3rd Stadium in the city along with Etihad and the MCG

[Eastdog]

This got me thinking again after the thread on the proposal to play AFL games in Ballarat. If we are just going to use VUWO for Footscray VFL games and training and if the Show-grounds in Ascot Vale aren't going to be developed then where near the city could a new stadium be built that holds up to 35K for AFL games which don't draw big numbers. Ultimately as I've said we need a better stadium deal at Etihad but also somewhere near the city that is a bit smaller in capacity to host matches where we play say an interstate side. What are your thoughts on this?

[bulldogtragic]

This got me thinking again after the thread on the proposal to play AFL games in Ballarat. If we are just going to use VUWO for Footscray VFL games and training and if the Show-grounds in Ascot Vale aren't going to be developed then where near the city could a new stadium be built that holds up to 35K for AFL games which don't draw big numbers. Ultimately as I've said we need a better stadium deal at Etihad but also somewhere near the city that is a bit smaller in capacity to host matches where we play say an interstate side. What are your thoughts on this?

Nice lateral thinking Easty, but I can't see a business case or ROI for anyone stumping up the cash for this.

[lemmon]

Nice lateral thinking Easty, but I can't see a business case or ROI for anyone stumping up the cash for this.

Especially now that AAMI Park has been built, can Melbourne hold 4 major stadiums?

[bulldogtragic]

Especially now that AAMI Park has been built, can Melbourne hold 4 major stadiums?

Yep. Maybe in theory, but it would be a waste of money.

[bornadog]

There was talk of a boutique Melbourne Stadium around the North melbourne station, but I think it was being used as a scare to Eithad Management. We don't need another stadium, we need a better deal at Eithad.

Some talk last year h (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-03-25/afls-boutique-push)ere

[Mofra]

AFL wont allow it considering they take full control of Etihad in 2025 - no way would they allow any competition

[Eastdog]

While its great to have the spiritual home the Whitten Oval up and running for the VFL for our AFL matches if we are not going to play some at WO could a 3rd stadium possible in the Showgrounds precinct could be an option to host these matches the draw smaller crowds. It would still be good as its in a central location for everyone. Do the AFL have plans possibly for a 3rd stadium in Melbourne. I sometimes ponder if they had of revamped Waverley and kept that along with Etihad and the MCG that could of been a viable option.

[KT31]

I remember years ago a proposal for us and Essendon to have a ground at the showgrounds.
I think we were quite happy but Essendon pulled out of the deal.

[ledge]

I would say Geelong would get it if it happened.

[bornadog]

Should have just bumped these threads

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?12979-3rd-Stadium-in-the-city-along-with-Etihad-and-the-MCG&highlight=stadium

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?5299-Boutique-Stadium&highlight=stadium

[LostDoggy]

Should have just bumped these threads

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?12979-3rd-Stadium-in-the-city-along-with-Etihad-and-the-MCG&highlight=stadium

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?5299-Boutique-Stadium&highlight=stadium

Why bump your own thread from 5 months ago on exactly the same subject when you can just start another one?

[westdog54]

Should have just bumped these threads

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?12979-3rd-Stadium-in-the-city-along-with-Etihad-and-the-MCG&highlight=stadium

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?5299-Boutique-Stadium&highlight=stadium

Agreed. Pointless having another.

[Eastdog]

Have the AFL still got this in my mind for the future? What do you reckon.

[boydogs]

Have the AFL still got this in my mind for the future? What do you reckon.

No, the AFL needs to fill the Etihad game quota. Once the AFL owns it, the shoddy deals will be over and we won't need to play small games elsewhere

[Webby]

I remember years ago a proposal for us and Essendon to have a ground at the showgrounds.
I think we were quite happy but Essendon pulled out of the deal.

That's correct. I remember that. From memory North might've been briefly involved, too, but swiftly went down the MCG/Friday night game route instead and the whole thing eventually fizzled. Essendon were at the MCG within eight or so years. It made sense for them because they've always been the McDonalds of the VFL. They've been franchises in the east and the west for 140 years.

I have often thought back to it over the years... It would've been a winner in hindsight.

[EasternWest]

Agreed. Pointless having another.
Redacted

[Eastdog]

Bump. If not the Showgrounds do you reckon the AFL has spoken to the Victorian government about a different site near the city for a boutique stadium.

[boydogs]

Bump. If not the Showgrounds do you reckon the AFL has spoken to the Victorian government about a different site near the city for a boutique stadium.

No, they need to fill the game quota at Etihad, and will own Etihad by the time a new stadium was built

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Yes plenty of room within the East-West tunnel design to fit another oval. All that parkland no-one uses since Burke and Wills set off on their fatal journey. Only problem is convincing the lobby groups.

[Bulldog4life]

AFL wont allow it considering they take full control of Etihad in 2025 - no way would they allow any competition

Wonder where the A-League will play then?

[LongWait]

Wonder where the A-League will play then?

Give them the Bulldog's Etihad stadium deal. :) And Sunday twilight games to boot.

[GVGjr]

Wonder where the A-League will play then?

AAMI Park can be increased to more than 40K I believe

[Dancin' Douggy]

I just can't believe there isn't any serious dialogue about Whitten oval as the 3rd boutique stadium.
It's right next to a Major railway station. It's close to the CBD. It's already there.
And before all the knee jerk naysayers come out with their automatic negativity.

I have one quote I will always go back to.

"IF GEELONG DID IT, WE CAN DO IT"

We just have to find a way, we just have to confront and smash the negatives by following Geelong's model.

Geelong's stadium is tucked up right against Moorabool st. Just like we are with Gordon st.
It doesn't have much parking and is pretty much surrounded by residential areas.
It was built around existing infrastructure, (as in they didn't demolish everything that was there)
So we don't need to demolish any of the new buildings to do it.

And we're actually close to the CBD of the 2nd biggest city in Australia, they're only in little old Geelong.
So our stadium is worth much MUCH more commercially. It can host games like North V GWS or Melbourne V Gold Coast etc. It would be ludicrous to hold those games in Geelong, and it's ludicrous to hold them at Etihad. There's probably at least 20 games like that a year, not to mention our suitable home games.
Then there's shield and 20/20 cricket and concerts in summer etc etc.

Geelong really should be the model for us to follow instead of trying to emulate Collingwood or Essendon.

Geelong has absolutely got it made. It should be the envy of every other victorian team.
Think about it.

