrel at the moment isn’t fair game though. 

 

The league is barely able to sustain 18 teams. There isn’t enough sponsorship, members or players to facilitate a 19th team. Americas population is 10x Australia’s and only has 32 teams. 

 
  • Author
24 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

McGuire is an [censored] but I don’t disagree on most points. The league doesn’t need 19 teams. But just because Norf are a scraping the barrel at the moment isn’t fair game though. 

 

Sadly it’s too late. North should have gone 12 years ago. 
Hawthorn are in for a world of pain, but they will survive. North won’t. 
Too many sides in Melbourne as well as an uneven number 

  • Author
2 minutes ago, Oxdee said:

The league is barely able to sustain 18 teams. There isn’t enough sponsorship, members or players to facilitate a 19th team. Americas population is 10x Australia’s and only has 32 teams. 

Yes. The AFL make money propping up GW$ & GC $un$, but they won’t have any benefit from propping up North. 
The Moment Brayshaw stepped down as President, that was the Final Curtain 


Until we're worried about the AFL going broke, why are we talking about killing teams? This is a sport with nearing 200 years of history. You don't rip that up in search of a dollar.

This was us 10 years ago… couid be us again one day.  We need to support the roos not dig their grave. 

  • Author
11 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

This was us 10 years ago… couid be us again one day.  We need to support the roos not dig their grave. 

But how will that happen?

Emotional ties only go so far. How many Players will leave at years end?

How can they attract Big Name Players?

The Spiral has begun….

 
14 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

But how will that happen?

Emotional ties only go so far. How many Players will leave at years end?

How can they attract Big Name Players?

The Spiral has begun….

Same issue with the Lions 10 years ago, as you may recall. They turned it around as any organisation turns itself around.
It's not a simple fix but it's not a fait accompli that a club doing poorly now will never recover.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/44612/where-did-it-all-go-wrong-for-the-lions

  • Author
Just now, Chook said:

Same issue with the Lions 10 years ago, as you may recall. They turned it around as any organisation turns itself around.
It's not a simple fix but it's not a fait accompli that a club doing poorly now will never recover.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/44612/where-did-it-all-go-wrong-for-the-lions

But you miss the Point. Brisbane are in a one Team town, yes they turned it around. 
North are in a much worse situation, Melbourne already has too many Clubs, compounded by The Tasmanian venture 


My preference is to remove and disband both GWS Giants and GC Suns 😇

On-field, between potential losses to free agency, potential losses to Tasmania, and the consumption of a couple of drafts by Tasmania coming in, it will be a very hard time for any club entering the next few years already in bad shape.

Off-field, for North things look even more taut with the potential to lose revenue from their Tasmania deal and the outright loss-making crowds to be expected if many of those games were in Melbourne (Adelaide, Port Adelaide and West Coast feature this season), plus an overall delicately balanced financial position.

It doesn't seem realistic that they'll manage even 5 wins this season, making that five consecutive years where their results would qualify for the old fashioned priority pick threshold. By fluke of venues and because of the Tassie fixture they have averaged one win a season in Victoria in that time.

It makes me worry. I'll keep my fingers crossed that their wave of kids develop together and become competitive soon enough to prevent a rolling exodus like the early days of Gold Coast, but with a much lower talent base.

I fear North Melbourne's prospects to 2030 in the brutal realities of 'AFL Inc' are about as promising as South Asia's prospects to 2050 in the brutal realities of climate change.

  • Demonland changed the title to The Drums are starting to beat for North
1 hour ago, Oxdee said:

The league is barely able to sustain 18 teams. There isn’t enough sponsorship, members or players to facilitate a 19th team. Americas population is 10x Australia’s and only has 32 teams. 

it's not as simple as that. there are other factors. the cost of running one nfl club is probably more than the cost of running the whole afl, so in finanancial cost measurements the nfl is running the equivalent of 32 afl's.

talent pool however is a different issue, like you alluded to.  

my biggest beef is the odd number of 19 creates more problems such as fixture fairness and extra byes. and with 19 teams there is still only 9 games per week to monetise but the cost of running the whole show goes up by about 5% with no revenue increase (leaving out inflation which affects both costs and revenue)


Apart from a couple of good defenders, North have a list with excellent promise. Clarko is a good coach. If the AFL support them as they did us with Jackson and Roos, I can't see why they cannot rise, if they can keep the list together

We need to be careful assuming we are safe. The next 3 years with a bunch of key retirements could prove disastrous if not replenished.

