20th AFL Team

[Kappa]

Why do we need 20?

The fixture is rooted atm. Having 19 might make byes easier while still having 9 games a week. Run it like the NFL does their bye instead of the shite we do

We don't need a 20th team, but an extra game each week is more money for the AFL, more money for TV partners, more money for players ect ect. Everyone in the industry benefits.

 

[Bjo187]

This article suggested there are movements behind the scenes.

"prominent figures behind the scenes are believed to be also eyeing off an AFL team long term."

Don't know how much to read into it (it is the Daily Mail after all), but it would make sense.

The ACT Government has to balance both the relationships with the Giants and the rectangular sports. If they were making moves, there's no point making waves and upsetting stakeholders for something that's not guaranteed.

Barr won't be around in 8 years time when a new team will likely come in, do you know of his deputies and if any of them are footy people? They will increase the chances significantly if they are, but in contrast a rugby/league shill on the other hand would be detrimental.

 

[Coolangatta]

No doubt NT would have to have a club structure and playing fixture like no other. Majority of their income would have to come from share of broadcast rights, government backing and because they would likely have a high profile ( unique club, isolated but iconic location) they may get significant corporate support.

Their fixture could be radical....early season training base in Adelaide...first few games out of Adelaide and then be based in Darwin playing all their home games...from May to August...11 home games over 16 weeks.. less travel demand...better connection to supporter base.. . local easily accessible small capacity roofed stadium...facilitates home matches played any night thru the week ...optimizes broadcast income.

If it could be made to work it would be great for NT and the game.

Depends.

How can they have 11 home games in 16 weeks? If you look at the current fixture of this season, clubs will have already played about 7 games before May comes around.

In order for your proposal to work, NT would have to hub in Adelaide for the first seven games of the season, playing as the away side. Who are they going to be playing? Apart from Adelaide, Port, and maybe GR if it keeps on being hosted there every year, where are the other four fixtures coming from?

I'd love to see a schedule which works for them but I don't see any way around it. The best they could hope for is hub in Adelaide for three weeks, then Melbourne for a month, but that is a brutal start to the season in terms of the home and away advantage. If they don't win at least two of those away games, their season is gonna be over before they get a chance to maybe capitalise on their home ground advantage.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Barr won't be around in 8 years time when a new team will likely come in, do you know of his deputies and if any of them are footy people? They will increase the chances significantly if they are, but in contrast a rugby/league shill on the other hand would be detrimental.

We don't need him in for eight more years, just long enough to get the ball rolling, like Jeremy Rockliff did. Just this upcoming term might do it.

But if he wanted another eight years, he could probably get it. The LNP's platform is tram=bad, and it fails for them every election.

 

[speedpeck23]

Depends.

How can they have 11 home games in 16 weeks? If you look at the current fixture of this season, clubs will have already played about 7 games before May comes around.

In order for your proposal to work, NT would have to hub in Adelaide for the first seven games of the season, playing as the away side. Who are they going to be playing? Apart from Adelaide, Port, and maybe GR if it keeps on being hosted there every year, where are the other four fixtures coming from?

I'd love to see a schedule which works for them but I don't see any way around it. The best they could hope for is hub in Adelaide for three weeks, then Melbourne for a month, but that is a brutal start to the season in terms of the home and away advantage. If they don't win at least two of those away games, their season is gonna be over before they get a chance to maybe capitalise on their home ground advantage.

Yes, fair enough, but they effectively have 2 home grounds. If they have a base in Adelaide....as you say they could play Crows, Port, GR in Adelaide in 3 of first seven games....so 4 others away....then base themselves in Darwin. Interesting to note that there is a big push for another SA team to come into the AFL .......

 

[Coolangatta]

Yes, fair enough, but they effectively have 2 home grounds. If they have a base in Adelaide....as you say they could play Crows, Port, GR in Adelaide in 3 of first seven games....so 4 others away....then base themselves in Darwin. Interesting to note that there is a big push for another SA team to come into the AFL .......

Well say if NT was team 20, why not hub at Optus for the first 7 weeks where they play as the "away" side against five big Vic clubs plus the Eagles and Dockers?

