A.F.L. Thread II

[Spikey]

probably "Or just stopped supporting a team passionately at all?". Going to Brisbane would have been particularly hurtful 'cause a merger with North Melbourne (?. Pretty sure it was them) was approved by the fans but rejected by the other clubs. So instead of staying in Melbourne they've been pissed off to Brisbane.

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by Jono

Question to you all: If you were a 30 year old Fitzroy fan who lived in Melbourne and had supported the team your whole life... would you have gone on to support Brisbane following the Fitzroy merger? Or chosen another Melbourne club? Or just stopped supporting a team passionately at all?

Was having a chat to my mates on the way to the footy on Sunday, and wondering your opinion. They all said they would not have supported Brisbane, which I found interesting.

As a sort of related note, what kind of fans are going to follow the Gold Coast?

I'd guess anyone from there with AFL interest has pledged their troth to another team already. I suppose kids may start to follow them but (if they're anything like English kids) tend to be attracted to success so the team will need to be less arse soonish.

Can't imagine currently playing "home" games in Brisbane helping either.

[Jono]

I reckon the Gold Coast being **** whilst Brisbane are **** will help them a lot to be honest.

I daresay some behind the Gold Coast setup are much happier now than they were 12 months ago when Brisbane were 3-0 (or was it 4-0?) and looking like they'd be a top 4 contender.

[Redbacks]

Originally Posted by Spikey

probably "Or just stopped supporting a team passionately at all?". Going to Brisbane would have been particularly hurtful 'cause a merger with North Melbourne (?. Pretty sure it was them) was approved by the fans but rejected by the other clubs. So instead of staying in Melbourne they've been pissed off to Brisbane.

Sums up the position of 60-70% of the SA football fans, Port still have a club, but the rest of us born before 1990 only have a franchi$e in the Crows. Despite the initial enthusiasm the reality still remained that a lot of people had supported their SANFL clubs for 30-50 years often across multiple generations and a merger/franchise just feels empty. Like the big bash teams, a state team with 100+ years of history to be overtaken by big business interests rather than community spirit.

It will work in the long run I guess. The AFL brand stinks in my opinion and survives purely because they are able to leverage off the fact that the 10 Victorian teams are still 'clubs' and still have a massive cultural meaning in the state. If that starts to break down, I don't think the current operating model would last. The stadium deals are horrible and the AFL stitched up the teams big time, and the 'don't ask don't tell' attitude of the TV rights deal has consistently devalued the integrity of the comp with the infiltration of gambling and beer advertisements into the general coverage of the sport in order to keep the deal profitable for 7 and 10.

When you ask the North/Hawthorn/Melb people to save the club, you get a mass uprising of support. Ask a franchise and people look to blame the current owners or the admin of the league, it's just not the same.

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Richmond vs Collingwood
Hawthorn vs West Coast
Carlton vs Essendon
Sydney vs Geelong
Port Adelaide vs Adelaide
Gold Coast vs Melbourne
Fremantle vs North Melbourne

[benchmark00]

Originally Posted by Redbacks

Sums up the position of 60-70% of the SA football fans, Port still have a club, but the rest of us born before 1990 only have a franchi$e in the Crows. Despite the initial enthusiasm the reality still remained that a lot of people had supported their SANFL clubs for 30-50 years often across multiple generations and a merger/franchise just feels empty. Like the big bash teams, a state team with 100+ years of history to be overtaken by big business interests rather than community spirit.

It will work in the long run I guess. The AFL brand stinks in my opinion and survives purely because they are able to leverage off the fact that the 10 Victorian teams are still 'clubs' and still have a massive cultural meaning in the state. If that starts to break down, I don't think the current operating model would last. The stadium deals are horrible and the AFL stitched up the teams big time, and the 'don't ask don't tell' attitude of the TV rights deal has consistently devalued the integrity of the comp with the infiltration of gambling and beer advertisements into the general coverage of the sport in order to keep the deal profitable for 7 and 10.

When you ask the North/Hawthorn/Melb people to save the club, you get a mass uprising of support. Ask a franchise and people look to blame the current owners or the admin of the league, it's just not the same.

At the same time the AFL's hand was forced to some degree when establishing a team in SA. If it called it Port Adelaide then you'd have the Port Magpies fans who would've jizzed in their pants and loved it, then you'd have the rest who have grown up watching the SANFL who have been taught to hate Port because they were the tall poppies. The way to create a team to have the most support is by neutralising it. Sure, you may not have the vicious die hard support you'd get from a team on tribal lines, but you'd sell out games.

Despite your obvious distaste for the way they set up the Crows, the AFL brand is the strongest sporting brand in Australia, and will continue to be for the rest of our lives.

[Redbacks]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

At the same time the AFL's hand was forced to some degree when establishing a team in SA. If it called it Port Adelaide then you'd have the Port Magpies fans who would've jizzed in their pants and loved it, then you'd have the rest who have grown up watching the SANFL who have been taught to hate Port because they were the tall poppies. The way to create a team to have the most support is by neutralising it. Sure, you may not have the vicious die hard support you'd get from a team on tribal lines, but you'd sell out games.

