The Dominance of Dublin GAA *Mod warning post#1*

RoyalCelt

kilns wrote: »

Again had Longford caught up with Dublin? The answer is no and never will,

In a would before dublin were blasted with millions it was actually possible. 2005 being the case in point. I'd imagine if Longford had been receiving 20M in development funds the previous 10 years and 10 million in sponsorship they'd have been in even better shape and would have beat Dublin. Unrealistic yes but it just shows how GAA special money interventions can alter results.

Enquiring

beggars_bush wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great if there was funding for clubs in rural counties to 50% fund a club coach?
Clubs could even row in together to share this 50%

Except, every club in Dublin is treated differently than those outside the county. Why is that?
Despite many of them having multi million euro in turnover

It really is a sad reflection on the GAA and what it has become. Of course, what you suggest would not only be the fair way but the right way to have done things. They decided to give one county special treatment. It was a business decision, nothing more. There were far more deserving counties, look at what GAA players in the 6 had to go through. The GAA made their money off their investment but now the profits are falling. It's up to the rest of us to protest with our feet. Hit them where it hurts. This is all of our organisation. It would die without us.

RoyalCelt

Enquiring wrote: »

It really is a sad reflection on the GAA and what it has become. Of course, what you suggest would not only be the fair way but the right way to have done things. They decided to give one county special treatment. It was a business decision, nothing more. There were far more deserving counties, look at what GAA players in the 6 had to go through. The GAA made their money off their investment but now the profits are falling. It's up to the rest of us to protest with our feet. Hit them where it hurts. This is all of our organisation. It would die without us.

Weird question. How many players are left playing outside of Dublin who hold a Leinster Medal or an All Ireland medal? Could we see a day where no current player from outside the capital holds either honour for the first time ever.

Enquiring

RoyalCelt wrote: »

Weird question. How many players are left playing outside of Dublin who hold a Leinster Medal or an All Ireland medal? Could we see a day where no current player from outside the capital holds either honour for the first time ever.

Would any of the Meath/Louth players from 2010 still be playing? Strangely, you might have to go back to 2003 in Leinster if Munnelly is still playing. There would be a few on the Donegal and Kerry squads. Maybe some on the Cork squad as well.

StupidLikeAFox

ArielAtom wrote: »

Tikka, this is the root of the misunderstanding by certain posters. The development funding which was allocated to Dublin was for the development of children of the ages 5-12 or to put it simply for those who can't grasp that simple fact, Primary School kids. .

How about these quotes from Dublin development officers - this would prove the opposite of what you are saying, or that the funding was used to focus on the club *instead* of the schools:

"It would have been difficult, trying to work the club-school relationship when you were trying to cover that many clubs. I’d say 65 percent of my time back then would have been in the schools whereas now it would be 75 percent with the club [Kilmacud]."

"The big change came when the funding came through in 2004, 2005. All of a sudden you had 40-45 coaches. Instead of having to go around to 10 clubs, you only had to focus on one or two"

kilns

RoyalCelt wrote: »

In a would before dublin were blasted with millions it was actually possible. 2005 being the case in point. I'd imagine if Longford had been receiving 20M in development funds the previous 10 years and 10 million in sponsorship they'd have been in even better shape and would have beat Dublin. Unrealistic yes but it just shows how GAA special money interventions can alter results.

In 2005 Dublin beat Longford by 19 points

RoyalCelt

kilns wrote: »

In 2005 Dublin beat Longford by 19 points

2006. You know the match I went. Used to be famously known as the last time dublin played outside croker even for qualifiers. Back when the dubs weren't world beaters and the gaa needed every advantage to milk the Dublin gate for money and hope you win at the same time.

MayoAreMagic

Strumms wrote: »

Dublin vs Kildare 2017...Attendance ... 66,734 for example turned up.

Positive thing not to play in croker ? If there are 60 thousand plus people demanding tickets the fair outcome is to play a match in a venue that can enable as much demand as possible to be catered for... ?

You’d rather that match take place in a venue with about half that capacity, turning up.

