SA Footy

JK wrote:People outside of Collingwood won't like him, but all that matters is that Collingwood people do. Eddie is an outstanding president, always has been and still is.

Booney wrote:I think he also has the wider football community in mind. Sure, ultimately his goal is for Collingwood to be the top of the tree but he is also mindful of some clubs having advantages over others...then again, he wouldn't share ANZAC Day, would he?

All in all every club wants a President like Eddie. Among other things he attracts major brands as sponsors and that cannot be underestimated.

woodublieve12 wrote:

Booney wrote:I think he also has the wider football community in mind. Sure, ultimately his goal is for Collingwood to be the top of the tree but he is also mindful of some clubs having advantages over others...then again, he wouldn't share ANZAC Day, would he?

All in all every club wants a President like Eddie. Among other things he attracts major brands as sponsors and that cannot be underestimated.

nah, very happy who we have and had over the past decade

Footy Smart wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:

Booney wrote:I think he also has the wider football community in mind. Sure, ultimately his goal is for Collingwood to be the top of the tree but he is also mindful of some clubs having advantages over others...then again, he wouldn't share ANZAC Day, would he?

All in all every club wants a President like Eddie. Among other things he attracts major brands as sponsors and that cannot be underestimated.

nah, very happy who we have and had over the past decade

WUB, genuine question. Would the Sydney Swans fill the SCG week in week out if Eddie was Pres? It appears from the oustide (probably a simplistic view), while you have had considerable recent onfield success, the offield side of things is still somewhat below its potential?

woodublieve12 wrote:

Footy Smart wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:

Booney wrote:I think he also has the wider football community in mind. Sure, ultimately his goal is for Collingwood to be the top of the tree but he is also mindful of some clubs having advantages over others...then again, he wouldn't share ANZAC Day, would he?

All in all every club wants a President like Eddie. Among other things he attracts major brands as sponsors and that cannot be underestimated.

nah, very happy who we have and had over the past decade

WUB, genuine question. Would the Sydney Swans fill the SCG week in week out if Eddie was Pres? It appears from the oustide (probably a simplistic view), while you have had considerable recent onfield success, the offield side of things is still somewhat below its potential?

fair question...
I have no idea...
But considering we get far bigger crowds at our games compared to rugby i feel we are going alright... The club is run exceptionally well, from the bottom up.
The academy is exceptional....
Running at a profit on a yearly basis...
Friday nights crowd wasn't great but we were playing carlton
Membership is at an all time high. somewhere between 45-50k (don't have the exact number on hand).
The biggest problem we have is using anz stadium, shocking venue and even though we pulled round 50k maybe more to the prelim and it looks pretty poor. supporters and players both can stand the place.

in the early/mid 90's we were screwed and from there the club has worked exceptionally hard to get were it is now. Did we get a bit of help, yep... but we have had a sustained growth since then.

woodublieve12 wrote:i think we are smashing rugby there in the attendace part... for example, when we played freo in the qualifying final last year we pulled roughly 40 odd thousand and on that same day there was 3 rugby finals on and the combined crowd totals from those games still didn't add up to the swans game.

in a non football state we are doing very well...

Armytank wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:i think we are smashing rugby there in the attendace part... for example, when we played freo in the qualifying final last year we pulled roughly 40 odd thousand and on that same day there was 3 rugby finals on and the combined crowd totals from those games still didn't add up to the swans game.

in a non football state we are doing very well...

I was at that game and I would guess that Fremantle had at least 10k supporters who had travelled from interstate. The crowd actually felt close to 50/50 from where I was sitting.

JK wrote:Rugby has the better TV deal though apparently

Timeline of AFL Broadcast Rights

1960 – the VFL rejects an offer of 14,000 pounds to broadcast the last quarter and replays
1971 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $200,000 a year for 5 years ($1 million) to 1975 (replays)
1976 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $600,000 a year for 5 years (3 million) to 1980 (replays)
1977 – Ch7 pays $200,000 to broadcast the night series 1977 – First live grand final broadcast, Ch7 pays $100,000 for that and again for the following grand final
1982 – Vic government bans the playing of VFL on Sunday
1985 – Ch7 pay 3.5 million for 1986 tv rights
1986 – Ch7 offer 2.7 million for 1987 season, offer rejected by the VFL
1986 – Broadcoms offer is accepted after exceeding the 1985 amount, rights onsold to ABC for 1.5 million
1986 – Ch7 rating plummet, offers broadcom 9 million to win rights back
1987 – Ch7 pays $6 million a year ($30 million) for 5 years from 1988 – 1992
1992 – Ch7 pays $17 million a year for 1993 – 1998 (100 million)
1998 – Ch7 Pays $40 million a year for rights to 2001
2001 – Fox, Ch9 and Ch10 pays $500 million for rights for 5 years from 2002-2006, Radio nets the AFl 2 million
2006 – Ch7, Ch10 and Foxtel bid $750 million for 5 years from 2007-2011, Radio nets the AFl 8 million
2011 – Ch7, Foxtel and Telstra bid 1.25 billion for 5 years to 2017. Radio fetches 23.2 million

woodublieve12 wrote:

Booney wrote:I think he also has the wider football community in mind. Sure, ultimately his goal is for Collingwood to be the top of the tree but he is also mindful of some clubs having advantages over others...then again, he wouldn't share ANZAC Day, would he?

All in all every club wants a President like Eddie. Among other things he attracts major brands as sponsors and that cannot be underestimated.

nah, very happy who we have and had over the past decade

bennymacca wrote:interesting page on the history of the TV rights for the AFL

The increase from 1998 to today is pretty astounding really.

http://www.worldofwookie.com/aflbusiness/?page_id=522

Timeline of AFL Broadcast Rights

1960 – the VFL rejects an offer of 14,000 pounds to broadcast the last quarter and replays
1971 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $200,000 a year for 5 years ($1 million) to 1975 (replays)
1976 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $600,000 a year for 5 years (3 million) to 1980 (replays)
1977 – Ch7 pays $200,000 to broadcast the night series 1977 – First live grand final broadcast, Ch7 pays $100,000 for that and again for the following grand final
1982 – Vic government bans the playing of VFL on Sunday
1985 – Ch7 pay 3.5 million for 1986 tv rights
1986 – Ch7 offer 2.7 million for 1987 season, offer rejected by the VFL
1986 – Broadcoms offer is accepted after exceeding the 1985 amount, rights onsold to ABC for 1.5 million
1986 – Ch7 rating plummet, offers broadcom 9 million to win rights back
1987 – Ch7 pays $6 million a year ($30 million) for 5 years from 1988 – 1992
1992 – Ch7 pays $17 million a year for 1993 – 1998 (100 million)
1998 – Ch7 Pays $40 million a year for rights to 2001
2001 – Fox, Ch9 and Ch10 pays $500 million for rights for 5 years from 2002-2006, Radio nets the AFl 2 million
2006 – Ch7, Ch10 and Foxtel bid $750 million for 5 years from 2007-2011, Radio nets the AFl 8 million
2011 – Ch7, Foxtel and Telstra bid 1.25 billion for 5 years to 2017. Radio fetches 23.2 million