Seriously Troy5 - you should keep to intelligent comments as you are not representing the club in the best light. Great to be passionate but keep to rational constructive comments as I believe that Chris has. The discussion was about the direction of the club and whether there was a better way as well as a member based club not approaching the business of SMFC in an appropriate manner. In my world - this doesn't happen. As I have said - put forward the plan, inform, discuss, review and revise if need be. Common business practice. SMFC is a great club with great people - don't mistake constructive criticism for destruction of your beloved club.

CCTV & Chris.
Our code suffers from way too many 'expert commentators' that have little experience or any runs on the board in running things successfully.
It's like taking advice from a homeless drunk in the street on 'how to manage your family'

Every club has its self opinionated experts, but when these individuals take their views into public forums, they are actually harming their club.
It's like those destructive fans lighting flares & claiming they are supporters of the club.
Sometimes people's perception of their self importance is far greater than their ability or judgment.

Best to keep your views in house.

Well put Chris - although somewhat heated. It is normal business practice to review, challenge, refine and then set up a path that is inclusive of all stakeholders. Apart from the fact that I am not confident that the state will get any better players with a system like this - it would seem to me that a better approach would have been to consult with NSW, Queensland and then make a recommendation from there. This just gets worse and worse - I am astounded that there has not been better governance at board level. Considering that there has not been a championship won since? You would think that they might have thought a bit harder about this. Anyway would be interested to see where it ends up - there's an information night this week? Be keen to hear the outcome. By the way - the under 21's are apparently paying for the trial and cost of $3500 - what happens when they get a senior gig - they are paid for that I am assuming so then?

May as well talk about the NSW NCR Program for a moment

You can view it here:

http://www.kdsa.asn.au/UserFiles/File/FNSW%20Correspondance/Board%20Decision%20200712/Competition%20Review%20Board%20Decision%20Final%20dated%2020%20July%202012.pdf

Based on this model that was released in June by FNSW - the following needs to be highlighted

- there is nothing on their recomnmendation that highlights anything regarding a club representing its zone

- There is nothing on their recommendation that highlights 1 team per age group in the Juniors

- Senior point system is in place

- none of the clubs publicly endorsed this progam upfront like we did - all the clubs held off and worked with each other anf their federation via open and honest consultation

- the point system at senior level remains - however I am certain that this element was the major scrutiny point between the clubs and their federation

My Point: whilst the inclusion of Olympic - United and Marconi have provided the NSW NCR with credibilty for next season it must be noted that the NSW version of the NCR does provide clubs the canvass to maintain their club structure - heritage and point of differentiation

On the other hand and the point that still gives me the shits and what needs to be raised by the memebers is the following....in Vic - the plan has some monumental differences - The FFV positioned the NCR as an extension to their Summer Zonal League with either successful clubs or newly created establishments to be the representative in each zone.

Unlike FNSW which clearly represents its clubs - FFV brought out a model which would make smfc a much thinner model at ground level and flatten the club culture and differentiation the club had built over the last 52 years

What infuriates me even more is that the panel - these so calles professionals that represented smfc agreed to it and fully endorsed it without hesitation - my message to these guys - "now are you guys representing yourslves or the club?

The creation and developments of the Victorian NCR and whatever the outcome will be is no thanks to the panel that represented smfc - my message to them is that you are Naive - you busiiness acumen in negotiation at a high level is non existent and the club was held hostage via your arrogance and ill informed self assessment

GET IT RIGHT

I always welcome change - but like I said - we dont just opt for change for the sake of change and certainly not on the model that the FFV produced

The VIC model is an extreme model and one that is designed for challenge to meet middle ground - but again and as we have shown repeatedly in the past - we just jump on things like a bunch of amatuers without weighing up the risks

Finally - Any favourable results regarding adjustment to the existing criteria will be on the back of the outcome of NSW and also the resistance and challenge of other clubs in Victoria - not smfc

We acted with desperation and panick = stupidity


Edited by chris: 16/10/2012 05:02:09 PM

Thanks Stallion - will be interested to see how it all pans out!

http://www.footballqueensland.com.au/index.php?display=item&id=1751

These are the Qld teams in the APL for 2013
For those interested

CCFC u asked about the teams

http://www.footballnsw.com.au/index.php?id=17&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=7155&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=389&cHash=68d12cbe55

NSW has just announced their 2013 Aust Premier League clubs.
Qld Football did a month ago
APL is on next season whether people like it or not.
2014 in Vic !