GENUINE home ground advantage. GENUINE!!!!
The only team left in Victoria that can claim that.
They take their own gate. THEIR OWN GATE! The only team in victoria that can claim that.

Their home ground for training and functions AND home games, is still in the heart of the suburb/town they represent.
The only team left in Victoria that can claim that.
(aside from Melbourne. Melbourne who?............. I hear you ask)

We could have what Geelong has. Training, functions, and home games at Whitten Oval.
We could do it. and remember..........always remember.
As soon as you come up with a reason why it won't work, repeat this phrase.

"IF GEELONG DID IT, WE CAN DO IT"

Now say it again please.

[chef]

Wonder where the A-League will play then?
Considering its a summer sport I guess they'll still be playing at the Dome.

[boydogs]

"IF GEELONG DID IT, WE CAN DO IT"

Geelong never lost their ground in the first place to be sucked in to the Etihad quota. If we don't play our 10 home games at Etihad anymore, the AFL needs to find someone else to play there instead. It's enough of a battle to get them to approve the 11th one being sold to Cairns, or the 2 North play in Tassie. Games like Hawthorn v Port this year are moved to Etihad to cover those, even though it's not Hawthorn's home ground and they would prefer to have it at the MCG

[Dancin' Douggy]

Geelong never lost their ground in the first place to be sucked in to the Etihad quota. If we don't play our 10 home games at Etihad anymore, the AFL needs to find someone else to play there instead. It's enough of a battle to get them to approve the 11th one being sold to Cairns, or the 2 North play in Tassie. Games like Hawthorn v Port this year are moved to Etihad to cover those, even though it's not Hawthorn's home ground and they would prefer to have it at the MCG

These are the types of negatives that need to be smacked over the boundary.

I will repeat '" if Geelong did it we can do it". Let's not be a victim of history.
Bad decisions were made but these bad decisions shouldn't define our future.

And the Etihad deal isn't signed forever. The AFL needs a 3rd ground. It should be the Whitten oval.

[boydogs]

I will repeat '" if Geelong did it we can do it". Let's not be a victim of history.

Geelong didn't do what we would need to do, in getting out of the Etihad deal. They have a stadium in similar surrounds to the Whitten Oval as you outlined, and I would agree with you if this was just about the stadium, carpark etc., but it's not. Ask the AFL whether they think they need a 3rd Melbourne stadium. They wouldn't have pulled the pin on the last remaining metro stadium, Princes Park, if they did.

Ballarat might get off the ground on the basis of bringing the game to new areas, I think that's the best we can hope for. We've tried to get the AFL to let us play in Geelong a few times to avoid the Etihad deal and it hasn't worked.

[bulldogtragic]

We aren't anything like Geelong. The team down is in a fishbowl with no competition. They have high members, packed out games, high sponsors and a political situation that allows itself to maximum taxpayer funding. They also don't have a stadium down the road the AFL wants games at. At the time of doing the upgrade the Geelong economy has been going down the poopchute and flat numbers while the western suburbs has been growing, and we have been going backwards. It's not about being pessimistic, I'm not sure sure how a team who can't get a Friday Night game for 1,500+ days can put a business plan together to gets funded to the tune of $30,000,000 for a stadium that will get the lowest crowds (outside exp. clubs) and who can't get enough and diverse sponsorship to cover the costs of erecting the signs around the ground. I want to go back to our heartland, to our home, I do... But, there's less than no chance of it happening because there's nothing similar about Geelong and us. Who would want their home games there? Essendon, Colingwood, St Kilda... I love your passion don't get me wrong, the macro and micro issues couldn't be further from our situation.

[w3design]

These are the types of negatives that need to be smacked over the boundary.

I will repeat '" if Geelong did it we can do it". Let's not be a victim of history.
Bad decisions were made but these bad decisions shouldn't define our future.

And the Etihad deal isn't signed forever. The AFL needs a 3rd ground. It should be the Whitten oval.

Agree DD, we only need to have a capacity of between 22k and 25k seats with up to 5k standing room.

The only part I disagree with is following the Geelong funding model. We need to be inventive but there are genuine ways to raise $50mllion in capital before work begins

[Dancin' Douggy]

Agree DD, we only need to have a capacity of between 22k and 25k seats with up to 5k standing room.

The only part I disagree with is following the Geelong funding model. We need to be inventive but there are genuine ways to raise $50mllion in capital before work begins
Yeah I think it's very very doable.
For sure we can have a different funding model.
The financial workings of how it might be done are 100% flexible.
Just glad to have someone who agrees with me that it's possible!

[Twodogs]

I agree it's possible DD. I've been riding this hobby horse for a long time now. Now that the AFL have dipped their toe in the water with a NAB cup game I'm pretty confident we will start playing some games back at the footy ground.

[hujsh]

Is there not an issue with the facilities? They were taking too much space or something.

[bornadog]

Sorry for being on the negative with this but I can't see it happening for at least the next 10 years or even more.

The AFL has too much invested in Eithad as it is. Forgetting the stadium deals and timeslots for games, Eithad is a great stadium with the roof and comfort for the patrons. The AFL has to come up with a better model for us to make money from playing there.

[Twodogs]

Sorry for being on the negative with this but I can't see it happening for at least the next 10 years or even more.

The AFL has too much invested in Eithad as it is. Forgetting the stadium deals and timeslots for games, Eithad is a great stadium with the roof and comfort for the patrons. The AFL has to come up with a better model for us to make money from playing there.


It wasn't that long ago they were saying that it couldn't stage a NAB cup game. I'm only talking one, maybe two, games. Make them events. The big return to footy's roots. And it's not just the playing clubs' supporters who will want to come. We can turn this into an experience that lots of people will want to do at least once

And the AFL and Etihad management have us right where they want us. They aren't going to come up with better financial deal for us unless we have some control over where we play our home games. Even if we can get a toe in at VUWO, make it work well enough so we can go to Etihad and say "tell us again why we are writing you cheques to play home games here when we can make X amount profit for a similar crowd at Whitten Oval?"

Then they might decide to have another look at our deal with them.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Surely even when the AFL own and run Etihad, theyr'e still not gonna make anything out of Dogs V Suns, or North v GWS, or Demons v Freo. A 3rd stadium for these types of games makes sense from every perspective.

[1eyedog]

The simple fact that we were able to attract 8000 patrons to an under-resourced, under-equipped suburban footy ground for a VFL Preliminary Final must have raised some eyebrows at both VFL and AFL headquarters.

