josh the gent
The Pieman
Unless you're 33 or older, you can tell me that.
Everyone knows that celebrating when you are a kid doesn't really count.
AFL 2025 - 20 Teams
- Thread starter McCrann
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Everyone knows that celebrating when you are a kid doesn't really count.
- Feb 7, 2013
- 245
- 52
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Your club is looking at your next flag in the 2030s, thats a sobering thought.
By then an entire generation of dog supporters will have passed away without being there in the last Saturday in September.
R.I.P Bulldog supporters.
flamingEMBERS
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 8, 2011
- 10,012
- 8,930
- AFL Club
- West Coast
in to bat for the poor doggies here but how does 05 and 06 feel.....
Gibbke
Premiership Player
Adelaide has arguably the greatest access to a traditional footy state's resources in the AFL (Port sucks less away from Adelaide than Freo drains WC) but still has fewer PF appearances in the same timespan and is on the wrong end of the W/L record to the Western Bulldogs (16-20), to the point where we can point at them as massive underachievers and not a powerhouse...
stmookeyj
Brownlow Medallist
ANYWAY, back on topic......
New Zealand would be a moral lock on the next team in for simple TV rights money (and not just from local NZ TV rights which may fetch a 200-300K a season). Makes a lot of sense for Fox to have their games starting at 4:30 PM in Australia on either a Friday or a Saturday (leading into the Saturday Night schedule in Australia), schedule them away for the major All Blacks test match weekends. Plus there is a large NZ contingent in Australia these days so potentially there's a market for the AFL to tap into. AND we could single handedly revive the NZ economy with supporters tours etc.
As for the other team, In terms of TV rights it probably would be irrelevant if the team was placed in Tassie/Canberra/Darwin as they are very much minor markets (surely Channel 9 who own the Darwin affiliate are looking to offload them to whoever if they could to make a few quid to bid for the next rights for whatever sport). The question would be if Tassie would be corporately viable, if so then they would be almost certain to get in. Otherwise it would be where the AFL think the money would be.
New Zealand would be a moral lock on the next team in for simple TV rights money (and not just from local NZ TV rights which may fetch a 200-300K a season). Makes a lot of sense for Fox to have their games starting at 4:30 PM in Australia on either a Friday or a Saturday (leading into the Saturday Night schedule in Australia), schedule them away for the major All Blacks test match weekends. Plus there is a large NZ contingent in Australia these days so potentially there's a market for the AFL to tap into. AND we could single handedly revive the NZ economy with supporters tours etc.
As for the other team, In terms of TV rights it probably would be irrelevant if the team was placed in Tassie/Canberra/Darwin as they are very much minor markets (surely Channel 9 who own the Darwin affiliate are looking to offload them to whoever if they could to make a few quid to bid for the next rights for whatever sport). The question would be if Tassie would be corporately viable, if so then they would be almost certain to get in. Otherwise it would be where the AFL think the money would be.
You are so so wrong. I know many people who bought Hawthorn memberships but they dont barrack for them. They just get into the footy cheaper!!!! I am black & white. If we had our own team I would be a member but I would still be a Pie member too. I know people in Brisbane who were Carlton supporters But when the BrizLions started theiy changed support to the new club.
Just saying that people wont change clubs is just so wrong. Some will, some wont But many more will buy a membership just to go & watch some decent football. The Tassie footy market would grow, a lot.
josh the gent
The Pieman
I think you'd have said if you were 33+, so I guess you haven't really experience Adelaide winning a flag either.
For the Dogs, if we have to wait then so be it.
At least when we eventually win, there will be the pleasure of knowing a proper club won the flag, not just some knock together franchise that the AFL setup for the 1991 season.
Apart from the SA v Vic thing
, the Problem with having too many clubs based in Victoria is that we get louder & louder calls for 'equalisation' policies to keep some of them going.The player draft & salary cap restrictions should be all the limits placed on clubs. If you implement unequal policies to restrict clubs & ad hoc payments & footy dept equality it will just stifle free enterprise efforts & reward mediocrity. Helping out with facility development & with spending money to improve club management probably the exception..
The AFL tend to follow the American football model. They copied them with the Draft & expansion clubs etc, except they seem tied to the old VFL clubs too much. That will not be good for the game. Some of those clubs, like the Swans did, need to move, or go back to the VFL system.
