20th AFL Team

[Canberra Pear]

I think GWS’s current 3 games is a good start and the ACT should gradually increase the number of AFL games in Manuka so that we regularly get 5-6 AFL games here. Getting more than the current 3 annual games (Tasmania was getting 8), would only boost Canberra’s chances of having a standalone AFL team?
I think this is best achieved by having some of the Victorian teams selling “home” matches here - with GWS as the away team.

This is what happened for a significant period of the 2000s with Sydney Swans as the “away” team for Norths/ Bulldogs/ Melbourne.

In Tasmania, Hawthorn seems to be looking at still selling a couple of matches in Launceston post the entry of the Tasmanian AFL team, including playing their home match against Tasmania. During the approx 20 years relationship they had playing at Launceston, they have built up a lot of committed fans, members and sponsors- a situation that will not be dissimilar to GWS if Canberra ever gets a full time AFL team.

If it could be done, sure, that would be great. But the ACT government already cops a lot of flack for giving money for an interstate team (more money than the Raiders get). They'd pretty much have to double how much they're giving out to get six games a year. I can't see them being able to justify even more money for more FIFO games. They might be able to justify $5-6m for a full-time team, but not for six FIFO games.

If it could be done, six games a year would probably be enough to start being seen as more of a Canberra side. The Brumbies only have seven or eight home games.

A few years ago, when it looked like Team 19 was decades away, I would've jumped at such a deal (any chance for more footy). I was even advocating for it myself.

But now with Tasmania more or less a lock, there's a sense of urgency in the air. Places are lining up for Team 20. And it would be absolutely devastating if we lose out because of a perceived Giants dependence on Canberra.

 

[Coolangatta]

If it could be done, sure, that would be great. But the ACT government already cops a lot of flack for giving money for an interstate team (more money than the Raiders get). They'd pretty much have to double how much they're giving out to get six games a year. I can't see them being able to justify even more money for more FIFO games. They might be able to justify $5-6m for a full-time team, but not for six FIFO games.

If it could be done, six games a year would probably be enough to start being seen as more of a Canberra side. The Brumbies only have seven or eight home games.

A few years ago, when it looked like Team 19 was decades away, I would've jumped at such a deal (any chance for more footy). I was even advocating for it myself.

But now with Tasmania more or less a lock, there's a sense of urgency in the air. Places are lining up for Team 20. And it would be absolutely devastating if we lose out because of a perceived Giants dependence on Canberra.

Yes. If Perth loses out on team three, no one in WA is going to cry about it, we have two teams. Ditto SA, NSW and QLD. NZ don’t care, at least not now they don’t.

So, who does? It’s just the NT and ACT, both of which have one thing in common, no full time team, so there’s far more up for grabs for these markets.

So how do we split the difference? Well, we know how. Who has the better financial case? Who isn’t going to be a big drain on the AFL? If anyone answers those questions with the NT, then I suggest they get a concussion test.

 

[RedV3x]

Well that is interesting.

Are you purposely trying to be obtuse? The extra game per week underwrites development plus the new markets. Yes soccer participation is huge, really huge in we and they have two prof teams. Look at the stats for nrl we teams remembering that gws doe’ t have the luxury of visited supprters.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

If it could be done, sure, that would be great. But the ACT government already cops a lot of flack for giving money for an interstate team (more money than the Raiders get). They'd pretty much have to double how much they're giving out to get six games a year. I can't see them being able to justify even more money for more FIFO games. They might be able to justify $5-6m for a full-time team, but not for six FIFO games.

If it could be done, six games a year would probably be enough to start being seen as more of a Canberra side. The Brumbies only have seven or eight home games.

A few years ago, when it looked like Team 19 was decades away, I would've jumped at such a deal (any chance for more footy). I was even advocating for it myself.

But now with Tasmania more or less a lock, there's a sense of urgency in the air. Places are lining up for Team 20. And it would be absolutely devastating if we lose out because of a perceived Giants dependence on Canberra.

Fair point about the Barr government paying more to Victorian teams to supplement the GWS games here.

