- Oct 29, 2012
- 4,565
- 7,667
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Parramatta Eels, Arsenal, The Exers
Certainly right about Kwality there.
-
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
A Tassie Team...Why it can help the AFL.
- Thread starter speedpeck23
- Start date
- Tagged users None
We need to be looking at less teams, not more
Although, given what Geelong make at KP, there's no reason a tassie side couldn't work
Although, given what Geelong make at KP, there's no reason a tassie side couldn't work
We need to be looking at less teams, not more
Although, given what Geelong make at KP, there's no reason a tassie side couldn't work
Although, given what Geelong make at KP, there's no reason a tassie side couldn't work
Still a lot of Vic teams though. Best decision ij my eyes would be move 1 of them to Tassie. Gives less saturation in one market.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,998
- 94,849
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Merge Melbourne and north Melbourne and bring in tassie
Good. The Tasmanian deal is a rort for Hawthorn and North Melbourne. There should be a variety of teams playing in Tasmania. The benefits are:
1) - give the punters a variety of teams to look at, ** and
2) also eliminates teams getting an unfair advantage from being defacto landlords in Launceston, Hobart. Hawthorn getting 15 million sponsorship purely on the AFL setting them up as the only landlords is a defacto rort.
You could have
3 games in Hobart eg
Western Bulldogs vs Fremantle
North Melbourne vs Adelaide
Hawthorn vs Brisbane..
Then the next year you have 3 matches in Launceston
St Kilda vs Geelong
North Melbourne vs West Coast
Western Bulldogs vs Melbourne
That is fairer to the punters - who get a variety of teams, fairer to the tax payers of Tasmania - a state that is broke after 10 years of a greens/labor alliance - and fairer to the AFL teams. It doesn't create an unfair advantage to one team over 4 or 5 competitors.
** at present the Launceston crowd get to see similar teams against Hawthorn each year that they progressively flog year after year. Sydney is about the only team to beat them in the last two years.
Awesome, another thread where harmsey 37 can sprout his warped view on how the AFL have given Tasmania to Hawthorn 
The $15m is packaged up as part of a commercial sponsorship between the Hawthorn FC and Tasmanian Government...it has no involvement with AFL Tasmania (which is an AFL front). In fact AFL Tasmania are opposed to the Hawthorn deal as they see it as counter productive to their movement in setting up a standalone /relocating an existing football club from Melbourne. The AFL have been pushing us back to Melbourne from at least 2010...
If the W Bulldogs, Melbourne and North Melbourne can offer the state government a similar / better proposition than Hawthorn (critical mass of members / supporters, profile, tourism etc.) I'm sure the Tasmanian government could be lured into shifting / sharing the sponsorship dollars amongst more clubs. Until such point its not viable in a straight transaction deal...
Though Im sure Carlton could offer a compelling offer (and possibly trump Hawthorn) if they ever put their hand up.
The $15m is packaged up as part of a commercial sponsorship between the Hawthorn FC and Tasmanian Government...it has no involvement with AFL Tasmania (which is an AFL front). In fact AFL Tasmania are opposed to the Hawthorn deal as they see it as counter productive to their movement in setting up a standalone /relocating an existing football club from Melbourne. The AFL have been pushing us back to Melbourne from at least 2010...
If the W Bulldogs, Melbourne and North Melbourne can offer the state government a similar / better proposition than Hawthorn (critical mass of members / supporters, profile, tourism etc.) I'm sure the Tasmanian government could be lured into shifting / sharing the sponsorship dollars amongst more clubs. Until such point its not viable in a straight transaction deal...
Though Im sure Carlton could offer a compelling offer (and possibly trump Hawthorn) if they ever put their hand up.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,998
- 94,849
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Merge bulldogs and bombers and bring in a Canberra team too
Games in Hobart and Launceston?
Awesome, another thread where harmsey 37 can sprout his warped view on how the AFL have given Tasmania to Hawthorn
The $15m is packaged up as part of a commercial sponsorship between the Hawthorn FC and Tasmanian Government...it has no involvement with AFL Tasmania (which is an AFL front). In fact AFL Tasmania are opposed to the Hawthorn deal as they see it as counter productive to their movement in setting up a standalone /relocating an existing football club from Melbourne. The AFL have been pushing us back to Melbourne from at least 2010...
