20th AFL Team

[Walshawk]

Not quite the same, but Newcastle has held a few preseason matches. Managed to get 5k to one.

Not bad for a preseason. And that was 20 years ago. Interest and population would now both be higher if they held more.

I think AFLW would be another great way to bring high level footy to Newcastle.

Footy is also growing around Woolongong, a city bigger than Geelong and double the size of Darwin or Cairns. Need some AFL action there as well.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

Footy is also growing around Woolongong, a city bigger than Geelong and double the size of Darwin or Cairns. Need some AFL action there as well.

Only issue Wollongong (and Newcastle tbh) have is the lack of infrastructure in place for quality stadium / training facilities and transport networks to and from city / interstate supporters.

Ideally, if both those cities had AFL suitable stadiums and clubs though and not represented by NRL, the concept and idea Gather Round in Sydney (i.e 22 team competition earliest timeframe) would have been more of a success than it is in Adelaide right now (even if I'll enjoy every moment of it here) with home matches being spread out of the following 4x SCG, 3x Showgrouds, 2x Newcastle & 2x Wollongong.

*SCG capacity increased to 50k.

*Sydney Showgrouds capacity increased to 30k.

Maybe what does need to happen is the AFL needing the NSW & smaller Victorian clubs to play their pre-season / 1-2 AFLW matches in those cities and towns to test the market out there first before they fully invest money and resources.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Only issue Wollongong (and Newcastle tbh) have is the lack of infrastructure in place for quality stadium / training facilities and transport networks to and from city / interstate supporters.

Ideally, if both those cities had AFL suitable stadiums and clubs though and not represented by NRL, the concept and idea Gather Round in Sydney (i.e 22 team competition earliest timeframe) would have been more of a success than it is in Adelaide right now (even if I'll enjoy every moment of it here) with home matches being spread out of the following 4x SCG, 3x Showgrouds, 2x Newcastle & 2x Wollongong.

*SCG capacity increased to 50k.

*Sydney Showgrouds capacity increased to 30k.

Maybe what does need to happen is the AFL needing the NSW & smaller Victorian clubs to play their pre-season / 1-2 AFLW matches in those cities and towns to test the market out there first before they fully invest money and resources.

Lack of infrastructure, and importantly, a severe lack of political will from NSW politicians to invest in infrastructure that will benefit the AFL. We can’t underestimate how much harder it will be to get these kind of projects over the line in non-AFL states, when the the majority of local politicians (and their constituents) don’t care for our game.

There’s a reason why the Suns and Giants have problematic stadiums e.g. being poorly located or unavailable for a chunk of the AFL season, while the Lions are now being forced to remain in a venue that is outdated and undersized for their requirements indefinitely.

Cricket consistently benefits (freeloads) from infrastructure upgrades that are primarily needed for AFL. So, for once, it would be nice for them to lead the charge for upgrades in locations where it’s politically challenging to get support for ‘AFL’ infrastructure.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

Lack of infrastructure, and importantly, a severe lack of political will from NSW politicians to invest in infrastructure that will benefit the AFL. We can’t underestimate how much harder it will be to get these kind of projects over the line in non-AFL states, when the the majority of local politicians (and their constituents) don’t care for our game.

Cricket consistently benefits (freeloads) from infrastructure upgrades that are primarily needed for AFL. So, for once, it would be nice for them to lead the charge for upgrades in locations where it’s politically challenging to get support for ‘AFL’ infrastructure.

Cricket NSW calls for 15,000-seat Newcastle stadium

The governing body of cricket in NSW has identified Newcastle as an infrastructure priority and wants to see a new 15,000-seat oval stadium built in the city, while it also says a SCG Masterplan is needed.

www.austadiums.com

Cricket NSW did propose the idea of a new 15k stadium being be built in Newcastle CBD last year and will be interesting to see if this proposal will happen or not, as this could help Newcastle's chances of hosting AFL matches (10-15 years) and having it's own club in the future (25-30 years).

If Newcastle does get a circular stadium for cricket / AFL, would allow Wollongong to follow a similar trajectory with their stadium plans but also would prefer capacity to increase to 20-25k though for both cities.

