Expansion 20th AFL team location

[VinnieB]

Caught the most recent "Eddie and Jimmy" podcast on youtube.

If anyone wants to see what a puffed-up loon Eddie McGuire is just check it out. His views on running the AFL are basically return it to the VFL on crack.
Just completely money and TV ratings obsessed with zero vision on how to grow a sport nationwide.
Dinosaurs like him should never be allowed near running a competition. He's a parochial club President and that's it.

Bartel raised some very good points and was just steamrolled by tomato head at every turn. Can't see them remaining together for long - you can sense the growing animosity between them. But worth a(n) (ironic) laugh.

I don’t know about that. Eddie does have some good ideas. He was championing for GWS to basically only play in NSW with games divided between western Sydney and Canberra. In fact, he suggested they change to NSW.

He is positive about Tasmania but as he said, it needs to be done right so that they can be competitive early rather than being a token club.

Do you really listen to him? Or was it one of 2 podcasts? Or are you still upset about him not wanting Port wearing black and white stripes.

There’s his opinions I disagree with, however, you can’t call him a dinosaur because he has a lot more vision for the game than most in the AFL.

Even suggesting the AFL sell Marvel and building a new stadium near the MCG precinct was left field but actually made sense when he went through it

 

[VinnieB]

Rather than add a team, can always remove a Melbourne based team.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Joondalup is full of poms.

They don't care about footy.

Can't win, either everyone already cares about footy and won't switch, or nobody cares about footy and won't switch. The beauty of immigrants is that their kids don't have allegiances already and are a potential future fan of a third team.

I looked at a map and realised that Joondalup is almost exactly halfway between Perth CBD and Yanchep, where the metro area is expanding to. It feels ideally situated if the plan is to try and affect Fremantle as little as possible and still have a third team in Perth.

 

[OxfordCambridge]

The town isn't anywhere near as strong as Perth to withstand it.

Adelaide is extremely strong financially, but Port isn't. Fremantle is much bigger than Port financially.

It's not really going to move the needle for the Crows, but a 3rd SA side could kill Port.

The town could handle it and it’s the Crows who would suffer, not Port. Needs to be a Norwood/Sturt combo based at Parade. Would get crowds similar to the weak Melb clubs.

 

[Kram]

I mean I'm sure another team in Perth could do 'ok' but is that a reason to expand an already bloated competition?

Yeah just no.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Fair point on undercooking Canberra’s population a bit. But even if you base it on the whole ACT and allow for the NSW suburbs (mostly Queanbeyan) it would still have a lower team/population ratio.

And if you are going to include the entire capital region, then you probably have to expand the size of Greater Perth as well.

I think you also have to take into account that there is greater competition with rugby in Canberra as the proportion of the population that passionately follow football will be lower than in Perth.

But all that aside, I think Canberra is viable, as I said at the start of my post.

"A bit". You cut off 60% of our population in the 2030s comparisons.

Perth could probably sustain a third team, but at the end of the day, why? Split that 2.9m population three ways, and WA3 isn't going to get 1m of that. They'd be lucky to get 400-500k of that. They'll be the poorer sibling, adding nothing to the game and diluting a rivalry.

 

[Kram]

"A bit". You cut off 60% of our population in the 2030s comparisons.

Perth could probably sustain a third team, but at the end of the day, why? Split that 2.9m population three ways, and WA3 isn't going to get 1m of that. They'd be lucky to get 400-500k of that. They'll be the poorer sibling, adding nothing to the game and diluting a rivalry.

As I said before Freo is still absolutely dwarfed by West Coast in support and that is after nearly 30 years! Imagine how hard would be for a another.

 

[Econopower]

"A bit". You cut off 60% of our population in the 2030s comparisons.

Perth could probably sustain a third team, but at the end of the day, why? Split that 2.9m population three ways, and WA3 isn't going to get 1m of that. They'd be lucky to get 400-500k of that. They'll be the poorer sibling, adding nothing to the game and diluting a

I already said that a third team wouldn’t get an even share. But equally, in Canberra/ACT or an even wider ‘capital’ region, you have a much higher proportion of rugby supporters.

League, union or AFL: Which is Canberra’s sport of choice? – The Roar

So if it is an effective potential support base we are talking about, I am still comfortable with the claim it would be larger for a third team in WA. There also would be no need for a new stadium.

Melbourne sustains multiple rivalries so I don’t know why Perth/WA should be any different.

But I’m just spitballing here. Ideally, there would be competing bids, with the best overall package coming out on top.

 

[uranium_death]

We need a team in Dubbo
The Late Show tried to get the Dubbo Globetrotters off the ground, but it never stuck


It has been 30 years, and it's time

 

[Fire]

WA3 is not needed. It would be a small team in an established market. No real benefit economically or sentimentality.

Same with SA3. With the exception of someone like Norwood. No economic benefit but a ton of sentiment. For a non profit this should have value to the AFL.

VIC11 or Tas2 are obviously ridiculous.

