20th AFL Team

[Canberra Pear]

I missed the bagder-based name memo for Canberra accounts.

I feel like I'm missing something. Should we be named the Canberra Badgers?

Not from what I've seen. People from Wagga (or Griffith or anywhere north of Albury) send their kids to Unis in Canberra, get their furniture from Ikea in Canberra, and get medivaced to Canberra Hospital. If they need to go to a bigger city it's Canberra. Plus there have been Riverina teams in the ACTAFL/AFL Canberra on and off for decades.

If they were competing with a NSW side maybe not, but compared a Sydney side (or a Melbourne team) I think people from the Riverina would back a Canberra team.

I think, just like the rest of the Canberra bid, the Riverina isn’t as black and white situation.

It's a distinct region a bit removed, so we can't just tack on their 250k people to our market like they're going to be able to attend 11 games.

But we’ll be the closest AFL team for the majority of these people. Even if we don’t play regular season men’s games, I expect we’d still have a presence (preseason, AFLW matches etc). We’ll likely have a few players from the region, so their friends and family will come, too.

It’s not a big block of population we can just tack on, but it’s also not nothing. I can see the Riverina adding 500-1000 to the average crowds.

 

[Professor Knowall]

I've finally had enough time to come back here and catch up on the latest talk - and had to wade through a half dozen pages of often bizarre, way off topic tripe, culminating in a pretend Pies fan who only displayed his gross ignorance of Canberra.

What really amused/bemused me was all the posts about 'effin Christchurch - WTF ... because I'm actually posting this from Christchurch, where I've been for the past week! Now, of all the possible locations for an AFL 20th (or 21st or 22nd) team, Christchurch ain't among them - and what plans the A-League, BBL, NBL, NRL, Netball or whatever may or may not have in Christchurch or Perth or wherever are also utterly irrelevant for this thread.

But, though also off-topic, some here may be interested about their new stadium, of which I had the privilege of having a little preview tour. The structural work is now complete and it's now being fitted out. It's very impressive and what was stressed to me was that it was only the roof that really makes it viable. This was the key lesson learned from Dunedin, which now bills itself as New Zealand's event capitol, based on the overwhelming success of its roofed stadium as an entertainment venue (Dunedin has less than half Hobart's population). Christchurch want in on all those events, and there was talk of Dunedin, Christchurch and Hobart forming a partnership attracting top acts to their roofed stadiums.

Also, there was much talk, what with the upcoming rugby union WC, about Christchurch pitching itself to rugby lovers worldwide as the "World Rugby Capitol" or some such similar term - nothing was decided, so just talk at this stage. But, over a drink or two, I spoke with an Englishman and a Scot who both recently came to Christchurch (the Scot as a permanent migrant) to further their rugby coaching careers. They and others explained that CanterburyChristchurch has the reputation of having the world's best rugby-soaked culture and coaching knowledge, and thus an opportunity for Christchurch to cash in as a "mecca" destination for rugby tourism. But enough of all this off-topic stuff - hopefully some here may find it of some net rest, unlike much of the other off-topic rubbish about Christchurch and Perth.

Discussion on the looming 20th team boils down to 3 realistic options -
Canberra - the favourite option, though the stadium size and facilities may be an issue.
Qld 3 - Shooting up to 2nd favourite, given the surging participation numbers and the really high quality of the leading recruits of the last few years. I can foresee the first Australian Football match in 2033 at the new Brisbane stadium to be a state of origin contest between Qld and Vic - and given all the recent top end talent from Qld, I'm. not sure who would be favourite!
WA 3 - OK, it'll reduce the travel demands of the Eagles & Freo by providing a couple more derbies, but otherwise doesn't provide any advantages compared to the other two options.

 

[hampton]

No, the Swans and the Lions were relocated functioning VFL sides NOT a failed NSWRL side.

Incorrect, both were bankrupt and Fitzroy were failing on the field as well and would not be existing today had it be if they werent moved to Sydney and Brisbane and given extra funding by the VFL in the bid to create a national comp.

edit - it even shares this on Sydney Swans website if you need to better acquaint yourself with AFL history:

It was revealed that South Melbourne had suffered an operating loss of at least $150,000 for the five previous years...

Significantly, it was noted that the VFL had frozen South Melbourne’s share of the ground improvement fund, which stood at $500,000 in 1981. This meant the club was unable to improve the facilities at Lake Oval in South Melbourne, which had been the club’s home since 1874.