It’s game of the ‘common person’... so play it where you can accommodate as many as possible but the game costs to run... and corporate facilities and entertainment do their share as a revenue generating facet of and for the GAA... it’s not just Dublin who benefit from that.... every sport, athletics, soccer, tennis the same... or maybe the GAA should have gone a different way, forget corporate facilities and when the likes of people are complaining about investment and lack of facilities assistance from the GAA, they can be happy they contributed to killing a revenue stream that can and does help GAA nationwide.

Funny enough, their average attendance in leinster for the same year was around 37000 - not even half of croke parks capacity. Is it even paying to open croke park on those figures?
They played a game in omoore park, which has a capacity of 22000, and only managed to bring 13400, including the opposition fans. Where were all these people demanding tickets that you referenced?

Clearly there is more than enough room in plenty of grounds for an average of 37000 and a less than half full croke park is pointless.
Your harping on about 'corporate' and revenue streams misses the most important point - have a good product that people want to see. If you have that then the rest is easy, and you dont need to be chasing corporations because they will come to you. We dont have that unfortunately.
As for your huge pride in the 66000 odd figure for the leinster final. Well Mayo and roscommon were able to get 65000 odd for the quarter final in the same year, so it is no great feat at all for dublin to be honest about it. Furthermore i will be the first to say, the game shouldnt have been in croke park at all, 65000 or not. Corporate types can travel too cant they? If the product was there, they would.

Strumms

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Funny enough, their average attendance in leinster for the same year was around 37000 - not even half of croke parks capacity. Is it even paying to open croke park on those figures?
They played a game in omoore park, which has a capacity of 22000, and only managed to bring 13400, including the opposition fans. Where were all these people demanding tickets that you referenced?

Clearly there is more than enough room in plenty of grounds for an average of 37000 and a less than half full croke park is pointless.
Your harping on about 'corporate' and revenue streams misses the most important point - have a good product that people want to see. If you have that then the rest is easy, and you dont need to be chasing corporations because they will come to you. We dont have that unfortunately.
As for your huge pride in the 66000 odd figure for the leinster final. Well Mayo and roscommon were able to get 65000 odd for the quarter final in the same year, so it is no great feat at all for dublin to be honest about it. Furthermore i will be the first to say, the game shouldnt have been in croke park at all, 65000 or not. Corporate types can travel too cant they? If the product was there, they would.

It’s not about a good product. It’s about a sport.. team A, endeavoring to beat team B...comprehensively.... that is what sport is.. professional or otherwise...Golf, soccer, basketball, Gaa ..football camogie and hurling, darts, hockey, tennis...competition... professional, amateur, under age, college, you name it.

Each team or participants in every fûcking sport wants to beat the other team as comprehensively as possible... in my tennis competition days in competitions I wanted to hammer the fûck out of the opposition... I wanted the kid to remember next year having beat him 6-3 6-1 6-2..

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

In 2015 Dublin's sponsorship total was 1.1 million, it moved to 1.5 million in 2016. It 2019 it sat at 2.1 million. It's ever increasing. What happens when it goes up to 5 million? Higher? Let's not forget, this increased sponsorship was gained off the back of increased success across Dublin GAA, that success came about from the Games Development money paid for by all of us.

Perhaps it’s ever increasing because dublin have been successful and are more marketable as a result over that period? As noted earlier Kerry’s sponsorship has been adversely affected by their relative recent lack of success.. similarly corks sponsorship deal includes a huge additional performance related element. Given the prominence of hurling in cork compared to dubli I’d say they’ll do well from that element over the lifetime of the deal.

Tell me enquiring, is there a reason you think kids growing up in dublin should get less attention in terms of game development than elsewhere? We’ve already seen that per capita dublin has significantly less coaches than the rest of Leinster- 118 vs 60 to 70. Why exactly shouldn’t kids in dublin have access to games development just so your county can win an all ireland or Leinster by beggaring teams that are better than yours.

