Expansion A third team in Queensland? AFL acknowledges QLD3 as a 20th licence option

[Canberra Pear]

also GWS cant sell many seats in West Sydney at the moment)

This isn't a reason to delay Canberra.

If anything, it's a reason to bring us in sooner. The Giants need to be playing full time in Western Sydney as soon as they can.

 

[Coolangatta]

The league would have a 30 year plan in mind. I reckon they are gonna do 22 teams max.

Canberra is a lock.

Then there's 2 more spots available to reach 22:
Options include:

• 2nd Brisbane team or Sunshine Coast team
• "northern" team playing games in Darwin/Cairns
• stand-alone NT team
• Newcastle area
• 3rd WA team
  -3rd SA team
  
  In my opinion, well have:
  1) 3rd QLD (to coincide with new Brisbane stadium)
  2) Canberra (could be delayed because rugby team in Canberra wants a stadium which might delay afl stadium, also GWS cant sell many seats in West Sydney at the moment)
  3) Northern - Cairns/Darwin
  
  
  That way there are 3 teams in NSW/ACT, 3.5 teams in QLD. NT gets genuine representation whilst having some help by being split across cities to give it a larger market.

22 can keep it single tier, too, without losing derby matches if they keep 23 games per year.

But honestly, this makes perfect sense IMO in terms of:

• Having two teams in each of the major cities
• Having representation from all states + NT and ACT

Would be nice, there's a symmetry to that. I just hope ACT doesn't get left out as there's probably going to be an NT/NQ side eventually as there's so much public support for NT and the AFL refuses to rule it out as preposterous.

Still, the expansionist in me says Auckland and Newcastle would be worth a punt in the future, but I understand people are not too keen on 20 teams let alone 24 or even more.

 

[GC2015]

I'm asking what's the basis of your conclusion. Other than gut-feel.

Mainly that the AFL continues to schedule the smaller Victorian teams to play games interstate. North are playing two home games in WA this year and have previously played home games in Tassie, Gold Coast, Canberra etc. I understand there's a financial incentive for the Roos to do that, but the AFL also has to approve it. The AFL have shown zero resistance to North playing home games outside of Victoria and I get the feeling they are encouraging them to do so behind closed doors. They're also committed to expanding the league even further with the addition of more non-Vic teams like Tasmania in a few years from now.

That's the basis for my opinion. Again, just an opinion. I could be wrong.

Two years before, or two years after, it doesn't matter. It's still too close together.

For a stadium increase that big, you'd need at least 15-20 years before expansion.

Will the Gabba still be in use after 2032? I thought its useful lifespan was past by then. Won't be popular to keep it upgraded when there's a perfectly good stadium 4km away.

There's currently a rumour that the Gabba site will be used for the new Brisbane Arena project. We won't know until later this month when they release the new Olympic plans. Having said that, I'm fairly sure I read that the Gabba can undergo minor upgrades before the Olympics in order to keep it going for another 10 years (2040). So that's potentially an option if the rumoured Brisbane Arena plans on the Gabba site don't go ahead. I'm sure Queensland Cricket will still want a smaller venue for some of their lower drawing fixtures over the summer months and that's most likely the Gabba.

I think the more success the Lions have over the next few years, the more we're going to see the meaningful numbers increase in terms of members, attendances, junior participation etc and that's really going to ignite this conversation about a potential third QLD team even more. The Lions are on the verge of completing a generational change within their market as the kids coming through now won't remember a time when the Lions weren't highly competitve. Should they make the finals this year, then 2025 would be their 7th year in a row that they've qualified for September and the average 15 year old in Brisbane isn't really going to remember those dark days pre-2019. Their vivid memories will be of the recent good times.

The Lions are a pro sports team that the younger Brisbane public can be proud of and get behind because they've been consistently good for close to a decade, meanwhile the Broncos haven't been very good for close to a decade now, with 2023 being the one good year in which they made the GF. The performances of both teams over the last decade have really opened the door for the AFL to experience significant growth in Brisbane and I can't help but think part of the reason the Dolphins were granted entry into the NRL was because they were worried about what the Lions were doing.

Anyway, time will tell in terms of the AFL's expansion plans. I'm sure Andrew Dillon will once again be asked about a third team in Queensland at some point in the future and we'll see if his answer is any more concrete next time.

