A Third Team In Sydney - It's Only a Matter Of Time !!

[Garlic muncher]

Yeh sure. Lets just forget the 8 NRL clubs & their financial & cultural position. Also RU & Soccer.
Whats the cost benefit of supporting another team for decades? This is massive generational stuff. Even GWS is no where near being 'established' as self sufficient.
Come & see me next century.
Get a grip.

LOL, the AFL said yesterday that within the next 20 years they want to be number 1 on the East coast, you explain to me how they can do that with only 4 teams in NSW and QLD ?.

Of course it remains to be seen whether they can deliver and lets face it, this has really been the aim for 100 years.

I actually think i have a firm grip thanks

Sydney is a sports market undergoing change IMHO, i really don't think RL is the dominant player it once was.

 

[Power Raid]

Another team from Sydney must be on the radar, the city is to big a market for just 2 teams, I wonder if the AFL has plans just ready to pull out in the best case scenario of rusted on GWS support.

As Fitzpatrick said yesterday that in 20 years or so they hope to be the market leader across the East Coast then surely to do that a third team must be on the horizon.

add canberra to that

 

[Bachars Beard]

LOL, the AFL said yesterday that within the next 20 years they want to be number 1 on the East coast, you explain to me how they can do that with only 4 teams in NSW and QLD ?.

Of course it remains to be seen whether they can deliver and lets face it, this has really been the aim for 100 years.

The people saying that are paying lip service to those stupid enough to believe it. The Lions are an example of what GWS will be without the same massive leg ups the swans have been give for the last 13 years. Is that really what we want anyway? How about we actually give every club a chance, and yes I say that as an annoyed richmond fan, but fmd, the Giants are far from impacting anything beyond the field at the moment

 

[madmug]

LOL, the AFL said yesterday that within the next 20 years they want to be number 1 on the East coast, you explain to me how they can do that with only 4 teams in NSW and QLD ?.

Of course it remains to be seen whether they can deliver and lets face it, this has really been the aim for 100 years.

I actually think i have a firm grip thanks

Sydney is a sports market undergoing change IMHO, i really don't think RL is the dominant player it once was.

I sincerely doubt any organisation ( apart from maybe the Catholic church ) has a 100 year development plan. Even the Soviets only did 5 year plans!
Please, give us a break.
Even the move from VFL to AFL seemed to be done in a somewhat ad hoc manner. If that was a plan, they board should have been sacked.

Sydney isnt a sports market. Its a city. Their are a lot of things to do. The vast majority probably dont even bother with sport.
Perspective, please.

 

[Garlic muncher]

I sincerely doubt any organisation ( apart from maybe the Catholic church ) has a 100 year development plan. Even the Soviets only did 5 year plans!
Please, give us a break.
Even the move from VFL to AFL seemed to be done in a somewhat ad hoc manner. If that was a plan, they board should have been sacked.

Sydney isnt a sports market. Its a city. Their are a lot of things to do. The vast majority probably dont even bother with sport.
Perspective, please.

To the VFL and now AFL Sydney is seen like the footballs holy grail, lasseters reef, win over Sydney and football will cement itself in the national psyche.

They have been working on it for over 100 years in different guises, I would say Sydney and its football development is always on the commissions mind.

I would also say they have plans for a 3rd team somewhere at AFL house, they would love to put a third team in Sydney and would have it in a instant before Tassie.

 

[BulldogJake]

To the VFL and now AFL Sydney is seen like the footballs holy grail, lasseters reef, win over Sydney and football will cement itself in the national psyche.

They have been working on it for over 100 years in different guises, I would say Sydney and its football development is always on the commissions mind.

I would also say they have plans for a 3rd team somewhere at AFL house, they would love to put a third team in Sydney and would have it in a instant before Tassie.

Tasmania will be next. Without a doubt in my mind. But as they did last time they'll add two teams at the same time so the real question becomes where the 20th team will come from? Another from Sydney? Highly doubt it... The Swans crowds and membership is good but I'll wonder how it'll go if they miss the finals 3-4 years in a row and GWS are an embarrassment off the field and I don't think they'll be any massive imprint there for 20-30 years (if they last that long before relocating to Canberra).

 

[jatz14]

To the VFL and now AFL Sydney is seen like the footballs holy grail, lasseters reef, win over Sydney and football will cement itself in the national psyche.

They have been working on it for over 100 years in different guises, I would say Sydney and its football development is always on the commissions mind.

I would also say they have plans for a 3rd team somewhere at AFL house, they would love to put a third team in Sydney and would have it in a instant before Tassie.

I think a lot of Sydney Footy people would disagree with you there from what I heard. Would have said footy totally ignored Sydney for significant parts of that 100 years.

 

[madmug]

Tasmania will be next. Without a doubt in my mind. But as they did last time they'll add two teams at the same time so the real question becomes where the 20th team will come from? Another from Sydney? Highly doubt it... The Swans crowds and membership is good but I'll wonder how it'll go if they miss the finals 3-4 years in a row and GWS are an embarrassment off the field and I don't think they'll be any massive imprint there for 20-30 years (if they last that long before relocating to Canberra).

WA3 & Tas1. No brainer.

 

[Garlic muncher]

I think a lot of Sydney Footy people would disagree with you there from what I heard. Would have said footy totally ignored Sydney for significant parts of that 100 years.

I think they got it wrong, i also think they had issues with their own (VFL) teams which may have taken their eye off the ball, but i will give you a scenario, if in 2025 the AFL had a chance to add 2 more teams and GWS and the Swans were doing OK and the League was deciding between a 3rd Sydney team and Tassie and economies and populations etc track like they looked in 2016 - where do you think the AFL would go ?.

For a start to be the most popular league on the East coast as Fitzpatrick has flagged, they need more than 2 teams in Sydney.

As i have said before if the AFL could set up a 3rd Sydney team that has a decent chance of success, they would be there like a rat up a drainpipe, the chance for a strong national footprint and cementing the game into Sydney's psyche has been the aim of many football people for way over 100 years.

 

[madmug]

I think they got it wrong, i also think they had issues with their own (VFL) teams which may have taken their eye off the ball, but i will give you a scenario, if in 2025 the AFL had a chance to add 2 more teams and GWS and the Swans were doing OK and the League was deciding between a 3rd Sydney team and Tassie and economies and populations etc track like they looked in 2016 - where do you think the AFL would go ?.

For a start to be the most popular league on the East coast as Fitzpatrick has flagged, they need more than 2 teams in Sydney.

As i have said before if the AFL could set up a 3rd Sydney team that has a decent chance of success, they would be there like a rat up a drainpipe, the chance for a strong national footprint and cementing the game into Sydney's psyche has been the aim of many football people for way over 100 years.

I wouldnt mind betting they never have 3 teams in Sydney. Remembering the NRL now has plenty of money.
Yes its nice to see kids playing the game, but a professional club needs money. Corporate support, Members, Gument support for facilities etc. Do you think their is enough of all that in a city with the NRL, A-League & a lot of people who couldnt give a rats arse for any sport, let alone, the Victorian game, as they call it.??
Ive at least lived in Sydney so I do have an understanding of the lifestyle.

 

[Garlic muncher]

I wouldnt mind betting they never have 3 teams in Sydney. Remembering the NRL now has plenty of money.
Yes its nice to see kids playing the game, but a professional club needs money. Corporate support, Members, Gument support for facilities etc. Do you think their is enough of all that in a city with the NRL, A-League & a lot of people who couldnt give a rats arse for any sport, let alone, the Victorian game, as they call it.??
Ive at least lived in Sydney so I do have an understanding of the lifestyle.

I would take that bet in a heartbeat, how can I ever lose ?, a team may be there in 10 years or a 100.

It has nothing to do with the NRL, they don't matter, my bet is a team in the Southern part of Sydney, just as a pointer, the St George district one of the most famous RL names in the world encompassing way over 200,000 people had only 5 under 12' teams this year, the soccer federation has over 10,000 players.

 

[madmug]

I would take that bet in a heartbeat, how can I ever lose ?, a team may be there in 10 years or a 100.

It has nothing to do with the NRL, they don't matter, my bet is a team in the Southern part of Sydney, just as a pointer, the St George district one of the most famous RL names in the world encompassing way over 200,000 people had only 5 under 12' teams this year, the soccer federation has over 10,000 players.

Of course the NRL matters. They take corporate sponsorship & members & gument support. Also the NRL TV rights makes them more reslient to AFL pressure.
Lets get GWS going off field first. Looking at Sydney Swans history iy took an age to be accepted. How will they go when they have a lean period? Brisbane & GC shows the effect of two AFL teams in the one area.
So I wouldnt get too chipper about it all. Unless you are living in an AFL dream where fact & reality don't bite?

 

[Garlic muncher]

Of course the NRL matters. They take corporate sponsorship & members & gument support. Also the NRL TV rights makes them more reslient to AFL pressure.
Lets get GWS going off field first. Looking at Sydney Swans history iy took an age to be accepted. How will they go when they have a lean period? Brisbane & GC shows the effect of two AFL teams in the one area.
So I wouldnt get too chipper about it all. Unless you are living in an AFL dream where fact & reality don't bite?

