praha

Sylvia.

The problem is Daniher created a specific culture, and I think Bails was always intent on completely draining the club of any drafted players under Daniher, which is fair enough. I think this is going to be a really good era under Bailey. I've only really seen maybe 2 eras (the Balme and Daniher ones) beforehand, and the end of the Northy one, but this one feels very different. I think that within the club the younger players are getting treated extremely well, maybe even better than some older players (the likes of Bruce, Jnr etc.). I'm not worried that this would cause discontent around the club among the players.

Thanks

I believe Collingwood was the youngest team to ever win a flag on the day with an average age of like 24 or 25 or something.

I thought he'd been banned for speaking his mind?

I'm not going to fall for it. The club is going to come out looking bad in all of this, but if a 31 year old won't accept a reasonable deal at 31 at a club he has spent his whole career at and made a crap load of money at, my bet is he already has a deal on the table from another club, or several others. You don't just walk out on a club that has your best mate, new facilities, high promise etc. etc. If he has, his ego is bigger than any of us imagined. In saying that, this doesn't look good for the club. They've said goodbye to so many veteran players now, and it might be hard to attract free agents in future if they aren't confident they're going to be supported by the club until they retire.

I rarely take any attention of what happens in the off-season, including injuries. I judge the team by on-field performance during the season, and if they do have off-field issues, I want to see them counter them successfully as a good team should be able to. But also because I dedicate 99% of my attention to the NBA season - League Pass, baby! I hope the AFL introduces some sort of HD live game streaming online some day for a yearly price.

Happy that it's 1 year. We have a number of players coming out of contract next year, don't we?

lol Ashley Pansen, amiright?

The difference is, the Yankees have a very big fanbase, and an established brand. If we don't have a brand after having used the original logo, why keep it? The reason for this new one is to help create a brand. Not sure why you'd want to go back to something that never brought us any off-field success in the first place...

Favourable draw how? On field? Sure. For attracting crowds? Nah. Too many Sunday games, a lot against interstate clubs, plus a home game against last year's wooden spooners at Etihad on a Sunday at 1:10pm. Our draw is great for the team to succeed on field, but it's far from the best from a marketing perspective. It's probably one of the worst in that regard.

We'd easily manage 50-55k in this climate if we were up and flying. Bulldogs and Saints figures are laughable considering we'd just come off two wooden spoons and come close to their figures.

I think he's joking...

I believe he is back at home in WA atm. On an unrelated note, I saw Jamar in GA on the grass right near the finish line. Had a members pass dangling from his pocket but for whatever reason was in GA with us peasants...

Newton returns. He is another Nick Smith. He has just one more chance, surely?

Fix the poll to allow multiple answers. I'd hope we don't only finish on top of one of those teams.

I am not criticising the AFL's ability to make a fair fixture, as I know they have an obligation to fans and showing off the best teams at the best time, but I think that fixture is TERRIBLE for marketing purposes. As I said on Big Footy: You need a favorable fixture to better market your product. If you have the best show on TV, you're not going to put it on TV at 11pm on a Tuesday night. We're given a [censored] marketable fixture because the AFL doesn't have confidence in our brand. We'll win plenty of games next year. But that fixture doesn't nothing to get our brand out to the casual football fan, and those we're hoping to attract. Sorry for not being optimistic, but that's how I feel about that fixture. And it's funny, because in years past, everyone made a big fuss about the Sunday games making it difficult for us to promote our brand and make money. But now that all those Sunday games are against easy beats, it's suddenly OK... Consider we have a new logo, new direction, new brand. That fixture is terrible. Big test for the likes of Schwab and co. this season. Hopefully they can continue their great form off-field.

I'm looking at it from a marketing perspective. Quite a terrible fixture for making money. Great for onfield success, but we'll be hit hard in the first 10 rounds.

Yep, my bad. Missed the round 22 match. At least it's only 1, and at the end of the season. Great fixture for on-field, terrible for off-field. I can't imagine the club being particularly impressed.

Pros: 1. Pretty easy fixture. Only one trip to Perth. 2. No trip to Adelaide. Cons: 1. We do not have one home game at the MCG on a Saturday. 2. We play a HOME game against the EAGLES at ETIHAD on a SUNDAY at 1:10PM. FFS! Why Hawthorn has a home game on Saturday against Port, and we're delegated to Etihad on a Sunday against the Eagles is beyond me. 3. We have 5 home games against interstate clubs on a Sunday, 3 of which start at 1:10pm 4. We have four Etihad matches.

Melbourne vs. Collingwood round 1? That would be as big a test as this club has probably seen ever in its history. 1. Club recently out of debt. New rebranding. 2. Playing against easily the biggest sports club in the Australia - maximum exposure on the big stage. The big test would come in that this would be a Collingwood home game (because Queen's Birthday is ours) and so the Pies brand will be spread everywhere. The only way we'd at least make some ground is if we win and win well, which we could. But the flag unveiling would be quite the intimidation factor, especially with the crowd. It's a brilliant opportunity, but oh so tragically the big test we might not be ready for just yet. Our brand can either benefit more from a single game of football than we ever have in our history, or fail miserably and the current brand remains intact anyway, as a new brand with minimum exposure. But it won't happen. I think they'll put the Pies against a weaker club. The AFL wants this to be an all-Pies affair. There's no way the Eagles would upstage Collingwood at the MCG on a Saturday night. Brand Collingwood and the AFL would benefit most from a Pies win, and the AFL considers this when making the fixture, especially for round 1. They want Collingwood to be the LA Lakers of AFL. I don't imagine they'd put us up against them. If it would be a Melbourne team, it would be more of a modern day rival, like Bulldogs, or even Geelong.

Jamar is overrated? He wishes. And Jones is not underrated. He is very one dimensional, but a valuable player. I think most people appreciate him as such.

I love how three finalists and the 2008 and 2009 Premiers are on Fox, whereas the likes of Adelaide, Port Adelaide, Gold Coast, GWS, West Coast, Brisbane and Richmond are all on free-to-air...

Fixed for accuracy

So you supported a logo that represented us at quite possibly our lowest in the history of the club, a time when we came FAR closer to collapsing than we did back in 96 and at any other time? How exactly does that make it a fantastic logo? It was a complete annihilation of our culture, even going as far as to ditch our beloved, embraced mascot of the Demon. You don't do that, because even if you or I don't embrace that Demon, it's The Demons that won the 1964 Grand Final. Not "Melbourne FC". Or is it "Melbournefc", a rather hilariously moronic attempt at dressing up a bold and rather insulting corporate rebranding. That logo made this club appealing to conservative Chinese companies that were willing to break into Australia through cheap sponsorship. The logo means quite a lot, especially with a sports team that would be considered by a business team as an entertainment venture. Those in charge of the club at the time weren't willing to maintain the club's iconic history and culture, but were quite intent on taking the easy way out and dealing quite extensively with wealthy Chinese investors. They did that, and it failed miserably, perhaps bad kharma for ditching something so many people appreciated, all in favor of exploiting a land and hiding our fusion with a mascot as striking as the Demon. We went from having a decent brand, to having a grey corporate brand that had no history. This current logo might not last the ages, but it at least helps build the brand through messages. People will associate with it, and people want that sense of belonging (membership) and being part of something historically influential. This new logo screams all of those things in some way, even if it is Hollywood'd up to stand out. Our demon is part of our image, and to not reference it or show it is marketing suicide for a football club that has such a small brand anyway.