Jump to content
Melbourne Football

2014-15 MEMBERSHIPS


CaNNaVo93
 Share

Recommended Posts

So markn what you're saying is that you'd rather have a bigger crowd turn up every week as opposed to winning games!?

In other words, you put 'atmosphere' ahead of 'success'!

Mate, we've felt that disappointing/angry feeling far too many times for far too long, I couldn't care less if we played our games out of LaTrobe training grounds in front of 1,500 fans if it meant I got to see my team win and leave the ground actually happy!

Which did you prefer: leaving AAMI Park after coming from behind to beat WSW in front of a lowly 7,500 fans or leaving Etihad Stadium last week after a miserable 3-0 loss in front of a massive 40,000? I know which one I'd choose ;)

I wouldn't even call it atmosphere. An extra 4,000 who turn upto watch Vill etc dont make atmosphere. It is the ones who turn up to support the club who make atmosphere, and usually a hell of a lot more when the team is winning.

So in conclusion Markn is a spud.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But surely it's not A, or B, or C, or D, etc? IMO these things are not mutually exclusive.

 

But really, does it matter at this stage? What we do know is that whatever models we have used and are using to sign and re-sign players, and the way we train and ultimately perform on the park are not working to deliver either good results or a large following. So as far as I am concerned we need some changes in the club. Simply repeating the same things over and over again won't produce different outcomes. I don't know what the hell we are waiting for.

That's insane!  :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So in conclusion Markn is a spud.

 

 

I'm a spud based on what????

 

 

So markn what you're saying is that you'd rather have a bigger crowd turn up every week as opposed to winning games!?

 

In other words, you put 'atmosphere' ahead of 'success'!

 

Mate, we've felt that disappointing/angry feeling far too many times for far too long, I couldn't care less if we played our games out of LaTrobe training grounds in front of 1,500 fans if it meant I got to see my team win and leave the ground actually happy!

 

Which did you prefer: leaving AAMI Park after coming from behind to beat WSW in front of a lowly 7,500 fans or leaving Etihad Stadium last week after a miserable 3-0 loss in front of a massive 40,000? I know which one I'd choose  ;)

 

 

The fact is we are playing crap and our attendances are poor.

 

If we follow the advice of Red or Dead - playing in front of 1,500 people will send us broke.  We will also fail to gain significant media coverage.  We wont even be able to pay the players.

 

Also Red or Dead believes i want to play in front of 40,000 people at Etihad and loose 3-0?????????????

Edihad was a home game for Victory, and i would be fathomed to believe city supporters comprised any more than 1/4 or total supporters. (10,000 people - no more than our home games)

 

Re: WSW Attendance - Why did we only attract 7,500 people??????? Simple, because we are not giving supporters a reason to return.

 

Build it and they will come.  Build a team people want to see and supporters will follow.  Win and we will grow.

 

I have never seen a loosing team increase support base and membership.

 

A strong marque attracts people / media / sponsors to the club - A winning performance makes them stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

So in conclusion Markn is a spud.

 

 

I'm a spud based on what????

 

 

So markn what you're saying is that you'd rather have a bigger crowd turn up every week as opposed to winning games!?

 

In other words, you put 'atmosphere' ahead of 'success'!

 

Mate, we've felt that disappointing/angry feeling far too many times for far too long, I couldn't care less if we played our games out of LaTrobe training grounds in front of 1,500 fans if it meant I got to see my team win and leave the ground actually happy!

 

Which did you prefer: leaving AAMI Park after coming from behind to beat WSW in front of a lowly 7,500 fans or leaving Etihad Stadium last week after a miserable 3-0 loss in front of a massive 40,000? I know which one I'd choose  ;)

 

 

The fact is we are playing crap and our attendances are poor.

 

If we follow the advice of Red or Dead - playing in front of 1,500 people will send us broke.  We will also fail to gain significant media coverage.  We wont even be able to pay the players.

 

Also Red or Dead believes i want to play in front of 40,000 people at Etihad and loose 3-0?????????????

Edihad was a home game for Victory, and i would be fathomed to believe city supporters comprised any more than 1/4 or total supporters. (10,000 people - no more than our home games)

 

Re: WSW Attendance - Why did we only attract 7,500 people??????? Simple, because we are not giving supporters a reason to return.

 

Build it and they will come.  Build a team people want to see and supporters will follow.  Win and we will grow.