Despite your obvious distaste for the way they set up the Crows, the AFL brand is the strongest sporting brand in Australia, and will continue to be for the rest of our lives.

Yes, but I am far from in the minority view, the AFL brand is fine, but the viability of its licenses in SA are currently struggling, we do have the history of port 'selling out' the rest of the clubs as we knew it then in 1990. However looking back, only the diehards of that generation still hold a massive grudge. More realist supporters seeing the national comp now accept it was just bound to happen anyway once the 'west was won'. Port were a big fish in a small pond they were becoming too big for and wanted to take it to the next level. What they didn't fully calculate was that success attracted a lot of hangers on and given the working class area the club built its foundation on, the history was 'win the flag and the people of Port Adelaide will be alright', with stories of the players being spat on if they returned to the club after a loss (that honour now the honour goes to Eddie) further evidence of the only the results being important to some rather than the actual institution itself.

Now with a salary cap and a draft based league, the area is switching off and in only representing 1/9th of the state, I don't think it's a viable long term product. Nobody will support them who doesn't support their SANFL club via family ties and the birth rate in the zone is hardly inspiring, 8/9 talented kids will be nurtured at a junior footy club told to hate Port, their fans are ferals and maybe only a few 'casuals' will come along for the ride when there is success. The Crows, they are owned by a bureaucracy and run like one, the most boring brand in the world with a ban on self-criticism to maintain the ‘strong state of the leadership’ they have never, ever, ever admitted publically they made a mistake! Blight was the pinnacle only because he brought the Victorian no bull**** swagger to the club and cracked some eggs.

What the Vic press never state, but all the NSW press aren’t afraid to say is that the reasons for weakness potentially stem back to the loss of ‘tribal nature’ at the games, marketing people in SA certainly understand the message, as there is nothing better than talking about a win on the weekend at work over a fellow worker from the other club, or watching loads of guys you went to school with play. With AFL teams, there is something counterfeit about it. I don’t care whether a team beats Richmond/Essendon etc. it’s just another club, just like they couldn’t give two hoots about beating Adelaide but will salvage a crap season by beating Carlton or the Pies twice, or watching them progressively be knocked out of the finals.

[vic_orthdox]

Originally Posted by Spikey

why would a person piss on a bar...?

Hilarious gag, ftr.

[howardj]

Richmond vs Collingwood
Hawthorn vs West Coast
Carlton vs Essendon
Sydney vs Geelong
Port Adelaide vs Adelaide
Gold Coast vs Melbourne
Fremantle vs North Melbourne

[superkingdave]

Richmond vs Collingwood
Hawthorn vs West Coast
Carlton vs Essendon
Sydney vs Geelong
Port Adelaide vs Adelaide
Gold Coast vs Melbourne
Fremantle vs North Melbourne

[Jono]

Completely agree with Brian Taylor on AFL Teams just then.

Karmichael Hunt kept Jarrad Grant to 2 kick and no score. This in a game where the Bulldogs smashed the Suns. The guy himself had 10 touches with 84% efficiency.

Ignore his salary, which is basically for marketing, and judge the guy on what he's doing on the actual park.

[benchmark00]

Originally Posted by Jono

Completely agree with Brian Taylor on AFL Teams just then.

Karmichael Hunt kept Jarrad Grant to 2 possessions or something last week, and no score. This in a game where the Bulldogs smashed the Suns. The guy himself had 10 touches with 84% efficiency.

Ignore his salary, which is basically for marketing, and judge the guy on what he's doing on the actual park.

Game has moved on from negating backmen who provide nothing the other way though.

[Jono]

By all means say he's not good. Fine.

But Rohan Connolly calling him "embarrassing" on the weekend is hyperbole, and Leigh Matthews saying he doesn't make Gold Coast's best 22 is a bit much as well.

[benchmark00]

Originally Posted by Jono

By all means say he's not good. Fine.

But Rohan Connolly calling him "embarrassing" on the weekend is hyperbole, and Leigh Matthews saying he doesn't make Gold Coast's best 22 is a bit much as well.

I don't actually think he would be in the Gold Coast's best 21 aws, however I should preface that with saying two things:

1) I don't have a deep knowledge of Gold Coasts list, and;
2) He definitely has scope for improvement, and it's not about playing the best 21 players for the Gold Coast, it's about playing guys to get AFL experience into them with an eye on the future.

[Spikey]

I thought he was pretty decent on the weekend. The only real problem I had was that he gets a bit lost in a big pack situation and the ball goes to ground. One-on-one he was fine and he was fine with putting his head over the ball. He's hardly the only defender with a bad kicking game in the league (I get worried every-time Kyle Hardingham has to kick it). Nathan Krakouer has been about 20000 times worse than Hunt so far.