20th AFL Team

[Coolangatta]

Completely agree - I liked Eddie's discussion around North making the Northern Suburbs their own, but i think playing 3 home games in Bendigo would be a great replacement to Tasmania. Get a Bendigo tourism sponsorship as well - always thought it was great how the Bulldogs had BALLARAT on their shorts.

North are looking at Bendigo already. Playing 3 games per year there is a great idea. Likewise, Dogs should up their Ballarat games to three per year.

 

[Coolangatta]

Unsure about Canberra to be honest - we had our opportunity in the early 80s but went to Sydney instead. It's a Raiders town now.

People can support both codes, you know, and Canberra seems like the kind of place that gets behind sports in general.

Reckon they’d go alright at an upgraded Manuka with their own club.

Would be shocked if they couldn’t pull at least 15k plus per game.

I hate how NT is always included in the expansion discussion but not ACT.

 

[Bjo187]

The Canberra question got asked on the sounding board this week, hutchie and damo who are as dumb as dogshit when it comes to footy said nuh 3 games currently is plenty for that market.

 

[Canberra Pear]

The Canberra question got asked on the sounding board this week, hutchie and damo who are as dumb as dogshit when it comes to footy said nuh 3 games currently is plenty for that market.

Damo frames himself as an intellectual, then pulls some absolute howlers.

About a month ago, he said he thought Team 20 would be FNQ. Absolutely crazy that he thinks Cairns can handle a team, but Canberra is tapped.

 

[Coolangatta]

Damo frames himself as an intellectual, then pulls some absolute howlers.

About a month ago, he said he thought Team 20 would be FNQ. Absolutely crazy that he thinks Cairns can handle a team, but Canberra is tapped.

Wish someone could ask him that question. Would love to hear his response. Probably default “Canberra is Giants territory” answer which does not at all address the question of whether the ACT market is serviced well enough or not, nor address whether Cairns is a more viable full time market than Canberra or not (which yes, is laughable).

 

[Canberra Pear]

Unsure about Canberra to be honest - we had our opportunity in the early 80s but went to Sydney instead. It's a Raiders town now.

What about Canberra are you unsure about?

NRL's had a leg up by the AFL neglecting us, but as a market, we are stronger and larger than we were in the 80s, and only growing larger.

 

[BigFrizz36]

Unsure about Canberra to be honest - we had our opportunity in the early 80s but went to Sydney instead. It's a Raiders town now.

It's not really though. Last week the Giants had a full house of 11.5K at Manuka and might have had more if there was bigger capacity. The established Raiders got 13K and belted 0 - 40 on the same weekend.

Imagine a new 25K stadium on the light rail with Canberra's own team playing there. I reckon that there would be a fair chance that they would regularly draw a bigger crowd than the Raiders.

 

[MrSlippyFist]

It's not really though. Last week the Giants had a full house of 11.5K at Manuka and might have had more if there was bigger capacity. The established Raiders got 13K and belted 0 - 40 on the same weekend.

Imagine a new 25K stadium on the light rail with Canberra's own team playing there. I reckon that there would be a fair chance that they would regularly draw a bigger crowd than the Raiders.

Good points here - but I doubt the AFL would have their latest expansion team playing a few games there a year if they had future plans on taking that away from them and putting a brand new team there. May be a while off I suspect.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Good points here - but I doubt the AFL would have their latest expansion team playing a few games there a year if they had future plans on taking that away from them and putting a brand new team there. May be a while off I suspect.

When they entered their latest expansion team, Teams 19 and 20 weren't on the cards yet.

Tasmania's strong-arming of the AFL moved the timelines up.

 

[Walshawk]

Damo frames himself as an intellectual, then pulls some absolute howlers.

About a month ago, he said he thought Team 20 would be FNQ. Absolutely crazy that he thinks Cairns can handle a team, but Canberra is tapped.

Cairns is an NRL town. It has a population of 150k and 2/3 would prefer NRL over AFL. So, a captive market of 50k.
Darwin also has around 150 but it is the reverse, with about 2/3 preferring AFL. So 100k footy fans.
Neither come close to being able to support an AFL team.

Canberra is around 50/50 from its population of over 500k. It would have a similar number of AFL fans as Gold Coast, which has a larger population but would be 60/40 NRL.

Canberra has the advantage of being an actual city, rather than a more spread out suburbs on the GC.

WA doesn’t want a team. SA is more likely to be team 20 than WA. The last thing the other 19 teams will want is more trips to Perth.

Canberra is also a doable drive from Melbourne and Sydney, so will get decent away fans at games.

 

[Saab NLAW]

It should be a team from metro Melbourne who identifies as a non-Vic team so it gets all the advantages of a Vic team plus it can complain about the advantages Vic teams get and then get its own recruiting zone and academy. It can then play its home games anywhere in the country because its identity is fluid so the AFL can slot it in anywhere.

Everyone wins

 

[Bjo187]

Cairns is an NRL town. It has a population of 150k and 2/3 would prefer NRL over AFL. So, a captive market of 50k.
Darwin also has around 150 but it is the reverse, with about 2/3 preferring AFL. So 100k footy fans.
Neither come close to being able to support an AFL team.

