20th AFL Team

[goodolcollingwood]

Why do you bother ?. Write it on some NRL site where even there I doubt it that anyone's interested.

I'm interested. It's refreshing reading different opinions that's not just all pro footy. You don't have to agree with it but its better than just being an echo chamber.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Also your thinking that an afl Canberra team will be huge and successful from day one rivalling the Raiders is very off. Some big assumptions there about levels of support based on a few afl games a year currently.

The only parallel we have is the Suns. Going from three interstate games to a full-time team.

Despite more games, averages rose quite a bit. That's the power of what an actual home team does.

AFL crowds in Canberra are stronger than they were on the Gold Coast pre-Suns. Even pre-Giants, Canberra crowds have been stronger.

I'm not saying a Canberra AFL team will "rival" the Raiders, but I am confident there would be strong support.

 

[The Educator]

The thing is Canberra is already somewhat of an afl town, as well as an nrl town primarily. That won’t change with a new team, it will still be primarily an nrl town but also officially an afl town too.

By putting a third afl team in WA, you ensure that you have created enough supply to sustain continued growth of fans and also you thwart the nrl from Perth becoming the ‘mixed code’ town sometime down the line. If no third team remember for a large city there will only be 2 afl teams, 1 nrl team. Nrl has 33% of the professional teams. Basically if the Perth bears are successful over time and build strong pathways Perth becomes a mixed code town not just an afl town. Perth being significantly larger than Canberra this is a big long term win for the nrl. Obviously this is if the nrl gets it right and it’s a long term play but the potential is there.

NRL already have canberra, if anything more competition for raiders will be a good thing for them.

Canberra being seen as a true mixed code town is way less of a win for the AFL.

Edit - forgot to mention but a successful Perth bears will mean an Adelaide nrl franchise will quickly rise on the cards. This is yet another threat to the afl. A less successful Perth bears means Adelaide is probably forever in the too hard basket.

Oh my good lord this guy!

NRL already have Canberra.......like an AFL team isn't every chance to flip Canberra given it is not far of parity without a team there

....but Perth might become a "mixed code town" and the NRL is a potential threat to the AFL in Perth and Adelaide!

The delusion levels are almost materialising into a 119th element!

 

[hampton]

Oh my good lord this guy!

NRL already have Canberra.......like an AFL team isn't every chance to flip Canberra given it is not far of parity without a team there

....but Perth might become a "mixed code town" and the NRL is a potential threat to the AFL in Perth and Adelaide!

The delusion levels are almost materialising into a 119th element!

• Mixed code town doesn’t mean 50/50 and ‘threat’ is subjective. I don’t think nrl will overtake the afl in those cities but it can grow in popularity and take some marketshare for sure
• Canberra is already a mixed code town even without a dedicated team.
• Canberra after a dedicated team will still be a mixed code town and won’t “flip” Canberra to becoming a primarily afl town over night
• Even over a long period of time it becomes 60/40 to afl at best case scenario for the afl. Hardly guaranteed.
• giving Perth open space for an NRL team may in time make Perth a mixed code town, not 50/50 but maybe 30/70.

NRL doesn’t need to “own” or “dominate” cities to be successful like afl zealots constantly think the afl needs to do in non-afl markets. All that chest thumping about coming in and dominating western Sydney and dominating qld. Even carving out a solid niche in Perth and Adelaide like it’s doing in Melbourne would be big for the nrl considering it “dominates” 2 of the 3 biggest states already.

Remember the nrl is beating the afl on tv ratings at present without even operating in Perth and Adelaide. If they can activate interest in those cities like they have in Melbourne and maintain current levels of support elsewhere it could run well ahead of the afl in tv and eventually total revenue.

Perth bears will grow in WA way faster than the storm in Melbourne which is saturated with afl, and also with the immigration mix in Perth and rugby historical ties making it more opportune than Melbourne for success for the nrl. Only competing with 2 afl teams not 9.

 

[qlderlions]

One is about creating a “dual home” strategy like GWS already has. Because Riverina and other areas like Albury mooted are completely different areas without logical connection or shared identity with Canberra. Especially trying to play afl level games across multiple areas emphasises this. You need to stick to Canberra if you want Canberra to work.

