- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #501
Participation rates? Heartland before rates wins every time.
No it doesnt. See: this morning.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Participation rates? Heartland before rates wins every time.
No it doesnt. See: this morning.
Hardly an indication of participation winning over anything else. For most given a chance it just mean the provisional licence given was being honoured. In Gold Coasts case they've been awarded a licence out of a completely misguided bat s**t crazy expansion mentality.
The player numbers might stack up, but the supporting numbers do not.
Richmond, Hawthorn and Essendon fan bases are ready to make an impact, particularly on a dollar level.
Unsure how heavily Gold Coast are going got be backed but when the men can't/barely get 10,000 to a game how the hell many are they expecting to a women's match up there?
Last I checked, Victoria is getting 5x as many new teams as Queensland in the next 2 years? Bombers were also late to the party & as such will rightfully wait their turn.Better than in Victoria? Dubious at best
Well it is and I look forward to copious amounts being thrown at this club to allow for it's survival and AFL saving face.Dollar level isnt everything either. Yet.
Insight into the factors can be found via various avenues, including this thread. Whether you accept them is your call.i don't think its a factor at all. AFL can't be too concerned with crowds if they are awarding licences to clubs on the lowed end of AFL crowd attendances over those that are higher.
GCS over Richmond, North/St Kilda over Ess/Hawks.
What isn't clear is what factors they made this decision on.
But crowds certainly wasn't one.
I am disappointed Essendon didn't get a look in, and to be honest I thought it might not happen until 2020, however don't mistake this stance for some one eyed view. This is purely about the AFL unnecessarily throwing time and money down a never ending drain that is the Gold Coast and it's rugby supporting populace. If you're expecting the Gold Coast women's team to be successful and capture the hearts and imaginations of the common throng then you are kidding yourself.Last I checked, Victoria is getting 5x as many new teams as Queensland in the next 2 years? Bombers were also late to the party & as such will rightfully wait their turn.
Dollar level isnt everything either.
North has had a relationship with one of the biggest local female football sides in the country for almost 15 years, we've had resources swaps during that time, we have key members of staff that have come from the MUW football club.
Laura Kane who is North's football operations manager originated from Melbourne Universities womens football club and came over in the staff sharing relationship, is now the top dog of football.
Melbourne and the Dog's organised a female match, sure, but we've been working with grass roots womens football for longer than anybody.
We should of been in the first intake.
i thought i saw GCS for 2019. my mistake.Insight into the factors can be found via various avenues, including this thread. Whether you accept them is your call.
And a minor correction: You've said twice now that the Suns have been admitted ahead of the Tigers. Both teams are joining in 2020.
Barely or don't get 10,000? Averaged 13,662 home attendance this year even if we were awful on the pitch.Hardly an indication of participation winning over anything else. For most given a chance it just mean the provisional licence given was being honoured. In Gold Coasts case they've been awarded a licence out of a completely misguided bat s**t crazy expansion mentality.
The player numbers might stack up, but the supporting numbers do not.
Richmond, Hawthorn and Essendon fan bases are ready to make an impact, particularly on a dollar level.
Unsure how heavily Gold Coast are going got be backed but when the men can't/barely get 10,000 to a game how the hell many are they expecting to a women's match up there?
Barely or don't get 10,000? Averaged 14,000 home attendance this year even if we were awful on the pitch.
Why some people have a right to their opinion if we should/shouldn't have an AFLW license for 2020, please make sure you are accurate with your accusations.
I totally agree to a mega club in AFL heartland like Essendon, 4000 is next to nothing but to a small club in its infancy, 4000 is a massive different, the difference between a 10,000 crowd and a 14,000 crowd is massive.4000 isn't that far off the mark. It's just that when you get 50,000 plus on average to a home and away game 4000 seems ridiculous to argue over.......
I want it to be successful don't get me wrong, but I'm a cynic at heart and I just can't see it.I totally agree to a mega club in AFL heartland like Essendon, 4000 is next to nothing but to a small club in its infancy, 4000 is a massive different, the difference between a 10,000 crowd and a 14,000 crowd is massive.
I'm happy that we have a license for 2020, and I can understand the trepidation by people as to why the Suns have an AFLW license over some AFL superpowers, but I think this is just the AFL trying to capitalise on the player base that is already there in QLD, and not send them off to play interstate.
Is it the right move? Who knows, when 2020 rolls around we will have a much clearer picture of the situation.
No problem, I am cynical about a lot of things, but I will defend the Suns to the hiltI want it to be successful don't get me wrong, but I'm a cynic at heart and I just can't see it.
So much sulking from the Essendon supporters in here, yet if their club had bothered to chase this from the outset instead of trying to bandwagon on after last season, they'd have a license. Today's outcome suggests that the AFL were very conscious of rewarding those teams with the provisional licenses who helped lay a competitive foundation for the league before it even existed.
Essendon were not financially capable at that time, nor was it an appropriate action to throw up their hand. More pressing issues caused by their own poor management took precedence and deserved Essendon's full attention. Hardly a bandwagon decision.
I'd have thought an AFLW team would've been a welcome PR distraction from everything else, plus the initial bid process came fairly late in the drugs saga timeline (once everything but the player bans had played out). Additionally the bid could've been funded easily if Hird hadn't received that dumb extension.
That's obviously all hindsight, but if the club were serious about it, they could've got it done. Essendon blaming all that has always sounded like a convenient excuse for being late to the party.
They rewarded clubs that supported the original league and not those that tried to jump in on the coattails of the work done by others. What is so wrong about that?Wow. AFL want financially stable clubs to hold AFLW licences, yet hand one to the Gold Coast when their mens team is struggling.
Yet Hawthorn/Port/Sydney/Essendon miss out.
I totally agree to a mega club in AFL heartland like Essendon, 4000 is next to nothing but to a small club in its infancy, 4000 is a massive different, the difference between a 10,000 crowd and a 14,000 crowd is massive.
I'm happy that we have a license for 2020, and I can understand the trepidation by people as to why the Suns have an AFLW license over some AFL superpowers, but I think this is just the AFL trying to capitalise on the player base that is already there in QLD, and not send them off to play interstate.
Is it the right move? Who knows, when 2020 rolls around we will have a much clearer picture of the situation.
It goes against what Gil originally stated which is clubs financial status will also be a factor in handing out a license.They rewarded clubs that supported the original league and not those that tried to jump in on the coattails of the work done by others. What is so wrong about that?