Times have changed since the late 80s early 90s - we have more members now and would fill a 20-22,000 capacity Whitten Oval on match day.

[GVGjr]

Surely even when the AFL own and run Etihad, theyr'e still not gonna make anything out of Dogs V Suns, or North v GWS, or Demons v Freo. A 3rd stadium for these types of games makes sense from every perspective.

Why is everyone accepting that we will never be able to draw a crowd against some of the other teams in the competition so therefore we need another venue to accommodate us?

Port had to use bay advertising for a while and yet now fill out their ground.

The onus has to be on the club to get our members to attend and for the AFL to come up with a vastly better deal for us.

[w3design]

Why is everyone accepting that we will never be able to draw a crowd against some of the other teams in the competition so therefore we need another venue to accommodate us?

Port had to use bay advertising for a while and yet now fill out their ground.

The onus has to be on the club to get our members to attend and for the AFL to come up with a vastly better deal for us.

It's nothing to so with the size of the crowd, it is everything to do with building a sense of self, setting ourselves apart for the homogenous docklands group of clubs, re establishing our own identity we can relate too and ensure long term profitability we will never be able to do at docklands.

the AFL landscape is changing with the AFL realising the focus on theatre goers and tv watchers has come at the expense of true heart and soul footy fans.

we lacked vision when we were given $30million for a redevelopment and did not think in the next 10 years we may want to look at playing games at home again. Now we have 5 teams sharing the one ground with the only differentiation being the colours of teams playing. This is the only professional sport in the world that has this ridiculous set up. All other codes particularly European football play at home grounds, all unique.

we can again if we have enough people who really want to and people running the club with vision not reactionary and just trying to keep our head above water.

there are many ways to fund the build, I could think of a few that would raise a minimum of $50million ourselves, but we need those people with vision to bring the stakeholders along selling that vision.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Why is everyone accepting that we will never be able to draw a crowd against some of the other teams in the competition so therefore we need another venue to accommodate us?

Port had to use bay advertising for a while and yet now fill out their ground.

The onus has to be on the club to get our members to attend and for the AFL to come up with a vastly better deal for us.

This is not simply about US drawing a crowd. It's about GWS drawing a crowd in Melbourne. Gold Coast drawing a crowd in Melbourne, Freo or Port drawing a crowd in Melbourne.
I don't envisage we'd play every home game at Whitten oval, and Geelong certainly don't play Collingwood or Essendon at Kardinia park. But we could,and should, play and host those smaller fixtures at Whitten Oval.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

It's nothing to so with the size of the crowd, it is everything to do with building a sense of self, setting ourselves apart for the homogenous docklands group of clubs, re establishing our own identity we can relate too and ensure long term profitability we will never be able to do at docklands.

the AFL landscape is changing with the AFL realising the focus on theatre goers and tv watchers has come at the expense of true heart and soul footy fans.

we lacked vision when we were given $30million for a redevelopment and did not think in the next 10 years we may want to look at playing games at home again. Now we have 5 teams sharing the one ground with the only differentiation being the colours of teams playing. This is the only professional sport in the world that has this ridiculous set up. All other codes particularly European football play at home grounds, all unique.

we can again if we have enough people who really want to and people running the club with vision not reactionary and just trying to keep our head above water.

there are many ways to fund the build, I could think of a few that would raise a minimum of $50million ourselves, but we need those people with vision to bring the stakeholders along selling that vision.

Inspite of playing in 7 prelim finals in the past 24 years there has been little change in our ability to grow the Club, highlighted by a poor membership base which simply hasn't grown in he past quarter of a century. Hawthorn and Geelong have led the charge among Victorian based clubs through fine leadership both on and off the field. Hawthorn's move to play 4 games in Tasmania has been brilliant with 10,000 extra members and a $3 million per annum windfall from the Tasmanian Government. Our $30 million redevelopment has still created a $10 million dollar debt. Geelong now makes more from one home game than we do for a whole season at Etihad. The Western Bulldogs, St Kilda, Melbourne and North Melbourne are in danger of being on a long term drip feed from the AFL unless some radical change is implemented. The $200 million reported investment by the AFL to recreate a team like GWS in Western Sydney may have enabled it to establish a $1 billion plus media deal for an 18 team National competition but has done little for the 4 struggling clubs in its major heartland. The strong clubs simply grow bigger with a minor miracle required to lift the Western Bulldogs into a truly professional unit. This is nothing short of an ongoing disaster which has now gone on for 60 years since our one and only flag. Unless the AFL Commission is willing to change the status quo to provide an equal playing field then we can expect much of the same in the future.

[GVGjr]

It's nothing to so with the size of the crowd, it is everything to do with building a sense of self, setting ourselves apart for the homogenous docklands group of clubs, re establishing our own identity we can relate too and ensure long term profitability we will never be able to do at docklands.


Did you go to or see the VFL Grand Final? If we can get the crowd going to AFL games as passionate we will not only set ourselves apart from the other clubs we will own the thing.




we lacked vision when we were given $30million for a redevelopment and did not think in the next 10 years we may want to look at playing games at home again. Now we have 5 teams sharing the one ground with the only differentiation being the colours of teams playing. This is the only professional sport in the world that has this ridiculous set up. All other codes particularly European football play at home grounds, all unique.



While I agree that many clubs sharing a facility isn't the norm nor is it ideal for a lot of the reason you raise, I don't think we would have got 30M for anything other than a redevelopment in the way that we did it.

Do you really think a genuine 3rd stadium in Melbourne will give us more of a home ground theme and thus assist with getting our supporters to the games more than Docklands?

I just get the impression so many people want a 3rd stadium in Melbourne but only if it's to be at Footscray.

[GVGjr]

This is not simply about US drawing a crowd. It's about GWS drawing a crowd in Melbourne. Gold Coast drawing a crowd in Melbourne, Freo or Port drawing a crowd in Melbourne.
I don't envisage we'd play every home game at Whitten oval, and Geelong certainly don't play Collingwood or Essendon at Kardinia park. But we could,and should, play and host those smaller fixtures at Whitten Oval.

Can't agree, the ground is now a training and administrative facility. I can't see anyone spending the type of money needed to build another Kardinia Park.

