Expansion Canberra

[Coolangatta]

There is no push for a club from anyone in Canberra, and not much prospect of increasing Manuka to the AFL's suggested 27,500. They would need to find a new site should they get a club. That won;t be easy - they can't even get a decent rectangular stadium despite more content. If GWS is still pulling 6K to Showgrounds games by the time Tassie enter the comp, I reckon that there will be a push to relocate the Giants to Canberra.

Yeah, I've changed my view since that comment. Bring Tassie around 2026-8, then let the competition breathe for ten years. If the Giants are struggling, consider a relocation to Canberra. It's hard to see this happening (a Giants relocation) because I suspect the AFL strongly believes in retaining 2x teams in NSW and QLD for the broadcasting. The locals seem more attached to GWS than North Melbourne, who always comes up on the relocation table, maybe not by the AFL but by the media.

They'd have to be a basket case off-field, as you suggest. If they pick up, there's no chance of relocation. I have no idea what happens to North or other minnow Vic clubs if things look bad for them in the future. Somehow I think the Suns will be fine. It may well be that we don't see team 20 for another 15-25 years after Tassie and that it comes from the NT. NT will be a hard sell, but the romanticism makes it an appealing expansion option for the AFL, so I'm sure they'll be open to any proposals that can turn a profit and not a net loss of 15 million a year like it would now.

 

[Coolangatta]

I think a truly national AFL should be our goal, but achieving that isn't easy. Whilst Tasmania is clearly ready now, and Canberra is probably only a decade or two away, the NT probably won't have the population to sustain a team on their own for another 50 years. The other issue is the fact that less teams is clearly better for the standard of the comp and fan engagement (less time between flags with less teams).

A couple of ideas I've had to get both territories represented in the comp have been either:

• Canberra as team 20 with NT entering into a partnership with North Melbourne as 'North Kangaroos' (still based at Arden St)
• a shared ACT/NT 20th club (not sure on the name)

I think a 20-21 team competition would be fine, 20 and 21 being ACT and NT (even if NT takes 50 years). 20 if the Giants are relocated. I'd rather not see North have anything to do with an NT team. NT, like Tassie, should have their own team in the colours of the Indigenous flag. Imagine their Indigenous round jersey. And I'd rather ACT have their own team, too.

As for expanding beyond 21 teams, you certainly could, but would it be necessary? If NSW and QLD markets grow, the AFL will probably want more teams there, but that's a big if. I hope that new teams in NSW and QLD are not at the expense of ACT and NT. As you said, a truly national AFL should be our goal, but I'd rather see it done without folding or merging. If some of the Vic sides have gotta go, relocate them to new markets in NSW and QLD instead of traditional footy areas.

 

[Canberra Pear]

From 2010 to 2019 rates of AFL 'fanaticism' in the ACT rose by 12% up to 28%. All traditional heartland AFL states (including Tassie) dropped 11-19% in this time period, but were still all ahead of the ACT.

Tasmania's level of fanaticism still sat 2% higher than the ACT at 30% and is currently at a low point (hence the push for a Tasmanian team to reignite interest in the sport in the tradional heartland state).

With a population almost 100,000 less than Tasmania, a Canberra team probably requires interest in the sport and population to continue to grow further along with a significant push from the ACT government (including financial support) in order to justify inclusion as the 20th team.

However, if the AFL were to form the view that a 20th team is required as soon as possible (unlikely, as they've said they're totally comfortable with 19 teams due to the flexibility that the bye provides), then Canberra is the most obvious choice and evidently a far more viable option than the NT.

Incredibly interesting. Thanks for this info. I didn't realise they could even measure this. Do you have links?

Do you know what it means by fanaticism? Does it mean that 28% of the ACT is considered AFL fanatics, or 28% of ACT AFL fans would be considered fanatics?

I think Canberra should be okay from a population perspective. The 2016 census had the ACT surpassing Tasmania's population between 2029-2035. The pandemic probably slowed that down, so you'd think closer to 2040. That also doesn't include the 100k-plus outside the ACT border.