 

[Roylion]

Mainly that the AFL continues to schedule the smaller Victorian teams to play games interstate.

At the various clubs' requests in light of financial offers made to those clubs. In North's case the WA games are the result of a financial offer made by Tourism WA and the WA government. North began planning for their post-Tasmania future once Tasmania was granted an AFL licence. Now they will play two more games per season in Victoria. The WA games also assist the Eagles and Dockers’ fixture problems.

North are playing two home games in WA this year and have previously played home games in Tassie, Gold Coast, Canberra etc. I understand there's a financial incentive for the Roos to do that, but the AFL also has to approve it.

The AFL do so, because it helps with financial equalisation.

The AFL have shown zero resistance to North playing home games outside of Victoria and I get the feeling they are encouraging them to do so behind closed doors.

But not with an eye to a full relocation by said club. That's not going to happen.

They're also committed to expanding the league even further with the addition of more non-Vic teams like Tasmania in a few years from now.

There will be 20 clubs in the AFL by the late 2030s.

 

[Section 5]

There's currently a rumour that the Gabba site will be used for the new Brisbane Arena project. We won't know until later this month when they release the new Olympic plans.

Nice post but just on the above point.

The rumor is the old GoPrint site opposite The Gabba.
The old GoPrint site is above the Cross River Rail new underground Wooloongabba Rail Station for those that don't know the area
Unfortunately, we have to wait till the 25th of March to find out the government's decision as you mentioned.
If the rumor turns out to be true (i hope it is) i don't see the Gabba staying a venue for AFL and cricket.
It will stay for a period of time until the new stadium is converted back to AFL & cricket.

At a guess the Gabba site will be turned into housing/mixed hospitality/greenspace etc.
Most likely sold off to help pay for the new stadium. Thats how i would put it to the public showing the new stadium net end cost won't be as high as suggested by the media.

On the thread topic i thing the two Queensland teams will just remain the same Lions and Suns
I think that is a sustainable model especially in regard to getting sponsorship in a NRL dominated state.

If the Suns become successful in regard to crowd numbers and membership they may play at the new stadium against teams like Lions, Pies, Essendon, Richmond and finals. But they have a way to go to get to that benchmark.
Another 7 years to get those attendance & membership numbers up.

 

[pazza]

Southport or Cairns. Both have legitimate cases.

 

[NorthernBastard]

I look forward to the first Coast Clash!

Sunshine Coast Golds Vs. Gold Coast Suns

 

[Canberra Pear]

Southport or Cairns. Both have legitimate cases.

Is this sarcasm?

Cairns is too small and isolated, and the Gold Coast clearly isn't going to get a second side.

 

[Elixuh]

Southport or Cairns. Both have legitimate cases.

There are reasons why we don't currently have the Gold Coast Sharks, leveraging Southport.

 

[Dangerousfield]

Agreed. The AFL won't want an uneven amount of teams for too long and if it hasn't already happened, then it will definitely be on the agenda by the time we reach 2035. In reality, Queensland is becoming too enticing for the AFL to ignore and that looks like it's only going to intensify with both the Lions and Suns having young + talented lists. Plus, they wouldn't want the NRL to get too much of a hold on the northern Brisbane / Sunshine Coast market now that the Dolphins have been around for a few years already.



The Sunshine Coast currently has a population of around 400k people and is growing really fast (more than double the rate of Canberra). Canberra has a population of around 450k. The Sunny Coast is very likely to overtake Canberra in terms of population in the next 10-20 years. Then you've got the 1 million+ people who live in northern Brisbane and an extra 450k in between Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast in an area called Moreton Bay. So you're essentially dealing with a market of around 2 million people for a QLD3 team.

2 million people in northern corridor Brisbane vs 450k people in Canberra. It's a pretty easy decision from my perspective.

and how good is the weather through winter on the Sunshine Coast, no brainer

 

[GC2015]

Nice post but just on the above point.

The rumor is the old GoPrint site opposite The Gabba.
The old GoPrint site is above the Cross River Rail new underground Wooloongabba Rail Station for those that don't know the area
Unfortunately, we have to wait till the 25th of March to find out the government's decision as you mentioned.
If the rumor turns out to be true (i hope it is) i don't see the Gabba staying a venue for AFL and cricket.
It will stay for a period of time until the new stadium is converted back to AFL & cricket.