 

I have never seen a loosing team increase support base and membership.

 

A strong marque attracts people / media / sponsors to the club - A winning performance makes them stay.

I was actually asking you a question of what you'd prefer...a bigger crowd but lose or a smaller crowd but smash the opposition? I'd rather see us win no matter what the crowd number is!

 

By "strong marque" I think you mean a "big name marquee" will attract people and you are probably right - sure it will get some Eurosnobs and football illiterates come to some matches, but if this "Big Name" marquee is past it and doesn't add much on-field value or helps us win games the extra 'supporters' - who came to see a big name first, and support City second - won't come back.

 

If however we had a strong marquee a la Broich or Carrusca who with their own individual brilliance can win us games, then that's when these extra supporters will come to support City!

 

Anyway, until we replace our coach, we'll continue to suck no matter who our marquees are!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The fact is we are playing crap and our attendances are poor.

 

If we follow the advice of Red or Dead - playing in front of 1,500 people will send us broke.  We will also fail to gain significant media coverage.  We wont even be able to pay the players.

 

Also Red or Dead believes i want to play in front of 40,000 people at Etihad and loose 3-0?????????????

Edihad was a home game for Victory, and i would be fathomed to believe city supporters comprised any more than 1/4 or total supporters. (10,000 people - no more than our home games)

 

Re: WSW Attendance - Why did we only attract 7,500 people??????? Simple, because we are not giving supporters a reason to return.

 

Build it and they will come.  Build a team people want to see and supporters will follow.  Win and we will grow.

 

I have never seen a loosing team increase support base and membership.

 

A strong marque attracts people / media / sponsors to the club - A winning performance makes them stay.

 

I don't think CGF are going broke any time soon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was clear on last weeks performance that Koren is not a marque player.  

 

His performances to date clearly don't attract fringe supporters to become members.

 

Nor does he appear to be the winning link to attract people to our games.

 

Thus far - he is a bust as a marketing and playing recruitment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile: -

 

- 11k members is the most this club has ever had.

- The recruiting has been great for the coming years. - If we were going to get players for the current year, we will be left with a hole that the tards are going to have next year. ie: WSW after losing their marquee's. 

- The direction is clear to those that understand the concept of the one team, one club - as opposed to a one team, one player concept that Sydney FC was with Del Piero.

- The supporters are hot and cold pending the results rather than taking their own advice of supporting through thick and thin.

 

I don't see a problem with how the club is travelling. More than likely we will make the finals in the first year of the CFG revolution. With all things considered (including the carrying of players/staff that won't be with the club next season), i'd say that we are definitely on the right track. 

Edited by Deviant
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile: -

 

- 11k members is the most this club has ever had.

- The recruiting has been great for the coming years. - If we were going to get players for the current year, we will be left with a hole that the tards are going to have next year. ie: WSW after losing their marquee's. 

- The direction is clear to those that understand the concept of the one team, one club - as opposed to a one team, one player concept that Sydney FC was with Del Piero.

- The supporters are hot and cold pending the results rather than taking their own advice of supporting through thick and thin.

 

I don't see a problem with how the club is travelling. More than likely we will make the finals in the first year of the CFG revolution. With all things considered (including the carrying of players/staff that won't be with the club next season), i'd say that we are definitely on the right track. 

:clap:  :clap:  :clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile: -

 

- 11k members is the most this club has ever had.

- The recruiting has been great for the coming years. - If we were going to get players for the current year, we will be left with a hole that the tards are going to have next year. ie: WSW after losing their marquee's. 

- The direction is clear to those that understand the concept of the one team, one club - as opposed to a one team, one player concept that Sydney FC was with Del Piero.

- The supporters are hot and cold pending the results rather than taking their own advice of supporting through thick and thin.

 

I don't see a problem with how the club is travelling. More than likely we will make the finals in the first year of the CFG revolution. With all things considered (including the carrying of players/staff that won't be with the club next season), i'd say that we are definitely on the right track.

Yeah but what fun is there in looking at things with a positive outlook

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol you're right niko... fold the club!

No Beckham/Villa/Lampard/Gerrard/Cahill, no Melbourne City!

Why should I attend games if there's no big name marquee to watch? Oh that's right, because I BLOODY LOVE FOOTBALL AND I BLOODY LOVE THIS CLUB!! :wub: Name change coming up

Blue or Dead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

lol you're right niko... fold the club!

