20th AFL Team

[Coolangatta]

Darwin is largely a non-Aboriginal town. Less than 10% (13k)identify as such. Almost as many indigenous people in Canberra (8k).

There are two myths often perpetuated about Darwin.
1. That it is full of Aboriginal people
2. That it is as AFL mad as Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide or Tassie. It isn’t. AFL is number 1, but NRL is big there. The NT has the highest participation rate for RL (as it also does for AFL). NRL games draw comparable crowds and ratings as AFL.

And myth 1 is connected too myth 2, in that because it is assumed there's more aboriginal people in Darwin, there's more interest in footy there.

But it's also the NT more broadly and its remote communities. Only problem is, they're so tiny and sparse.

 

[Walshawk]

And myth 1 is connected too myth 2, in that because it is assumed there's more aboriginal people in Darwin, there's more interest in footy there.

But it's also the NT more broadly and its remote communities. Only problem is, they're so tiny and sparse.

Another myth though is that almost all aboriginal people prefer and play AFL. The NRL has virtually the same % of indigenous players as the AFL.

 

[Walshawk]

The best thing the AFL can do for the people of Darwin and NT is to rotate all teams thought there. Once Tas come in, if they move to 24 games, this is easy, There will be 19 extra games. Nine for gather round and the other ten to be rotated around secondary venue like Darwin, Canberra, Cairns, etc.

 

[Walshawk]

However, it can add an extire extra round, by virtue of that fact that an odd number of teams cannot all play an (equal) odd number of games, as it doesn't result in a whole number of games. 19 teams playing 23 games each makes 218.5 games (since each game features two teams). So they'd instead play 22 games each, which makes 209 games. Whereas with 20 teams, they can play 23 games each for a total of 230 games. Another weekend of high ratings might be something broadcasters want.

No, with 19 teams playing 22 games that would be done over 24 rounds, same as 23 games over 24 rounds with a bye. If you want to add more byes (why would you?), just add more byes, it is nit dependent on the number of teams.

The AFL won’t retreat to 22 games when Tas enters. It will be 24.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

However, it can add an extire extra round, by virtue of that fact that an odd number of teams cannot all play an (equal) odd number of games, as it doesn't result in a whole number of games. 19 teams playing 23 games each makes 218.5 games (since each game features two teams). So they'd instead play 22 games each, which makes 209 games. Whereas with 20 teams, they can play 23 games each for a total of 230 games. Another weekend of high ratings might be something broadcasters want.

I think there’s virtually no chance of them retracting back to 22 games after the addition of Tasmania, as that somewhat defeats the purpose of expanding in the first place. They won’t scrap Gather Round either since it has been a huge success. I think with 19 clubs, they’re much more likely to go with a model like this:

a) 24 game season - 11 home, 11 away, 2 gather rounds (228 game H&A season)

24 games works with both a 19 and 20 club comp, so then could retain the model for quite sometime while maintaining 11 home games per club + gather rounds.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

No, with 19 teams playing 22 games that would be done over 24 rounds, same as 23 games over 24 rounds with a bye. If you want to add more byes (why would you?), just add more byes, it is nit dependent on the number of teams.

The AFL won’t retreat to 22 games when Tas enters. It will be 24.

Are you deliberately trying to misunderstand? There will be 10% more games.

 

[dustysnecktattoo]

just give tasmania, canberra and NT there own team at the same time and get it done with

 

[MelbourneGWS]

just give tasmania, canberra and NT there own team at the same time and get it done with

But that will make it 21 teams? I really think in a national competition, a couple of Victorian teams should merge, but unfortunately that won’t happen

 

[dustysnecktattoo]

But that will make it 21 teams? I really think in a national competition, a couple of Victorian teams should merge, but unfortunately that won’t happen

no merging, never again. they can make it work

 

[Coolangatta]

just give tasmania, canberra and NT there own team at the same time and get it done with

If Darwin and Cairns had 500k+ people each, then I'd say sure, bring on Tassie, ACT, NT and NQ all up by 2050, make it 22 teams. Work around the weather/climate, and get it done.

But that's not reality.

I mean 500k might be enough in 50 years, the number required for a team doesn't necessarily have to go up, if you can build or develop a niche little stadium and get 20-25k people in that's a pass, then you've got a club that can stand on their own.

We're a long way off, if ever, from the top end getting a team.

Get ACT in.

There's a good chance it stays on 19 for more than five years if Dillon's comments are indicative of anything.

 

[weewilly]

If Darwin and Cairns had 500k+ people each, then I'd say sure, bring on Tassie, ACT, NT and NQ all up by 2050, make it 22 teams. Work around the weather/climate, and get it done.

But that's not reality.

