AFL assistance

[St Ick]

I think we desperately need some assistance from the AFL at the end of the season.

Ideal world we would get a PP after pick one - Petracca and McCartin will speed up the rebuild somewhat.

It is not in the AFLs best interests for any team to be done by 10 plus goals week in week out. We will have under 25k in mbr numbers next year and likely be less competitive.

If they don't want to give us a PP, why don't they give us access to trade the best 17 year old in the country? Just a thought to assist our recovery.

[saintspremiers]

We have only been really crap for one year. Last year we were competitive generally.
If we go really crap as forecast next year there is a 10% chance they'll give us a PP at the end of round 1.

I just being realistic not living in some fantasy land.

[MC Gusto]

Doubt it will happen this season.

Might give is something at the end of next season when we're truly in the poo then and again we might be so deep in the poo they might push/force a relocation or merge

I'll take the tassie saints over Wellington..

[ROLS-LEE]

Pick 1 and 2 plus the best 17year old. Yes please. That's like 1 and 2 this year and next but doubt it will happen.

Lets just hope that our good young players want to stay around.

[bobmurray]

We won't get any help this year, if we are shite next year they may help out. Depends if Eddie bends their ear about helping out anyone but Collingwobble.If he does they will cave.

Maybe that's what Roo was talking to the AFL boss about, some extra draft picks.

[St Ick]

To be fair, last year we won 5 games - one of which was that final round debacle vs Freos twos.

So 4 wins in reality, followed by 3. I know the old rules were 5 wins over two years but the AFL have changed it to use it at their discretion. With the state of our list having our best players still over 30 - I genuinely don't think its the stuff of fantasy to be asking for some genuine assistance this year.

Our list desperately needs more than simply two first rounders over two years to become competitive and I think the threat of us trading away yet another of our best players to bring in more first rounders will be enough to convince the AFL to help us out. 17 losses and a percentage under 50, all working in our favour imo.

[bobmurray]

To be fair, last year we won 5 games - one of which was that final round debacle vs Freos twos.

So 4 wins in reality, followed by 3. I know the old rules were 5 wins over two years but the AFL have changed it to use it at their discretion. With the state of our list having our best players still over 30 - I genuinely don't think its the stuff of fantasy to be asking for some genuine assistance this year.

Our list desperately needs more than simply two first rounders over two years to become competitive and I think the threat of us trading away yet another of our best players to bring in more first rounders will be enough to convince the AFL to help us out. 17 losses and a percentage under 50, all working in our favour imo.

I hope you are right, but i won't bet on it.

[gringo]

The AFL changed priority picks to the end of first round to discourage tanking so best case we get one just before our second rounder which still helps.

[saintbrat]

The AFL changed priority picks to the end of first round to discourage tanking so best case we get one just before our second rounder which still helps.

and I believe it is now fairly much at AFL discretion

[mullet]

Well this is the result of bringing in 2 new teams at the same time and propping them up.

Is it really worth it. Really?

Establish 2 new teams that no one cares about, that has no following and in the process screw over 2 of the oldest
clubs in the league. (us and Melbourne)

It is an absolute farce and mismanagement at its best.

No wonder that bloke wrote the letter to the newspaper saying afl is dead to him and his family.

And they talk about an equalisation program. Geezuz they wouldn't need one if they didn't stuff up what they already had.

We did not need 2 new teams.

[St Ick]

To be fair, last year we won 5 games - one of which was that final round debacle vs Freos twos.

So 4 wins in reality, followed by 3. I know the old rules were 5 wins over two years but the AFL have changed it to use it at their discretion. With the state of our list having our best players still over 30 - I genuinely don't think its the stuff of fantasy to be asking for some genuine assistance this year.

Our list desperately needs more than simply two first rounders over two years to become competitive and I think the threat of us trading away yet another of our best players to bring in more first rounders will be enough to convince the AFL to help us out. 17 losses and a percentage under 50, all working in our favour imo.

I hope you are right, but i won't bet on it.

My last St Kilda related bet was on Choco as coach so no, I wont bet on it either

[St Ick]

The AFL changed priority picks to the end of first round to discourage tanking so best case we get one just before our second rounder which still helps.

and I believe it is now fairly much at AFL discretion

You certain about that? Ive never heard that before re priority picks at end of first round. I thought it was completely up to the discretion of the AFL

[Dave McNamara]

I don't want anymore priority picks... ever!!! We can sort our list without resorting to them thank-you very much AFL.

The AFL assistance that I would like to see is anything that'll aid us in getting back to the Junction.

That would help us more in the long run than anything else.