I don't think the NRL matters as much as you think, we are talking about a club built with strong grass roots foundations and FWIW I have never suggested that a 3rd Sydney club should be placed without the other 2 Sydney clubs being healthy at all levels.

But I find it extremely interesting that the AFL committed a lot of money in Southern Sydney for new facilities when that part of Sydney is a hell of a long way from either Swans or GWS territory.

I will take your bet because never are the AFL going to turn around and 100% rule out a 3rd club, if needs be it can be part of my inheritance - what do you suggest - case of Crownies ?

 

[The_Wookie]

Tasmania will be next. Without a doubt in my mind. But as they did last time they'll add two teams at the same time so the real question becomes where the 20th team will come from? Another from Sydney? Highly doubt it... The Swans crowds and membership is good but I'll wonder how it'll go if they miss the finals 3-4 years in a row and GWS are an embarrassment off the field and I don't think they'll be any massive imprint there for 20-30 years (if they last that long before relocating to Canberra).

I wish they'd just add one team and go back to having a one or two team bye every week, rather than that three week period where 1/3rd of the league is off. Give Tassie their team, and leave it at that.

 

[madmug]

LOL, the AFL said yesterday that within the next 20 years they want to be number 1 on the East coast, you explain to me how they can do that with only 4 teams in NSW and QLD ?.

Of course it remains to be seen whether they can deliver and lets face it, this has really been the aim for 100 years.

I actually think i have a firm grip thanks

Sydney is a sports market undergoing change IMHO, i really don't think RL is the dominant player it once was.

Where does it say thats been the VFL/AFL aim for a century. ?
I really think they doubted the whole Sydney thing. People like Ron Barrassi pushed to get the AFL to give it some proper support. It could quite easily have died in t he womb.

 

[Garlic muncher]

Where does it say thats been the VFL/AFL aim for a century. ?
I really think they doubted the whole Sydney thing. People like Ron Barrassi pushed to get the AFL to give it some proper support. It could quite easily have died in t he womb.

Barassi was a vocal supporter, but the fact is the VFL played games in Sydney from 1902, 1903, etc etc.

If you are really interested, try this, it will give you some detail about the VFL and others peoples efforts over the years to grow the game in Sydney.

https://nswfootballhistory.com.au/posts

 

[telsor]

Barassi was a vocal supporter, but the fact is the VFL played games in Sydney from 1902, 1903, etc etc.

If you are really interested, try this, it will give you some detail about the VFL and others peoples efforts over the years to grow the game in Sydney.

https://nswfootballhistory.com.au/posts

VFL played games long ago, and then stopped for ~80 years...hardly the argument for a sustained effort to grow the game.

As respected as he is, Barassi isn't the VFL.

The idea to play in Sydney in the 80s had less to do with a desire to grow the game there as it did with getting games played on Sundays, primarily for TV purposes (at the time the Vic government mandated that VFL was Saturdays, with VFA on Sundays).


As an aside however...if your argument is true and the VFL has been trying to grow the game in Sydney for over 100 years, and it's still so woeful that even 2 teams need significant support, on and off field, to be viable, then surely wisdom would dictate that it's time to give up rather than throw more at them.

 

[Garlic muncher]

VFL played games long ago, and then stopped for ~80 years...hardly the argument for a sustained effort to grow the game.

As respected as he is, Barassi isn't the VFL.

The idea to play in Sydney in the 80s had less to do with a desire to grow the game there as it did with getting games played on Sundays, primarily for TV purposes (at the time the Vic government mandated that VFL was Saturdays, with VFA on Sundays).


As an aside however...if your argument is true and the VFL has been trying to grow the game in Sydney for over 100 years, and it's still so woeful that even 2 teams need significant support, on and off field, to be viable, then surely wisdom would dictate that it's time to give up rather than throw more at them.

You couldn't be more wrong about VFL games in Sydney, they actually played games for premiership points in 1952 and 1979 and many other non premiership VFL match games in between.

But please do not let your ignorance of what has happened deter you from making a unqualified statement.

 

[Garlic muncher]

Some may be interested in this.

https://nswfootballhistory.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/1980-VFL-Move-to-Sydney.pdf

Makes you wonder why the VFL decided to go to Sydney in 1981 instead of Tassie, Tassie would have made sense right ?, but the VFL have always had their eye on the bigger picture for football.

https://nswfootballhistory.com.au/swans-move-to-sydney

This factual account of questions and answers at the meetings leaves no doubt that Sydney was front and center.

 

[jatz14]

You couldn't be more wrong about VFL games in Sydney, they actually played games for premiership points in 1952 and 1979 and many other non premiership VFL match games in between.

But please do not let your ignorance of what has happened deter you from making a unqualified statement.