The current population comparisons would be pretty close. If you include anything within a 50-minute drive, Canberra has about 500k. If you include anything within a 70-minute drive it would be maybe 550k, pretty much the same as Tasmania. In terms of a television market, RegionalTAM actually considers Canberra bigger than Tasmania, with 566k to 534k people.

I think Canberra's main advantage is a central population. It doesn't affect the TV audience, but it means a larger potential pool that can get to games.

 

[Coolangatta]

Incredibly interesting. Thanks for this info. I didn't realise they could even measure this. Do you have links?

Do you know what it means by fanaticism? Does it mean that 28% of the ACT is considered AFL fanatics, or 28% of ACT AFL fans would be considered fanatics?

I think Canberra should be okay from a population perspective. The 2016 census had the ACT surpassing Tasmania's population between 2029-2035. The pandemic probably slowed that down, so you'd think closer to 2040. That also doesn't include the 100k-plus outside the ACT border.

The current population comparisons would be pretty close. If you include anything within a 50-minute drive, Canberra has about 500k. If you include anything within a 70-minute drive it would be maybe 550k, pretty much the same as Tasmania. In terms of a television market, RegionalTAM actually considers Canberra bigger than Tasmania, with 566k to 534k people.

I think Canberra's main advantage is a central population. It doesn't affect the TV audience, but it means a larger potential pool that can get to games.

Now I like the idea even more of bringing in Tassie around 2026-7 and waiting until 2035 to see where the competition is at, but if there's going to be a 20th team (or an existing club ends up being relocated) then Canberra is the best choice. It should happen before the NT.

 

[Coolangatta]

According to Google featured search:
Gold Coast population 2011: 507,642
Tasmania population 2022: 526,386

I know that different regions have different population projections and growth rates. Then there's Covid, but if you look at Gold Coast and Tasmania, 500k looks like the minimum magic number if there's enough interest in that market or an attractive high-growth area.

Canberra could get to 500k as early as 2029, just as Canberra Pear said about the census. So the AFL don't have to wait until 2035 if they don't want to.

The NT is a long way off getting to 500k. I can't see them being team 20.

 

[Canberra Pear]

I reckon they'll see how the giants are going in 2030, if struggling then it might be on the cards to move them to Canberra. That's 20 years in. The problem with the giants and suns though is that the AFL have already put so much money and effort in its very hard to just wipe your hands of that at any stage, all that work for nothing they will see it as.

The Giants are definitely a tricky subject for Canberra.

My preference is for the Giants to be a Western Sydney team. There's been so much groundwork laid, it would be a huge waste (and an embarrassment) if the Giants were to retreat from Western Sydney. I genuinely think they have the potential to be a huge club.

But it's quite frustrating from a Canberra perspective. We rock up, Manuka crowds have been 90% higher than Giants Stadium this year. The AFL isn't going to be confident about GWS standing alone with 6k crowds, and poor Sydney crowds will likely ensure the Giants continue to be tethered to Canberra.

Ironically, as I've bleated on about (sorry), Canberra is handicapping GWS. The Giants Sydney support would be better if they didn't straddle two markets. Canberra looks like a lifeboat, an exit plan, and doesn't help gain potential Sydney fans.

 

[fargothegreat]

Incredibly interesting. Thanks for this info. I didn't realise they could even measure this. Do you have links?

Do you know what it means by fanaticism? Does it mean that 28% of the ACT is considered AFL fanatics, or 28% of ACT AFL fans would be considered fanatics?

I think Canberra should be okay from a population perspective. The 2016 census had the ACT surpassing Tasmania's population between 2029-2035. The pandemic probably slowed that down, so you'd think closer to 2040. That also doesn't include the 100k-plus outside the ACT border.

The current population comparisons would be pretty close. If you include anything within a 50-minute drive, Canberra has about 500k. If you include anything within a 70-minute drive it would be maybe 550k, pretty much the same as Tasmania. In terms of a television market, RegionalTAM actually considers Canberra bigger than Tasmania, with 566k to 534k people.

