Tasmania Congratulations on Tassie License. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5

[Chief]

---

GO TO PART 2 of this thread:

Tasmania - Tasmania Devils, welcome to the AFL. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5 (Part 2)

Continued from Part 1: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/congratulations-on-tassie-license-mens-team-to-enter-2028-womens-team-tba-other-details-tba-3-5.1226653/ Was going to draft up a Summary but this is pretty good...

www.bigfooty.com

---

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Compelling case:

Scope to attract and retain players: low
Scope to gain following of a large populace: nil

If it’s set up properly from the start with the right people in place competitive on field they will retain players and Tassie have produced a couple half decent players over the years to you know look at your own club since they got the right people in retaining and attracting good players now . As for gaining support gws have a base of

Issues with attracting marquee type players and general retention will suck too.

absolute rubbish would struggle no more then your club!

 

[Blackhawk42]

On the name though I question whether Basketball Tasmania has some degree of ownership over the “Devils” moniker and this another option will need to be considered. Give n the agricultural background I’m a fan of the Tasmanian Harvesters bit that’s a bit out there.

Regards

S. Pete

They already have all of their football operations under the banner of the Devils. This was brought in early last year I believe. You'd think that the major sporting clubs within the state would like to band together and really forge a true individual identity.

 

[caloschwaby]

They already have all of their football operations under the banner of the Devils. This was brought in early last year I believe. You'd think that the major sporting clubs within the state would like to band together and really forge a true individual identity.

Devils is an obvious choice, but Sharks is an identity bewilderingly missing from the AFL.
Gold Coast really needed to be the Sharks.

 

[DEECEE]

Awesome. Another feeder team for talent.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Devils is an obvious choice, but Sharks is an identity bewilderingly missing from the AFL.
Gold Coast really needed to be the Sharks.

Yeah I would really love to know who come up with all the branding for the suns they couldn’t have done a worse if they tried !

 

[D-N-R]

I'm not sure how well 2 grounds would go. Considering 9 Melbourne clubs play out of 2 grounds it would be hard to justify it.

York Park has a 21,000 capacity with about half of that seated.

Bellerive is about 20,000 which I think is all seated.

I'm not sure if 20,000 per game is enough to sustain a club without trying to increase capacity and spreading that money over 2 stadiums.

Doesn't seem feasible.

 

[Pessimistic]

Id imagine York park would be modernised eventually, but kept at capacity. bellerive has major access problems, the plans seem to be for a 30k in greenfield site hobart. Bellrive until then, maybe temporary stands in the interim
Half of york park is temporary type stands and has been for 15 years
Plus training facility

These size grounds have been seen as the optimal size for gold coast and gws

But really, filling stadiums, at least in the first few years, would be the smallest hurdle to cross. They will fill them


But isnt filling stadiums the number 1 economic factor?

 

[Pessimistic]

Also consider the bulldogs play adelaide for a finals spot this weekend in ballarat.

Were that at docklands, they would have ahuge crowd. The need to play uneconomic crowds out of melbourne is diminished now.
Id expect bulldogs and north to share ballarat if north leaves tassie. The hope for hawks is we play mostly in melbourne

Getting used to the rolling bye idea too

 

[Pessimistic]

Awesome. Another feeder team for talent.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Id love the hawks to be a major assitor to the new team. Itd be awesome if they played games in melbourne on the weekends the hawks are out of town

 

[Mr Taswegian]

B

I'm not sure how well 2 grounds would go. Considering 9 Melbourne clubs play out of 2 grounds it would be hard to justify it.

York Park has a 21,000 capacity with about half of that seated.

Bellerive is about 20,000 which I think is all seated.

I'm not sure if 20,000 per game is enough to sustain a club without trying to increase capacity and spreading that money over 2 stadiums.

Doesn't seem feasible.

Bellerive only has 12000 seats and a capacity for 19500,the plan is for 15000 eatra seats for each or for Hobart to build a new stadium at Macquarie point.

 

[juss]

Not a fan of 19 teams, so either +1 or -1.

Given the thinning spread of talent 20 teams would create, I'm leaning towards -1 VIC team and keep it at 18 teams.

 

[Professor Knowall]

I'm not sure how well 2 grounds would go. Considering 9 Melbourne clubs play out of 2 grounds it would be hard to justify it...

What about Geelong? Comparing a whole state, with 2 distinct population centres (about evenly divided between North and South) with one single city (albeit a very big city) for stadium needs is just plain silly. I think it's blindingly obvious that a Tasmanian AFL team would have to split games between Hobart and Launceston to get statewide support, to service both the population bases of the state, maximise attendances and enhance the viability of the club.

... York Park has a 21,000 capacity with about half of that seated.

More then half - 13,825 seats to be exact and a record crowd of 20,971. Plenty of room for expansion.

Bellerive is about 20,000 which I think is all seated.

All seated?? Have you not noticed the big grassy hill straight across from the TV cameras? It has about the same seating of York Park and despite claiming a capacity of 19,500, it's record crowd is just a touch over 18,000 which would be more like it's true capacity.

Bellerive is in a terrible location (God knows why it was ever chosen for Hobart's main stadium) and I notice the Age article mentions developing a new stadium at Macquarie Point. Given the strong State Gov't backing for a Tasmanian AFL club, they will contribute much of the money for any new stadium and/or existing stadium upgrades in return for having their own AFL club.

 

[Buzz Hawk]

Tassie deserve their own side far more than the Gold Coast did but as we know it’s about revenue (broadcast rights) and on that score tassie will never have their own side as it’s already an AFL state.
Would love to see it happen but it would need two of the Victorian sides to merge as the talent pool is being spread too thin already imo.

 

[GC2015]

You forgot Brody Mihocek - after yet another 4 goals from him tonight.

Plus Hugh Dixon from freo, Robbie Fox, Casboult, Jackson Thurlow, Weller, Tim Mohr, and Lovell from the Hawks. Im sure ive forgotten a few too. i think for our population, our % of afl players would be up there with all the other footy states id imagine. And thats with AFL tas and the state league and all the developments league programs being an absolute shambles, now we finally have a team in the under 18 tac cup and with improved junior pathway programs and better structured leagues around the state theres a big chance that tassie would start seeing more kids getting drafted, and more mature blokes getting picked up from the state league rather than most players having to move to the vfl/sanfl etc to get picked up by an afl club.

I don't think a Tasmanian AFL team would have exclusive access to all Tassie players taken in the draft (particularly those selected in the first round) but I'm going to explore a starting 22 for argument's sake. Let's say a Tasmanian (Devils) AFL team was entering the league next year and were able to convince every Tasmanian in the AFL to come home plus were given the top 5 picks in the draft this year. Here's what their best 22 might look like:

FB: Jake Kolodjashnij (Launceston), Liam Jones (Hobart), Grant Birchall (Devonport)
HB: Lachlan Ash (Murray), Alex Pearce (Devonport), Jeremy Howe (Hobart)
C: Mitch Robinson (Hobart), Hugh Greenwood (Hobart), Lachie Weller (Burnie)
HF: Chayce Jones (Launceston), Jack Riewoldt (Hobart), Levi Casboult (Hobart)
FF: Brody Mihocek (Burnie), Ben Brown (Devonport), Tarryn Thomas (Launceston)
Ruc: Tom Bellchambers (Launceston), Noah Anderson (Oakleigh), Matt Rowell (Oakleigh)
Int: Toby Nankervis (Launceston), Hugh Dixon (Hobart), Brodie Kemp (Bendigo), Will Gould (Glenelg)

Predicted draft picks are highlighted red. I think that team would be highly competitive in the AFL without heavy reliance on players from interstate.

 

[Hawkk]

Also consider the bulldogs play adelaide for a finals spot this weekend in ballarat.

Were that at docklands, they would have ahuge crowd. The need to play uneconomic crowds out of melbourne is diminished now.
Id expect bulldogs and north to share ballarat if north leaves tassie. The hope for hawks is we play mostly in melbourne

Getting used to the rolling bye idea too

Hawthorn, according to the Wilson article, indicated that they would make the same, if not more, from playing more games at the MCG anyway

That said, it’s unrealistic to suppose that they will play 11 home games at the MCG (Melb, Rich and Coll get 8-9)

Hawthorn’s Docklands ‘home’ games have been more than decent (avg 33,900 against GC, PA, WC, WB, WC) so I would like to see the club negotiate a proper stadium deal for 4-5 games at the venue like Carlton and Essendon (a semi MCG / Docklands tenant instead of a pure MCG tenant like Coll, Rich and Melb)

We’re playing ‘home’ games at the venue more seasons then not as it is anyway (2013, 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2019)

It will be difficult but it could be a contingency by the AFL to facilitate the move either before the end of the current contract or some stage over the next 4-6 years

 

[juddymarvelous]

If they do this, they so have to call them the Tasmanian Devils.

