A-league expansion

[Dylan]

2 hours ago, NYCFCFan10 said:

Hello expansion my constant companion. 

Any chance it's Toowoomba or Warrnambool?  Those are just more fun to say.

Nah but they are considering Tangambalanga, Tallangatta and Yackandandah next

[malloy]

1 hour ago, Dylan said:

Nah but they are considering Tangambalanga, Tallangatta and Yackandandah next

I thought Wycheproof had it in the bag.

[bt50]

1 hour ago, malloy said:

I thought Wycheproof had it in the bag.

Wyche could play the odd home game in Tittybong to try to encapsulate the wider community, given its only 20 minutes drive.

Edited December 7, 2016 by bt50

[NYCFCFan10]

So what are the chances that "best name to say" is one of the criteria?  Got some winners here.

[jw1739]

Just has to be Poowong.

[Blackout]

8 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

Just has to be Poowong.

It's just a matter of Howlong.

[Young Polak]

On 1/17/2016 at 8:47 PM, mus-28 said:

 

 

Still gets me to this day

[Baka1]

4 hours ago, Young Polak said:

Still gets me to this day

This and the FFA hatamoto discussion one. Fkn pissers

[japiedog]

i saw this on our rivals forum

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sp...pansion/#page1

Football Federation Australia has asked TV networks to state their preferred A-League expansion club locations as part of negotiations for what they hope is a bumper new broadcast deal.

The long-anticipated agreement moved a step closer on Thursday, the deadline for network executives to submit their tender documents.

With two new teams to be added in the 2018-19 season - within the next four-year broadcast cycle - TV rights negotiations have become inextricably linked to expansion.

So much so that FFA chief executive David Gallop revealed the desires of networks would partly dictate where the governing body chooses to introduce those teams, on the premise that a deal's value could differ vastly depending whether a new franchise is based in southern Sydney, Brisbane or Tasmania.

"We want them to indicate when they come to us their attitude to not only expansion, but expansion where," Gallop said.

"It's not appropriate to go completely into the detail of discussions with media companies, but we have indicated that we're looking at the feasibility of adding teams.

"We want to add teams and therefore we've asked them for their view of a competition that is 12 teams, not 10."

Gallop said FFA was "not quite" pre-disposed to certain markets but conceded "it's certainly something that has been clear in our thinking for a number of years now".

"I've said for some time, expansion is more than the ability to set up a sustainable operation in a geographical location - that's only half the equation," he said.

"The other half of the equation is adding value to the whole competition and the game, in the sense that you provide something that is of value to our broadcasters, our national sponsors, and therefore the overall pie grows."

It means some expansion bidders could, for all intents and purposes, be out of contention even before FFA release their criteria in February, given the governing body hope to sign a new broadcast deal in the next couple of months.

 

 

[jw1739]

Prima facie I find these most recent statements from Gallop to be mildly disturbing. I don't recall him saying anything "for quite some time" on expansion - indeed he's had more positions on A-League expansion than there are in the Kama Sutra. As for the TV networks having a say on expansion, shouldn't the encouragement be to clubs that can be sustainable in their own right rather than rely on "deals" that have to be renewed every few years?

[Jovan]

On Friday, December 09, 2016 at 0:10 PM, jw1739 said:

 As for the TV networks having a say on expansion, shouldn't the encouragement be to clubs that can be sustainable in their own right rather than rely on "deals" that have to be renewed every few years?

Logically yes but probably no.

The next idea these morons might come up with is that the tv networks actually put in their own teams and run them themselves and make a few shows at the same time. Coaches and players selected because they have some unique back story and at the end of 90 mins everyone texts in to decides who wins the 3 points. 

Crazy to even suggest that TV has any place in decision making of the League. 

[Tony999]

I know who George Donikian will be choosing.

[bt50]

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2016/12/14/exclusive-league-hopefuls-south-melbourne-announce-marquee-signings

Looks like Samaras is finally coming to the A League...

[Tony999]

Samaras? They've definitely gone for a nationality not related to the club. South Melbourne Hellas, please stay where you belong.

[jw1739]

The only people who want South in the League are South. No-one else does. They are just a scab on an old wound. If "old soccer" creeps back into the League that will be the beginning of the end for it.

[Blackout]

7 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

The only people who want South in the League are South. No-one else does. They are just a scab on an old wound. If "old soccer" creeps back into the League that will be the beginning of the end for it.

I honestly think they are the only viable Victorian expansion club in the near future (the next decade, at least).

I will admit I have never lived in Geelong. But having lived in regional Victoria for most of my life, I can already see a Geelong side going the way of North Queensland and the Gold Coast. Conversely, the south east/Dandenong proposal would create the most Vanilla of clubs, they may as well as call it 'South East Suburbia FC' (Heart Mk. II here we come).

At the very least, South Melbourne are economically sound and have a distinct identity and supporter base. I was a bit young to remember ye ol' NSL days, but I find it hard to believe that South Melbourne circa 2016 could be any worse than the try-hards in the MV North Terrace.