Clearly, the message from the South Melbourne administration was that there was no alternative. If the club continued to operate as it had done it would not survive. But if it adopted the Sydney proposal it would not lose its identity, either through an amalgamation or a ground-sharing arrangement, which could even lead to amalgamation.

No, The Bears are a resurrection of a failed NSWRL side.

No they're not actually it's a brand new club with the branding of the Bears. The North Sydney Bears NSWRL club still exists and is operating in NSW, not being moved or resurrected, existing as it's own entity.

Perth Bears
North Sydney Bears

But don't let the truth stop your agenda.

 

[RedV3x]

Incorrect,

No, the Swans and the Lions were relocated functioning VFL sides NOT a failed NSWRL side.

But don't let the truth stop your agenda.

Look in the mirror.

The Bears are a resurrection of a failed NSWRL side.

 

[Canberra Pear]

I've finally had enough time to come back here and catch up on the latest talk - and had to wade through a half dozen pages of often bizarre, way off topic tripe, culminating in a pretend Pies fan who only displayed his gross ignorance of Canberra.

What really amused/bemused me was all the posts about 'effin Christchurch - WTF ... because I'm actually posting this from Christchurch, where I've been for the past week! Now, of all the possible locations for an AFL 20th (or 21st or 22nd) team, Christchurch ain't among them - and what plans the A-League, BBL, NBL, NRL, Netball or whatever may or may not have in Christchurch or Perth or wherever are also utterly irrelevant for this thread.

I think you may have misread (or I may have), but the references to Christchurch were about the NRL’s future options. A bit of a derailment, but in the discussion on who had more options to expand to.

Discussion on the looming 20th team boils down to 3 realistic options -
Canberra - the favourite option, though the stadium size and facilities may be an issue.

In its current form, Manuka’s definitely not big enough. But the ACT Government is already looking to upgrade it to 20k for cricket. So that should strengthen our bid as that progresses.

Qld 3 - Shooting up to 2nd favourite, given the surging participation numbers and the really high quality of the leading recruits of the last few years. I can foresee the first Australian Football match in 2033 at the new Brisbane stadium to be a state of origin contest between Qld and Vic - and given all the recent top end talent from Qld, I'm. not sure who would be favourite!

I just can’t agree with this. SEQ is booming. I’m all aboard a future team, but the timing just doesn’t fit for the 20th team. A new team occurring alongside the opening of the much bigger stadium would flood the market with seats and any demand would just go to the Lions rather than the new team. If the new stadium wasn’t happening, it’d be a better option, but not with Vic Park opening around the same time.

WA 3 - OK, it'll reduce the travel demands of the Eagles & Freo by providing a couple more derbies, but otherwise doesn't provide any advantages compared to the other two options.

Even then, a new team doesn’t reduce travel any more than North playing games there already does. A much cheaper option to reduce travel.

 

[Roylion]

Incorrect, both were bankrupt

Not correct. Fitzroy was not bankrupt.

and Fitzroy were failing on the field

Fitzroy were poor on the field from 1994 onwards.

as well and would not be existing today had it be if they werent moved ..... to Brisbane and given extra funding by the VFL in the bid to create a national comp.

Also not correct.

 

[hampton]

Not correct. Fitzroy was not bankrupt.


Fitzroy were poor on the field from 1994 onwards.


Also not correct.

That's a very optimistic take on the Fitzroy.

On the field their last modest success was in the early 80s, and by mid 90s it got real grim. Off the field they had sustained financial issues and stadium issues, with multiple relocations and mergers being proposed over years prior to their move up north. By 1996 they entered into administration. Without some major rescue package from the VFL they would not be around as a top flight AFL club.

Moving north to greener pastures saved their identity and allowed continuation just like South Melbourne, otherwise being both clubs would be gone.

If these clubs werent in big trouble they would not have moved.

If anything, North Sydney Bears were in a better state on and off the field than both Fitzoy and SM. Following Super League and the formation of the NRL, they decided some teams needed to be culled and Norths didnt make the cut (stupidly). They are not around primarily because of the league rationalisation.

 

[Roylion]

That's a very optimistic take on the Fitzroy.

What actually happened is detailed here and here.

On the field their last modest success was in the early 80s, and by mid 90s it got real grim. Off the field they had sustained financial issues and stadium issues, with multiple relocations and mergers being proposed over years prior to their move up north.