Whilst I wish you luck and hope that we do get a Canberra standalone team, I am pessimistic because there is no ACT government lobbying or funding support for this - unlike the Tasmanian and even the NT government. The recent decision to spend $ on the Calvary hospital takeover, the fights with the other codes on not going ahead with the Civic stadium, the additional $ that will need to be used to subsidise the proposed new Canberra ALeague soccer team as well as the ongoing $ on the tram to Woden, makes it unlikely that there is the financial appetite for Barr to lobby or fund a standalone ACT AFL team. The liberals have also not said anything about an AFL team either, and are focused on attacking Barr over the Tram and the Calvary hospital.

 

[Coolangatta]

Fair point about the Barr government paying more to Victorian teams to supplement the GWS games here.

Whilst I wish you luck and hope that we do get a Canberra standalone team, I am pessimistic because there is no ACT government lobbying or funding support for this - unlike the Tasmanian and even the NT government. The recent decision to spend $ on the Calvary hospital takeover, the fights with the other codes on not going ahead with the Civic stadium, the additional $ that will need to be used to subsidise the proposed new Canberra ALeague soccer team as well as the ongoing $ on the tram to Woden, makes it unlikely that there is the financial appetite for Barr to lobby or fund a standalone ACT AFL team. The liberals have also not said anything about an AFL team either, and are focused on attacking Barr over the Tram and the Calvary hospital.

Yeah, I think even Canberra Pear isn't optimistic about Canberra being team 20, even though it's the best choice.

There's still time for the ACT government to lobby for a team, though.

If they don't, it's probably going to be NT/Northern Australia because of populism rather than reason.

I fear Canberra will never get a team, which reeks of bullshit when anyone talks about a truly national comp that ignores the national capital.

 

[The_Wookie]

If it could be done, sure, that would be great. But the ACT government already cops a lot of flack for giving money for an interstate team (more money than the Raiders get). They'd pretty much have to double how much they're giving out to get six games a year. I can't see them being able to justify even more money for more FIFO games. They might be able to justify $5-6m for a full-time team, but not for six FIFO games.

They cop more flack, but I bet the tourism data favours the Giants over the others.

 

[Walshawk]

Are you purposely trying to be obtuse? The extra game per week underwrites development plus the new markets. Yes soccer participation is huge, really huge in we and they have two prof teams. Look at the stats for nrl we teams remembering that gws doe’ t have the luxury of visited supprters.

I understand that an extra team adds 11 games and more broadcast revenue. But if that is our only measure, a team placed some where with a feint interest in AFL would have been better. The club extra broadcast revenue exists regardless of how GWS is tracking with other KPIs. Other than membership (would love to see the breakdown), there is no other measure that could be seen as a success.

And very few RL fans travel, they don’t use centralised stadiums like we do and it is a long, long way from Penrith, Cronulla, Manly, etc to other NRL grounds. Do you really think that the current crowds around 8k are what the AFL would have expected 12 season in? I bet they had projected at least 15k by now.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

Yeah, I think even Canberra Pear isn't optimistic about Canberra being team 20, even though it's the best choice.

There's still time for the ACT government to lobby for a team, though.

If they don't, it's probably going to be NT/Northern Australia because of populism rather than reason.

I fear Canberra will never get a team, which reeks of bullshit when anyone talks about a truly national comp that ignores the national capital.

Yes, even though Canberra beats Darwin on almost all metrics (population, $, number of AFL matches, crowds etc), there is a whiff of populism and “romanticism” about NT/ Northern Australia that seems to override logic!

My personal belief is that WA3 is the leading contender for team 20 in the absence of our ACT Government not actively lobbying for it and publicly committing funds for it like the Tasmanian and NT government did.

 

[RedV3x]

I understand that an extra team adds 11 games and more broadcast revenue. But if that is our only measure, a team placed some where with a feint interest in AFL would have been better.

No, the opposite is true.

The club extra broadcast revenue exists regardless of how GWS is tracking with other KPIs. Other than membership (would love to see the breakdown), there is no other measure that could be seen as a success.

