20th AFL Team

[sherb]

Perth looks like it's becoming the front-runner for the 18th NRL team. I wonder how that'd affect WA3 as AFL20.

The irony, of course, is that Perth did have a team, during the short-lived Super League days (Western Reds). Imagine if that team had been retained somehow, RL would have had a 25 year presence at the top level in Perth. But now, they have to start off from scratch again.

Ditto for Adelaide by the way (Adelaide Rams).

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Will you be leaving North Melbourne to barrack for the new Tassie team?

Yes I will be

 

[Tigerlaird]

My preference would be a new standalone team. Just as Tasmania won't have to deal with a second-hand club, I'd prefer not to either.

Yes, 19 teams can be done, but 20 is just so much neater.

If it came to a relocation, I'd prefer it be a Melbourne club. Sydney is too big to only have one club.

If it came to it, which Melbourne club would you prefer?

 

[Tigerlaird]

The irony, of course, is that Perth did have a team, during the short-lived Super League days (Western Reds). Imagine if that team had been retained somehow, RL would have had a 25 year presence at the top level in Perth. But now, they have to start off from scratch again.

Ditto for Adelaide by the way (Adelaide Rams).

Bring them both back - then whatever location is good for the 20th NRL team.

 

[sherb]

I really can't see the point of putting a 3rd team in any of WA, SA, NSW or Qld. Two clubs in each of those states is plenty.

There's probably too many clubs in Victoria, but I am really not a supporter of mergers or relocations.

20th side would, for me, come from either ACT or NT, and to offer up a smokey - NZ. I think the ACT is the obvious one though.

 

[Dirty Bird]

SA government apparently have paid $10m for ‘Magic round’ would they pay that all year for another AFL team?

North Adelaide Redlegs and take over the North East of Adelaide? Can they capture the Neutral supporters? And get a % of the SANFL supporters to convert from the Rooster and Norwood? Or do you just go with a new team? Not sure but either way it’s a 20 year play and is sure to pay off compared to Cairns-Darwin team or GWS ect.

Oh god no.

I dont want to support North Adelaide and have to deal with the idiotic Norwood supporters

At least when the other 8 SANFL clubs' fans can drown out the stupidity of Norwood fans at Crows games, it's tolerable.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

I really can't see the point of putting a 3rd team in any of WA, SA, NSW or Qld. Two clubs in each of those states is plenty.

There's probably too many clubs in Victoria, but I am really not a supporter of mergers or relocations.

20th side would, for me, come from either ACT or NT, and to offer up a smokey - NZ. I think the ACT is the obvious one though.

I can't see Nt being viable with such a small population but can see Canberra working.

 

[Tigerlaird]

I really can't see the point of putting a 3rd team in any of WA, SA, NSW or Qld. Two clubs in each of those states is plenty.

There's probably too many clubs in Victoria, but I am really not a supporter of mergers or relocations.

20th side would, for me, come from either ACT or NT, and to offer up a smokey - NZ. I think the ACT is the obvious one though.

There are too many clubs in Victoria but that's just the reality we have to accept moving forward. Would be a shame to see a club like North Melbourne which is the quintessential blue-collar Victorian footy club relocate to a different state. AFL will always be the V/AFL and for most of us, that's fine.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Since Fremantle/West Coast moved from Subiaco to Perth Stadium, each and every argument I see for wa3, I look at it and go 'so why not support freo'?

wa3 is sheer stupidity at this point and is more likely to fail than gws.

I'd rather see Canberra, Sydney3, Newcastle, Sunshine Coast, Cairns or Darwin before I'd rather see wa3.

Ideally what I would like to see

Tassie 19 (7 games Hobart, 4 Launceston)
Canberra 20

GWS to go from 7 Sydney/4 Canberra to 9 Sydney/2 Newcastle
North Melbourne to go from 7 Melbourne/4 Hobart to 8 Melbourne/2 Cairns/1 Townsville
Hawthorn to go from 7 Melbourne/4 Launceston to 11 Melbourne
St Kilda to go from 10 Melbourne/1 Cairns to 10 Melbourne/1 Darwin

 

[Tigerlaird]

Oh god no.

I dont want to support North Adelaide and have to deal with the idiotic Norwood supporters

At least when the other 8 SANFL clubs' fans can drown out the stupidity of Norwood fans at Crows games, it's tolerable.

SA government apparently have paid $10m for ‘Magic round’ would they pay that all year for another AFL team?

North Adelaide Redlegs and take over the North East of Adelaide? Can they capture the Neutral supporters? And get a % of the SANFL supporters to convert from the Rooster and Norwood? Or do you just go with a new team? Not sure but either way it’s a 20 year play and is sure to pay off compared to Cairns-Darwin team or GWS ect.

If there was a legit bid for an SA3 team - South Adelaide Panthers baby - we're like the Geelong of SA (in regards to location) - we got all of the South and Kangaroo Island, and nobody hates us. Perfect neutral team for a 3rd SA AFL side.

Norwood fans are mainly Crows supporters, although I know of one Hawthorn guy, a few Power supporters and my good mate is a Melbourne Demons fans - all from Norwood.