I think Canberra's main advantage is a central population. It doesn't affect the TV audience, but it means a larger potential pool that can get to games.

Its all in the Gemba research at the back of the Tasmanian Taskforce's report (p116).

Fanatics are defined as very passionate fans who:

• contribute 80% of revenue
• are 12 times more likely to attend games
• 4 times more likely to watch the team on TV
• 30 times more likely to become members

The percentage is a percentage of total population aged 16–65, so 28% of people in the ACT aged 16-65 were considered to be AFL fanatics in 2019.

If you compare any potential Canberra bid to the Tasmania bid, it sounds like Canberra is quite close in terms of population and fanaticism, but there are still a couple of questions left to answer:

Do the people of Canberra have the hunger for their own team?

There's a huge push from Tasmanians to get their own team. North/Hawthorn games get lower crowds because the people are demanding their own side. I don't see that from Canberra residents. Crowds are close to capacity at GWS games (with only a slight COVID drop-off) and the government is about to sign another 10-year deal with the club.

Would the government support a bid for a team?

The ACT government has recently said they're not interested in bidding for an AFL team and are happy to sign a long-term deal to keep having the Giants play in Canberra. The Tasmanian bid is likely to end up including $12-15m a year from the state government + a new 27,000 seat stadium. Without a similar level of government funding + upgrade capacity to Manuka Oval, Canberra has no chance of getting their own team.


It may be worth looking at when the next GWS deal ends in 10 years time, but I can't see it happening before then.

 

[Canberra Pear]

According to Google featured search:
Gold Coast population 2011: 507,642
Tasmania population 2022: 526,386

I know that different regions have different population projections and growth rates. Then there's Covid, but if you look at Gold Coast and Tasmania, 500k looks like the minimum magic number if there's enough interest in that market or an attractive high-growth area.

Canberra could get to 500k as early as 2029, just as Canberra Pear said about the census. So the AFL don't have to wait until 2035 if they don't want to.

The NT is a long way off getting to 500k. I can't see them being team 20.

It's important to note that it's just the ACT. The 2018 projection had the ACT with 505k residents in 2029.

NSW suburbs will bring Canberra up to ~600k by 2029.

 

[Rob]

According to Google featured search:
Gold Coast population 2011: 507,642
Tasmania population 2022: 526,386

I know that different regions have different population projections and growth rates. Then there's Covid, but if you look at Gold Coast and Tasmania, 500k looks like the minimum magic number if there's enough interest in that market or an attractive high-growth area.

That's a ridiculous comparison. If you took the area of Tasmania around the Gold Coast there would be over 3 million people.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Its all in the Gemba research at the back of the Tasmanian Taskforce's report (p116).

Fanatics are defined as very passionate fans who:

• contribute 80% of revenue
• are 12 times more likely to attend games
• 4 times more likely to watch the team on TV
• 30 times more likely to become members

The percentage is a percentage of total population aged 16–65, so 28% of people in the ACT aged 16-65 were considered to be AFL fanatics in 2019.

If you compare any potential Canberra bid to the Tasmania bid, it sounds like Canberra is quite close in terms of population and fanaticism, but there are still a couple of questions left to answer:

Very interesting, thanks for that!

So theoretically, there are 157,916 fanatics in Tasmania, and 121,520 in the ACT. A conservative estimate of support in NSW suburbs, that'd be about 130,000 fanatics in Canberra. You'd think that gap could close as Canberra's population grows quicker, too.

Do the people of Canberra have the hunger for their own team?

There's a huge push from Tasmanians to get their own team. North/Hawthorn games get lower crowds because the people are demanding their own side. I don't see that from Canberra residents. Crowds are close to capacity at GWS games (with only a slight COVID drop-off) and the government is about to sign another 10-year deal with the club.

Definitely not to the same extent as Tasmania. I think being in a larger, more diverse market, we don't get that single voice of affirmation, so I feel many Canberrans don't think we "deserve" a team in the same way Tassie do. Those fanatic numbers show the numbers are there, but we're not as loud about it.

