Geelong has about as much chance as South...nudda

Cant for the life of me recall what your stadium is called these days but South still shares the record crowd at the venue...16,500 something...was always a hot ticket when Ange and the lads would travel to Perth...and we mostly got thumped:lol:

18k in 1998 against South Melbourne.

Also 17,000 Adelaide United v Sout Melbourne at Hindmarsh 2004...record for a domestic game at Hindmarsh...im amazed that hasnt been beaten yet..surely Del Piero will.

Won't be beaten in Perth, stadium capacity reduced

Boring. Smfc promising world and delivering nothing in vain attempt to impress ffa

I have serious concerns and this direction has split the club in 2 and media statements like this compounds things even further

Issues: South will isolate itself from the football community and tag itself to elitist - question is at what cost – from where I am standing right now the exchange rate does not look good

Football clubs are measured by members – clubs with 1000 kids will be stronger than clubs with 100 kids any day of the week and at any level

As for the presentation – all very glossy but no carriculum data - just some mug coming from Brazil with a significant price on his head (who is he?)

I am more interested in data – there seems to be a huge upfront investment – what is the plan to sustain costs and RIO – how will it be measured and by whom?

On the last 5-10 years - what exactly is it that makes south so priveledged to be so elite?
Football at all levels should be inclusive – not exclusive

There appears to be 2 seperate columns of thought here

What smfc's aspirations are and the projected model and what the FFV Proposal which have launched on the following site - under the guidance of the FFA

http://www.footballfedvic.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Competitions/NCR/NCR_Presentation_FFV_July_2012.pdf

Below are the Key details regarding the NCR from the FFV website that challenges smfc's direction

Proposed Framework - STRUCTURE

•Can only have one team in each age bracket
•Cannot field sides in community competitions or SSF competitions
•For Junior age brackets under 18 and down recruitment must come from a designated zone (or part of a zone in the case of Wimmera South Coast and Goulburn North East)
•Junior players (u18 and down): To be eligible for selection talented player identification is based on the community club they play for NOT their residential postcode
•When an u18 participant becomes a playing member they automatically become a legal member of the club
–Therefore all junior players (all parents or guardians) have the right to have a say in how the talented player club is run


New structure would require clubs who wish to participate in second-tier competition to have the teams identified below
•Must meet the NCR & FFV team requirements and/or have a plan to meet them over the Licence period
–SAP Training Programs (9 – 11 years boys and girls)
–Under 12 Boys, Under 13 Boys, Under 14 Boys, Under 15 Boys,
Under 16 Boys–Under 18 Boys, Under 20 Men, Open Men
–Under 12 Girls, Under 14 Girls, Under 16 Girls
–Under 18 Girls, Open Women Accredited

Proposed Framework

•No promotion and relegation from/to the community leagues while the licensed clubs are meeting NCR requirements

–Promotion and relegation may exist between the 2 divisions within the League for all age brackets to ensure the best teams play against the best at each age level or
–The 2 divisions are based on geographical division ie East Victoria, West Victoria

•As the sport grows new licences may be added to the new structure, but not within the first licence period
•No other semi professional leagues in Victoria

Licence fee:

•Estimated $50k

–Based on current fee structures for clubs entering teams in VPL/WPL and teams in the identified age brackets

Junior fees:

•clubs will be able to charge a fee for junior players

•Budget and fees for junior programs will need to be submitted to FFV for approval
•Based on information collected from VCL clubs and extrapolating this to a 40 week season the cost of the program would be approximately $110k.

–This is dependant on cost structures of the club in terms of venue costs, administration costs, coaching payments etc.

•Estimated cost based on VCL model for 40 week season is between $700 and $1,000 per junior player
•Scholarships should be available to talented players unable to afford fees

Senior Teams Costs:

•Men‟s and Women‟s senior teams will participate in semi-professional Leagues
•Points Cap to apply to both Leagues will help reduce player payments, to be set at 200 points (currently VPL clubs operating on 280 to 330 points)
•Accredited NCR clubs will receive a greater share of training compensation
•NCR clubs ability to earn revenue from canteen sales, gate takings, fundraising and sponsorship will remain in the control of clubs
•Costs associated with running senior teams in the NCR will be similar to costs associated with the VPL.
–This is dependant on cost structures of the club in terms of venue costs, administration costs, coaching payments, player payments etc.
Accredited 1st

____________________________________________________________
Where do I start ......
Firstly - under who's guidance has the club decided to charge $3,200 per kid when the FFV has clearly stated no more than $1000 max per player?

The FFV will not pass this - one of the catalysts for the FFA to launch the review that led to the NCR program was that Junior fees nationally were scrutinised - - - -remember? - or have we forgotten already?

An FFV officer has already stated at an information session that if south think they can charge $3,200 per child then thay are kidding themselves

Secondly - FFA Guidelines are that the following age groups will have 1 team only - 12s-14s-16s-18s-youth(20s) and seniors (u25s+) = so this means atleast 1 in 2 of the 300 registered players will miss out

Thirdly - Each elite club that represents its zone can only receive players registered within that zone up to U18s

I can go on and on......point is smfc have launched an elitist program for next season on the back of the NCR program which is still in a proposal stage and currently going through a consultation period

Furthermore: The 2 planograms (smfc's and FFV's) have a monumental disconnect between them - our direction and the FFV's are 2 different pathways alltogether - there is no resemblance between the 2

This begs the question - under who's advocacy has the club gone and employed specialist coaches etc for next season and at what cost?