All the other SANFL teams are spread across whatever - I know a few Glenelg fans who support the mighty Richmond Tigers in the AFL.

 

[RedV3x]

WA3 makes the most sense if they were to add a 20th team.

WA3 adds nothing except another game a week which all additions will provide.

They don’t want another money draining team.

You do realise that expansion teams are funded by the additional media revenue then marketing and merchandise.
When the Swans were the only team playing on Sundays they funded the VFL.

They would need a team that can’t stand by its self.

They would need a team that can stand by its self.
Freemantle took some time to be established. A WA3 would definitely struggle to get traction.
The few fans disaffected with AFL look to the WAFL.

Go back and watch Eddie’s segment on FC. He knows

LOL.

 

[RedV3x]

I really can't see the point of putting a 3rd team in any of WA, SA, NSW or Qld. Two clubs in each of those states is plenty.

I keep referring back to it, but it depends on what model you want - big or boutique.
I prefer two big clubs in each of WA, SA, NSW and Qld.

There's probably too many clubs in Victoria, but I am really not a supporter of mergers or relocations.

There aren't two many clubs in Victoria, but rather poor distribution of supporters across the clubs.
Even the weak Victorian clubs are relatively strong and I prefer regional associations to boost those clubs.

20th side would, for me, come from either ACT or NT, and to offer up a smokey - NZ. I think the ACT is the obvious one though.

The AFL were well on the way with N.Z. with participation numbers etc and games in Wellington
but Covid and Auckland dragging it's feet on a new stadium stymied that.
The momentum doesn't seem to have been re-established, but Auckland stands out in the reasons for expansion.

 

[sherb]

The AFL were well on the way with N.Z. with participation numbers etc and games in Wellington
but Covid and Auckland dragging it's feet on a new stadium stymied that.
The momentum doesn't seem to have been re-established, but Auckland stands out in the reasons for expansion.

Interesting read about footy in NZ. It reminds me of what happened here in Sydney, ie it was very popular back in the day (100+ years ago) but succumbed to politics and the rugby codes.

Australian rules football in New Zealand - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[RedV3x]

Interesting read about footy in NZ.

The Wiki arcticle is poorly worded and quite misleading.

It reminds me of what happened here in Sydney, ie it was very popular back in the day (100+ years ago) but succumbed to politics and the rugby codes.

In Sydney the rugby establishment actively tried to suppress football of the colonial rules.
New Zealand was different. Colonial football spread to N.Z. as it did to the other colonies. It became the popular football.
A large influx of British miners in later goldrushes swung the momentum to rugby.
To my knowledge there was no active suppression of colonial football in N.Z..
N.Z. played the British Lions at rugby and colonial football as did N.S.W. and Victoria
before the British withdrew fearing the popularity of colonial football would overtake rugby.
WWI decimated Australian Football were it was not strong and even where it was strong.
Freemantle is known for it's passion for A.F. having three teams in the early WAFL
but North Freemantle disappeared because 19 players died in WWI.
WWII just made things worse.

 

[DEVO]

Surely it has to be Canberra, just under 500,000 currently living in Canberra and Queanbeyan and the region is growing rapidly. We have solid support as a large influx of Victorians polluted the city a few decades back and a decent ground that requires an upgrade but is still very good, if a little small. We are set to go.

 

[sherb]

The Wiki arcticle is poorly worded and quite misleading.



In Sydney the rugby establishment actively tried to suppress football of the colonial rules.
New Zealand was different. Colonial football spread to N.Z. as it did to the other colonies. It became the popular football.
A large influx of British miners in later goldrushes swung the momentum to rugby.
To my knowledge there was no active suppression of colonial football in N.Z..
N.Z. played the British Lions at rugby and colonial football as did N.S.W. and Victoria
before the British withdrew fearing the popularity of colonial football would overtake rugby.
WWI decimated Australian Football were it was not strong and even where it was strong.
Freemantle is known for it's passion for A.F. having three teams in the early WAFL
but North Freemantle disappeared because 19 players died in WWI.
WWII just made things worse.

I was talking broadly, but thanks for filling me in.

 

[Tigerlaird]

AFL teams for Tasmania and Canberra!

NRL teams for Perth, Adelaide and eventually Tasmania!

 

[madmug]

I really can't see the point of putting a 3rd team in any of WA, SA, NSW or Qld. Two clubs in each of those states is plenty.

There's probably too many clubs in Victoria, but I am really not a supporter of mergers or relocations.

20th side would, for me, come from either ACT or NT, and to offer up a smokey - NZ. I think the ACT is the obvious one though.

The point of WA3 is Perth has over 1 million people per team & is an Aussie rules strong hold. Thats about twice the number of people per team that Melbourne has per team. WA3 would still make it some 700k per team, still much more than Melbourne/Geelong

Also Sydney, despite its population, will probably never really support 2 clubs. It has 8 NRL clubs who don't pull the crowds most AFL clubs do. Thus the support for all football codes is Sydney is limited.

So the Mantra of 2 clubs per state outside of Victoria is bent. Its obviously ridiculous.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Surely it has to be Canberra, just under 500,000 currently living in Canberra and Queanbeyan and the region is growing rapidly. We have solid support as a large influx of Victorians polluted the city a few decades back and a decent ground that requires an upgrade but is still very good, if a little small. We are set to go.

