Westaway joins the fray
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Westaway is saying that the biggest revenue issues at the moment are gate receipts, stadium deals and probably memberships (even though he didn't mention it explicitly).
Question: Why is football popular and what makes a person barrack and then fork out money to become a member of a club?
Answer (imo): Because they attended enough games in person to grow a fondness for that club and convert their hard earned into a financial bond with the club. Not from watching it on TV. Not from and AFL or club promotion. Not from hearing from so and so that X is a good team to go for (although that does start the young kids following)
So what am I trying to say? That if people don't get to go to games for whatever reason: Stadium admission expense, night/twilight games, games sold interstate...they lose their affinity with the club, become empathetic and don't turn up, meaning the club doesn't get there money anymore.
Regardless of what the AFL bend the clubs over a barrel for (even the rich ones), match fixtures are paramount the health of both the clubs and the AFL competition as a whole and right now it is bent way too far towards just the TV audience.
In my opinion this is becoming unhealthy and cannot be sustained and definitely needs to be looked at further.
Off my soapbox now! :D
Question: Why is football popular and what makes a person barrack and then fork out money to become a member of a club?
Answer (imo): Because they attended enough games in person to grow a fondness for that club and convert their hard earned into a financial bond with the club. Not from watching it on TV. Not from and AFL or club promotion. Not from hearing from so and so that X is a good team to go for (although that does start the young kids following)
So what am I trying to say? That if people don't get to go to games for whatever reason: Stadium admission expense, night/twilight games, games sold interstate...they lose their affinity with the club, become empathetic and don't turn up, meaning the club doesn't get there money anymore.
Regardless of what the AFL bend the clubs over a barrel for (even the rich ones), match fixtures are paramount the health of both the clubs and the AFL competition as a whole and right now it is bent way too far towards just the TV audience.
In my opinion this is becoming unhealthy and cannot be sustained and definitely needs to be looked at further.
Off my soapbox now! :D
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
To go with the horse racing analogy....
A gun horse in an 8 horse field, has a better chance of winning than if it's in a 24 horse field.
It's ability doesn't change, but the probability of it winning changes due to the increase in variables being added in.
And that's where it's gets harder for clubs.
Each year, there's really only 4 teams that are fair dinkum. You need to be one of those 4, then corss your fingers come finals time that tihngs go your way and you pinch a flag.
With an 18 or 20 team comp, there's a distinct chance (especially with the way the AFL are pumping money and resources into the new clubs) that you might find that there are 5-6 clubs that are fair dinkum each year.
The other thing that makes it tough, is that it will take longer to 'bottom out'.
The comp is very uneven in terms of the standard of the top teams compared to the bottom teams.
In the AFL, the cycle is pretty quick. You're up the top, then you can be down the bottom very, very quickly - sometimes within a year or so. The only way to get back up, is to get good kids, which only happens from being down the bottom.
With 18-20 teams, there's a big chance that it will take longer to get to the bottom.
So in the future, you may not bottom out within a year or so. It may take 3-4 years to slowly become shithouse, and you may be fighting over Draft picks with 3-4 clubs instead of 1 or 2.
So these days, you bottom out and score 3-4 really decent picks, in the future you may only get 1-2. So it will take longer to rebuild.
I just wonder how many fans will hang around for 7-8 years for their team to come good, instead of the current 3-4 cycle that seems to happen.
A gun horse in an 8 horse field, has a better chance of winning than if it's in a 24 horse field.
It's ability doesn't change, but the probability of it winning changes due to the increase in variables being added in.
And that's where it's gets harder for clubs.
Each year, there's really only 4 teams that are fair dinkum. You need to be one of those 4, then corss your fingers come finals time that tihngs go your way and you pinch a flag.
With an 18 or 20 team comp, there's a distinct chance (especially with the way the AFL are pumping money and resources into the new clubs) that you might find that there are 5-6 clubs that are fair dinkum each year.
The other thing that makes it tough, is that it will take longer to 'bottom out'.
The comp is very uneven in terms of the standard of the top teams compared to the bottom teams.
In the AFL, the cycle is pretty quick. You're up the top, then you can be down the bottom very, very quickly - sometimes within a year or so. The only way to get back up, is to get good kids, which only happens from being down the bottom.
