20th AFL Team

[Bjo187]

And the AFL couldn't force them to take the deal and relocate. Even when $5 million in debt.

Why would North take a deal they thought was dodgey? It was just another stuff up in Demetrious reign as CEO, as it was as good as done till they smelt a rat on the offer.

Anyhow, the AFL took it as an opportunity to instead bring in two new clubs, like they had been planning for a long time having a second Sydney team anyway. Also they were time sensitive so couldn't go through the drama of pulling a licence, because they didn't want the NRL to get the jump on them in the gold coast.

If they instead decided to force the issue by saying take the deal or fold and had the time to use power plays, I think we know where North would be playing out of now.

 

[Purple Suit]

I beg you, please look up some numbers before you post these things.

The ACT is the fastest growing state/territory. It has been for the past two censuses. We're not capped. There are so many buildings going up. New suburbs announced every other year.

Only by %. Other states and cities are growing far more in actually population due to their bigger base.

 

[Roylion]

Why would North take a deal they thought was dodgey?

Why didn't the AFL force them? Isn't that supposed to be really easy?

Anyhow, the AFL took it as an opportunity to instead bring in two new clubs,

They had to once North rejected their offer. The AFL knew they couldn't force North to relocate.

Also they were time sensitive so couldn't go through the drama of pulling a licence, because they didn't want the NRL to get the jump on them in the gold coast.

Yeah. The AFL didnt really want a long protracted legal battle. Much less the angst, vitriol and negative publicity that would occur

If they instead decided to force the issue by saying take the deal or fold

They had no choice but to accept North Melbourne's choice.

I think we know where North would be playing out of now.

Melbourne.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Only by %. Other states and cities are growing far more in actually population due to their bigger base.

But you're agreeing Perth isn't growing by more than a whole Canberra in 10 years?

Look, I'm fine for Perth to get a third team. But if there's only one team on offer in the next 30 years, it should go to Canberra.

Yes, Perth is growing faster than Canberra overall, but it already has two teams. Come 2030, Greater Canberra will have 900k. The Capital Region will have 1.1m. Greater Perth will have 3m (according to the ABS).

So the options:

WA3: WA teams with 1m people each, Canberrans with nobody to follow
Canberra: WA teams with 1.5m each, Canberra with 900k-1.1m.

Canberra is clearly the most equitable, and also the best way to bring in more fans.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

What if the majority of afl clubs voted for north to relocate to Canberra.

Couldn’t give a shit what other clubs’ preferences are. Since the failed GC attempt, North’s amended constitution now requires minimum 75% of voting members to be in favour of a relocation/merger proposal in order for it to be approved. Like that will ever happen.

If the AFL couldn’t force us to the GC, then there’s no way 3/4 of members will agree to end our club as we know it. Time to move on and focus on someone else, or better yet, accept that all 9 Melbourne clubs are here to stay in what will soon be Australia’s largest city. Expansion beyond 20 clubs is the most likely outcome for the competition.

 

[Bjo187]

Couldn’t give a shit what other clubs’ preferences are. Since the failed GC attempt, North’s amended constitution now requires minimum 75% of voting members to be in favour of a relocation/merger proposal in order for it to be approved. Like that will ever happen.

If the AFL couldn’t force us to the GC, then there’s no way 3/4 of members will agree to end our club as we know it. Time to move on and focus on someone else, or better yet, accept that all 9 Melbourne clubs are here to stay in what will soon be Australia’s largest city. Expansion beyond 20 clubs is the most likely outcome for the competition.

There are already too many teams in the comp let alone going to 22 and I explained above why the afl didn't force it, they had time constraints during that period.

I don't get how north fans wouldn't see Canberra as an appealing offer, for the growth, money, success and long term viability of their club, whilst still playing like 7 games in Melbourne per year.

 

[Roylion]

There are already too many teams in the comp let alone going to 22 and I explained above why the afl didn't force it, they had time constraints during that period.

The AFL had no power to force any relocation and they knew it.

I don't get how north fans wouldn't see Canberra as an appealing offer, for the growth, money, success and long term viability of their club, whilst still playing like 7 games in Melbourne per year.

Because they can grow and be successful in Melbourne playing 13 games per year there. That’s what they’re doing already.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

There are already too many teams in the comp let alone going to 22 and I explained above why the afl didn't force it, they had time constraints during that period.

I don't get how north fans wouldn't see Canberra as an appealing offer, for the growth, money, success and long term viability of their club, whilst still playing like 7 games in Melbourne per year.

I don’t have too many issues with the current number of teams and it won’t be the end of the world when the league expands to 19 clubs. With the level of investment being directed towards the Devils, and Tassie’s improved talent pathways, I don’t believe they’ll be a huge drain on the league’s resources (the AFL ensured they won’t be with the contract they signed with the government). Team 20 needs to operate on a similar basis to reduce how long it takes for the club to be competitive, financially stable and well-established in its community.

The AFL has openly stated that there’ll be a transitional period between team 19 and 20. Many have theorised about it being 5 years, but that isn’t set in stone, particularly when we don’t even know who #20 will be yet. If 21 and 22 ever eventuate then it’s hard to envisage it occurring much earlier than 2045-2050 - so much can change between now and then. What’s to say that won’t be considered an ideal number of clubs in another 25 years?

Aside from playing a few games there about 20 years ago, Canberra and North have nothing to do with each other, nor want to in the future. IMO relocation is the closest thing that a club can get to folding, as the club no longer represents its original community. From 2026, North will be back to playing 9 home games in Melbourne (the most in years). At this stage, that should be enough to indicate where it’s heading for North.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

It can be summarised in one word, stubborn.

Your attitude can be summarised in one word as well, ignorant.

 

[big_e]

There are already too many teams in the comp let alone going to 22 and I explained above why the afl didn't force it, they had time constraints during that period.

I don't get how north fans wouldn't see Canberra as an appealing offer, for the growth, money, success and long term viability of their club, whilst still playing like 7 games in Melbourne per year.

It's happened once, more than 40 years ago. The fact that it's never happened again should give you an idea of how popular the idea is.

If your think it's such a great idea, perhaps you could try floating it at the next Essendon AGM and see how far you'd get.

 

[Bjo187]

The AFL had no power to force any relocation and they knew it.

You're like a broken record.

For the record I actually like North and always have, despite them hating Essendon. I want them to be successful.

The answer to this question is, would a move the small distance to Canberra be good for them? On every metric, yes. Would them moving to Canberra be good for the AFL as a whole, the answer to that is yes.

Because they can grow and be successful in Melbourne playing 13 games per year there. That’s what they’re doing already.

The gap between the big and small Melbourne clubs is bigger than it's ever been and will only get bigger and bigger. Their growth potential in Canberra is huge, the area will have 900k by 2030 and they'd be the toast of the town with a monopoly over the footy market there. You could even run buses from Melbourne to Canberra for all the home games ffs.

I'm interested to know, do you classify the swans relocation as a success? You know the most supported club in the country that have played in about 7 grand finals in the past 20 years?

 

[Fire]

I'm positive they could find a way to make it work if they had the ticker. Goyder and Dillon are the two most uninspiring leaders the afl have seen as a combination though, so I'm sure they cbf. If a chairman came in with the competitions best interests at heart, they could make the move.

The difference between this and all other merger and relocations proposals is, it's actually a genuinely good offer for once.

• ACT government will kick in about 10 mill per year.
• North get their own redeveloped new ground.
• They get their own training base.
• Get a zone encompassing the whole on the ACT as well as the footy hotbed of the riverina.
• North retain 2 Victorian home games.
• It's only 7 hours drive away for the diehards.

It's just simply a great offer for a club that's been running off an oily rag it's whole existence, to finally obtain a bigger supporter base, be a financial powerhouse, have the best recruiting zone in the country and great growth potential. They could even be another swans or lions, but they are within reasonable travelling distance and retain more of their Melbourne identity in the move than the previous two.

I am not against a move for my club so long as its on our terms and there is no merger or identity theft. (i.e, the gold coast deal would have seen us merge with southport and add gold piping/colours so **** that shit off).

However stop pissing in our pockets with this. 7 hours drive is a plane trip, so don't say its reasonable travelling distance. If they kept 2 home games a year in Melbourne, then they are not really a fully committed Canberra team, so why short change that community? I WOULD say a deal like the lions, where there are X guaranteed away games in Melbourne per year which members can access via a class of membership for Melbournites would work; but the AFL has already proven they are not to be trusted with that as they broke that exact promise for the lions. So again, **** that shit off.

