View Full Version : A 17th team: In favour or against?
Topics are running a little thin atm, I had one about a donkey and a shoe maker but I think it deserves an bigger audience.. :p
Anywhoo.. If the AFL did have plans to introduce another team how would you feel?
crawf_legend
5 Nov 2007, 11:41
How are we going to have a 17th team, thats an odd number of teams, noo go. Sack Kangaroos and bring in another team.
Its about time the Kangaroos relocated. They are a blight on the competition and its about time they took responsibility for their own club instead of relying on the AFL to continual prop them up.
At the end of the day, if they don't go, the AFL will cut their funding. They already have negative assets of over $4 million and with a deficiecy circa $1 million annual, their financial position will spiral out of control and they will die or do a Fitzroy.
Its about time the Kangaroos relocated. They are a blight on the competition and its about time they took responsibility for their own club instead of relying on the AFL to continual prop them up.
At the end of the day, if they don't go, the AFL will cut their funding. They already have negative assets of over $4 million and with a deficiecy circa $1 million annual, their financial position will spiral out of control and they will die or do a Fitzroy.
I agree. I might be a little ignorant on this subject but doesn't the AFL pay roughy 75% of the Kangaroos revenue? The Kangaroos are upset witht the AFL's proposal to relocate them. If the Kangaroos decide to stay in Melbourne they will die a very painful and extravegant death similiar to Romeo and Julliette. Hence the comment made by the AFL last week.. 'relocate or die' .. lol, or something along those lines!
The kangaroos have hopped their last hop! :p
If a new team is introduced, the AFL will allow a number of concession to make that team competitive straight away. This would include priority picks, salary cap concessions and access to more players. This dilutes the pool of players available to the other 16 teams and changes the mix of other teams.
Say if four of our young guns are up for contract renewal. This new 17th club has heaps of cash to splash at one, two or three of our guns that we could not. The club strategic plans has been that we now need what..A KP back man and small crumber in the forward line. What if we lost an on baller and a KP forward. Now we need to find two new position in the draft. But the draft concession go to the new club. So what happens is we have gone backwards.
Do we need this??
NO
Cheers
hawks_legends
5 Nov 2007, 12:13
I want Kangaroos to relocate..thats it! :D
CharlieMitchell
5 Nov 2007, 12:17
If a new team is introduced, the AFL will allow a number of concession to make that team competitive straight away. This would include priority picks, salary cap concessions and access to more players. This dilutes the pool of players available to the other 16 teams and changes the mix of other teams.
Say if four of our young guns are up for contract renewal. This new 17th club has heaps of cash to splash at one, two or three of our guns that we could not. The club strategic plans has been that we now need what..A KP back man and small crumber in the forward line. What if we lost an on baller and a KP forward. Now we need to find two new position in the draft. But the draft concession go to the new club. So what happens is we have gone backwards.
Do we need this??
NO
Cheers
Summed up perfectly :thumbsu:
Bring in a 17th team I say. Considering the Kangaroos are so against relocating to Queensland, forcing them up there wont help. Bringing another club not only provides interest for spectators, but it further enchances the games reputation as our 'national' sport and would allow for clubs to have a bye, (Considering players are constanly calling out for more mid-season breaks this is only a positive)
The only other option to prevent 17 teams is to introduce a new team and merge two others, and everyone knows how mergers are received?
How are we going to have a 17th team, thats an odd number of teams, noo go. Sack Kangaroos and bring in another team.
Never heard of a bye week?
Bringing in a 17th team will be easier then relocating the Roos. The AFL have learnt from their mistakes in the lack of establishment and awareness in the creation of the Bears and the relocation of the Swans and are more prepared then ever in issuing a new liscence and creating a new team.
Unfortunatly creating a new team in the Gold Coast WILL require alot of funding. I think the Brisbane Lions finished the 07 year with the worst membership in the league despite being easily the most succesful team in the past 10 years. Thrusting a team on the Gold Coast with the now established Titans will be hard to gain membership. This leaving more hand outs to the club, whilst gaining zone restrictions and draft picks for success. Throw in the continued support the Roos will need it will be difficult.
I believe the only real sollution is to force the Roos. It will be hard, the Roos will loose some membership. But they will start off with a clean slate when it comes to their enormous debt, and they will get plenty of benefits in moving.
The AFL cant allow a club to die, but they also cant brest feed the Roos. The Roos had a very succesful year, but only seem to loose money. Move them to the Gold Coast, clean their slate, and give them a new begining.
TAZZIE HAWK
5 Nov 2007, 12:50
If they introduce another team into the comp & cut the roos funding it will only be a season or two before the roos collapse & it will be back to a 16 team comp again anyway. So the roos should just bite the bullet & relocate save their history, & the rest of the comp anguish.
New team NO WAY!!:thumbsd:
noosa hawk mad
5 Nov 2007, 13:50
Kangeroos will have no choice:D
lethalselbow
5 Nov 2007, 19:58
Add a "not sure" category and I'd tick it.
Really not sure about the ability of Melbourne keeping 10 teams in the future so something has to give... just not sure what.
Mervyn Beasley
6 Nov 2007, 10:39
My biggest bugbear with the AFL is its warped fixture and complete and utter money before credibility attitude.
I actually want 14 teams, not 17, so that we can get evenness and play eachother twice.
Its such a catch 22 though, as Vic teams will have to die, and having almost died ourself I'm reluctant to wish it upon anyone else.
RustyHawk
6 Nov 2007, 11:33
Im in favour of an expanded AFL. 18 teams seems a better option than 17.
As we get a bigger population and population centres and business expands with the ability to fund new clubs through membership and sponsership is there.
Plus if only 660 young men get the chance to play football at the elite level some boys at 13-15 might decide to give up and go onto other sports such as soccer, basketball rather than risk only the possibility of a career in the AFL.