With 18-20 teams, there's a big chance that it will take longer to get to the bottom.
So in the future, you may not bottom out within a year or so. It may take 3-4 years to slowly become shithouse, and you may be fighting over Draft picks with 3-4 clubs instead of 1 or 2.
So these days, you bottom out and score 3-4 really decent picks, in the future you may only get 1-2. So it will take longer to rebuild.
I just wonder how many fans will hang around for 7-8 years for their team to come good, instead of the current 3-4 cycle that seems to happen.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2011 3:26pm
I'm confused, didn't we sign the deal to play at Docklands? I can't remember what happened, but didn't we have the choice of what ground to play at?
While we are obviously being "stiffed" in terms of what we should get, I would have thought that we should have negotiated a better deal to begin with - or we should have gone elsewhere.
While we are obviously being "stiffed" in terms of what we should get, I would have thought that we should have negotiated a better deal to begin with - or we should have gone elsewhere.
Easy Solution for the AFL, introduce 3 Conferences of 6
You play your Conference H&A, and Half of each of the other Conferences at Home and the Other Half Away then next year you switch which one you played at home and which you played away.
The Finals are made up of either:
Conference winners + next best 5 records with the Conference winners making up the top 3 and the best record of the rest of the qualifiers taking the final double chance.
or
Top 2 from each Conference + next best 2 records. Conference winners making up the top 3 and the best record of the rest of the qualifiers taking the final double chance.
That way you have a 1 in 6 chance of winning a Conference Title and 1 in 18 chance of a Premiership.
More things to win, fairer draw.
Conference shoulds be set up as
2WA + Essendon or Carlton + Richmond or Hawthorn + 2 Other Vic
2QLD + Essendon or Carlton + Richmond or Hawthorn + 2 Other Vic
2SA + Collingwood + Melbourne + 2 NSW
That travel is more equal, teams will have to travel similar distances.
the 2 + 2 + 2 conference will travel slightly more but only shorter trips compared to the others.
The Fixtureing could be set that of the teams interstate not in you conference you only play one from each state home and one from each state away.
i.e. if you are in the Qld Conference 1 year you wouild play Freo at Home and West Coast Away and the next it would be West Coast at Home and Freo away.
You play your Conference H&A, and Half of each of the other Conferences at Home and the Other Half Away then next year you switch which one you played at home and which you played away.
The Finals are made up of either:
Conference winners + next best 5 records with the Conference winners making up the top 3 and the best record of the rest of the qualifiers taking the final double chance.
or
Top 2 from each Conference + next best 2 records. Conference winners making up the top 3 and the best record of the rest of the qualifiers taking the final double chance.
That way you have a 1 in 6 chance of winning a Conference Title and 1 in 18 chance of a Premiership.
More things to win, fairer draw.
Conference shoulds be set up as
2WA + Essendon or Carlton + Richmond or Hawthorn + 2 Other Vic
2QLD + Essendon or Carlton + Richmond or Hawthorn + 2 Other Vic
2SA + Collingwood + Melbourne + 2 NSW
That travel is more equal, teams will have to travel similar distances.
the 2 + 2 + 2 conference will travel slightly more but only shorter trips compared to the others.
The Fixtureing could be set that of the teams interstate not in you conference you only play one from each state home and one from each state away.
i.e. if you are in the Qld Conference 1 year you wouild play Freo at Home and West Coast Away and the next it would be West Coast at Home and Freo away.
Last edited by Ice Wolf on Thu 11 Aug 2011 2:36pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
When we signed that deal, we didn't really have much bargaining power.SainterSoul wrote:I'm confused, didn't we sign the deal to play at Docklands? I can't remember what happened, but didn't we have the choice of what ground to play at?
While we are obviously being "stiffed" in terms of what we should get, I would have thought that we should have negotiated a better deal to begin with - or we should have gone elsewhere.
It was locked in money (the gate was guaranteed) which was what we needed to get us out of the s***.