[plugger66]

I don't want anymore priority picks... ever!!! We can sort our list without resorting to them thank-you very much AFL.

The AFL assistance that I would like to see is anything that'll aid us in getting back to the Junction.

That would help us more in the long run than anything else.

\Why wouldnt you want them. You will get your wish this year. We are no hope. About the same chance as the JO wherever that is. Someone said we trained and played there half a century ago. Have no idea how it is relevant to 95% of supporters now.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Well this is the result of bringing in 2 new teams at the same time and propping them up.

Is it really worth it. Really?

Establish 2 new teams that no one cares about, that has no following and in the process screw over 2 of the oldest
clubs in the league. (us and Melbourne)

It is an absolute farce and mismanagement at its best.

No wonder that bloke wrote the letter to the newspaper saying afl is dead to him and his family.

And they talk about an equalisation program. Geezuz they wouldn't need one if they didn't stuff up what they already had.

We did not need 2 new teams.

to get any type of assistance that is meaningful and long term we need the following.

commit to 6 home games in Wellington.

As a development zone we then get top draft picks similiar to GWS and GC for two years.

We get financial assistance on our SC to attract FA's

We get the pick of any young players from a NZ academy.

We get financial relief from the crap deal at Etihad.

All depends on us relocating partly to NZ.

I would support it.

[plugger66]

Well this is the result of bringing in 2 new teams at the same time and propping them up.

Is it really worth it. Really?

Establish 2 new teams that no one cares about, that has no following and in the process screw over 2 of the oldest
clubs in the league. (us and Melbourne)

It is an absolute farce and mismanagement at its best.

No wonder that bloke wrote the letter to the newspaper saying afl is dead to him and his family.

And they talk about an equalisation program. Geezuz they wouldn't need one if they didn't stuff up what they already had.

We did not need 2 new teams.

to get any type of assistance that is meaningful and long term we need the following.

commit to 6 home games in Wellington.

As a development zone we then get top draft picks similiar to GWS and GC for two years.

We get financial assistance on our SC to attract FA's

We get the pick of any young players from a NZ academy.

We get financial relief from the crap deal at Etihad.

All depends on us relocating partly to NZ.

I would support it.

Then we arent the Saints. The NZ government arent going to give up huge money for 6 games and the AFL dont get any TV benefit out of it. We would be lucky to get 8K to every game and bugger people in NZ know anything about the game. We dont need to move anyway unless the AFL decide they dont want 18 clubs because as long as they do we will get propped up. I reckon if we played 6 in NZ im not even sure id bother looking to see if we won or lost. My interest would be in the Ammos and not the AFL. Think many others would feel the same and I dont reckon we will make up even close to the lost support with little interest from NZ.

[Richter]

Team for 2018 (with ages) on basis of current probables and getting a PP this year:

Wright (24) Delaney (29) Webster (25)
Gilbert (31) Bruce (25) Savage (27)

Weller (26) Longer (25) Acres (22)
Dunstan Newnes (25) Steven (28)

Billings (22) Stanley (27) Petracca (21)
Templeton (22) McCartin (21) White (23)

Int: Armitage (30), Roberton (27)... other 2015-2017 pick-ups.

Doesn't exactly look threatening does it...

[Bunk_Moreland]

Well this is the result of bringing in 2 new teams at the same time and propping them up.

Is it really worth it. Really?

Establish 2 new teams that no one cares about, that has no following and in the process screw over 2 of the oldest
clubs in the league. (us and Melbourne)

It is an absolute farce and mismanagement at its best.

No wonder that bloke wrote the letter to the newspaper saying afl is dead to him and his family.

And they talk about an equalisation program. Geezuz they wouldn't need one if they didn't stuff up what they already had.

We did not need 2 new teams.

to get any type of assistance that is meaningful and long term we need the following.

commit to 6 home games in Wellington.

As a development zone we then get top draft picks similiar to GWS and GC for two years.

We get financial assistance on our SC to attract FA's

We get the pick of any young players from a NZ academy.

We get financial relief from the crap deal at Etihad.

All depends on us relocating partly to NZ.

I would support it.

Then we arent the Saints. The NZ government arent going to give up huge money for 6 games and the AFL dont get any TV benefit out of it. We would be lucky to get 8K to every game and bugger people in NZ know anything about the game. We dont need to move anyway unless the AFL decide they dont want 18 clubs because as long as they do we will get propped up. I reckon if we played 6 in NZ im not even sure id bother looking to see if we won or lost. My interest would be in the Ammos and not the AFL. Think many others would feel the same and I dont reckon we will make up even close to the lost support with little interest from NZ.