[bulldogtragic]

We can't attract sponsors. We can't retain members. We can't get even get a Friday night game. The logic that says building a stadium impacts any of this is a kin to David Brent hiring staff when told to make redundancies. I'd love to know the business plan that would be sold to investors... "Give us $50,000,000 and history says you won't ever, ever, ever get that money back based on our commercial history". If I didn't bleed for this club I wouldn't put money into it if it was a generic stock on the stock exchange. There is less than no chance of it happening and it has nothing to do with positive or negative thinking. It being a pleasant thought doesn't mean it's remotely viable or at al realistic. Snagging a preseason game is much different to a redevelopment where other Vic teams would willingly play at. If their members won't go, the AFL president's won't agree and it's over before the business plan begins.

[w3design]

We can't attract sponsors. We can't retain members. We can't get even get a Friday night game. The logic that says building a stadium impacts any of this is a kin to David Brent hiring staff when told to make redundancies. I'd love to know the business plan that would be sold to investors... "Give us $50,000,000 and history says you won't ever, ever, ever get that money back based on our commercial history". If I didn't bleed for this club I wouldn't put money into it if it was a generic stock on the stock exchange. There is less than no chance of it happening and it has nothing to do with positive or negative thinking. It being a pleasant thought doesn't mean it's remotely viable or at al realistic. Snagging a preseason game is much different to a redevelopment where other Vic teams would willingly play at. If their members won't go, the AFL president's won't agree and it's over before the business plan begins.

There are many ways to raise the capital. If you pre sell 5000 seats of the 22,000 to 25,000 for 25 years up front for $10,000 or $200 per year you immediately raise $50,000,000. These can be passed on through generations or used as corporate seats till they expire.
You don't need to get your money back, the value is in the core business of the club football matches and live attendance.

These same seats still require yearly memberships to be acquired helping cash flow. 5,000 general admission seats and 5,000 standing room still allows for 12,000 to 15,000 annual or game day seats to be sold.

plus corporate sponsorship, plus catering, plus a clean ground for advertising.

if you keep focussing on the problem using the same paradigm or processes currently used you will never succeed.

think outside the square, have people with vision who lead to this vision and anything is possible.

we are still to busy looking at failed 80's and 90's business models.

run through the possibilities of suggested above for 8 home games per annum and you will find we easily match Geelongs $500,000 profit per match. Now consider the loss we currently make on home games and then tell me there is no business plan that makes it viable. We would also be able to get a level of local, state and federal government support if properly presented and the AFL needs to show its support for the average fans in Melbourne or its next tv rights deal.

i am not saying its easy, but its utter nonsense to keep putting up stale old arguments why things can't be done as they are based on a paradigm that no longer exists.

[bulldogtragic]

If we can raise $50,000,000 that simply then by all means. The $200 a year option won't work because the commitment can be ended at any time. So all that's left is to find 5,000 members to add on $10,000 to their renewal.

Then lobby the AFL, AFL Presidents, Foxtel & ch 7, all levels of government and find sponsors who won't give us anything at the moment. Then there's up keep, maintenance, staffing, repairs, costs, running costs, etc. So find another $250,000 per year. So the plan is short about $7,000,000 . So make it about 6,000 x $10,000 packages. The council would probably demand a multi storey carpark with costs, so make it about 6,500 x $10,000 packages. Also then guarantee all other income and protect against cost creepings, and also protect against any breaching of contracts if the contract to 25 years is maintained.

Happy for the world to prove me wrong, but Im not sure we have 6,500 members who can tick that box to add $10,000 to their renewal. The problem ain't the paradigm, the problem is no one in their right mind would fund it. Not enough sponsors, members, attendees or any Friday night games is a fact, not a paradigm. We are boarder.line the poorest and smallest Victorian club and a few grand stands doesn't address any critical issue.

[w3design]

If we can raise $50,000,000 that simply then by all means. The $200 a year option won't work because the commitment can be ended at any time. So all that's left is to find 5,000 members to add on $10,000 to their renewal.

Then lobby the AFL, AFL Presidents, Foxtel & ch 7, all levels of government and find sponsors who won't give us anything at the moment. Then there's up keep, maintenance, staffing, repairs, costs, running costs, etc. So find another $250,000 per year. So the plan is short about $7,000,000 . So make it about 6,000 x $10,000 packages. The council would probably demand a multi storey carpark with costs, so make it about 6,500 x $10,000 packages. Also then guarantee all other income and protect against cost creepings, and also protect against any breaching of contracts if the contract to 25 years is maintained.

Happy for the world to prove me wrong, but Im not sure we have 6,500 members who can tick that box to add $10,000 to their renewal. The problem ain't the paradigm, the problem is no one in their right mind would fund it. Not enough sponsors, members, attendees or any Friday night games is a fact, not a paradigm. We are boarder.line the poorest and smallest Victorian club and a few grand stands doesn't address any critical issue.

BT Again you are looking for reasons for it not to work and have not understood even the first sentence and have just thought about how we currently do things in Australia, AFL in particular. Where did I say renewal of $200?

The $10,000 for he 5000 is UP FRONT and the $50,000,000 raised from this for the build Guarantees seats that are transferable for the next 25 years. Given seating already costs $200 per year the value for those individuals or corporates is immense when you look at the value of money over time. Any government or AFL funding which we do get at the moment, becomes a bonus but by tying the project to the community the contributions becomes greater.

They still need to renew memberships to utilise the seats if they opt out we already have the seat money and building done. This merely opens opportunities to on sell the seats.

Seriously, you talk about $250,000 pa for upkeep? We still have 12,000 to 15,000 seats to sell per game or per annum on top of memberships. We still have a clean stadium for advertising ad catering. We still have, 5000 seats for General admission and up to 5,000 for standing room, for 8 games per year. Even at a 50% take up, say 6,000 seats at $25 per seat per game is $1.2 million, and we still have 6,000 to 9,000 more seats to sell, plus membership, plus admission, plus catering plus advertising and I have not even added in Corporates other than they would have purchased a portion of the 5,000 seats.

Yes we are one of the poorest clubs in Melbourne, and if we keep doing things the same way and thinking the same way we will remain there.

My concern BT is not that you think this way. I am not sure of your corporate experience and expertise in this area. My concern is the board is still in defensive crisis mode as it has been for many years and are still coming up with the same lack of vision negative thoughts contained in your reply, which will forever see us totally dependant on the AFL not working with them. There are always opportunities and now where the AFL NEEDS to get its heartland re engaged, maybe, just maybe we can take the opportunity.

[bulldogtragic]

BT Again you are looking for reasons for it not to work and have not understood even the first sentence and have just thought about how we currently do things in Australia, AFL in particular. Where did I say renewal of $200?