GDeathe good to see that you still have an interest in the goings on at South Melbourne and its History.

It is good to see that South Melbourne has affected your life so much that you find the need to comment.

Viva! South Melbourne.

wait, what wasn't the club originally red and white

everything the club has done since screwing the naive sth melbourne united part of the amalgumation has very much been small minded

Forgot that aspect of the new program that it is outsourced and we haven't developed a club cultural program.

Never dismiss anything - especially on the back of a National Review - I have been pushing the satelite club agenda for years - difference is that my proposal grows the brand - stimulates inclusion and stretches the fabric of this club over multiple locations and segments = diversity / growth / Brand awareness

Arthur also makes some valid recomendations

What I question with the NCR is the following - 1 team per age group - teams accepted in this program cannot be affiliated or associated or have representative clubs at any other state level or associations = shrinkage / 1 Point of Presence / community dissengagement

This will leave the club with a very thin trunk and no branch

Why football in this country loves operating under a capped system beats me up every time

Futhermore the way smfc is going about it is a total Organisational Restructure - and whilst I understand changes are required and all organisations need to adapt - it does pay to sit back - take a deep breath and see how things unfold

So why the rush as far as smfc is concerned?

The whole NCR application is about best past the post - not first past the post

If financials are a valid reason at the AGM then they are doing it for the wrong reason and revenue does not equate to market appeal - Retention - Growth and Sustainability in this business

If "compete at the highest level" card is tabled at the AGM then I am prepared for that too

Again - what is at stake?

Firstly there is much much more to a football club than its colors - location - infrastructure
Identity - who we are - where we come from and the future directions are critical in this business

Clubs should build on their legacy
Clubs should build on the identity and its integrity

I am not sure smfc truly appreciates how valuable these fundamentals are and that identity is not something you put a dollar figure on

You sell a clubs identity - You sell its soul

The smfc youth proposal is an institutionalised, privatised model - w2ho will it represent?

Everyone I have spoken to believes the whole direction smacks of arrogance and that has rubbed on on all the clubs achievements - this is not inclusive

From a marketing point of view - football already has an elitist system - it is called the HAL - NYL and WL >>>>>>> The NCR will sit under these comps

Question is what will smfc's point of differentiation be???



Edited by chris: 14/10/2012 07:18:51 PM

Really nice to see some new forumites signing up on 442 to discuss South's new junior setup.

My personal opinion is firstly that regarding the new program at South I don't really think it will have the desired outcomes. Which is to produce players capable of firstly playing for South, secondly reaching A-League standard and thirdly Europe.

Integrating this junior setup into the APL will also have its limitations due to the restrictive practices regarding player recruitment at zone level and restrictions on pricing as well as restrictions on the program delivery (programs must be approved by the FFV TD).
Mixing the two together will not acheive the desired outcomes as South is brought even further down to the common denominator of being a Zonal administrative club.

The alternative which I have discussed some time ago amongst South people was to develop a system of junior development to develop a larger pool of players. The concept would be to develop centres of excellences in the inner East South North and West as well as 4 outer suburban areas.

Each centre of excellence would be developed to accomodate upto 800 players per centre, the main focus would be to reconnect with the membership and support base to get their kids to play for SOuth at a Junior level.
Developing a database and support base moving the club forward. The Albert Park location would be for developing players showing potential.

Just a basic outline for here, but I think you get the gist.

Shocked is right - which is why the FFV has said in their forums that they will need to review it - they have been told that it is a great programme but the costs are prohibitive. By the way - I believe that the APL set up is starting in season 2013 in Sydney - is that true? Which clubs are participating?

Meant medical ''Physios', damn spell check !

Just went through Sths pamphlet, 4 x 2 hour training sessions then a match so 10 hours a week. 48 weeks in total, with physics, school tutors for kids to do homework before training, full time coaches, tech director from Brazil, and they have a General Mgr.

