SA Footy

Both South and West are struggling and have struggled to be competitive for many years, both sides border one another with Westies recruitment zone stretching into the Reynella area.

South's management have admitted on several occasions that the club has a losing culture and that is why they are various other SANFL club supporters "second" team because they dont annoy those people enough.

Changing a culture at a club is not impossible, yet not easy either! Yet when West Torrens and Woodville combined they soon won a premiership and despite losses in recent years to Central have been competitive and participated in various finals campaigns.

South will never go for a merger because the club is cashed up, Yet over the years they have tried a few strategies to make the club competitive and failed, not recruiting from interstate and playing only local players has been tried and failed, similarly getting the most of the best interstate players money can buy ( - who cares about the Salary Cap any way) has been tried and failed on various occassions.

South need a culture change and the SANFL needs to have eight teams in it, maybe the time has come for a consequence to constantly losing to come to pass and for the club to seriously consider the idea of approaching West Adelaide to discuss a potential merger.

I dont know how it could work, what the colours would be or where the club would be located or any of that, yet the Eagles made it a success, so maybe so can we!

Eh? This was raised by a South supporter?
Although I hate the bye, I'd hate even more to see South or Westies disappear. It was bad enough that Woodville and Torrens smudged themselves together, but in a way that sort of made sense, as Woodville were sort of cut out of part of Torrens to begin with. But South and West are meant to be there (the SANFL) IMO. They are both founding clubs, and one of the problems with South is that they have been relocated too many times. They also have a fairly wretched history, but they should become stable in their new location, and with the investments taking place down at Noarlunga they should be able to put their stamp on that whole southern area. I don't think Westies are that success starved that they should be given the axe or merged either. I reckon they have character in their history, the names they have produced, their guernsey, colours, the part of Adelaide they represent etc. To take all that away would be like the SANFL chopping off an arm and saying "Ah well at least I don't have such a large body to support anymore!"
Don't do it! Don't even talk about it! Leave it to the trolls from other clubs, but don't initiate a discussion about your own club throwing in the towel!

I'm surprised a South supporter is bringing this up. I doubt 120 odd years of playing under the same name and colours will change when the club is strong financially and have the opportunity to tap into such a massive market in Adelaide's expanding southern suburbs.

As far as West Adelaide is concerned, they are always strong in the juniors and if memory serves me correctly, they have produced more current AFL players than any other SANFL club. They have also had a change at the top recently and would be looking to build a successful culture at senior level. They are ok financially as well aren't they?

Norwood and Sturt are rebuilding (plus they have a huge supporter base) and the rest of the clubs seem to be doing pretty well.

Hopefully mergers are behind us. Yes, Woodville and West Torrens was/is a success, but in lots of ways it was just going back to what it was pre-1964 in terms of the one club representing the district.

I think a nine club competition is ok. A week off footy every now and then isn't so bad!

Sojourner NO F***ING WAY. The Sanfl will die if it lose South and West so forget about it. I support one merged side i will not support any Merger with West Adelaide both clubs are well off moneywise and things take time South will improve and so will West these things take time. you never know what will happen in the next few years. But support you club as one team don't say that it needs to merge.

what ever youve been drinking i hope its worth the hangover in the morning you must be mad to think south could even think about merging sure mabe some changes could be made as far as culture and things but not a merge fought too damn hard to keep club going back in early 90s to waste on that. positive things are showing now and give it a couple a years south could be a real force.

A big NO to any mergers... South will be an altogether different proposition in 10 years time... Hang in there Panther fans, your time will come in the not too distant future. Trust me, as a Sturt supporter it tastes a hell of a lot sweeter when you have to wait so long

The only thing that West have in common with South is the Wood- Panthers netball club

No need to merge, just give South what should rightfully be theirs, ie all the area south of Taps.
If there's not enough kids in the Western area to accomodate the teams there then look at merging some of those.

The next merger will be between Sturt and Norwood - the 2 financial basketcases of the SANFL.

doggies4eva wrote:The next merger will be between Sturt and Norwood - the 2 financial basketcases of the SANFL.

financial basketcases?

Norwood have 5 million dollars and a new pokies parlour ready to go!

