Little Goffy

Would've been an emotional day for CJ on Monday. Seeing Bell have another turd sandwich would've had him thinking he was finally back in. Then when Moloney got injured, it must have run through his head that he was definately going to be in next week. Must be an odd feeling, seeing a mate get hurt, or having a miserable day out, and knowing that it creates a huge opportunity for you.

It's becoming even more obvious that Yze_Magic is Bruce's abandoned illegitimate child... and that it was good old Mr & Mrs Sylvia up in Bendigo who took him in and cared for him. In fairness - Bruce had a pretty poor game, and his next contract should certainly not be any better than guys like Nathan Brown and Daniel Ward played out their careers on. Sylvia was very effective. I'd rate him as a legitimate and rapidly maturing player who may yet deliver something special. Other than that, I'd just like to say WONAEAMIRRI! Just for fun. He gives me little adrenalin rushes the same way Colin Garland and Matty Warnock are starting to give me deep sighs of relief and hope.

Bah. Malthouse is just grumpy 'cos Woey sat with the Red and Blue, instead of the filth. An truly inglorious exit from the club, but he still would rather be amongst us than that rabble.

Uhhh... Morton aced the beep test at draft camp, and his ability to run and run and run was one of the major points raised about his upside when we drafted him. He was also noted for his skills, so it's a shame there's been a couple of games where, I presume, he just got a little overwhelmed and careless with the kicking. It's worth noting that there's also been a few games where he has had just about our highest disposal efficiency (I think he was, for one game early in the year, outright best)

Sometime Caroline Wilson gives me the craps, sure. But I'll give her credit where it's due - she's just about the only true journalist, in the great tradition of the profession, covering AFL. A fair portion of her articles have actually been researched, and involved talking to people and doing some investigating. She's rarely doing summary, full of herself blasts about the latest team she wants to have a go at (hello Robert Walls) or writing self-indulgent 'here's how I felt' stories (eg. Flanagan, but at least his are sometimes interesting). Caroline Wilson remains Australian Football's best hope of piecing together all the $#^ that pours out of AFL HQ and constructing a compelling case to sack the bastard incumbents. That buys her a lot of patience from me.

6 - Mclean 5 - Garland 4 - Wonaeamirri 3 - Sylvia 2 - Jones 1 - Green Yze in the best? He went for two reckless snaps in the dying minutes when he had options closer to goal. I was furius, despite his otherwise ok game.

Yep. Bell had a true shocker today. Some of it was just plain bad luck. Plenty of it was just plain bad. To Sandringham for a while. If he's gonna get some decent form going it's gonna be with enough headspace - he is not going to improve or build confidence when he's being soundly beaten each week. Whelan, CJ and Petterd seem the options.

Actually, with the Gold Coast and boganville clubs being formed, looks like there might be a resurgence of zone selections, with ridiculous priviliedges, likely contending for premierships. But i'll be damned if want my club involved in that. <_<

Ahhh... Lovely. Totally inappropraite, but just such a clean slap. Nice work Gardner.

News just in - Hawthorrn vs Essendon at the Telstra dome just got 46,000, about the same as our game against the Hawks. Clearly, Essendon are in strife, and in danger of losing their big fixtures... Eg - Carlton, MCG, Saturday night, Bulldogs, TD, Friday night, Port Adelaide, TD, sunday Twilight Richmond, MCG, Saturday Night, Hawthorn, MCG, Saturday Night West Coast, TD, Friday Night, Brisbane, TD, Saturday Night Collingwood, MCG, Saturday, Melbourne, MCG, Saturday Adelaide, MCG, Saturday St. Kilda, TD, Sunday Twilight. So, more than half on either saturday or friday night, and the rest on saturday day time except for round 22 against St. Kilda, and the game against port. They also play ALL of Carlton, Richmond, Collingwood and St Kilda twice. Doesn't that include the "dreamtime at the 'G" and some modestly promoted game in late April? We would [censored] ourselves with joy if we had that set of fixtures next year, and still be laughing about it in 2010. Self-fullfilling prophecy, favouring the 'big-drawing' teams with better fixtures, and it drives me mad.