Umm, a game or 2 every year is a concerted effort. Playing for points 27 years apart is a random event

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[telsor]

You couldn't be more wrong about VFL games in Sydney, they actually played games for premiership points in 1952 and 1979 and many other non premiership VFL match games in between.

But please do not let your ignorance of what has happened deter you from making a unqualified statement.

2 whole games, decades apart? Wow, yes, I was so wrong, clearly they were laying it all on the line there.

I assume you agree with my other points though.

 

[speedpeck23]

Tasmania will be next. Without a doubt in my mind. But as they did last time they'll add two teams at the same time so the real question becomes where the 20th team will come from? Another from Sydney? Highly doubt it... The Swans crowds and membership is good but I'll wonder how it'll go if they miss the finals 3-4 years in a row and GWS are an embarrassment off the field and I don't think they'll be any massive imprint there for 20-30 years (if they last that long before relocating to Canberra).

Agree with Tassie, but can't see any point in another Sydney team...they will just want Giants and Swans to keep getting bigger and bigger .. The Tassie team along with an NT team would be a totally different modis operandi for the AFL. Small but genuine avid supporter base in boutique stadiums. 15,000 max stadium...local easy accessability to these venues along with matches only every second week would promote good attendances...matches broadcast nationally on Monday or Thursday nights. The AFL profile would be significantly enhanced as the nations game by representing all states.

 

[Garlic muncher]

2 whole games, decades apart? Wow, yes, I was so wrong, clearly they were laying it all on the line there.

I assume you agree with my other points though.

There was plenty of games, but only 2 games for premiership points, that was probably a bigger thing back then since we have been slowly conditioned to accept it these days.

I am not even sure what you are arguing.

Are you arguing that the VFL/AFL did not want to be big in the Sydney market and had not planned for many many years in various guises for footy to have a big imprint there ?.

Why not send the Swans to Hobart if they were not interested in spreading football to Australia' biggest and wealthiest city.

The reason to send the Swans to Sydney was more about expansion of the VFL and the game in the then VFL president Ayletts eyes than TV, but one achieved the other.

I can quote from Gary Linnell and some of his books if you like, about Ayletts zeal for expansion to Sydney.

 

[BulldogJake]

Agree with Tassie, but can't see any point in another Sydney team...they will just want Giants and Swans to keep getting bigger and bigger .. The Tassie team along with an NT team would be a totally different modis operandi for the AFL. Small but genuine avid supporter base in boutique stadiums. 15,000 max stadium...local easy accessability to these venues along with matches only every second week would promote good attendances...matches broadcast nationally on Monday or Thursday nights. The AFL profile would be significantly enhanced as the nations game by representing all states.

With Tasmania growing and being in close proximity to Victoria I think Hobart would need to be expanded to 30-35k and Launceston 25-30k. When hype was around about Tasmania possibly getting a team last time the AFL expanded, Hawthorn games at Launceston were booming, practically sold out every game.

 

[The_Wookie]

There was plenty of games, but only 2 games for premiership points, that was probably a bigger thing back then since we have been slowly conditioned to accept it these days.

I am not even sure what you are arguing.

Are you arguing that the VFL/AFL did not want to be big in the Sydney market and had not planned for many many years in various guises for footy to have a big imprint there ?.

Why not send the Swans to Hobart if they were not interested in spreading football to Australia' biggest and wealthiest city.

The reason to send the Swans to Sydney was more about expansion of the VFL and the game in the then VFL president Ayletts eyes than TV, but one achieved the other.

I can quote from Gary Linnell and some of his books if you like, about Ayletts zeal for expansion to Sydney if you like.

They went for Sydney because it had the support of sponsors and HSV 7

• 1977 – December 23. Ron Barrassi presents a plan to the VFL for a team in Sydney with himself as the coach.
• 1978 – April 26. VFL board of Directors authorises the VFL to investigate the Sydney Cricket Ground hosting Sunday VFL matches.
• 1980 – July 29 – VFL approves South Melbourne plan to play 11 home games in Sydney from 1981.
• 1980 – The Hennessy Report recommends a team be established in Sydney. The team would be profitable, making profits of $750,000 after three years, and drawing 17,000 average crowds in the first year up to 20,000 in the third. (Football Limited, pg, 93)
• 1981 – January 28. VFL appoints Graham Huggins to do a study into launching a full time VFL side in Sydney. The study takes 5 months
• 1981 – June 17. Huggins report is tabled to the VFL board recommneding immediate expansion. Under the Huggins report Sydney would be controlled by a VFL trust, and have a trial period of three years in the league before becoming a full member.
• 1981 – July 1. South Melbourne asks the VFL to fixture all home games in Sydney and all away games at VFL Park under lights