And there's just so many positives.

Growth
We're the fastest growing state/territory over the past ten years. Now Labor's in, I expect that to grow even faster, they've already announced more public service jobs and a new 5000-employee precinct in Barton. The ACT will have 500k by 2028. Greater Canberra should be around 600k by 2030.

Economics
Economically, we're in a great position. Highest median wage, highest average disposable income, lowest unemployment. That means that our fast growing population also has money to spend on memberships and merch, and our value is greater as a TV market.

Support
I've gone on and on ad nauseum about how much AFL support Canberra has, but we also have a large neutral population, which means we can actually grow the pie (unlike an SA or WA team).

 

[RedV3x]

The point of WA3 is Perth has over 1 million people per team & is an Aussie rules strong hold.

What is the point of having another team even if might technically be possible.
Do really want an incredibly long list of teams so every fan gets disillusioned?

Thats about twice the number of people per team that Melbourne has per team. WA3 would still make it some 700k per team, still much more than Melbourne/Geelong

But like Melbourne it's not the total numbers but the distribution that is the problem.

Also Sydney, despite its population, will probably never really support 2 clubs.

Sydney supports the swans and the giants.

It has 8 NRL clubs who don't pull the crowds most AFL clubs do. Thus the support for all football codes is Sydney is limited.

Doesn't that suggest the outlook for AFL is better than the NRL?

So the Mantra of 2 clubs per state outside of Victoria is bent.

W.A. and S.A. both two powerful clubs.
NSW and Qld have one powerful club and one potentailly big club.

 

[Canberra Pear]

If it came to it, which Melbourne club would you prefer?

I don't want to death ride Victorian clubs, so based on identity rather than financial status or likelihood of moving, I think I'd like North.

The Canberra Kangaroos has a great ring to it #CanGaroos. They're an inoffensive club so it's easier for fans of other teams to get on board. There are a huge amount of kangaroos in Canberra. And the blue and white colour scheme are a great contrast to our two closest teams in Sydney. But, that's a huge if. Can't see any team moving any time soon.

 

[DEVO]

And there's just so many positives.

Growth
We're the fastest growing state/territory over the past ten years. Now Labor's in, I expect that to grow even faster, they've already announced more public service jobs and a new 5000-employee precinct in Barton. The ACT will have 500k by 2028. Greater Canberra should be around 600k by 2030.

Economics
Economically, we're in a great position. Highest median wage, highest average disposable income, lowest unemployment. That means that our fast growing population also has money to spend on memberships and merch, and our value is greater as a TV market.

Support
I've gone on and on ad nauseum about how much AFL support Canberra has, but we also have a large neutral population, which means we can actually grow the pie (unlike an SA or WA team).

Totally agree, but one thing I will say about the neutral population is that a fairly high percentage of the neutrals are from Sub-Continent Countries, and they don't necessarily follow the footy codes, but you do see a lot of them at the Cricket. As well as an AFL team, we should be looking at bringing in a BBL and WBBL team to Canberra, kill the Renegades and set up a new franchise in Canberra.

 

[madmug]

What is the point of having another team even if might technically be possible.
Do really want an incredibly long list of teams so every fan gets disillusioned?



But like Melbourne it's not the total numbers but the distribution that is the problem.



Sydney supports the swans and the giants.



Doesn't that suggest the outlook for AFL is better than the NRL?



W.A. and S.A. both two powerful clubs.
NSW and Qld have one powerful club and one potentailly big club.

Distribution of support is a Melbourne problem which affects the strength of the league.

The AFL supports 2 teams in Sydney. Just look at the annual AFL $$$ distribution!

Aussie Rules may be better, its more the point people don't support sport as much in Sydney.

NSW & QLD have 4 highly AFL funded clubs. 2 of which have most of that states support, the other 2 may just keep struggling.

 

[Canberra Pear]

WA3 makes the most sense if they were to add a 20th team. They don’t want another money draining team. They would need a team that can’t stand by its self.

Go back and watch Eddie’s segment on FC. He knows

What segment are you talking about?

I've searched and the only things I've found from Eddie are his "Tasmania Kangaroos 11/11" and "Northern Crocodiles" ideas. Both of which are ridiculous and don't instil me with a lot of confidence with any other ideas he's had.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Totally agree, but one thing I will say about the neutral population is that a fairly high percentage of the neutrals are from Sub-Continent Countries, and they don't necessarily follow the footy codes, but you do see a lot of them at the Cricket. As well as an AFL team, we should be looking at bringing in a BBL and WBBL team to Canberra, kill the Renegades and set up a new franchise in Canberra.

True. Apparently we have a booming Nepalese community. It makes sense to target communities that don't have any Australia sport attachment yet.

But I've brought soccer, union and league fans to Giants games and they've enjoyed themselves. And while we have a large AFL-supporting community, we have a large amount of non-AFL people that are willing to try it out.

I agree with a BBL and WBBL team. It'd really help the case for redeveloping Manuka Oval. And we don't have enough major summer sport.