I mean 500k might be enough in 50 years, the number required for a team doesn't necessarily have to go up, if you can build or develop a niche little stadium and get 20-25k people in that's a pass, then you've got a club that can stand on their own.

We're a long way off, if ever, from the top end getting a team.

Get ACT in.

There's a good chance it stays on 19 for more than five years if Dillon's comments are indicative of anything.

Yep Darwin with only 140,000 and Cairns at 160,000 are clearly not big enough to sustain an AFL team full time!

 

[Walshawk]

Are you deliberately trying to misunderstand? There will be 10% more games.

There are more games because you are suggesting playing more games for each team if you have 20. You can play more games with 19 teams as well (there will be 24), One new team adds 11 or 12 more games, not 10%.

 

[neogh]

I think Canberra is left out in the discussion, because there is this big stereotype that it was a place to legally buy fireworks and naughty stuff, which is as accurate as Darwin being full of footy-mad Indigenous Australians.

 

[dustysnecktattoo]

If Darwin and Cairns had 500k+ people each, then I'd say sure, bring on Tassie, ACT, NT and NQ all up by 2050, make it 22 teams. Work around the weather/climate, and get it done.

But that's not reality.

I mean 500k might be enough in 50 years, the number required for a team doesn't necessarily have to go up, if you can build or develop a niche little stadium and get 20-25k people in that's a pass, then you've got a club that can stand on their own.

We're a long way off, if ever, from the top end getting a team.

Get ACT in.

There's a good chance it stays on 19 for more than five years if Dillon's comments are indicative of anything.

I think these places can build better membership numbers than the likes of north melbourne regardless of there state/territory populations. Plus AFL is not short of a dollar really, they lying if they say so, to own these teams. I think it'll better the game in the long run to just get them in now.

Then pause the growth of adding teams. 22 teams with no new teams for a good 20+ years or maybe just no more teams added again. 22 round competition no byes. everyone plays each other once and still a top 8. i'd love to see it.

Thats big enough. just have to remember we are not america, we can't copy them with everything on how sports run.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

There are more games because you are suggesting playing more games for each team if you have 20. You can play more games with 19 teams as well (there will be 24), One new team adds 11 or 12 more games, not 10%.

Only if they definitely go to 24 games, and that's an entire new rounds worth of games. So basically you're spurning games for no real reason.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I think these places can build better membership numbers than the likes of north melbourne regardless of there state/territory populations. Plus AFL is not short of a dollar really, they lying if they say so, to own these teams. I think it'll better the game in the long run to just get them in now.

Of course they're not short of a dollar. Neither are most corporations, yet they'll chase bigger and bigger profits regardless, no matter how many people they have to sack to do so. The AFL is exactly the same, they'll do whatever maximises their profits and an NT team doesn't do that.

 

[Canberra Pear]

I think these places can build better membership numbers than the likes of north melbourne regardless of there state/territory populations. Plus AFL is not short of a dollar really, they lying if they say so, to own these teams. I think it'll better the game in the long run to just get them in now.

Then pause the growth of adding teams. 22 teams with no new teams for a good 20+ years or maybe just no more teams added again. 22 round competition no byes. everyone plays each other once and still a top 8. i'd love to see it.

Thats big enough. just have to remember we are not america, we can't copy them with everything on how sports run.

The AFL isn't short of a dollar because they don't make decisions like these.

They're taking a big hit with the Suns and Giants with the expectation that they'll pay off in the future.

NQ and the NT will costs loads more than either, with no foreseeable payoff.

The AFL has only one merged entity in the past four decades. And no clubs folded since University. From what I can tell, that's unparalleled in pro sport in Australia. Look at the path of discarded clubs in the NRL, A-League, NBL etc.

And that's because they don't make stupid decisions like simultaneously adding NT and NQ teams.

 

[Aussie in exile]

The AFL isn't short of a dollar because they don't make decisions like these.

They're taking a big hit with the Suns and Giants with the expectation that they'll pay off in the future.

NQ and the NT will costs loads more than either, with no foreseeable payoff.

The AFL has only one merged entity in the past four decades. And no clubs folded since University. From what I can tell, that's unparalleled in pro sport in Australia. Look at the path of discarded clubs in the NRL, A-League, NBL etc.

And that's because they don't make stupid decisions like simultaneously adding NT and NQ teams.

I struggle with the idea of having a team in Cairns as with the wet season there sometimes going into May there would be in my opionion a chance of having games postponed.

 

[Perry Pie]

Team 20 is between Canberra, WA3 and SA3 + Tassie standing up as planned. No others could stand financially with the limitted benefits that come from 1 extra per week. (SA3 is only credible if neither Canberra or WA3 go for it and they really want it).

Does Canberra need a new stadium to make it work? Should it have a roof? I suggest both of those are probably needed for Canberra to work well. (If you build one it would need some creativity so it can be used for rectangular sports effectively).