But above all else, is that you are approaching this backwards. You are looking for a struggling club to relocate to a market. You aren't looking for an market for a struggling club. But we are doing just fine now thanks, no need for us to consider this.

You're trying to force a move on a club that doesn't need to, into a community that wants its own full time team and be proud members of the community, not constantly going back to their ex for a few games a year.

And then we would still need a 20th team anyway.

This is a solution in search of a problem.

 

[Roylion]

You're like a broken record.

Yet you keep repeating the mantra that the AFL could somehow have moved North to the Gold Coast in 2007. They couldn't then and they couldn't now.

For the record I actually like North and always have, despite them hating Essendon. I want them to be successful.

They will be successful in Melbourne.

The answer to this question is, would a move the small distance to Canberra be good for them?

Not necessarily. They're doing quite well in Melbourne.

The gap between the big and small Melbourne clubs is bigger than it's ever been and will only get bigger and bigger. Their growth potential in Canberra is huge, the area will have 900k by 2030 and they'd be the toast of the town with a monopoly over the footy market there. You could even run buses from Melbourne to Canberra for all the home games ffs.

Melbourne will be Australia's largest city by 2032 with an estimated population of 6.1 million and the population is projected to be as many as 8 million in twenty five years. Plenty of scope for growth for North Melbourne in Melbourne as well.

I'm interested to know, do you classify the swans relocation as a success? You know the most supported club in the country that have played in about 7 grand finals in the past 20 years?

The Swans had to relocate to survive as a club in the early 80s. And they made the move to Australia's largest city. The move came very close to failing at least twice.

North Melbourne does not need to relocate to survive as an AFL club. Certainly no more than the Saints, Demons or Bulldogs. There is no appetite by either the AFL or North Melbourne to consider relocating from Melbourne. The North Melbourne members will simply not agree to doing so.

There will be 20 AFL clubs by the end of the 2030's and one of those will be North Melbourne playing out of Melbourne.

 

[Outtatym]

There are already too many teams in the comp let alone going to 22 and I explained above why the afl didn't force it, they had time constraints during that period.

I don't get how north fans wouldn't see Canberra as an appealing offer, for the growth, money, success and long term viability of their club, whilst still playing like 7 games in Melbourne per year.

If it's such a good idea, why aren't you pushing for Essendon to move?
Dropping a small club into a small market that would prefer their own team would be much much more of a drain on the comp funds for decades. Big club like the bombers would be able to swoop in while maintaining their strong Vic supporters. Imagine how big the bombers could be with an entire territory for themselves.
Play 7 games in Vic.
It's only a 7 hour drive for the diehards to see the Canberra Bombers right?

 

[Canberra Pear]

If it's such a good idea, why aren't you pushing for Essendon to move?
Dropping a small club into a small market that would prefer their own team would be much much more of a drain on the comp funds for decades. Big club like the bombers would be able to swoop in while maintaining their strong Vic supporters. Imagine how big the bombers could be with an entire territory for themselves.
Play 7 games in Vic.
It's only a 7 hour drive for the diehards to see the Canberra Bombers right?

Pure coincidence, but the Canberra aircraft was a bomber. The Canberra Bombers actually does fit well.

 

[Bjo187]

If it's such a good idea, why aren't you pushing for Essendon to move?
Dropping a small club into a small market that would prefer their own team would be much much more of a drain on the comp funds for decades. Big club like the bombers would be able to swoop in while maintaining their strong Vic supporters. Imagine how big the bombers could be with an entire territory for themselves.
Play 7 games in Vic.
It's only a 7 hour drive for the diehards to see the Canberra Bombers right?

I would be for it if we were a small club getting smaller in comparison to the other Vic clubs and having to be propped up by the afl distributions. Gee at this point I'd almost be for it simply to get better on field results, but it would be stupid due to the size of our fan base to do that and you know that.

If I were a north fan I'd prefer to have the money, growth potential, ACT and riverina area as a zone and my team playing in grand finals every few years, like the swans and lions. All while I can still watch my club play 7 games in Melbourne anyway if i choose to, which is practically the same as the giants and suns get now in their local areas too anyway. They'd also be on prime time and free to air every home game in Canberra, so their growth potential compared to Melbourne, where they're barely ever on fta, would be massive in comparison.