So I take it from this you are happy for the Saints to be just "propped up" by the AFL and be just an also ran pauper compared to the powerVic clubs and the interstate clubs.

Why would they not be the Saints playing somewhere else? Does this mean they stopped being St.Kilda in 1965 when they moved from the junction oval?

How many supporters do GWS get to a home game? How many do they get at super rugby matches in Wellignton?

lets face it without radical changes, the Saints are going out the back door pretty soon.

GWS and GC have bled the draft dry and we are now worse off than Melbourne were, in fact the worst I have seen the Saints certainly on field and probably off field since I moved to Melbourne since 1988.

So tell me P66, instead of just slagging off my suggestions, give us your model to get the Saints to a sustainable level both on and off the field?

[HitTheBoundary]

I don't want anymore priority picks... ever!!!

I'd take as many picks as we can get.
Plus ask for extra financial support.

The playing field is already skewed, what with dodgy stadium deals, the fixture, and concessions to interstate teams.

We should go for broke and push for everything we can.

As for playing more games in NZ, moving overseas is a tad different to moving a few suburbs away (from St.Kilda to Moorabbin/Seaford).

[plugger66]

Well this is the result of bringing in 2 new teams at the same time and propping them up.

Is it really worth it. Really?

Establish 2 new teams that no one cares about, that has no following and in the process screw over 2 of the oldest
clubs in the league. (us and Melbourne)

It is an absolute farce and mismanagement at its best.

No wonder that bloke wrote the letter to the newspaper saying afl is dead to him and his family.

And they talk about an equalisation program. Geezuz they wouldn't need one if they didn't stuff up what they already had.

We did not need 2 new teams.

to get any type of assistance that is meaningful and long term we need the following.

commit to 6 home games in Wellington.

As a development zone we then get top draft picks similiar to GWS and GC for two years.

We get financial assistance on our SC to attract FA's

We get the pick of any young players from a NZ academy.

We get financial relief from the crap deal at Etihad.

All depends on us relocating partly to NZ.

I would support it.

Then we arent the Saints. The NZ government arent going to give up huge money for 6 games and the AFL dont get any TV benefit out of it. We would be lucky to get 8K to every game and bugger people in NZ know anything about the game. We dont need to move anyway unless the AFL decide they dont want 18 clubs because as long as they do we will get propped up. I reckon if we played 6 in NZ im not even sure id bother looking to see if we won or lost. My interest would be in the Ammos and not the AFL. Think many others would feel the same and I dont reckon we will make up even close to the lost support with little interest from NZ.

So I take it from this you are happy for the Saints to be just "propped up" by the AFL and be just an also ran pauper compared to the powerVic clubs and the interstate clubs.

Why would they not be the Saints playing somewhere else? Does this mean they stopped being St.Kilda in 1965 when they moved from the junction oval?

How many supporters do GWS get to a home game? How many do they get at super rugby matches?

lets face it without radical changes, the Saints are going out the back door pretty soon.

GWS and GC have bled the draft dry and we are now worse off than Melbourne were, in fact the worst I have seen the Saints certainly on field and probably off field since I moved to Melbourne since 1988.

So tell me P66, instead of just slagging off my suggestions, give us your model to get the Saints to a sustainable level both on and off the field?

Im very happy for us to be propped up by the AFL until we again become successful. Surely what you are suggesting is AFL assistance anyway. id just rather have the assistance at Etihad than an unknown Wellington. Got no idea what GWS have to do with it. They do help in TV rights though. And JB I didnt slag you suggestion. Silly comment. i gave reasons why i dont think it will happen or work. Im totally sure that isnt slagging a suggestion. My model is simple. We get assistance off the AFL until we hopefully can stand on our own feet. And we play as many home games at home. And yes I shouldnt have said Saints i should have said St Kilda and if you think 6 homes games in NZ wouldnt cause a name change then you have a better imagination than me. How are South melbourne going now?And finally and I think most important, how does playing 6 games in Wellington improve your list or ability to play footy.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Thank you for your answer, unlike some when challenged at least you reply with your proposals and dont run away when asked what you would do.
I will attempt to answer your questions from your post

Im very happy for us to be propped up by the AFL until we again become successful. Surely what you are suggesting is AFL assistance anyway.

I believe it is piecemeal and only just a survival mechanism. The GWS and GC will get stronger, Collingwood, Geelong, Hawrthorn, and depending on their drug bust, Essendon will continue to get favourable treatment due to their drawing capacity, membership numbers and stadium deals. Adelaide, Port, West Coast and Freo will continue to power their way financially. Sydney still gets advantages over the Melbourn clubs in terms of SC and first pick of NSW kids.

