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.

Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Too little, too late. Clubs have to choose to relocate, they only will if they think they can become bigger out of Melbourne.For the growth of the league North and St Kilda relocating make sense. I don't want any more than 20 teams.
The AFL can squeeze them financially though.Too little, too late. Clubs have to choose to relocate, they only will if they think they can become bigger out of Melbourne.
Yeah, that’s what I’d do, minimum financial assistance for the Victorian clubs.The AFL can squeeze them financially though.
Saints and North are the two Melbourne clubs that have been propped up the most by the AFL through additional funding. Take some of that added gravy away and it makes it super challenging for them to be able to compete with the self sustaining clubs.
They may never be forced to leave, but it could be made very hard for them by the AFL if they wanted to stay put. But for now, the AFL seem very supportive of all Melbourne clubs staying where they are.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Our constitution now states that any future relocation/merger proposals require the support of minimum 75% of members for the proposal to pass. That simply won’t happen, so under those circumstances, there’d be far greater chance of us going back a level than relocating. The PR battle for this scenario would be a horrific one for the AFL.IF WA3 is the 20th team, THEN...
ACT should push hard for a Vic club to relocate. You couldn't see it happening but if the AFL decided to only give North, St Kilda, and the Bulldogs the baseline amount of annual funding, one of them might buckle and cave in to a lucrative relocation offer.
If I were to guess, they probably want: 20 WA3 21 NQ 22 NT. If that's the case, ACT will need to try and lure one of the Saints, Roos or Dogs to the cap, but there's a lot to play out yet.
I'd say you're right.Our constitution now states that any future relocation/merger proposals require the support of minimum 75% of members for the proposal to pass. That simply won’t happen, so under those circumstances, there’d be far greater chance of us going back a level than relocating. The PR battle for this scenario would be a horrific one for the AFL.
Notice how quiet they’ve gone on relocations and mergers since we rejected the Gold Coast offer? That was a bloody long time ago now. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the AFL has given up on the possibility of relocations and mergers in the short-to-medium term.
Maybe another in Sydney when NRL clubs move to Vegas where people care enough to attend games in numbers
.Wouldn't want that dickhead anywhere near a WA3 club if you actually wanted it to become popular.
I'm still far more keen on ACT and by the time WA3 would come under consideration for team 21/22, the southwest region of WA might be a better location for the club.
But if WA3 was to be the 20th club, just change the blue sash to light blue, keep it as close to WP looking as possible. But surely if the Perth name is used they'd be called the North Perth Falcons, they wouldn't actually be based in WP like the original club was.
Agree with most of this but here's the problem with the SC:
1. By the 2050s they'll barely have what the GC population was when they came in.
2. It's an untested market. Someone has to play 1-2 games there at least before they could be seriously considered.
3. What if the Lions become a West Coast of QLD in the future? That is to say, new Gabba, sellouts every game, a waiting list of 30k+.
Brisbane's population will be massive by then, surely there's much more potential for a second side there that plays a game or two at the SC as opposed to a solo SC team.
SC will continue to grow, but it will remain dwarfed by Brisbane population-wise. These population projections show that by 2046, the medium projection for SC is 550k, Greater Brisbane is forecast to have 3.6 million by the same time. IMO, it wouldn’t make sense to have one team representing both of these regions. The SC club would be absolutely tiny and struggle even more than what the Suns have to this point.BNE population is already too big for its infrastructure, the Lions are almost already the WC of QLD due to size limitations of the Gabba. They will continue to grow, but wouldn’t want to be impacted by another BNE club.
I’d be taking advantage with the nRL not giving the Sunshine Coast an NRL team. SC population will continue to grow, businesses continue to move in and is growing closer to BNE along the highway. For me, all comes down to where you put Carrara 2.0
A new BNE team will have to contest with lions, broncos, dolphins, possible another nrl club. Sunshine Coast has nothing apart from dolphins playing one game a year.
I see SC as more of a positive for a club over cairns. Then the three QLD clubs play one game each up north to spread the message.
