Long-term future of the AFL.

[Canberra Pear]

Yeah my mistake, was getting Hobart and Tassie’s population mixed up. How many people do you think Darwin would need for NT to be considered for a team?

Surely not 500k as Alice Springs population should grow but I’d imagine they’re at least 30 years if not 50 away from being any sort of economic shot.

No worries, it just reinforces the importance of the whole of Tasmania being included.

I honestly don't know if Darwin will have enough people any time in the next 40 years. It really depends how heavily the government pushes the northern growth.

Darwin is so isolated that it really needs a solid population of its own to support a team. Wagga and Launceston are theoretical daytrips to Canberra and Hobart. Alice Springs is a 30-hour round trip from Darwin (and still a very small secondary city).

I would say Darwin needs 400k at a minimum. Being the only team in town will give it a boost, bit its isolation plays against it.

 

[RedV3x]

I honestly don't know if Darwin will have enough people any time in the next 40 years. It really depends how heavily the government pushes the northern growth.

It's rather irrelevant. Growth is relative - the rest of Australia is growing at the same time
so growth has to be very outstanding.
Perth's growth has been outstanding - that's why some people are suggesting WA3.
Brisbane's growth has been similar and I wouldn't be surprised if that hasn't already been looked at.

 

[Coolangatta]

No worries, it just reinforces the importance of the whole of Tasmania being included.

I honestly don't know if Darwin will have enough people any time in the next 40 years. It really depends how heavily the government pushes the northern growth.

Darwin is so isolated that it really needs a solid population of its own to support a team. Wagga and Launceston are theoretical daytrips to Canberra and Hobart. Alice Springs is a 30-hour round trip from Darwin (and still a very small secondary city).

I would say Darwin needs 400k at a minimum. Being the only team in town will give it a boost, bit its isolation plays against it.

Yeah, say if you get Tassie mid 20s and Canberra early 30s, and expansion continues 15 years on, I doubt NT will be viable as team 21 or 22 by the sounds of it. They might push for the social angle though.

Team 23 or 24 in the 60s/70s perhaps for NT.

I’d be looking at Sunshine Coast and South West WA for teams 21 and 22. I have my doubts about expansion in NSW but I don’t also see QLD ever adding two new expansion teams within a few years either.

 

[Tigerlaird]

I don’t think there’ll ever be an NT team.

WA3 would happen before that.

Although I don’t see expansion past 20 ever happening, if it did happen;

T21 - WA3
T22 - SA3
T23 - Newcastle
T24 - QLD3

Not necessarily in that order.

 

[madmug]

It's rather irrelevant. Growth is relative - the rest of Australia is growing at the same time
so growth has to be very outstanding.
Perth's growth has been outstanding - that's why some people are suggesting WA3.
Brisbane's growth has been similar and I wouldn't be surprised if that hasn't already been looked at.

Population size is one thing. The numbers of Aussie rules people & the likelihood or otherwise of picking up more supporters over the short, medium & longer term must also be factors, Also the other economic factors ie Business/Government support.

As an example, Tasmania has 570k, Hobart 250k. Not huge numbers but its a footy state so pro rata has a high current interest in the AFL. So getting a team has a lot of support & Government see a team (our first & only) would have solid economic & social value for the state. Thus far the other issue of the proposed new stadium hasn't got that level of support. It'll take an effort of better marketing & a business case to match to improve that situation.

Other places which have a myriad of other teams or football codes probably wouldn't get the same level of interest/support from the community & Government. Thats why I'd think WA3 before any more Qld or NSW teams.

Canberra doesn't have a team & has a decent rural population around it so it too would be in the mix b4 NSW/Qld IMO.

 

[RedV3x]

Population size is one thing. The numbers of Aussie rules people & the likelihood or otherwise of picking up more supporters over the short, medium & longer term must also be factors, Also the other economic factors ie Business/Government support.

Definitely and each case could be considered different.

As an example, Tasmania has 570k, Hobart 250k. Not huge numbers but its a footy state so pro rata has a high current interest in the AFL. So getting a team has a lot of support & Government see a team (our first & only) would have solid economic & social value for the state.

That is the case for Tasmania.
The AFL case is that Tasmania doesn't add that much to the AFL itself.
Of course this is a selfish business view but that's what most businesses are.

Thus far the other issue of the proposed new stadium hasn't got that level of support.

it was the major hold in New Zealand as well.

Other places which have a myriad of other teams or football codes probably wouldn't get the same level of interest/support from the community & Government.

The exact opposite. the governments are trying to attract what they don't have already.

