20th AFL Team

[Canberra Pear]

The whole ‘making the comp national’ idea is such a flawed and stupid argument. The nfl don’t have teams in most states, are they not national? If the afl put a team in NT AND Canberra, does that make it national… what about other larger urban areas like North Queensland and Newcastle? Why does it make the comp more national by putting a team in a population area of 250k, but only one team in Brisbane of 3m and 2 teams in Sydney of 5m… are these populations served with just 1 or 2 teams?

The whole national thing is simply a map ticking exercise to feel good that there are some dots spread across the land mass. Nothing to do with making the comp or the game national.

The most important factor of being a national competition is obviously having a team in the national capital.

 

[Coolangatta]

The most important factor of being a national competition is obviously having a team in the national capital.

Yeah, while I agree about the map ticking comments made in this thread, is there any national sport in the world that doesn't have a team based in the national capital, apart from the AFL?

I'd say, ironically, Canberra being in the AFL makes it more a truly national comp than the NT, even though I've lost count how many times people say the opposite, that NT completes the jigsaw puzzle.

Obviously this is influenced by how big the NT is... on the map. But that's all it is.

I think a stronger argument for an NT club is how much it's given to our game per capita. But even then, the AFL has made it clear they expect clubs to pay for themselves eventually... ahem... with the exception of a few Vic clubs it seems, but they get the privilege of being part of the comp foundation.

NT just isn't and probably is sadly never viable without fed money forever, like some ridiculous 100 year contract... which could still be torn up.

I also agree with QLD3 not being viable yet, not while the Lions and Suns can't pay for themselves yet. That'll change, but we're not there yet.

Perth 3 I still have my reservations about getting enough break off supporters, and South West WA is just too small and should stop being mentioned by the media.

Canberra it is.

 

[RedV3x]

The whole ‘making the comp national’ idea is such a flawed and stupid argument.

Yes, because it's generally agreed that Australian Football is already the national and indigenous sport of Australia.

The NFL don’t have teams in most states, are they not national?

There are numerous examples like this where the national sport is not universally played across a country..
Then there are numerous examples where the national sport is not the most popular sport played eg kabaddi and hockey in India. Canada has two official national sports: ice hockey is the national winter sport, and lacrosse is the national summer sport.

If the afl put a team in NT AND Canberra, does that make it national

If the AFL put a team in NT AND Canberra, does that make it more national?

The whole national thing is

What countries do to promote and be proud of their national sports

 

[hampton]

Yes, because it's generally agreed that Australian Football is already the national and indigenous sport of Australia.



There are numerous examples like this where the national sport is not universally played across a country..
Then there are numerous examples where the national sport is not the most popular sport played eg kabaddi and hockey in India. Canada has two official national sports: ice hockey is the national winter sport, and lacrosse is the national summer sport.



If the AFL put a team in NT AND Canberra, does that make it more national?



What countries do to promote and be proud of their national sports

You missed the entire point, which is not whether afl is or isn’t a national sport, it’s that adding a team in NT doesn’t make it more inherently ‘national’ and the whole concept of placing dots on a map to make a ‘national sport’ is flawed.

 

[The Educator]

This debate is obviously on a spectrum and multifaceted

Not having coverage of every population centre of 100K or more does not mean a sport is not National.

In a federation of 6 states, having representation in every state now, and having multiple teams in each of the 5 metro areas means the AFL is absolutely a national competition now.

Other codes are objectively less national

 

[Coolangatta]

This debate is obviously on a spectrum and multifaceted

Not having coverage of every population centre of 100K or more does not mean a sport is not National.

In a federation of 6 states, having representation in every state now, and having multiple teams in each of the 5 metro areas means the AFL is absolutely a national competition now.

Other codes are objectively less national

Having teams in all states is awesome.

ACT and NT would also be sweet, though. Especially, you know, our actual capital.

If the AFL wants cap the number of teams, I’d love if we could get ACT and then 40-50 years later NT and South West WA (or by that stage NQ if QLD becomes more of a footy state than WA which I doubt).

 

[RedV3x]

You missed the entire point,

No i didn't

which is not whether afl is or isn’t a national sport,

because obviously by all criteria Australian football is a national sport.

the whole concept of placing dots on a map to make a ‘national sport’ is flawed.

Yes and didn't i give examples of other countries with national sports that fall well short of being universally popular or universal coverage. Do you want other examples of countries with well recognised national sports that fall into this category?

 

[hampton]

This debate is obviously on a spectrum and multifaceted

Not having coverage of every population centre of 100K or more does not mean a sport is not National.

In a federation of 6 states, having representation in every state now, and having multiple teams in each of the 5 metro areas means the AFL is absolutely a national competition now.

Other codes are objectively less national

Very flawed logic here. NFL has only 22 out of 50 states that have NFL teams, yet NFL is played across the whole country and can easily lay claim to being their biggest and national sport. AFL will have professional clubs soon in 6 out of 8 states/territories, but in 2 of the biggest it's still a minor sport overall. It'd be like if NFL was very popular in the mid west states but a niche sport in Texas and California.

AFL doesnt have a team in the nation's capital (double the population of Hobart). It's not the biggest sport in some of Australia's largest populated and largest growing centres. Putting a team in Hobart and saying '6 out of 6 states now covered' is such a flawed argument is this 'debate'.