No Beckham/Villa/Lampard/Gerrard/Cahill, no Melbourne City!

Why should I attend games if there's no big name marquee to watch? Oh that's right, because I BLOODY LOVE FOOTBALL AND I BLOODY LOVE THIS CLUB!! :wub: Name change coming up

Blue or Dead

Not even funny :P I BLOODY LOVE THE HEART!!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

lol you're right niko... fold the club!

No Beckham/Villa/Lampard/Gerrard/Cahill, no Melbourne City!

Why should I attend games if there's no big name marquee to watch? Oh that's right, because I BLOODY LOVE FOOTBALL AND I BLOODY LOVE THIS CLUB!! :wub:

 

Name change coming up

Blue or Dead

 

Not even funny :P I BLOODY LOVE THE HEART!!!

I was just about to "like" this post. Then I realised I already had.

Bring back the Heart.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

11000 members. Sounds better than reading out the match day attendance.

6k of those members sick of the bullshit. 6001

Missed the attendance really only 5999? Sunday timeslot is bad.

 

6486.

 

The fact is that Sunday attendances are higher than Friday and Saturday. The statistics are (excluding derbies and rural matches):

Friday: 12 matches 7256;

Saturday: 15 matches 7097;

Sunday: 20 matches 7687.

 

The Sunday matches are distorted by the first ADP match and the first Villa match.

 

I suggest that that we get piss poor attendances because we provide piss poor entertainment.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11000 members. Sounds better than reading out the match day attendance.

6k of those members sick of the bullshit. 6001

Missed the attendance really only 5999? Sunday timeslot is bad.

6486.

 

The fact is that Sunday attendances are higher than Friday and Saturday. The statistics are (excluding derbies and rural matches):

Friday: 12 matches 7256;

Saturday: 15 matches 7097;

Sunday: 20 matches 7687.

 

The Sunday matches are distorted by the first ADP match and the first Villa match.

 

I suggest that that we get piss poor attendances because we provide piss poor entertainment.

We don't deserve anything BUT Sunday afternoon games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sunday 5pm kick offs just don't work for us, but for some reason we seem to get a larger share of them.

I think the Villa and ADP matches on Sunday were 3pm kick offs, which seem to be more attractive for fans.

What I'd like to know though is how many of these 11k members are season ticket holders (allocated seat or GA)? It must not be that high of a % of the total based on what attendances we are achieving.

Until we start winning though there's no chance of us getting growth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sunday 5pm kick offs just don't work for us, but for some reason we seem to get a larger share of them.

I think the Villa and ADP matches on Sunday were 3pm kick offs, which seem to be more attractive for fans.

What I'd like to know though is how many of these 11k members are season ticket holders (allocated seat or GA)? It must not be that high of a % of the total based on what attendances we are achieving.

Until we start winning though there's no chance of us getting growth.

play shit, get shit times

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

King Malta its important to understand our current position in the market.

 

We receive little no no media.  We have poor attendances. 

 

The questions should be-

 

Why don't we have a quality recognisable marque player?

 

Why did New York get Villa and Lampard while we only got Koren?

 

Why did LA Galaxy get Gerard?

 

Big names create a big buz.  We dont have time to let players settle to show off their skills.  

 

Koren is a clear example of how his investment has been a huge failure (thus far).

 

Koren currently has shown little quality to attract people to come and watch him - nor does he have the reputation to attract interest.

I'd much rather a lesser known marquee that becomes a Thomas Broich type and dominates the league than an over the hill Steven Gerrard or uninterested David Villa.

 

 

I agree, but signing a 'Broich-type' could just as easily get us a spud. Just like signing an over-the-hill superstar might get us an A-League superstar. I think the sentiment is right ('who cares what his name is, as long as he rips the A-League to shreds?'), but I think it's fuzzy logic: the assumption that apparently because we haven't heard of a guy that we sign as a marquee, that means he'll be a good signing. I'd never heard of Koren when he signed and I'm sure I wasn't alone in thinking that our marquee would be a 'bigger' name than Duff, who'd already signed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a players fault. They are there becasue they have been selected. It's the managers job to bring in the player that will fit the right role and have the right mentality. Getting players with the right attributes and mentality has been one of the top major shortfalls of the two managers we have had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

King Malta its important to understand our current position in the market.