Gives WA people more live footy action.

NSW/QLD/TAS get most of opening round: three games in Sydney, three in Brisbane, one in Gold Coast, one each in Hobart and Launceston, one in Perth featuring NT.

SA keep gather round so AO gets extra games as well.

 

[Walshawk]

Well say if NT was team 20, why not hub at Optus for the first 7 weeks where they play as the "away" side against five big Vic clubs plus the Eagles and Dockers?

Gives WA people more live footy action.

NSW/QLD/TAS get most of opening round: three games in Sydney, three in Brisbane, one in Gold Coast, one each in Hobart and Launceston, one in Perth featuring NT.

SA keep gather round so AO gets extra games as well.

That all sound half arsed and pretty crap. We don’t need a new club that will be less supported than the Giants or Suns. Pass.

 

[Walshawk]

We don't need a 20th team, but an extra game each week is more money for the AFL, more money for TV partners, more money for players ect ect. Everyone in the industry benefits.

A 20th team does not add an extra game every week. Just 11/12 more games. If it placed in a market with similar appeal to GWS or GC, it might actually cost the game money. Another timeslot and more games overlapping is not what the broadcasters want. Reckon we will sit at 19 for quite a while.

 

[Coolangatta]

That all sound half arsed and pretty crap. We don’t need a new club that will be less supported than the Giants or Suns. Pass.

Hey I wouldn't do it myself, just trying to figure out how each state could get a slice of something but honestly it'd be much better if an NT side just split Darwin-Alice games 8-3, play 3 out of 7 of their games in Springs, the other 4 away; May onwards home games in Darwin, and just cop the truck load of extra thousand+ km travel. 15+ road trips is brutal though.

I don't agree on "less support than the Giants or Suns" either, in terms of raw member numbers, yeah absolutely you're right but I think you're underestimating the amount of casual and neutral support they'd get as a side that's exciting to watch on the tele, and that's got to count for something.

That said I'm not personally advocating for NT as team 20, I'd much prefer ACT as team 20.

 

[Coolangatta]

A 20th team does not add an extra game every week. Just 11/12 more games. If it placed in a market with similar appeal to GWS or GC, it might actually cost the game money. Another timeslot and more games overlapping is not what the broadcasters want. Reckon we will sit at 19 for quite a while.

They wouldn't be adding to overlap, it's not like they'd jump from 5 Saturday games to 6, with 20 teams it'd be either 1 each Thursday and Friday, 5 Saturday, 3 Sunday or 1 Thursday, 2 Friday, 4 Saturday, 3 Sunday. Not a hell of a lot different than we have now, just that surely Thursday night becomes a regular fixture post-Tassie.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

Interesting article in yesterday’s Conversation website that discussed candidates for the 20th AFL team.

Their conclusion? It’s not clearcut with plenty of time to decide - with NT a slight favourite due to the feel good factor, but as discussed in this thread the population, climate and $ being significant disadvantages.

Darwin Dingoes, Canberra Capitals, Cairns Crocodiles? Weighing up the options for the AFL’s 20th team

Tasmania is set to become the AFL’s 19th team and the league is likely to expand again at some point, which begs the question: where should the 20th club be based?

theconversation.com

 

[_Cerberus_]

Interesting article in yesterday’s Conversation website that discussed candidates for the 20th AFL team.

Their conclusion? It’s not clearcut with plenty of time to decide - with NT a slight favourite due to the feel good factor, but as discussed in this thread the population, climate and $ being significant disadvantages.

Darwin Dingoes, Canberra Capitals, Cairns Crocodiles? Weighing up the options for the AFL’s 20th team

Tasmania is set to become the AFL’s 19th team and the league is likely to expand again at some point, which begs the question: where should the 20th club be based?

theconversation.com

$$$$ issues aside for Darwin. On the issue for dealing with the climate, they will need a stadium with a retractable roof (open for cool nights and if weather is to humid/closed for boiling hot days), and a fully air-conditioned stadium on the levels used in Qatar. Will be way more expensive than Tasmania's proposed stadium.

