Expansion Why AFL fails miserably in Queensland

[telsor]

FNQ & CQ are far too distant to gain any benefit from 2 clubs in SEQ, was more my point. I commented on the desire to convert the 4.6million populus. Going from one to two clubs in SEQ is going to have little effect on the support for the AFL.

In Tasmania, going from having none to one club, playing in two venues, would make a hell of a difference.

GC plays in Cairns, and seems to be quite popular up there ( yes, Vic clubs sell games there, but they're to promote GC), so the 'hate' you mention doesn't seem to apply.

2 teams gives more opportunity to grow the game...A lot of enthusiasm in support comes from having friends, family, coworkers, etc supporting other clubs, so when you have a second club, it pushes that support up to another level.

 

[Experimental]

GC plays in Cairns, and seems to be quite popular up there ( yes, Vic clubs sell games there, but they're to promote GC), so the 'hate' you mention doesn't seem to apply.

Suns players are up in NQ quite often to promote the game too. AFL Cairns does well in promoting the game to the population, so the Suns games up there seem to get a good reaction.

Not quite a city stopper as you'd hope it would be, but if the Suns make it into the top 4 regularly - like every Queensland 'fan' - they'll get into it.

 

[madmug]

GC plays in Cairns, and seems to be quite popular up there ( yes, Vic clubs sell games there, but they're to promote GC), so the 'hate' you mention doesn't seem to apply.

2 teams gives more opportunity to grow the game...A lot of enthusiasm in support comes from having friends, family, coworkers, etc supporting other clubs, so when you have a second club, it pushes that support up to another level.

A good expat population & having the Cazalys facility is great for the city. From my understanding, Cairns need a team in the NEAFL to get to the next level. AFL matches are good for tourism & to showcase the game. I'm not sure it really helps grow the game very much.

I'm not sure if splitting the support of the AFL in SEQ will generate a lot of growth. It certainly is a big 'investment'. So I hope it bears fruit, sooner rather than later, if at all.

 

[Experimental]

I'm not sure if splitting the support of the AFL in SEQ will generate a lot of growth. It certainly is a big 'investment'. So I hope it bears fruit, sooner rather than later, if at all.

I think it will.

There's a definite rivalry between GC and Brisbane. Not a hateful rivalry, but a rivalry nonetheless.

Starting back when the Brisbane Bears played on the Gold Coast, a lot of people on the GC weren't interested because it was a Brisbane team. Likewise, when the Bears moved to the Gabba, there were Brisbane people not interested because it was a GC team.

Might not have made a big difference overall, but it's generally agreed upon that had the Brisbane Bears actually been started and played in Brisbane, they'd have been a lot more popular. Either that, or having called them the Gold Coast Bears.

Furthermore, when the Gold Coast Titans were brought into the NRL, a LOT of rugby league fans who supported other clubs began supporting the Titans instead. This sparked a growth at grassroots levels and spiked the popularity of rugby league on the coast. Yeah, the crowds are dwindling and the club is in trouble at the moment, but that's not through a dislike of the code itself - just poor management and stupid decisions made by the club.

By separating the two regions into separate entities, rather than the Lions controlling the whole SEQ region as a single team, the AFL as allowed the two very different areas to prosper. Despite being only an hour away, GC and Brisbane are vastly different, culturally. The GC region would never been 'tapped into' without a club to represent it.

As for the Suns - I remember talking to a club official (can't remember their title, but they were in charge of some aspect of memberships), and he said that some absurd number of new members for the 2014 season didn't previously support an AFL team.

Gold Coast, as a city, is undergoing a social transformation from a tourist town, to an actual city. There's currently a CBD being constructed in Southport with the council cutting red tape to allow businesses and corporations to easily build their new HQ or branch in one spot, for example. It's becoming less of a destination to visit, and more of a city to live. The AFL knows this, and with the population expected to increase to more than one million in the next 20 years, it's one of the best investments the AFL could have made.

Grassroots footy on the GC has increased overwhelmingly. The number of junior clubs popping up, creating extra age-group teams due to popularity, senior clubs having their inaugural season, etc, is just fantastic. The Suns and the AFL are really putting a focus on grassroots footy on the Coast, and it's really starting to come together nicely.