Agree in that there is a lack of political power from NSW government regarding growth of the sport compared to RL.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Cricket NSW calls for 15,000-seat Newcastle stadium

The governing body of cricket in NSW has identified Newcastle as an infrastructure priority and wants to see a new 15,000-seat oval stadium built in the city, while it also says a SCG Masterplan is needed.

www.austadiums.com

Cricket NSW did propose the idea of a new 15k stadium being be built in Newcastle CBD last year and will be interesting to see if this proposal will happen or not, as this could help Newcastle's chances of hosting AFL matches (10-15 years) and having it's own club in the future (25-30 years).

If Newcastle does get a circular stadium for cricket / AFL, would prefer capacity to increase to 20-25k though.

15k would be sufficient as a secondary market venue, then if it had the capacity to expand to 20-25k it would be ideal.

The Big Bash needs to be re-energised. I don’t see why they couldn’t be looking to bring in some new teams with Canberra, Gold Coast and Newcastle being obvious candidates.

I think that this would help the case because, in this economic climate, I’m highly doubtful that a government would invest in a venue of this size if it wasn’t going to have a permanent tenant bringing in regular content.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

15k would be sufficient as a secondary market venue, then if it had the capacity to expand to 20-25k it would be ideal.

The Big Bash needs to be re-energised. I don’t see why they couldn’t be looking to bring in some new teams with Canberra, Gold Coast and Newcastle being obvious candidates.

I think that this would help the case because, in this economic climate, I’m highly doubtful that a government would invest in a venue of this size if it wasn’t going to have a permanent tenant bringing in regular content.

Agree that ideally 15k would be enough for a secondary market venue or even 1-2 Gather Round matches (when NSW does host it someday) before capacity does increase to 20-25k when Newcastle gets their own standalone license.

Still think Canberra deserves that 20th team though especially if CA continue to fund resources and support over there for the overall end goal of standalone teams, and Perth / WA will be short-dollar favourites of being the 21st club (providing WAFC fund it) given how much $$$$$ the AFL will receive from that decision and help starve any momentum of RL having a foothold in WA with the new Perth Bears team (est. 2027 / 2028 it looks like).

However, the 22nd team will be an interesting decision to have, when the time does come, given cities such as Darwin, Cairns, Townsville, Sunshine Coast, Newcastle, Wollongong, Auckland & Wellington will continue to see population and financial growth (some more than others) without a standalone team in the AFL.

That's why I've always had the controversial belief IMO that the AFL need to figure out what their long-term competition strategy is and what the best plan of the smaller Victorian clubs (we know who) will look going forward cause 10 teams in one state is just too many especially if the numbers of teams in the league continues to grow above 20.

 

[Walshawk]

Agree that ideally 15k would be enough for a secondary market venue or even 1-2 Gather Round matches (when NSW does host it someday) before capacity does increase to 20-25k when Newcastle gets their own standalone license.

Still think Canberra deserves that 20th team though especially if CA continue to fund resources and support over there for the overall end goal of standalone teams, and Perth / WA will be short-dollar favourites of being the 21st club (providing WAFC fund it) given how much $$$$$ the AFL will receive from that decision and help starve any momentum of RL having a foothold in WA with the new Perth Bears team (est. 2027 / 2028 it looks like).

However, the 22nd team will be an interesting decision to have, when the time does come, given cities such as Darwin, Cairns, Townsville, Sunshine Coast, Newcastle, Wollongong, Auckland & Wellington will continue to see population and financial growth (some more than others) without a standalone team in the AFL.

That's why I've always had the controversial belief IMO that the AFL need to figure out what their long-term competition strategy is and what the best plan of the smaller Victorian clubs (we know who) will look going forward cause 10 teams in one state is just too many especially if the numbers of teams in the league continues to grow above 20.

How will the AFL reap big $$$ from a third WA team?

 

[Bjo187]

Footy is also growing around Woolongong, a city bigger than Geelong and double the size of Darwin or Cairns. Need some AFL action there as well.

How do you know footy is growing in these places?

I agree on Newcastle and Wollongong. At least try and play a pre season game at these locations, it doesn't need to be a great stadium for that and the afl should be doing it for free if there is no government funding on offer, simply to have some presence there.

 

[Walshawk]

How do you know footy is growing in these places?

I agree on Newcastle and Wollongong. At least try and play a pre season game at these locations, it doesn't need to be a great stadium for that and the afl should be doing it for free if there is no government funding on offer, simply to have some presence there.

Most of my extended family is in NSW. I know lots of people around Woolongong.

 

[Coolangatta]

Agree that ideally 15k would be enough for a secondary market venue or even 1-2 Gather Round matches (when NSW does host it someday) before capacity does increase to 20-25k when Newcastle gets their own standalone license.

Still think Canberra deserves that 20th team though especially if CA continue to fund resources and support over there for the overall end goal of standalone teams, and Perth / WA will be short-dollar favourites of being the 21st club (providing WAFC fund it) given how much $$$$$ the AFL will receive from that decision and help starve any momentum of RL having a foothold in WA with the new Perth Bears team (est. 2027 / 2028 it looks like).

However, the 22nd team will be an interesting decision to have, when the time does come, given cities such as Darwin, Cairns, Townsville, Sunshine Coast, Newcastle, Wollongong, Auckland & Wellington will continue to see population and financial growth (some more than others) without a standalone team in the AFL.

That's why I've always had the controversial belief IMO that the AFL need to figure out what their long-term competition strategy is and what the best plan of the smaller Victorian clubs (we know who) will look going forward cause 10 teams in one state is just too many especially if the numbers of teams in the league continues to grow above 20.

Can’t see any Vic teams moving.

Just get Canberra in and reassess. I’d say Perth 3 and Brisbane 2/SC are reasonable proposals for team 21/22.

Get some footy games and infrastructure into Auckland, Cairns, Newcastle and Wollongong.

They are possibilities but we’re probably talking 50 years from now, 30 for Auckland and Newcastle depending on how fast the AFL can get the ball rolling.

All should be ahead of Darwin but ironically they may get team 20 if they get the long term funding secured.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Can’t see any Vic teams moving.

These figures are all speculative; however, if population growth eventuates this way then it may be foolish to reduce the number of Melbourne-based teams. If Melbourne retains 9 clubs, Adelaide 2, and Perth gets a 3rd, then each city will have club to population ratios of 1-1.2m in another 40 years.

Furthermore, regional Victoria is forecast to have approx 3.5m people by that time. As we’ve mentioned before, this could open up co-location/ secondary market opportunities for the smaller Victorian clubs within their own state. Cities like Ballarat and Bendigo would presumably be well over 200k then if the state’s regional pop is that high.

Here's how many people could be in your capital city by 2071

As of the end of June 2022, 67 per cent of all Australians lived in capital cities – that is set to increase to 68 per cent by 2032.

amp.abc.net.au

 

[Canberra Pear]

These figures are all speculative; however, if population growth eventuates this way then it may be foolish to reduce the number of Melbourne-based teams. If Melbourne retains 9 clubs, Adelaide 2, and Perth gets a 3rd, then each city will have club to population ratios of 1-1.2m in another 40 years.

Furthermore, regional Victoria is forecast to have approx 3.5m people by that time. As we’ve mentioned before, this could open up co-location/ secondary market opportunities for the smaller Victorian clubs within their own state. Cities like Ballarat and Bendigo would presumably be well over 200k then if the state’s regional pop is that high.

Here's how many people could be in your capital city by 2071

As of the end of June 2022, 67 per cent of all Australians lived in capital cities – that is set to increase to 68 per cent by 2032.

amp.abc.net.au

Interesting that in 2066, Darwin is still only predicted to grow to 200k. Won't be viable for a long time.

Also interesting in the growth comparison between Canberra and Perth. Perth is currently about five times bigger than Greater Canberra, but by 2066, it'll be less than three times as big.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Interesting that in 2066, Darwin is still only predicted to grow to 200k. Won't be viable for a long time.

Also interesting in the growth comparison between Canberra and Perth. Perth is currently about five times bigger than Greater Canberra, but by 2066, it'll be less than three times as big.

I was actually surprised to see Perth’s low growth rate. Brisbane is currently 400k bigger than Perth, yet the gap is projected to be over 1.2m by 2066.