Exactly, and there's a reason why the NRL don't have a team in the Sunshine Coast, that's not a coincidence. If it isn't big enough for them, it's certainly not going to be for AFL. Besides, if there's a new stadium in Brisbane, wouldn't the AFL want one game per week being played there? I'd say that will be far more tempting to them than Carrara 2.0.SC will continue to grow, but it will remain dwarfed by Brisbane population-wise. These population projections show that by 2046, the medium projection for SC is 550k, Greater Brisbane is forecast to have 3.6 million by the same time. IMO, it wouldn’t make sense to have one team representing both of these regions. The SC club would be absolutely tiny and struggle even more than what the Suns have to this point.
SE Qld is quite a cohesive region. Therefore, IMO it would make more sense for a club to represent Brisbane’s Northern corridor - the Northern part of BCC, Moreton Bay, extending up towards the SC. Under these circumstances, a new club could primarily play out of a new Brisbane stadium and play a few games each season at a boutique venue on the SC (as opposed to building another major venue on the SC that would only get used for a few AFL games each year).
This is how I would approach expansion in SEQ. Especially since the Lions are now based in the SW of greater Brisbane (Ipswich), so it would be possible for a Northern corridor club to develop an identity distinct from the Lions.
I wouldn't. If it were me, the 2nd Brisbane team would be playing 10 home games at the Gabba and 1 at the Sunshine Coast, with a return away game against the Lions, so they'd get 11 Gabba games per year. Though two SC games like Redcliffe get would be acceptable.How would you split brisbane? Or make it a qld regional team with bigger games at the gabba
Sunshine Coast will have a NRL team eventually.Exactly, and there's a reason why the NRL don't have a team in the Sunshine Coast, that's not a coincidence. If it isn't big enough for them, it's certainly not going to be for AFL. Besides, if there's a new stadium in Brisbane, wouldn't the AFL want one game per week being played there? I'd say that will be far more tempting to them than Carrara 2.0.
Maybe.Sunshine Coast will have a NRL team eventually.
This is why the AFL should get the clubs to play their pre season match in non-representative cities and towns around Australia instead of the majority of clubs playing them out their backyard.I don't see how Townsville and Mackay are going to get games as no one's willing to play there, yet, but they should be looking at them for pre-season games if they aren't already.
From the rumours I have heard, the 3 immediate new clubs that will be formed in the NRL by 2037 would be PNG, NZ2 (Christchurch favourites) and Perth (joint-venture with North Sydney).Maybe.
As far as I know, they're looking at maybe an Adelaide team, 3rd Brisbane, second New Zealand, return of North Sydney, PNG/Cairns, and Perth.
No mention of SC team outright and surprisingly, I haven't seen anything about a Central Coast team.
The bears should be back in, on the Cenny Coast as was their plan back in the late 90’s.Maybe.
As far as I know, they're looking at maybe an Adelaide team, 3rd Brisbane, second New Zealand, return of North Sydney, PNG/Cairns, and Perth.
No mention of SC team outright and surprisingly, I haven't seen anything about a Central Coast team.
Yeah I saw something about Biden supporting the PNG team cause of the whole America-China cold war 2.0 going on.From the rumours I have heard, the 3 immediate new clubs that will be formed in the NRL by 2037 would be PNG, NZ2 (Christchurch favourites) and Perth (joint-venture with North Sydney).
Sunshine Coast have definitely had bids to join before.From the rumours I have heard, the 3 immediate new clubs that will be formed in the NRL by 2037 would be PNG, NZ2 (Christchurch favourites) and Perth (joint-venture with North Sydney).
Seem a long way off from having a team, though.Sunshine Coast have definitely had bids to join before.
Will be the Perth Bears, play 2 games at Bear Park each year.Yeah I saw something about Biden supporting the PNG team cause of the whole America-China cold war 2.0 going on.
Will be interesting to see how the Perth-North Sydney joint venture would work.
I see. Better than nothing, I suppose.Will be the Perth Bears, play 2 games at Bear Park each year.
Pretty much, as the only things that will stay in tradition is their nickname, possible colours and 1-2 matches at NSO.Will be the Perth Bears, play 2 games at Bear Park each year.