Again - where is the risk assessment? - This will marginalise the club at all levels - even seniors which will have a silly points system

We do not even know if we will be accepted in this program - the FFV program is still being built - but I guarantee you there are certain elements that are not Negotiable from the FFA HQ

What concerns me the most is that the model south has released for next season resembles a privatised institutianal model - yet smfc is a public asset

My View: This is an iscolated plan and nothing to do with thr NCR - more to the point - I have concerns smfc may have used the NCR as a convenient excuse to launch its own carriculum - and to a small minority niche market



Edited by chris: 13/10/2012 10:37:45 PM

Point is south will appeal solely to a niche (extreme Minority) market - not good

Mr Chris M......s,
Firstly, 3 people on a SMFC forum disagreeing are not half the club. Inexperienced over-opinionated individuals seem to be plentiful in our code.
SMFC aspires to play at the national level via the Aust Premier League.

Just participatory community clubs have a place in our code. However a club like Smfc with its heritage, infrastructure and ambition need to aim higher. The direction of the club is obviously to play at the highest possible level.

I'd be surprised if a majority of their members wish otherwise..
The NCR are a work in progress with FFV announcing its preferred transition model soon. So don't get too hung upon what they have published 'for discussion'

Well Chris - you bring up some valid points about the clubs structure and you are obviously Blue and White through and through! I'm not sure that I agree with their approach as it is contrary to developing the best in the region,but you bring up points regarding a members based club that has made decisions without the members being informed. I assume that you are a member - have you asked the question of the board or those in charge?

repeat thread

Edited by chris: 13/10/2012 10:19:22 PM

My views will remain based on what has been delivered by the FFV - what has been posted is official - everything else is speculation and my views will remain until such a time when/if their official stance has been altered - afterall it is the current model the FFV are working of when they are addressing the football community statewide during their info sessions - however Our model does not match up with the FFVs at all ATM

What a shame I don't know who you are - nor do I care to find out - nor do I attack the man rather than the ball

I guess the AGM will give us a true indication of who is for and against it

Happy to back down if my views represent the minority - are you?


Edited by chris: 13/10/2012 10:42:12 PM

Well done SMFC, if all HAL clubs and at least another 10 clubs follow this initiative, we could see some great things for Aus football.

For those that are bagging this initiative, it's time to embrace the change and become a leader like SMFC or lag behind and preish into oblivion.

I have spoken with 3 Board memebrs - provided my views and indicative concerns backed up by data and the response has been just wait and see - well myself and other members (more than 3 LOL) have some serious concerns - our concerns are centralised on protecting this valuable asset called smfc - I am a third generation member and have a right to raise concerns based on available data

Meanwhile - the club keeps spending cash on a model that is not finalised - I guess the key is transperancy - at the moment there is hardly any - just spend - and reassurances formalised with a wink

One thing is for certain - certain board members do not enjoy being challenged....what a shame - true leaders thrive on challenge

Edited by chris: 13/10/2012 10:32:02 PM

Read the thread one_toouch - no one has said it's not a great initiative - in fact I think that I said that as well. The points are more about whether the club should have the Rolls Royce ( which most decent players can't afford ) and now the fact that they gone ahead with it without all members across it considering the APL league is not going to start until 2014 - that means there will be a year where the club has made a decent amount of dollars depending on expenses off course. You are obviously an advocate - perhaps you know more than most - care to be provide more detail on the where the dollars generated will go in 2013 season?

No offence but there are too many keyboard warriors who offer critiques but NO SOLUTIONS

Chris table a SMFC preferred model u would like to see..that grows membership, attracts sponsors, developed players, and I presume u would like to see your team play at the highest level..
We are all curious

Oh
And cost it.

Then I'm sure u would have a preferred model on how the National comp should be run, does it include relegation /promotion ?

My Views are clear

smfc should have an aspiration to have over 1000 - 1500 juniors at $500-$700 per kid - whether they be directly with the club or affiliated via satelite clubs

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

Costing it would take me way too much energy - however $3,200 is overkill

smfc needs to aspire to achieve junior participant volume - I have discussed this with the board repeatedly - then costs can be absorbed and scholarship programs can be offered to the talent at a marginal price increase

I am extremely ambitious when it comes to smfc - however I don't like "exclusivity" - I believe it will be more damaging than the "ethnic perceptions" we have had to absorb the last decade

One thing the club has shown is its uniqueness by having a capacity to design and execute in such a tight timeframe - industry leader - however in my view the club's objective is ill-directed

small market = small exposure regardless of the comp we play in


Edited by chris: 13/10/2012 11:04:41 PM

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

'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.

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.

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.

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

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 promise I wont bring a Keyboard to the AGM:)

Enough for now

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.

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

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

go smfc

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