Mr Taswegian
Roo Man
- May 25, 2019
- 3,049
- 1,441
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
How can an uneven amount of teams work long term?
20th AFL Team
- Thread starter lionshine
- Start date
- Tagged users None
There won’t be a 20th team.
Darwin/Cairns rediculous due to unsuitable weather being small cities where NRL is strong and minimal corporate support.
WA3. If Freo can’t fill Optus, who on earth is going to change from WC? Would be a disaster.
No other city has any chance except Canberra, who would be stronger than GWS, about the same as GC, but not as stroNg as Tassie. Reckon four games satisfies that market.
The main priority after announcing Tassie is to sort out the secondary markets. Where will Hawks and Roos Play?
Darwin/Cairns rediculous due to unsuitable weather being small cities where NRL is strong and minimal corporate support.
WA3. If Freo can’t fill Optus, who on earth is going to change from WC? Would be a disaster.
No other city has any chance except Canberra, who would be stronger than GWS, about the same as GC, but not as stroNg as Tassie. Reckon four games satisfies that market.
The main priority after announcing Tassie is to sort out the secondary markets. Where will Hawks and Roos Play?
How can it not?
19 teams adds 11 more games. Allows for a weekly bye so that team plays the next Thursday night, minimising short breaks. Having 15 byes in the last round also allows for a ore-finals bye for teams in contention.
Name one disadvantage?
YeahGnar
Benchwarmer
WA team is by far the safest option.
Mad footy state, and no actual Perth team in the league to represent the metro area. No brainer if AFL want to actually have a win for once.
How there has been no Perth team so far, with GC & GWS coming in instead, baffles me.
I thought the AFL liked money?
Mad footy state, and no actual Perth team in the league to represent the metro area. No brainer if AFL want to actually have a win for once.
How there has been no Perth team so far, with GC & GWS coming in instead, baffles me.
I thought the AFL liked money?
- Moderator
- #30
The AFL dont want to hand the WAFC another license. As long as the WAFC hold two licenses you wont see WA3
Canberra won't be getting four games every year, it's just to make up for missing a Covid game last year. We'll be back to three and WS with eight games next year.
Tbh, I'd be pretty happy for a Victorian team to play games in Canberra instead. There's more flexibility to play more games. GWS need more games in Sydney, Canberra needs more games in general. If GWS left and we could get four of five games a year from North. Not as good as our own team, but would solve both problems.
I could see a third Perth team work as a super slow relocation.
For the sake of the example, I'm going to use the Western Bulldogs as they wouldn't have to change their name. A third team in Perth will always have a small following, I couldn't see them reaching 30k members, so this way a third Perth team would at least have a strong following in Melbourne, too.
- The Dogs start by playing two games a year against West Coast and Freo (similar to how Gold Coast played a home game against Freo at Optus). Pretty much guaranteed crowds.
- After five or so years, start adding a third game, add another game every five years or so if the crowds to continue
- Anybody who doesn't like WC or Freo can jump onto the Dogs, but their small Perth membership will be buoyed by the Melbourne membership
- By the time they're playing four or five games, set up a secondary base in Perth, which will eventually become the main base. Maybe out at Joondalup for a point of difference.
- No WAFC licence issues either
Mr Taswegian
Roo Man
- May 25, 2019
- 3,049
- 1,441
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
My dad told me Canberra hosted North home games in the past and the crowds were poor which would be the same now considering how poorly North are playing.
We hosted them for six seasons (2001-06), before they ditched us for a shiny offer on the Gold Coast.
Funnily enough, we had higher crowds than the Gold Coast when they were hosting the Roos.
Canberra is the only city that is remotely viable. After that i can't imagine any further expansion for many decades.
The WA market is tapped, a third team would only cannibalise existing support instead of bringing in new fans. NT doesn't have the population or the money or really anything going for it.
The WA market is tapped, a third team would only cannibalise existing support instead of bringing in new fans. NT doesn't have the population or the money or really anything going for it.
I'd say the stadium is probably the biggest hurdle for Canberra.
I think the most likely option is a redeveloped Manuka Oval. I honestly don't have the answers to funding though. The dream scenario is an AFL team and a BBL expansion team at a similar time to have more justification and more stakeholders chipping in.