I think Canberrans are just grateful to have AFL. Jumping between North, then a few years of Melbourne and the Dogs. The Giants have treated us pretty well in the scheme of things, so there's no real reason to protest. I think if we were suddenly in the conversation, we might start to protest with no-shows, but low crowds in a multi-code town just looks like a lack of interest in AFL rather than a protest.

Plenty of people I chat to say they would get behind a Canberra team, but the public wave isn't there. We really need a public Canberran like Mick Molloy, Jesaulenko or Hird getting behind the bid. I think the fuel is there, it just needs a spark.

Would the government support a bid for a team?

The ACT government has recently said they're not interested in bidding for an AFL team and are happy to sign a long-term deal to keep having the Giants play in Canberra.

It may be worth looking at when the next GWS deal ends in 10 years time, but I can't see it happening before then.

There have been whisperings that the Giants have recently only signed a five-year deal, despite wanting a 10-year deal. BT said it during a broadcast, and it was on a radio bulletin that Tony Shepherd announced a five-year extension at a Canberra function before the Saints game. I've heard nothing else, and hadn't read anything, so I emailed the Giants and they said there had been no announcement yet.

There were a few articles amping up the 10-year extension and an imminent announcement, and there's been radio silence since, so there's definitely something weird there. I'm probably reading too much into it, but my big hope is that the AFL stepped in limit it to five years to keep the Canberra market free from 2028.

The Tasmanian bid is likely to end up including $12-15m a year from the state government + a new 27,000 seat stadium. Without a similar level of government funding + upgrade capacity to Manuka Oval, Canberra has no chance of getting their own team.

Yeah, we're a bit buggered there. The Giants, Brumbies and Raiders all get between $2-3m. We could probably get up to $3m, but in a contested market, any more would tick off other codes.

The stadium is probably the biggest issue. There were plans to get Manuka Oval up to 20k for only $56m. It'd likely have to be a few thousand more, but we don't need a brand new stadium (as nice as it'd be). The dream scenario would be a BBL expansion at a similar time to help split costs.

Canberra might not have has much government support, but we've got a bigger economy, which will help fund the team. Canberrans have 22% more disposable income than Tasmanians, so can spend more on merch and memberships, and have more value to broadcasters.

I think whoever comes in as Team 20 won't be forced to jump through the same hoops as Tassie (unfair I know). Tasmania has pretty much bent the AFL over a barrel and forced their way in before the AFL was ready, so the AFL are adding some pre-conditions to ensure stability. But once a 19th team is in, a 20th pretty much helps the AFL. As long as Team 20 is financially stable (basically not the NT), they'll pay for themselves with broadcast rights.

 

[Coolangatta]

That's a ridiculous comparison. If you took the area of Tasmania around the Gold Coast there would be over 3 million people.

So? Tasmania is still under serious consideration despite only having 520k people. So if ACT has 5-600k in a similar vicinity, why shouldn’t they eventually be under consideration? They’re not as footy mad but they’re hardly lacking in interest either.

The demand isn’t there yet, at least not as loudly and passionately, but that could change if the AFL looks that way. My point was you need 500k minimum I’d think to be a look in. So no NT for at least another 30 years I would’ve thought.

 

[Rob]

So? Tasmania is still under serious consideration despite only having 520k people. So if ACT has 5-600k in a similar vicinity, why shouldn’t they eventually be under consideration? They’re not as footy mad but they’re hardly lacking in interest either.

The demand isn’t there yet, at least not as loudly and passionately, but that could change if the AFL looks that way. My point was you need 500k minimum I’d think to be a look in. So no NT for at least another 30 years I would’ve thought.

They should, but the comparison isn't as simple as you think. If Hobart had 500k and there were about 23 people in the rest of Tassie then they would have had a team in the 80s.

 

[fargothegreat]

Very interesting, thanks for that!

So theoretically, there are 157,916 fanatics in Tasmania, and 121,520 in the ACT. A conservative estimate of support in NSW suburbs, that'd be about 130,000 fanatics in Canberra. You'd think that gap could close as Canberra's population grows quicker, too.