I'm well aware of what happened. Many Victorian clubs had multiple relocations and mergers being proposed over the years.

By 1996 they entered into administration.

Do you know why? It wasn't because they were bankrupt. What actually happened is detailed here.

Without some major rescue package from the VFL they would not be around as a top flight AFL club.

Fitzroy aren't in the AFL. They currently play in the VAFA. 2026 will be their 143rd year of existence as a football club.

Moving north to greener pastures

They didn't move north.

saved their identity and allowed continuation just like South Melbourne,

I'm not sure you understand the situation as it really occurred.

otherwise being both clubs would be gone.

See above.

If these clubs werent in big trouble they would not have moved.

Fitzroy didn't move. Many Victorian clubs have been in bigger 'trouble' than Fitzroy.

They are not around primarily because of the league rationalisation.

Same with Fitzroy.

Invite Fitzroy back into the AFL as the 20th team. They could be the Maroons or Reds, like Carlton are the Blues.

 

[RedV3x]

I'm not sure you understand the situation as it really occurred.

He doesn't, because from what he's said, he wasn't around at the time.
He spends his entire life trying to formulate something negative about Australian Football.
Heck, he doesn't even believe that Australian Football is Australia's national game.

 

[Professor Knowall]

Haha - it's very unwise (though funny) for Hampton (or anyone else for that matter) to try and take on Roylion over the circumstances that led to Fitzroy exiting the AFL and entering the VAFA. He's well recognised as the Bigfooty resident expert on all things Fitzroy.

 

[BigChippa52]

What actually happened is detailed here and here.


I'm well aware of what happened. Many Victorian clubs had multiple relocations and mergers being proposed over the years.


Do you know why? It wasn't because they were bankrupt. What actually happened is detailed here.


Fitzroy aren't in the AFL. They currently play in the VAFA. 2026 will be their 143rd year of existence as a football club.

They didn't move north.

I'm not sure you understand the situation as it really occurred.

See above.


Fitzroy didn't move. Many Victorian clubs have been in bigger 'trouble' than Fitzroy.


Same with Fitzroy.

Invite Fitzroy back into the AFL as the 20th team. They could be the Maroons or Reds, like Carlton are the Blues.

thanks, that was a good read long live fitzroy, should still be in the afl would love them back, but unfortunately don't see it happening

 

[hampton]

Still very optimistic. A lot of what you say is semantics. Ultimately they could only continue in a lower division not the top tier. They were at the bottom of clubs the VFL/AFL wanted to retain in a new national competition because of various factors including lack of adequate facilities, lack of performance and lack of funding required to be sustainable in the top flight.

Basically they were a basketcase, trying to argue otherwise is just crazy.

Fitzroy's true continuation is already in the AFL via the Brisbane Lions. The AFL wouldnt invite Fitzroy back not as the 20th or 200th license.

 

[Roylion]

Still very optimistic. A lot of what you say is semantics.

No it's not. And I've explained here and here why it is not.

Ultimately they could only continue in a lower division not the top tier.

They have continued in a lower division.

This was their 140 year old commemorative jumper in 2023.

They were at the bottom of clubs the VFL/AFL wanted to retain in a new national competition because of various factors including lack of adequate facilities, lack of performance and lack of funding required to be sustainable in the top flight.

Fitzroy made a profit each year from 1993-1995. They won 10 games (from 20 played) in 1993. They certainly weren't bankrupt. Many AFL clubs have been in far more debt than Fitzroy ever were.

Fitzroy's true continuation is already in the AFL via the Brisbane Lions.

Brisbane certainly commemorate Fitzroy's AFL history in the AFL. But the club actually competes in the VAFA. As I've clearly explained here and here.

The AFL wouldnt invite Fitzroy back not as the 20th or 200th license.

Fitzroy will never be back in the AFL. But theoretically they could be invited to re-enter the AFL as the 20th team, given they continue to exist independently of the Brisbane Lions. Fitzroy is, after all, the only football club to have competed in the VFA, the VFL, AFL and the VAFA.

Go the Maroons! Or maybe the Reds! Fitzroy for the 20th team!

 

[hampton]

No it's not. And I've explained here and here why it is not.


They have continued in a lower division.

This was their 140 year old commemorative jumper in 2023.




Fitzroy made a profit each year from 1993-1995. They won 10 games (from 20 played) in 1993. They certainly weren't bankrupt. Many AFL clubs have been in far more debt than Fitzroy ever were.


Brisbane certainly commemorate Fitzroy's AFL history in the AFL. But the club actually competes in the VAFA. As I've clearly explained here and here.


Fitzroy will never be back in the AFL. But theoretically they could be invited to re-enter the AFL as the 20th team, given they continue to exist independently of the Brisbane Lions. Fitzroy is, after all, the only football club to have competed in the VFA, the VFL, AFL and the VAFA.

Go the Maroons! Or maybe the Reds!

hey RedV3x see here Roylion is saying Fitzroy are a separate entity to Brisbane Lions and operating at the lower division level - isn't that the same as the Perth Bears vs North Sydney Bears that you keep harping on about is a relocation of a failed club when both clubs are exisiting separately? Or do you like to just pick and choose what suits your distorted hot takes.

It's not very different what happened with Fitzroy with the North Sydney Beears. Both at the lower end of the priority list of their respective competitions viability, both continuing as separate entitites to their big league brother that's incorporated their branding and history.

In saying that, Roylion stil think you're overestimating the viability of Fitzroy and using rose coloured glasses, you're trying to paint a picture that things were going pretty good for the club. They weren't bankrupt technically but they did enter into administration, are you going to deny that?

 

[Coolangatta]

Fitzroy will never be back in the AFL. But theoretically they could be invited to re-enter the AFL as the 20th team, given they continue to exist independently of the Brisbane Lions. Fitzroy is, after all, the only football club to have competed in the VFA, the VFL, AFL and the VAFA.

Go the Maroons! Or maybe the Reds! Fitzroy for the 20th team!

Yeah, if they relocate to Canberra.

Canberra Reds/Roys/Maroons/Gorillas.

Or Canberra Bears for a laugh.

Or come back in Perth.

Perth Bears?

 

[hampton]

Yeah, if they relocate to Canberra.

Canberra Reds/Roys/Maroons/Gorillas.

Or Canberra Bears for a laugh.

Or come back in Perth.

Perth Bears?

Hmm I'd love to see a Perth Bears club operating in Perth that has both an AFL and NRL club attached to it.

It would actually be a unique way to gather an immediate larger membership base for both the league and afl side of things, and cross-polinate fans across both codes.

Similiar to Newcastle Knights bid for a netball team that would be under the same brand/club as the NRL team: https://www.newcastleherald.com.au/...s-67m-netball-hub-to-boost-super-netball-bid/

 

[Coolangatta]

Canberra Bears has a ring to it, in honour of Canberra Pear and his great… care… for the bear… of AFL footy in the ACT.

 

[Roylion]

In saying that, Roylion stil think you're overestimating the viability of Fitzroy and using rose coloured glasses,

Fitzroy made an annual profit from 1993-1995.

They'd finally got a social club that was making money through the Fitzroy Club Hotel (purchased in March 1992) and were making plans to return to the Brunswick Street Oval (just up the road from the Fitzroy Club Hotel) as a training and administration base. The club had actually gained approval from the Council in 1992 to do just that, but just couldn't find the spare $250,000 to renovate the old heritage grandstand and build a modern gymnasium over the existing community rooms.

Unfortunately every attempt to generate that revenue by Fitzroy was stymied by the AFL who wanted to keep financial pressure on Fitzroy, so that Port Adelaide's AFL entry in 1997 would still only keep the league at 16 teams.

It became clear the AFL was actively working against Fitzroy when they threatened to sue the club for $250,000 that had been paid to Fitzroy by CUB as part of a club sponsorship, which included selling CUB's product in the Fitzroy Club Hotel. CUB was the AFL's sponsor and the AFL thought they should have received the money instead of Fitzroy. This was despite the fact that CUB had been a minor sponsor of Fitzroy for over ten years previously. The AFL even threatened to reduce the dividend to other clubs by the amount Fitzroy received.

Dyson Hore-Lacy said if they could have found another million dollars ($500,000 to be used to improve facilities in a move back to the Brunswick St Oval [which had been approved by the local council] as their training and administrative base and $500,000 to pay players to improve their playing list), Fitzroy would not have sought a merger with North Melbourne.

