One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on July 16, 2011, 04:51:35 AM

Title: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: one-eyed on July 16, 2011, 04:51:35 AM
As mentioned by WP on OER a week or so ago ...


The Coburg Tigers, another team coming out of contract, are also confident of a deal with Richmond for the next three years despite Richmond coming on the front foot and wanting a stand-alone team in the VFL.

Several AFL clubs have looked into the concept of fielding their own team as soon as next season, but it is likely to be a long-term goal rather than a short-term one.

Even then, some VFL pundits believe that by 2014 powerhouse clubs Geelong and Collingwood will have perhaps fallen down the ladder and the trend of becoming stand-alone may have died off.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/sandringham-still-saintly-20110715-1hi12.html#ixzz1SCXkh9Md
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: 10 FLAGS on July 16, 2011, 08:02:17 AM
If this occurs then its a terrible decision. You cant go out on the one hand raising millions of dollars and then make a decision like this, when you have told the supporters a key priority is to have your own reserves team.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: Jackstar is back again on July 16, 2011, 08:05:18 AM
I thought one of the reasons to raise money was to also have a stand alone reserves team ? ::)
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: akhoury on July 16, 2011, 08:26:15 AM
If this occurs then its a terrible decision. You cant go out on the one hand raising millions of dollars and then make a decision like this, when you have told the supporters a key priority is to have your own reserves team.

I get the feeling the clubs fund raising didn't go as well as hoped. They aimed to raise $6 million at the beginning of the year. I doubt they got even half of that.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: sugark on July 16, 2011, 09:15:31 AM
Richmond are as much to blame if people think the Coburg alliance hasn't worked.  The coaching staff have very minimal dialogue with the Coburg coaching staff except for say Tim Clarke who spends time at Coburg.  Other than that Dimma hasn't even introduced himself to some of the Coburg staff, I would have thought that if it were to work then the Coburg people would be made to feel a part of the whole set up rather than ostracised from it.  The RFC football manager treats the Coburg people like leppas, very poor on RFC front they should be more embracing if they want the transition to work for our younger players from Coburg to RFC.

Another monumental blunder from our inexperienced coaching panel, I would imagine that Mick Malthouse would be all over Tarkyn Lockyer and his assistants to ensure they are doing things the same way as him.  RFC and Coburg should be no different, treat it as an alliance rather than a alienation.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: TFL on July 16, 2011, 09:28:23 AM
I am not saying you are wrong Sugark.

But you cant compare us to Collingwood, they have their own team and they all train at the same venue etc Ofcourse they are going to be better set up or have a better relationship.

You need to compare our alignment to others such as Melbourne, North, Hawks etc
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: sugark on July 16, 2011, 09:39:16 AM
I am not saying you are wrong Sugark.

But you cant compare us to Collingwood, they have their own team and they all train at the same venue etc Ofcourse they are going to be better set up or have a better relationship.

You need to compare our alignment to others such as Melbourne, North, Hawks etc


Sorry TFL i have to disagree, regardless of whether they train together or not my point is that the RFC coaching staff and the Coburg coaching staff should be in it together not a division.  If they are fair dinkum about the transition of our younger guys then there is no other way than to embrace rather than alienate.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: tony_montana on July 16, 2011, 11:52:41 AM
Terrible decision with even worse timing. Like a couple have already said, one of the key priorities of the FTF is a standalone side yes? ...and yet within 6 months they go ahead and sign a 3 year extension with coburg? What rubbish - same old bullshitting richmond FC. Taking the pee out of supporters
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: 10 FLAGS on July 16, 2011, 11:57:43 AM
Terrible decision with even worse timing. Like a couple have already said, one of the key priorities of the FTF is a standalone side yes? ...and yet within 6 months they go ahead and sign a 3 year extension with coburg? What rubbish - same old rubbishting richmond FC. Taking the pee out of supporters

100% spot on. Its absolutely disgraceful if its true.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: gerkin greg on July 16, 2011, 12:01:04 PM
I must say this news has upset me a great deal.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: TigerLand on July 16, 2011, 12:04:42 PM
Absolutely gutted if so.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: Smokey on July 16, 2011, 12:24:58 PM
Reality check guys.  It will take a minimum 1-2 years of planning and implementation to get a standalone side up and running, and that won't happen until we can be sure it can be funded on an ongoing permanent basis (the AFL will demand this before it allows us to do so anyway).  Given that only part of the FTF money is for the standalone side and we are only halfway in terms of timeframe and money raised, then it makes perfect prudent sense to sign a new agreement for 3 years.  Any less would be unreasonable, any more might be detrimental so 3 years seems about right to me.  A standalone side can't possibly happen before then so why not sign the agreement?
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: Jackstar is back again on July 16, 2011, 12:25:24 PM
Terrible decision with even worse timing. Like a couple have already said, one of the key priorities of the FTF is a standalone side yes? ...and yet within 6 months they go ahead and sign a 3 year extension with coburg? What rubbish - same old rubbishting richmond FC. Taking the pee out of supporters

Have you just realised that clubs use up supporters
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: Jackstar is back again on July 16, 2011, 12:27:50 PM
Reality check guys.  It will take a minimum 1-2 years of planning and implementation to get a standalone side up and running, and that won't happen until we can be sure it can be funded on an ongoing permanent basis (the AFL will demand this before it allows us to do so anyway).  Given that only part of the FTF money is for the standalone side and we are only halfway in terms of timeframe and money raised, then it makes perfect prudent sense to sign a new agreement for 3 years.  Any less would be unreasonable, any more might be detrimental so 3 years seems about right to me.  A standalone side can't possibly happen before then so why not sign the agreement?