 

[madmug]

I think it will.

There's a definite rivalry between GC and Brisbane. Not a hateful rivalry, but a rivalry nonetheless.



Grassroots footy on the GC has increased overwhelmingly. The number of junior clubs popping up, creating extra age-group teams due to popularity, senior clubs having their inaugural season, etc, is just fantastic. The Suns and the AFL are really putting a focus on grassroots footy on the Coast, and it's really starting to come together nicely.

I think The AFL stuffed things up at the start. Brisbane Bears on the GC was just a farce. Actually moving to Brisbane was an obvious move. I hope it does go well, the cost is huge. The risk is their. The GC will always be a holiday & retirement city. Some corporate development may change that to some extent.
I hope so or it will be a bloody expensive disaster.

Having Brisbane represent SEQ would be no different than Canberra being made a part of Western Sydney.

 

[Experimental]

http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au...ue-in-queensland/story-fnj9yd7s-1227497193398

Australian football has a vastly higher participation rate in Queensland with its 180,132 players last year dwarfing rugby league’s 61,828. But it is yet to translate into a significant fan base with the sport still trailing rugby league in members and crowd figures.

 

[Aucklander]

180,132 players?

Very, quite possibly, deliberately misleading article, which is probably what Rugby league should get used to seeing from News LTD. in the future.

From another article.

25,167 Queenslanders took to the field to play club football

In another article.

Queensland Rugby League reported 170,027 active participants in 2012

I'd be surprised if that had suddenly fell to 61,828.

 

[Colonial]

180,132 players?

Very, quite possibly, deliberately misleading article, which is probably what Rugby league should get used to seeing from News LTD. in the future.

From another article.



In another article.



I'd be surprised if that had suddenly fell to 61,828.

Meh considering the drivel Aussie rules has copped from the northern media up here for 100 years im going to enjoy some favour.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[Aucklander]

Meh considering the drivel Aussie rules has copped from the northern media up here for 100 years im going to enjoy some favour.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

I didn't realise you were that old.

 

[Colonial]

I didn't realise you were that old.

Some times i feel it

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[Slax]

180,132 players?

Very, quite possibly, deliberately misleading article, which is probably what Rugby league should get used to seeing from News LTD. in the future.

From another article.



In another article.



I'd be surprised if that had suddenly fell to 61,828.

It has been well known for a long time that the AFL reports its figures differently to any other sport in the country to inflate participation rates. League and soccer generally only report those who are members of an affiliated club. AFL include those who partake in any AFL program which includes Auskick run at schools as part of their physical education program.

 

[Colonial]

It has been well known for a long time that the AFL reports its figures differently to any other sport in the country to inflate participation rates. League and soccer generally only report those who are members of an affiliated club. AFL include those who partake in any AFL program which includes Auskick run at schools as part of their physical education program.

Dont the leagues include touch footy and Oztag etc etc?

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[Slax]

Dont the leagues include touch footy and Oztag etc etc?

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

No. Members of affiliated clubs only, it is the Gold Coast region though so not sure on boundries

 

[Experimental]

It has been well known for a long time that the AFL reports its figures differently to any other sport in the country to inflate participation rates. League and soccer generally only report those who are members of an affiliated club. AFL include those who partake in any AFL program which includes Auskick run at schools as part of their physical education program.

Auskick is how I became interested in Aussie rules. I've got no problem with including Auskick in participation numbers.

I just wonder how many kids are counted twice because of their participation in both school-based Auskick and club duties.

 

[Slax]

Auskick is how I became interested in Aussie rules. I've got no problem with including Auskick in participation numbers.

I just wonder how many kids are counted twice because of their participation in both school-based Auskick and club duties.

They'd be quite a few and I'll bet the AFL has made no attempt to rectify the error. Some of the numbers put out there by AFL friendly reporting agencies are just laughable. The best one I saw talked about global football participation and said Association Football global participation was 31 million, so I taken the view that if it isn't being published by a recognised government department like the ABS, then it isn't worth the paper it is written on.