The total debt of Fitzroy in 1996 was $2.7 million (of which $1.25 million was owed to one secured creditor.) They were meeting their repayments to that secured creditor. (wasn't due to be repaid in full until 2001)

Current Brisbane Lions CEO Greg Swann was one of the people working for Fitzroy's administrator Michael Brennan in 1996 on discharging Fitzroy's $2.7 million debt and publicly stated in August 2014 that Fitzroy could have 'easily been retained' in the AFL competition had there been the will by the AFL to do so.

The AFL had $12 million to spare in 1996 to give to clubs that merged, yet couldn't find $1 million to help Fitzroy.

Had they done so then Fitzroy would have very likely survived the era of AFL rationalisation where it was official AFL policy to remove a small Melbourne club to make room for Port Adelaide and keep the competition at 16 teams. Other AFL clubs have been assisted by the AFL to the tune of millions of dollars.

The 1998 TV rights deal saw the TV rights rise from $17 million to $40 million. In 2001 Fox, Ch9 and Ch10 paid $500 million for rights for 5 years from 2002-2006, Radio nets the AFL 2 million. By 2006 this had risen to $750 million from 2007-2011. Radio netted $8 million. By 2011 this had risen to $1.25 billion to 2017 with radio fetching $23.2 million.

Between 2002-2009 the following clubs received extra funds from the then named Competitive Balance Fund
Western Bulldogs - $8.4 million
North Melbourne - $5.8 million
Melbourne - $5.25 million
Carlton - $2.1 million

you're trying to paint a picture that things were rosy for the club. They weren't bankrupt technically but they did enter into administration, are you going to deny that?

I'll ask again. Do you know why? It wasn't because they were bankrupt. What actually happened and why is detailed here.

 

[hampton]

Fitzroy made an annual profit from 1993-1995.

They'd finally got a social club that was making money through the Fitzroy Club Hotel (purchased in March 1992) and were making plans to return to the Brunswick Street Oval (just up the road from the Fitzroy Club Hotel) as a training and administration base. The club had actually gained approval from the Council in 1992 to do just that, but just couldn't find the spare $250,000 to renovate the old heritage grandstand and build a modern gymnasium over the existing community rooms.

Unfortunately every attempt to generate that revenue by Fitzroy was stymied by the AFL who wanted to keep financial pressure on Fitzroy, so that Port Adelaide's AFL entry in 1997 would still only keep the league at 16 teams.

It became clear the AFL was actively working against Fitzroy when they threatened to sue the club for $250,000 that had been paid to Fitzroy by CUB as part of a club sponsorship, which included selling CUB's product in the Fitzroy Club Hotel. CUB was the AFL's sponsor and the AFL thought they should have received the money instead of Fitzroy. This was despite the fact that CUB had been a minor sponsor of Fitzroy for over ten years previously. The AFL even threatened to reduce the dividend to other clubs by the amount Fitzroy received.

Dyson Hore-Lacy said if they could have found another million dollars ($500,000 to be used to improve facilities in a move back to the Brunswick St Oval [which had been approved by the local council] as their training and administrative base and $500,000 to pay players to improve their playing list), Fitzroy would not have sought a merger with North Melbourne.

The total debt of Fitzroy in 1996 was $2.7 million (of which $1.25 million was owed to one secured creditor.) They were meeting their repayments to that secured creditor. (wasn't due to be repaid in full until 2001)

Current Brisbane Lions CEO Greg Swann was one of the people working for Fitzroy's administrator Michael Brennan in 1996 on discharging Fitzroy's $2.7 million debt and publicly stated in August 2014 that Fitzroy could have 'easily been retained' in the AFL competition had there been the will by the AFL to do so.

The AFL had $12 million to spare in 1996 to give to clubs that merged, yet couldn't find $1 million to help Fitzroy.

Had they done so then Fitzroy would have very likely survived the era of AFL rationalisation where it was official AFL policy to remove a small Melbourne club to make room for Port Adelaide and keep the competition at 16 teams. Other AFL clubs have been assisted by the AFL to the tune of millions of dollars.

The 1998 TV rights deal saw the TV rights rise from $17 million to $40 million. In 2001 Fox, Ch9 and Ch10 paid $500 million for rights for 5 years from 2002-2006, Radio nets the AFL 2 million. By 2006 this had risen to $750 million from 2007-2011. Radio netted $8 million. By 2011 this had risen to $1.25 billion to 2017 with radio fetching $23.2 million.