The $10,000 for he 5000 is UP FRONT and the $50,000,000 raised from this for the build Guarantees seats that are transferable for the next 25 years. Given seating already costs $200 per year the value for those individuals or corporates is immense when you look at the value of money over time. Any government or AFL funding which we do get at the moment, becomes a bonus but by tying the project to the community the contributions becomes greater.

They still need to renew memberships to utilise the seats if they opt out we already have the seat money and building done. This merely opens opportunities to on sell the seats.

Seriously, you talk about $250,000 pa for upkeep? We still have 12,000 to 15,000 seats to sell per game or per annum on top of memberships. We still have a clean stadium for advertising ad catering. We still have, 5000 seats for General admission and up to 5,000 for standing room, for 8 games per year. Even at a 50% take up, say 6,000 seats at $25 per seat per game is $1.2 million, and we still have 6,000 to 9,000 more seats to sell, plus membership, plus admission, plus catering plus advertising and I have not even added in Corporates other than they would have purchased a portion of the 5,000 seats.

Yes we are one of the poorest clubs in Melbourne, and if we keep doing things the same way and thinking the same way we will remain there.

My concern BT is not that you think this way. I am not sure of your corporate experience and expertise in this area. My concern is the board is still in defensive crisis mode as it has been for many years and are still coming up with the same lack of vision negative thoughts contained in your reply, which will forever see us totally dependant on the AFL not working with them. There are always opportunities and now where the AFL NEEDS to get its heartland re engaged, maybe, just maybe we can take the opportunity.

I've not run a footy club, but I've done many a business plan, invested wisely and helped funding arrangements for other businesses. I've written many a contract and researched many investments. I've studied at Masters level in numerous fields across business and law. I'm not sure my experience in this area changes the validity of my posts. It's from experience that this plan can not succeed, attitude or outlook is not relevant.

I pitched something similar to our previous CEO many moons ago along the lines of 1 game a year with a higher ticket price as a quasi fundraiser and engagement vehicle to the old guard. There were so many obstacles in the way it wasn't funny, AFL codes, players and coaches requirements, TV set ups, facilities, car parking, costs of running the day (security, insurance, spoiled food), lack of sponsors, etc, etc. It was literally impossible. It's not just build it and they will come.

It has nothing to do with a lack of vision or negativity, with where we are right now it will never happen. Our biggest issue is businesses and members aren't in for the long haul statistically. The AFL isn't interested in real equalisation and we don't have any block busters or Friday games. Fact, not negative thought. In 1989 we fought back, 7 years later everybody stopped turning up the Whitten Oval again and The Smorgon ticket had to come in change everything because members stopped turning up. Again a fact. If this was so lucrative Victoria Park would be doing it, but they're not. They've got a fair stadium deal, memberships, sponsors lining up, blockbuster games and the like. The AFL would not support it and for viability other teams would need to play there and I don't see any Victorian club voluntarily playing there. The AFL doesn't care, the draw and empty attempt at equalisation shows that. I'm a big believer in thinking differently, and the power of new, critical and positive thinking. But in this case it's not going to work until we can demonstrate to the AFL that we are a new force to be dealt with and to sponsors that we are a good investment for their cash. As GVGJR said, we can rock Etihad and make it tribal like the VFL GF, we are not. As I say, I'd love to be proven wrong. Would love it. But anyone wanting to commit $10,000 for a WO reserved seat should email the club and get the ball rolling.

[Sedat]

Sorry for being on the negative with this but I can't see it happening for at least the next 10 years or even more.

The AFL has too much invested in Eithad as it is. Forgetting the stadium deals and timeslots for games, Eithad is a great stadium with the roof and comfort for the patrons. The AFL has to come up with a better model for us to make money from playing there.
I beg to differ on the so-called greatness of Etihad. To me, and I've been going to both Dogs games and neutral games there since 2000, it is a soulless passionless place devoid of any discernible atmosphere. The empty atmosphere there is completely interchangeable - two sets of different clubs can create the same sense of dread that this place generates. I hate the place. The MCG has so much more atmosphere and real sense of football occasion than Etihad has. Hell, even Princes Park had a much more organic and real feel as a football venue for us in the late 90's.

The key to making Whitten Oval a viable boutique venue is to ensure that it has 7 day a week patronage away from just the sporting venue and training base. Lantern's detailed posts on this issue a few years ago on another thread are well worth reading - in short, if the entire area is developed as a shopping and multi-purpose precinct that gets valuable usage every day of the week, then the expenditure to upgrade the area to accommodate a boutique stadium could be more than justified. Ground capacity would not need to be more than 22k, which would make it the perfect venue to soak up the dozen or so terrible drawing matches against interstate clubs. it would also reinforce the AFL's desire to return the game back to the community, to which Polo Gill is saying and doing all the right things in the post-Vlad era to be a more fan friendly competition.

At the very least it is a discussion worth having and preparing a cost analysis for.

[Twodogs]

Lantern's posts on this topic in this thread;


http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?10699-Playing-home-games-at-Whitten-Oval/page3&p=271060#post271060

[w3design]

I've not run a footy club, but I've done many a business plan, invested wisely and helped funding arrangements for other businesses. I've written many a contract and researched many investments. I've studied at Masters level in numerous fields across business and law. I'm not sure my experience in this area changes the validity of my posts. It's from experience that this plan can not succeed, attitude or outlook is not relevant.

I pitched something similar to our previous CEO many moons ago along the lines of 1 game a year with a higher ticket price as a quasi fundraiser and engagement vehicle to the old guard. There were so many obstacles in the way it wasn't funny, AFL codes, players and coaches requirements, TV set ups, facilities, car parking, costs of running the day (security, insurance, spoiled food), lack of sponsors, etc, etc. It was literally impossible. It's not just build it and they will come.

It has nothing to do with a lack of vision or negativity, with where we are right now it will never happen. Our biggest issue is businesses and members aren't in for the long haul statistically. The AFL isn't interested in real equalisation and we don't have any block busters or Friday games. Fact, not negative thought. In 1989 we fought back, 7 years later everybody stopped turning up the Whitten Oval again and The Smorgon ticket had to come in change everything because members stopped turning up. Again a fact. If this was so lucrative Victoria Park would be doing it, but they're not. They've got a fair stadium deal, memberships, sponsors lining up, blockbuster games and the like. The AFL would not support it and for viability other teams would need to play there and I don't see any Victorian club voluntarily playing there. The AFL doesn't care, the draw and empty attempt at equalisation shows that. I'm a big believer in thinking differently, and the power of new, critical and positive thinking. But in this case it's not going to work until we can demonstrate to the AFL that we are a new force to be dealt with and to sponsors that we are a good investment for their cash. As GVGJR said, we can rock Etihad and make it tribal like the VFL GF, we are not. As I say, I'd love to be proven wrong. Would love it. But anyone wanting to commit $10,000 for a WO reserved seat should email the club and get the ball rolling.

