Straight Sets Simon

Fair enough. Just putting it out there.

I realise that most people are from up Melbourne way so it might be a big hassle, but I wonder what the chances are of playing the game at Casey Fields? Preferably while the team isn't there, we can't have them being critical of the way we play football... There are a few grounds there and they always seem to be in good nick. Just a thought.

Preference for a Sunday at this point and that shouldn't change.

Now that my exams have finished I would seriously consider playing depending on the day that is chosen.

I don't like those pages at all because if anything people will not want to go to the site because it will be more (even marginally) of a hassle. A good website for the MFC should be one where you can quickly pop on and see the latest news and updates or one where you can browse in your leisure reading articles and features.

I pretty much agree with all of that.

One thing that I need to add is that no matter how strong, creative or innovative a marketing campaign is, on-field performances are still going to be the number one influential factor.

I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

A bit of background information First of all, I find that the term "brand" gets thrown around a lot as it seems to be the new buzz word. For those who don't know, it refers to the perception that a person has about a firm based on personal experience with, or information about that particular firm. My idea looks at addressing the Melbourne Football Club brand and using it to attract new and old supporters as well as potential sponsors. Idea The ideas that I have are by no means earth-shattering and a lot of them probably aren't necessarily new. What I want to do is take a whole lot of bits and pieces and put them into a grand vision for the Melbourne Football Club. After seeing the thread about a potential new MFC logo, I was drawn to the idea of having different logos (and brands) for the team (Demons logo, fearsome and more aggressive) and the club (MFC monogram, more traditional). That is, the club (administration and corporate affairs) and the team (players and coaching staff) are seen as separate, whilst still being connected. This would already be done to a point, but it always isn't so obvious. Here on Demonland there has been much debate about the logo and whether or not to bring the Demon back or to continue with a more conservative logo. I say do both and there two main reasons why. 1) A possible connection with Casey 2) A possible connection back with the MCC Each of these possibilities throw up a lot of opportunities for the MFC, the interesting part is that the opportunities couldn't be more different. - A move to Casey (in whatever capacity) is an opportunity to tap into high growth outer area that is likely to be made up of low-to middle income families, many of which may have children (at a guess). - A reunion (of sorts) with the MCC is a chance to be reconnected with the club's old, traditional and conservative roots right in the heart of the city. It is clear that for each of these situations, what appeals to one market isn't likely to appeal to the other and hence the split personality approach. The Demon The key with a move to Casey is to attract the kids. Excluding the football side of things for a moment, I can't imagine too many kids getting excited about an MFC monogram (or any other traditional branding), even with "Rotten Ronald Deeman" as the mascot. In my opinion, the strength for Casey is in the "Demons" as "Melbourne" would have little significance for many kids, let alone those who don't live anywhere near the city. It might sound a little tacky, but the Demons need to be feared, they need to be strong and they need to be ruthless. Kids these days don't want to follow the "Fuschias" (thank you Checker Hughes). Therefore, an appropriate Demon logo would be made up that would be used as a team logo, on merchandise, used in newspapers, official website etc. As far as sponsorship goes, I believe that the ideal sponsor would be Snickers. Their whole advertising campaign at the moment is based on the "Get Some Nuts" promotion and would fit in nicely with the revamped Demon image and persona. According this article the Snickers target market is males aged 15 - 25 years of age, which would also fit in with a Demon Casey target market (Demon target market may be slightly younger). Currently, Snickers focus a lot of their marketing communication on the sponsorship of sports in the US (notably NFL and NASCAR) and they have whole section on their website dedicated to sports sponsorship. The other advantage is that Melbourne have already done some promotional work with Snickers and Mr T (the face of Snickers). Snickers isn't the only option, but just one that I thought may be appropriate. MFC On the other end of the scale, there is the MCC. This relationship would be more about reconnecting with people from the past as opposed to connecting with new people. As a result, the return of the MFC monogram as a second logo and on an alternate jumper would be fitting more fitting. The target market here would most likely be made up of older, wealthier and more conservative people who may have a connection with the corporate side of the club. Conclusion A point that I want to make clear is that I'm not saying that people are either Casey or MCC. It's all still the same thing, the same club and the same team that wears red and blue. My idea is that within the club, there can be two parts , each that appeal to different supporters and each that have their own benefits. The AFL have said that Melbourne don't stand for anything, well here's an idea to have two brands with one club and one team united.

I don't mind the idea of having two logos, one the more traditional (this one) and another more fearsome Demon. The idea being that the Demon is the team logo (i.e. the logo used in the newspaper) and the traditional one is used for the club (administration type things). Either that or I'm just over-analysing it all.

I'm not fussed about CJ. I am however disappointed that Valenti wasn't promoted. He showed a hell of a lot in the limited time he got this year.

I'm happy with it. I like the cut of his jib. He' s a smart guy who knows what it takes to be successful.

It's called 'Competitive Balance'. I don't have time now, but when my exams are over I'll try and put my two cents worth into the matter.

Just call it "Docklands". Problem solved.

FB: Whelan Warnock Garland HB: Petterd Martin Grimes C: Morton Moloney Green HF: Sylvia Rivers Davey FF: Wonaeamirri Miller Maric Foll: PJ McLean Valenti* Int: Jamar Buckley Bate Bruce Emergency: Jones Dunn Newton *Pending promotion from Rookie List. NOTE: This is assuming that Robertson isn't quite ready. EDIT: I forgot about McDonald.

John Faine is one of the best presenters and interviewers on radio. He is far more reasonable and balanced than someone like Neil Mitchell.

Haven't the Saints moved from Frankston to Seaford? Not a big difference, but a little closer.

Beat me to it. My question: Were the team competitive this season?

In the video on the MFC website with Bailey being interviewed the other day, Paul Johnson looked absolutely massive. He's always been big but his arms looked huge.

By playing someone purely as a "tagger" it is implied that their primary focus is to stop another player. I prefer players who go, get their own ball, attack and make things happen but when they don't have the ball, they man-up.

Taggers are overrated IMO. What Dunn could offer as a forward outweighs his benefit as a tagger.

Being a decent tagger is like being the world's biggest midget. He needs consistent game time up forward, however he is probably more of a flanker as opposed to the key position we hoped that he would develop into.

Give me Daniel Bell ahead of a late draft pick any day. Dunn needs to be played forward. Moloney needs to be fit. CJ probably saved his career (in the short-run at least). Whelan still has a fair bit of good quality football left in him.

Post of the year.

Wasn't he told not to come to training until all of the off-field stuff with his management was sorted out?