[Jimmy]

1 hour ago, jw1739 said:

The only people who want South in the League are South. No-one else does. They are just a scab on an old wound. If "old soccer" creeps back into the League that will be the beginning of the end for it.

I'd take them.

[Young Polak]

37 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

I'd take them.

+1

[Geo400]

8 hours ago, Tony999 said:

Samaras? They've definitely gone for a nationality not related to the club. South Melbourne Hellas, please stay where you belong.

They arent going for samaras.

My mail is its from spain, thats where the club has all its contacts these days. 

A south east melbourne team is throwing its hat in now and they plan to play at aami park, if people think south melb is a disaster what would this be? This new lot wont even have fans to begin with.

Ive said it all allong as long as sm is at lakeside and does its own thing its going to have minimal impact on the aami park tenants. Thats the advantage of having a dinstinct identity and set up. 

[jw1739]

6 minutes ago, Geo400 said:

They arent going for samaras.

My mail is its from spain, thats where the club has all its contacts these days. 

A south east melbourne team is throwing its hat in now and they plan to play at aami park, if people think south melb is a disaster what would this be? This new lot wont even have fans to begin with.

Ive said it all allong as long as sm is at lakeside and does its own thing its going to have minimal impact on the aami park tenants. Thats the advantage of having a dinstinct identity and set up. 

A big welcome to South Melbourne Tapas.

[Bannon]

vote tassie in the poll cunts fuck south melbourne

[Tony999]

6 minutes ago, Bannon said:

vote tassie in the poll cunts fuck south melbourne

Where is the link homie?

[Geo400]

4 hours ago, Bannon said:

vote tassie in the poll cunts fuck south melbourne

Tasmania is technically a south melb bid when you see who is involved, hell the 2 bids are probably working together lol.

The polls are stupid of course south is going to win every one..the other options dont even exist yet.

[Tony999]

If l was Gallop and saw South's bid my only response would be: Next!

[Jovan]

10 minutes ago, Tony999 said:

If l was Gallop and saw South's bid my only response would be:

Next Season!

Fixed.

[Tesla]

Tried to hack the poll so random team wins it.

Ended up breaking the poll for everyone.

South Melbourne didnt win either way.

[Geo400]

They were in front before voting stopped..all the polls favour sm and tasmania lol

[Dylan]

I reckon they should put Heidelberg in to piss South off.

[Tony999]

Of course South would win - there are 250,000 Greeks in Melbourne after all imagine all the votes there.

[Geo400]

4 hours ago, Dylan said:

I reckon they should put Heidelberg in to piss South off.

Heidelberg is apparently backing souths bid, they're about to redevelop their ground and see the introduction of SM as the potential ice breaker that could move plans forward for a 2nd division. 

[n i k o]

Looking forward to the day in the near future when FFA denies SM entry into the league again. The salty tears will be truly magnanimous to witness. 

[Geo400]

11 minutes ago, n i k o said:

Looking forward to the day in the near future when FFA denies SM entry into the league again. The salty tears will be truly magnanimous to witness. 

The ffa still pays them a commission for hyping the expansion process. Without them and the other old hellas crew in Tasmania nobody would even know about this.

[jw1739]

This is descending into farce, if it wasn't already there. What on earth is FFA doing talking to so-called "potential bidders" when it hasn't even released the criteria for expansion? What is FA doing asking TV networks what they think? Who else does it have lined up for further opinions? IMO letting "old soccer" back anywhere near the A-League will destroy the credibility that the League has managed to establish so far. FMD I can't believe that anyone is even considering it.

[Geo400]

Foxtel have basically run the game since "new football" started, of course tv networks are gonna have input into where teams are put considering they are stumping up the cash, with that cash comes the power to have a big say in where the league heads in the future, they want ratings above all and that comes from big markets.

if you don't like it you can lobby with the other euro snobs/NSL bitters about promotion/relegation and a pyramid structure, but careful that would mean more interest from "old soccer" since they are pretty much 95% of the sport in this country.

in simple terms you can't have it both ways. If fox chooses what you want great, if not tough luck.either way they won't be picking based on what's best for the game.

Edited December 15, 2016 by Geo400

[Blackout]

2 hours ago, jw1739 said:

This is descending into farce, if it wasn't already there. What on earth is FFA doing talking to so-called "potential bidders" when it hasn't even released the criteria for expansion? What is FA doing asking TV networks what they think? Who else does it have lined up for further opinions? IMO letting "old soccer" back anywhere near the A-League will destroy the credibility that the League has managed to establish so far. FMD I can't believe that anyone is even considering it.

I would be interested to hear your reasoning for your stance against 'old soccer' and why their admission would destroy the credibility of the league.