Firstly apologies if you took my questioning of your experience as a form of questioning the validity of your posts. It was more of seeing where your negativity to this type of planning comes from. Experience creates the most obstacles due to emotional involvement.

This system or similar is commonly used overseas, we are one of the few countries never to adopt it. It has and will continue to work as it connects the clubs community in an emotional way.

1 game a year will never work, there needs to be value for members. 8 games allows for all issues raised in your second paragraph to be addressed in the building.

Whether you realise it or not, vision is about looking forward, your claim stating it is not about vision saying where we are now means I will never happen demonstrates it is about vision. We are not nor never will be Collingwood so will never get a deal like they have at the MCG or Essendon at Etihad.

However, as a smaller club we can become financially powerful in our own right. We should learn from the past we will never be economically viable playing all home games at Etihad. We do not have to demonstrate we are a force, we need to demonstrate how we become one.

For all the Facts you are presenting, none of them a relevant when looking to control your own destiny, only you are accepting where you are now.

[bornadog]

I think we are looking at this the wrong way. If we start winning lots of games and are once more a top four side, we will need Eithad stadium to cater for all the fans. In 2009, we averaged 39,805 for all games at Eithad including playing three interstate teams.

Our strategy should be:

1. Win games
2. Attract more members and supporters to games
3. Do a better deal with Eithad.

I disagree with Sedat on Eithad being souless. Any large stadium less than half full will be the same. Its the fans that make the atmosphere great. The VFL GF was just fantastic for atmosphere, and take a look at the A-League games.

In 2009 we played in front of :



Collingwood
51,382


Collingwood
48,888


Essendon
47,120


Geelong
46,818


Richmond
46,261


St Kilda
45,082


Geelong
44,620


Carlton
44,268


That is where we should be at.




Build the fan base so we can become viable. Building for a smaller stadium is admitting we won't achieve the big crowds.

[w3design]

I think we are looking at this the wrong way. If we start winning lots of games and are once more a top four side, we will need Eithad stadium to cater for all the fans. In 2009, we averaged 39,805 for all games at Eithad including playing three interstate teams.

Our strategy should be:

1. Win games
2. Attract more members and supporters to games
3. Do a better deal with Eithad.

I disagree with Sedat on Eithad being souless. Any large stadium less than half full will be the same. Its the fans that make the atmosphere great. The VFL GF was just fantastic for atmosphere, and take a look at the A-League games.

In 2009 we played in front of :



Collingwood

51,382



Collingwood

48,888



Essendon

47,120



Geelong

46,818



Richmond

46,261



St Kilda

45,082



Geelong

44,620



Carlton

44,268



That is where we should be at.





Build the fan base so we can become viable. Building for a smaller stadium is admitting we won't achieve the big crowds.
Average 40,000at Etihad v 20,000 WO approximately $2.5 million less profit

[bornadog]

Average 40,000 at Etihad v 20,000 WO approximately $2.5 million less profit

See my point 3.

[bulldogtragic]

I understand vision, and I'm not negative. I'm skeptical about finding $50,000,000 every 20 years and on a rolling basis to find it with no stakeholder support. But we are going in circles, I suggest emailing the club with the plan.

[w3design]

I understand vision, and I'm not negative. I'm skeptical about finding $50,000,000 every 20 years and on a rolling basis to find it with no stakeholder support. But we are going in circles, I suggest emailing the club with the plan.

Have done so as there are a few other models not traditional, however if there is no want well of course nothing will come of it

[bulldogtragic]

Have done so as there are a few other models not traditional, however if there is no want well of course nothing will come of it

Cool, that is the way of the world.

[Eastdog]

Could the possible E-gate development be an option. Would love the WO to be redeveloped to AFL standard but I'm not sure we can afford it. Is there any guarentee that Ballarat will work out. You'd like to think it will but this government has already pulled out on plans to redevelop Junction Oval.

Would be great to have 50,000 members so we could get the MCG experience more than we do currently.

[SlimPickens]

Keep flogging that dead horse Easty.

[Eastdog]

Keep flogging that dead horse Easty.

Webby got me thinking again about this.

[azabob]

Does the E in E-Gate stand for Easty?

[SlimPickens]

Webby got me thinking again about this.

Just can't see it happening Easty. The AFL will eventually gain complete ownership of Etihad Stadium in 2025. What's the point in spending big money to build a stadium that will only achieve revenue gains in the short term for the competing clubs?

With our and the governments commitment to Eureka stadium, it just doesn't make sense for the AFL to go down the path of building a boutique stadium at great financial cost. I have no doubt if it was going to happen, it would have by now.

But hey keep fighting the good fight.

[Eastdog]

Does the E in E-Gate stand for Easty?

Nice one azabob :) :)

[Eastdog]

Just can't see it happening Easty. The AFL will eventually gain complete ownership of Etihad Stadium in 2025. What's the point in spending big money to build a stadium that will only achieve revenue gains in the short term for the competing clubs?

With our and the governments commitment to Eureka stadium, it just doesn't make sense for the AFL to go down the path of building a boutique stadium at great financial cost. I have no doubt if it was going to happen, it would have by now.

But hey keep fighting the good fight.

Yeah its an intersting debate. Right now we need to get crowd numbers up out our home games at Etihad as much as we can.

[hujsh]

Just can't see it happening Easty. The AFL will eventually gain complete ownership of Etihad Stadium in 2025. What's the point in spending big money to build a stadium that will only achieve revenue gains in the short term for the competing clubs?

With our and the governments commitment to Eureka stadium, it just doesn't make sense for the AFL to go down the path of building a boutique stadium at great financial cost. I have no doubt if it was going to happen, it would have by now.

But hey keep fighting the good fight.

The way the situation we stated in another thread Etihad sounded like a money pit sitting on a gold mine with the property value increasing a great deal and the stadium underperforming and needing expensive repairs in the near future.