 

[Bjo187]

$$$$ issues aside for Darwin. On the issue for dealing with the climate, they will need a stadium with a retractable roof (open for cool nights and if weather is to humid/closed for boiling hot days), and a fully air-conditioned stadium on the levels used in Qatar. Will be way more expensive than Tasmania's proposed stadium.

Or could just have a wet weather ball like other sports, which they should have anyway.

 

[_Cerberus_]

Or could just have a wet weather ball like other sports, which they should have anyway.

I refereed to Humidity, not wet weather. Doubt you want 20,000 people stuck in a permanent indoor venue and humidity is high. Would be like one of those greenhouses. And ball will slip out of everyone's hands. Will need a roof to play daylight games during hot days though. Having a roof open during cool and dry nights is stupid. Still hate it when they close it at Marvel.

Though I doubt anyone would want the new team playing in rain every weekend, even if its an outdoor game. Not even teams in Victoria play in that much rain as the far north gets. The new teams players will have no legs left and get smashed away, and most games will be unattractive to watch. Big difference between typical outdoor wet weather we get down here, and regular wet season downpours.

 

[Bjo187]

I refereed to Humidity, not wet weather. Doubt you want 20,000 people stuck in a permanent indoor venue and humidity is high. Would be like one of those greenhouses. And ball will slip out of everyone's hands. Will need a roof to play daylight games during hot days though. Having a roof open during cool and dry nights is stupid. Still hate it when they close it at Marvel.

Though I doubt anyone would want the new team playing in rain every weekend, even if its an outdoor game. Not even teams in Victoria play in that much rain as the far north gets. The new teams players will have no legs left and get smashed away, and most games will be unattractive to watch. Big difference between typical outdoor wet weather we get down here, and regular wet season downpours.

Yeah I'm saying the wet weather ball should be used for all wet conditions, which includes humidity. Look at games in the gc as an example, it's humid and it may as well be pissing down rain with how slippery the ball is. The weather becomes less of an issue if the players can actually handle the ball, an easy fix that the afl seem to be unaware of. But yes the seating and stands in the new stadium would at least need to be covered to avoid people getting drenched.

 

[Coolangatta]

Interesting article in yesterday’s Conversation website that discussed candidates for the 20th AFL team.

Their conclusion? It’s not clearcut with plenty of time to decide - with NT a slight favourite due to the feel good factor, but as discussed in this thread the population, climate and $ being significant disadvantages.

Darwin Dingoes, Canberra Capitals, Cairns Crocodiles? Weighing up the options for the AFL’s 20th team

Tasmania is set to become the AFL’s 19th team and the league is likely to expand again at some point, which begs the question: where should the 20th club be based?

theconversation.com

Mostly a good article but yet again another “NT would make it a truly national competition.”

It’s almost as if they’re saying that it’d be okay to shut up shop after NT and forget about ACT since the competition would already be “complete.” And that’s horseshit.

 

[eastfreo75]

We don't need a 20th team, but an extra game each week is more money for the AFL, more money for TV partners, more money for players ect ect. Everyone in the industry benefits.

100%.

With a bye a week it gives opportunities for more Monday, Thursday and public holidays.

Another thing you can massive reduce the number of 6 day breaks, and get rid of teams playing 2 games in 12 day period.

19 teams equal to 38 byes in 24 rounds.

Example might be Derby Monday with Fremantle vs West Coast on WA day. Game would at 5:30pm WST and 7:30pm EST.

 

[Coolangatta]

There’ll be a 20th team. If the AFL doesn’t want the Giants and ACT to go their separate ways, that doesn’t mean they’ll stay on 19. There’s a clear choice aside from ACT and that’s WA3, as Victoria having 5x more teams than us is bullshit.

 

[Walshawk]

There’ll be a 20th team. If the AFL doesn’t want the Giants and ACT to go their separate ways, that doesn’t mean they’ll stay on 19. There’s a clear choice aside from ACT and that’s WA3, as Victoria having 5x more teams than us is bullshit.