Ffs, money, memberships, merchandise, sponsorship etc

And very few RL fans travel….

Good points why nrl shouldn’t work in ws, which it doesn’t very well, making the effort of gws even more creditable.

 

[Walshawk]

No, the opposite is true.


Ffs, money, memberships, merchandise, sponsorship etc



Good points why nrl shouldn’t work in ws, which it doesn’t very well, making the effort of gws even more creditable.

Disagree strongly. Having a team in an area with minimal interest is a net negative for the AFL. The lack of interest in GWS games brings the comp down. It is a flat spot most weekends. Besides broadcast revue that clips have been generated by any other 18th club, GWS add little. Besides broadcast revenue, it costs way more than it generates.

If the AFL could go back to 2009 there is not way they would do things the same.

 

[Canberra Pear]

They cop more flack, but I bet the tourism data favours the Giants over the others.

I'd say you're right. There was an article from 2021 speaking about the economic impact of Giants games. The ACT government is lucky it's pretty much in the politically safest state/territory in the country.

Barr also said that an evaluation of the Giants' economic tourism value showed that "AFL fans travel more".

The article stated the two games played in 2021 delivered an estimated $1.47 million.

That number was lower due to Covid restrictions. I haven't seen any more recent figures, but across three games and without Covid restrictions, it's probably pretty close to break even for the $2.85m every year (noting I think that's for the community, probably not breakeven for the government budget).

If the ACT government were willing to fork out twice as much money for more games on the basis of tourism, they might as well just bid for their own team.

GWS isn't the big tourist drawcard, it's the opposition teams. A team of our own would play at least three times as many games. And the brand recognition of having a Canberra team would huge, too. Our name on the back of the guernsey during the 2019 grand final was apparently $1m worth of exposure. Having the name Canberra in the sports news in the southern states, constantly on the ladder, would be worth way more than being on the back for a three-hour timeslot.

More games is always good, but eventually it'd be more cost efficient to just host our own team.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Yeah, I think even Canberra Pear isn't optimistic about Canberra being team 20, even though it's the best choice.

There's still time for the ACT government to lobby for a team, though.

If they don't, it's probably going to be NT/Northern Australia because of populism rather than reason.

I fear Canberra will never get a team, which reeks of bullshit when anyone talks about a truly national comp that ignores the national capital.

I have shifting days between optimism and pessimism. Canberra's much more in the conversation than it ever was before, but I can see it slipping away.

I honestly don't think it can be the NT. It's absolutely a popular option, but somewhere along the line they'll have to take a closer look with the numbers and realise it's just not possible. I wish it well if it comes, but it's going to need special treatment for at least half a century.

Yes, even though Canberra beats Darwin on almost all metrics (population, $, number of AFL matches, crowds etc), there is a whiff of population of NT/ Northern Australia that seems to override logic!

My personal belief is that WA3 is the leading contender for team 20 in the absence of our ACT Government not actively lobbying for it and publicly committing funds for it like the Tasmanian and NT government did.

You're probably right that WA3 is the leading contender, and ironically, I think it's because of GWS.

80% of commentary around why we can't get a team is because people think GWS need us. The Giants are our number one roadblock. The same commentary wouldn't exist if we were hosting a Victorian team (nobody cared that North lost Hobart).

 

[Coolangatta]

I have shifting days between optimism and pessimism. Canberra's much more in the conversation than it ever was before, but I can see it slipping away.

I honestly don't think it can be the NT. It's absolutely a popular option, but somewhere along the line they'll have to take a closer look with the numbers and realise it's just not possible. I wish it well if it comes, but it's going to need special treatment for at least half a century.




You're probably right that WA3 is the leading contender, and ironically, I think it's because of GWS.

80% of commentary around why we can't get a team is because people think GWS need us. The Giants are our number one roadblock. The same commentary wouldn't exist if we were hosting a Victorian team (nobody cared that North lost Hobart).

If we can get confirmation in the upcoming years that the Giants will leave Canberra after 2032 then you’re a good chance.