Definitely not to the same extent as Tasmania. I think being in a larger, more diverse market, we don't get that single voice of affirmation, so I feel many Canberrans don't think we "deserve" a team in the same way Tassie do. Those fanatic numbers show the numbers are there, but we're not as loud about it.

I think Canberrans are just grateful to have AFL. Jumping between North, then a few years of Melbourne and the Dogs. The Giants have treated us pretty well in the scheme of things, so there's no real reason to protest. I think if we were suddenly in the conversation, we might start to protest with no-shows, but low crowds in a multi-code town just looks like a lack of interest in AFL rather than a protest.

Plenty of people I chat to say they would get behind a Canberra team, but the public wave isn't there. We really need a public Canberran like Mick Molloy, Jesaulenko or Hird getting behind the bid. I think the fuel is there, it just needs a spark.



There have been whisperings that the Giants have recently only signed a five-year deal, despite wanting a 10-year deal. BT said it during a broadcast, and it was on a radio bulletin that Tony Shepherd announced a five-year extension at a Canberra function before the Saints game. I've heard nothing else, and hadn't read anything, so I emailed the Giants and they said there had been no announcement yet.

There were a few articles amping up the 10-year extension and an imminent announcement, and there's been radio silence since, so there's definitely something weird there. I'm probably reading too much into it, but my big hope is that the AFL stepped in limit it to five years to keep the Canberra market free from 2028.



Yeah, we're a bit buggered there. The Giants, Brumbies and Raiders all get between $2-3m. We could probably get up to $3m, but in a contested market, any more would tick off other codes.

The stadium is probably the biggest issue. There were plans to get Manuka Oval up to 20k for only $56m. It'd likely have to be a few thousand more, but we don't need a brand new stadium (as nice as it'd be). The dream scenario would be a BBL expansion at a similar time to help split costs.

Canberra might not have has much government support, but we've got a bigger economy, which will help fund the team. Canberrans have 22% more disposable income than Tasmanians, so can spend more on merch and memberships, and have more value to broadcasters.

I think whoever comes in as Team 20 won't be forced to jump through the same hoops as Tassie (unfair I know). Tasmania has pretty much bent the AFL over a barrel and forced their way in before the AFL was ready, so the AFL are adding some pre-conditions to ensure stability. But once a 19th team is in, a 20th pretty much helps the AFL. As long as Team 20 is financially stable (basically not the NT), they'll pay for themselves with broadcast rights.

There were 96,000 AFL fanatics in Tassie in 2018, 121,000 in 2010. Remember, it's 30% of 16-65 year olds, not the total population, hence why it's less than what you calculated.

If that deal with GWS does end up being only five years, when both parties have wanted 10, that is very interesting! Sadly (for Tassie, not for Canberra), I agree with you that Tassie will have to do a lot more work for team 19 than the bid for team 20 will have to.

The then VFL made a big mistake in losing the ACT to rugby in the 80s. Perhaps that's why they're not going to let history repeat itself with the rise of basketball in Tassie.

 

[Canberra Pear]

There were 96,000 AFL fanatics in Tassie in 2018, 121,000 in 2010. Remember, it's 30% of 16-65 year olds, not the total population, hence why it's less than what you calculated.

If that deal with GWS does end up being only five years, when both parties have wanted 10, that is very interesting! Sadly (for Tassie, not for Canberra), I agree with you that Tassie will have to do a lot more work for team 19 than the bid for team 20 will have to.

The then VFL made a big mistake in losing the ACT to rugby in the 80s. Perhaps that's why they're not going to let history repeat itself with the rise of basketball in Tassie.

Ahh yeah, of course. Still interesting stats though!

If confirmation does come out about five years, I will be buzzing. It'd be the first real indication that the AFL's actually thought about us. Or after all that, Tony Shepherd could have just misspoke and I've just read too much into it.