A 20th team is so far down the track I am nit sure why we are taking so much about it. The AFL will see how Tas goes - how the new stadium works, how the list building mechanisms works, etc, before they canvas a 20th team, and before they out it to the clubs for a vote. I predict that in 2020, when they are negotiating the next round of media relights, is the earliest that any decision will be made.

 

[Aussie in exile]

A 20th team is so far down the track I am nit sure why we are taking so much about it. The AFL will see how Tas goes - how the new stadium works, how the list building mechanisms works, etc, before they canvas a 20th team, and before they out it to the clubs for a vote. I predict that in 2020, when they are negotiating the next round of media relights, is the earliest that any decision will be made.

Probably talking at least 20 years time, when a lot of us won't be around or too old and frail to care.

 

[Coolangatta]

Probably talking at least 20 years time, when a lot of us won't be around or too old and frail to care.

A 20th team is so far down the track I am nit sure why we are taking so much about it. The AFL will see how Tas goes - how the new stadium works, how the list building mechanisms works, etc, before they canvas a 20th team, and before they out it to the clubs for a vote. I predict that in 2020, when they are negotiating the next round of media relights, is the earliest that any decision will be made.

Yeah, Dillon’s comments indicate that it’s not something they consider absolutely necessary.

If they do wait 20+ years then they’ll probably try and get another Sydney team in if the Giants do well.

But you’ve got to ask the question, why get rid of Fitzroy? Should have just let them stay in Melbourne or moved them to Canberra which the AFL blocked.

If odd teams aren’t a big deal, why couldn’t the competition have been 17 teams with GC, WS and Tassie coming in later and not necessarily in close proximity. But it was a different time then, I guess.

 

[LordLucifer]

C’mon the Darwin Dingoes or the Canberra Capitals? Who will be the AFL’s 20th team?

Now that the Tasmania Devils have finally secured the 19th licence in the Australian Football League, (AFL), who is going to win the 20th? After all, then AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan when announcing Tasmania as the 19th club did say the competition would eventually return to an even number of...

www.uts.edu.au

 

[Coolangatta]

C’mon the Darwin Dingoes or the Canberra Capitals? Who will be the AFL’s 20th team?

Now that the Tasmania Devils have finally secured the 19th licence in the Australian Football League, (AFL), who is going to win the 20th? After all, then AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan when announcing Tasmania as the 19th club did say the competition would eventually return to an even number of...

www.uts.edu.au

Yeah, that's by the same guy who wrote the article in the conversation more or less saying the same thing.

I cannot believe he seriously believes that if the NT get a team that every state and territory will have a team.

3 games in Canberra isn't comparable to 4 in Launceston, as Launceston is very much part of Tasmania and ACT is not a part of Western Sydney.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Yeah, that's by the same guy who wrote the article in the conversation more or less saying the same thing.

I cannot believe he seriously believes that if the NT get a team that every state and territory will have a team.

3 games in Canberra isn't comparable to 4 in Launceston, as Launceston is very much part of Tasmania and ACT is not a part of Western Sydney.

The same writer published his piece on Canberra today.

I think Darwin is his preferred for sentimental reasons (as it is for many), but he recognises the strengths of Canberra.

He calls it the "compromise" option between Darwin and WA3, which I think is fair. The new market expansion of Darwin with the financial viability of WA3.

 

[Coolangatta]

The same writer published his piece on Canberra today.

I think Darwin is his preferred for sentimental reasons (as it is for many), but he recognises the strengths of Canberra.

He calls it the "compromise" option between Darwin and WA3, which I think is fair. The new market expansion of Darwin with the financial viability of WA3.

Much better article.

I wonder if part of the resistance to ACT that comes from some people is the belief that their favourite pick, the NT will never get a team if the ACT gets to be team 20 instead.

20 doesn’t have to be the max, NT could still happen even if they don’t get to be team 20, just not next decade.

Like Tassie, they’ll never give up, and if they can somehow secure a boat load of cash, I’d look at them for sure.

But if NT is team 20, I fear ACT won’t bother or people will just dismiss them and say we don’t need anymore teams after NT.

WA3 is more of a “yeah probably could, probably should have another” but we’ve got the Eagles and Dockers. I’ve still yet to come across people outside of BF/Reddit that want another team here.