 

[The_Wookie]

No. Members of affiliated clubs only, it is the Gold Coast region though so not sure on boundries

The hell they dont. It was the entire reason the NRL took on and rebranded Touch Footy last year. Further league began reporting on "rugby league experiences" last year - basically anyone who saw a league ball was counted.

 

[Colonial]

The hell they dont. It was the entire reason the NRL took on and rebranded Touch Footy last year. Further league began reporting on "rugby league experiences" last year - basically anyone who saw a league ball was counted.

Thought that was the case.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[The_Wookie]

Hopefully this clears a few things up -

______________________________________________________

Queensland Participation - All Football Codes in 2014

AFL 2014 Annual Report

• Total participation reached 180,132 – 14.2 per cent more than 2013 and the largest increase since 2008.
  
• Queensland achieved the highest female participation in Australia with 51,722 girls and women playing the game – up 30 per cent.
• Queensland again recorded the largest AFL school participation in Australia with 117,432 primary and secondary school students playing the game.

This is broken down further in the AFl Queensland Annual Report 2014

For the National Rugby League, according to its Annual Report it has

• 61,828 players
• 3,974 teams
• 455 clubs

The QRL Annual Report breaks this down too

For the Rugby union, the ARU Annual Report says

At a state level, when aggregating all participation categories Queensland led the country with 296,356 participants (43% of the total).

The QRU annual Report adds that

• 42,902 Students in Try Sevens programs in 171 schools
  
• 7,039 Rookies to Reds participants ( age 5-11)
• 5.6% rise in junior club particpation
• 13% rise in female participation
• 49% rise in Sevens participation

Football Queensland (Soccer) reported

• 2014 saw a 5% percent jump across all registrations in Queensland. As football strives to be the number one participation sport in the country, Football Queensland aims to focus on both the retenion and recruitment of players. A rise in player registrations saw 66,500 people participate in outdoor football in 2014 alone, with females making up 19%.

 

[Slax]

The_Wookie whilst you might of firstly abused me, I find it very interesting that you then go and post something that actually confirms what I was saying, in that the League figure is only registered players and the AFL figure is for participation. They are two incredibly different things in case you are not aware, so obviously you are buying the AFL PR lies about participation versus registered players.

As a guide to how misleading the stats are please refer to page 18 of your link to the AFL Queensland report. They have no problem publishing up front about 51,722 female participants, but then when you try and find better data, you see that they have 1,800+ registered club participants. I would also like to point out that the aren't too good at proof reading their own publications as the main figure used in the overview is actually incorrect according to their own document, with page 18 listing it at 51,677. So how do you believe an organisation that can't even quote its own figures correctly.

Female participation at club level in League is double that of the Aussie Rules, with 3831 registered players in Queensland. Female club registration in 2014 were up 63% on 2013, no chance AFL saw anything like that number.

Unfortunately I cannot find any mention of male registrations so it is impossible to compare that figure, but suffice to say the much publicised figure of 180,132 when you scratch at it, is actually a bullshit number and the true number is much lower than that. The real picture is that at club level AFL is quite clearly running third behind League and Football.

So thanks again for saving me the leg work to prove that the AFL is manipulating the numbers to try and paint the most positive picture it can in Queensland when the true numbers say that they are a long way behind. IF the AFL ever decide to release the full numbers like the NRL and FFA a lot of people will be in for a massive shock to realise that what they thought was happening is actually not the case and AFL growth in NSW & Qld is nowhere near as good as the AFL make it out to be.

 

[The_Wookie]

The_Wookie whilst you might of firstly abused me,

Say what now? The statement about the NRL taking over Touch to increase participation numbers is fact.

I find it very interesting that you then go and post something that actually confirms what I was saying, in that the League figure is only registered players and the AFL figure is for participation. They are two incredibly different things in case you are not aware, so obviously you are buying the AFL PR lies about participation versus registered players.

Im not afraid to post data that may prove me wrong. Im not some sort of god that thinks I know everything.

The state figures for players and clubs are supplied by AFL queensland. the AFL figure is only meant to be an overview. The NRl reports for the country - and the FFA,ARU and AFL ones for that matter - also cite participation/experiences/contacts.