The reality is there are three national sports in Australia at present: Cricket, Australian football, Rugby League. One-eyed AFL-only fans like to think aussie football is the national sport which is AFL hubris rather than reality. Who knows in future but certainly at present given the 25m population of Australia, if half of that AFL is a niche sport how can it possibly be the only national sport, no matter how many smaller regional towns get a professional club

 

[Professor Knowall]

The reality is there are three national sports in Australia at present: Cricket, Australian football, Rugby League. One-eyed AFL-only fans like to think aussie football is the national sport which is AFL hubris rather than reality. Who knows in future but certainly at present given the 25m population of Australia, if half of that AFL is a niche sport how can it possibly be the only national sport, no matter how many smaller regional towns get a professional club

AFL is unarguably (at least in realistic terms) the most popular sport overall in Australia. It also has a far larger footprint in NSW and, even more-so now, in QLD, where it grown to be much more than just a "niche" sport, compared to what the NRL has outside these two states (from my very regular visits to Sydney, I've found some NRL fans (at least from those relatively few I've spoken to that actually care) don't realise just how niche (mostly confined to the NZ and Polynesian community) support for NRL is in Melbourne and Perth - and it's even more so in Adelaide.

Australian Football is also our only major indigenous game, another major reason as to why it's our true national sport.

I note the media narrative today is already shifting to the 20th team, now that Dillon has today all but stated it's inevitable and they will be looking at Tne options. Canberra is the early favourite.

 

[hampton]

AFL is unarguably (at least in realistic terms) the most popular sport overall in Australia. It also has a far larger footprint in NSW and, even more-so now, in QLD, where it grown to be much more than just a "niche" sport, compared to what the NRL has outside these two states (from my very regular visits to Sydney, I've found some NRL fans (at least from those relatively few I've spoken to that actually care) don't realise just how niche (mostly confined to the NZ and Polynesian community) support for NRL is in Melbourne and Perth - and it's even more so in Adelaide.

Australian Football is also our only major indigenous game, another major reason as to why it's our true national sport.

I note the media narrative today is already shifting to the 20th team, now that Dillon has today all but stated it's inevitable and they will be looking at Tne options. Canberra is the early favourite.

I agree it might be the largest, arguably, but not by a big margin, and in 2 of the 3 biggest cities that make up most of Australia it’s still relatively small.

There’s no clear national sport among the football codes, cricket most certainly holds the title otherwise.

AFL is bigger than water polo and lacrosse in nsw obviously it’s not that niche, but it’s still nowhere near as popular as league and that includes qld too. Most Sydneysiders wouldn’t be able to recognise a single current Sydney swans player. Victorians overstate how popular the game is up here.

Lots of kids play auskick but that doesn’t translate to general support.

Could argue soccer is the most popular football code based on participation.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

The reality is there are three national sports in Australia at present: Cricket, Australian football, Rugby League.

Soccer, Netball and Basketball not 'national'? - sure their professional leagues may not be commercially as viable as those three sports but if your argument is a professional presence in a cross section of all Australian cities the cities of Perth and Adelaide host fully professional NBL, Super Netball and A-League teams and not NRL teams.

One can make the very reasonable argument that Basketball is a bigger sport in South Australia than Rugby League. It's certainly the bigger sport in Tasmania.

 

[RedV3x]

Very flawed logic here.

yes you are.

NFL has only 22 out of 50 states that have NFL teams

Yes, that's correct.

yet NFL is played across the whole country

No, NFL is only played in 22 out of 50 states.

and can easily lay claim to being their biggest and national sport.

Apart from baseball? So why cannot Australian Football lay claim to be the national sport of Australia?

AFL will have professional clubs soon in 6 out of 8 states/territories,

AFL will have professional clubs soon in all states.
Much better than the NFL with 22 clubs in 50 states.

The reality is there are three national sports in Australia at present

No. There is one only national sport but many sports played nationally.

at present given the 25m population of Australia, if half of that AFL is a niche sport

But Australian Football and AFL are very popular across Australia in all states.
Now are you admitting that American Football is the national sport of the U.S.A. ?
Are you recognizing our national sports or are you saying national sports don't exist.
If you are saying national sports exist then what is you criteria.

 

[hampton]

I think it’s too hard basket to discuss this topic when there are zealots that want to hold their hands to their ears and keep repeating “but afl is very popular in nsw and qld” when the reality is it’s not. And this is over 50% of the population.

If American football was not that popular in 50% of the US population it would certainly not be the national sport of the USA.

Also you’re trying to say that because afl is in more states in Australia than it must be ‘more national’ than nfl is to USA? Absolutely laughable. American football is very popular all over the states. Unlike in Australia where the afl are spending billions on trying to get nsw and qld to like their sport but it’s still a minor sport. More popular than league is in Victoria or WA for sure. But not anywhere close to popular with the masses like league is in nsw and QLD from the cities to the towns, in large population centres that are far larger than all other states.

Rugby league is not followed much in Tasmania and Adelaide for sure (population 2m combined) but it certainly is in nsw and qld (population 13m), and growing in vic and wa. Rugby league isn’t trying to claim the sole national sport of Australia though, that zealots here like to parrot the “Australia’s game” marketing line that the afl trot out in a desperate bid to sell this message.

 

[Burtyl78]

3rd WA team is the most likely, most money over there, would allow the WA teams to travel less which to be honest is fair

 

[Canberra Pear]

3rd WA team is the most likely, most money over there,

I keep hearing this spouted.

But WA3 will have to compete against two mammoth clubs. It's not like it's going to carve off a third of AFL supporters there. Plus a high breakeven stadium, plus the $1m-plus WAFC royalty.

Conversely, Canberra has $3m-plus in government funding; likely $4m in preferable stadium deals. Plus its population has a 39% higher median income.

Financially, Canberra and WA3 would be in the same ballpark.

would allow the WA teams to travel less which to be honest is fair

Wouldn't reduce travel any more than North games already are now. Already managed to reduce travel by a game without having to introduce a whole new team.