As for more than 20 teams, nah, even 20 is probably 2 too many in my mind but still remains justified to have games every week in QLD & Sydney.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Team 20 is between Canberra, WA3 and SA3 + Tassie standing up as planned. No others could stand financially with the limitted benefits that come from 1 extra per week. (SA3 is only credible if neither Canberra or WA3 go for it and they really want it).

Does Canberra need a new stadium to make it work? Should it have a roof? I suggest both of those are probably needed for Canberra to work well. (If you build one it would need some creativity so it can be used for rectangular sports effectively).

As for more than 20 teams, nah, even 20 is probably 2 too many in my mind but still remains justified to have games every week in QLD & Sydney.

I really don't think Canberra needs a new stadium. Just an upgraded one.

Bellerive is in the middle of suburbia. Manuka is in the middle of pubs, restaurants and medium density housing. Manuka is as inner as you're ever going to get an oval stadium.

I also disagree about a roof. March through September, Canberra is the driest capital. Yes, it snowed once, but it hasn't snowed at a Raiders game since 2000, so show during a match is really a once-in-a-generation event. But on your average Canberra winter's day, it's cold, but beautifully sunny. You're going to want as much sun as you can get.

 

[Coolangatta]

I struggle with the idea of having a team in Cairns as with the wet season there sometimes going into May there would be in my opionion a chance of having games postponed.

It’d have to run similar to what some have suggested here about NT. Basically they’d hub in Alice Springs for three games then off to Adelaide for three and then Darwin for the rest of the year.

I think NQ would need something similar. A couple weeks in Townsville, then off to Mackay, then down to Brissy and GC for a fortnight, a few in Adelaide for Crows, Power and GR, then Cairns for the rest of the year.

So 8 games max for Darwin and Cairns.

Would still need to triple their populations though. Also allows them time for faster planes etc.

I’d like to see Canberra as team 20 and if everyone wants to it to stay at 20 then so be it unless NT/NQ can be viable in another 50 years or so.

Competition could settle nicely for 40 years after 2033 and a Canberra team.

 

[Perry Pie]

I really don't think Canberra needs a new stadium. Just an upgraded one.

Bellerive is in the middle of suburbia. Manuka is in the middle of pubs, restaurants and medium density housing. Manuka is as inner as you're ever going to get an oval stadium.

I also disagree about a roof. March through September, Canberra is the driest capital. Yes, it snowed once, but it hasn't snowed at a Raiders game since 2000, so show during a match is really a once-in-a-generation event. But on your average Canberra winter's day, it's cold, but beautifully sunny. You're going to want as much sun as you can get.

All decent points.
My thinking was along lines of a multi use stadium, similar to the Mac Point stadium concept.
Something well located that has stuff around it. (Dont know Canberra well enough to know where that could be, so you could run with Manuka as a site).
Just a thought if it was to attract team 20.

 

[Aussie in exile]

It’d have to run similar to what some have suggested here about NT. Basically they’d hub in Alice Springs for three games then off to Adelaide for three and then Darwin for the rest of the year.

I think NQ would need something similar. A couple weeks in Townsville, then off to Mackay, then down to Brissy and GC for a fortnight, a few in Adelaide for Crows, Power and GR, then Cairns for the rest of the year.

So 8 games max for Darwin and Cairns.

Would still need to triple their populations though. Also allows them time for faster planes etc.

I’d like to see Canberra as team 20 and if everyone wants to it to stay at 20 then so be it unless NT/NQ can be viable in another 50 years or so.

Competition could settle nicely for 40 years after 2033 and a Canberra team.

Would they be able to build a strong supporter base by keep playing at different venues?

 

[Canberra Pear]

All decent points.
My thinking was along lines of a multi use stadium, similar to the Mac Point stadium concept.
Something well located that has stuff around it. (Dont know Canberra well enough to know where that could be, so you could run with Manuka as a site).
Just a thought if it was to attract team 20.

The multi-use stadium is a bit of a political hot potato here.

We have two, possibly three, full-time rectangular teams, so any push for a multi-use is rallied against by them. It's still an option that's being floated, but it's not the popular option. On the plus side, it would likely be a higher capacity than Manuka.

One of the main negatives of the multi-use is the size. A theoretical city stadium is only on a small parcel, barely big enough for a rectangular stadium. A city stadium equals no oval. If it ends up at Bruce, it's easier to make multi-use.

So, I'm not opposed to playing in a multi-use stadium, I just think it's the lesser likely of the options.

 

[Teen Wolf]

A short stretch of eastbound Parkes Way gets shifted south and then there's plenty of space for an oval stadium in the city.

If Canberra ever gets its own AFL team, guaranteed they'll be playing on the old pool site in a 25k roofed venue.