NSW3 or QLD3 would largly double up existing growth efforts so increase risks without too much added reward.

NT is a sentimental choice but economic suicide. Would be awesome if it could be made to work, but would need perpetual government subsidisations as the market just isn't big enough to grow into. And is never projected to be. And never really has the potential to ever be projected to be.

That leaves the ACT and NZ.

NZ will be like GC/GWS, except much harder (higher risk) in a much bigger market (higher reward). I'm not sure if the appetite for such an aggressive move is there though considering other ongoing growth investments. But overall not a ridiculous option.

That leaves the ACT as theclosest thing to a standout. Though on the smaller side, it's an appropriately sized market, in a region that's not represented (FIFO teams do not count as much as some people seem to pretend they do) and in a region that not only has some existing interest, but is also not openly hostile like in other growth states.

 

[RUNVS]

That leaves the ACT as theclosest thing to a standout. Though on the smaller side, it's an appropriately sized market, in a region that's not represented (FIFO teams do not count as much as some people seem to pretend they do) and in a region that not only has some existing interest, but is also not openly hostile like in other growth states.

If we think Tasmania will get small crowds it is nothing compared to what a Canberra team would get.

 

[Purple Suit]

WA3 is not needed. It would be a small team in an established market. No real benefit economically or sentimentality.

Same with SA3. With the exception of someone like Norwood. No economic benefit but a ton of sentiment. For a non profit this should have value to the AFL.

VIC11 or Tas2 are obviously ridiculous.

NSW3 or QLD3 would largly double up existing growth efforts so increase risks without too much added reward.

NT is a sentimental choice but economic suicide. Would be awesome if it could be made to work, but would need perpetual government subsidisations as the market just isn't big enough to grow into. And is never projected to be. And never really has the potential to ever be projected to be.

That leaves the ACT and NZ.

NZ will be like GC/GWS, except much harder (higher risk) in a much bigger market (higher reward). I'm not sure if the appetite for such an aggressive move is there though considering other ongoing growth investments. But overall not a ridiculous option.

That leaves the ACT as theclosest thing to a standout. Though on the smaller side, it's an appropriately sized market, in a region that's not represented (FIFO teams do not count as much as some people seem to pretend they do) and in a region that not only has some existing interest, but is also not openly hostile like in other growth states.

How can you say that WA3 would offer nothing economically? It would bring crowds, which generate the same money as TV rights and another weekly game for the next TV deal. A committed fan who attends brings more cash to the game than having a team in a highly populated area who have no supporters.

It’d be more than what Canberra or NZ would bring in and not involve a Billion on a new stadium. If the AFL was paying for the stadium rather than the government, it wouldn’t even be a discussion.

 

[Fire]

If we think Tasmania will get small crowds it is nothing compared to what a Canberra team would get.

That's a specious argument.

Canberra is a growth market with potential to get larger crowds tomorrow than they could today. Tasmania is not and does not. Apples to oranges.

 

[RUNVS]

That's a specious argument.

Canberra is a growth market with potential to get larger crowds tomorrow than they could today. Tasmania is not and does not. Apples to oranges.

Canberra isnt really growing though, not compared to almost every other major city.

 

[Adz2332]

Well while we're revisiting talking points from 2007;

119.

except, apart from GC and GWS you have the lowest home attendance and lowest membership, not in 2007, right now

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Joondalup is full of poms.

They don't care about footy.

No one cares about footy, if they did they would not of allowed the AFL to change 100 rules in the last 10 years. AFL is simply entertainment, huge percentage of crowds at all AFL games know nothing about footy. They are just there as it's a good place to tell your friends you were there.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

From an economic standpoint WA really does make the most sense. All a Canberra team will do is cost money, and we already have Tasmania for that.

And Gold Coast and GWS and about 4 Melbourne clubs.

 

[LordLucifer]

At the end of every season, play a champion's league style tournament for the winners of the state leagues. The winner of that tournament gets a one year promotion into the AFL, before being replaced by the winner of the next tournament the next year. Means that we don't need to worry about the long-term viability of the 20th team because we're going to cycle through a bunch of them before they have the chance to become a drain on the league's resources. Attendance wouldn't be great, but at least the teams playing will have a core of genuine, grass-roots supporters and there will be an incentive for fans to attend the matches while they can, knowing that the team won't be in the AFL the next year. It would be good way for state teams and their leagues to gain exposure, fans and possibly to build up some finances as well, and the AFL would obviously benefit financially from the extra fixture each week. You could institute a loan system in which players who aren't getting much game time at other clubs could play for the 20th team each year, and also give that team unrestricted access to state league talent, in order to bridge the talent gap.

Badda bing, badda boom. Simples pimples.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Perth could probably sustain a third team, but at the end of the day, why?

To prevent West Coast getting too powerful off the field. One of the biggest mistakes the NRL made was letting the Brisbane Broncos grow too large.

