Different side of the Equalisation - Story in yesterday's Age.

[mustang]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...f-the-equalisation-debate-20131213-2zcsl.html

Hi guys was in the Age yesterday not sure if anyone had posted it already. Great read.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Messenger]

Great article.

Our success is good management decisions with a splash of luck. The Mirvac deal at Waverley was crazy good.

 

[Hodge2NormSmith]

Great article..... For us.

Not so much fun if 1966 is your year of choice....

 

[Procrastinator35]

A lot of people rightfully praise Ian Dicker in his role as the Club's saviour, though choose to Ignore the role Jeff Kennett played in turning Us into the Independent, self-sufficient, financial powerhouse of an Entity that we are today!....He may be opinionated & have a big mouth ( Yeah I know- Me too ) & be a constant source of lampooning....But geez We owe That bloke a huge debt of gratitude!.....Not the least of which for his continued defiance towards Fat VLAD!....For THAT alone I'll love this bloke forever, No matter what anybody says about him in this here forum or anywhere else!

Oh yeah, before I forget....Thanks also Jeff for Dragging the State of Victoria from out of The Victorian Era & into the 21st Century...I Salute You....There said it, Jeff's critics can all go & suck the Big One!

 

[Goodo73]

I noticed in the article's comments the usual one about the Hawks' success in the 80s increased the supporter base and ultimately provided the injection of funds. Not sure I find that argument all that valid, especially when it doesn't seem to be true for North and their crack teams of the 90s. For me it's the decisions & deals made at the club management-level that have had a big hand in getting Hawthorn to where it is now.

 

[Thaihawk]

Great article..... For us.

Not so much fun if 1966 is your year of choice....

Spent 10 months of that year overseas. Listened to the GF and loike most was on the Saints. England won the World Cup when I was working in an English pub, so it was a great year for me.

 

[Thaihawk]

I noticed in the article's comments the usual one about the Hawks' success in the 80s increased the supporter base and ultimately provided the injection of funds. Not sure I find that argument all that valid, especially when it doesn't seem to be true for North and their crack teams of the 90s. For me it's the decisions & deals made at the club management-level that have had a big hand in getting Hawthorn to where it is now.

Must agree with Goodo here. I think most bandwagoners that jump on in times of success, will jump off just as quickly when success fades.

 

[BlueWaterHawk]

Must agree with Goodo here. I think most bandwagoners that jump on in times of success, will jump off just as quickly when success fades.

Not if they're young kids making up their minds who to support. They're the group who have come through to be members now.

bit I of a tangent here, but I think modern fabrics have also helped improve people's opinion of our colours also. The brown is darker and the gold more vivid now, which is easier on the eye. The colours look fantastic in a crowd, gold always offsets the boring colours of other teams well.

 

[Noneedforaname]

Must agree with Goodo here. I think most bandwagoners that jump on in times of success, will jump off just as quickly when success fades.

North could've enjoyed a greater legacy and might have something to crow about today, if the Duck hadn't s**t in their nest.

So much damage, leaving such a bad taste in everyone's mouth. How could you think back to that time with any fondness?

If we didn't have so many other stars, and Buddy was allowed to run unrestrained like Carey - we could have faced a similar situation, with the gloss taken off our most recent golden period (though thankfully on a much smaller scale)! I think people realise his departure was a blessing in disguise, the upside will be that we keep existing talent, and can identify and inject new talent as required. Opened a door of opportunity to further success, which is what we're all about.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Amazing what has happened since 96, and the new era from 04 (Clarkson's reign).

When I think of the clubs that were either in solar positions to us at those times or better placed than at us at those times, to where they and we are now it must be said that we are very lucky to support such a great club.

Down and out financially in 96, down and out on the field in 04.

Top of the charts in both now.

 

[Thaihawk]

Not if they're young kids making up their minds who to support. They're the group who have come through to be members now.

bit I of a tangent here, but I think modern fabrics have also helped improve people's opinion of our colours also. The brown is darker and the gold more vivid now, which is easier on the eye. The colours look fantastic in a crowd, gold always offsets the boring colours of other teams well.

Have to agree. Our colours do look fantastic, and the modern "shirt" compared to the old fashioned jumper also works in our favour.

 

[moginie]

Great article.

Our success is good management decisions with a splash of luck. The Mirvac deal at Waverley was crazy good.

In hindsight, it's the deal that turned us into a financial powerhouse. Coupled with the financial commitment of a rapidly increasing membership base, it has changed our club forever.

