Bulldogs to 'axe' SCG home games

[sydneyswans1989]

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,19143822-23211,00.html

I could see this coming because honestly i don't think the bulldogs get alot out of having a home game at the SCG. Surely the swans do of course

[swansrock4eva]

The Bulldogs have an agreement to play one of those games in Sydney each season, handing the Swans a freebie advantage every time they meet.

I love the fact that everyone conveniently forgets that it puts the Swans back on a level playing field with all the other interstate teams in terms of travel requirements.

I hope there is some arrangement put in place to give us our 12th Sydney game if this one disappears.

[j s]

Originally posted by swansrock4eva
I hope there is some arrangement put in place to give us our 12th Sydney game if this one disappears.

Only if another club wants the money!!

We will only be guaranteed to get 12 games when a second team moves to Sydney.

[j s]

Re: Bulldogs to 'axe' SCG home games

Originally posted by sydneyswans1989
http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0...-23211,00.html

I could see this coming because honestly i don't think the bulldogs get alot out of having a home game at the SCG. Surely the swans do of course

They get more money than they would by playing it in Melbourne.

[Damien]

Originally posted by swansrock4eva
I love the fact that everyone conveniently forgets that it puts the Swans back on a level playing field with all the other interstate teams in terms of travel requirements.

I hope there is some arrangement put in place to give us our 12th Sydney game if this one disappears.

I know it makes me laugh that they fail to mention that despite the SCG game and Darwin game, the Bulldogs still play at Telstra 11 times and the MCG 5!

[hammo]

Let's hope the club cuts membership fees accordingly.

Not holding my breath though.

11 AFL games per season in the country's biggest market is appalling.

[stellation]

Originally posted by hammo
Let's hope the club cuts membership fees accordingly.

Not holding my breath though.

11 AFL games per season in the country's biggest market is appalling.

I totally agree.

I think the Swans should have the reserves play their ACTFL home games in Sydney on the weeks that the Seniors are out of town (and use a SFL game as the early match before the Swans) so they have a consistent presence in town as many weekends as possible through the season.

[australian_made]

Originally posted by swansrock4eva
I love the fact that everyone conveniently forgets that it puts the Swans back on a level playing field with all the other interstate teams in terms of travel requirements.

c'mon, Collingwood travel their fair share! They have to leave Melbourne FOUR times this year. I dont know how they cope to be honest....

And how do the Bulldogs end up with money out of this? At the bottom on the interview with Monty on the Swans website yesterday it states:

"Despite this weekend's match being a Western Bulldogs "Home" game, all SYDNEY SWANS game entry membership packages allow entry into this Round 8 match."

If 25,000 odd Swans members dont have to pay, how are the Dogs going to make money out of this?

[hammo]

The Dogs get a guaranteed $250,000 for the game.

Not entirely sure where the money comes from though.

The Swans (from membership $$) and SCG are possibles.

[garethb83]

"Despite this weekend's match being a Western Bulldogs "Home" game, all SYDNEY SWANS game entry membership packages allow entry into this Round 8 match."

If 25,000 odd Swans members dont have to pay, how are the Dogs going to make money out of this? [/B]

Easy, the Bulldogs 'sell' the game to the Swans, thats how they get their money. The portion of our membership dollars for that game go to the Doggies, not to the Swans in this instance. In return for doing it, our team gets another game in Sydney.

Thats how i took it to be anyway.

[liz]

Originally posted by stellation
I totally agree.

I think the Swans should have the reserves play their ACTFL home games in Sydney on the weeks that the Seniors are out of town (and use a SFL game as the early match before the Swans) so they have a consistent presence in town as many weekends as possible through the season.

Given the sparse crowd that turns up early to senior games to catch the reserves, I can't see a stand-alone reserves game attracting any sort of crowd. The costs of opening up the SCG for these games would be prohibitive, which means that the reserves would probably land up playing on the Bus Stop Oval.

And I doubt I'd get up at 8am on a Sunday morning of a senior game to go along to watch an SFL game. I'd just turn up at 12.45pm along with the rest of the crowd.

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

Originally posted by stellation
I totally agree.

I think the Swans should have the reserves play their ACTFL home games in Sydney on the weeks that the Seniors are out of town (and use a SFL game as the early match before the Swans) so they have a consistent presence in town as many weekends as possible through the season.

What, the Swans actually promoting members about the SFL & emcouraging them to go and have a look at matches!?!


You seriously don't live in the real world, do you? There is NOTHING in it for Swans, so they simply do nothing & act as if the only footy in NSW is at AFL level.

I reckon if they did a survey that most Swans members couldn't name 3 SFL sides, let alone know where & when they play.

SFL games actually ain't that bad at all. I enjoy popping along to Henson to have a look, even if I don't really have an allegiance to any team. I'd love it if the Swans & AFl made more concerted efforts to get their members & supporters to A) become aware of the SFL & B) go and have a look at matches.

We need to cultivate more general Australian Rules football supporters in Sydney, not JUST Swans fans.

JF

[j s]

Originally posted by garethb83
Easy, the Bulldogs 'sell' the game to the Swans, thats how they get their money. The portion of our membership dollars for that game go to the Doggies, not to the Swans in this instance. In return for doing it, our team gets another game in Sydney.

Thats how i took it to be anyway.

Exactly right! THe Bulldogs chose this approach in contrast to the Roos who tried to just muscle in.

I woud expect next year's membership to be 11/12ths of this year plus whatever annual increase is added on (which could devour most, or all, of the decrease)

[liz]

Originally posted by j s


I woud expect next year's membership to be 11/12ths of this year plus whatever annual increase is added on (which could devour most, or all, of the decrease)

I'd be inclined to "watch this space".

The Dogs have been talking about removing this game for a while now but it never seems to quite happen. It all depends on where their finances are at the moment, but they are surely going to get more money from a guaranteed crowd of 30,000 (and quite probably more this year given where the two teams are) than from a 12,000 crowd at Manuka or Carrara or Marrara or wherever else they chose to play.

I also think the AFL will strongly persuade them to leave it where it is given that they wouldn't be keen to reduce exposure to AFL in Sydney by removing one match a year.

[Old Royboy]

I think you would find that Footscray are given a fixed amount for the game, as also applied to Melbourne at the Gabba. If 30,000 do happen to turn up any difference between the take and the guarantee would go to the Swans.

Footscray will still need to sell home games, but Rocket has indicated that the club's football department will push heavily for a neutral venue such as Darwin rather than hand another team such as Sydney home ground advantage on a plate.

On Fox the other night Eade said that losing the SCG game last year could well have cost them a place in the finals.