 

We receive little no no media.  We have poor attendances. 

 

The questions should be-

 

Why don't we have a quality recognisable marque player?

 

Why did New York get Villa and Lampard while we only got Koren?

 

Why did LA Galaxy get Gerard?

 

Big names create a big buz.  We dont have time to let players settle to show off their skills.  

 

Koren is a clear example of how his investment has been a huge failure (thus far).

 

Koren currently has shown little quality to attract people to come and watch him - nor does he have the reputation to attract interest.

I'd much rather a lesser known marquee that becomes a Thomas Broich type and dominates the league than an over the hill Steven Gerrard or uninterested David Villa.

 

 

I agree, but signing a 'Broich-type' could just as easily get us a spud. Just like signing an over-the-hill superstar might get us an A-League superstar. I think the sentiment is right ('who cares what his name is, as long as he rips the A-League to shreds?'), but I think it's fuzzy logic: the assumption that apparently because we haven't heard of a guy that we sign as a marquee, that means he'll be a good signing. I'd never heard of Koren when he signed and I'm sure I wasn't alone in thinking that our marquee would be a 'bigger' name than Duff, who'd already signed.

 

 

IIRC CFG stated that the marquee may not be a household name but their expectations were that he became a household name. Going by that statement I dare say Koren is not fulfilling that part of the contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

King Malta its important to understand our current position in the market.

 

We receive little no no media.  We have poor attendances. 

 

The questions should be-

 

Why don't we have a quality recognisable marque player?

 

Why did New York get Villa and Lampard while we only got Koren?

 

Why did LA Galaxy get Gerard?

 

Big names create a big buz.  We dont have time to let players settle to show off their skills.  

 

Koren is a clear example of how his investment has been a huge failure (thus far).

 

Koren currently has shown little quality to attract people to come and watch him - nor does he have the reputation to attract interest.

I'd much rather a lesser known marquee that becomes a Thomas Broich type and dominates the league than an over the hill Steven Gerrard or uninterested David Villa.

 

 

I agree, but signing a 'Broich-type' could just as easily get us a spud. Just like signing an over-the-hill superstar might get us an A-League superstar. I think the sentiment is right ('who cares what his name is, as long as he rips the A-League to shreds?'), but I think it's fuzzy logic: the assumption that apparently because we haven't heard of a guy that we sign as a marquee, that means he'll be a good signing. I'd never heard of Koren when he signed and I'm sure I wasn't alone in thinking that our marquee would be a 'bigger' name than Duff, who'd already signed.

 

 

IIRC CFG stated that the marquee may not be a household name but their expectations were that he became a household name. Going by that statement I dare say Koren is not fulfilling that part of the contract.

 

 

Fair point. I guess what I'm saying is no team initially signs a marquee just to put bums on seats. 'Big name' and 'quality player for us' don't have to be mutually exclusive any more than 'no-name' and 'terrible player for us' do. Every club expects the marquee that they sign to be an outstanding player at this level when he puts pen to paper, whether he's a household name, or he's been toiling away in some smaller European competition. It's just that clubs often get it wrong.

 

Bottom line: Koren's it for us as a marquee for this year at least (presumably next year, as well), so he either needs to pull his finger out in a big way, or some serious questions need to be asked of those that were responsible for signing him in the first place.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sunday 5pm kick offs just don't work for us, but for some reason we seem to get a larger share of them.

I think the Villa and ADP matches on Sunday were 3pm kick offs, which seem to be more attractive for fans.

What I'd like to know though is how many of these 11k members are season ticket holders (allocated seat or GA)? It must not be that high of a % of the total based on what attendances we are achieving.

Until we start winning though there's no chance of us getting growth.

play shit, get shit times

 

and shit numbers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may be interested in the actual numbers.

 

Excluding derbies and regional matches, our average home attendances have been:

S1: 5849

S2: 6472

S3: 7075

S4: 7255

S5 to date: 9924

 

Obviously the S5 numbers to date are strongly influenced by the two home appearances of David Villa, but there are all sorts of factors involved in the numbers for all the seasons - days of the week, KO times, weather, competing events, etc. etc. 

 

I don't think that as supporters and members we should worry too much about the numbers - let the club do that. IMO considering that this is our fifth season without a hint of silverware it's a bloody miracle that anyone turns up at all. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...