Now it's fair to say that should be less of a concern than ensuring more people have a local team to follow. But Perth has a top of the line, relatively new stadium, and Canberra doesn't. If the Tasmania saga has taught us anything, it's that the AFL has a fetish for new stadiums regardless of whether the existing one is adequate.

 

[Philth]

Lol there is absolutely no need for a 3rd team in Perth apart from trying to make the comp numbers even.

The argument goes like this - "Hey, Perth have a stadium and lots of people, so it's a no brainer that they get a team!!"

Mostly from those outside WA.

Or a select few who would like their WAFL team to be WA3.

 

[random260]

I'm pretty skeptical about a third WA team honestly. Presuming they were to play out of Optus Stadium, would large numbers of Eagles and Dockers supporters really be that willing to jump ship to a club lacking a well-established identity and/or close ties to any particular suburb? I feel like we're talking a whole different ball game to Freo's entrance in 1995 when West Coast had only been around for eight years. Both clubs have been established for decades now and any new team might have a tough time winning over support.

Yeah nah. Let's be real no cold blooded fifo will be caught dead wearing a purple shirt with a doofus hippie as a mascot.

Quite frankly fremantle are a disgrace of a second side. And why our waiting list is so long

As I said before Freo is still absolutely dwarfed by West Coast in support and that is after nearly 30 years! Imagine how hard would be for a another.

 

[Purple Suit]

The argument goes like this - "Hey, Perth have a stadium and lots of people, so it's a no brainer that they get a team!!"

Mostly from those outside WA.

Or a select few who would like their WAFL team to be WA3.

I want a third team and I won't even go for them.

The biggest mistake would be aligning with a WAFL team. You'll then be creating a struggling club that will take much longer to get up and limit the supporter base in the longer term. Just call it Perth and it'll do fine and eat into WC fans who can't go to games even if it does take 5-10 years to become financially independent.

By the time it gets off the ground, Freo should be contenting regularly and almost a sell out most weeks. They need to have some capacity for walk ups to go to AFL games in Perth as it's currently the most at capacity ground in Australia with more than a handful of games. Currently 1 weekend is sold out and the other at 80%. Population growth is going to max it out soon enough unless they do something about it.

 

[Philth]

I want a third team and I won't even go for them.

The biggest mistake would be aligning with a WAFL team. You'll then be creating a struggling club that will take much longer to get up and limit the supporter base in the longer term. Just call it Perth and it'll do fine and eat into WC fans who can't go to games even if it does take 5-10 years to become financially independent.

By the time it gets off the ground, Freo should be contending regularly and almost a sell out most weeks. They need to have some capacity for walk ups to go to AFL games in Perth as it's currently the most at capacity ground in Australia with more than a handful of games. Currently 1 weekend is sold out and the other at 80%. Population growth is going to max it out soon enough unless they do something about it.

This is probably the most logical post I have seen so far regarding WA3. Good points made.

The only point I'll disagree on is in bold. You can't guarantee success on field.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I want a third team and I won't even go for them.

The biggest mistake would be aligning with a WAFL team. You'll then be creating a struggling club that will take much longer to get up and limit the supporter base in the longer term. Just call it Perth and it'll do fine and eat into WC fans who can't go to games even if it does take 5-10 years to become financially independent.

By the time it gets off the ground, Freo should be contenting regularly and almost a sell out most weeks. They need to have some capacity for walk ups to go to AFL games in Perth as it's currently the most at capacity ground in Australia with more than a handful of games. Currently 1 weekend is sold out and the other at 80%. Population growth is going to max it out soon enough unless they do something about it.

Disagree re not aligning with a WAFL team. I am bias and I admit that but if it is Joondalup it would be mad not being West Perth trading as Joondalup. You would instantly pick up 10-20k members if it was West Perth in my opinion.
They won't align though as the AFL love making up clubs out of thin air everywhere but Victoria. Was ok for their State league clubs to be the AFL but no where else.

 

[Tyberious Funk]

As I said before Freo is still absolutely dwarfed by West Coast in support and that is after nearly 30 years! Imagine how hard would be for a another.

IMHO, a fair amount of that discrepency can be explained by Freo's lack of on-field success, poor management, questionable trade history, silly team song, and goofy team colours. To be fair, they've addressed a lot of those issues. But they carried the stink of "losers" for a very long time. If they can snag a premiership or two, that will disappear pretty quickly.

I'd like to think that a new WA team, having seen some of the mistakes Freeo made in the early days, would have a better blueprint for success. I also think a third team would potentially diffuse the cross-town rivalry, which IMHO is pretty stupid, but also damaging to Freo. I mean, how many kids growing up in a West Coast household would dare switch support to Freo? Add a third team to WA, and Freo become "just another team".

Just speculation, of course.

The problem is that there is a huge difference between a well run club, and poorly run one. Poor management has almost destroyed Essendon, while good management has turned Geelong into an absolute powerhouse. Whether it is WA3, Canberra or the new Tasmanian team, their success is probably going to mostly depend on the people involved, more than just about anything else.