No idea who's right, that's just the argument as I remember it

[jeemak]

The way the situation we stated in another thread Etihad sounded like a money pit sitting on a gold mine with the property value increasing a great deal and the stadium underperforming and needing expensive repairs in the near future.

No idea who's right, that's just the argument as I remember it

If I was advocating for Stadium Management Consortium I'd be getting them on the front foot for a new stadium venture on land that isn't as valuable, and pretty much closing out the Etihad contract by no later than 2022.

The AFL isn't a stadium management business and it never will be. Because the Consortium is going to be out of a job in ten years it will be looking for something productive to invest in, and in this instance the AFL will actually have some leverage in determining how clubs can be treated from a contractual perspective, and some understanding of how the process should work not being a novice this time around.

I'd be thinking a maximum capacity of 45K in another enclosed venue, that can benefit from upgrades in technology in stadium design and be fully functional for enclosing towards a rectangular field.

Anyway, I don't see a third stadium getting up.

[Eastdog]

If I was advocating for Stadium Management Consortium I'd be getting them on the front foot for a new stadium venture on land that isn't as valuable, and pretty much closing out the Etihad contract by no later than 2022.

The AFL isn't a stadium management business and it never will be. Because the Consortium is going to be out of a job in ten years it will be looking for something productive to invest in, and in this instance the AFL will actually have some leverage in determining how clubs can be treated from a contractual perspective, and some understanding of how the process should work not being a novice this time around.

I'd be thinking a maximum capacity of 45K in another enclosed venue, that can benefit from upgrades in technology in stadium design and be fully functional for enclosing towards a rectangular field.

Anyway, I don't see a third stadium getting up.

It would be beneficial for clubs like us to have a 3rd boutique stadium but if it doesn't happen we must get a better deal at Etihad Stadium and make sure we are making a profit from there. Ive said it before but would our profit improve somewhat if we say played like 3 home games per year at the MCG?

[Bulldog Joe]

Interesting debate, but I think the only certainty is that the stadium as Docklands (currently known as Etihad) will cease to be a sports venue.

The property value just makes it far too attractive for development.

This means a new stadium will be required, it is just a matter of where.

I would see it as most likely being funded from an investment consortium, who would again negotiate an AFL buy back arrangement providing certainty to their bottom line, with an opportunity for upside.

[jeemak]

It would be beneficial for clubs like us to have a 3rd boutique stadium but if it doesn't happen we must get a better deal at Etihad Stadium and make sure we are making a profit from there. Ive said it before but would our profit improve somewhat if we say played like 3 home games per year at the MCG?

Eastdog. You need to understand that the AFL and the MCC don't want us to play at the MCG, and that we need to play at Etihad to pay the bills. It's been continually stated to you that this is the case, and there's no avoiding it.

I agree that a better deal and better crowds at Etihad will help, but you need to forget about playing home games at the MCG.

[Eastdog]

Eastdog. You need to understand that the AFL and the MCC don't want us to play at the MCG, and that we need to play at Etihad to pay the bills. It's been continually stated to you that this is the case, and there's no avoiding it.

I agree that a better deal and better crowds at Etihad will help, but you need to forget about playing home games at the MCG.

Understand jeemak. I'm just putting thoughts out there to improve our profits from our home games.

[GVGjr]

Understand jeemak. I'm just putting thoughts out there to improve our profits from our home games.

There is no getting aroud the fact that unless we start drawing good crowds at Etihad we wont get the call up to play home games at the MCG.
Getting a better deal at Etihad will greatly assist. Ballarat might also help as with the traditional smaller drawing games.

[Eastdog]

There is no getting aroud the fact that unless we start drawing good crowds at Etihad we wont get the call up to play home games at the MCG.
Getting a better deal at Etihad will greatly assist. Ballarat might also help as with the traditional smaller drawing games.

Getting some Friday night games would help too. Yes that is the issue our crowds at our home games recently which is not helped by the fact we play quite a few interstate teams at home.

[Ozza]

If we got Friday night games, we'd still get poor crowds and there'd be excuses about how hard it is to get to matches on Friday nights with families and young kids playing Friday night basketball! :eek:

[Eastdog]

If we got Friday night games, we'd still get poor crowds and there'd be excuses about how hard it is to get to matches on Friday nights with families and young kids playing Friday night basketball! :eek:

No local footy on Friday night Ozza so those folks will come to the game hopefully.

[Greystache]

There is no getting aroud the fact that unless we start drawing good crowds at Etihad we wont get the call up to play home games at the MCG.
Getting a better deal at Etihad will greatly assist. Ballarat might also help as with the traditional smaller drawing games.

Not being fixtured home games against 7-8 interstate teams a season would be a good start. Of course the AFL will make sure we don't have the chance to control our own destiny.

[Eastdog]

Not being fixtured home games against 7-8 interstate teams a season would be a good start. Of course the AFL will make sure we don't have the chance to control our own destiny.

So far we have only played one Victorian team St. Kilda in a home game at Etihad. The rest were against West Coast Round 1, Adelaide round4, Freo round 7 and GWS round 9.

[Twodogs]

I wonder if the 2022 World Cup maybe being up for grabs again makes any difference to Etihad's future?

We may need all the stadia we can get. They say that when FIFA leave after a WC all they leave behind are bills and empty football grounds.

[westdog54]

FIFA's criteria is at least 10 stadiums of 40000 or more.

Australia has:

MCG: 100000
Stadium Australia: 84000
Docklands: 56000
Adelaide Oval: 53000
Lang Park: 52000
SCG: 48000
SFS: 45000
Subiaco: 43500
The Gabba: 42000
kardinia park: 34074
Newcastle Stadium: 33000
AAMI Park: 30050.

Anything below that would require a significant upgrade to get anywhere near that.

[Twodogs]

FIFA's criteria is at least 10 stadiums of 40000 or more.

Australia has:

MCG: 100000
Stadium Australia: 84000
Docklands: 56000
Adelaide Oval: 53000
Lang Park: 52000
SCG: 48000
SFS: 45000
Subiaco: 43500
The Gabba: 42000
kardinia park: 34074
Newcastle Stadium: 33000
AAMI Park: 30050.

Anything below that would require a significant upgrade to get anywhere near that.

Could the actual oval be constructed over at the bigger ground to increase the capacity? A soccer pitch is considerably smaller than a cricket/football ground.