Between 2002-2009 the following clubs received extra funds from the then named Competitive Balance Fund
Western Bulldogs - $8.4 million
North Melbourne - $5.8 million
Melbourne - $5.25 million
Carlton - $2.1 million



I'll ask again. Do you know why? It wasn't because they were bankrupt. What actually happened and why is detailed here.

That's the thing history favours the winners. Just like old mate above harping on about north sydney bears as a 'reject' or 'failed club', had they received a small help from the NRL they would be here, in the same way as Fitzroy. But the reality for North Sydney, much like for Fitzroy, is that the parent competition had to make a decision on which clubs to prioritise funding and support to have future growth. You can't have a national competition with 15 teams from Victoria.

Whether you or I or anyone likes it, Fitzroy were at the bottom of the priority ladder because as you say they were seen as a Melbourne small suburb club, unfortunately different small suburb Melbourne clubs were prioritised to keep, why? Because they offered more financial returns, more fans, better faciltiies, etc etc

 

[BigChippa52]

Canberra Gorillas wearing maroon

 

[BigChippa52]

North got shafted much like Souths did initially, and many other ARL and Super League teams at the time, as they weren't taking them all in a lot of the could have continued, much like Fitzroy and the Bears could have done, but the Roys got shafted too, sadly

 

[hampton]

The AFL in the mid 90s were looking at the then ARL with fear - they had just as much if not more of a national spread of clubs including into NZ, while the AFL had a bigger concentration of clubs in Victoria. The ARL were growing, had more clubs, they had a big media campaign with Tina Turner, and they were in a position to really push well past the AFL in terms of national popularity. The swans were averaging 8-9k, their expansion efforts didnt start very strong.

Fortunately for the AFL and unfortunately for league, the money hungry Murdoch got his mits on rugby league and split it apart, causing a need for a mass consolidation in the late 90s with clubs like Norths, Souths, Western Reds, Adelaide Rams and many others were a victim of. The ARL couldn't see to fruition their expansion plans, while the AFL did and prospered.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Yeah, if they relocate to Canberra.

Canberra Reds/Roys/Maroons/Gorillas.

Or Canberra Bears for a laugh.

Or come back in Perth.

Perth Bears?

Manuka Oval does come off Fitzroy Street.

Just saying.

 

[Roylion]

But the reality for North Sydney, much like for Fitzroy, is that the parent competition had to make a decision on which clubs to prioritise funding and support to have future growth. You can't have a national competition with 15 teams from Victoria.

You can have a national competition with 17 teams and 11 from Victoria.

But at least we've now established that Fitzroy still exists in its own right in Melbourne, independent of the Brisbane Lions and is over 140 years old.

Whether you or I or anyone likes it, Fitzroy were at the bottom of the priority ladder because as you say they were seen as a Melbourne small suburb club,

And yet haven't been in as much debt as many other clubs. Indeed from 1993-1995 the club was making a profit.

Because they offered more financial returns, more fans, better faciltiies, etc etc

Had Fitzroy received the same amount of extra money, say as Melbourne did, between 2002 and 2009 they would have:

1. paid off their only secured creditor - Nauru - to whom they owed $1.25 million (due in 2001). Fitzroy was already profitable between 1993-1995.
2. redeveloped Brunswick Street Oval as a permanent training base, just up the road from their administrative base. (As I said above, this step already had the approval of the Fitzroy Council and needed $250,000 to bring it to fruition).
3. paid close to 100% of the cap - thereby being able to retain their drafted and traded players and remain more competitive on the field, resulting in increased fans, attendances and membership
4. developed their former recruiting zone out at Balwyn and Doncaster way, thereby further developing a significant supporter base / identity and further increasing their membership (particularly if they were competitive).
5. Moved from the Western Oval to Docklands Stadium as their home ground in 2000. Clubs received compensation payments from the AFL to balance the weak deals when the attendance was below 20,000. After 2016, the AFL clubs were millions of dollars better off, as they and the AFL arranged more favourable tenancy agreements than had existed between 2000-2015.

And then by 2028, we'd have 20 teams with just over half of them in Victoria, in a healthy vibrant competition. Indeed Tasmania might have happened sooner, given the desire for an even number of teams to maximise broadcast revenue.

 

[RedV3x]

Still very optimistic. A lot of what you say is semantics. Ultimately they could only continue in a lower division not the top tier.

Are you remembering what you said about The North Sydney Bears ?