The other is about creating a home base at Christchurch, and developing pathways through the South Island. Not creating a conglomerate team of different locations and trying to play professional games across there.

The Canberra + Riverina idea:

• 2 different states, therefore different funding models required, increased operational complications etc
• already established afl presence with GWS, and already established pathways through Riverina
• Doesn’t add anything significant for the next tv rights
• dual home dilutes membership, attendance habit formation and sponsor opportunities
• reduces focus on building out support in Canberra (same issue as we already have with gws playing games in canberra)

The Christchurch nrl team doesn’t have those negatives. The South Island opportunity comes naturally because unlike the afl who are already operating into Canberra, the nrl aren’t operating in the South Island. And the pathways aren’t mature in the South Island, like the already mature pathways in Riverina. I can go on but if you can’t see the difference and just want to yell “bad NRL man” go for it.

I’m also not suggesting people from other cities in the South Island are going to drive to Christchurch to watch games. At least not in any significant numbers. That’s not what I meant by drawing support from South Island - I’m talking about pathways and tv rights. However for the Canberra afl team people here are suggesting that we will ‘tap into’ all these disparate areas in nsw for not only pathways but both people driving to Canberra to watch games and also even playing afl level games there. Very different. Melbourne is closer than Canberra to those areas.

It’s a blessing and a curse for the afl because they have already expanded and mature professional and pathway development in lots of areas so the upsides to expansion are dwindling. Unlike the nrl who have not expanded to that level across the country in a formal sense.

You obiviously have no knowlege of NZ. There is more much of a cultural differnce between Southland, Otago and Nelson Bays with Christchurch than southen NSW and Canberra. In regards to Rugby League pathways. Culturally you could not get more of different sporting culture than working class South Auckland (pasifica RL) and the deep South rural Rugby union heartland.

 

[The Educator]

• Canberra is already a mixed code town even without a dedicated team.
• Canberra after a dedicated team will still be a mixed code town and won’t “flip” Canberra to becoming a primarily afl town over night
• Even over a long period of time it becomes 60/40 to afl at best case scenario for the afl. Hardly guaranteed.
• giving Perth open space for an NRL team may in time make Perth a mixed code town, not 50/50 but maybe 30/70.

Hahaha, 60/40 to AFL is best case scenario in Canberra........but NRL may in time make Perth 30/70

NRL doesn’t need to “own” or “dominate” cities to be successful like afl zealots constantly think the afl needs to do in non-afl markets. Even carving out a solid niche in Perth and Adelaide like it’s doing in Melbourne would be big for the nrl considering it “dominates” 2 of the 3 biggest states already.

What are you even trying to say? You're all over the place!

I don't think you have any idea how precarious Melbourne Storm are in Melbourne for a start. After 25 years where they have barely missed the top 4 there are 25 men's teams in total. In. Total.

The problem is, it doesn't matter how many more teams you add, there are still only 4 preliminary finalists and 1 premier each year. If Melbourne already has a mortgage on one of them, how many are left for Perth, Adelaide and Christchurch?

These are all teams in smaller markets, where the vast majority of its players won't be from....there'll be massive retention issues and the NRL does not have the same ability to distribute players equitably

Remember the nrl is beating the afl on tv ratings at present without even operating in Perth and Adelaide. If they can activate interest in those cities and maintain current levels of support elsewhere it could run well ahead of the afl in tv and eventually total revenue.

It is not beating the AFL in tv ratings.....it'll be about $200 million behind a year in TV revenue in 2026.

It has never been further behind in total revenue even before the new TV deal started this year.

None of Perth, Adelaide or Christchurch will materially add to TV rights value

You're deluded

Perth bears will grow in WA way faster than the storm in Melbourne which is saturated with afl, and also with the immigration mix in Perth and rugby historical ties making it more opportune than Melbourne for success for the nrl. Only competing with 2 afl teams not 9.

You're deluded.

The most likely outcome for the Perth Bears is "bad news Bears". The fact there are only 2 AFL teams just means the hyperfocus is on those two teams. Both the only paper and the dominant TV station are owned by channel 7 media that will treat the Bears like the Daily Telly and the Courier-Mail treated AFL clubs

There is no reason the union community are going to just convert the RL because there is team in the NRL that has no profile there anyway.

 

[The Educator]

Just read this on another thread and thought I'd post it here....

The NRL are in a different situation because virtually nobody plays it. So I assume they're going to be focused on just getting players. Their under 17 comp - which includes under 16s as there is no separate under 16 division - has just 6 teams. And they're virtually all from the outskirts of Perth, making it a nightmare to get to games. There's no point focusing on development when your pool of players is literally in the dozens.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Just read this on another thread and thought I'd post it here....

I played RL in the Vic State School sports system a couple of decades ago because we had a PE teacher from Sydney we liked, in year 10/11.

We went off to our one round-robin day (largely an excuse to get a day of school and hang with your mates). It was comical. There were like only five or six schools in the state each year willing to play, and two of them were sports academy type schools in some outer suburbs of Melbourne (who otherwise had a bunch of Rugby Union players) who trounced us 100-0 in shortened length games.

We found it quite funny that if we played good League in literally just one day we'd get a free interstate trip to play the winners of the SA, WA, whatever competitions.

Now according to these links they haven't even run Rugby League in state schools since 2017 (or at least not in the same organised way that they do other sports.

State Results

School Sport Victoria – State Results

It's not even a matter of it being a private school sport because that's all RU in Melbourne.

I get for sports like RL, it's a club based thing, so state school isn't the best representative of development. But nobody is touching the sport in Vic, having any idea that the sport even exists, getting a taste of it so they might want more. Sports like Lacrosse, Baseball, Volleyball have clubs around Melbourne reinforced by teenagers who might have played in a competitive game in state high schools in Vic (unlike RL).

Probably going to be warned about getting off topic for the thread, but it's amazing how the overall talent base and inherent support for a professional team found in the base of its club and community and school base population really teeters for RL - it doesn't exist outside of the heartland in the same way that e.g. GWS could at least base itself of the fact that there was some Aussie Rules community in Western Sydney (Hills district of NW Sydney, etc.).

Maybe Canberra is or isn't viable - remains to be seen whether about 250,000 actual AFL supporters combined with the potentital to convert 250,000 non-AFL supporters is enough of a base so that 11 home games get 20,000+ crowds to make a team viable - but at least we actually know that there is 250,000 active AFL fans with the 10,000 active Adult participants in the sport part of that group. That's non-existent for Christchurch.

 

[RedV3x]

It's refreshing reading different opinions that's not just all pro footy.

I like hearing opinions about Australian Football
but I find talk about NRL totally boorish just like the game itself.

I'm not interested in what the NRL are doing because i believe that Australian Football is a very attractive game
and what makes Australian Football so attractive game and passionate is being found extensively in NSW and Qld.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

A three team position in Perth means afl buzz is constant, it really squeezes the bears out. I think you underestimate the impact a third afl team will have in reinvigorating the Australian rules landscape in WA (which kinda needs it) and eroding any potential for the nrl to catch popularity. Just the additional local derby games it creates would be huge.

Nobody disagrees with you on the idea of a Perth 3 team, you're acting like you're saying something to not be a NRL troll when you're stating something obvious to everyone - you're not going out on a limb here by saying it.

The issues with a Perth 3 team is the difficulty of branding to get people to support them if they already have a team, the uncertainty of Perth football takeup as a 'neutral' supporter (you are not wanting either team to win but you are willing to show up to the game), which we know exists in Melbourne and largely through MCC/AFL membership, the geographic aspect - where to put the training, reserves and women's footy, and lastly, most importantly, politics with the WAFC, which control footy in the state and get very high royalty payments and don't want to shake the tree at risk of it falling down.

 

[Rob]

The most likely outcome for the Perth Bears is "bad news Bears". The fact there are only 2 AFL teams just means the hyperfocus is on those two teams. Both the only paper and the dominant TV station are owned by channel 7 media that will treat the Bears like the Daily Telly and the Courier-Mail treated AFL clubs

There is no reason the union community are going to just convert the RL because there is team in the NRL that has no profile there anyway.

Look, I think it's possible the Bears will find a niche, but it could require a lot of patience and a fair bit of success on the field. They'll probably have some solid publicity early but if the wins don't come then it could go south pretty quickly. Perth people can be fickle and once it's no longer the shiny new fashionable thing it could go the way of the Glory or Force. Which are both sports that have a much bigger fan base in Perth. Then it comes down to whether the NRL are prepared to support them long term.

I'd add that IMO a 3rd Perth AFL team will have no effect on whether they're successful. It's not like 20 years ago when sports compete for column inches.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I'm interested. It's refreshing reading different opinions that's not just all pro footy. You don't have to agree with it but its better than just being an echo chamber.

The fact that you read this as pro footy is ridiuclous.

While I don't watch NRL as much as AFL, I actually am an NRL fan - I go to Storm games, I watch games on TV (yes, I'm an anti-social freak that will flick on an NRL game on a Thursday when there's no AFL, or on a Friday night before the AFL game is on). It's not a passion of mine, but I certainly understand the league, the sport, its rules, its culture, and have a respect for its place in Australian society.

I'm also able to call a spade a spade and call out obvious pro-NRL bias.

 

[The Educator]

Look, I think it's possible the Bears will find a niche, but it could require a lot of patience and a fair bit of success on the field. They'll probably have some solid publicity early but if the wins don't come then it could go south pretty quickly. Perth people can be fickle and once it's no longer the shiny new fashionable thing it could go the way of the Glory or Force. Which are both sports that have a much bigger fan base in Perth. Then it comes down to whether the NRL are prepared to support them long term.

I'd add that IMO a 3rd Perth AFL team will have no effect on whether they're successful. It's not like 20 years ago when sports compete for column inches.

I think as you've thought it out in your post, you'd have to say that it is very unlikely that the Perth Bears will establish a sustainable niche.

Essentially they need to be another Melbourne Storm - probably globally unique in terms of gravity defiance in equalised pro sporting competitions - or they need NRL to buckle down for decades of supporting them - little chance

On a more, let's call it "bullish" projection, what would the prospects be of a 30-70 split in terms of support in WA (i.e. NRL / AFL)?

 

[The Educator]

The fact that you read this as pro footy is ridiuclous.

While I don't watch NRL as much as AFL, I actually am an NRL fan - I go to Storm games, I watch games on TV (yes, I'm an anti-social freak that will flick on an NRL game on a Thursday when there's no AFL, or on a Friday night before the AFL game is on). It's not a passion of mine, but I certainly understand the league, the sport, its rules, its culture, and have a respect for its place in Australian society.

I'm also able to call a spade a spade and call out obvious pro-NRL bias.

I'd note, for your consideration, the person you are responding to established their account yesterday and have used their second post to defend Hampton as well as liking his posts

 

[Rob]

I think as you've thought it out in your post, you'd have to say that it is very unlikely that the Perth Bears will establish a sustainable niche.

I wouldnt necessarily say that, the NRL have significantly more resources than rugby or soccer. So if they're prepared to support them for as long as it takes, then they'll probably carve out at least a reasonable core of support. Perth people might be fickle, but they have plenty of cash and will pay decent prices for tickets if they're interested.

Essentially they need to be another Melbourne Storm - probably globally unique in terms of gravity defiance in equalised pro sporting competitions - or they need NRL to buckle down for decades of supporting them - little chance

On a more, let's call it "bullish" projection, what would the prospects be of a 30-70 split in terms of support in WA (i.e. NRL / AFL)?

Haha if they can get roughly half the support of AFL they'll be selling out every game before the season starts. But they shouldn't be worried about the AFL, it would just take their eye off what they should be trying to achieve.

 

[RedV3x]

Perth bears will grow in WA way faster than the storm in Melbourne which is saturated with afl

What do you think Perth is saturated with - AFL, in fact because we have only the two teams the coverage is split down the middle, not fragmented like in Melbourne.

So Perth isn't purely AFL. Perth has netball, basketball and baseball.
You wouldn't know it but we also have the Glory and the Force which were quite respectful once.
The Perth Bears are going to be a millstone around the NRL's neck pretty soon.
And , no, Peth3 wouldn't make any difference because two AFL teams ensure there is AFL every week in Perth
and derbies are like S.O.O. to us.
The NRL really messed up by misreading the Perth environment.

 

[The_Reaper]

Not going to lie I have limited interest in a cast off eastern states reject team