 

[Rabbitpig]

Great article.

Our success is good management decisions with a splash of luck. The Mirvac deal at Waverley was crazy good.

The deal with Tassie is also a big big winner for us.
With the 'clean stadium' deal we get, I've been told we're at least a million dollars a year better off playing the games in Tassie, and that's without the huge sponsorship dollars we get from the government.
Not wanting to take the thread off topic, but it amazes me some 'maybe selfish?' Vic supporters want us to return to being a Melb only club!.

 

[JoeHawk]

I noticed in the article's comments the usual one about the Hawks' success in the 80s increased the supporter base and ultimately provided the injection of funds. Not sure I find that argument all that valid, especially when it doesn't seem to be true for North and their crack teams of the 90s. For me it's the decisions & deals made at the club management-level that have had a big hand in getting Hawthorn to where it is now.

The 80s factor was huge in hawks becoming the powerhouse it is today. This was dermies and Don Scott's driving force during the merger debate and it worked. As awful as that year in 1996 was,and what could have been, it was in fact the kick in the rear every hawthorn "barracker" needed to become a paid supporter. And don't forget, hawks were also powerful in the mid to late 70s. That's 15+ solid years near and at the top. No other club compares. North's power years wasn't even half of this. We can be somewhat thankful that the merger threat occurred and although there was some pain to follow a lot of luck went our way too, but we always had good leaders such as dicker, Kennett and dunstall that directed us to where we are today.

 

[Procrastinator35]

I'm reading a lot about Luck here & not enuf about just plain bloody hard work.... THAT combined with astute governance, business acumen, & Damn Good Foresight!....These things don't just happen by a 'stroke of luck.'

We pulled ourselves out of the mire, just as We did when one John Kennedy Senior arrived on the Scene in 1950....THE HARD WAY! From The Ground UP!....Our success is real....It's roots are strong & are grounded on a firm tangible basis!

Not many other clubs can say the same....Yet the AFL continue to kick us up the Arse for having the audacity to defy them from 1996 onwards....Weird THAT!

 

[Bosk]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...f-the-equalisation-debate-20131213-2zcsl.html

Hi guys was in the Age yesterday not sure if anyone had posted it already. Great read.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It was a good article -how rare is it to see anything longer than a couple of paragraphs written by footy journos these days, and obviously well-researched too- but I did not enjoy reading it.


Why? Because call my paranoid or crazy but I thought Niall came across as being jealous of Hawthorn's accomplishments and eager to chalk up our financial powerhouse status largely to being fortunate with a couple of key decisions that fell our way.

An example being when he speaks of the Waverly arrangement being 'the deal of a lifetime' and perhaps it was, but did he bother to mention how we were kicked out of Princes Park, after the club was forced to invest some of its own money in renovating the John Elliott stand too? (Or whatever that shitty stand was called back then)

He also made it sound as if we were opportunists by taking advantage of Tasmania. Which I suppose you could argue in a sense we were, but the club worked its butt off to make that move successful, it didn't just fall into our lap. St.Kilda got out because it was all too much effort, are we supposed to feel sorry for them lacking the foresight Hawthorn possessed?

Jake Niall is a Collingwood supporter and by reading between the lines the message that I got out of that article was "Hawthorn was once a minnow club but after an insane run of luck they're now bursting at the seams with dollars and would like to think of themselves as a power club like mine, except they really aren't because Collingwood's greatness is God-given and everyone in Australia knows it".

Well yeah, heck you Jake Niall if that's what you happen to think. Our club deserves every ounce of its success which it worked bloody hard to earn.

 

[Bosk]

I'm reading a lot about Luck here & not enuf about just plain bloody hard work.... THAT combined with astute governance, business acumen, & Damn Good Foresight!....These things don't just happen by a 'stroke of luck.'

Precisely.

You make your own luck in this world and fortune favors the brave. Hawthorn may have had its share of luck since the "bad times" of 1996 but so has every other club - difference is our club has worked its butt off to make the most of the luck it had.

To label Hawthorn's off-field accomplishments over the past two decades as "luck" is absolutely insulting, it completely sells the club short.

 

[Stratton_Gun]

I don't understand. Why did we get it for $1?