Of about 80 picks a year, one (obviously) is pick one. 22 players a year play in a premiership. Which, eventually, works out to one in four (22 in 80) players, putting aside the statistical problems of repeats. So, 2 number 1 draft picks to play in premierships would probably be a little low on the scale, over a decade and a half. Expecially considering the number of later picks which wouldn't have even played in a game, you'd expect a top pick to be more likely, rather than less. Of course, it's also an argument for 'crap teams actually stay crap'. This applies to Richmond and Carlton only. Obviously not Melbourne. I wonder which pick has played in the mos premiershipst? We should trade players to get as many as possible of that pick !!

I wouldn't so much say Daniher is 'to blame', but obviously the situation we found ourselves in at the start of the 'Bailey Era' is the situation we were left with when Daniher finished. Daniher attempted to win a premiership, and recruited some veterans with that in mind - Bizzell, Read, Holland and Pickett most obviously - possibly at an overly high price in some cases. He also held onto other veteran players which we my have been tempted to delist earlier if we'd been thinking more long term - Ward, Brown, Nicholson. The last few years before the changeover saw very limited turnover, only the minimum three or four picks each draft. In the end, we've been left with an odd demographic with a clump of older players now retiring or about to retire, plus a big wave of younger players from last years (and this years, and next years) drafts. The older players have also not being performing at an elite level in many cases, which has hurt. So, Daniher's objectives see us in the crapper now, but I can't have a problem with the man for putting everything into trying to win a premiership. To blame Bailey after half a season is a little silly though. Makes more sense to blame Riley (the bastard cost us pick 17 last year and the extra pick at 1 this year, with his stupid beating of Carlton and the Dogs.)

Yep. Thread is just an insult to all of us who actualy care if there is any news. Get your hand off it 'realist' - this corner of the world mysteriously doesn't revolve around you and you're just going to have to live with that.

Ho hum. Gee it's fun to have a go, isn't it? I was gonna write a full rebuttal with draft analysis and comparison, but stuff it. W've done pretty well with drafts in the last few years, though we had a bit dip around 01. Molan and Smith were mistakes in the end, as much through peristent injury, if that can be called a recruiter's mistake so be it. And if anyone dares to say "look at who we could've had after that pick" I'll make a point of abusing every post they make for a month - that kind of idiotic illogical garbage just gives me the prize $#^#s. And Yze? You're kidding that you think CAC was anything to do with his selection, right? And you know what, for a mid-first-round selection from the early 90's, he hasn't been a bad contributor, what with the hundreds of games and goals, regular placings in the B&F, All Australian selection and so forth.

Fevola? Eww.. Nup.

Demetriou is bringing up the threat of excluding us from the QB game because it's all they have left to threaten us with. Once the Balance fund dries up, and with us already having just about the worst fixture possible, commercially speaking, there's not actually anything left the AFL can take away from us. And once we're in a position with nothing to lose... Well. The AFL will get a sustained earful from a club which has been callously targeted for years by the incompetent and reactive 'leadership' of the AFL under Demetriou. Queen's Birthday fixtures, a record which apparently leaves us in a precarious position - 2007 - 70,660 2006 - 78,773 2005 - 65,347 2004 - 56,988, (Collingwood were having a bad year, and as we know, they don't turn up when the going is tough) 2003 - 60,010 2002 - 65,860 2001 - 62,761 2000 - was played on saturday? Actually, that looks to me like a general growth pattern, which may suffer a hiccup this year, but it's not like this is the kind of administratoin which would pursue a radical knee-jerk reaction to essentially a non-problem. Oh dear, I can see it now - all patrons to submit paperwork notifying AFL officials of each game they will attend for the coming year, and clubs to be awarded 50m penalties if their opponent's supporters leave the gate area too early. Of course, I'd be happy to play two games a year against Collingwood, if the present fixturing arrangement is deemed too advantageous for our club...