Canberra is around 50/50 from its population of over 500k. It would have a similar number of AFL fans as Gold Coast, which has a larger population but would be 60/40 NRL.

Canberra has the advantage of being an actual city, rather than a more spread out suburbs on the GC.

WA doesn’t want a team. SA is more likely to be team 20 than WA. The last thing the other 19 teams will want is more trips to Perth.

Canberra is also a doable drive from Melbourne and Sydney, so will get decent away fans at games.

This is a smart way to do it. Calculate the catchment of people that are already AFL fans. The bigger that number, the better option is. I don't think they'll wanna go in cold turkey to a new area again with no underlying support.

For example Canberra:
total population catchment area: 500k
Percentage of sports fans in that area: 50 percent.
Percentage of afl fans out of those sports fans: 50 percent.
Starting point fan number = approx 125k

As the population grows and the afl immerses itself in the local market, the afl fans in the town might from currently 50 percent, plus another 15 percent of dual code fans that currently only like rugby.

I did hear someone the other day say that each club needs 500k fans these days to be viable though. But that seems high.

 

[Coolangatta]

I did hear someone the other day say that each club needs 500k fans these days to be viable though. But that seems high.

Yeah, nah, 500k people, sure, but not fans.

In 2011, ABS. "In the 2011 Census, there were 507,642 people in Gold Coast of these 48.9% were male and 51.1% were female. Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people made up 1.3% of the population. The median age of people in Gold Coast was 38 years."

2033 projection of Canberra. "The ACT Government will need to act fast on urban planning to stay ahead of exploding population growth, with new data from the Federal Government's Centre for Population predicting Canberra will grow by almost 100,000 within the next decade, reaching 550,000 by 2033."

500k is a good starting point. I don't know what exact capacity Canberra could upgrade Manuka to, but if they're getting anywhere between 20-25k people per game (sometimes there'd be less, I'm sure), then wouldn't that be a success? Doesn't the club succeed if the stadium turns into a money maker? Not every club is going to need 50k+ attendances to succeed, surely.

That's why I would never say never with Darwin and Cairns but would say never in our lifetimes because it would take a very long time for their populations to grow.

 

[Canberra Pear]

If you compare Canberra to Melbourne (including Geelong), we have about 1/10th of the population, and Team 20 would give us 1/10th of the teams.

We're obviously not as AFL-friendly as Melbourne, but Melbourne's not split up equally between the teams.

If you use memberships as gauge and split up Greater Melbourne's population by the same percentage, North would have a catchment of about 350k, and the Bulldogs 380k.

Canberra is less AFL-friendly, but the AFL fans in our 560k would probably compare pretty similarly to those catchments.

 

[Coolangatta]

Cairns is an NRL town. It has a population of 150k and 2/3 would prefer NRL over AFL. So, a captive market of 50k.
Darwin also has around 150 but it is the reverse, with about 2/3 preferring AFL. So 100k footy fans.
Neither come close to being able to support an AFL team.

Canberra is around 50/50 from its population of over 500k. It would have a similar number of AFL fans as Gold Coast, which has a larger population but would be 60/40 NRL.

Canberra has the advantage of being an actual city, rather than a more spread out suburbs on the GC.

WA doesn’t want a team. SA is more likely to be team 20 than WA. The last thing the other 19 teams will want is more trips to Perth.

Canberra is also a doable drive from Melbourne and Sydney, so will get decent away fans at games.

The Eagles are adored here, it's hard to see many jumping ship, waiting list or not. It's the same issue with the Crows and Port - these clubs are thirty plus years entrenched in the states, it's just far too late and adds nothing to the game.

I have no doubt West Perth/East Perth/Fremantle and Port/Norwood/Sturt would've worked in the 80s/90s but not now.

It's gotta be Canberra if we go to 20. I've yet to hear a good argument against it. I can tell with some people they just don't like Canberra therefore don't want them to have a team, but that's not an argument, that's a whine.

 

[Bjo187]

If you compare Canberra to Melbourne (including Geelong), we have about 1/10th of the population, and Team 20 would give us 1/10th of the teams.

We're obviously not as AFL-friendly as Melbourne, but Melbourne's not split up equally between the teams.

If you use memberships as gauge and split up Greater Melbourne's population by the same percentage, North would have a catchment of about 350k, and the Bulldogs 380k.

Canberra is less AFL-friendly, but the AFL fans in our 560k would probably compare pretty similarly to those catchments.

The one issue here is, would the afl want another club the size of north and the dogs who are considered small, or would they prefer to go with a location that has less initial fans, but bigger growth potential (like they did with gws). If that's the case, they might see Perth or a second Brisbane team as attractive.

 

[Canberra Pear]

The one issue here is, would the afl want another club the size of north and the dogs who are considered small, or would they prefer to go with a location that has less initial fans, but bigger growth potential (like they did with gws). If that's the case, they might see Perth or a second Brisbane team as attractive.

