by LPH » Wed Jun 08, 2016 7:01 pm
by Aerie » Wed Jun 08, 2016 10:00 pm
by johntheclaret » Thu Jun 09, 2016 6:53 am
by Booney » Thu Jun 09, 2016 7:47 am
by Wedgie » Thu Jun 09, 2016 8:40 am
Booney wrote:Hopefully all supporters and members who walked away so easily make their way back.
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by UK Fan » Thu Jun 09, 2016 8:49 am
Wedgie wrote:Booney wrote:Hopefully all supporters and members who walked away so easily make their way back.
I doubt it was easy and I hope they don't walk back and stick to their guns.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by am Bays » Thu Jun 09, 2016 8:58 am
by Wedgie » Thu Jun 09, 2016 9:05 am
am Bays wrote:What's that old saying, footy doesn't build character, it reveals it....
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by johntheclaret » Thu Jun 09, 2016 9:25 am
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 09, 2016 9:37 am
by Aerie » Thu Jun 09, 2016 11:01 am
Dogwatcher wrote:Let's not pretend this has happened just because of the AFL reserves.
They were a killer blow, but this is where we were heading all along.
I don't know what the answer is, but this competition needs Glenelg to survive.
This competition is becoming less and less relevant and its future is in question if we lose even one of its stand alone clubs.
If the Bays go, who's next?
We've seen clubs go to the wall and be saved before, Sturt and North, most notably. But those were different times.
Our clubs and our competition, in particular, need to look at a strategic plan that will see this competition survive and retain its strength.
Sure, the SANFL is 'only' second tier, but without a second tier the AFL doesn't have players as ready for the big time.
The AFL needs a strong second tier, it needs the SANFL.
by UK Fan » Thu Jun 09, 2016 12:27 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:Let's not pretend this has happened just because of the AFL reserves.
They were a killer blow, but this is where we were heading all along.
I don't know what the answer is, but this competition needs Glenelg to survive.
This competition is becoming less and less relevant and its future is in question if we lose even one of its stand alone clubs.
If the Bays go, who's next?
We've seen clubs go to the wall and be saved before, Sturt and North, most notably. But those were different times.
Our clubs and our competition, in particular, need to look at a strategic plan that will see this competition survive and retain its strength.
Sure, the SANFL is 'only' second tier, but without a second tier the AFL doesn't have players as ready for the big time.
The AFL needs a strong second tier, it needs the SANFL.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by Booney » Thu Jun 09, 2016 12:39 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:Let's not pretend this has happened just because of the AFL reserves.
They were a killer blow, but this is where we were heading all along.
I don't know what the answer is, but this competition needs Glenelg to survive.
This competition is becoming less and less relevant and its future is in question if we lose even one of its stand alone clubs.
If the Bays go, who's next?
We've seen clubs go to the wall and be saved before, Sturt and North, most notably. But those were different times.
Our clubs and our competition, in particular, need to look at a strategic plan that will see this competition survive and retain its strength.
Sure, the SANFL is 'only' second tier, but without a second tier the AFL doesn't have players as ready for the big time.
The AFL needs a strong second tier, it needs the SANFL.
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:06 pm
by Booney » Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:10 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:Let's not pretend it's not been a factor either, big fella.
by tipper » Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:22 pm
Booney wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Let's not pretend it's not been a factor either, big fella.
Absolutely, not denying that, I also can't see how kicking them out will be the savior either.
The "product" is diluted now, take away more of the "product" ( whether it be pure or otherwise ) and the people in charge can only ask for less from the consumer for the product.
by The Bedge » Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:36 pm
tipper wrote:i think removing them will actually condense what is left of the league, not dilute it. its already been shown that the reserves sides supporters are staying away in droves, so by getting rid of them, it will bring together what is left of the league
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
by Booney » Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:39 pm
by Booney » Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:44 pm
Zartan wrote:tipper wrote:i think removing them will actually condense what is left of the league, not dilute it. its already been shown that the reserves sides supporters are staying away in droves, so by getting rid of them, it will bring together what is left of the league
The SANFL is dying a slow painful death.. Fact remains regardless of reserves sides or not, the interest in the comp from the next generation just isn't there period.
Kids/teenagers if they're interested in footy are either involved at club level or they're home watching the AFL if not at an AFL game.
Harsh reality, but grass roots footy (SFL, SAAFL, HFL) probably has a greater interest and following amongst the younger generation.
by tipper » Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:49 pm
Booney wrote:Fair points, I should have added in regards to my view the comp would be further diluted would be the calibre of player the competition could attract.
I'd say it's likely the recruiters would find it harder to drag "names" to the SANFL, thus the standard drops thus it's diluted....fair?
If the standard drops further sponsors will drop off as the almighty dollar is harder to come by, all making it harder for clubs to survive.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |