-
AFLW 2025 - AFLW Trade and Draft - All the player moves
-
Mobile App Discontinued
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.
20th AFL Team
- Thread starter lionshine
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
I also disagree.
The bye doesn't really do much for Thursday games. The AFL has played large chunks of consecutive Thursdays before without a bye. Last year, rounds starting on Friday were still the norm (at least the majority) and they managed to fit nine games into them every week. A tenth game can help solidify the Thursday timeslot.
I actually think Canberra would be more desirable than Tasmania for broadcasters.
- RegionalTAM considers the Canberra market bigger than Tasmania, 566k to 534k. That's not including the 300k in the Riverina that would be drawn into the Canberra market
- Tasmanians already watch the footy. Canberra has many neutrals, so a team would bring in new eyeballs
- Canberrans have 22% higher disposable income than Tasmanians, so Canberra viewers are worth more to advertisers (and therefore broadcasters)
The ladder will also be a pain all season long with teams not having played as often as each other. Excluding the few bye weeks, the ladder is simple now.
Once again, I disagree.
Firstly, 35 is only 20 players more than 15. And any new team in a currently unrepresented area will get a boost from having their own team. Tasmania's not unique.
If Canberra entered, they would be the closest team to the hometown of 40 players currently in the league. If those towns continue contributing talent, it'd be an easy daytrip for families instead of a flight to Melbourne or Sydney. I'd say it would be likely that a Canberra team, including a stronger academy focus on the Riverina, and the ability to stay connected to friends and family, there would be a big boost of Canberra players in the Riverina. The Raiders have been playing games in Wagga, so similarly, that number might go down if we don't get a team.
We've had eight Canberran men drafted since 2015. Prior to that we had a 10 year gap of no draftees. Canberra has had a huge boost from having the Giants and we're only just starting to see the benefits now. I'd say with our own team, Canberra would probably be producing about three players a year.
So a Canberra could also add 20-30 players to the talent pool.
The NT could possibly add another 20 players in that situation, too. So many Territorians never never pursue their career because they don't want to move away from family, and more retire earlier than they had to to return. The NT would still be reliant on interstate talent, but it would increased the overall pool.
It's still bigger than RL now.
fargothegreat recently showed that AFL fanaticism is pretty similar in the ACT and Tasmania (28%-30% of the population respectively). Canberra aren't as desperate to get on board as Tasmania, we don't have the same parochialism, but it's not that far behind Tasmania as a footy heartland (even post-Raiders).
Of course Team 20 is on the radar. This isn't the NRL where they rush through an expansion side, it's the AFL, where they plan 50 years ahead and put the teams where they think is best. Not only is Team 20 on the radar, Team 21 and Team 22 probably are, too.
Sidenote: I didn't mean for this to become a Canberra v Tasmania post. I'm very keen on Canberra AND Tasmania together.
The census results further favoured Canberra's demographics over the NT.
The census showed that the ACT population had been undercounted by 20k, and we're actually at 454k in the territory.
The ACT was the fastest growing jurisdiction for the second consecutive census.
I can't find census data on NSW towns yet, but if they remained as expected, that would put Canberra-Queanbeyan at 494k and Greater Canberra (I define as anything within an hour) at around 540k.
Conversely, Greater Darwin was shown to be smaller than estimated, at only 140k.
If the current growth rates continue, Greater Canberra will soon quadruple the population of Greater Darwin.
The census showed that the ACT population had been undercounted by 20k, and we're actually at 454k in the territory.
The ACT was the fastest growing jurisdiction for the second consecutive census.
I can't find census data on NSW towns yet, but if they remained as expected, that would put Canberra-Queanbeyan at 494k and Greater Canberra (I define as anything within an hour) at around 540k.
Conversely, Greater Darwin was shown to be smaller than estimated, at only 140k.
If the current growth rates continue, Greater Canberra will soon quadruple the population of Greater Darwin.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics is today releasing the 2021 census data. But I went back to a data release in April for the population of Australian Cities with population over 10,000.
Regional population, 2020-21 financial year
Statistics about the population and components of change (births, deaths, migration) for Australia's capital cities and regionswww.abs.gov.au
I modified the layout of their table to be easier to get the key information and made some tables, which show the growth of Australia’s 20 largest cities in the last 20 years.
A couple of take aways I had, and these aren’t the most important, but they help to paint a picture:
1. In the past 20 years Melbourne grew by more people than Adelaide has in total.
2. In the past 20 years Adelaide grew by more people than Hobart has in total.
Given where the massive growth in people is/was, I can see why the AFL chose Gold Coast and West Sydney to be the most recent expansion teams.
Tasmanian have a hard sell for getting an AFL team with their small market, which is not concentrated in one city and growing slower in comparison to elsewhere. But I still support them for team 19.
And whilst I prefer Canberra for team 20 over any other location, their case for a team is probably even harder than Tasmania as they don’t have the sentimental factor of being known as a traditional footy state.
Just the sheer size of the big 6 cities really makes it hard to see any smaller city being home to an AFL team in the future.
This is what the stats above looks like, if you break down the population by the number of AFL teams in that City.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Mr Taswegian
Roo Man
- May 25, 2019
- 3,049
- 1,441
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
The Bereau of stastics said a few days ago that Hobart's population is currently 247000.
Interesting chart! It's good to see it visualised like that.
I can see the Sunshine Coast being in conversations a few decades down the track. They're expected to reach 500k by 2040ish (which is pretty much what the Gold Coast had when the Suns entered). I expect it'll be a pretty AFL-friendly town with a lot of southerners moving up for the sunshine. They've already got two teams in the state league.
I think you're still going off slightly old data though. I believe it's based on what was expected from the census, but not the actual results. The estimate undercooked the ACT's numbers, so I think Canberra-Queanbeyan would be more like 494k.
Not really. They can bring back Match Ratio like when it was a 15 team comp.
I updated the table to include NRL as the AFL big winter competitor. I recognise that some numbers are different to recent census data, but not by enough to change the overall visualisation comparison.
Note’s :
1. Wollongong shares an NRL team with Sydney (St George Illawarra Dragons)
2. Sunshine Coast will share an NRL team with Brisbane (Brisbane Dolphins)
Now you could expand it further and include Super Rugby and A-League teams. Which would give the Central Coast the Mariners, and bring the share of population in Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, Newcastle and Canberra down.
It also makes Hobart the largest population centre without a football team in the four big codes.
And makes you question the ability of Canberra to be shared, not only by the NRL and super rugby, but also by a potential 20th AFL team. Perhaps Canberra sharing an AFL team is the way to go. Whether that be GWS, or let them focus on Sydney and it instead be a Melbourne based team.
Note’s :
1. Wollongong shares an NRL team with Sydney (St George Illawarra Dragons)
2. Sunshine Coast will share an NRL team with Brisbane (Brisbane Dolphins)
Now you could expand it further and include Super Rugby and A-League teams. Which would give the Central Coast the Mariners, and bring the share of population in Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, Newcastle and Canberra down.
It also makes Hobart the largest population centre without a football team in the four big codes.
And makes you question the ability of Canberra to be shared, not only by the NRL and super rugby, but also by a potential 20th AFL team. Perhaps Canberra sharing an AFL team is the way to go. Whether that be GWS, or let them focus on Sydney and it instead be a Melbourne based team.
Last edited:
I was replying but misread you post.
I Didn't realise the Redcliffe Dolphins were to be a joint effort with the Sunshine coast.
I wondered why Redcliffe got the nod over the stronger NRL area of Ipswich.
I guess the part expansion into SC would be the attempt to beat the AFL into the SC
Very interesting.
Should BBL be included? Not a football code, but they have higher attendance than the NRL or A-League.
I think other codes are relevant, but shouldn't be given the same weight as an AFL team. People would be more likely to be invested in two codes, rather than two teams in the same code. For instance, I would say at least 80% of Melbourne Storm fans would be AFL fans, too. Same as Canberra, we don't have a lot of sport on, so it's easy to support two teams on alternating weekends.
In terms of Canberra, the ACT has similar levels of AFL fanaticism to Tasmania (counted as 12 times more likely to attend games, 4 times more likely to watch the team on TV, 30 times more likely to become members). The Gemba report measured it as 28% in the ACT and 30% in Tasmania. If that translates the same to Hobart, that means Canberra has 72% more AFL "fanatics" than Hobart. And that's just the ACT, not including Queanbeyan or nearby towns.
Hobart's level of fanaticism will go up when they get a team (as would Canberra's), and I know they will represent all of Tasmania, but if Hobart can be the base for a full-time team, then Canberra definitely can be too.
Two games (of 12) @ SC. Hardly a joint venture.
Oh, is it only 2 games. That’s not really the same as the Dragons in Wollongong.
Perhaps I should remove them from Sunshine Coast.
Ok. Thats interesting.
Perhaps the post shouldn't include Sunshine coast as having a football team of any code then!!
- May 13, 2012
- 15,812
- 5,972
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
From an AFL perspective, the clear take away from the stats is that the only team missing from the AFL is a 3rd Perth team.
Macca180
Club Legend
Tassie and Canberra need to come in.
This has been my long held opinion. Based on the fact that with 18 teams Tas1 has the capacity & should be part of that size of an AFL comp, & WA3 in the 2nd largest footy market in Australia.
Tas1 & WA3
Yes, but how many people in Perth don't already have a team to follow? And how many WC or Freo fans are going to change clubs? It's like saying Collingwood should have two teams.
More than anything it shows the stupidity of how the AFL have structured a national competition.
Developing teams in NSW & Qld is one thing. but in football states they have stuffed it up. Too many in one place & not enough in others. The longer it went on, the harder it is to change it. The gravy train just covers up the problem.
Yes but there is no way it could have been done better given how it all evolved. Also Perth was smaller than Adelaide in the 1980s. Sure if you were starting a National comp from now it would look different but it is nobody’s fault.
Still I would not have more than two Perth teams.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
This has been my long held opinion. Based on the fact that with 18 teams Tas1 has the capacity & should be part of that size of an AFL comp, & WA3 in the 2nd largest footy market in Australia.
Tas1 & WA3
Canberra's the only option that has enough existing AFL support for an AFL team to exist, and enough room for growth to make the expansion worthwhile.
Perth is already AFL mad, a third team will just become the poorer Perth brother and add nothing to the footprint.
One would never know. We have Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, so a team called Perth makes sense.
The 'Perth Sharks' may attract many who don't particularly like WCE or Freo & who may not be members. The WAFC would perhaps like another team to attract more sponsorship & use of the Wests fantastic new venue.
Anyway, its not as if I'm against Canberra. Far from it.
Canberra and Perth are the only places I can see conceivably working as Team 20. The NT is a romantic option, but really a pipedream.
But I think Canberra still makes more sense (I realise I can't say that without bias).
To me, Fremantle is still so far behind West Coast, that they still need time to catch up (hopefully a few years of the current performances can help). Even this year, West Coast have 100k members and Freo have 53k.
Freo should be a huge club alongside West Coast, but I fear a third Perth team will hamstring Freo's growth and result in West Coast overshadowing two mediocre clubs, rather than Perth having two strong clubs.
I guess I'd say that it wouldn't affect Freo. A bit like a 3rd Adelaide side wouldn't affect Port.
It may affect WCE a bit. I'd think it'd attract those who want something different. Like a team called Perth!!
I just don't think we're going to agree here.
A third Adelaide team would absolutely affect Port. Port is a mid-level supported team, and we've had years where that has dipped (remember the tarps?). Port already struggles for media attention against the Crows to the point where a lot of Port fans call the local paper the Crowsvertiser. I haven't been to Perth, but I imagine Freo's struggles are probably pretty similar.
Adelaide also has closer to a 50/50 fan distribution, so both teams would be more similarly impacted if a third Adelaide team were to come in.
In Perth, WC has the big franchise feel, Freo has the cool underdog feel if you want to go against the grain. If you're an AFL fan and support neither, you're clearly holding strong to your interstate team and wouldn't likely switch over to a new team. A third team would also be playing at Optus, so it's not like they really offer a point of difference.
I think ‘Perth Snakes’ or ‘Perth Serpents’ works better, so that it can tie in with the indigenous Dreamtime serpent the Wagyl that formed the Perth geography.
Similar threads