Thats why I'd think WA3 before any more Qld or NSW teams.

Let's get one thing clear. Successive W.A. governments haven't supported Australian Football much at all.
Successive W.A. governments have reneged on many Australian Football projects
and tried to screw Australian Football with the contract for the new stadium.
The break even point is at least 25K.
WA3 would have no support from the W.A. government, reasoning that there is enough here already
but WA3 would lose money at the new stadium so where would WA3 play?
the only people proposing WA3 are here on B.F.

Canberra doesn't have a team & has a decent rural population around it so it too would be in the mix b4 NSW/Qld IMO.

Canberra has the ACTAFL, a history of elite A.F. players, AFL games, a city, a hinterland and people open to more AFL
but they do need a stadium and preferably one with indoor heating.

 

[Coolangatta]

Let's get one thing clear. Successive W.A. governments haven't supported Australian Football much at all.
Successive W.A. governments have reneged on many Australian Football projects
and tried to screw Australian Football with the contract for the new stadium.
The break even point is at least 25K.
WA3 would have no support from the W.A. government, reasoning that there is enough here already
but WA3 would lose money at the new stadium so where would WA3 play?
the only people proposing WA3 are here on B.F.

I didn't know that, about WA butting heads with the AFL.

If I were going to propose a 3rd WA team, it'd be in the South-West in about 20 years time. You've got Bunbury, Busselton, Albany, Mandurah, should get plenty of support in that region.

But is it needed? Not really.

You could say the same of Tassie and Canberra, though, but unlike WA they don't have representation yet and it's not like they aren't interested in footy.

I think it's too soon to look at where teams 21 and 22 should be, but Tassie and Canberra should be teams 19 and 20.

I suspect the AFL will wait until the mid 2040s to see what the state of the game in NSW and QLD is like first.

 

[madmug]

Definitely and each case could be considered different.



That is the case for Tasmania.
The AFL case is that Tasmania doesn't add that much to the AFL itself.
Of course this is a selfish business view but that's what most businesses are.

The AFL is a not for profit organisation. It is not 'most businesses'. It gets a lot of Government support on the basis of helping develop the game, clubs & people. How 'jobs for the boys' fits into that I'm not too sure.

it was the major hold in New Zealand as well.



The exact opposite. the governments are trying to attract what they don't have already.

If they already have RL. RU, ALeague & or AFL teams, why would they invest in a 2nd or 3rd team, Tasmania wishes to invest in its first & only. WA is underrepresented in the AFL so I thought their would be commercial opportunity & good for WA tourism, game development & player opportunity.


Let's get one thing clear. Successive W.A. governments haven't supported Australian Football much at all.
Successive W.A. governments have reneged on many Australian Football projects
and tried to screw Australian Football with the contract for the new stadium.
The break even point is at least 25K.

WA3 would have no support from the W.A. government, reasoning that there is enough here already
but WA3 would lose money at the new stadium so where would WA3 play?
the only people proposing WA3 are here on B.F.

We don't know how they'd perceive a 3rd team if it were to present itself. A business case of 11 more games would good economically for the stadium & player opportunity.

Canberra has the ACTAFL, a history of elite A.F. players, AFL games, a city, a hinterland and people open to more AFL
but they do need a stadium and preferably one with indoor heating.

ACTAFL, TFL,VFL,WAFL,SANFL,QAFL etc etc don't matter when it comes to getting an AFL team. A new/expanded stadium would be needed. One with a roof anyway. It'd also help the case for a possible BBL team.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

I don’t think there’ll ever be an NT team.

WA3 would happen before that.

Although I don’t see expansion past 20 ever happening, if it did happen;

T21 - WA3
T22 - SA3
T23 - Newcastle
T24 - QLD3

Not necessarily in that order.

Given the delays by the AFL on Tasmania, I honestly also can’t see any expansion beyond 20 till the 2040s.

 

[RedV3x]

"The AFL is a not for profit organisation. It is not 'most businesses'."

Not-for-profit organisations are business.

"WA is underrepresented in the AFL so I thought their would be commercial opportunity"

So now it's a business - make your mind up.

"We don't know how they'd perceive a 3rd team"

We know how W.A. accepted a second team.

"if it were to present itself. A business case of 11 more games would good economically for the stadium & player opportunity."

There you go with that word 'business" again.
There wouldn't be 11 more games at the stadium because the new club would lose money.
Players go into the draft so WA3 has not real effect.

Canberra has the ACTAFL, a history of elite A.F. players, AFL games, a city, a hinterland and people open to more AFL
but they do need a stadium and preferably one with indoor heating.

