Booney wrote:mighty_tiger_79 wrote:I'm a tad baffled that Booney has started up a thread without getting the thesaurus out for the title
You think I use a thesaurus?
Yes
by mighty_tiger_79 » Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:15 am
Booney wrote:mighty_tiger_79 wrote:I'm a tad baffled that Booney has started up a thread without getting the thesaurus out for the title
You think I use a thesaurus?
by Jim05 » Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:17 am
Dutchy wrote:Yet Hawks have increased their membership by going to Tassie?
by Dutchy » Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:06 pm
Jim05 wrote:Dutchy wrote:Yet Hawks have increased their membership by going to Tassie?
Difference between membership and season tickets though. Despite them having nearly 20,000 members more than us they made $2m less revenue from membership last season. They have got a lot more general memberships and 3 game memberships but lost plenty of top end ones.
Once again the ones getting hurt the most are the ones who rock up each and every week rain, hail or shine. Wouldn't have an issue with the Dogs going to Ballarat if it held 25-30k but 11k is a joke.
If the Crows or Port were offered $1m a game to play at Norwood oval do you think they would?
by Dutchy » Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:10 pm
Booney wrote:Dutchy wrote:Yet Hawks have increased their membership by going to Tassie?
I think 3 premierships in a row might have something to do with that.
So they play 4 in Tassie, but only leave Melbourne 5 times ( in 2016, anyway ) so it's not like supporters / members are missing out.
by Jim05 » Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:11 pm
Dutchy wrote:Jim05 wrote:Dutchy wrote:Yet Hawks have increased their membership by going to Tassie?
Difference between membership and season tickets though. Despite them having nearly 20,000 members more than us they made $2m less revenue from membership last season. They have got a lot more general memberships and 3 game memberships but lost plenty of top end ones.
Once again the ones getting hurt the most are the ones who rock up each and every week rain, hail or shine. Wouldn't have an issue with the Dogs going to Ballarat if it held 25-30k but 11k is a joke.
If the Crows or Port were offered $1m a game to play at Norwood oval do you think they would?
Port would in a heartbeat. Why do they play in Alice?
by bennymacca » Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:12 pm
Dutchy wrote:Jim05 wrote:Dutchy wrote:Yet Hawks have increased their membership by going to Tassie?
Difference between membership and season tickets though. Despite them having nearly 20,000 members more than us they made $2m less revenue from membership last season. They have got a lot more general memberships and 3 game memberships but lost plenty of top end ones.
Once again the ones getting hurt the most are the ones who rock up each and every week rain, hail or shine. Wouldn't have an issue with the Dogs going to Ballarat if it held 25-30k but 11k is a joke.
If the Crows or Port were offered $1m a game to play at Norwood oval do you think they would?
Port would in a heartbeat. Why do they play in Alice?
by Booney » Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:13 pm
Dutchy wrote:Jim05 wrote:Dutchy wrote:Yet Hawks have increased their membership by going to Tassie?
Difference between membership and season tickets though. Despite them having nearly 20,000 members more than us they made $2m less revenue from membership last season. They have got a lot more general memberships and 3 game memberships but lost plenty of top end ones.
Once again the ones getting hurt the most are the ones who rock up each and every week rain, hail or shine. Wouldn't have an issue with the Dogs going to Ballarat if it held 25-30k but 11k is a joke.
If the Crows or Port were offered $1m a game to play at Norwood oval do you think they would?
Port would in a heartbeat. Why do they play in Alice?
by Booney » Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:19 pm
Dutchy wrote:For no financial benefit?
by whufc » Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:40 pm
Booney wrote:Dutchy wrote:For no financial benefit?
Excellent opportunity to expand on our indigenous programs. Not sure what the financial benefit from the game is but I'd imagine it would be cost neutral or cost negative with the cultural program leaders there for some days before and after the match.
by Rik E Boy » Wed Oct 05, 2016 1:03 pm
bennymacca wrote:I know they won it, but think automatically installing the dogs as favourites again is a bit short. They only finished seventh in the regular season. Of course they had a massive finals. Then again, they did overcome some huge injuries, so some better luck next year should see them top 4.
I reckon GWS and Sydney are the ones to beat.
The next few years has "crows losing prelims" written all over it
by stan » Fri Oct 07, 2016 7:55 am
by Mr Beefy » Fri Oct 07, 2016 8:39 am
stan wrote:North are an interesting one, possibly missing the 8 or battling for a 17th or 18th spot maybe.
by stan » Fri Oct 07, 2016 8:40 am
Mr Beefy wrote:stan wrote:North are an interesting one, possibly missing the 8 or battling for a 17th or 18th spot maybe.
Fixed that for you
by Booney » Fri Oct 07, 2016 8:49 am
stan wrote:GWS loom large. They will only improve and will be hard to beat next season.
Sydney will be around the mark with there young players like Mills and Heeney getting games into them. Both are very good players and will start to get midfield time.
WB will be up there. Again some older players on the list but there core grunt of players are on the younger side. If Tom Boyd can take the next step from the GF then that forward line will be interesting.
The Crows in my opinion will be up there, not alot of turn over from that list and we havent seen much from there young drsfties yet like Milera.
I think the Hawks, Geelong and my Eagles will make the 8 but maybe not top 4. I thinkit will be very competitive with teams like St.kilda and Melbourne showing alot of improvement.
North are an interesting one, possibly missing the 8 or battling for a 7th or 8th spot maybe.
by Jim05 » Fri Oct 07, 2016 9:02 am
by stan » Fri Oct 07, 2016 9:17 am
Jim05 wrote:AFL has purchased Etihad Stadium, there goes our cushy deal lol
by Spargo » Fri Oct 07, 2016 9:20 am
stan wrote:Jim05 wrote:AFL has purchased Etihad Stadium, there goes our cushy deal lol
Was always going to happen. Sorry Jimbo but your cushy deal is done now. Looks like the Dogs and WB will get better deals and yours might be a bit more smelly.
by Jim05 » Fri Oct 07, 2016 9:21 am
stan wrote:Jim05 wrote:AFL has purchased Etihad Stadium, there goes our cushy deal lol
Was always going to happen. Sorry Jimbo but your cushy deal is done now. Looks like the Dogs and WB will get better deals and yours might be a bit more smelly.
by stan » Fri Oct 07, 2016 9:21 am
Spargo wrote:stan wrote:Jim05 wrote:AFL has purchased Etihad Stadium, there goes our cushy deal lol
Was always going to happen. Sorry Jimbo but your cushy deal is done now. Looks like the Dogs and WB will get better deals and yours might be a bit more smelly.
Much better for North & St.Kilda also.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |