Expansion Canberra

[PaythePerryman]

You've been in the other threads, right?

Plenty of alternatives floating around for the Easter Show. If Canberra gets its own team, the Giants will have a plan b ready.



So we're just a secondary market? But also, our crowds are so strong that we don't need the big teams?


The difference is that the big four play North in Melbourne and get huge crowds.

But a Giants game against Carlton or Essendon would most likely get a bigger crowd at Manuka.



It's because actual Giants fans make up a minority of that crowd. Yes we're in orange, we're all members and get the merch with our packs, but the majority of these crowds primarily support another team first.

So huge chunks of fans never get to see their teams live in Canberra.

Well if they aren't 'actual' giants fans....**** em?
I dunno man. Sounds like some Canberra fans just wants their own team and aren't happy with the arrangement.
I'd love for the Giants to play all our home games in Syd. Some dude wants them all to be played at the SCG for ****s sake. Canberra wants its own team (I doubt this happens btw).
I just feel like it's not a bad deal for Canberra fans ATM.

"So we're just a secondary market? But also, our crowds are so strong that we don't need the big teams?"
1. Yes. It is a secondary market ...like Tassie or Darwin.
2. Yeah. It's a 13k seat stadium....it's pretty close to capacity each game (bar suns) with a great atmosphere. It doesn't need those teams. In fact it's be hard to get tickets.

We all understand that it's not 'fair' in any way, shape or form right? But it makes sense for the current set up we have.
Hopefully next year you get Richmond and the Bombers playing is Canberra....

 

[PaythePerryman]

Btw...no animosity at all.
Are you a Canberra member? Do you go to games in Sydney or primarily the Canberra 3.
Also do you have an 'Actual' team or are you Giants

 

[Canberra Pear]

Well if they aren't 'actual' giants fans....**** em?
I dunno man. Sounds like some Canberra fans just wants their own team and aren't happy with the arrangement.

The majority of Canberran AFL fans would prefer their own team over a part-time interstate team.

That doesn't mean our opinions about wanting a fair deal in the meantime aren't valid.

I'd love for the Giants to play all our home games in Syd. Some dude wants them all to be played at the SCG for ****s sake. Canberra wants its own team (I doubt this happens btw).

What makes you doubt it?

"So we're just a secondary market? But also, our crowds are so strong that we don't need the big teams?"
1. Yes. It is a secondary market ...like Tassie or Darwin.

There aren't many secondary markets that get better crowds than its primary market.

2. Yeah. It's a 13k seat stadium....it's pretty close to capacity each game (bar suns) with a great atmosphere. It doesn't need those teams. In fact it's be hard to get tickets.

It can push 15k. We squeezed in 14,974 against Richmond.

We sold out every game last year, but there were plenty of empty seats. Plenty of members not rocking up for the smaller teams. We would get 14.5-15k for Carlton, Essendon and Collingwood.

Btw...no animosity at all.
Are you a Canberra member? Do you go to games in Sydney or primarily the Canberra 3.
Also do you have an 'Actual' team or are you Giants

I'm both a Port and Giants member. I've been a Giants member since 2016.

I support Port first, the Giants a distant second. I try to get to every Giants Canberra game, but I've been to two Sydney finals (against the Bulldogs and Swans).

I genuinely want the best for the Giants, but not at the expense of Canberra. But I think Canberra getting the 20th team will be the best thing for both.

 

[PaythePerryman]

1. Okay. I think it is a fair deal. We are gonna have to agree to disagree on that one. There's plenty of value there without The Pies/Tiges/Bombers/Carlton

2. Only just...and it'll change over pretty quick. The Pies game in Round 0 was incredible last year. It was a packed Giants stadium...Western Sydney needs to be the primary growth market and hosting those big clubs gets the crowds through the door. More exposure. More footy fans = good.

3. It's just been continuously shunned by the AFL. I don't think it's a priority or a 'growth market'. I'm not saying Canberra shouldn't ...I'm just saying I don't think it will. Tassie is different...a total heritage play.

Supporting the Giants a DISTANT second...so you just want more big teams in Canberra coz it's fun...not really coz you believe Giants can exist in both territories. Don't know what to tell you man I think they got it about right.

 

[Canberra Pear]

1. Okay. I think it is a fair deal. We are gonna have to agree to disagree on that one. There's plenty of value there without The Pies/Tiges/Bombers/Carlton

I also mean this with no animosity, but perhaps you aren't the best placed to determine what's fair for Canberra.

It's like a North fan telling Tasmanians to suck it up before they had a team announced.

2. Only just...and it'll change over pretty quick. The Pies game in Round 0 was incredible last year. It was a packed Giants stadium...Western Sydney needs to be the primary growth market and hosting those big clubs gets the crowds through the door. More exposure. More footy fans = good.

Look, I really, really, really want that to be true.

And round 0 is pretty set. I get we're not getting Collingwood.

But Carlton hasn't drawn more than 11.8k in Sydney. Since Covid, Essendon hasn't drawn that either.

It'll be at least a few more years before those two teams are averaging 15k at the Showgrounds and can surpass what they would draw at Manuka.

3. It's just been continuously shunned by the AFL. I don't think it's a priority or a 'growth market'. I'm not saying Canberra shouldn't ...I'm just saying I don't think it will. Tassie is different...a total heritage play.

But Tasmania coming in as a 19th team means a 20th team to complement it.

Darwin can't support a team. Which makes just WA3 and Canberra left. And Canberra is much more of a priority growth market than WA3.

You don't think Canberra would be likely for the 20th team?

Supporting the Giants a DISTANT second...so you just want more big teams in Canberra coz it's fun...not really coz you believe Giants can exist in both territories. Don't know what to tell you man I think they got it about right.

Like I said, I want the Giants to do well. I'll probably even keep an interstate Giants membership if Canberra gets a team.

But the Giants are not enough for Canberra. Three games a year is not enough. Demand is outstripping supply. Canberra needs more, but the Giants have no more to give.

 

[PaythePerryman]

I also mean this with no animosity, but perhaps you aren't the best placed to determine what's fair for Canberra.

True. I care way more about the club and it's prospects than the city of Canberra.

But Tasmania coming in as a 19th team means a 20th team to complement it.

Not necessarily.

 

[Canberra Pear]

True. I care way more about the club and it's prospects than the city of Canberra.

And I the reverse.

Long-term, I think we both agree we want to see 11 Giants games in Sydney.

I just want better for Canberra in the meantime. And you want what's best for Sydney.

But while we're putting up the cash and the crowds, we're within our rights to expect better.

Not necessarily.

All rhetoric and history has pointed to a 20th team being an inevitability (unless there's a contraction back to 18).

Nothing is 100%, but I'd say a 20th team coming within five years of Tasmania is 60-70% likely, and more than 95% within a decade.

 

[Aussie in exile]

And I the reverse.

Long-term, I think we both agree we want to see 11 Giants games in Sydney.

I just want better for Canberra in the meantime. And you want what's best for Sydney.

But while we're putting up the cash and the crowds, we're within our rights to expect better.



All rhetoric and history has pointed to a 20th team being an inevitability (unless there's a contraction back to 18).

Nothing is 100%, but I'd say a 20th team coming within five years of Tasmania is 60-70% likely, and more than 95% within a decade.

Probably slightly longer to give the Tassie team a little be longer to be in

 

[Canberra Pear]

Probably slightly longer to give the Tassie team a little be longer to be in

I agree that they'll give Tassie longer to settle than the Suns, but I can't see it being more than a decade.

In the past century, the VFL/AFL has only ever had five seasons with odd teams. I don't think more than a decade with odd teams is likely.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

You've got to be kidding me.

Blind freddy can see it is true.....and he would be relying in ticket data sales like everyother state and territory leader defending an investment in a sporting product

And then people can look at average crowds.....they can look AT the crowds across the country and how much support out of town teams get

They can look at grand finals, like the last one, where two non victorian teams result in a GF where there still is no GA tickets sold.....compared to the NRL which is giving away tickets on the day.





You'd have to be thoroughly deluded to think that the AFL doesn't have many many more travelling fans
.

Also, the previous posts make significant reference to the lack of travelling fans because opposition teams are typically smaller. Granted, they do make up a majority of the fans travelling from outside the ACT, but we have to consider that there are genuine GWS fans based in NSW (both within Sydney as well as from the below the Barassi line area) that enter into the ACT economy because games are being played there. If those games were taking place in Sydney, those fans would either watch the game in Sydney or not bother travelling to them at all as Sydney is further away. We have to assume that this number is several hundred if not in the thousands for every game.

There is a minority of hardcore, Sydney based GWS fans that travel to Canberra because they're that hardcore. We have to assume that there's GWS fans in places like Wagga making the 3-hour drive to games, that make the ACT Government buying the games worthwhile.

While I suppose if being far we have to compare those same fans travelling to Raiders games too, it's probably much lower (other than coming from Queanbeyan), as people have pointed out, League simply doesn't have a travel to games attendance culture unlike the AFL.

 

[Canberra Pear]

While I suppose if being far we have to compare those same fans travelling to Raiders games too, it's probably much lower (other than coming from Queanbeyan), as people have pointed out, League simply doesn't have a travel to games attendance culture unlike the AFL.

I would've assumed more Raiders fans than Giants fans in Wagga/Riverina.

The area is pretty well shared between the codes, but the Raiders have had a 30-year head start (and are based a lot closer).

The Riverina has a lot of AFL fans, but three games a year, three hours away, isn't much incentive to switch to the Giants. Wagga is pretty much equidistant to Sydney and Melbourne.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I would've assumed more Raiders fans than Giants fans in Wagga/Riverina.

The area is pretty well shared between the codes, but the Raiders have had a 30-year head start (and are based a lot closer).

The Riverina has a lot of AFL fans, but three games a year, three hours away, isn't much incentive to switch to the Giants. Wagga is pretty much equidistant to Sydney and Melbourne.

But that's just your assumptions.

I'm adding to the point that Barr and his government would clearly have the data.

I'm making the point more about Sydney-based hardcore fans than other NSW fans, but adding them together.

And if the fans are driving into the GWS games even if they don't consider themselves GWS fans, it's a distinction without a difference. For the economics of ACT government paying for the games, they're as consistently contributing to the economy irrespective of how much GWS merchandise they're choosing to slap on for the games or how hard they cheer a goal in the game itself.

And the 30-year old head start is not as relevant in developing a travel culture as the very nature of the fans themselves, in my eyes. NRL fans simply don't have an attendance culture especially when it involves lengthy travel (as many people consistently point out, there is very little attendance in away Sydney games, even accounting for that travel time can be somewhat lengthy in bad traffic/poor public transport).

But it's also directly relevant to places like Wagga and the places that straddle the Barassi line - AFL fans tend to travel more simply because Aussie Rules communities in these areas tended to be the farming communities who are used to long travel anyway, while League people tend to be the townies who travel less. I love using someone like Shannon Noll as an example of this, who is from Condobolin which is a Rugby League town - but because he grew up on a farm (as did his family) just outside the town, he and his family were actually Aussie Rules people, used to longer travel, more willing to travel 3 hours to watch an AFL game given that they would have to travel an hour (or whatever) just to get into town to get supplies.

Again, the ACT government is not stupid. They have the data on the split of GWS ticket sales between ACT residents, non-ACT residents travelling irrespective of opponent (say GWS fans who travel from Sydney or Queanbeyan general footy fans, or whatever), and those who travel with the away team.

 

[Canberra Pear]

But that's just your assumptions.

I was exclusively applying it Wagga/Riverina. I wasn't referencing anything else.

You said: We have to assume that there's GWS fans in places like Wagga making the 3-hour drive to games, that make the ACT Government buying the games worthwhile. While I suppose if being far we have to compare those same fans travelling to Raiders games too, it's probably much lower.

And that's just your assumptions.

Yes, AFL fans travel more. Do the Giants bring more economic impact to Canberra than the Raiders? I'd say that's unlikely.

At the end of the day, regardless of the economic studies, the real reason the Giants get paid so much is because games cost so much. North and Hawthorn get ~$1m a game in Tasmania. Cairns and Darwin paid close to the that. North are going to make a tonne in WA.

If we didn't give the Giants millions a year, they wouldn't be playing here. The Raiders would be playing here regardless.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I was exclusively applying it Wagga/Riverina. I wasn't referencing anything else.

You said: We have to assume that there's GWS fans in places like Wagga making the 3-hour drive to games, that make the ACT Government buying the games worthwhile. While I suppose if being far we have to compare those same fans travelling to Raiders games too, it's probably much lower.

And that's just your assumptions.

Yes, AFL fans travel more. Do the Giants bring more economic impact to Canberra than the Raiders? I'd say that's unlikely.

At the end of the day, regardless of the economic studies, the real reason the Giants get paid so much is because games cost so much. North and Hawthorn get ~$1m a game in Tasmania. Cairns and Darwin paid close to the that. North are going to make a tonne in WA.

If we didn't give the Giants millions a year, they wouldn't be playing here. The Raiders would be playing here regardless.

I'm making the assumptions because of the willingness of the ACT government to pay the money that they do to guarantee the GWS games. It's not speculative, it's deductive reasoning assuming that the ACT government is at least to an extent governing and spending money in an appropriate and responsible way.

People typically don't drive to Hobart and Darwin, too, if they're mainlander fans, unlike Canberra.

 

[Canberra Pear]

I'm making the assumptions because of the willingness of the ACT government to pay the money that they do to guarantee the GWS games. It's not speculative, it's deductive reasoning assuming that the ACT government is at least to an extent governing and spending money in an appropriate and responsible way.

People typically don't drive to Hobart and Darwin, too, if they're mainlander fans, unlike Canberra.

You keep widening the scope.

You said there were more Giants fans travelling from Wagga than Raiders fans. That's all I was correcting.

You're arguing against yourself on the rest of it.

 

[Walshawk]

I agree that they'll give Tassie longer to settle than the Suns, but I can't see it being more than a decade.

In the past century, the VFL/AFL has only ever had five seasons with odd teams. I don't think more than a decade with odd teams is likely.

Up until 20 years ago for those 95 seasons there was never a bye. Then, up until very recently there was only one bye. Now there are three (early season for those teams playing round zero, mid season and pre finals). We players and fans are used to byes now. I don’t think there is any chance that the AFL will add an extra team just to even up the numbers.

A city like Canberra or anywhere else will need a very compelling case. Government funding, an elite training facility, modern stadium. And despite being the logical place to a 20th AFL team, the ACT cannot afford any of that. Tasmania was and still is borderline. Canberra is a long way behind what Tassie can offer. So don’t hold your breath!

 

[Canberra Pear]

Up until 20 years ago for those 95 seasons there was never a bye. Then, up until very recently there was only one bye. Now there are three (early season for those teams playing round zero, mid season and pre finals). We players and fans are used to byes now. I don’t think there is any chance that the AFL will add an extra team just to even up the numbers.

It's not a necessity that there's an even number of teams, but it's preferable.

You seem perfectly fine with a rolling bye, but many aren't. It's messy. Messes with the ladder, messes with fantasy/super coach. Even teams is just neat. That's why the AFL pushed through the Fitzroy merger when Port joined.

Of the 50 top sports leagues in the world (by revenue), only the NRL has an odd number of teams, and they're looking to even things up shortly. Even teams is just natural.

The priority is obviously getting Tasmania up and running, and an even number of teams isn't necessary immediately. But it will come.

Even teams is an inevitability, whether it's a contraction to 18, or expansion to 20. Can't see two teams willingly merging, so a 20th team will come.

A city like Canberra or anywhere else will need a very compelling case. Government funding, an elite training facility, modern stadium. And despite being the logical place to a 20th AFL team, the ACT cannot afford any of that.

We already have government funding. Not as much as Tasmania, but more than 18 of the other teams would be getting in a 20-team competition.

Manuka Oval is also in train for an upgrade by then.

So that's two out of three boxes ticked.

Tasmania was and still is borderline. Canberra is a long way behind what Tassie can offer. So don’t hold your breath!

There is a difference between a 19th and 20th.

The AFL couldn't have been clearer. They did not want Tasmania to enter as the 19th team at that point in time. They gave a ridiculous amount of hoops for them to jump through.

The barrier for the 20th team won't be as high. Tasmania did all the hard work opening the doors for this round of expansion. The 20th team won't have as many hoops (unless it's the NT).

 

[Walshawk]

It's not a necessity that there's an even number of teams, but it's preferable.

You seem perfectly fine with a rolling bye, but many aren't. It's messy. Messes with the ladder, messes with fantasy/super coach. Even teams is just neat. That's why the AFL pushed through the Fitzroy merger when Port joined.

Of the 50 top sports leagues in the world (by revenue), only the NRL has an odd number of teams, and they're looking to even things up shortly. Even teams is just natural.

The priority is obviously getting Tasmania up and running, and an even number of teams isn't necessary immediately. But it will come.

Even teams is an inevitability, whether it's a contraction to 18, or expansion to 20. Can't see two teams willingly merging, so a 20th team will come.



We already have government funding. Not as much as Tasmania, but more than 18 of the other teams would be getting in a 20-team competition.

Manuka Oval is also in train for an upgrade by then.

So that's two out of three boxes ticked.



There is a difference between a 19th and 20th.

The AFL couldn't have been clearer. They did not want Tasmania to enter as the 19th team at that point in time. They gave a ridiculous amount of hoops for them to jump through.

The barrier for the 20th team won't be as high. Tasmania did all the hard work opening the doors for this round of expansion. The 20th team won't have as many hoops (unless it's the NT).

8 of 24 rounds are already affected by byes. No other league in the world runs like that either. So the ladder is ‘affected’ a third of the season plus every week from Thursday 10pm until Sunday 7pm (half the week). People will cope with a weekly bye. SuperCoach won’t be a factor in the AFL’s decision. There is no funding for the Manuka upgrade.

I am all for Canberra as team 20 but the more I think about it, the less inevitable it seems.

 

[Canberra Pear]

8 of 24 rounds are already affected by byes. No other league in the world runs like that either. So the ladder is ‘affected’ a third of the season plus every week from Thursday 10pm until Sunday 7pm (half the week). People will cope with a weekly bye. SuperCoach won’t be a factor in the AFL’s decision.

We can quibble back and forth, but we clearly aren't going to agree on the importance of even numbers.

But all the history and rhetoric I've seen indicates a desire to keep even teams. Just like every other major sports league.

There is no funding for the Manuka upgrade.

Still early days, but it's tied in with the BBL team, which the ACT Government is pushing hard for.

I am all for Canberra as team 20 but the more I think about it, the less inevitable it seems.

I think a 20th team (or at least an even number) is inevitable. I obviously hope it's Canberra, but I'm less confident on that.

 

[Walshawk]

We can quibble back and forth, but we clearly aren't going to agree on the importance of even numbers.

But all the history and rhetoric I've seen indicates a desire to keep even teams. Just like every other major sports league.



Still early days, but it's tied in with the BBL team, which the ACT Government is pushing hard for.



I think a 20th team (or at least an even number) is inevitable. I obviously hope it's Canberra, but I'm less confident on that.

Ha! Let’s see who gets the last word.

What rhetoric are you referring to? All I have heard is Gil at the time of announcement saying we could end up with 18 or 20 teams (walked that reference to 18 back the next day). This is all Dil has said:

No rush to decide on further expansion after Devils inclusion

Andrew Dillon says there is no hurry to make a decision on further expansion after Tasmania join the competition in 2028

www.afl.com.au

There have been no signs from CA that expanding the BBL is on their agenda. Why would they add Canberra? That would give them an odd number of teams which you say is untenable. Where would the 10th team be?

I think a 20th team is inevitable as well, I just think it could be a long, long way off.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Ha! Let’s see who gets the last word.

What rhetoric are you referring to? All I have heard is Gil at the time of announcement saying we could end up with 18 or 20 teams (walked that reference to 18 back the next day). This is all Dil has said:

No rush to decide on further expansion after Devils inclusion

Andrew Dillon says there is no hurry to make a decision on further expansion after Tasmania join the competition in 2028

www.afl.com.au

Dil has said that Tasmania is the priority, that's there's no rush for a 20th team, and that the 20th team is an inevitability.

I guess we've just interpreted that differently.

I read that as not wanting replicate the Suns/Giants expansion; not wanting teams together so close together. Not going on indefinitely with an odd number of teams.

I genuinely believe we'll have an even number within a decade of Tasmania entering.

Does bigfooty have a remindme function? If we don't have an even number by 2038, you're welcome to come back with a big I told you so and I'll eat humble pie.

I hope it doesn't take until 2038, but at least Canberra's credentials only get stronger in the meantime.

There have been no signs from CA that expanding the BBL is on their agenda.

This article from December is titled "Cricket Australia sets sight on adding new BBL team by 2026/27". It's paywalled sorry, I can't actually get the article.

Why would they add Canberra? That would give them an odd number of teams which you say is untenable. Where would the 10th team be?

Gold Coast looks like the common option. Carrara is ready to go. Largest unrepresented Australian market.

I've also read Geelong and NZ a bit.

 

[Badger17]

I'm making the assumptions because of the willingness of the ACT government to pay the money that they do to guarantee the GWS games. It's not speculative, it's deductive reasoning assuming that the ACT government is at least to an extent governing and spending money in an appropriate and responsible way.

People typically don't drive to Hobart and Darwin, too, if they're mainlander fans, unlike Canberra.

Anybody who's lived here for more than 20 years can tell you that isn't true, LMAO.

Nothing Barr says, or any politician for that matter, should be taken on face value. He not only has a vested interest in the deal being seen as a success, but in covering it up if it isn't. He also has a history of misleading the public on such things.

The fact of the matter is that Barr would be crowing about the success of the GWS deal to all that would listen, and championing hard data to support his claims, if the GWS deal was as good for Canberra as he tries to make out.

 

[Badger17]

You've got to be kidding me.

Blind freddy can see it is true.....and he would be relying in ticket data sales like everyother state and territory leader defending an investment in a sporting product

And then people can look at average crowds.....they can look AT the crowds across the country and how much support out of town teams get

They can look at grand finals, like the last one, where two non victorian teams result in a GF where there still is no GA tickets sold.....compared to the NRL which is giving away tickets on the day.





You'd have to be thoroughly deluded to think that the AFL doesn't have many many more travelling fans
.

No, you're definitely the one kidding me.

Numbers nationally have no bearing on whether or not more people are traveling for GWS games in Canberra than similar events in the city. Nor do they have any bearing on whether or not GWS games are a better investment for the ACT government than other similar sporting events.

Crowd averages and ticket sales (both of which favour the Raiders BTW) don't give you any hard data on what percentage of those tickets are being sold to interstate fans, or how much money those traveling fans are spending in the city.

However there are a few things we can deduce from the facts we do know and our experience-

1. Their are more seats at Bruce than Manuka to sell, and therefore a larger away allocation.
2. The Raiders have a larger active fanbase nationally and more history than GWS (don't kid yourself, you all know it's true).
3. There're more NRL teams and fans within convenient traveling distance of Canberra than AFL.
4. The Raiders face big NRL sides here annually, while the opposition GWS brings to Canberra is generally of the variety that are lesser draws by AFL standards.
5. Somewhere between a quarter and a third of the crowd can be away support at larger Raiders games. The same simply isn't true of GWS crowds.

You'd have to be an embarrassing AFL cheerleader to believe that the Western Bulldogs, Port, and Roos, will draw more interstate travellers to Canberra than the three biggest NRL games next season. And, for that matter, you'd have to be lobotomised to believe that GWS games are a bigger draw than Rugby World Cup or FIFA Women's World Cup games for example.

 

[speedpeck23]

I think a 20th team (or at least an even number) is inevitable. I obviously hope it's Canberra, but I'm less confident on that.

I think the thing that will get Canberra the 20th team is if the AFL can successfully have indigenous players and communities represented at the highest level. How that looks I'm not sure but if NT is left as the odd one out without a team it is massively problematic for the AFL image and for those communities.

Ironically of course the logistics around NT being the 20th team are massive as well. Canberra is well credentialled to have an AFL club. The question as I see it is can you put NT front and centre in the AFL competition without actually having a team ??

 

[Canberra Pear]

I think the thing that will get Canberra the 20th team is if the AFL can successfully have indigenous players and communities represented at the highest level. How that looks I'm not sure but if NT is left as the odd one out without a team it is massively problematic for the AFL image and for those communities.

Ironically of course the logistics around NT being the 20th team are massive as well. Canberra is well credentialled to have an AFL club. The question as I see it is can you put NT front and centre in the AFL competition without actually having a team ??

I think they're two separate issues.

Greater indigenous recognition is a great bonus, but shouldn't have much bearing on actually choosing where to place a team.

I also think indigenous players get wrongly conflated with the NT.

The NT only made up 18% of Indigenous players last year. There were more from SA and twice as many from WA. A Northwest WA team might be just as deserving of a team if we're basing it on where players come from.

But a solution I think could help is tying the Giants to the NT.

If Canberra enters, the Giants academy will shrink. Simultaneously, the Suns academy is getting too strong, and they'll need to take the NT from them eventually.

Western Sydney has one of the largest indigenous populations in the country. Seven times that of Darwin. But the Giants' playing list doesn't reflect that.

A partnership between the Giants and the NT could cover the gap from Southern NSW and help the Giants' list better reflect their territory.

I don't think the Giants should sell home games, but they could arrange to be the away team in the NT games. Melbourne teams selling games would appreciate dragging away a low-drawing game.

The orange in their guernseys could be ochre for those games.