Relocations today aren't like they were back in the 80s or 90s, when teams were out of sight out of mind, thousands of km's away and you'd get no news you could access about them for weeks on end.

Now you have every AFL game on Foxtel and kayo, every vfl game on the afl website for free, a thing called the internet where you can have club fan forums, so you can still have ownership over your club from anywhere. It's simply selfish for the small percentage of the supporter base that attends every single game, to put their own interests over the on and off field success of their own club and overall competitions health. 90 percent of these fans don't attend more than 7 games per year anyway, but are locked into the mindset of stomping their feet refusing to move 7 hours drive away. All because they got offered a shit deal back in 2008 to move 3 states and territories away, in a rushed offer to the gold coast.

 

[Roylion]

If I were a north fan I'd prefer to have the money, growth potential, ACT and riverina area as a zone and my team playing in grand finals every few years, like the swans and lions.

If I was a North fan (and I'm not), I'd prefer to remain in Melbourne at Arden Street in my AFL quality admin and training base.

All while I can still watch my club play 7 games in Melbourne anyway if i choose to,

7 games in Melbourne is a pipe dream. It would only last a few years and then it would be down to 4-5 games a year (with the occasional sixth game at Geelong).

It's simply selfish for the small percentage of the supporter base that attends every single game, to put their own interests over the on and off field success of their own club and overall competitions health.

That's complete rubbish. North has as much chance of success both on and off field remaining in Melbourne as they would relocating to Canberra. Adding a 20th team in Canberra and keeping North Melbourne in Melbourne would make no negligible difference to the 'health' of the AFL competition.

 

[Bjo187]

If I was a North fan (and I'm not), I'd prefer to remain in Melbourne at Arden Street in my AFL quality admin and training base.


7 games in Melbourne is a pipe dream. It would only last a few years and then it would be down to 4-5 games a year (with the occasional sixth game at Geelong).


That's complete rubbish. North has as much chance of success both on and off field remaining in Melbourne as they would relocating to Canberra. Adding a 20th team in Canberra and keeping North Melbourne in Melbourne would make no negligible difference to the 'health' of the AFL competition.

I know it was a terrible deal for Fitzroy compared to what North would get by keeping their whole identity and gaining money, fans and talent access (plus they would get 7 or 8 games in Melbourne coz I'm saying they can retain 2 home games at marvel in the proposed deal).

But I'm interested to know, did you prefer watching Fitzroy in the 90s getting thrashed every week, or the lions since they merged playing in 6 grand finals and winning 4 premierships in the past 20 odd years? Remembering of course you now have incredible access through social media and tv that you didn't have when they first merged.

 

[Roylion]

I know it was a terrible deal for Fitzroy compared to what North would get by keeping their whole identity and gaining money, fans and talent access (plus they would get 7 or 8 games in Melbourne coz I'm saying they can retain 2 home games at marvel in the proposed deal).

They simply won't get 7-8 games in Melbourne indefinitely. The more non-Victorian clubs in the competition, the less chance of this occurring. No matter what the AFL initially promise.

But I'm interested to know, did you prefer watching Fitzroy in the 90s getting thrashed every week,

Much prefer if Fitzroy stayed in the AFL competition in Melbourne in its own right. They didn't get thrashed every week for the entirety of the 1990s. In 1992 for example, Fitzroy won 9 of their 22 games played and in 1993 they won 10 of their 20 games played. In 1994 they only won five games, but they lost four other games by three goals or less.

or the lions since they merged playing in 6 grand finals and winning 4 premierships in the past 20 odd years?

I support the Brisbane Bears / Lions only because of their re-branding to resemble Fitzroy, (and the fact they are the guardians of Fitzroy's VFL-AFL history in the current competition) but it definitely isn't the same. Fitzroy aren't in the AFL competition anymore. They currently play elsewhere.

Remembering of course you now have incredible access through social media and tv that you didn't have when they first merged.

They didn't merge. I've explained why elsewhere. Not going into it again here. I now support the Brisbane Bears / Lions in the AFL.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I would be for it if we were a small club getting smaller in comparison to the other Vic clubs and having to be propped up by the afl distributions. Gee at this point I'd almost be for it simply to get better on field results, but it would be stupid due to the size of our fan base to do that and you know that.