There also could be 5m Queenslanders living outside their capital city compared with fewer than 720k West Aussies. If that ends up being even remotely accurate then you’d think we’ll be seeing more than two clubs in Qld in the coming decades and the AFL will be shutting up shop in WA after they’ve got their 3rd club.

 

[Coolangatta]

I was actually surprised to see Perth’s low growth rate. Brisbane is currently 400k bigger than Perth, yet the gap is projected to be over 1.2m by 2066.

There also could be 5m Queenslanders living outside their capital city compared with fewer than 720k West Aussies. If that ends up being even remotely accurate then you’d think we’ll be seeing more than two clubs in Qld in the coming decades and the AFL will be shutting up shop in WA after they’ve got their 3rd club.

Cause of long term mining projections I think. Our growth will peak and taper off eventually.

Like we’ve discussed, Perth 3 and Brisbane 2 make sense for 21 and 22.

Beyond that you’d think NSW3 and NZ. Presumably, Auckland and Newcastle. I don’t know about Adelaide 3 because of the population.

If NT and NQ ever happens I doubt it’ll be in our lifetime.

24 teams in 50 years isn’t that far fetched, but I can’t see there being more than 24 teams until the 22nd century.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Clubs rely on the income generated from tyhe home and away season and it is refutable logic that Melbourne clubs are blessed with the greatest number of derbies ensuring greater mutual crowds.

Carlton, Essendon, Fremantle, Gold Coast, GWS and Port Adelaide get a home game against the biggest club in their state every year. Adelaide, Brisbane, Collingwood, Sydney and West Coast are also guaranteed home games against their biggest rivals. These are the clubs therefore most reliant on derbies.

Which you then discredit by saying...

You said it - the larger supported club has more exposure.

You were making more sense when bringing up Auckland in a 20th team thread. Read posts properly before responding, please.

I said FTA (means "free-to-air", i.e. Channel 7) exposure for Vic clubs is largely dictated by on-field performance, not so much size of the club. I then cited a big club (Richmond) with more Fox exclusive games than a small club (Melbourne) this year. So no... it's pretty clear I didn't say the bigger club has more exposure in that instance.

 

[WesternSydneyHawk]

I think the best bet for growing the game in Newcastle over the short-to-medium term would be for Canberra to get the 20th club in the AFL.

That would free up the three games a year GWS currently plays in Canberra, which could instead be played in Newcastle.

Potentially, the Canberra side could be marketed as a Canberra and Southern NSW club, playing 3 games a year in Wollongong.

As for stadia, you really don't need to start with a massive billion-dollar-plus stadium in either Newy or Wollongong.

Longer term, in 20 or 30 years when the AFL is looking to expand to 22 teams, that would give you a much better starting point for a Newcastle side.

A smaller stadium, the size of Eureka/Mars Stadium in Ballarat, would suffice in both cities for the first decade or so.

We're talking a capacity of around 11,000, with around 5,000 of that in undercover seating.

The upgrades to Eureka Stadium to-date have cost around $30 million in total, abd s similarly-sizdd stadium in Newcastle or Wollongong should be well within the budget of the AFL and Cricket Australia.

You could then incrementally upgrade it with new grandstands as crowds increase.

 

[Giant YoYo]

I think the best bet for growing the game in Newcastle over the short-to-medium term would be for Canberra to get the 20th club in the AFL.

That would free up the three games a year GWS currently plays in Canberra, which could instead be played in Newcastle.

They won't be playing any games in Newcastle.

Cumulatively they haven't played any home games in Sydney for four months of the season (2 months easter show, 1 month between Bulldogs game and PA game and then Suns to Freo game)

4 months of no games during the season is a shockingly long time.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

They won't be playing any games in Newcastle.

Cumulatively they haven't played any home games in Sydney for four months of the season (2 months easter show, 1 month between Bulldogs game and PA game and then Suns to Freo game)

4 months of no games during the season is a shockingly long time.

Exactly- I would have thought that if there was to be a Canberra side as team 20 after our current contract expires in 2032, these 3 games will all be played in Sydney?

