Magpies and Power merger to be announced in a fortnight.

[Barto]

I have seen the sort of comments Barto is referring to. The ones I have seen are an idiot minority (aged about 12 IMO) that lurk on BigFooty on the Port board.

Maybe there's other sites too.

As far as I can tell it's a minority of Port posters. As many as I have seen call for the PAP and/or the PAM to die!!

I haven't looked for a while though!

BF does have it's twelve year olds but some of the more vocal ones have been around for year. We've seen the "nest of vipers" comment on this very forum when the SANFL is anything but. It gets tiresome.

Port need to realise that the other clubs just wish to survive and have a long future as well.

I was banned for daring to suggest that North's opposition to their merger wasn't about the 1989 grand final.

[JK]

The SANFL clubs could cut back on junior development. When Power supporters say they want the SANFL to up and die, I'm sure they've got a plan B for getting new players into the AFL system. Haven't they?

I have NEVER heard a Port supporter say that EVER. What a ridiculous comment.

Most of my best mates are Port supporters, and they along with pretty much all of their Magpie footy mates say it all the time regarding the SANFL should their club perish.

[Hondo]

Most of my best mates are Port supporters, and they along with pretty much all of their Magpie footy mates say it all the time regarding the SANFL should their club perish.

Well that's a bit disappointing then. And to you Barto.

[Wedgie]

Quite unfair on 12 year olds IMHO.

[Hondo]

I venture onto BF occasionally and the only excusing factor I can give some of the posters is that they must be 12 years old!

[Booney]

The SANFL clubs could cut back on junior development. When Power supporters say they want the SANFL to up and die, I'm sure they've got a plan B for getting new players into the AFL system. Haven't they?

I have NEVER heard a Port supporter say that EVER. What a ridiculous comment.

Most of my best mates are Port supporters, and they along with pretty much all of their Magpie footy mates say it all the time regarding the SANFL should their club perish.

Oh yeah right, Port fans have the SANFL's best interest at heart, CP has mates.....Suuuuuuuuuure

[GWW]

Certainly some interesting personalities over on BF

It tends to attract all types.

[Wedgie]

I venture onto BF occasionally and the only excusing factor I can give some of the posters is that they must be 12 years old!

12 year olds I know are a lot more mature and less abusive than the morons on BF.

[StrayDog]

I thought this extent of hysterical, paranoia being perpetrated by the Menzies Crescent Ostriches (NAFC) ended when society stopped looking for Reds under the Bed!

Grow up.

Since you're so obviously weighing into the Thrust and Parry of this whole debating schtick, please allow me an appropriate rebuttal to your well thought out argument...

GET STUFFED!!

Ouch!

As ever, quite overawed by the "thrust" of your rapier-like observation, and the "parry" of your seemingly inexhaustible hubris. I would, however, prefer debating "schtick" of better quality comedians - preferably someone that knows the difference between a "debate" and an open forum discussion.

I loved your double "!" by the way. Very twee.



Seriously though, with a lull in the "debate" kindly allow me to respond to your "appropriate rebuttal".

Beenreal, you've thrown words like "paranoia" and "hysteria" around on this thread like they're going out of style - the irony of THAT is palpable enough. To go on to drawing a parallel - however flippant - between a footy club and McCarthyism ranks with the most mind-numbingly inane things ever said on this forum. Bravo!

So there was no "argument" (as you so creatively put it) from me - just the plain, direct response that it so richly deserved.

To borrow from one of your own "well thought out arguments" ...

... if you don't like it? STIFF!

So get stuffed (!!) yourself.

[beenreal]

You don't like the comparison between McCarthyism and a Paranoid North Adelaide because it doesn't suit your argument. Your call.

But a big part of the North Adelaide whinge was the "We're managing $1.7M of debt" I ask, how much of that debt is made up of Contract payouts to Sacked Coaches?

And they Cr@p on about Port Adelaide managing money?

[Wedgie]

You don't like the comparison between McCarthyism and a Paranoid North Adelaide because it doesn't suit your argument. Your call.

But a big part of the North Adelaide whinge was the "We're managing $1.7M of debt" I ask, how much of that debt is made up of Contract payouts to Sacked Coaches?

And they Cr@p on about Port Adelaide managing money?

The 1.7m is in reference to how much is left from the many millions they had to borrow to pay for the Northern Tavern and Grand North.
Because we've managed our club so well financially things like contract payouts is chicken feed when it comes to North's books and if anything helps it as they can't show too much of a consistent profit to not be regarded as a business.

North don't need to look at any proposals as they remain consistent and steadfast in their view of a SANFL club being involved with an AFL club no matter who they are.

Anyway, enough of how well run a football club can be run off the field, this thread is about the 2 Port Adelaides.

Only solution is merging the 2 Port clubs into one, that club playing in the SANFL and the SANFL use their license to make a Crows Mk 2. More money and people in the SANFL and more money and people in the AFL via the SANFLs 2 clubs. Unfortunately those how stuffed up in granting Port the license in the first place would be too stubborn to fix this and the logistics of fixing a mistake that happened 14 years ago would be pretty massive too.