Btw congratulations to cork for getting their act together and pursuing a strategy to maximise sponsorship revenue. I’m assuming all the split dublin brigade will now recant the posts where they assured is it ‘couldn’t be done by other counties’ and ‘ wouldn’t work elsewhere’. Hopefully this is the beginning of other counties taking this stuff seriously- the idea of counties with huge diaspora in particular playing the poor mouth on their commercial appeal as an excuse to not move forward helps mo one

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

That's not possible and you know it's not possible. In this GAA you envisage, it's about those who can gain access to funds who will excel and those who can't will be confined to the b competitions I assume you're in favour of. There's only one path that will lead us down.

That's not the GAA I want to see and it's not what the GAA is supposed to be about. If you're happy to compete unfairly then you are in the same boat as the Dubs. The rest of us have to stand up and put a stop to this.

Why is this a problem for you now but not for the 30 years that Kerry were ahead of everyone in sponsorship terms for example? You paint a picture that somehow money was nice and fair pre this dublin team while ignoring that evidence that it was anything but. What do you think the issues with funding were pre this dublin team and how do you propose to fix them? I assume you’re equally unhappy with the skewed nature of the championship pre 2011?

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

Yes, no one has suggested that!

It's interesting though that you bring up Longford. They nearly beat Dublin in 2006, this was just after the increase in funding was sent Dublin's way. The investment into Dublin GAA was supposed to bring results. The GAA wanted and needed to make a return on it. So Dublin were moved to Croke Park for every championship game for the next 10 years after that scare v Longford.

Amazingly, Longford were able to compete with Dublin before the millions of euros took effect. It's crazy the difference money can make.

Wait, a few pages back you were telling us dublin were seeing the benefits of the money back in 2003. Now you’re telling is in 2006 the GAA couldn’t get any return from the dublin money

At least get your story straight and stick to it

tritium

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

has the laois offaly amalgamation happened yet?

thats why the split will never happen.

how many coaches do dublin have vs kildare for example?

From earlier dublin have 60-70 games dev personnel. Rest of Leinster have 118. Per capita rest of Leinster have significantly more than dublin

beggars_bush

tritium wrote: »

Perhaps it’s ever increasing because dublin have been successful and are more marketable as a result over that period? As noted earlier Kerry’s sponsorship has been adversely affected by their relative recent lack of success.. similarly corks sponsorship deal includes a huge additional performance related element. Given the prominence of hurling in cork compared to dubli I’d say they’ll do well from that element over the lifetime of the deal.

Tell me enquiring, is there a reason you think kids growing up in dublin should get less attention in terms of game development than elsewhere? We’ve already seen that per capita dublin has significantly less coaches than the rest of Leinster- 118 vs 60 to 70. Why exactly shouldn’t kids in dublin have access to games development just so your county can win an all ireland or Leinster by beggaring teams that are better than yours.

Btw congratulations to cork for getting their act together and pursuing a strategy to maximise sponsorship revenue. I’m assuming all the split dublin brigade will now recant the posts where they assured is it ‘couldn’t be done by other counties’ and ‘ wouldn’t work elsewhere’. Hopefully this is the beginning of other counties taking this stuff seriously- the idea of counties with huge diaspora in particular playing the poor mouth on their commercial appeal as an excuse to not move forward helps mo one

If only all those multi millionaires from longford now living in the Bahamas would pump a few million in every year to improve standards across the county
How many foreign based dubs are doing likewise?

ooter

I've no idea if dublin's sponsorship deals are performance based, but if they are imagine how much more money they'd be getting if the hurlers weren't going backwards.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

The coaches wages are half paid by the clubs. They work for the clubs! High ranking Dublin GAA officials say they work for the clubs and outline their role. I don't know why you doubt their word? Yes, they spend time in local primary schools. The main goal of that is to recruit players for the club they're hired for.