It’s a myth that Melbourne supporters aren’t turning up, it’s a myth that we aren’t buying memberships. Our resilience has been excellent in the face of great adversity, drawing attendances higher than two other clubs who both have on-field results in their favour. I’m not asking for the other small Victorian clubs to get bashed. I just don’t want mine being bashed all the time by the very people who supposedly are tasked with promoting the AFL brand. Constant talk of our demise and failure, while ultimately false, is enough to truly undermine sponsorship opportunities and morale at the club. Anyone with an internet connection can investigate for themselves, through sites like footywire.com. Average attendances at home games 2008 – Melbourne – 33,336 Bulldogs – 33,233 Kangaroos – 29,217 (note Gold Coast game, the in-Melbourne Average is about that of the other two) The spread of opponent drawing power and fixture times at homes games has been roughly even for these three clubs (yes, they are all being screwed in that way) However, we have matched the attendances of both of these clubs, one of which is copping no heat whatsoever (Bulldogs) and the other has been explicitly congratulated by the AFL for it’s turnaround (Kangaroos). Our Queen’s birthday game against the Pies will push our overall home game attendance average even further ahead of these two clubs. All this despite our most miserable year on-field in a very long time, and despite both of these teams traveling well on field and receiving boosts off-field (the Kangaroo ‘fightback’ momentum, the Bulldog’s heavy government funding for facilities). Just compare - Bulldogs, currently in 3rd with 8 wins and a draw from 10 matches. Kangaroos, currently in 8th with 5 wins and a draw from ten matches. Melbourne, currently in 16th with 1 win from 10 matches.

I'm starting to warm to Naitanui. It's all the talk about Jimmy Stynes lately... I went back to read some comments and descriptions of his play, and to look at some stats. There is definate value in ultra-mobile ruckman/midfielders, I think. And I think there is also great scope for redirecting our China Strategy to a Fiji strategy, the market may be smaller but some people over there might actually care. How awesome would an occasional midwinter fixture in Suva be? Maybe against the Gold Coast team? We'd get five thousand turning just cos of the hype and the novelty in Fiji, and Melbourne based people could make it a great excuse for a winter holiday. I'd better stop - I'm starting to talk myself into thinking it's not a bad idea.

Age Article Hey- there it is. Apologies if this link is already in. Now all we have to do is trawl through the posts to find exactly who suggested this first - I definately remember seeing exactly this design (simple reversal of red and blue) being mentoined by someone. The extra red looks pretty damn good, actually. Stranger, come forward and receive your acclamation! As to how we ended up the the travesty-wear - The club slipped it into a member survey, giving us the option of three designs, each worse than the previous. They really were all shocking. I think even I picked the silver as best of a bad lot. There was no 'anything else, please' option. So, they had their handy feedback telling them what they wanted (it was clear a decision had already been made before the consultation) and they off and ran with 'awful design number three'. I would like the individual to step forward, who not only proposed the design, but also biased the survey structure so grossly to favour that option. It rankles of not only incompetence but even of some kind of shifty trading. Come to think of it. I WANT TO KNOW WHO HAS BEEN MAKING THE STEADY STREAM OF IDIOTIC DECISIONS AT THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB. 1. the clash jumper and survey design. 2. the failure to run quality assurance on the stickers and merchandise last year. 3. the damn foolery of obliging members to accept a crappy tie or half baked pashmena scarf (stinks of kickback from makers) instead of making their own major merchandise decisions. 4. the apparent failure to invite the current players to the 150th dinner (thank Chroist and McNamee that has been corrected) 5. the routine faliure to properly promote events to supporters - to the point where players are coming to undersubscribed events and fans are wondering why they never get to see players. 6. the decision to actually promote the sterotype undermining our reputation, with the snow day at the 'G, the mini-promotions at perisher and so forth. Do people not understand that developing our brand in a self-destructive direction actually reduces our other sponsorship options. 7. the failure to develop Team Melbourne into anything meaningful. 8. the pursuit of the China 'Strategy' like it was a mild whim, and the failure to bring any substance to it. 9. the complete absence of grass-roots network marketing, promotions, or even recognition for members. 10 and where the f$%# is my 'signed birthday card'? Seven years a member and still never got one. We have half a dozen event managers on our staff! WTF? What do they do all day? I want some frickin accountability. I'M MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANY MORE. McNamee give me hope, but next time I get down to Melbourne I'm gonna physically sit in people's offices until I get some answers. I'll notify on here and we can form a crowd.