The catch of course was, that when we hit our straps, the deal was costing us money.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2011 3:26pm
- stevie
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4898
- Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2010 9:09am
- Location: Gold Coast
- Has thanked: 194 times
- Been thanked: 144 times
We haven't been in 10 Grand Finals?plugger66 wrote:Are we talking about 2 teams or 22. Not a great example but no worse than your lotto one. Can please explain any logic in that all. How many flags have we won. One. How many years have we played. 114. How many sides have we played against. Between 4 and 17. Has GC made it harder for anyone likely to win the flag this year. No.matrix wrote:if theres two teams in the league you reckon they have the same chance of winning a flag if there was 22 teams in the league??
if yes, it would explain a lot around here
Why will not anyone answer why we havent got about 10 flags.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
The deals have now changed at both Etihad and the G where you have to make a minimum of 100K what ever is the crowd. You can obviously make more than that like we will on Friday.Johnny Member wrote:When we signed that deal, we didn't really have much bargaining power.SainterSoul wrote:I'm confused, didn't we sign the deal to play at Docklands? I can't remember what happened, but didn't we have the choice of what ground to play at?
While we are obviously being "stiffed" in terms of what we should get, I would have thought that we should have negotiated a better deal to begin with - or we should have gone elsewhere.
It was locked in money (the gate was guaranteed) which was what we needed to get us out of the s***.
The catch of course was, that when we hit our straps, the deal was costing us money.
You have previously tole me they didnt try hard enough. Surely you can make up your mind.Johnny Member wrote:How did you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate North to the Gold Coast?plugger66 wrote:I am sorry I see the big picture and I am also sorry i want to keep all the clubs in the AFL.
I certainly dont want to lose 5 weeks and am pretty sure many others dont either but even forgetting that is the fact you would get much less for the TV rights and I doubt any player would take a pay cut even though they play less games. I know they cant just up and leave because there is no where else to go but it would be very harsh to take a 20% pay cut. Also less money for the AFL means clubs will go for sure. Less sponsorship for the clubs as well.stevie wrote:My main gripe with the fixture is teams playing each other twice before they've even plated another team once. Ludicrous!
And I wouldn't gave a prob with only 17 games from next year, with annual rotating of venue
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18599
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1924 times
- Been thanked: 852 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
24 hour football, 365 days a year.
It's the only answer.
It's the only answer.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
plugger66 wrote:You have previously tole me they didnt try hard enough. Surely you can make up your mind.Johnny Member wrote:How did you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate North to the Gold Coast?plugger66 wrote:I am sorry I see the big picture and I am also sorry i want to keep all the clubs in the AFL.
How do you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate a Melbourne club?
I think it is a good idea if they want to go. They havent desperately done it yet though. They have tried through endorsements but it hasnt been taken up.Johnny Member wrote:plugger66 wrote:You have previously tole me they didnt try hard enough. Surely you can make up your mind.Johnny Member wrote:How did you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate North to the Gold Coast?plugger66 wrote:I am sorry I see the big picture and I am also sorry i want to keep all the clubs in the AFL.
How do you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate a Melbourne club?
- Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
So you don't want to keep all clubs? And the AFL doesn't either?plugger66 wrote:I think it is a good idea if they want to go. They havent desperately done it yet though. They have tried through endorsements but it hasnt been taken up.Johnny Member wrote:plugger66 wrote:You have previously tole me they didnt try hard enough. Surely you can make up your mind.Johnny Member wrote:How did you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate North to the Gold Coast?plugger66 wrote:I am sorry I see the big picture and I am also sorry i want to keep all the clubs in the AFL.
How do you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate a Melbourne club?
You're all over the place now.
That is a confusing statement. Is sydney not a club? Tell my mate who played at Sth melbourne they have nothing to do with sydney or his dad who also played there.Johnny Member wrote:So you don't want to keep all clubs? And the AFL doesn't either?plugger66 wrote:I think it is a good idea if they want to go. They havent desperately done it yet though. They have tried through endorsements but it hasnt been taken up.Johnny Member wrote:plugger66 wrote:You have previously tole me they didnt try hard enough. Surely you can make up your mind.Johnny Member wrote:How did you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate North to the Gold Coast?plugger66 wrote:I am sorry I see the big picture and I am also sorry i want to keep all the clubs in the AFL.
How do you feel about the AFL desperately trying to relocate a Melbourne club?
You're all over the place now.