If Collingwood were in the same position, it would happen over night
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: Smokey on July 16, 2011, 12:39:01 PM
Reality check guys.  It will take a minimum 1-2 years of planning and implementation to get a standalone side up and running, and that won't happen until we can be sure it can be funded on an ongoing permanent basis (the AFL will demand this before it allows us to do so anyway).  Given that only part of the FTF money is for the standalone side and we are only halfway in terms of timeframe and money raised, then it makes perfect prudent sense to sign a new agreement for 3 years.  Any less would be unreasonable, any more might be detrimental so 3 years seems about right to me.  A standalone side can't possibly happen before then so why not sign the agreement?

If Collingwood were in the same position, it would happen over night

Rubbish.  You can't change the facts of financial position, logistics, approvals etc.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: Jackstar is back again on July 16, 2011, 12:42:30 PM
Reality check guys.  It will take a minimum 1-2 years of planning and implementation to get a standalone side up and running, and that won't happen until we can be sure it can be funded on an ongoing permanent basis (the AFL will demand this before it allows us to do so anyway).  Given that only part of the FTF money is for the standalone side and we are only halfway in terms of timeframe and money raised, then it makes perfect prudent sense to sign a new agreement for 3 years.  Any less would be unreasonable, any more might be detrimental so 3 years seems about right to me.  A standalone side can't possibly happen before then so why not sign the agreement?

If Collingwood were in the same position, it would happen over night

Rubbish.  You can't change the facts of financial position, logistics, approvals etc.

Eddie McGuire can achieve the unachievable.
he did get athletics aust moved out of Olmypic Park so Colligwood can take over
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: Jackstar is back again on July 16, 2011, 12:44:07 PM
Mate, and thats why we are where we are.
look at Carlton, make there own rules to get Judd, re Visy involvement and now the AFL cover up the loop hole
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: Penelope on July 16, 2011, 12:49:28 PM
Reality check guys.  It will take a minimum 1-2 years of planning and implementation to get a standalone side up and running, and that won't happen until we can be sure it can be funded on an ongoing permanent basis (the AFL will demand this before it allows us to do so anyway).  Given that only part of the FTF money is for the standalone side and we are only halfway in terms of timeframe and money raised, then it makes perfect prudent sense to sign a new agreement for 3 years.  Any less would be unreasonable, any more might be detrimental so 3 years seems about right to me.  A standalone side can't possibly happen before then so why not sign the agreement?

good bit of perspective smokey.

it cant be rushed, particularly if we dont have the funds for it right now.

If we rushed the decision and a balls up occurred the club would cop a bagging for that. Once again it seems that no matter what way they go they just will not please some people.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: tiger101 on July 16, 2011, 12:50:45 PM
Reality check guys.  It will take a minimum 1-2 years of planning and implementation to get a standalone side up and running, and that won't happen until we can be sure it can be funded on an ongoing permanent basis (the AFL will demand this before it allows us to do so anyway).  Given that only part of the FTF money is for the standalone side and we are only halfway in terms of timeframe and money raised, then it makes perfect prudent sense to sign a new agreement for 3 years.  Any less would be unreasonable, any more might be detrimental so 3 years seems about right to me.  A standalone side can't possibly happen before then so why not sign the agreement?

100% agree with smokey on this.
Also I think the FTF will keep on running into next season before we reaching the full 6 million.
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: WilliamPowell on July 16, 2011, 03:23:26 PM
If this occurs then its a terrible decision. You cant go out on the one hand raising millions of dollars and then make a decision like this, when you have told the supporters a key priority is to have your own reserves team.

True if the raised a caertain amount of the $6 mil

The Club also made it very clear that to field their own VFL side they said they would need $4-4.5 mil of the $6mil.

They also guaranteed (rightly) that the majority of the money was to get rid of the debt.

At the moment they got $2.6 of the $6 - a long way off and therefore as per what they have said all along not enough to field their own VFL side.

And let's not forget they have always said it was highly unlikely that they would have their own VFL team in season 2012.

I think you will find that both clubs will have an out clause ....
Title: Re: New 3-year deal between Richmond and Coburg (Age)
Post by: tony_montana on July 16, 2011, 05:28:53 PM
If this occurs then its a terrible decision. You cant go out on the one hand raising millions of dollars and then make a decision like this, when you have told the supporters a key priority is to have your own reserves team.

True if the raised a caertain amount of the $6 mil

The Club also made it very clear that to field their own VFL side they said they would need $4-4.5 mil of the $6mil.

They also guaranteed (rightly) that the majority of the money was to get rid of the debt.

At the moment they got $2.6 of the $6 - a long way off and therefore as per what they have said all along not enough to field their own VFL side.

And let's not forget they have always said it was highly unlikely that they would have their own VFL team in season 2012.

I think you will find that both clubs will have an out clause ....

Hang on a sec WP - didn't Infamy, yourtself(if not u then i apologise) and several others tell us all that we are using the FTF money to spread evenly across all priorities not mainly debt? This was after myself and a few others said just get rid of debt first and save ourselves 500mill in interest payments.

which is it? this is what annoys me about the club - constant mixed msgs to appease the masses at different junctures of time.

Just a smoke and mirrors FOS club