My point wasn't to suggest that Green or Rivers are as good or as valuable as Simon Black (who I acknowledge as a true great of the game), but rather to emphasise that trading players in their late twenties isn't necessarily a path to glory. I used Black as the example specifically because it would be so foolish to ditch him (but think of the draft picks! think of the draft picks!) Our problem is that our veterans have crumbled in our hands. Neitz, Robertson, Yze, Holland and even White and McDonald are all either injured, fading or just not quite great. We actually have a SHORTAGE of experienced quality players, which is a problem whether you're trying to finish one spot ahead of the spoon or one spot ahead of the other grand finalist. You don't trade away what you have a shortage of (quality experienced players) to get something you have lots of (draft picks, including probably three top-20 picks as it is).

Grr... I suppose Brisbane should've traded Simon Black two years ago? They did, though, trade Akermanis. For pick 30ish. We did our version of that trade (to Brisbane, even) and got pick 14 for Johnstone. But I'm going to now commit to not getting involved in this further - if people could periodically refer to the following points, then I'll still be having my say - 1. We have a large stock of very young players, backed by a strong development coahcing unit and a head coach who firmly believes in focusing on development. 2. Trading even the better players rarely gets more than a late first round draft pick. 3. An extra draft pick here and there is overrated as a path to the top of the ladder. 4. Brad Green has five years left, which will be very good. 5. The rest of our veteran players are considerably older/injury prone and likely to retire (or already have) within the next 18 months. 6. Matthew Bate and Cale Morton will constitue one of the best HF lines in the game very soon. So who knows what else comes next?

I stand ready to shake Paul Gardners hand and wish him well, when he does go. A responsible and hard-working president when the club desperately needed exactly that. We'd be toast by now if we'd landed another Szondy or Gutnick. While I agree I'd like to know more about what the new leadership will be up to, I'm quietly confident it won't be the half-arsed leadership which came to be expected at the board in years past. Gardner has played a big part in changing that expectation, and whatever Stynes and his team can accomplish will be that much more achievable because of Gardner's steady hand.

Seriously, someone needs to at least let the players know about this. You rode a bike from Perth to Melbourne to get to the Queens Birthday game? Was it for a charity promotional thing? If it was, add an extra round of publicity by attaching it to the game, and give the players their weekly inspiriation. These little things change the way people look at things.

I can only assume Chuck Norris was involved.

I'm convinced that even if you're a member it still earns the club some money to turn up to games. Here comes some thinking out loud, bear with me - My understanding is that the club gets a kind of a 'bounty' based on how many people turn up to eat the stadium's "food", drink it's beer and throw chips at it's seagulls. Gate takings are only one aspect; three beers, a hot dog and a bucket of chips works out to aboout... $127 at the MCG... or... Lets say a typical patron buys between $10 and $20 worth of 'stuff', on top of gate. 10,000 people means $100,000 to $200,000 worth of crap sold, with a pretty small margin of the total price going to actual expenses (plastic cups, a paper bag, payment to the pigeon/rat catcher, plus a courtesy stomach pump for every tenth visitor). The bigger the crowd, the smaller the relative costs get because an unused bar has the same expenses as a full one. So, just on food and drinks you could easily see a half million gross profit from a 50,000 crowd. Sponsors and those annoying ads bring in some more. Then of course you've got corporate boxes, and finally the gate takings from non-members (plus those who have upgraded their seat beyond their normal member entitlement). If I was making a wild guess, I'd say it's worth about $10 a head for the Melbourne Football Club, with a 20,000 attendance breaking even and a 50,000 attendance bringing us $300,000, a good cut of the afternoon's take, which would likely be approaching a cool million overall. A boutique stadium has, obviously, much lower initial capital costs (MCG is well into the hundreds of millions to build, 800 sounds right but I'm not sure) as well as much smaller overheads to keep all of it's facilities open on gameday. Lets presume the club's cut at a small stadium is much better. 25,000 people might make the stadium three hundred thousand, of which we could reasonably hope to get a hundred an fifty? So still $10 a head, but with a break-even at 10,000 instead of twenty. Ok, I'm done thinking out loud, anyone else want a go?