If the W Bulldogs, Melbourne and North Melbourne can offer the state government a similar / better proposition than Hawthorn (critical mass of members / supporters, profile, tourism etc.) I'm sure the Tasmanian government could be lured into shifting / sharing the sponsorship dollars amongst more clubs. Until such point its not viable in a straight transaction deal...
Though Im sure Carlton could offer a compelling offer (and possibly trump Hawthorn) if they ever put their hand up.
If you bothered to read my post properly and as you have correctly mentioned there are a few ...I have clearly indicated in past posts than the 15 million came from the Tasmanian govt. It is in relation to the AFL setting Hawthorn up as the sole tenant of Launceston that this 15 million is possible. Would the govt have paid Hawthorn 15 million if there were a variety of teams playing out of Launceston?
The AFL keeps mentioning its desire for equitability, equal status, evenness, equal chance etc...yet it has given one club with over 60,000 members and vast profits year after year a monopoly on a section of the Australian football community in Northern Tasmania.
This is not equitable however you dress it up.
The solution is to have a variety of teams playing out of Launceston
eg Hawthorn vs Adelaide - game 1
Melbourne vs North or West Coast- game 2
Western Bulldogs vs Port - game 3
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,998
- 94,849
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Merge st Kilda and hawthorn and bring in Darwin team
- Banned
- #38
Not really a merger, would probably end up giving NZ a team in 20 years. NT will never get a team in this lifetime - WA, NSW, SA & QLD would all get their third before that.
The AFL never set Hawthorn up as the sole tenant of Launceston (a city of 110,000 people), that’s the thing…
Hawthorn was the sole tenant in Launceston between 2001-2002 (because no other club expressed interest in playing at what was then a suburban ground) and from 2007 onwards (where Hawthorn took over the remaining St Kilda games who in turn expressed interest in coming home, again no other team expressed interest in playing games in Tasmania until 2010). In fact by 2006, the Hawthorn FC went around the AFL and did a deal directly with the Tasmanian State Government (which involved the state of Tasmania being brought on as a major sponsor...something we have never lived down) in a very controversial transactional agreement between the football club and government. The agreement was controversial because it effectively bypassed AFL Tasmania (Scott Wade – the father of Matthew Wade) who is the AFL outpost in Tasmania…
In 2010, with the Hawthorn FC and State Government in the early stages of renewing the 2007/2011 agreement, the AFL, AFL Tasmania and the North Melbourne FC tried to sabotage the Launceston agreement, offering to buy Hawthorn off (to the tune of $7m) and seeking to relocate 7 North Melbourne home games to Tasmania (3 Hobart / 4 Launceston) and effectively become the Tassie Kangaroos by stealth. Gill McLaughlin has already expressed interest in the one club model once the current Hawthorn FC agreement finishes up in 2016 (ominously the new NMFC agreement will tie in with this date)
...but the more this is said to you, the more you choose to ignore it.
Hawthorn FC had 30,000 members when we decided to originally play home games in Tasmania (2001), 28,000 when we decided to take on the St Kilda games (2006) and 57,000 when we opted to renew the Launceston agreement in 2011. The AFL havent given us anything, in fact they continue to try and erode our presence in Tasmania with a crap fixture of games year after year.
That's a different model again...
Are you opposed to the Tasmanian Government sponsoring a football club (because that's a large component of the current Hawthorn FC agreement). Can Melbourne / North or the W Bulldogs draw the same critical mass of tourists from Victoria to Tasmania year in, year out as Hawthorn do?
If so, absolutely...though you'll probably find that Hawthorn will wind back its commitment, its development program and shift games back to Melbourne so you'll be left with only the battlers playing games down there.
Why would a club that has no need to sell games for survival opt to play games in what would become a saturated market where the incentive to develop the game (for member / supporter growth) is non existent?
Sounds like a good reason to me.
