Stevi_Tigers
TheBrownDog
- Mar 2, 2013
- 55,058
- 116,841
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Manchester United
just play more games in geelong. or better yet relocate a low drawing melb side
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That sounds awfully like they're either in the wrong league or in the wrong city to me, and both of those things they absolutely can change. No team has an absolute god given right to be in the AFL.
A twelve team league would give us a fair fixture.
Never gonna happen. The drop in TV revenue would hurt every club too much.
Be realistic.
It really would. Would result in only 6 games in a weekend which might half the AFL rights. There would be no competition for games between 7 and Fox...Would it though? A smaller pie with bigger slices? And would the pie even be that much smaller? Plus the clubs it would hurt the most wouldn't be an issue anymore, as they wouldn't be there.
I don't know, I'm merely asking the question.
Building a 56k stadium and having 19k rock up doesn't make money. All you're doing is searching for ways to drop the losses on someone else.
12 is a too few, 14 could work.
The decrease in TV rights would be offset with less teams to distribute the income to plus the dollars spent propping up the smaller clubs that cant make it by themselves.
Increase in skill level with 4 less teams, better standard of footy, less crappy games each week, less competition for supporters in the crowded Victorian market.
The only losers would be the clubs sent back to the VFL those few supporters could still go and watch their team each week - just in a different league.
Not quite.
Hawthorn has 8700 members in Tasmania.
Once the AFL run the audit on the Richmond figures they have a tendancy to lose 10,000 to 15,000 members every season (I blame the Tiger Insider memberships) but hey I'm just a numbers man
You really think the AFL would (or could) just boot four teams from the league? That’s over 20% of the league.
The stench from Fitzroy is still around. How would this be?
You really think that would be cheaper and easier than just upgrading a ground somewhere in Melbourne to hold 30k people?
Or simply making the Etihad situation a bit more even?
The AFL keeping Etihad and giving a better deal is the only solution. Building another stadium would be stupid as it would take 2-3 years to complete anyway, far easier to wait till 2020.You really think the AFL would (or could) just boot four teams from the league? That’s over 20% of the league.
The stench from Fitzroy is still around. How would this be?
You really think that would be cheaper and easier than just upgrading a ground somewhere in Melbourne to hold 30k people?
Or simply making the Etihad situation a bit more even?
Now your just speaking BS, that was three or four years ago when there was disputes over teams like Hawthorn and Richmond over how they calculated the membership numbers since then our figures match what the AFL shows our members to be, the AFL announced that we reached 70,000, Id like to see how may members the Hawks would have if they had no flags in 35 years, then again I doubt the Hawks would even exist in that situation.Not quite.
Hawthorn has 8700 members in Tasmania.
Once the AFL run the audit on the Richmond figures they have a tendancy to lose 10,000 to 15,000 members every season (I blame the Tiger Insider memberships) but hey I'm just a numbers man
It really would. Would result in only 6 games in a weekend which might half the AFL rights. There would be no competition for games between 7 and Fox...
Plus there's no room for expanding, and the fans of the demoted clubs would be a massive loss to the veiwing public.
Hawthorn crowds are already suffering from winning fatigue. They don't turn up when assured of a win against a lowly side. It's kind of ridiculous but true. They might do well when up and about but if they eventually drop back then watch their crowds fall. Tassie is crucial for them still. There's very little to say a stand alone Tassie team will be a success either. It's almost certain to cost the league money in terms of TV deals if you replace a Victorian side with a Tassie side.It would be more profitable to give a third team to WA and maybe one to Tassie (instead of the Hawks/North games) at the expense of merging 4 Melbourne sides. Hawks will pull crowds in Melbourne 11 games a year so it's time to get them out of Tassie with their own team replacing them. This move would make the league more money.
Swapping allegiance from a team that you had been following for at most 8 years is much different to a merger. If you were young then you didn't have a huge link to the Eagles, if you were old then I'm tipping you'd been a WAFL fan for many years before the Eagles anyway.I don't see why merging is considered so bad, I was a West Coast fan till I knew Freo was entering the comp. I instantly knew I would be following Freo considering I live here and would have been going for them had I had a choice at the start.
Tiges lose member numbers, please explain.
Do the Hawks have more 3 (?) game memberships ( is it 4?) than other clubs Hawkk?
I think the AFL should.
We can continue to tinker around the edges all we like and no doubt we will continue to do so.
Equalization funds, soft caps on coaching, building a smaller capacity ground in Melbourne etc etc all designed to keep the small (too small for AFL) clubs afloat.
Lets have the tough discussions and look at business plans, supporter numbers etc to see which clubs can make a go of it in the Elite national comp. Pretty much everyone outside of Vic can see there are too many teams based in Melbourne for the national comp.
That is the reason a Tasmanian team gets knocked on the head all the time, not enough supporter numbers, business plan cant sustain a team and yet this same argument is NOT made for the saturated Melbourne market.