I am of the opposite opinion, I think South's admission would actually legitimise the league. At the very least they would provide a template to grow the league organically. That must be infinitely preferable than plonking generic franchises in market areas identified by focus groups, in the hope the locals will get on board. I hope the FFA consider existing clubs like Wollongong Wolves, Auckland City, Brisbane Strikers and South Melbourne in one form or another (admission would be contingent upon other factors obviously)

Personally I want to see Tasmania, Wollongong, South Melbourne and Auckland City as the next four clubs.

But at the end of the day I am just a plebian with a keyboard. Certainly not anything like the brilliant minds that produced such clearly defined and tangible framework for expansion in the 'Whole of Football' report.

 

 

Edited December 16, 2016 by Blackout

[Jovan]

33 minutes ago, Blackout said:

I would be interested to hear your reasoning for your stance against 'old soccer' and why their admission would destroy the credibility of the league.

I am of the opposite opinion, I think South's admission would actually legitimise the league. At the very least they would provide a template to grow the league organically. That must be infinitely preferable than plonking generic franchises in market areas identified by focus groups, in the hope the locals will get on board. I hope the FFA consider existing clubs like Wollongong Wolves, Auckland City, Brisbane Strikers and South Melbourne in one form or another (admission would be contingent upon other factors obviously)

Personally I want to see Tasmania, Wollongong, South Melbourne and Auckland City as the next four clubs.

But at the end of the day I am just a plebian with a keyboard. Certainly not anything like the brilliant minds that produced such clearly defined and tangible framework for expansion in the 'Whole of Football' report.

 

 

Very reasoned post and I agree totally. 

[Tony999]

4 hours ago, Blackout said:

I would be interested to hear your reasoning for your stance against 'old soccer' and why their admission would destroy the credibility of the league.

I am of the opposite opinion, I think South's admission would actually legitimise the league. At the very least they would provide a template to grow the league organically. That must be infinitely preferable than plonking generic franchises in market areas identified by focus groups, in the hope the locals will get on board. I hope the FFA consider existing clubs like Wollongong Wolves, Auckland City, Brisbane Strikers and South Melbourne in one form or another (admission would be contingent upon other factors obviously)

Personally I want to see Tasmania, Wollongong, South Melbourne and Auckland City as the next four clubs.

But at the end of the day I am just a plebian with a keyboard. Certainly not anything like the brilliant minds that produced such clearly defined and tangible framework for expansion in the 'Whole of Football' report.

 

 

Ok Stavros

[Blackout]

5 minutes ago, Tony999 said:

Ok Stavros

Nearly, but blonde hair, blue eyes and a mother who doesn't mind 'soccer' except for the fact that she wishes "they would stop rolling around on the ground like wusses".

Edited December 16, 2016 by Blackout

[NewConvert]

8 hours ago, jw1739 said:

This is descending into farce, if it wasn't already there. What on earth is FFA doing talking to so-called "potential bidders" when it hasn't even released the criteria for expansion? What is FA doing asking TV networks what they think? Who else does it have lined up for further opinions? IMO letting "old soccer" back anywhere near the A-League will destroy the credibility that the League has managed to establish so far. FMD I can't believe that anyone is even considering it.

Well in the private sector it is quite common for companies to talk to potential 'bidders'. Expressions of interests either formally or informally generated through various means are quite common - the only case I am aware of (where we are talking over a $100m bid) where this did not happen ended in tears and in the courts. So far we are aware of SM, Tassie, Canberra bids because they have gone public but it is also quite likely that the FFA may be talking to particular individuals about joining an existing bid - say Wollongong - because the FFA may feel that the bid lacks a particular expertise.
The TV networks have a say in all professional sports - that is the way of the 21st century. Certainly the AFL gets substantial input from the the TV networks as do other sports. For FIFA it is a consideration as to who gets the World Cup.

Other stakeholders would have to be the Federal, State and local governments, current FFA and club sponsors, and potential sponsors for the bids. The state NPLs would also be in line for some consideration - say what would happen to the Vic NPL if SM departs? Banks? Insurance companies?

As for your point about letting "old soccer" back in to the prime time - that is a different point altogether.

[ecguymer]

We hear the most about the South Melbourne bid because they are making the most noise; most of the others considering a bid are mostly keeping quite, presumably waiting on the criteria to be released. And I'm pretty sure the South Melbourne bid happened before the FFA had even confirmed they were actively looking at expanding the league. We're also getting noise and speculation about bids that don't actually exist yet (no one has actually organised a bid for South Sydney or Canberra yet, and I don't think Northern/Queensland Furry have confirmed there intent either way yet; and as for Canberra, Capital Football has outright said that they will not be making a bid themselves as they have other priorities). As we are still waiting on the criteria, we have no idea who has any chance of getting in at this stage; for all we know, there could be a "not from Melbourne or Sydney" clause or a "no currently existing clubs" condition in the criteria (though I doubt it); at this point all we know for certain is that the FFA want 2 new clubs to start from the season after next and they they are currently getting input from some major stakeholders while drawing up the details for how it's all going to work.