 

[Blackhawk42]

I do understand the basis for the 'dilution of talent' argument. There is an alternate view that can allay those fears however.
It is quite universally accepted that currently the AFLW is a difficult product to watch due to the lack of skills, with the key factor being a lot of girls with little to no footy experience before being drafted. The belief is that as time passes, more and more girls will grow up playing the game and developing their skills leading to a better product.

So relating this back to a 19 team and 44 extra players, the professional mould in which the game has progressed in the last 30 years is the true indicator of how it will look in ANOTHER 30 years. The more teams there are to fill, the more development systems there needs to be to support. Sure, there could be some initial teething problems and a notable divide between the star and fringe players, but the more kids that are placed in academy programs, the better chance they have of developing into solid AFL players.

 

[Professor Knowall]

Just reduce the playing numbers to 16 on the field with 3 on the bench. This is a long overdue reform, with the numbers last reduced from 20 to 18 due to congestion caused by increased fitness way back in 1898! IMO (though seemingly not that of the AFL) player fitness has improved a bit more since 1898, hence more congestion.

Do this if/when any new teams introduced and there won't be any 'dilution of talent' and the game will greatly improve with less congestion. Two birds with one stone and all that ...

 

[Billy ray]

Would all these Tasmanian players want to return to tassie?

I like 19 teams. Rolling bye. 16 on field and 4 on bench

 

[Engimal v3]

I know people from all states are parochial but Tasmanian’s are next level

There's a bit to that, and I think mainlanders have a hard time understanding this sometimes. It's very much a "us and them" outlook across the state, to the point where many people (particularly rural people) still refer to the mainland as "Australia". I think an AFL team would have huge success if the AFL markets the "come watch Tasmania flog those soft mainalnders" angle.

 

[Engimal v3]

I'm not sure how well 2 grounds would go. Considering 9 Melbourne clubs play out of 2 grounds it would be hard to justify it.

York Park has a 21,000 capacity with about half of that seated.

Bellerive is about 20,000 which I think is all seated.

I'm not sure if 20,000 per game is enough to sustain a club without trying to increase capacity and spreading that money over 2 stadiums.

Doesn't seem feasible.

I think it goes without saying that Bellerive and York Park would go through some pretty major upgrades if a bid was successful.

 

[Harro59]

Those questioning whether Tassie could sustain a team financially need to look beyond the state’s population. There are plenty of Tasmanian’s on the mainland who would be happy to take out a membership even if it means they would not be able to attend a game.

I know people from all states are parochial but Tasmanian’s are net level, particularly when it comes to sport and and many won’t hesitate to make financial contributions to the club to help it stay strong.

On the name though I question whether Basketball Tasmania has some degree of ownership over the “Devils” moniker and this another option will need to be considered. Give n the agricultural background I’m a fan of the Tasmanian Harvesters bit that’s a bit out there.

Regards

S. Pete

A Tassie team would easily start getting 15 - 20k through the gate at the start. No problems getting people to game. There crowds will be so much better than the GWS and GC.

The key will be player retention. Firstly they will need an acadmay for some local talent. That will be a key. Then get them set up with ability to secure Marque players with some additional cap assistance.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Th

I think it goes without saying that Bellerive and York Park would go through some pretty major upgrades if a bid was successful.

Bellerive has limited space for expansion though,that's why the Macquarie point stadium idea would be better for the Hobart games.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

A Tassie team would easily start getting 15 - 20k through the gate at the start. No problems getting people to game. There crowds will be so much better than the GWS and GC.

The key will be player retention. Firstly they will need an acadmay for some local talent. That will be a key. Then get them set up with ability to secure Marque players with some additional cap assistance.

With Tassie being a traditional football state and with Hobart having more of a “Melbourne feel” that any other capital retention issues will be far less of a problem as compare to other teams.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Who here is from Tassie?

What’s your feeling on Tassie folk switching their allegiance from their current AFL club to the new one?

Reckon it’s a given, 99% of supporters will just do it? 50%?

There’s some ridiculous number of Tasweigiens who are AFL club members at the moment.