[Twodogs]

There a few areas in the Top End and FNQ that could do with a new soccer come modern sports facility. Darwin or Cairns. Build the stadium to hold 50 or 60 k people and then convert some of the seating back into dressing rooms/admin and stuff. Don't know how that helps us though.

[westdog54]

There a few areas in the Top End and FNQ that could do with a new soccer come modern sports facility. Darwin or Cairns. Build the stadium to hold 50 or 60 k people and then convert some of the seating back into dressing rooms/admin and stuff. Don't know how that helps us though.

Townsville currently holds 26000 and they host the NQ Cowboys. Might be able to upgrade that.

KP could potentially have seating on the arena.

You and I both know a 50k Stadium in Darwin would be a white elephant.

The only other possible candidate I could think of would be a substantial rebuild of Canberra Stadium that would incorporate a state of the art AIS and HQ for a multitude of national governing bodies.

[boydogs]

You and I both know a 50k Stadium in Darwin would be a white elephant.

They only got 8,000 to Souths v Canberra in Cairns this year

[GVGjr]

Getting some Friday night games would help too. Yes that is the issue our crowds at our home games recently which is not helped by the fact we play quite a few interstate teams at home.

I'd rather play them at home than away.

I can't see the AFL building a 3rd stadium and I can't see them replacing Etihad with a smaller venue when the likes of Ballarat, Hobart and Launceston etc are available.

I think you are posing a lot of what ifs for something that is never going to happen.

[Twodogs]

Townsville currently holds 26000 and they host the NQ Cowboys. Might be able to upgrade that.

KP could potentially have seating on the arena.

You and I both know a 50k Stadium in Darwin would be a white elephant.

The only other possible candidate I could think of would be a substantial rebuild of Canberra Stadium that would incorporate a state of the art AIS and HQ for a multitude of national governing bodies.

But we're reducing the capacity and replacing it with amenity after the tournament.

[westdog54]

But we're reducing the capacity and replacing it with amenity after the tournament.

Even still, would the use justify the investment?

[Eastdog]

I'd rather play them at home than away.

Agree Friday night home games if we get them would be better.

[Twodogs]

Even still, would the use justify the investment?


There's jobs in the construction and the refit, there's people coming in for the World Cup and there's a world class sports facility left in Darwin when everyone goes home. If we are going to have to build 3 or 4 50, 000 seat stadia then we have to think about what to do with them afterwards.

[jeemak]

I don't think we'll have to worry about it anyway:

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jun/09/australia-no-fifa-events-until-overhaul

[soupman]

From memory FIFA requires 12 stadiums picked from a list of 15-16 in something like at least 9 cities and no double ups (ie. multiple stadiums in the same cities), although they could stretch that for one or two cities in an exceptional circumstance I believe.

Our problem is that of our list of 12 biggest stadiums only 7 different cities are represented and two of those cities are Newcastle and Geelong. Maybe to get to 9 you steal the Gold Coasts ground and give Canberra a game, but from there its really pushing it. Darwin and Hobart would be next in line, but are all too small, require too much money to be invested in much too big stadia and unlike Geelong aren't close enough to major cities to grab crowds coming down the highway.

On top of this the limited stadiums per city means the SCG, Docklands and almost certainly Aami Park would all miss out, and there wouldn't be much of a legacy left as any new stadia built would be a white elephant. The only place where a new rectangular stadium could be semi-justified would be to give Victory an alternative to Etihad that is bigger than Aami, and there is no way they would build a new stadium in a city which already has more than enough for a world cup.

If we hosted a world cup our best chance would be in partnership with NZ, with games in Auckland and Wellington. And I'm not sure FIFA is keen on having joint hosts from different confederations and taking up two automatic qualifier spots. Not to mention the ridiculous travel times.

Besides, the Bulldogs would see no benefit from a world cup scenario, and seeing as it would direct substantial funds into the refurbishment and enhancing of stadia across the country it would leave little government funding for any upgrades or new builds that would actually benefit us.

[Twodogs]

From memory FIFA requires 12 stadiums picked from a list of 15-16 in something like at least 9 cities and no double ups (ie. multiple stadiums in the same cities), although they could stretch that for one or two cities in an exceptional circumstance I believe.

Our problem is that of our list of 12 biggest stadiums only 7 different cities are represented and two of those cities are Newcastle and Geelong. Maybe to get to 9 you steal the Gold Coasts ground and give Canberra a game, but from there its really pushing it. Darwin and Hobart would be next in line, but are all too small, require too much money to be invested in much too big stadia and unlike Geelong aren't close enough to major cities to grab crowds coming down the highway.

On top of this the limited stadiums per city means the SCG, Docklands and almost certainly Aami Park would all miss out, and there wouldn't be much of a legacy left as any new stadia built would be a white elephant. The only place where a new rectangular stadium could be semi-justified would be to give Victory an alternative to Etihad that is bigger than Aami, and there is no way they would build a new stadium in a city which already has more than enough for a world cup.

If we hosted a world cup our best chance would be in partnership with NZ, with games in Auckland and Wellington. And I'm not sure FIFA is keen on having joint hosts from different confederations and taking up two automatic qualifier spots. Not to mention the ridiculous travel times.

Besides, the Bulldogs would see no benefit from a world cup scenario, and seeing as it would direct substantial funds into the refurbishment and enhancing of stadia across the country it would leave little government funding for any upgrades or new builds that would actually benefit us.

I agree. Co hosting with NZ is the best way. I don't really want the World Cup, due to the BS involved and the fact that it's already been awarded to Qatar (they did what they had to do in order to get the tournament, playing by the rules at the time, it's not their fault that FIFA is corrupt) but I just have a feeling that it's coming our way.

[westdog54]

I agree. Co hosting with NZ is the best way. I don't really want the World Cup, due to the BS involved and the fact that it's already been awarded to Qatar (they did what they had to do in order to get the tournament, playing by the rules at the time, it's not their fault that FIFA is corrupt) but I just have a feeling that it's coming our way.

The USA would be first in line if it's stripped from Qatar I would have thought.

[Twodogs]

The USA would be first in line if it's stripped from Qatar I would have thought.

It depends on a lot of things I guess. All of a sudden there are a lots of balls in the air. For infrastructure a,readyin place the USA would be the safest bet at short notice.

[chef]

It depends on a lot of things I guess. All of a sudden there are a lots of balls in the air. For infrastructure a,readyin place the USA would be the safest bet at short notice.

It's not really short notice as there's still 7 years until that Cup.

We have no chance at getting the WC IMO.