SA Football at both levels would be so much more ridiculously healthy if they hadn't made the wrong decision in 1996 but I think we can blame the AFLs ignorance and pushing it for that.

[Psyber]

Only solution is merging the 2 Port clubs into one, that club playing in the SANFL and the SANFL use their license to make a Crows Mk 2. More money and people in the SANFL and more money and people in the AFL via the SANFLs 2 clubs. Unfortunately those how stuffed up in granting Port the license in the first place would be too stubborn to fix this and the logistics of fixing a mistake that happened 14 years ago would be pretty massive too.

SA Football at both levels would be so much more ridiculously healthy if they hadn't made the wrong decision in 1996 but I think we can blame the AFLs ignorance and pushing it for that.

Right on Wedgie!

[X Runna]

You don't like the comparison between McCarthyism and a Paranoid North Adelaide because it doesn't suit your argument. Your call.

But a big part of the North Adelaide whinge was the "We're managing $1.7M of debt" I ask, how much of that debt is made up of Contract payouts to Sacked Coaches?

And they Cr@p on about Port Adelaide managing money?

The 1.7m is in reference to how much is left from the many millions they had to borrow to pay for the Northern Tavern and Grand North.
Because we've managed our club so well financially things like contract payouts is chicken feed when it comes to North's books and if anything helps it as they can't show too much of a consistent profit to not be regarded as a business.

North don't need to look at any proposals as they remain consistent and steadfast in their view of a SANFL club being involved with an AFL club no matter who they are.

Anyway, enough of how well run a football club can be run off the field, this thread is about the 2 Port Adelaides.

Only solution is merging the 2 Port clubs into one, that club playing in the SANFL and the SANFL use their license to make a Crows Mk 2. More money and people in the SANFL and more money and people in the AFL via the SANFLs 2 clubs. Unfortunately those how stuffed up in granting Port the license in the first place would be too stubborn to fix this and the logistics of fixing a mistake that happened 14 years ago would be pretty massive too.

SA Football at both levels would be so much more ridiculously healthy if they hadn't made the wrong decision in 1996 but I think we can blame the AFLs ignorance and pushing it for that.

Must be a typo, that should read 1990 not 1996

[heater31]

Must be a typo, that should read 1990 not 1996

You suggesting the SANFL stayed out of the VFL/AFL then?

[X Runna]

Must be a typo, that should read 1990 not 1996

You suggesting the SANFL stayed out of the VFL/AFL then?

No, what I'm suggesting is the SANFL should have endorsed Port and not formed the Crows.

[Barto]

Must be a typo, that should read 1990 not 1996

You suggesting the SANFL stayed out of the VFL/AFL then?

No, what I'm suggesting is the SANFL should have endorsed Port and not formed the Crows.

It would have been worse. Everyone besides Port fans who wanted in to the AFL hated your clubs guts at the time, crowds at Port games would've been rubbish and where were you going to play your games? The SANFL wouldn't have handed over Football Park to Port.

The real failure is Port's inability to hang on to the majority of the neutrals. Crowds for Port games in 1997 were excellent and there would've been a lot of people going along who didn't think much of the Crows and wanted to follow AFL in Adelaide, only to be disenfranchised a few years later by having the creed shoved down their throats.

[Royal City]

Must be a typo, that should read 1990 not 1996

You suggesting the SANFL stayed out of the VFL/AFL then?

No, what I'm suggesting is the SANFL should have endorsed Port and not formed the Crows.

they would of granted you licence. But port/webber stupidly wanted to be independent and not let the sanfl control your licence . So the crows became the better option for the sanfl as they were willing to put money back into the sanfl .

Nobody else to blame but yourselves for that one IMHO

[Hondo]

The real failure is Port's inability to hang on to the majority of the neutrals. Crowds for Port games in 1997 were excellent and there would've been a lot of people going along who didn't think much of the Crows and wanted to follow AFL in Adelaide, only to be disenfranchised a few years later by having the creed shoved down their throats.

The "creed" started in 2009

Port had about 35000 in 1997 and then it was about 30000 from 98-2007 (apart from another spike in the premiership year)

In 2008 it dropped to 24000ish and in 2009 creed started

[Barto]

The real failure is Port's inability to hang on to the majority of the neutrals. Crowds for Port games in 1997 were excellent and there would've been a lot of people going along who didn't think much of the Crows and wanted to follow AFL in Adelaide, only to be disenfranchised a few years later by having the creed shoved down their throats.

The "creed" started in 2009

Port had about 35000 in 1997 and then it was about 30000 from 98-2007 (apart from another spike in the premiership year)

In 2008 it dropped to 24000ish and in 2009 creed started

Thought they'd been banging on about it for longer.

[Psyber]

Must be a typo, that should read 1990 not 1996

You suggesting the SANFL stayed out of the VFL/AFL then?

I'd support that - and I did at the time.
Forming the Crows as a composite team was the only way to attract enough support pay a profit, and it still is.
Crows mark II may pay - it is certainly more likely to than an ALF team tied to any single SANFL club.