At a guess the Gabba site will be turned into housing/mixed hospitality/greenspace etc.
Most likely sold off to help pay for the new stadium. Thats how i would put it to the public showing the new stadium net end cost won't be as high as suggested by the media.

On the thread topic i thing the two Queensland teams will just remain the same Lions and Suns
I think that is a sustainable model especially in regard to getting sponsorship in a NRL dominated state.

If the Suns become successful in regard to crowd numbers and membership they may play at the new stadium against teams like Lions, Pies, Essendon, Richmond and finals. But they have a way to go to get to that benchmark.
Another 7 years to get those attendance & membership numbers up.

Well, there you go. Nine News reported tonight that the final report has recommended the new Brisbane Arena be built at the old GoPrint site (see below), just like you suggested. In theory, this means the Gabba can remain if that's what they want. It's obviously going to stay until at least 2032/33 when the new Olympic stadium becomes fully available for the Lions to use on a full-time basis. It'll be really interesting to see what happens to the Gabba if the AFL ramps up its interest in a second Brisbane AFL team between now and then.



Right now, there would be no reason to keep the Gabba alive beyond 2032 and selling off the land to a developer would make a lot of sense in the current landscape. However, if a second AFL team is established in Brisbane before or around 2033, then there may well be good reason to keep the Gabba alive for another decade or so while the new team builds its fanbase up to a level to justify shared tenancy with the Lions at the Olympic stadium.

Just to be clear, I don't believe that scenario is going to play out. In all likelihood the Gabba gets demolished shortly after the Olympics and is sold off to a developer. I'm just pointing out that retaining the Gabba for a bit longer is a possibility if there is genuine concern about a new Brisbane team playing home games in a half empty Olympic stadium.

and how good is the weather through winter on the Sunshine Coast, no brainer

Sunshine Coast mean daily maximum / minimum

March - 27.9 / 20.2
April - 26.0 / 20.2
May - 23.6 / 13.7
June - 21.4 / 11.4
July - 21.2 / 9.6
August - 22.2 / 9.9
September - 24.4 / 12.9

Very good weather over the AFL season months. It basically never falls below 20 degrees during the day. Would be a very appealing place to live for a lot of young footballers. Plenty of positives in that area of Queensland and, from a team competitiveness standpoint, a third Queensland team in that area would travel would less from the beginning because playing away games against Lions and Suns eliminates four plane trips straight off the bat. 13 games in South East Queensland and 10 interstate sound like a pretty good deal for a non-Victorian side. The same can be said about a northern Brisbane expansion team that plays most of their home games in Brisbane and a game or two on the Sunny Coast.

 

[FreoMonocle]

I, too, like the idea of the major cities having a two team rivalry.

I think 2 team rivalries suck.

It promotes crap like demolition derbies (plus endless baiting around the office water cooler which is tiresome). The Problem is, there is a game the following week, battered and bruised and probably missing a player or two from injuries or reports aint good.

Sure, if all you want from AFL is entertainment, then the Hanson Brothers antics from the Slapshot movie should be encouraged - and we can have more young players having their jaw destroyed like Brayshaws only a few years ago. But if the sport itself matters as much as the entertainment (and it matters to me), then bring on a 3rd team ASAP.

The AFL probably should have started with 2-3 teams from WA and SA, starting with 1 team basically entrenched them as the state team.

 

[Coolangatta]

I think 2 team rivalries suck.

It promotes crap like demolition derbies (plus endless baiting around the office water cooler which is tiresome). The Problem is, there is a game the following week, battered and bruised and probably missing a player or two from injuries or reports aint good.

Sure, if all you want from AFL is entertainment, then the Hanson Brothers antics from the Slapshot movie should be encouraged - and we can have more young players having their jaw destroyed like Brayshaws only a few years ago. But if the sport itself matters as much as the entertainment (and it matters to me), then bring on a 3rd team ASAP.

The AFL probably should have started with 2-3 teams from WA and SA, starting with 1 team basically entrenched them as the state team.

There was just no way they were going to fold any Vic clubs though except for Fitzroy because they wanted Port and didn’t want 17 teams.