They offer more than any NSW club at the moment .
Good luck to them for having the 'kahunas' to put it all together

any parent that aspires their child to play at a high level spends between $2500-$$3500 a year.
i Know, that's what it costs me.
Some parents than pay for glorified overseas trips to UK, Europe then add another $5000 plus

Look everyone is shocked in Victoria cause they've just worked out what it actually costs to develope footballers.

Is it still enough to compete internationally. I still don't think so.

yes your right Stallion - i have been in Sydney and spoken to a few clubs about what they are doing moving forward and to date it is about charging $2500 per annum for......? SMFC should be acknowledged as taking a brave step - the step is too far forward and my fear is that they will not have much to show for it in 5 years time.

We have the same problem in Syd, Neanderthals with no idea or experience on running clubs wasting everyone's time with criticisms but when you ask them to table a workable model, it's 'I don't have time'.

Most federations let alone clubs have stuffed around for years & yep most of the u16s national Joeys that failed recently came from NSW. do we have the right credential coaches ? Or training formats? Or leadership with experience? I don't know

But a club like Sth having the balls to try & improve its youth / coaching / with 'overseas experts' should be applauded, I bet it's not cheap, but Australia's national squads are getting worse not better. the Dutch experiment has failed so far, hopefully the NCR will fix it.

Also, for the SMFC board members or their affiliates on here, getting personal with club members and treating them as dinosaurs isn't helping your cause - it only makes you look more elitist and out of touch.

There are elements of the club that are very resistant and conservative when it comes to change, but tarring them all with the same brush is counter productive. Chris is a good guy, and a dedicated member. Just because you disagree with his position, doesn't mean you should dismiss his concerns out of hand. Having known him for two or three years now, we have had many disagreements on South issues, but he has never been disrespectful and has never had anything less than the club's interests at heart.

You know when you argue for something like this, you're actually arguing for something similar to the NCR's zone set up?

i hope the members/board with a view to a future get uo over the paleantologists like chris

go smfc

My Last comment on this topic

Troy 5 said only 3 of us are against this program on the forums

There is a Poll on the forum - 22 votes in total - 18 are against it - not big numbers but pretty indicative

The NCR is a filter for the HAL - fair enough - it will sit under the NYL and WL - yet those two channels hardly attract revenue - so what is the plan for the NCR regarding exposure and revenue?

I have no doubt the intention is to attract the best talent - but talent is meant to filter up from each zone via the community clubs (has smfc engaged any of the clubs in each region? - ofcourse not) - not through trials at a cost of $599 and a seasoned fee of $3200

Like I said - there are disconnections everywhere - the club endorsed the NCR program which is still being built and made a significant investment on the back of this program with its own program that is iscolated completely to the NCR

Whether we agree or disagree with the NCR - the south model and the NCR model are poles apart

Why the rush?

I hope these so called football experts can answer these simple questions at the AGM - I need to feel better about the whole thing as I am extremely opinionated and naive as pointed above by Troy5

My fears are on the back of smfc diving into something that is still taking shape - it will alienate existing members - Potentially, it will marginalise the club's presence in the community with this niche model - and it will close off existing revenue channel

In summary the club better know what it is doing - it has to explain how watching an u25+ team as a senior level against newly formed sides (a bunch of NTCs)will retain existing fans and attract new fans and sponsors - the club has to explain how 1 team per age group will grow our presence at junior levels

I guess what I am saying in my simplistic "opinionated and naive manner" is that if the club FUCKS THIS UP - there is no return -> stretch targets - rushed models and shortcuts involve big risk taking

As I have said - the club has decided to make a significant investment and a complete relaunch of its brand - they need to reassure the members - smfc has been built over 52 years - this has the potential to disassemble the club in months - permanently


Edited by chris: 14/10/2012 01:08:45 AM

Nice duck and weave Troy5 - by the sounds of it - the club won't be getting anywhere fast with one sided opinions that will not listen to dinner table chats.
I think that the mag should send a journo to the AGM - will make for decent reading after the event. BTW - I hope the club succeeds with it's endeavours.

