One of the nation’s most successful football clubs says the "flawed" model is being deserted in droves as many long-established clubs fear being pushed to the point of bankruptcy.

Up to 33 clubs have joined forces to oppose the roll-out and more are expected to follow suit, alarmed at the prospect of incurring debts some claim could exceed $140,000 annually.

Lawyers have been briefed and clubs are preparing to take out a court injunction to prevent the roll-out in its present form.

FFV shows no sign of buckling under the pressure. The federation says the costs have been exaggerated and it remains confident of holding a “strong and competitive” competition next year.

The national second tier league has already kicked off in other parts of Australia, with Victoria and Western Australia slated to jump on board in April.

But South Melbourne director Tom Kalas said the local model is a potential disaster for the game in Victoria, with the state’s elite clubs giving it a wide berth.

“Who is going to underwrite the debt?” Kalas said. “FFV will not, the employees who work at FFV will not, the FFA will not. It’s the mums and dads and us volunteers that are running the clubs as directors that are liable for the debt.”

Kalas said of the 45 expressions of interest in the NPLV only 18 remained – including 10 consortiums, six regional clubs and just one VPL club, Richmond.

The FFV is holding firm. Applications will close on August 16 as planned and there is no intention of revisiting the criteria.

Newly-appointed CEO Mitchell Murphy said several clubs named as withdrawing their EIO were in fact continuing to consult with FFV about their application, but South Melbourne pointed to a letter sent to FFV on Monday, and publicly released, in which 17 signatories withdrew their EOIs.

“The reality is, despite some correspondence that has been sent around on an email trail, we actually don’t have any official withdrawals from the EOIs,” Murphy said.

“I do not have an official letter from South Melbourne that says they have withdrawn. All I’ve seen is a media release.”

He said it was up to each club to decide their own financial model and that some costs “floated in the public domain” were inflated.

“Each respective applicant will vary in terms of a whole host of things, for instance one club may opt to pay a coach a lot more than another club will,” he said.

“All we can do is provide information that we are aware of in terms of benchmarks around the country for those types of roles and then it’s up to each club to decide what their financial model is.

“I also believe that with some strategic thinking around that model in terms of sponsorship and revenue that they can get more dollars in through those avenues.”

Murphy added it was time for a reality check on all the negativity.

“The scenario that some clubs are considering withdrawing from the process can’t be defined as a bad news scenario,” he said. “They simply decided that they don’t want to apply.

“The good news is that there are still plenty of people who are going to be willing to apply.”

Despite the growing schism between the FFV and clubs, Kalas said a workable model could be put together in 10 days if the federation was prepared to listen.

He said the clubs supported a range of initiatives in the package including the points system, youth pathways and coaching accreditation.

“But they have to do it with a model that works financially as well and they haven’t done that,” he said.

“Our concern is that we might have to go through the cost of a court injunction and the money FFV will spend in court fighting the clubs is our money – our registration fees are paying for these court actions.

“This is the tragic point of all this…they are going to fight the people who pay their wages.”

Football Federation Australia has to date steered clear of the crisis. FFA said it would not be making a statement at this stage but Kalas said the governing body had been “informed all the way”.

FFV agreed, noting the federation was “acutely aware of the process that we’re running.”