The support we get is minimal and designed for the AFL to sell an 18 team, 9 game broadcast rights coming up in a year or so. Unless we get large financial help, extra draft picks, our own "zone" for recruiting underage talent and a decent stadium deal, we will never compete long term with the above clubs.

The only possible way for that to occur is to have some form of relocation. In this way the other clubs cant really complain when this is the AFL's strategic goal - ie develop potential new areas for AFL football (as per the GWS and GC model)

id just rather have the assistance at Etihad than an unknown Wellington. Got no idea what GWS have to do with it.

My opinion is that we draw 30k at Etihad and we make a loss, we draw 10k to six games at Wellington and we get the AFL to cover the loss as part of the compensation package. And that is the point of GWS. They get nobody at their home games and the AFL is tipping in millions to make it work.

They do help in TV rights though.

My point exactly. The rights from Wellington would be the same and it would allow further time zones for the broadcasters to play with.

And JB I didnt slag you suggestion. Silly comment. i gave reasons why i dont think it will happen or work. Im totally sure that isnt slagging a suggestion.

Well, I initially read it is just uot of hand dismissal. And JB doesn't post here anymore, if you want to read any of JB's posts he sometimes posts at Bigfooty, my nic is Bunk_Moreland.

My model is simple. We get assistance off the AFL until we hopefully can stand on our own feet. And we play as many home games at home.

We have had AFL assistance for 25 years, since the commission came in and we cant stand on our own two feet, because the ground we are standing on is not even. We dont get blockbuster games like Essendon and Collingwood, we dont get a decent stadium deal, we have to deal with the FIXture relegating us to low drawing timeslots, we dont get preferencial draft picks, we dont have a COLA so we can buy Kurt Tippett, or Buddy, we dont have first dibs on the best kids in the state, we dont get anything from F/S.

We need radical long term help like GWS and GC and that means we cant sustain ourselves in Melbourne full time

And yes I shouldnt have said Saints i should have said St Kilda and if you think 6 homes games in NZ wouldnt cause a name change then you have a better imagination than me. How are South melbourne going now?And finally and I think most important, how does playing 6 games in Wellington improve your list or ability to play footy.

Yes we will still be the Saints, and still play at least 12-15 games in Melbourne (FIXture can assure this). Members get compsentation games (part of the compo package) and we get all the help of a development team.

Playing 6 games in NZ doesn't mean a name change, but we can call ourselves the Wellington-St.Kilda Saints, wear the same colours, and play 12-15 Melbourne games while getting the generous bonuses that the other clubs get in development zones and more (we stay mostly in Melbourne).

Unfortunately unless you want to embrace mediocrity this is the only way to get what we really need for the long term survival of the club and to threaten to win not just one flag but be in contention over decades (like Sydney).

[mr six o'clock]

I think we should ask the AFL for picks 1 to 10 ! that's fair
They should wipe off our debt !
They should fund the rebuilding of Moorabbin !
Then give the club 10 million , just cos they love us .

[plugger66]

Thank you for your answer, unlike some when challenged at least you reply with your proposals and dont run away when asked what you would do.
I will attempt to answer your questions from your post

Im very happy for us to be propped up by the AFL until we again become successful. Surely what you are suggesting is AFL assistance anyway.

I believe it is piecemeal and only just a survival mechanism. The GWS and GC will get stronger, Collingwood, Geelong, Hawrthorn, and depending on their drug bust, Essendon will continue to get favourable treatment due to their drawing capacity, membership numbers and stadium deals. Adelaide, Port, West Coast and Freo will continue to power their way financially. Sydney still gets advantages over the Melbourn clubs in terms of SC and first pick of NSW kids.

The support we get is minimal and designed for the AFL to sell an 18 team, 9 game broadcast rights coming up in a year or so. Unless we get large financial help, extra draft picks, our own "zone" for recruiting underage talent and a decent stadium deal, we will never compete long term with the above clubs.

The only possible way for that to occur is to have some form of relocation. In this way the other clubs cant really complain when this is the AFL's strategic goal - ie develop potential new areas for AFL football (as per the GWS and GC model)

id just rather have the assistance at Etihad than an unknown Wellington. Got no idea what GWS have to do with it.

My opinion is that we draw 30k at Etihad and we make a loss, we draw 10k to six games at Wellington and we get the AFL to cover the loss as part of the compensation package. And that is the point of GWS. They get nobody at their home games and the AFL is tipping in millions to make it work.

They do help in TV rights though.

My point exactly. The rights from Wellington would be the same and it would allow further time zones for the broadcasters to play with.