Changing rules to protect entrenched mediocrity will do the game no good in the long run. IMO
flamingEMBERS
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 8, 2011
- 10,012
- 8,930
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Harsh to hear this but the doggies will relocate or fold before they win a flag and only the AFL is to blame for strangling poor clubs.
They wouldn't as much though. Yes people will go to the games, but people will still support their club of choice. I was also talking about football states. If the Dogs or Kangas moved to north Queensland they could keep their identity because effectively your trying to win football fans from rugby and soccer, they are people who have no affinity to football. Moving a team to WA, SA or Tasmania people your trying to move people from the team they support already. I gues with Tasmania being starved of a team for so long some would jump ship. Though say theres a team in Tasmania in 2025 what about all those supporters that jumped on the Hawthorn bandwagon in the last 10 years and have attended games. sh*t they attended games while the magical Buddy played, he kicked a hundred and they won a flag. People are more likely to stay loyal to that. Then you got the ones that have started following the Kangas as of last year. Thats still 14 years of support by 2025. What happens if they go on to win a premiership and become a powerhouse for many years. People dont like jumping off the bandwagon for a loser. And thats exactly what people will be doing if they turn to a relocated team. The only essence in which it would work (and sorry to bulldogs fans to continually use your club as an example) would be if a team like the doggies completely rebranded but even then why would some one in remote tasmania change teams. They dont go to games now and they wont be able to attend games if the Dogs moved to Hobart or Launceston. A Tasmanian team has to be the Tasmanian Devils. They have to wear green, red and gold to be embraced by the whole of Tasmania. You have to remember we need the people all over Tasmania buying merchandise and that simply wont happen in the towns and cities that this relocated team would play.
For a start I just dont agree that people wont change. Even many of the real die hards will buy memberships to go to the footy. In Tassie I believe we have a lot of people who follow other teams that may not buy memberships because they never or hardly ever see that club play (Collingwood, Richmond,Essendon,Carlton,StKilda etc), but will buy 'Tassie' memberships & support a team of their own. It happened in Brisbane as I said.
I agree that sending another financial basket case down here to play would be ridiculous. Not to mention, arrogant, demeaning, etc etc. It would struggle to establish IMO. Similar to to relocating a Victorian suburban club to FNQ, it would also be fraught with danger IMO. If/when the AFL go further north they need to start a local club, otherwise I dont think it would survive. The same applies down here. Simple as that. The AFL are trying GWS, a brave move & it will take time. If they had forced a Melbourne club to move up to Blacktown, I think that would have been a disaster & would have had little chance of gaining acceptance in 50 years, let alone 10 or 20 that GWS may take.
flamingEMBERS
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 8, 2011
- 10,012
- 8,930
- AFL Club
- West Coast
But Brisbane wasn't a relocation. It was a merger. Given time and the concessions they had received like Sydney they would have still been a success in the early noughties. It's not so much the people in the cities but more so the people in the remote areas who are still unable to go to a game. Yes Tasmanians would get behind it but a club would definitely get way more love from the fans in Tasmania if it was a new Tasmanian team not a rebranded one. To be honest St Kilda and Bulldogs don't really deserve to be in this league. Had there been relegation in AFL they would never have returned to the top flight competition. One premiership in over a 100 years each not to mention St Kilda winning a wooden spoon every 4 years of their existence in the VFL.
Gibbke
Premiership Player
?!? When the league sold the tv rights for a ridiculous sum a decade ago, they did it on the back of the footy that teams like the Dogs, Roos and Saints were playing...sure you can look at the strong Swans and Bears/Lions teams of the time as integral to the tv markets in the two non-footy states, blah blah, but somewhere you need to showcase the best teams, and these were it. They'll be back, just like the other Vics were after 2006 with everybody predicting the permanent dominance of interstaters...short memories, if you'll recall 2008-09-10...
flamingEMBERS
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 8, 2011
- 10,012
- 8,930
- AFL Club
- West Coast
They'll be back for sure I dont deny that. Will they have enough money to survive until then? I'm not too sure unless the AFL shares these blockbuster games and allows them to get greater money and exposure from sponsors and allows them to get new fans who want to watch their club play on ANZAC day....