But without folding they could have started off with Fitzroy moving to Brisbane with Adelaide joining West Coast to make it 14 teams back in 87.

Port and Freo to 16 teams.

Roos move to Canberra early 2000s instead of Gold Coast shoved down their throats.

Bulldogs to Western Sydney, Gold Coast Sharks team 17 and Tassie team 18.

That would have left room for a 3rd Perth club and Norwood to come in as teams 19 and 20. Would’ve been a much better setup.

 

[Walshawk]

There was just no way they were going to fold any Vic clubs though except for Fitzroy because they wanted Port and didn’t want 17 teams.

But without folding they could have started off with Fitzroy moving to Brisbane with Adelaide joining West Coast to make it 14 teams back in 87.

Port and Freo to 16 teams.

Roos move to Canberra early 2000s instead of Gold Coast shoved down their throats.

Bulldogs to Western Sydney, Gold Coast Sharks team 17 and Tassie team 18.

That would have left room for a 3rd Perth club and Norwood to come in as teams 19 and 20. Would’ve been a much better setup.

North should have gone to North Sydney. No team in Western Sydney as there is minimal interest in footy there. The Parramatta River and the harbour is a perfect delimitation between the two Sydney teams. North Sydney Kangaroos - still North, still the Kangaroos. No new jumper. Perfect.

Gold Coast in 2011, Tassie in 2012. 18 teams.

 

[Canberra Pear]

North should have gone to North Sydney. No team in Western Sydney as there is minimal interest in footy there. The Parramatta River and the harbour is a perfect delimitation between the two Sydney teams. North Sydney Kangaroos - still North, still the Kangaroos. No new jumper. Perfect.

Gold Coast in 2011, Tassie in 2012. 18 teams.

And if the Melbourne Hawks merger had gone ahead, Fitzroy could've moved to Canberra instead of being forced to merge, then we would've had a Canberra team in your 18-team league.

 

[BlueTucker456]

who would actually choose to live in that dump especially not a young well paid footballrr

Canberra is the second lowest average population age in Australia (behind Darwin) and also the highest average salaries. It's a very young city. PLENTY of people move for early career work and uni, I don't really buy this.

 

[1990crow]

If this was Team 20, relocate North to Canberra.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Canberra is the second lowest average population age in Australia (behind Darwin) and also the highest average salaries. It's a very young city. PLENTY of people move for early career work and uni, I don't really buy this.

A lot of the second lowest population age thing is international students, hardly long term prospects for following the team - but also (unlike interstate movers) don't already have an attachment to a team.

Canberra's only weak point is a bit like Gold Coast's main one. If there is a heavily reliance on interstate ex-pats and high population turnover (a lot do 12 or 24 months at head office before going elsewhere, and of course defence turnover is huge), the amount that will swap clubs is relatively small. Not that it is like it was 15-20 years ago, where it was estimated somewhere near 20% of the population left and were replaced each year.
However, there is also a much more solid core of definite Canberrans these days.

 

[wormy]

22 can keep it single tier, too, without losing derby matches if they keep 23 games per year.

But honestly, this makes perfect sense IMO in terms of:

• Having two teams in each of the major cities
• Having representation from all states + NT and ACT

Would be nice, there's a symmetry to that. I just hope ACT doesn't get left out as there's probably going to be an NT/NQ side eventually as there's so much public support for NT and the AFL refuses to rule it out as preposterous.

Still, the expansionist in me says Auckland and Newcastle would be worth a punt in the future, but I understand people are not too keen on 20 teams let alone 24 or even more.

I completely agree, but by that time I think we're realistically talking a 50 year plan. Newcastle would be cool, but I think it sits as a lower priority than the other 3 - knowing that it would be a GWS situation (building support from the ground) all over again.

 

[wormy]

This isn't a reason to delay Canberra.

If anything, it's a reason to bring us in sooner. The Giants need to be playing full time in Western Sydney as soon as they can.

Yeah I agree with you. But first and foremost I think the stadium issue is the number one problem for Canberra right now. The Canberra rugby team is begging for a stadium, and if they build a share stadium, the chances of an oval being build in the 10 years following that are low. I think Canberra's best bet is to lobby for an oval stadium, get an AFL team and maybe a big bash team - then the rugby side can draw their lines closer in the field, and watch from afar.