I think it would be great for Tasmania to have a team of its own. We' have to wait 7-10 years since the GWS inclusion though, need some clean drafts for a bit to recover. Two teams at once was madness.
I say bring in Tassie and each team can have 5/6 byes a season over 23/24 rounds and play eachother once with equal number of home and away games.
less overlapping of games, more rest for players, fairer draw, less pointless games.
less income, for clubs and the AFL but the number of games will be slightly less then the 16 team competition we had just a few years ago.
So yes bring in Tassie.
less overlapping of games, more rest for players, fairer draw, less pointless games.
less income, for clubs and the AFL but the number of games will be slightly less then the 16 team competition we had just a few years ago.
So yes bring in Tassie.
22 rounds divided by 19 teams means 3 teams would get 2 byes or the season would have to be shortened which wont happen.
I agree Tassie will eventually get a team, but it will come at the cost of a Melbourne based club being relocated similar to South and Fitzroy or someone folding.
I disagree there's enough top end talent to support a 19th team.
catters05
Norm Smith Medallist
Tassie team would be great, bring them in and move out Hawthorn and North Melbourne.
Would really help out with tourism for the state with 11 Games with the travelling fans of those teams especially if Tourism Tas and Virgin Australia sets it up well.
In-regards to the North/South thing, they should alternate fixture each year. 1st Year (6 Home Games in the South, 5 Home Games + Finals in North), 2nd Year (6 Home Games in the North, 5 Home Games + Finals in South)
Send the Vic clubs to play more games in ACT/NT/NZ and maybe more at ANZ Stadium if AFL are looking to saturate the market in NSW more. IMO GWS should have been the Tasmanian team, and then the AFL should have sent the Vic clubs to play more games at ANZ, whilst the Swans had the SCG.
Would really help out with tourism for the state with 11 Games with the travelling fans of those teams especially if Tourism Tas and Virgin Australia sets it up well.
In-regards to the North/South thing, they should alternate fixture each year. 1st Year (6 Home Games in the South, 5 Home Games + Finals in North), 2nd Year (6 Home Games in the North, 5 Home Games + Finals in South)
Send the Vic clubs to play more games in ACT/NT/NZ and maybe more at ANZ Stadium if AFL are looking to saturate the market in NSW more. IMO GWS should have been the Tasmanian team, and then the AFL should have sent the Vic clubs to play more games at ANZ, whilst the Swans had the SCG.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,998
- 94,849
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Merge Adelaide and Port Adelaide and bring in a second Adelaide team
Last edited:
So the answer to the GWS problem is to further saturate the NSW marketplace and erode whatever support base they have failed to capture?
I'm sure the Swans, who see themselves as the AFL outpost in the NSW marketplace would love that
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,998
- 94,849
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
catters05
Norm Smith Medallist
So the answer to the GWS problem is to further saturate the NSW marketplace and erode whatever support base they have failed to capture?
I'm sure the Swans, who see themselves as the AFL outpost in the NSW marketplace would love that
Did I mention anything about a GWS Problem?
All I am saying is if I was in charge of the AFL I would have brought a Tasmanian team in first and then had neutral games at ANZ Stadium from the Vic clubs to promote the code.
worthy
Cancelled
You do realise that Tassie makes far more out of the Hawks than they put in, it's an excellent investment.
That said, terrible reasons, also, having a Tassie (not a relocated) team would end the Hawks and Roos in Tassie, the money and the interest would dry up.
Also, Tassie doesn't have a population centre capable of sustaining an AFL team, Hobart would be the obvious choice due to it being the capital, but it's remote to the North and North West, where much support comes from, It's a bit like Sydney (Hobart) V Melb (North/NW). Also, the best ground in Tasmania is in the North.
For AFL to survive in Tassie, Launceston would need to be the capital and major population centre, it's not and never will be, A Tasmanian AFL team will fail.
4 Games a year in L'ton and a couple in Hobart is about all Tassie can handle, the Hobart games have already jeapordised it's sustainability.
catters05
Norm Smith Medallist
You put someone like Brian Cook in charge of a new Tassie club and it wont fail.
Similar threads
