pitmaster

Considering an individual footy career can end in an instant with the sound of one knee popping no company is committing millions to sponsorship on the basis of one player. That suggestion that Macca cost us a sponsorship is a joke, right?. Early on this thread I pointed out differences between the Dogs and us regards exposure - Friday night games and the prospect of serious finals football over the term of this deal are much greater for the Dogs than us. Apart from airing week old grievances about the captaincy there's been nothing added to lack of exposure. Anyone got any other suggestions why Mission preferred the Dogs? And as for bagging people boycotting the products - why shouldn't they? I bought LG when they sponsored us. Member support of sponsors was one of the questions on the member survey this year. I've got by mostly with El Paso tacos in the past and will emphatically walk past the Mission display in the future.

Tortillas, taco shells, corn chips the usual Tex-Mex basics. Actually found a packet of Mission tortillas in my fridge this morning - last batch I buy. I really think it's the Dogs potential media exposure, particularly over the next two years that would have decided this. Look at it from the company's point of view - they are new to the market and they want the biggest exposure for their (sob) one and a half million bucks a year (can't quite believe it).

It does look like MI now if Mission was our target. Why the Dogs and not us? Possiblity of finals football in the next two years? Dogs yes; Us 2009 No; 2010 maybe but not all that probable. Grand Final Prospects next three years? Dogs possible; Us highly unlikely. Fixture: Dogs 5 Friday nights; Us 1. A mix of on field and fixturing looks likely as one element in the decision. Any other ideas? And the upside might be...this year you can buy a beautiful Melbourne jumper without some commercial on it.

We're in deep trouble. Hopefully CS does better than Danners at Plan B (and C)

Ditto to what rpfc said. This youth worship thing can go too far - now someone reckons Wats will be captain after McDonald. Why? Because he was the number one draft pick? That means Trapper coulda been skipper. How laughable is that? They got it right and good luck to him.

Very fine sentiment. The best thing would be to contact the club directly - as they ring around members who have not signed up from last year the club callers hear many reasons for people not rejoining - just had a baby, lost their job, starting a new business and no time to go, there's many reasons. I'm sure they would hear of someone in tough times who would appreciate it so try the membership department.

I'm not getting 13CABS but Volvo, Reebok and Konica Minolta are all prominent. That's a good move - giving something back to the existing (second tier) sponsors for staying staunch. Good vision

Point of clarification: for me this was never about the Stynes board versus any other. I liked the idea of McNamee as CEO to the extent he was used to running a major sporting event, but the ATO is starkly different to running a year-round footy club. I think the Gardner board fell for that dummy promotional ad McNamee put together. Who knows, maybe he'd have been good? For my two bob's worth, the way McNamee was sacked was unprofessional and damaging to the club. It also gave the impression of the old boys moving back. The only saving grace to that shoddy business is that we ended with Cameron Schwab as ceo. If we had not finished with him it would have been a disaster. I hope he gets us a sponsor, and I hope they are sitting on the captaincy announcement in order to do the sponsor thing first.

Tell us more O Wise One...and you can start by answering my query

My response: This is where you make me deeply suspicious RFW. C Schwab was not the salary cap cheat and why would you bring that up? Schwab inherited deals done by Hassa Mann and took the fall. The full story is that Fremantle was encourged by the AFL to go hell for leather and did everything they could to lure Steven Tingay among others. Hassa did what football clubs then did and defended the patch. When the Melbourne crew fronted up to the AFL Ian Collins said to them: "what the hell are you doing here?" It was his way of expressing his amazement that we had dobbed ourselves in (ie: we were never going to be caught in the culture of the times). All of that is of no moment. It will only give you ammo to take another swipe at me, but I am enjoying this too much to stop now. I just want to work out who the ---- you are. Your defence of Gardner over the course of this thread is fascinating. Why would you bother? No-one is beating him up. I just don't get it. He stuffed up but he did his best, leave it at that, but learn from his errors: ie: build relationships. Although I can see already that you're not very good at that. Now tell me why you kept secret that press release. Go on, it will make you feel better to get it off your chest. PS I can't work out why my earlier responses are in your box but that stuff about the LG TV etc, that's me, and that stuff about how harris and gardner did not prevent the economic meltdown, that's me too. Me? I was buying LG gear to keep the economy going.