While the giants failure to draw crowds in western Sydney isn't the reason for delaying a team, whilst this stadium issue persists in Canberra - the AFL will do what they can to prop up GWS

 

[Canberra Pear]

A lot of the second lowest population age thing is international students, hardly long term prospects for following the team - but also (unlike interstate movers) don't already have an attachment to a team.

Canberra's only weak point is a bit like Gold Coast's main one. If there is a heavily reliance on interstate ex-pats and high population turnover (a lot do 12 or 24 months at head office before going elsewhere, and of course defence turnover is huge), the amount that will swap clubs is relatively small. Not that it is like it was 15-20 years ago, where it was estimated somewhere near 20% of the population left and were replaced each year.
However, there is also a much more solid core of definite Canberrans these days.

I think they meant it more that it's actually a pretty decent place for young footballers as it's got a pretty young population.

Unis would be a part. Two major unis (soon to be three) is a lot in a city our size.

A huge chunk of that would be grads, the majority of which stay in Canberra long-term.

And ADFA/RMC also boosts our 20-somethings population by a couple thousand.

 

[errant bounce]

They should concentrate on getting Tassie over the line. it felt too good to be true and too much of a 'this is for the fans' when they were announced and now it has all the feelings of an ill fated PR run from Gil's final days.

I don't think we need ten games per round, the schedule is already crammed, and we certainly don't need another 45 guys in the system. the bottom ten players at every single club are pretty ****ing shit.

The Giants need to be full time in their actual area rather than be half-committal, and they probably need a better stadium because everyone hates getting there; Tassie coming in means six more games for the Hawks and North.

Canberra cannot and won't support an 18th club and has far less appeal than Tassie, which has goodwill and a local lad pull to it. Canberra's a mecca for public servants. footballers don't work in town planning and certainly don't need to move for 200k.

The future should be a reconsideration of the fixture and home game balance: does every team have 11 home matches, 11 away, a bye, a Gather Round, and a community round where, essentially, Canberra, Cairns, Newcastle or Wollongong, and the Territory share 19 matches?

 

[Apsaalooke]

There was just no way they were going to fold any Vic clubs though except for Fitzroy because they wanted Port and didn’t want 17 teams.

But without folding they could have started off with Fitzroy moving to Brisbane with Adelaide joining West Coast to make it 14 teams back in 87.

Port and Freo to 16 teams.

Roos move to Canberra early 2000s instead of Gold Coast shoved down their throats.

Bulldogs to Western Sydney, Gold Coast Sharks team 17 and Tassie team 18.

That would have left room for a 3rd Perth club and Norwood to come in as teams 19 and 20. Would’ve been a much better setup.

In what Bizarro world do Adelaide and West Coast amalgamate?

 

[Canberra Pear]

Yeah I agree with you. But first and foremost I think the stadium issue is the number one problem for Canberra right now. The Canberra rugby team is begging for a stadium, and if they build a share stadium, the chances of an oval being build in the 10 years following that are low. I think Canberra's best bet is to lobby for an oval stadium, get an AFL team and maybe a big bash team - then the rugby side can draw their lines closer in the field, and watch from afar.

Most of this is already in the works. There's plans to upgrade Manuka contingent on a BBL team.

It was part of Labor's election campaign (which they won). Canberra's the front runner for a BBL team.

It's a tricky one with the rugby teams also pushing for a stadium, but a Manuka upgrade will only cost like 10% of the new stadium.

While the giants failure to draw crowds in western Sydney isn't the reason for delaying a team, whilst this stadium issue persists in Canberra - the AFL will do what they can to prop up GWS

But that's counter-intuitive. Canberra isn't propping up the Giants, it's holding them back.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Canberra cannot and won't support an 18th club and has far less appeal than Tassie, which has goodwill and a local lad pull to it. Canberra's a mecca for public servants. footballers don't work in town planning and certainly don't need to move for 200k.

Not sure what your argument is here.

First of all, off-field support is way more important than local players. And Canberra has that. We likely have more AFL fans than Hobart. Public servants like football and spend money like everyone else (in fact, usually spend more money).

As for local players. Canberra has about 8 current players. Combined with SNSW, there's ~40 current players. Plenty of pull for players to play at, or close to, home.