 

[Coolangatta]

I don't think it's a good idea long-term for the Giants or Suns to play games out of their home markets. Vic clubs can pick up the slack there and if they can't get them to sell games, rotate Gather Round.

You could easily have games in Newcastle and Wollongong if Gather Round's in NSW, although it wouldn't be every year.

What they could do instead is have every team play opening round. So, say by the time there's 20 teams, you could have 5 games in NSW and 5 in QLD and that's where you can chuck in a game in Cairns, Newy etc.

Then you get, say, the Roos playing 3 games a year in Darwin/1 Alice if keen, the Saints play a game in Albury and Hawks to take up some games in NZ (maybe 2 Auckland, 1 Wellington, or just Auckland) and your secondary markets are done. Or the Dees take Wellington.

Either way, they can get it done.

 

[RedV3x]

I was actually surprised to see Perth’s low growth rate. Brisbane is currently 400k bigger than Perth, yet the gap is projected to be over 1.2m by 2066.

Huh ?

Queensland | Breaking News and Headlines | Brisbane Times

The latest Queensland breaking news, comment and analysis from the Brisbane Times covering Brisbane and around the State

www.brisbanetimes.com.au

perth-to-leapfrog-brisbane-as-third-largest-city-in-australia-20150409-1mhjcg.html

 

[RedV3x]

Carlton, Essendon, Fremantle, Gold Coast, GWS and Port Adelaide get a home game against the biggest club in their state every year. Adelaide, Brisbane, Collingwood, Sydney and West Coast are also guaranteed home games against their biggest rivals.

Yes, interstate clubs get one derby a year against there cross-town rivals.

These are the clubs therefore most reliant on derbies.

You see, again, this is where you logic seems to desert you.
Melbourne teams have any number of derbies, so Melbourne teams benefit most from having derbies.
I cannot see how anyone could see it any other way.

 

[RedV3x]

You were making more sense when bringing up Auckland in a 20th team

So where did I lose you, by saying smaller Melbourne teams need to look to their future ?

 

[Teen Wolf]

You see, again, this is where you logic seems to desert you.
Melbourne teams have any number of derbies, so Melbourne teams benefit most from having derbies.
I cannot see how anyone could see it any other way.

Knowing a thing or two about stadium economics would help you. For the small Marvel teams with deals vastly inferior to Essendon's and Carlton's, the difference between drawing 20k and anything up to at least 40k is still pretty small, in terms of making money.

Games vs big Melbourne clubs are simply far more profitable for MCG tenants and non-Vic teams. This will also be true of any new team too (the Tasmania business case makes it clear the Devils won't be viable without enough home games vs Collingwood, etc.).

 

[RedV3x]

Knowing a thing or two about stadium economics would help you.

Not being so arrogant would definitely help you.

For the small Marvel teams with deals vastly inferior to Essendon's and Carlton's, the difference between drawing 20k and anything up to at least 40k is still pretty small, in terms of making money.

Games vs big Melbourne clubs are simply far more profitable for MCG tenants and non-Vic teams.

I know all this. What I don't know is why you would post this as it backs up by statements about smaller Melbourne AFL clubs having to focus on their future environment.

This will also be true of any new team too (the Tasmania business case makes it clear the Devils won't be viable without enough home games vs Collingwood, etc.).

Tasmania will have it tough because they won't have any derbies but then every Victorian team will seem like a derby.
Tasmania should benefit from enough Victorians making the trip.
Tasmania's stadium deal probably will be critical as will their initial player setup.
Tasmania is a new exciting market whilst smaller Melbourne AFL clubs are not.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I know all this. What I don't know is why you would post this as it backs up by statements about smaller Melbourne AFL clubs having to focus on their future environment.

You must have forgotten it when spouting nonsense about small Melbourne clubs surviving due to derbies. To reiterate: Marvel Stadium arrangements mean those fixtures provide little more financial support than games vs non-Vic teams--this contradicts your claim, regardless of how many times you try the "nah but dat backs up wot i said m8" card.

Nothing is going to change about the way clubs (including GWS and Gold Coast) contemplate selling home games in the future, nor does it need to. There is quite a bit of delusion about that in both this thread and in the "secondary markets" thread.