Sorry, is the issue now that the clubs in Dublin are spending their OWN money? Do clubs elsewhere not spend their OWN money? I’m assuming any club that’s funding an employee has a say over at least some of their time, regardless of which county they’re in

tritium

beggars_bush wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great if there was funding for clubs in rural counties to 50% fund a club coach?
Clubs could even row in together to share this 50%

Except, every club in Dublin is treated differently than those outside the county. Why is that?
Despite many of them having multi million euro in turnover

Every time it’s suggest someone tells us it won’t work

Rest of leinster has 118 games development personnel!!!!

beggars_bush

tritium wrote: »

From earlier dublin have 60-70 games dev personnel. Rest of Leinster have 118. Per capita rest of Leinster have significantly more than dublin

What is the point of per capita conparisons?

There are thousands of children in dublin who don't play any gaa as the coaching is disproportionately placed in middle class area schools and clubs

Rosita

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

As for your huge pride in the 66000 odd figure for the leinster final. Well Mayo and roscommon were able to get 65000 odd for the quarter final in the same year, so it is no great feat at all for dublin to be honest about it.

.

Funny you should mention "being honest about it" in the same breath as neglecting to mention that when Mayo and Roscommon played in front of 65,000 people in Croke Park, there were actually four counties playing in the stadium that day as there were two quarter-finals taking place.

They attracted 39,000 to the replay when it was just the two of them, which is respectable but hardly of the order you are suggesting.

tritium

beggars_bush wrote: »

What is the point of per capita conparisons?

There are thousands of children in dublin who don't play any gaa as the coaching is disproportionately placed in middle class area schools and clubs

The whole point of games development is to get them playing, tha yes why gdos spend time in the scholls

You seem to be implying this notion that the gdos are running some sort of training supercamps in dublin. We both know thats not the case. But you tell me so how many coaches each county should have and what should be the basis of allocation

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Perhaps it’s ever increasing because dublin have been successful and are more marketable as a result over that period? As noted earlier Kerry’s sponsorship has been adversely affected by their relative recent lack of success.. similarly corks sponsorship deal includes a huge additional performance related element. Given the prominence of hurling in cork compared to dubli I’d say they’ll do well from that element over the lifetime of the deal.

Tell me enquiring, is there a reason you think kids growing up in dublin should get less attention in terms of game development than elsewhere? We’ve already seen that per capita dublin has significantly less coaches than the rest of Leinster- 118 vs 60 to 70. Why exactly shouldn’t kids in dublin have access to games development just so your county can win an all ireland or Leinster by beggaring teams that are better than yours.

Btw congratulations to cork for getting their act together and pursuing a strategy to maximise sponsorship revenue. I’m assuming all the split dublin brigade will now recant the posts where they assured is it ‘couldn’t be done by other counties’ and ‘ wouldn’t work elsewhere’. Hopefully this is the beginning of other counties taking this stuff seriously- the idea of counties with huge diaspora in particular playing the poor mouth on their commercial appeal as an excuse to not move forward helps mo one

I just said in that post that Dublin got increased sponsorship off the back of the success gained from having a huge number of professional coaches.

The question is, why do you think underage development in Dublin should have got 2 decades worth of attention while no other county had access to the same program?

Cork had sponsorship prior to this deal? Were you not aware that all counties have sponsors? It's just no one has close to 2.1 million per year and rising like Dublin.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Why is this a problem for you now but not for the 30 years that Kerry were ahead of everyone in sponsorship terms for example? You paint a picture that somehow money was nice and fair pre this dublin team while ignoring that evidence that it was anything but. What do you think the issues with funding were pre this dublin team and how do you propose to fix them? I assume you’re equally unhappy with the skewed nature of the championship pre 2011?

I've called for pooled sponsorship and a cap on spending on team preparations. Would you be in favour of the same? I'm interested in fair play for all, you'll need to look closer to home for those in favour of unfair competitions.

tritium

beggars_bush wrote: »

If only all those multi millionaires from longford now living in the Bahamas would pump a few million in every year to improve standards across the county
How many foreign based dubs are doing likewise?