ACTAFL, TFL,VFL,WAFL,SANFL,QAFL etc etc don't matter when it comes to getting an AFL team.

Shows how little you think. Strong particiaption is a good underwriter of development.

 

[RedV3x]

If I were going to propose a 3rd WA team, it'd be in the South-West in about 20 years time. You've got Bunbury, Busselton, Albany, Mandurah, should get plenty of support in that region.

Then you'd expect Peel to be a power-house and not a cellar-dweller in the WAFL.
Bunbury hasn't even suggested a team in the WAFL.
If the entire population of Albany turned up you'd get a crowd of 40k.

You could say the same of Tassie and Canberra, though, but unlike WA they don't have representation yet and it's not like they aren't interested in footy.

That's the emotional case. There needs to be a business case
and from the AFL's point of view there needs to be expansion.

I think it's too soon to look at where teams 21 and 22

Before Covid and ignoring the stadium issue, New Zealand was well on track to be the 20th AFL team.
The situation changes quickly. There were once a lot of Canberra-based propositions.
Maybe Canberra just got tired of asking or were confused with the GWS arrangement.

 

[Coolangatta]

Then you'd expect Peel to be a power-house and not a cellar-dweller in the WAFL.
Bunbury hasn't even suggested a team in the WAFL.
If the entire population of Albany turned up you'd get a crowd of 40k.



That's the emotional case. There needs to be a business case
and from the AFL's point of view there needs to be expansion.



Before Covid and ignoring the stadium issue, New Zealand was well on track to be the 20th AFL team.
The situation changes quickly. There were once a lot of Canberra-based propositions.
Maybe Canberra just got tired of asking or were confused with the GWS arrangement.

Okay fair enough, maybe WA3 is a bad idea after all.

Yeah but I’m pretty sure Tasmania does have a strong business case at the moment. Hasn’t Gil said as much himself? Canberra I’m confident would, too.

Does NZ even care about AFL? Yes they have the population, infrastructure, etc, but the business case needs to be supported by some sort of indicators that Kiwis give a toss about footy.

 

[madmug]

"The AFL is a not for profit organisation. It is not 'most businesses'."

Not-for-profit organisations are business.

"WA is underrepresented in the AFL so I thought their would be commercial opportunity"

So now it's a business - make your mind up.

"We don't know how they'd perceive a 3rd team"

We know how W.A. accepted a second team.

"if it were to present itself. A business case of 11 more games would good economically for the stadium & player opportunity."

There you go with that word 'business" again.
There wouldn't be 11 more games at the stadium because the new club would lose money.
Players go into the draft so WA3 has not real effect.

Canberra has the ACTAFL, a history of elite A.F. players, AFL games, a city, a hinterland and people open to more AFL
but they do need a stadium and preferably one with indoor heating.

ACTAFL, TFL,VFL,WAFL,SANFL,QAFL etc etc don't matter when it comes to getting an AFL team.

Shows how little you think. Strong particiaption is a good underwriter of development.

Not for profit is not 'most businesses', most businesses are most definitely FOR profit.

To run a NOTfor profit you still need to run it on sensible accounting & business management lines & not lose money. Therefore IMO a WA3 would be a good opportunity for sponsorship & membership for a new entity. Its not clear it'd lose money, like GWS/GC do.

ACTAFL etc matter not to whether one gets an AFL team or not. ie NSWFL, QAFL were of a relatively low standard when the Swans & Bears/Lions started. Indeed the QAFL had a heap of 'Southerners' which lifted the standard from where it would have been. The NSWFL was very ordinary at the time the Swans moved in.

GWS was plonked out where Aussie rules is particularly weak. They weren't put there because of 'strong participation', they were put there to try to lift support for the AFL & perceived sponsorship/membership opportunities.

Anyway, no need to make cheap comment. I do think. I may not always be right, but its about discussion & reasoned points. Thats all.

 

[RedV3x]

To run a NOTfor profit you still need to run it on sensible accounting & business management lines & not lose money.

Yes, they are indeed run along business lines FFS.

Therefore IMO a WA3 would be a good opportunity for sponsorship & membership for a new entity.

Where's the "therefore" come from/

Its not clear it'd lose money,

Well it's not going to get crowds unless it plays at the new stadium and WA# cannot afford to play there.

like GWS/GC do.

How are WA# going to do better than GC or GWS.?

ACTAFL etc matter not to whether one gets an AFL team or not.

It matters because it's participation.

ie NSWFL, QAFL were of a relatively low standard when the Swans & Bears/Lions started.