I heard at various times over the last 6 years that North, St Kilda and us have been in the firing line for folding or relocation.

Our success has saved us... for now

No home base, aging stars,, membership ok but not near matching the big clubs.

It's a long road to the top, but a fast road back down

Good god, I'm sounding like SWYL now! 🤔

2 hours ago, Oxdee said:

The league is barely able to sustain 18 teams. There isn’t enough sponsorship, members or players to facilitate a 19th team. Americas population is 10x Australia’s and only has 32 teams. 

I'm impressed the US has 32 teams, even though I expected they would have a few more around. Seems like a big country. What is this sustainability you talk about? The AFL is a non-profit sport: the biggest in the country. 

Leave North alone (add Britney meme): they have a proud and boring history. Add Tas and then NT. Build a truly national sport and they will come. 

2 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

This was us 10 years ago… couid be us again one day.  We need to support the roos not dig their grave. 

Don’t want to dig their grave but 18 clubs is enough for the foreseeable future.

That said, I think the idea put forward that an existing AFL club be sacrificed is not going to work. There’s a lot of infrastructure invested at North Melbourne and the AFL continues to pump money into the club. To kill it off would be a tremendous waste of existing resources.

12 minutes ago, Skuit said:

I'm impressed the US has 32 teams, even though I expected they would have a few more around. Seems like a big country. What is this sustainability you talk about? The AFL is a non-profit sport: the biggest in the country. 

well, 32 nfl teams... and 32 nhl teams... and 30 (soon to be 32) nba teams... and mlb has 30 teams... not to mention a plethora of college teams whose support level dwarfs some of the teams in their four big codes

by comparison in terms of the biggest competitive sports there's 18 afl, 16 nrl, and 1 australian (plus 8 bbl) cricket team/s

the a-league and nbl are small fry; more akin to high school sports in the states that the professional competitions

as others have said, with the size of the pie that the afl ostensibly splits evenly as a nfp, there's no reason the kangas should be killed off any time soon and the 20th team - possibly a third in wa? - will appear within a few years of tasmania devils entry to even up the competition again

the one thing you want to avoid is to be 'down' from 2028-2034


Another beat up. Roos are a couple of decent key backmen and a goal sneak or two away from being very competitive. Get games into the kids. There's no hurry. Paul Roos had three years and he never made finals...

3 hours ago, Skuit said:

I'm impressed the US has 32 teams, even though I expected they would have a few more around. Seems like a big country. What is this sustainability you talk about? The AFL is a non-profit sport: the biggest in the country. 

‘The afl is a non profit sport’? You do realise clubs fold if they can’t make a profit? 

2 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

well, 32 nfl teams... and 32 nhl teams... and 30 (soon to be 32) nba teams... and mlb has 30 teams... not to mention a plethora of college teams whose support level dwarfs some of the teams in their four big codes

by comparison in terms of the biggest competitive sports there's 18 afl, 16 nrl, and 1 australian (plus 8 bbl) cricket team/s

the a-league and nbl are small fry; more akin to high school sports in the states that the professional competitions

as others have said, with the size of the pie that the afl ostensibly splits evenly as a nfp, there's no reason the kangas should be killed off any time soon and the 20th team - possibly a third in wa? - will appear within a few years of tasmania devils entry to even up the competition again

the one thing you want to avoid is to be 'down' from 2028-2034

I wonder how much of hawthorns success could be attributed the the introduction of gws and gc?

 

Hawthorn are pretty irrelevant at the moment, why can’t they disband?

Honestly though, for the game to be more of a national sport another team outside of Victoria is needed. Though there isn’t enough talent going around to keep it at the ‘elite’ level that was once offered back in the 16 team days.

Good luck getting a team up in the NT, conditions just aren’t right to have a team there (think of the disadvantage they’d have playing every 2nd week up in energy sapping conditions). 

4 hours ago, Oxdee said:

‘The afl is a non profit sport’? You do realise clubs fold if they can’t make a profit? 

Being non-profit doesn’t mean you don’t make a profit. It just means that the profits don’t go to shareholders or other private beneficiaries.


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

    • 50 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Like
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

    • 4 replies