harry

I'm pretty sure Jimmy said that they were going to do some sort of debt demolition again this year.

The way the draft picks are awarded is sucking so much out of the game! Here we are, getting ready to play one of our most hated rivals (MOST hated to me!), and we're saying it might be better if we lost. We're also discussing the wooden spoon like it's something to aim for, when in years gone by we'd all be screaming our lungs out, trying to lift our team off the bottom. I can only imagine, but thirty or forty years ago, games like Melb Vs WC would be highly anticipated because both teams wouldn't want the dishonour of finishing bottom. It would almost be like a relegation battle in soccer. It's just wrong! For mine, I don't give a fark. I'd love to beat the scum!!!

Doesn't matter who wins, it's win-win for me. Like fark it doesn't matter. I despise the scum. If we beat them they're out of the finals race. I hope we smash them.

This question is academic: -Aug 08 - debt demolished -2009 onwards - post a profit -Sep 2014 - Deano and Brock hold premiership cup up. In the interests of study however, my whole family supports Melbourne. I've been going my whole life. They are part of my soul. If they relocate/merge/fold I'll go to the soccer.

Let's be rational about this. This article is making two central points. The first is that the playing group was divided during the mid 90s between an 'in' crowd and the rest. The second is that this same 'in' crowd is now assuming control of the club to its detriment. First point. To be honest, none of us can really say if the playing group was divided during this time. We weren't playing. In fact, I'd bet any money that you could ask numerous players who were on the list during that time and receive different responses on this. The fact is, footy clubs are big places. Matthew Lloyd said the other day he had played with no few than 100 different players during his career. It is inevitable that people who have played together for a decade will have a stronger bond than someone who's been there three weeks. It is also inevitable that people who aren't getting a game may become bitter and start attributing it to the fact they aren't part of the 'in' crowd. What we do know is that those players he mentions dragged this club out of the wilderness. Sure, we've never achieved the ultimate success, but no club apart from Essendon and West Coast has made the finals more than us in the last 20 years. We went quite close to winning flags in the late eighties and in 98. Hardly a 'shambolic excuse' for a football club. Second point. Imagine people playing football for a club and then going on to work for them once they've finished playing. Furthermore, imagine they were friends and shared a common bond and passion to see that football club succeed. Wow, what a novel notion. What nepotism! I think we should find people who don't care about the club and who don't like each other. This talk of 'cabal' is [censored] garbage if you ask me. Every club has former players on its books. Does anyone accuse Carlton of being a cabal because Kernahan and Ratten used to play together? We don't know how the new regime is going to go. And God help us if they fail. But to write them off because some of them used to play together is nonsensical.

Clinging to our "traditional home" at the MCG is sending us broke, the gate doesn't matter if someone else funds us say $250K to play at another location, are you really suggesting we are better off losing $100K on a crowd of 15,000 at the MCG? No-one is going to pay us to play at Kardinia Park. Why not become the first truly "national" team and play home games in all the capitals, returning home only for blockbuster games?

High Tower, I see your point about the Boutique Stadiums and I think it's a good one. However, Melbourne would have difficulties making the most of this. Firstly, Casey. The thing people tend to be forgetting is that there isn't a stadium at Casey and it would take tens of millions of dollars to build. Melbourne can't afford this. The AFL would not fund it because they have spent the last 30 years reducing the number of grounds (and teams) in Melbourne. It is extremely unlikely that they would reverse this process for the benefit of only one club, a club that they would be happy to see the back of. They are far more interested in investing in areas that are not traditional football strongholds. The last thing on their agenda is building stadiums in Melbourne. Seriously, a stadium at Casey would be great, but it's not going to happen. Secondly, Geelong. IF in fact the Geelong council would be happy for us to play there and IF the break even point was 5000 there would still not be much benefit for us. We wouldn't get any more than 5000 so we would probably only break even. This year we got 20,000 for the Freo game. I'd rather break even in front of 20,000 at the G than 5,000 at Geelong. The only way this would make money for us is if the AFL threw money at us to play games there, which of course, would never happen. To be honest, I think the best way we can enhance our revenues with regards to stadiums is to improve the current deal we have at the G. We must make the AFL make these deals fairer. This is something that is being discussed as we speak at a meeting of the club Presidents. Furthermore, we must become closer to the MCC so that we have more control over the ground on match days e.g. close the top level of stands therefore requiring less staff, having greater scope for advertising and corporate revenue. I'm of the belief that the most important thing that needs to change if we are to become profitable is for an improved stadium deal.