 

[Slax]

Say what now? The statement about the NRL taking over Touch to increase participation numbers is fact.

What you posted were the registered player numbers, not the participation numbers, massive difference between the two.

Im not afraid to post data that may prove me wrong. Im not some sort of god that thinks I know everything.

The state figures for players and clubs are supplied by AFL queensland. the AFL figure is only meant to be an overview. The NRL reports for the country - and the FFA,ARU and AFL ones for that matter - also cite participation/experiences/contacts.

What I want is to compare apples and apples, not apples and oranges. We have one code talking solely about participation rates, and two other codes talking about club registrations. The two numbers will always be miles apart and everyone knows that, so trying to say otherwise fails to prove any point.

The only number in the AFL Queensland document I could use were on female registrations which are half of the League and a sixth of Association Football registrations. That is a fact.

This is gives a clear indication that Aussie Rules is clearly below the other two in terms of market penetration and interest. The others are well established and it is fair to say that they will remain well ahead of AFL for a long time to come.

 

[The_Wookie]

What you posted were the registered player numbers, not the participation numbers, massive difference between the two.

Then you massively failed to read the graphics correctly.

club participants are registered players, and in fact the AFL only counts auskick participants who take part in a course lasting at least 6 weeks. Discounting any of them is a little disengenous.

 

[Slax]

Then you massively failed to read the graphics correctly.

club participants are registered players, and in fact the AFL only counts auskick participants who take part in a course lasting at least 6 weeks. Discounting any of them is a little disengenous.

Sorry I did miss the number of 25,167, which puts them at 40% of League and 38% of Soccer. Still miles behind in a heavily saturated market.

 

[The_Wookie]

Sorry I did miss the number of 25,167, which puts them at 40% of League and 38% of Soccer. Still miles behind in a heavily saturated market.

No doubt. I dont think anyone seriously thought they were number 1 or two, but the number of kids and women in the system is encouraging.

 

[Smashwood]

Gold Coast Suns are a disaster and were never going to be anything else but a disaster! The Gold Coast population isn't big enough to sustain an AFL team, fact. From the get go it had fail naming themselves the Suns as opposed to the Sharks. Then marinating themselves in this orange snotty looking training guernsey is horrendous. Yes I know, if the guernsey was another colour it wouldn't get anymore bums on seats. Even when Collingwood, Essendon etc play there, the crowd is still a disgrace.

The only players the Suns will ever attract are either totally burnt out or just can't get on another list. Utter waste of money and the AFL should be ashamed! Brisbane Lions were on the decline when the Suns entered the AFL, time and resources should've been aimed at them. You're trying to promote a brand that little Jonny looks up to and wants to be part of. Suns entering the AFL has just sent the Lions into an even bigger downward spiral.

Putting a NEAFL team in Cairns would be another waste of cash, time and resources. The old 'oh but there is plenty of ex pats up this way' just doesn't fly. I mean cmon, enough ex pats to fill a stadium on the GC or in Cairns, give me a break it is not feasible. So what's the solution. Well it's difficult now that the AFL have brought the Suns into the comp. AFL should've made the Lions the jewel in the crown of Queensland AFL and them alone. You just have to look at all the comps North of the GC, all made up of 5-6 team comps. The interest just isn't there.

Are the AFL having a go at trying to make AFL enticing in Queensland, yes they are. But, they need to keep focused on these leagues before thinking about a NEAFL team. Perfect world you would fold the Suns like it never happened, but I understand this won't happen, the AFL has already screwed that up, epically. And what is all this bullshit going hard at promoting women's football in Queensland, yet they haven't got the men's league healthy! They have a real fixation with women's football, and if the AFL keep this as a priority, the code will continue to be stagnant.

So. Forget this NEAFL talk. Stop prioritising women's football. Focus on getting the local league more enticing and healthy. And for the love of god try and get people into these leagues that actually know what they are doing. The money the AFL has spent on the Suns and possibly a NEAFL team, could be used on employing people who actually know the mechanics of the code. You will find that 'most' head honchos employed throughout the Queensland region know diddly squat about the game.