And JB I didnt slag you suggestion. Silly comment. i gave reasons why i dont think it will happen or work. Im totally sure that isnt slagging a suggestion.

Well, I initially read it is just uot of hand dismissal. And JB doesn't post here anymore, if you want to read any of JB's posts he sometimes posts at Bigfooty, my nic is Bunk_Moreland.

My model is simple. We get assistance off the AFL until we hopefully can stand on our own feet. And we play as many home games at home.

We have had AFL assistance for 25 years, since the commission came in and we cant stand on our own two feet, because the ground we are standing on is not even. We dont get blockbuster games like Essendon and Collingwood, we dont get a decent stadium deal, we have to deal with the FIXture relegating us to low drawing timeslots, we dont get preferencial draft picks, we dont have a COLA so we can buy Kurt Tippett, or Buddy, we dont have first dibs on the best kids in the state, we dont get anything from F/S.

We need radical long term help like GWS and GC and that means we cant sustain ourselves in Melbourne full time

And yes I shouldnt have said Saints i should have said St Kilda and if you think 6 homes games in NZ wouldnt cause a name change then you have a better imagination than me. How are South melbourne going now?And finally and I think most important, how does playing 6 games in Wellington improve your list or ability to play footy.

Yes we will still be the Saints, and still play at least 12-15 games in Melbourne (FIXture can assure this). Members get compsentation games (part of the compo package) and we get all the help of a development team.

Playing 6 games in NZ doesn't mean a name change, but we can call ourselves the Wellington-St.Kilda Saints, wear the same colours, and play 12-15 Melbourne games while getting the generous bonuses that the other clubs get in development zones and more (we stay mostly in Melbourne).

Unfortunately unless you want to embrace mediocrity this is the only way to get what we really need for the long term survival of the club and to threaten to win not just one flag but be in contention over decades (like Sydney).

Firstly i called you JB because i just bring myself to say BM. Brings back far to many memories. Just a couple of things i dont agree with. i dont think playing in NZ helps the TV rights IMO. Also if we were to play 6 games in NZ we would have to play at least 3 to 4 games interstate. That could be up to 10 and yes that does leave 12 games in Melbourne but I dont reckon you can half embrace going to NZ. We are the Wellinton saints again IMO if that happens. Also it seems what you are suggesting still needs AFL assistance so if we require it anyway lets just play in melbourne. All the negatives you suggested like fixture, stadium deals etc still applied in 09 and 10 and look how close we got to winning a flag. We can do it again no matter how things seem against us.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Firstly i called you JB because i just bring myself to say BM. Brings back far to many memories.

lol - fair enough

Just a couple of things i dont agree with. i dont think playing in NZ helps the TV rights IMO. Also if we were to play 6 games in NZ we would have to play at least 3 to 4 games interstate.

Not necessarily. We will already be playiong 6 games "interstate" on a nominally neutral ground.

That could be up to 10 and yes that does leave 12 games in Melbourne but I dont reckon you can half embrace going to NZ.

I reckon only 2-3 games in other Australian states. That would be at least 13 games in Melbourne with 6 compensation to Saints 11 game members. I dont see it as a half embrace, it is embracing Wellington like Hawthorn has embraced Tasmania. It would eventually get us many NZ members and long term we would become a Wellington Fixture.

We are the Wellinton saints again IMO if that happens.

Dont agree we can just be the Saints, like the Super Rugby teams are opnly their nicknames and not territories.

Also it seems what you are suggesting still needs AFL assistance so if we require it anyway lets just play in melbourne.

But what we get is just welfare to keep us alive. I want compensation for the 6 games, draft picks, SC relief, FIXture favours etc, not the dribble of cash handed out like we are paupers. And we will stay ion Melbourne but also develop the game.

NZkick has gone from a couple of thousand to over 30 thousand kids playing it. It is growing exponentially and we are first under the wire. We just HAVE to exploit the opportunity and reap the benefits from the AFL.

All the negatives you suggested like fixture, stadium deals etc still applied in 09 and 10 and look how close we got to winning a flag. We can do it again no matter how things seem against us.

[/quote][/quote]

Times have changed. We are going backwards in membership, owe millions, and keep losing money. Time slots are different and we get the worst because we are a low drawing team, we dont have a Butters type admin to reign in spending, and at the same time clubs like Collingwood and Hawth orn have 70k plus members and millions and millions to spend. We dont have the type of pull even Melbourne have.

We wont be the next Fitzroy because the AFL will keep us on life support, but we will NEVER be a power unless we bite the bullet.

[Spinner]

Surely we ask for first priority if you specify and prob get a end of first priority.