The AFL will probably grant the 20th licence after 2028 but before 2032 so they can squeeze more dollars out of the next media rights deal.

So if the Giants don’t get an extension then that should bode well for Canberra. If they stay in Canberra after 2032 then I’m afraid it’s going to be Perth, and if that happens I worry about Canberra ever getting a team.

 

[RedV3x]

Disagree strongly. Having a team in an area with minimal interest is a net negative for the AFL.

FFS, your logic is increasingly and alkarmingly lacking.
WTF do you keep ignoring the facts that the GWS has brought to the AFL and WS (and Canberra).

The lack of interest in GWS games brings the comp down.

At least they're not bring the competition down like the Eagles or the Roos.
Some great football from GWS at times and they're not creating the wrong type of interest like your Hawthorn.

It is a flat spot most weekends.

Only for you and you seem to resent their success.
I see young families wearing the GWS colours here in PERTH.
You should come and see the passion from the Perth GWS supporters.

Besides broadcast revue that clips have been generated by any other 18th club,

But there isn't any OTHER 18th club Einstein is there.
And no matter what people say about 19th and 20th AFL clubs thjeir case isn't any where near as strong.

GWS add little.

If you don't like GWS stick to your Victorian clubs and get bored.

Besides broadcast revenue, it costs way more than it generates.

Again, you don't the basic financial situation.
In reality, with the current accounting the top half of the AFL subsidises the lower half.

If the AFL could go back to 2009 there is not way they would do things the same.

That's right, they'd rectify their mistakes and make GWS a success from the start.
The VFL and AFL problems have ALWAYS been the under commitment to decisions.
The AFL came extraordinary close to losing the Sydney Swans when the Swans single-handedly
saved your VFL with Sunday football game television revenue.

 

[Walshawk]

FFS, your logic is increasingly and alkarmingly lacking.
WTF do you keep ignoring the facts that the GWS has brought to the AFL and WS (and Canberra).



At least they're not bring the competition down like the Eagles or the Roos.
Some great football from GWS at times and they're not creating the wrong type of interest like your Hawthorn.



Only for you and you seem to resent their success.
I see young families wearing the GWS colours here in PERTH.
You should come and see the passion from the Perth GWS supporters.



But there isn't any OTHER 18th club Einstein is there.
And no matter what people say about 19th and 20th AFL clubs thjeir case isn't any where near as strong.



If you don't like GWS stick to your Victorian clubs and get bored.



Again, you don't the basic financial situation.
In reality, with the current accounting the top half of the AFL subsidises the lower half.



That's right, they'd rectify their mistakes and make GWS a success from the start.
The VFL and AFL problems have ALWAYS been the under commitment to decisions.
The AFL came extraordinary close to losing the Sydney Swans when the Swans single-handedly
saved your VFL with Sunday football game television revenue.

It is shame that you resort to personal insults. Your post makes little sense, and not everyone will agree with what you are saying, no matter how many times you say it, nor how angry you get. I would love a second team to be successful in the Sydney market. But that isn’t what is happening. Blind Freddy could see that GWS is floundering off field, and that new strategies are needed. Even GWS know and admit that.

 

[freddy mercury]

Anywhere but Darwin or Northen Queensland

 

[Bjo187]

FFS, your logic is increasingly and alkarmingly lacking.
WTF do you keep ignoring the facts that the GWS has brought to the AFL and WS (and Canberra).



At least they're not bring the competition down like the Eagles or the Roos.
Some great football from GWS at times and they're not creating the wrong type of interest like your Hawthorn.



Only for you and you seem to resent their success.
I see young families wearing the GWS colours here in PERTH.
You should come and see the passion from the Perth GWS supporters.



But there isn't any OTHER 18th club Einstein is there.
And no matter what people say about 19th and 20th AFL clubs thjeir case isn't any where near as strong.



If you don't like GWS stick to your Victorian clubs and get bored.



Again, you don't the basic financial situation.
In reality, with the current accounting the top half of the AFL subsidises the lower half.