Gibbke
Premiership Player
In the current climate, none of the clubs are having a struggle to survive. If a club needs it, they get it, so survival isn't an issue. Spending for success is a different scenario, as Collingwood and other big teams can demonstrate, so the trick is for every team to be able to boost their premiership chances, not just exist. You could quite easily see a scenario where a few teams simply hang around for decades without any real glory, but don't cause the AFL too many problems financially, including making up the numbers for tv rights...why not, it's been the case since the VFL started. The AFL's equalisations will also kick in in the future to a reasonable point, with caps on various spendings and boosts in others, before they start pointing the bone at clubs, again as they've always done. A club will need to get to Fitzroy's precariousness, and there were a lot of factors (not including their apparent unpopularity with VFL admin) which made life difficult over many decades for them...the fan bases and networks below these other teams aren't so bad as to allow this in the foreseeable future...
Kwality
Hall of Famer
Interesting peice in todays Fairfax press on the current climate & it is less positive than the picture you paint:
The AFL's most powerful clubs are uniting as angst grows on both sides of the league's financial divide.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/the-bloc-20130301-2fc4x.html#ixzz2MLPGdw1P
The AFL have invested a HUGE amount in moving the competition more towards being truly 'national'. They supported Sydney for years. Now they will spend multi millions to support GC & GWS. They also have work to do with PA. If I were a struggling club in Melbourne I wouldnt be counting too much on a wad of AFL cash to boost me up to the financial level of the big four or 5 clubs in that city. The AFL may give some exceptional assistance for some clubs who have short term difficulties. I just dont see them handing out cash to support mediocrity in an overcrowded footy market. Some clubs have shown mediocrity for decades. Why do they think they have some 'devine' right to continue on at a national level?
flamingEMBERS
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 8, 2011
- 10,012
- 8,930
- AFL Club
- West Coast
They should have been relegated years ago. Im looking at St Kilda and Bulldogs here....
Gibbke
Premiership Player
This doesn't condemn anything I've said, and isn't any different to the usual grumblings from these presidents. The journalist makes it sound like a meeting of the godfathers, but you can bet none of them will want to bail from a ship that resembles the Titanic in size only. Unlike the mid-80's, a breakaway could not possibly match the levels of comfort currently enjoyed by these big teams, and there is a consequence to the AFL tag being on nearly everything in Australian footy. The only thing this meeting will (and was most likely designed to) achieve is a group proposal from several club presidents as to how finances are arranged in the AFL, and the most likely outcome is that they will all sit down and have a good long chat with resolutions...doesn't sound so dire all of a sudden, does it...off the cuff comments by Footscray, Hawthorn and Collingwood presidents will be shelved for official statements representing the position of each club...omigod, this gets less newsworthy by the second...and in the years to come the other sides run out again as per usual and Eddie Maguire finds something else to whinge about because it pumps the egos of his supporters who then go out and break membership records in response to "the call"...like BSG, all this has happened before and will happen again, the big difference being that BSG was a good show to watch...
Gibbke
Premiership Player
Of course they won't. But they will give them enough to ensure they run out onto the field. How they get to the elite level is then up to them. But saying there will be an end to support is silly. If it were true, the EPL for a start would axe around 85 of their 92 teams. While the teams can fill up nine timeslots and pay enough of the bill, they'll stay...and this could go on indefinitely as long as no sudden financial axe from the gods (like a really bad recession) causes irreparable wounds...
Kwality
Hall of Famer
Any resolution in this talkfest era is an achievement.
The last time the clubs forced the AFLs hand was when the Pies & Blues presidents saw an AFL Commissioner thrown out.
In the context of this discussion on 20 teams, its about where the money is being spent because I'd suggest 101 cents of every dollar from the last broadcasting deal is accounted for & there are claims beinmg made for another 10 cents - cant happen, wont happen.
TassieEagle
Premiership Player
- Jul 10, 2012
- 3,517
- 2,492
- AFL Club
- West Coast
If the AFL expands to 20 teams and Tassie isn't one of them I will lose my s**t! Without it actually happening I am unsure if I would jump off the Eagles and onto a Tassie team but I could guarantee I would be buying a buying a membership every year regardless.
As for the other team I don't really care. NZ, Darwin, Perth, North Queensland, the Moon.
As for the other team I don't really care. NZ, Darwin, Perth, North Queensland, the Moon.
Hodge is God
Norm Smith Medallist
Shouldn't happen so therefore it will.
I think the AFL is unbalanced as it is. 18 teams is enough. The problem is having too many old VFL clubs in a national competition.
Well, to make it more balanced - perhaps it should go to 24 Teams. I am going to post on this shortly. The fixture works out pretty well with 24 teams - believe it or not. Yeah - no NAB Cup though, and 2 weeks of practise.
