DaveyDee

I would be very surprised ifthe AFL didnt continue to support us on this issue - However, many MFC supporters do hate the AFL and they never stop telling us around this site - so you never know.

I'm led to believe - dont quote me. Crows AFL licence is owned by the SANFL so this is the way the AFL supports grass-roots/local football in that state and it goes back to the inception of the Crows.

I'm a very positive person I would never, never use the word "can't" - What I would say is all the AFL evidence points towards the more you sustain the spending inside the football department the closer you are to a flag. So when we lose a revenue stream you have to replace it - if we dont it might take 15-20 years to win our next flag - maybe longer. I can wait, time is not a problem. However, we need to be blunt we have many ageing loyal supporters who may not see the day. Our Foundation heroes did a very good job.

Ah - the good old chicken and the egg argument. Not a problem - cheers.

No doubt you did, well looks like we have one bidder on Dean Kent already to do his lawns - we have to start some where. Just for the record I knew what you were doing - but it goes to show other clubs are prepared to do near anything to find income sources in 2017.

Not that dramatic. Carlton, Collingwood & Tigers are well down this path including getting massive financial support from Federal & State governments. These clubs also have the AFL onside as to ensure a strong financial bid and we avoid mistakes made at the then Telstra Dome now Ethiad Stadium. But happy to hear more.

Wiseblood - you surprise me at times 1/ We used to do something along these lines at our annual auction - think 50% of the funds went to the club and 50% to the players end of year functions. But think much of this was stopped due to the professional nature of the game today. 2/ However, other clubs have already thought of your idea and are exploring the "services" industries as a way to further monetise their supporter base. Not sure if they have gone as far as Gardening services but you could not rule anything in or anything out in 2017. Thanks for your constructive input - hopefully that was your intention.

ok - you have told me the problems (thank-you) - now what is the solution? Baring in mind suggestions for alternative revenue streams you would pay for?

Good point - so how can the rank and file help? Would it be more player - member functions? More administrators - member functions? All constructive ideas are worth exploring.

The point of the thread is to look for ways to find additional revenue streams and what you would consider topping up your financial contribution on a yearly/weekly basis - business who want their products show cased - I like the idea. Personally i would probably even pay a marginal amount to be show cased too - knowing the club stood to benefit.

I should post what i would be pre-pared to pay extra for MFC Business Directory - almost like a MFC yellow pages online I would actually pay twice a/ to access the information & b/ to list a company on the directory. So in theory if I was looking for a bricklayer, dentist, accountant almost any profession I could go to the directory knowing the club has benefited. Also companies could offer exclusive deals to subscribed members almost exactly like "groupon" do again the club could benefit. Just a thought.

What would you pay more money for to help the MFC further financially stabilise? Lets be clear I'm not taking about anything membership or seating related - I'm taking about what would further motivate you to send the MFC some extra dollars on a yearly/weekly basis. AFL has made its stance clear, poker machines are on the way out, we have a very heavy reliance on the income from those machines and we need to find alternatives. We cant rely that "Project Fruit" will un-cover a satisfactory result for all clubs. So in a nutshell - what would you do to further help stabilise the MFC financially.

Now you are implying more than one person was involved in making the decisions yet you are so critical of the individuals in CC & BP. Your recruiting team is only as good as the development staff, the conditioning staff, the injury prevention and recovery staff. You are arguing from a position of ignorance - if you fail in drafts your whole club has to take the blame.

What makes me laugh the most about most of these so called "redrafts" is even after you have seen ever player play x number of games you still get a fair amount of disagreement. Yet so many "forums experts" are critical of individuals who make the initial selections and thats where there involvement ends - it over to the coaches, the conditioning and fitness staff & in some cases the doctors, surgeons and injury recovery staff. However, interestingly only the recruiters cop the blame or grab the glory - very amusing.

Fair call - you could well be right. However, exactly why I think we have a very bright future - we dont have so many auto top 22's. 1/ I would prefer TMac not to be used as 2nd ruck option - if he was to be moved it would be to go back into defense, then Pedo plays 2nd tall, or Pedo plays 3rd tall / ruck back up 2/ Tyson vs Vandenburg - I went the later for his extra height/weight up forward 3/ Harmes vs Neal Bullen - it was a real 50/50 and Id be happy to have either in the side But fair calls on your behalf

I only went to 2 ER games this year for a beer & a chat. But what struck me was this kid's North ability to win the ball and direct the game. Beautiful left foot, works hard very hard, good link man but best of all prepared to win his own football. He does not look quick but he has quick hands and feet. For me this draft is all about building our depth, finding solid AFL players - for me North fits that mold.

Im updating my round 1 team B: Jetta Frost Hibberd HB: Salem Lever Hunt C: Brayshaw Oliver Petracca HF: Melksham TMac Hannan F: Garlett Hogan Harmes Fol: Gawn Jones Viney Int: Lewis, Maynard, Pedo, Vandenberg

Im going to take a punt - more what I hope rather than what will happen 29. Zac Bailey 31. Gryan Miers 36. Bayley Fritsch 47. Thomas North

Interestingly no draft has ever been redone in reality. However, clubs have spent a fortune in the following areas 1/ Pre-draft - physic testing, combine analysis, video analysis, plus a few others I wont discuss 2/ Draft Day - general acceptance that the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts 3/ Post Draft - induction programmes and the 3 most important things in drafting are development, development and development. This all said and done overall we recognise drafting is not an exact science its only a game of probabilities. Which all cost big dollars to marginally improve your odds.

Not a problem, I"m glad you and others care. As I said earlier, if its important to you, knock yourself out, good luck.

You totally missed the point - before the event some people will find something to complain about ie this years grand final 1&2 are both just opinions. clash jumpers are just marketing events, some you will win some you lose, you can never please all of the people all of the time. But I'm tipping if we go undefeated in our clash jumper this year - watch sales start to soar irrespective of your opinion irrespective of the colours involved. Its just such a non-issue. You focus on the colours of our jumpers - i will focus on the results of our games, then the clash jumper will resolve itself.

The clash jumper/ alternative jumper is more of a marketing opportunity - some you will win some you will lose, before the event you will never know after the event depends on the results. Take this years grand final - classic example. Its just such a non-issue.

Cheers - agreed we have different opinions respect your stance. Much appreciated.

I agree with you - its a non-issue for me its a clash jumper. Now I dont think the views shared by Rodney are stupid - if its that important to him, knock yourself out, go for it and Good luck.