That's right, they'd rectify their mistakes and make GWS a success from the start.
The VFL and AFL problems have ALWAYS been the under commitment to decisions.
The AFL came extraordinary close to losing the Sydney Swans when the Swans single-handedly
saved your VFL with Sunday football game television revenue.

Why do you get so rude and aggressive? He makes a number of valid points.

 

[RedV3x]

Why do you get so rude and aggressive? He makes a number of valid points.

Because he keeps repeating the same questions and doesn't acknowledge the answers.
GWS doesn't have flash crowds due to lack of visiting fans in addition to the onfield performance.
take away visiting crowds to some Victorian matches and you have low attendances.
ALL underperforming AFL clubs take money away from the more successful AFL clubs.
That position changes over time.
GWS was always planned as a long term project.
If the the powers had pulled the pin when challenged there would be no Swans, no Bulldogs, no Saints, no Demons, no Hawks, no Roos.

 

[RedV3x]

It is shame that you resort to personal insults.

because you seem fixated on something you don't understand but persist in saying you're right.

Your post makes little sense,

to you.

and not everyone will agree with what you are saying,

of course, but a.t.m. it seems to be only you.

no matter how many times you say it,

i only say it many times as you have said it - does that seem logical to you ?

nor how angry you get.

I'm just frustrated that you cannot or wont accept my point of view but feel the need to repeat the same ol same ol.

I would love a second team to be successful in the Sydney market.

All we hear is criticism.

But that isn’t what is happening.

By your definition.
Take away visiting fans and add onfield performances then it equates to some Vic team performances.
Why do you neglect to mention other under performing teams ?

Blind Freddy could see that GWS is floundering off field,

NOoooooooooooooooo. I'd look at the Weak Coast Eagles and the North Melbourne Poos
Oh - how's the Hawks going ?
How about getting reid of the Hawks for bringing down the image of the AFL ?

and that new strategies are needed. Even GWS know and admit that.

 

[Canberra Pear]

If we can get confirmation in the upcoming years that the Giants will leave Canberra after 2032 then you’re a good chance.

The AFL will probably grant the 20th licence after 2028 but before 2032 so they can squeeze more dollars out of the next media rights deal.

So if the Giants don’t get an extension then that should bode well for Canberra. If they stay in Canberra after 2032 then I’m afraid it’s going to be Perth, and if that happens I worry about Canberra ever getting a team.

Yeah, I think our deal mostly hinges on the status of the Giants.

Most seem to agree the Giants are better off, long-term, focusing on the one market. So it makes the best sense that Giants focus on Sydney and Canberra gets its own team. It's two birds with the one stone.

But we just can't shake the narrative that the Giants "need" Canberra. I just hope the Giants Stadium crowds can lift before the race for Team 20 really heats up.

 

[Coolangatta]

Yeah, I think our deal mostly hinges on the status of the Giants.

Most seem to agree the Giants are better off, long-term, focusing on the one market. So it makes the best sense that Giants focus on Sydney and Canberra gets its own team. It's two birds with the one stone.

But we just can't shake the narrative that the Giants "need" Canberra. I just hope the Giants Stadium crowds can lift before the race for Team 20 really heats up.

A lot hinges on how they go under Kingsley. If he gets them playing finals and deep into September then I think they can surpass their pre Covid numbers.

 

[Walshawk]

Why do you get so rude and aggressive? He makes a number of valid points.

Thanks. Some people have no manners.

 

[RedV3x]

Thanks. Some people have no manners.

Some people have no manners.

Yes, like those who keep on trying to degrade a legitimate football club for no good reason.

 

[RedV3x]

A lot hinges on how they go under Kingsley. If he gets them playing finals and deep into September then I think they can surpass their pre Covid numbers.

This is the number one law of football survival - onfield success,
not only for the present to increase the level of support but to build on that added support to grow into the future.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Apparently Cairns has come forward with a bid.



There's more details on the NT News and Cairns Post (same article), but I don't have access. Anybody able to read it?

I think it's incredibly optimistic. Cairns is barely bigger than Darwin, but without the romanticism and AFL fanaticism that Darwin has. Can't see it happening in this expansion round.