No idea, any more than I know for Mayo, Kerry Galway etc. Given expensive New York dinners are a common form of “fundraising” I’d say it’s common across the GAA

Not at all sure what that’s got to do with being able to market yourself to sponsors though. AIG aren’t a dublin company , sports direct aren’t a cork company

Though if you believe there’s anything underhanded going on that you have proof rather than paranoia about you can share it. It’s unlikely to be controversial I would have thought given the money the like of Limerick seem to have received from their donors

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Wait, a few pages back you were telling us dublin were seeing the benefits of the money back in 2003. Now you’re telling is in 2006 the GAA couldn’t get any return from the dublin money

At least get your story straight and stick to it

The money was used for coaching and improving underage structures. That helped underage teams in 2003 and it eventually transferred to senior level.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Sorry, is the issue now that the clubs in Dublin are spending their OWN money? Do clubs elsewhere not spend their OWN money? I’m assuming any club that’s funding an employee has a say over at least some of their time, regardless of which county they’re in

I was just busting the myth that the coaches were just for primary schools. As you know, the clubs wouldn't be paying big money just for that. The coaches have transformed club standards in Dublin and consequently, inter county standards.

You are probably also aware that this was a Dublin only scheme? That is the problem. Half the wages were paid for by all of us.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

The whole point of games development is to get them playing, tha yes why gdos spend time in the scholls

You seem to be implying this notion that the gdos are running some sort of training supercamps in dublin. We both know thats not the case. But you tell me so how many coaches each county should have and what should be the basis of allocation

Wait a minute! You were just going on about the clubs spending their own money. Do you think they might actually coach for the clubs that are paying half their wages? They dont coach other coaches? They dont run training camps?

ooter

Except it hasn't transferred to senior level with the small ball.
Underage players in 2003 would be in their prime now.

JeffKenna

Really goes to show how dead intercounty football is that this is the main topic of conversation all year.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

I just said in that post that Dublin got increased sponsorship off the back of the success gained from having a huge number of professional coaches.

The question is, why do you think underage development in Dublin should have got 2 decades worth of attention while no other county had access to the same program?

Cork had sponsorship prior to this deal? Were you not aware that all counties have sponsors? It's just no one has close to 2.1 million per year and rising like Dublin.

As has already been pointed out, as is evidenced by the deal they just signed, cork may have had sponsorship but they certainly and demonstrably weren’t making the most of it.

You seen to want to put everything down to funding but conveniently ignoring the wider funding the GAA provides. It spent over €20 million on games development and player welfare last year, not all of it going directly to counties. Dublin came up with an approach that enabled them to directly use the funds but the reality is games development would need that level of funding anyway based on the number of people it’s trying to reach in dublin. Would you be happier if it was shared out and administered centrally on a per capita basis, with dublin getting more? If dublin tore down the organisational structures so they used funding less efficiently? Again how would you allocate this funding ? You keep avoiding giving those details. As I’ve already demonstrated Leinster has 118 gdos, not all of these coming from county allocations, until you’re prepared to acknowledge and account for that your numbers are absolute pony and your argument pointless

As has also been pointed out, the gdos are not supporting the inter county game. You talk about sponsorship money,fundraising, club subscriptions and the rest as if they were all one pot funding team dublin- they’re not. Most large inter county teams are spending massively on their team preparations, I gave the figure of 1.6m for Mayo in 2016, yet you’re happy to fob it off as travelling expenses. You just want the flashy headline as an excuse to justify your bitterness. What exactly is the breakdown of the dublin salary spend you quote for example? You bitch about their ability to attract sponsors but what does that cost dublin in terms of marketing personnel? What’s the net gain rather than the headline? I’m sure it’s worth it but I’m also sure that you’re quite deliberately missing the context to push your agenda

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

I was just busting the myth that the coaches were just for primary schools. As you know, the clubs wouldn't be paying big money just for that. The coaches have transformed club standards in Dublin and consequently, inter county standards.

You are probably also aware that this was a Dublin only scheme? That is the problem. Half the wages were paid for by all of us.

Are “all of us” also paying ten wages for the 118 gdos in the rest of Leinster? What’s that costing “all of us”?