It matters because it's participation.

Indeed the QAFL had a heap of 'Southerners' which lifted the standard from where it would have been.

It matters because it's participation.

The NSWFL was very ordinary at the time the Swans moved in.

It matters because it's participation.

GWS was plonked out where Aussie rules is particularly weak. They weren't put there because of 'strong participation',

That's right. Because of few AFLs in Ws it was a pointer to just how challenging the project would be.
The Goldcoast however had Southport which claims some record about size.

they were put there to try to lift support for the AFL & perceived sponsorship/membership opportunities.

They were put there to grow an AFL team first and foremost.

I may not always be right, but its about discussion & reasoned points. Thats all.

I find myself repeating the same points with you. You don't seem to follow logic to put it nicely.

 

[RedV3x]

Okay fair enough, maybe WA3 is a bad idea after all.

WA3 looked technically feasible because of population increase but it stops right there without any soul.

Yeah but I’m pretty sure Tasmania does have a strong business case at the moment.

I'd agree to that because people have gone beyond just saying "Tasmania deserves an AFL team".

Canberra I’m confident would, too.

I haven't heard too much from Canberra but there once were quite a few proposals.

Does NZ even care about AFL?

Wiki says that there are 4,100 registered rugby league players in W.A.
Wiki says that there are 8,300 registered registered Australian Football players in Canberra.
Wiki says that there are over 30,000 registered Australian Football players in N.Z.
We're talking Auckland that holds the biggest AFLs in N.Z.
25,000 people attended an AFL match in Wellington a city of only 400,000, wet, windy and miserable.

 

[Coolangatta]

Wiki says that there are 4,100 registered rugby league players in W.A.
Wiki says that there are 8,300 registered registered Australian Football players in Canberra.
Wiki says that there are over 30,000 registered Australian Football players in N.Z.
We're talking Auckland that holds the biggest AFLs in N.Z.
25,000 people attended an AFL match in Wellington a city of only 400,000, wet, windy and miserable.

Wow, didn’t know that.

With numbers like that I’ve come around to the idea of a NZ team, based in Auckland obviously. Maybe they could play a game or two in Wellington or somewhere, try and garner national support.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Wow, didn’t know that.

With numbers like that I’ve come around to the idea of a NZ team, based in Auckland obviously. Maybe they could play a game or two in Wellington or somewhere, try and garner national support.

It will be light years before we have a team in New Zealand

 

[The_Wookie]

Wiki says that there are over 30,000 registered Australian Football players in N.Z.

These are participants, not club players as in mostly Kiwikick and schools programs.

 

[The_Wookie]

It will be light years before we have a team in New Zealand

its cute when you pretend to be one of us

 

[Tigerlaird]

I see Canberra, WA3 and SA3 being in the mix before New Zealand.

 

[Coolangatta]

I see Canberra, WA3 and SA3 being in the mix before New Zealand.

It’s hard to say beyond Canberra, which I would be shocked if it wasn’t the front runner for team 20. I know there’s a strong push for NT but until Darwin is hitting around 400k like Canberra Pear said, then it’d be almost a guaranteed failure.

I just hope the AFL doesn’t try to ram NSW teams down our throats. The business case can’t be dictated by population. 400-600k in a footy mad zone is going to do better than 3 million in a zone where no one cares about footy imo.

 

[Aussie in exile]

its cute when you pretend to be one of us

I am more than you think, but sometimes some posters struggle with the truth.
The truth is nothing to fear. Its lies that are to be feared.
Fear those that make claims, but cant back them up with independent links

 

[RedV3x]

These are participants, not club players as in mostly Kiwikick and schools programs.

These are mostly participants, with some club players and mostly schools programs
but still, 30k is a large number of people getting involved.
Auckland AFL has six clubs just like the WARL in Perth.
Auckland AFL doesn't count flag football as does the WARL

.
"The Senior National Provincial Championships (NPC) held annually, is to determine the best Australian Football League in New Zealand at a senior level.
Teams from Canterbury, Wellington, Auckland, and Otago compete for national honours and the opportunity to be selected in New Zealand national teams."

New Zealand has been world champions of Australian Football and never finished lower than third
at the AFL International Cup.

 

[RedV3x]

I am more than you think, but sometimes some posters struggle with the truth.
The truth is nothing to fear. Its lies that are to be feared.
Fear those that make claims, but cant back them up with independent links

So look yourself in the mirror and repeat that.

 

[Aussie in exile]

So look yourself in the mirror and repeat that.

Its not rocket science. When YOU make a claim back it up with an independent link