I feel like Tassie has done so much of the ground work putting expansion on the table, and whoever Team 20 is (whether it's Canberra, the NT, WA or Newcastle etc) will pretty much just waltz in after. But the fans of Team 20 will be forever grateful to Tasmania for getting the ball rolling!

The ACT was asking for a team about the same time the Swans moved to Sydney. It would be interesting to see what the Canberra sporting landscape would look like today if we already had an AFL team with four decades of history.

 

[Walshawk]

Ahh yeah, of course. Still interesting stats though!

If confirmation does come out about five years, I will be buzzing. It'd be the first real indication that the AFL's actually thought about us. Or after all that, Tony Shepherd could have just misspoke and I've just read too much into it.

I feel like Tassie has done so much of the ground work putting expansion on the table, and whoever Team 20 is (whether it's Canberra, the NT, WA or Newcastle etc) will pretty much just waltz in after. But the fans of Team 20 will be forever grateful to Tasmania for getting the ball rolling!

The ACT was asking for a team about the same time the Swans moved to Sydney. It would be interesting to see what the Canberra sporting landscape would look like today if we already had an AFL team with four decades of history.

If it is five years I think it is more likely that GWS play all games in Sydney as Hawks and Roos will be looking for a new secondary market and they or even Dees (Nth to NT) will be playing games in Canberra rather that that indicating that Canberra might come in soon as team 20.

 

[Canberra Pear]

If it is five years I think it is more likely that GWS play all games in Sydney as Hawks and Roos will be looking for a new secondary market and they or even Dees (Nth to NT) will be playing games in Canberra rather that that indicating that Canberra might come in soon as team 20.

I hadn't thought of that option. The most prolific argument against a Canberra team has been that GWS has been too dependent, so that'd be a pretty ironic scenario.

I've been pretty happy with the GWS partnership, but GWS needs to focus on Sydney, so it'd still be a positive step. A Victorian team means we could have more games as well.

If Canberra got a Victorian team, my preference would be North. Surely the Hawks are in a good enough position now for more than seven Melbourne home games.

 

[fargothegreat]

I hadn't thought of that option. The most prolific argument against a Canberra team has been that GWS has been too dependent, so that'd be a pretty ironic scenario.

I've been pretty happy with the GWS partnership, but GWS needs to focus on Sydney, so it'd still be a positive step. A Victorian team means we could have more games as well.

If Canberra got a Victorian team, my preference would be North. Surely the Hawks are in a good enough position now for more than seven Melbourne home games.

You could probably get as many as 7 North home games in Canberra. They wanted to play that many in Tassie a few years ago and the AFL were onboard, but the government here didn't want to abandon their partnership with Hawthorn.

 

[Coolangatta]

You could probably get as many as 7 North home games in Canberra. They wanted to play that many in Tassie a few years ago and the AFL were onboard, but the government here didn't want to abandon their partnership with Hawthorn.

7 games in Canberra? Isn’t that a soft reboot relocation?

 

[Giantman]

I hadn't thought of that option. The most prolific argument against a Canberra team has been that GWS has been too dependent, so that'd be a pretty ironic scenario.

I've been pretty happy with the GWS partnership, but GWS needs to focus on Sydney, so it'd still be a positive step. A Victorian team means we could have more games as well.

If Canberra got a Victorian team, my preference would be North. Surely the Hawks are in a good enough position now for more than seven Melbourne home games.

Giants are entrenched in ACT and Western Sydney..... The only change the AFL would look at would be balance of home matches between Western Sydney and Canberra . Giants are the direct rivals of the Swans.... that's a work in progress of course.... so the aim is to grow that rivalry....Giants need both regions.

Giants are the direct

 

[Coolangatta]

If GWS is not getting a 10-year Canberra deal, I don't think it's because the AFL is looking for a new home for North and Hawthorn. They want the Giants playing games in Canberra, no one else, and I'm not sure the locals would be interested in watching anyone else. So, I think the AFL is weighing up Canberra as team 20, whether that's 10-20 years from now. They'd be silly not to. WA3 is doable but not necessary, SA3 would struggle. QLD and NSW haven't yet shown enough growth, NT doesn't have enough people, so who else is there? NZ? I don't think so. If we've thought of it, I'm sure they have.

