View Full Version : How many teams would you like to see in the AFL in 2020/2025?
McCrann
10 Dec 2007, 17:17
How many teams would members of BigFooty like to see in the AFL circa 2020/2025?
Personally, I would like to see an expanded 20 team competition. I know exactly what I want - but I won't go into detail here.
Why?
I can see the A-League being at least 16 Teams by then, probably still looking at expansion to that magical 20 Number of the European Leagues.
We can't allow them to beat us to that number. We are the No.1 Football Code in this country, and if we want to stay at the top of the tree we have to be a step ahead of the competition. Being the first to 20 teams would ensure we maintain that lead.
Also, don't forget the NRL and Super 14?16?18? I'd expect the NRL to be putting new teams in Perth and Adelaide over the next 15 years, sure it sounds crazy now - but that has got to be part of their long-term planning.
As for Super 14?16?18? They will definitely be looking at expansion into Melbourne and beyond. We need to stay ahead of them as well.
As I seem to say ad nauseam over these boards, if the AFL does not continue to grow - that means it is stagnating. If it is stagnating, then it is in trouble.
Also, I would ask all the BigFooty members out there. Would you rather the AFL expand around the nation by relocating Melbourne teams? Or by starting new teams?
I know which I'd much prefer - NEW TEAMS - and if that means a 20 Team competition some 15 years down the track - then in my mind that is great.
just get rid of the roos. im sick of their supporters being so cocky about winning the 'battle' against the afl.
"we won!!!!!!!!"
actually all that happened was you were asked "do you want to move" and you replied with "no"
well done!
Seethus
10 Dec 2007, 17:26
just get rid of the roos. im sick of their supporters being so cocky about winning the 'battle' against the afl.
"we won!!!!!!!!"
actually all that happened was you were asked "do you want to move" and you replied with "no"
well done!
Rofl. couldn't have put it better myself mate:thumbsu::)
Anyway, I would love to have those 18 teams, including the proposed gold coast and west sydney teams.
However if it was 20 teams I cant say Id be at all unhappy, the more the merrier. Cant see how any one can disagree
Holding The Ball
10 Dec 2007, 17:35
More isn't neccessarily more though. The NRL had twenty teams at one stage, and look what happened there.
16 is fine, with a Gold Coast side to be a relocated Melbourne team.
huggy_b
10 Dec 2007, 17:38
11ty ten
dobbo_18
10 Dec 2007, 17:48
Voted for 16, 20 is far too many, and BTW if you had seen the quality of the A-League games, you wouldn't be saying that you could see them expanding to 16 teams. Some of the A-League soccer is really poor and only a few clubs at the top of the table play half-decent soccer.
Hopefully the AFL can stick with 16 teams for as long as possible, but if they do expand, i hope that they expand to 20 teams, so that the competition can work better.
If there is 18 there is the question of a final 8,9 or 10
20 teams!
2 divisions of 10 playing each other twice = 18 rounds.
Each with a final 5.
This also means that all new teams can be added to the lower division.
Promotion of 3 up and 3 down each season keeps nearly every team involved up until finals. And you could stagger the start of each division so that the season is a bit longer.
And a knock out comp with all teams to make up the four rounds that are lost under this system.
Chances of this: Practically nil. :(
McCrann
10 Dec 2007, 18:47
20 teams!
2 divisions of 10 playing each other twice = 18 rounds.
Each with a final 5.
This also means that all new teams can be added to the lower division.
Promotion of 3 up and 3 down each season keeps nearly every team involved up until finals. And you could stagger the start of each division so that the season is a bit longer.
And a knock out comp with all teams to make up the four rounds that are lost under this system.
Chances of this: Practically nil. :(
I disagree with promotion and relegation in a 20 Team competition.
4 Group of 5 Teams works much better.
Other teams in own Group (twice) (4x2=8)
Other 15 teams (Once) - 7 Home, 7 Away and 1 Development Match
23 Round Season played over 24 rounds.
Stronger Local Rivalries established.
Moving towards 24 Teams though, when you would have 2 Divisions of 12 Teams it may well be a better idea to start exploring promotion and relegation - but not before you get to at least 24 teams I'd have to say.
Minimum.
Even then you could probably have 4 groups of 6 teams or 3 groups of 8 teams and it would work better.
But I still think 20 is a much better ideal number than 24 because i'd prefer not to go down the road of making half the teams in the comp 2nd class citizens - its just not the way we do it, and it has proven to be a disaster in for instance the VFA before.
Was completely unsustainable.
philhawk
10 Dec 2007, 18:57
Why the need to change dramatically?
OK, Western Sydney and the Gold Coast should have teams by then - but i'd leave it at that.
So what if the A-League or even the Netball get 20 teams - if the AFL can have 18 well run, self-sufficient teams by 2020 then everyone will be happy.
The only other growth areas that could be looked at are,
Western Queensland (Tawoomba)
Central Coast
... and maybe down the track a Darwin team.
Bestbird
10 Dec 2007, 18:59
Currently 16 teams isn't viable in it's current format since their are clubs that are struggling finance wise so adding more dosen't seem sustainable in the short to medium term
The Teflon Dean
10 Dec 2007, 19:00
Forget all this "free trade economics" closed minded thinking.:thumbsd:
The expansion of the game should not hindered by budgetry issues.
Pool the money and spread it further, slow down the salary cap.
26 sides with the possible inclusions of Broome and Alice Springs taking it to 28.:thumbsu:
Howard Littlejohn
10 Dec 2007, 19:09
2025 might be too early, but 20 teams.
17th, 18th and 19th are clear (GC, WSyd, 3rd WA) but the 20th is hard to place. Tassie would be ideal from a footy heritage viewpoint, but financially a bigger concern than having 16 teams in Melbourne.
12 teams. 2 from SA, WA, 1 from NSW, QLD and 6 from Vic. More viable for teams to win premierships and quality top level. State leagues would be stronger and the game would be healthier in general. Each team plays every other team twice for 22 rounds. Not gonna happen but that's how I'd like to see it.
20 teams would be fantastic.
Gold Coast team, bring up Central Districts from SANFL, Another WA team and a Tassie or NT team. So many youngsters with talent that just miss out and veterans that struggle to find new clubs would thrive. Because old players are dying out, everyone always wants the youngsters.
Funkalicous
10 Dec 2007, 19:20
18: Including Gold Coast, West Sydney, Perth, and a merged or dead Victorian side.
just get rid of the roos. im sick of their supporters being so cocky about winning the 'battle' against the afl.
"we won!!!!!!!!"
actually all that happened was you were asked "do you want to move" and you replied with "no"
well done!
Someone needs to wipe their nose and get a hug.
Metallica_Man
13 Dec 2007, 10:28
20: Gold Coast, Tasmania, West Sydney, and then there are lots of other choices for a new team, or old teams to relocated/merge and create a new: Darwin, North Qld, Perth, etc
14 would be perfect - but I can't see that happening. 8 Vic teams and 8 non Vic teams is probably about right and is what the AFL want. North will probably die and Melbourne will start shitting themselves and either merge, die or relocate.