But vague concepts of being "propped up" when discussing fairness etc. can easily be criticised.

North simply don't get to play as many home games against the big four Vic clubs. It can be argued that distributions are only the financial compensation for that

If I were a north fan I'd prefer to have the money, growth potential

But you're not, and North fans prefer the history of the fact that they're representing the same region and are based out of Arden St etc as their reason for existence.

ACT and riverina area as a zone and my team playing in grand finals every few years, like the swans and lions.

Your assumption that this is true is wrong. What evidence do you have that an ACT team would be more successful than the overall average of one grand final every 9 years? A Canberra team would still be in the bottom half of attendances. Only half of Canberra support AFL. There are going to be tens of thousands of Canberrans who are rusted on Raiders fans who you will never convince to support an AFL team.

All while I can still watch my club play 7 games in Melbourne anyway

8 out of 17 other teams playing 11 away games and the fact that any Canberra team will likely play the Sydney teams twice in a year for rivalry/travel reasons means that they'd be playing 5 games a year in Melbourne, not 7. You can't just make up mathematical numbers to prove your point.

Now you have every AFL game on Foxtel and kayo, every vfl game on the afl website for free, a thing called the internet where you can have club fan forums, so you can still have ownership over your club from anywhere.

That doesn't change the fact that a lot of people support North not for their success (as the last few years are patently obvious) but for the historical and geographic nature of who they represent and their history.

It's simply selfish for the small percentage of the supporter base that attends every single game, to put their own interests over the on and off field success of their own club and overall competitions health.

Who says that North are doing financially unhealthily?

They had 50,000 members. That's 50,000 packages that people were willing to stump up financial support for.

Why is their views selfish? It's literally the constitution of the club - the club exists to be member run, and those that make the effort to vote are entirely entitled to have the way the club is run the way that they want. It's the literal purpose of the club's existence and organisation.

90 percent of these fans don't attend more than 7 games per year anyway, but are locked into the mindset of stomping their feet refusing to move 7 hours drive away. All because they got offered a shit deal back in 2008 to move 3 states and territories away, in a rushed offer to the gold coast.

Who cares. They buy a membership, adhere to the rules of how the club is formed, and entitled to it.

If you yourself are so convinced that this is the right move for North, buy a North membership, network among other North members, attempt to get on the board yourself, etc.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Your assumption that this is true is wrong. What evidence do you have that an ACT team would be more successful than the overall average of one grand final every 9 years? A Canberra team would still be in the bottom half of attendances. Only half of Canberra support AFL. There are going to be tens of thousands of Canberrans who are rusted on Raiders fans who you will never convince to support an AFL team.

People need to stop looking at Canberra as so black and white. It's not AFL or NRL in Canberra. A decent proportion like both.

We were chatting footy in my team at work the other day. All six of us in the team had AFL teams, but three also had NRL teams. There will be a large chunk of people who have memberships to both the Raiders and a Canberra team.

 

[RedV3x]

That doesn't change the fact that a lot of people support North not for their success (as the last few years are patently obvious) but for the historical and geographic nature of who they represent and their history.

That reminds me of the attitude of members of WAFL club, West Perth.
West Perth moved from their home in Leederville, West Perth to the populous North coastal city of Joondalup.
A new oval and stadium was created close to the city to tap into the new Northern developments.
Joondalup City offered a very generous sponsorship to play under the name "Joondalup".
The rusted on West Perth fans declined this generous offer to play under "Joondalup"
even though the football club retained the old name.
Holding onto traditions probably means not moving forward.

 

[Angus Young]

North Melbourne does not need to relocate to survive as an AFL club. Certainly no more than the Saints, Demons or Bulldogs. There is no appetite by either the AFL or North Melbourne to consider relocating from Melbourne. The North Melbourne members will simply not agree to doing so.

There will be 20 AFL clubs by the end of the 2030's and one of those will be North Melbourne playing out of Melbourne.

They should though. Or fold.

 

[Roylion]

They should though. Or fold.

No they shouldn't. They wont be 'folding' either.

 

[Outtatym]

They should though. Or fold.

Short memory.
If they didn't make the Hawks when they were drowning in debt begging Melbourne to merge (cool jumper though) why would they make a club with zero debt that's been profitable for 12 years?