 

[madmug]

That's a ridiculous comparison. If you took the area of Tasmania around the Gold Coast there would be over 3 million people.

Tasmanias population is very much centred around Hobart, & the strip from Burnie to Launceston. The total area is quite irrelevant as so much is wilderness or farm country. The key aspect is the near 50/50 split between the Hobart & northern strip areas.

The number of people isn't indicative of support. You certainly need a decent number of people, but a 550k traditional footy community is better than any large number who CGAF,

 

[Bjo187]

I hadn't thought of that option. The most prolific argument against a Canberra team has been that GWS has been too dependent, so that'd be a pretty ironic scenario.

I've been pretty happy with the GWS partnership, but GWS needs to focus on Sydney, so it'd still be a positive step. A Victorian team means we could have more games as well.

If Canberra got a Victorian team, my preference would be North. Surely the Hawks are in a good enough position now for more than seven Melbourne home games.

Do you think North could become the Canberra team permanently or people wouldn't adopt them similar to sending a current club to Tassie? I reckon it's a pretty attractive proposition for north.

 

[madmug]

Do you think North could become the Canberra team permanently or people wouldn't adopt them similar to sending a current club to Tassie? I reckon it's a pretty attractive proposition for north.

One would think if NM knocked back $100mil to go the GC, & flat out refuse to consider Tas, & say they are set to stay in Melbn, then they won't be relocating anywhere anytime sooner or later.

But they will play for money, anytime, anywhere.

 

[Walshawk]

If GWS is not getting a 10-year Canberra deal, I don't think it's because the AFL is looking for a new home for North and Hawthorn. They want the Giants playing games in Canberra, no one else, and I'm not sure the locals would be interested in watching anyone else. So, I think the AFL is weighing up Canberra as team 20, whether that's 10-20 years from now. They'd be silly not to. WA3 is doable but not necessary, SA3 would struggle. QLD and NSW haven't yet shown enough growth, NT doesn't have enough people, so who else is there? NZ? I don't think so. If we've thought of it, I'm sure they have.

The AFL is not looking at a team in Canberra. They are only looking at Tasmania and are quite comfortable with 19 team and the fixture benefits. In AFL circles only ever NT has pushed at all for a future team previously.
The secondary markets need to be fixed up. GC playing in Darwin while Saints play in Queensland makes no sense. There needs to be games in Albury, Newcastle (being upgraded) and possibly Woolongong (300k)
I would set up as follows once Tas is in.
Darwin - Nth x 2/3
Canberra - Hawks x 2, Dees x 2.
Ballarat - WB x 2
Albury - Saints x 2
Cairns - GC x 1
Newcastle - WS x 1
Wollongong - WS x 1
Or if GWS stay in Canberra then Dees in Newcastle (same colours as Knights), Hawks in Woolongong (basketball team is Hawks).

 

[Coolangatta]

The AFL is not looking at a team in Canberra. They are only looking at Tasmania and are quite comfortable with 19 team and the fixture benefits. In AFL circles only ever NT has pushed at all for a future team previously.
The secondary markets need to be fixed up. GC playing in Darwin while Saints play in Queensland makes no sense. There needs to be games in Albury, Newcastle (being upgraded) and possibly Woolongong (300k)
I would set up as follows once Tas is in.
Darwin - Nth x 2/3
Canberra - Hawks x 2, Dees x 2.
Ballarat - WB x 2
Albury - Saints x 2
Cairns - GC x 1
Newcastle - WS x 1
Wollongong - WS x 1
Or if GWS stay in Canberra then Dees in Newcastle (same colours as Knights), Hawks in Woolongong (basketball team is Hawks).

Sounds good. What about Townsville and Alice Springs? Maybe North could play 2 in Darwin, 1 Springs, and since the Suns play 2 games in Darwin, have the Suns play 1 in Cairns and 1 in Townsville.