And you still need to explain why you suppressed that October 30 statement...maybe you should just change your ID

How's that hamstring RFW? You over-reached that time. You know the treatment: Rest, Ice, Compression and Elevation, then gentle stretching, but very gentle because you're prone to over-doing it. Fact: Szondy annointed Gardner as president as early as August 2003. I was wrong in linking it to Harris but that's for other reasons. The basic point remains. New Boy Syndrome. OK it still looks like it was Gardner and not Harris who wanted to be the hero and delivered Primus and cost us LG which leaves us sponsorless now. Gardner even had the endorsement (now this is weird) of Robert Flower for the second half of 2003.

I stand corrected - so it was Gardner after all and not Harris. Thanks for digging that out. I'll readjust my bitterness.

No I'm not - that was the point of asking flowerwing for what he knew - Harris was appointed in June 2004 - when the LG deal ended I am not sure. I think Harris unloaded LG but while you say I don't have much at all I made the point I was willing to be corrected. I'm still waiting.

"MELBOURNE's plight as the most vulnerable club in the AFL has become more critical with the loss of major sponsor Primus Telecom. The loss of the deal, which has been in place since 2004 " _ The Australian August 13, 2008 Steve Harris said, "I was given a challenging brief in 2004" - Melbourne FC press release February 4, 2008 So show us what you have...

if you're right, sure, but short of going to the history books that's how I remember it. Maybe you'll offer some evidence.

Steve Harris dumped LG and brought in Primus. Primus is history in sponsorship and LG are still going with Freo. That's the problem with new ceos trying to make heros of themselves by bringing in a new sponsor. Remember the AFL's criticism of Melbourne earlier this year? That we were no good at relationships with outsiders. That could have been a dig at the way we dumped LG who were keen to stay with us. Mugs with only ourselves too blame - Oh and Paul G who appointed Harris. Might as well give him another kicking.

"Agree Jarka if we are going to develop as a side McDonald will very well struggle to be a regular by seasons end" well it would seem not - clearly you blokes are not on the match committee - the only thing that would keep the very honest junior from playing out the season would be injury. captains bring things to teams that are not always on show. brock is being given time to get his own game right and that's as it ought to be

i touch wood on behalf of a prominent recruit upon whom much hope is riding and remember vividly what this sort of luck did to our mid-90s flag chances

very sad if true - shows how easy it is to cop some bad luck and i won't mention you know who - at least if it's a fracture it's a relatively good knee to do.

Of course we have one of the worst teams of the lot. Of course we were crap in the 70s and 80s. Country zoning came in about 1965. Before that we recruited from all over the state and Tassie. Our country zone was the Goulburn Valley - Yze, Lyon, O'Donnell and not much else came out of there. The strongest zones were Bendigo (Carlton) and Gippsland (Hawthorn). Hawthorn also got a lift because their metro zone took in private schools that drew kids from all over the state so they had the pick of them too. Throw in Essendon and you have the clubs that dominated in the 70s, 80s and 90s. The zones were supposed to rotate but guess who lobbied for that not to happen (Carlton - who supplied senior execs to the VFL for years). Demonator's comment is a bit misleading: "how many kids grow up in inner city Melbourne? no wonder they scrapped the zoning idea!" Metro zoning always existed and inner city clubs fared well (C'wood, Carlton, R'mond, Fitzroy spring to mind). Melbourne's metro zones were Murrumbeena (Flower), part of the Mornington Peninsula (Healy's I think) and outer Melbourne we had something around Melton. Neitz was one of our last metro zone players. Country zoning was the end of our golden period and it shows in this team. Maybe it was brought in to bring us down to size...

You're spot on that they were burned in the American sub-prime collapse but they are still the biggest - or close to the biggest - bank in the US and are not sinking anywhere - they were one of those too big to fail. Although the financial sector is hurting that establishment old world look is a fit for us as much as some don't like it, although right now I'd even cop Twisties as a sponsor

Citi Group would be perfect - major international bank with growing presence in Australia - offices in Melbourne and Sydney and 2500 staff doing investment and consumer banking. and so far a low profile - go for it Dees!