Central's are certainly secure...plenty of morons to tip their money in the machines out your way Doggie... True that Sturt have been a bit of a basket case over a number of years. Hopefully we're sailing in the right direction now though... From what I've seen BarZar always seems to have steady clientele...

doggies4eva wrote:The next merger will be between Sturt and Norwood - the 2 financial basketcases of the SANFL.

pffft Sturt's venues are apparently making some decent turnover I am led to believe and Norwood just returned 4.5 million on a 900K investment

heater31 wrote:

doggies4eva wrote:The next merger will be between Sturt and Norwood - the 2 financial basketcases of the SANFL.

pffft Sturt's venues are apparently making some decent turnover I am led to believe and Norwood just returned 4.5 million on a 900K investment

Doh, selling assets is not a way for long term prosperity. There have been so many posters who just don't get the Norwood situation. Unless they can turn that $4.5m or whatever is left after they have paid their debts into a revenue stream they are stuffed.

doggies4eva wrote:Doh, selling assets is not a way for long term prosperity. There have been so many posters who just don't get the Norwood situation. Unless they can turn that $4.5m or whatever is left after they have paid their debts into a revenue stream they are stuffed.

Making 4 million dollars profit on business ventures over a period of a few years definately is a way to long term prosperity.
As I said before on top of that their pokies parlour opens this month also.
Money isn't the problem at Norwood, finding a club room is.
Definately not a financial basketcase.

I can't see any need for either of those two clubs to merge and personally, despite following neither, I'd hate to see them not exist as their own individual entities.

I will say however, that Soj has shown plenty of courage and open mindedness with his post and should be commended not condemned for his lateral thinking.

doggies4eva wrote:

heater31 wrote:

doggies4eva wrote:The next merger will be between Sturt and Norwood - the 2 financial basketcases of the SANFL.

pffft Sturt's venues are apparently making some decent turnover I am led to believe and Norwood just returned 4.5 million on a 900K investment

Doh, selling assets is not a way for long term prosperity. There have been so many posters who just don't get the Norwood situation. Unless they can turn that $4.5m or whatever is left after they have paid their debts into a revenue stream they are stuffed.

Yes, I think I am reading a message from one of those "posters who just don't get the Norwood situation".

$4mil profit, which goes toward ownership of another venue (asset) and the revenue (gaming) that will come from it.

I would imagine the club will also look at buying another property to be established as club rooms.

Not sure where you see the downside in this, (given the mix of asset & income) ... A fair way behind other clubs granted, but the best position we've been in for 4 or 5 years!

even it Norwood just invested the $4m @ say 7% you have $280k pa in interest which almost covers player payments

Constance_Perm wrote:

doggies4eva wrote:

heater31 wrote:

doggies4eva wrote:The next merger will be between Sturt and Norwood - the 2 financial basketcases of the SANFL.

pffft Sturt's venues are apparently making some decent turnover I am led to believe and Norwood just returned 4.5 million on a 900K investment

Doh, selling assets is not a way for long term prosperity. There have been so many posters who just don't get the Norwood situation. Unless they can turn that $4.5m or whatever is left after they have paid their debts into a revenue stream they are stuffed.

Yes, I think I am reading a message from one of those "posters who just don't get the Norwood situation".

$4mil profit, which goes toward ownership of another venue (asset) and the revenue (gaming) that will come from it.

I would imagine the club will also look at buying another property to be established as club rooms.

Not sure where you see the downside in this, (given the mix of asset & income) ... A fair way behind other clubs granted, but the best position we've been in for 4 or 5 years!

My point is you have sold a property for $4.5m but you will now have to go out and buy another one on the same property market. I accept that it is an opportunity to structure the club financially in a way that produces a future cash stream and return to club to financial stability. But $4.5m won't last very long if the club continues losing money at the rate it has for the past couple of seasons.

They shouldn't be losing $$ with a gaming venue in place, that has been the crux of the problem, no significant revenue.

There was no point sitting on an asset and chewing up it's value by continually increasing borrowings anyway.

If you are referring to me CP I was making the point that if that 900k wasn't invested then Norwood wouldn't have that 4.5 million to set up a venue which in turn will generate income. then service all their debts