Teams like Melbourne move home games to other places because the AFL gives them money to do so. The AFL gives them money to do so because they want to promote the game in those places. The AFL doesn't need to grow the game in Geelong because Geelong is already a football stronghold. Therefore, they won't pay any club to play there. Therefore, Melbourne won't play home games there. Therefore, this topic is a complete waste of time.

As much as it's exciting that we've got lots of promising youngsters and some good picks in what shapes to be a strong draft, to be truly succesful we must also cultivate a 'strong' culture. Obviously, this is very difficult to quantify and even more difficult to achieve but all premiership teams have it. Amongst other things, it requires placing the team above the individual, maximising potential, expecting success, togetherness and unyielding self-belief. This list doesn't pretend to be exhaustive. Although it is only early, and I am only a another fan who is passing opinion from the outside, this group, led by these coaches appears to be in the seminal stages of creating such a culture. The way Bails, after an honourable loss at the cattery said, 'we still lost by 5 goals', the way the likes of Dunn and Garland have the confidence to play on and beat some of the premier players in the comp, the way Nathan Jones always talks in 'we's' and 'us's' rather than 'I's'. These, in isolation, obviously mean absolutely nothing. And maybe I'm constructing something I want to see rather than something that is actually there. But, to me, these are indicators of a wider shift in culture which has only just begun. To win the flag you need the right culture and the talent. Having one or the other is not enough. I reckon we are making small steps on both fronts. I'll tell you what, I'd love to beat the scum on Saturday.

I'm 23. So didn't have to deal with years in the wilderness but also have never seen a flag. Too young to remember 87 but would've loved to have been a part of it. I've watched the replay on tape of the last game out at the Western Oval thousands of times. I loved the bit when Brian Wilson chased a Footscray player all the way down the wing then it turned over and he ran all the way back with the ball and kicked the sealer. The commentator shouts 'Cover yourself in glory son!' and they show the crowd behind the goals and they're jumping around like it's the FA Cup final. The excitement around the club must've been amazing during that time. As far as I'm concerned, in my time, 98 was the one that got away. Smashed Adelaide and St Kilda then went down to North on a cold, dewey friday night. If we'd got them on a fast track we would've beaten them. Then Adelaide won the flag after we'd beaten them by ten goals a couple of weeks earlier. Malcolm Blight said in an interview after the match that he was most worried about Melbourne. I'm looking forward to the day Brock Mclean and Deano hold the premiership cup aloft. Should probably do some work now...

If we can get a similar standard of facilities to the new stadium in the refurbished southern stand why wouldn't we want them? They would be at our home, we wouldn't have to share them with other entities and they would be cheaper according to reports. I think the push from some to stick to our original plan of buying into the new stadium facilities is borne out of the frustration of having to wait around even longer than anticipated to have our new arrangements in order. Of course, I totally understand this frustration. But IF we are able to move gym, pool facilities etc into the Southern Stand and IF it is in fact cheaper common sense suggests we simply must be patient and wait that little bit longer. If you think you're frustrated imagine how the players must feel!

This is a misnomer that gets bandied around a lot. North Melbourne were the dominant team in the late 90s and almost got relocated last year. Hawthorn dominated for over a decade and their board still decided in 96 that they would put a merger proposal to the members. On the other hand, freo have never done anything and have about 8 million in the bank. Collingwood have won one flag in fifty years and have loads of money as well. It is unrealistic to rely on performance to keep the club afloat. Football, more than ever, is cyclical. As supporters we must accept that it's going to take a number of years for us to realistically challenge for the flag. In the meantime, as a club we need to find ways to make money without winning flags. As a fan on the outside like everyone else here, I reckon that means renegotiating a better stadium deal, abolishing debt, attracting more sponsors and investing in non-football related revenue. But that's just an educated guess. Premiership performance would definitely help, but we can't rely on it.