There was a Grocon proposal for a $800m redevelopment in 2016. It was going to be privately funded, with Grocon benefiting from developing the surrounding area. It was an unsolicited proposal and not popular with the locals. There might be more luck if a similar proposal - with less surrounding development - is raised as an ACT govt-led partnership (with a bit of ACT, fed, AFL and cricket funding) rather than a Grocon-led proposal.
- Mar 24, 2012
- 1,366
- 3,770
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I don't think a new ground would be 100% necessary
Manuka is the second-best location for a stadium in Canberra, after Civic. Geographically Manuka is pretty close to the centre of Canberra and has decent places to eat/drink before and aftera game (plus the Foreshore isn't too far)
I dunno about zoning and NIMBYs but surely they can expand on the current 13.5k capacity close to 25k with a new stand or two:
The north side of the ground has a good amount of land to build back onto before you get to NSW Crescent. The bottom right/west has Manuka Circuit to contend with but there is definitely room to build a bigger stand there too.
I am on board for a team so hope they can get the ground built
When I said new ground I didn’t mean necessarily in a new location.
As part of a Manuka Oval redevelopment, why not rotate the footy field 90 degree to run east-west.
The same as the MCG and Optus Stadium.
Allowing the facilities like media booths and sponsorship boxes to be in the northern stand and be in the preferred location for both cricket (behind the stumps) and footy (on the wing).
It was a big decision in the decided orientation and design of Optus Stadium. Because along with the media facilities and corporate boxes, spectators prefer to be in these locations too.
So you can build larger north and south stands and smaller east and west stands, which suits both sports.
The same as the MCG and Optus Stadium.
Allowing the facilities like media booths and sponsorship boxes to be in the northern stand and be in the preferred location for both cricket (behind the stumps) and footy (on the wing).
It was a big decision in the decided orientation and design of Optus Stadium. Because along with the media facilities and corporate boxes, spectators prefer to be in these locations too.
So you can build larger north and south stands and smaller east and west stands, which suits both sports.
To me, a knockdown and rebuild makes sense, so might as well build it up with stuff like that in consideration.
I'd also like to see a big underground carpark built underneath. Apparently Marvel can fit 2500 cars underneath. Parking is a major issue in the area around Manuka, so that could help alleviate that, too.
Yes but a new 25k stadium with underground parking will be $300m - $350m. That ain’t happening until after Canberra get a new rectangular stadium, which is a long, long way off.
The government's commitment to a shiny new stadium (and commitment in general) is the one area the NT's bid is better than Canberra's.
With a Super Rugby, NRL - and a push for an A-League team, there would be a huge uproar if a new oval came before a new rectangle. Our best chance would be a near-simultaneous BBL expansion to help justify the funds.
In an ideal world, with enough money, Canberra could start with a new stadium that would help fix orientation and parking issues. Because once a full-time team starts, a rebuild looks unlikely with nowhere for the team to go.
But Manuka Oval could probably get to a "good enough" level without a massive redevelopment. There's a decent amount of room on the eastern side, it could probably get it up to ~22k without having to do much knocking down. It will probably have to be a bit of a patchwork redevelopment like Geelong or the SCG when (if) crowds and funding can justify it.
Sure, no new team is going to compete with West Coast for crowds. But with a big enough stadium, a Canberra team would get higher crowds than the Gold Coast, GWS or a new NT team.
I think it they'd also be a chance to get higher crowds than Tasmania and than North get against interstate teams.
Bigger than Nth/GWS/GC/Dogs, sometimes. Sure, but Tas will have a better base crowd.
As a whole, Tasmania will likely have a bigger base, but given everything being equal (stadium capacity, ladder position etc) I think Canberra might be able to get similar crowds to Hobart.
- Tasmania has a slightly larger population, but Canberra has double the population able to access a stadium (compared to Hobart)
- Canberra and Hobart have a similar number of AFL fans
- Canberra has a bunch of untapped fans (I've brought three leaguies to Manuka games)
- Canberrans have 22% more disposable income than Tasmanians, so more money to spend at the footy
- Canberra is a very Monday-to-Friday workforce, meaning more spare time on the weekends.
ExpatAussie
Rookie
- May 27, 2022
- 42
- 29
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Looks like a good Div2 ground, if only the AFL had a policy of equal opportunity, instead of equality.
Last edited:
Mr Taswegian
Roo Man
- May 25, 2019
- 3,049
- 1,441
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Hobart actually has more people closer to the ground that can access the ground than Launceston and don't forget all the people from Melbourne that will attend games.