 

[Hawkk]

The 80s factor was huge in hawks becoming the powerhouse it is today. This was dermies and Don Scott's driving force during the merger debate and it worked. As awful as that year in 1996 was,and what could have been, it was in fact the kick in the rear every hawthorn "barracker" needed to become a paid supporter. And don't forget, hawks were also powerful in the mid to late 70s. That's 15+ solid years near and at the top. No other club compares. North's power years wasn't even half of this. We can be somewhat thankful that the merger threat occurred and although there was some pain to follow a lot of luck went our way too, but we always had good leaders such as dicker, Kennett and dunstall that directed us to where we are today.

This.

North were one of the 2-3 power clubs from 1974-1980 and than from 1994-2000. That's 12 years or so as a top football club for 4 flags.

The Hawks by contrast was one of the 2-3 power clubs from 1971-1991 and aside from 1972-73 and 1979-1981 Hawthorn practically had a mortgage on the Preliminary Final/Grand Final weekend. That wall to wall dominance (12 GF's, 8 flags and 3 PF's) will never be repeated again (which is te great irony of equalisation, with the way the system is now set up the status quo is perpetually in stone)

North and Hawthorn had very similar records in the '70s, while the Hawks of 2007-2013 and North of 1993-2000 practically mirror each other...but North have never had a 1983-1991 period to solidify and broaden its base.

Hawthorn have experienced wall-to-wall success in all the eras that will ensure that it'll continue to grow in the future. In 10/15 years time I have no doubt the clubs growth will mushroom again on the back of its current success.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Yes, I agree that sustained on field success (with a few blips along the way) is a strong factor in our off field success and increasing support/membership.

 

[Pessimistic]

Imagine if premier jeff and the afl didnt have such a hard on for docklands and dicker succeeded in persuading them to allow him to engage backers to improve waverley

Imagine something like metricon stadium at waverley with us playing several of our games there, not tasmania

I dont think luck has gone our way at all, but we made the best of a bucket of s**t.

One key decision was dicker sniffing that docklands is financial suicide for clubs well before anyone else did, and that was the reason we originally got into tassie

 

[Roddy]

It was a good article -how rare is it to see anything longer than a couple of paragraphs written by footy journos these days, and obviously well-researched too- but I did not enjoy reading it.


Why? Because call my paranoid or crazy but I thought Niall came across as being jealous of Hawthorn's accomplishments and eager to chalk up our financial powerhouse status largely to being fortunate with a couple of key decisions that fell our way.

An example being when he speaks of the Waverly arrangement being 'the deal of a lifetime' and perhaps it was, but did he bother to mention how we were kicked out of Princes Park, after the club was forced to invest some of its own money in renovating the John Elliott stand too? (Or whatever that shitty stand was called back then)

He also made it sound as if we were opportunists by taking advantage of Tasmania. Which I suppose you could argue in a sense we were, but the club worked its butt off to make that move successful, it didn't just fall into our lap. St.Kilda got out because it was all too much effort, are we supposed to feel sorry for them lacking the foresight Hawthorn possessed?

Jake Niall is a Collingwood supporter and by reading between the lines the message that I got out of that article was "Hawthorn was once a minnow club but after an insane run of luck they're now bursting at the seams with dollars and would like to think of themselves as a power club like mine, except they really aren't because Collingwood's greatness is God-given and everyone in Australia knows it".

Well yeah, **** you Jake Niall if that's what you happen to think. Our club deserves every ounce of its success which it worked bloody hard to earn.

The Pies may have slightly more money and a few more fans than us, but 11 flags in the same time that they've won 2 tells us all who the true great and powerful club is.

 

[Flukey!]

Yes, I agree that sustained on field success (with a few blips along the way) is a strong factor in our off field success and increasing support/membership.

Particularly with the young kids who are often easily influenced.If you can hang onto the kids, in time these hopefully translate into members and life-long fans.

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

The Pies may have slightly more money and a few more fans than us, but 11 flags in the same time that they've won 2 tells us all who the true great and powerful club is.

Collingwood are the single most club reliant on handouts from the AFL. It's called the self perpetuating FIXture which ensures favorable scheduling and profitable return games.

They have done little to no hard work themselves.

Hawthorn has made the hard decisions and worked tirelessly to make them succeed. Being lumped with Collingwood is disrespectful to the Hawks administration.

 

[Thaihawk]

The Pies may have slightly more money and a few more fans than us, but 11 flags in the same time that they've won 2 tells us all who the true great and powerful club is.

This is all that is needed to stick it up pie fans (including Eddie and any jurnos), and they will Shut up! They really realize which club is better, but just aren't game to admit it.