I promise I wont bring a Keyboard to the AGM:)

Enough for now

We have capacity for atleast 400 kids at our venues

As I said satelite clubs - similar to the acquisition of the SE Pirhanas academy - only issue aside from the fact that they are an academy - they were broke and we gave them a lifeline (smart business)

The season before was even more ridiculous with O.S and his Academy and ofcourse the old A.D who both left with their kids in tow (smart Business)

One example would be to approacha community club like Nunnawadding :)

They have over 400 kids

Oh thats right - we did already - but they canned our proposal as they viewed it as tooo elitist and results driven

South should target the south eastern corridor along the Princess Hwy and Neapean Hwy - 5 solid community clubs with reciprical benefits

LOL with your personal attacks and discredit attempts - you are not interested in a potential market that uses a dinner table and likes talking football?



Edited by chris: 14/10/2012 12:08:48 AM

I know, every one has an opinion.
The facts are that we all have been focused on 'participation' over talent development particular in Victoria.
The code is going backwards cause we aren't developing players. We have failed nationally at producing players. Abysmal results in U16, U17, Olyroos and I cant see us making the next World Cup either.

Clubs like Smfc are bitting the bullet and obviously doing the hard work to support National initiatives, which finally seem progressive and you have inexperienced keyboard warriors talking nonsense.

In regards to money, best to ask the club, but its appears a monumental endeavour by a great club to lead the way. How much would it cost to run a program like that? Last time I checked they were a members based club, no shareholders, not owners, so it all goes back to coaches, players, parents, facilities, rents, strips, FFV regos etc etc

By the way - the U16 Joey team has been smacked overseas. Wouldn't be using the NSW Fed as an example of developing players if that team is stacked with them.

Troy5 - perhaps you could answer the question. Vic APL season is not supposed to start until 2014. The academy is starting now - have you got some details on where the money is going in 2013? Queensland is moving ahead with their model for next season - how are they set up considering they have followed the NCR directive? Shame I am not going to be in Melbourne - would be an interesting AGM!! The game is full of one sided opinions - that's the problem.

'I believe an academy should be the result of having a community ground model and then providing opportunity to the most tatented kids'

So how would this model work?
Where would you house the 1000 plus players, where will you find the grounds miraculously to train etc, do u want your club to be part of the Aust Premier League or not?

The clubs that are affiliated: do they pay Smfc the registration funds, what does affiliated mean??
How will that bring more people to the Stadium, you think a State 1 club playing 2 rugs beneath the ALeague and Aust Premier League will be able to be viable??

Where is the costing??

Typical over opinionated comments and no substance or real detail to support ones view, its a common problem in our code.

Talented players will be attracted to Aust Premier League Clubs, have u studied the NSW model?? Obviously not.

The U16 Joey side out of 23 man squad had 1 Victorian (the reserve goalkeeper) How will your 2 sessions a week 6 month program develop players??

Chris, please save your opinions for the dinner table with your friends over a beer, best to leave the hard work to those best able.

As for the NCR and the New FFV Model - it is the FFV that approached us and the rest of the football community - therefore it is up to the FFV to provide a model that suits the need of the game - the clubs - the players and football community

However smfc is the only club statewide to date that agreed to this "unfinished model" - now in my experience in football and in business -> you get a more favorable result by resisting rather than accepting - especially when someone comes to you with a proposal <- not only did smfc accept - but did it swiftly without consultation -----> part of a negotiation process is to welcome change for the better however to resist detail that does not meet the clubs model - and there are many elements of the FFV proposal which raises serious questions

smfc has given this proposal credibility by endorsing it when it is clear as I highlighted already there are certain elements that raises serious questions in regards to costs and points systems to name a few

Now the club has spent a significant amount of money on a prgram which is still being built - which is why I raised the question-----> Perhaps smfc has welcomed the NCR as a convenient excuse to implement it's own program - I have no doubt smfc wants to play at the highest level - but at what cost???

What next - change name - change colors???? we just cant keep agreeing for the sake of agreeing

smfc is still a big big club but it is obvious it is not thinking like a big club when it is so conveniently obedient to the FFV which has issued what can only be described as the right direction - but an extremely naive model

That Is the point of view I have developed and I am entitled to it based on the data that is available - Perhaps one day my viewpoint will change - however I can only observe the data that has been released and at the moment my viewpoint is FIXED


Edited by chris: 13/10/2012 11:33:34 PM

Edited by chris: 13/10/2012 11:49:43 PM