That just means we've got a North/Bulldogs potential catchment of pre-existing AFL fans to start with. It means we've got a stable base (and a better start than the Suns and Giants).

But there's still a lot of neutrals, non-AFL folks to grow into. Our ceiling would be higher than those two clubs.

Using that same measurement, Geelong and Hawthorn have got catchments of about 550k, which is very similar to Greater Canberra. I doubt we'd ever become as AFL-friendly as Victoria, but that's the ceiling we'd be trying to grow towards.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Alastair Clarkson has just said the NT should get the 20th team.

Pretty sure he has put little-to-no thought into it, but he's just pushing a 20th team to get the heat off North. And the NT just seems to be the default option.

 

[Sainter1873]

My guess is an NT team sometime in the 2030s and a relocation of North to Canberra. I wouldn’t like to see a relocation but it’s my prediction. Puts a club in every state and territory.

 

[Coolangatta]

Alastair Clarkson has just said the NT should get the 20th team.

Pretty sure he has put little-to-no thought into it, but he's just pushing a 20th team to get the heat off North. And the NT just seems to be the default option.

It's not the first time he's said that. And again, he claims NT would make it a "truly national competition." Really sick of hearing this.

My guess is an NT team sometime in the 2030s and a relocation of North to Canberra. I wouldn’t like to see a relocation but it’s my prediction. Puts a club in every state and territory.

No. North won't relocate. If NT are team 20, ACT will miss out.

Because every muppet and their dog will think the game is "complete" but if ACT got to be the 20th side, you'd still have people saying, "Hey, what about NT."

Works better for ACT to get it first if you actually want a national competition like they keep saying.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

My guess is an NT team sometime in the 2030s and a relocation of North to Canberra. I wouldn’t like to see a relocation but it’s my prediction. Puts a club in every state and territory.

North Melbourne will never relocate. They changed their constitution after they refused AFL’s offer to relocate to Gold Coast, to make it almost impossible for a relocation as a significant majority of their membership have to now agree to any such decision.

Also Canberra does not want North. That ship has already sailed. North Melbourne played 17 home games in Canberra from 2001-06, before leaving us to play in the Gold Coast for more $. Since then, North have only played ONE match in Canberra over 18 years!

 

[Coolangatta]

North Melbourne will never relocate. They changed their constitution after they refused AFL’s offer to relocate to Gold Coast, to make it almost impossible for a relocation as a significant majority of their membership have to now agree to any such decision.

Also Canberra does not want North. That ship has already sailed. North Melbourne played 17 home games in Canberra from 2001-06, before leaving us to play in the Gold Coast for more $. Since then, North have only played ONE match in Canberra over 18 years!

Yeah, North’s not going anywhere.

My preference would be to see Canberra get their own team.

No more relocations or mergers.

 

[Canberra Pear]

North Melbourne will never relocate. They changed their constitution after they refused AFL’s offer to relocate to Gold Coast, to make it almost impossible for a relocation as a significant majority of their membership have to now agree to any such decision.

Also Canberra does not want North. That ship has already sailed. North Melbourne played 17 home games in Canberra from 2001-06, before leaving us to play in the Gold Coast for more $. Since then, North have only played ONE match in Canberra over 18 years!

I don't want a relocation. It's messy. I'd much rather our own team. I'd rather getting our own team be filled with the fanfare that Tasmania's getting, not the heartbreak of a relocation.

But if it came down to three Giants games a year for the next 50 years, or the Canberra Kangaroos (or any hypothetical Victorian side), I'd take the relocation.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

I don't want a relocation. It's messy. I'd much rather our own team. I'd rather getting our own team be filled with the fanfare that Tasmania's getting, not the heartbreak of a relocation.

But if it came down to three Giants games a year for the next 50 years, or the Canberra Kangaroos (or any hypothetical Victorian side), I'd take the relocation.

Which Victorian side do you think would agree to relocate here? North will not, the Bulldogs seem happy with Ballarat as their secondary market, and even financially struggling St Kilda did not renew their one game contract to play a home game in Cairns after their narrow loss there in 2022.

 

[weewilly]

It's not really though. Last week the Giants had a full house of 11.5K at Manuka and might have had more if there was bigger capacity. The established Raiders got 13K and belted 0 - 40 on the same weekend.

Imagine a new 25K stadium on the light rail with Canberra's own team playing there. I reckon that there would be a fair chance that they would regularly draw a bigger crowd than the Raiders.

The official crowd at Manuka on April was 13,080 not 11,500 andwas the same a the the NRL match!

It's not really though. Last week the Giants had a full house of 11.5K at Manuka and might have had more if there was bigger capacity. The established Raiders got 13K and belted 0 - 40 on the same weekend.

Imagine a new 25K stadium on the light rail with Canberra's own team playing there. I reckon that there would be a fair chance that they would regularly draw a bigger crowd than the Raiders.

The Giants had 13,080 on Anzac Day NOT 11,500 and was the same as the NRL got to their last home match in Canberra so there is good potential to grow our game in the nations capital!
For starters Manuka needs better facilities and be upgraded to 20 - 25,000 same as the rectangular GIO stadium capacity.