Fixture Hawks after Tasmania? Sponsorship extended to 2025!

[Walshawk]

Walshawk is anti Tassie, anti Dingley, anti Marvel, in fact they are bordering on anti Hawthorn.
So don’t be surprised by a loaded poll

I’m pretty sure they’d want HFC to still be playing home games at Glenferrie, so they could watch the games with the only other 3 people that could fit into the stands.

Harsh.
Not anti Dingly at all. I don’t really care where we train. Whatever is best for the players. But, it is not a good place to host anything. Miles from our heartland. It was a risky move given we did not have funding in place. I hope it comes off.
Not anti Marvel either. I would be very happy to have an 8/3 MCG/Marvel split. Also think we could consider a couple of games in another secondary market. As long as we get the opportunity to play eight or more games at our chosen home ground. All other tenants there get nine.
As for Tassie, it was great 10 - 15 years ago. I have been to games there. But the reality is that our time there is up.
So fair to say I am pro MCG, pro Box Hill and very pro Tassie getting a team. What we do post Tassie will determine whether we stay the fifth biggest club in Melbourne - whether we close the gap to the big 4 or whether it widens.

 

[speedpeck23]

Harsh.
Not anti Dingly at all. I don’t really care where we train. Whatever is best for the players. But, it is not a good place to host anything. Miles from our heartland. It was a risky move given we did not have funding in place. I hope it comes off.
Not anti Marvel either. I would be very happy to have an 8/3 MCG/Marvel split. Also think we could consider a couple of games in another secondary market. As long as we get the opportunity to play eight or more games at our chosen home ground. All other tenants there get nine.
As for Tassie, it was great 10 - 15 years ago. I have been to games there. But the reality is that our time there is up.
So fair to say I am pro MCG, pro Box Hill and very pro Tassie getting a team. What we do post Tassie will determine whether we stay the fifth biggest club in Melbourne - whether we close the gap to the big 4 or whether it widens.

Appreciate your point, but I'd rather Hawthorn aim to be the biggest club in Australia rather than the 5th biggest club in Melbourne. We have a unique opportunity having already established a extended base outside Victoria.

Given Tassie will have a team we would play one away game in Tassie, 3 home in Launceston. Hang on to our Tassie membership. Then I would play a further home game in Brisbane at the Gabba v Gold Coast, the usual 2 games away v Brisbane and GC...3 games in Qld.... develop a 3rd Membership base in SE Qld with 3 game membership.

Nominally we become the team of the East Coast ...4 games Tassie, 12 games Melbourne , 3 games Qld , 2 in Sydney. 1 in SA, 1 in WA. ( I am including the 23rd match as it seems the AFL will bring this in next year. In other words Hawthorn is a recognised Victorian club but has 2 other significant membership bases.. one in Tassie, One in Qld.

The AFL is a club competition, not a state competition....players come from anywhere, so can supporters. The state borders should not be seen as limiting our growth or any other clubs growth...particularly the Victorian Clubs.

 

[Yardie]

Appreciate your point, but I'd rather Hawthorn aim to be the biggest club in Australia rather than the 5th biggest club in Melbourne. We have a unique opportunity having already established a extended base outside Victoria.

Given Tassie will have a team we would play one away game in Tassie, 3 home in Launceston. Hang on to our Tassie membership. Then I would play a further home game in Brisbane at the Gabba v Gold Coast, the usual 2 games away v Brisbane and GC...3 games in Qld.... develop a 3rd Membership base in SE Qld with 3 game membership.

Nominally we become the team of the East Coast ...4 games Tassie, 12 games Melbourne , 3 games Qld , 2 in Sydney. 1 in SA, 1 in WA. ( I am including the 23rd match as it seems the AFL will bring this in next year. In other words Hawthorn is a recognised Victorian club but has 2 other significant membership bases.. one in Tassie, One in Qld.

The AFL is a club competition, not a state competition....players come from anywhere, so can supporters. The state borders should not be seen as limiting our growth or any other clubs growth...particularly the Victorian Clubs.

We only play in Tassie cause the state government give us a truck load of cash. That'll stop when they get a team. We aren't going to stay to make a loss.

 

[Walshawk]

Appreciate your point, but I'd rather Hawthorn aim to be the biggest club in Australia rather than the 5th biggest club in Melbourne. We have a unique opportunity having already established a extended base outside Victoria.

Given Tassie will have a team we would play one away game in Tassie, 3 home in Launceston. Hang on to our Tassie membership. Then I would play a further home game in Brisbane at the Gabba v Gold Coast, the usual 2 games away v Brisbane and GC...3 games in Qld.... develop a 3rd Membership base in SE Qld with 3 game membership.

Nominally we become the team of the East Coast ...4 games Tassie, 12 games Melbourne , 3 games Qld , 2 in Sydney. 1 in SA, 1 in WA. ( I am including the 23rd match as it seems the AFL will bring this in next year. In other words Hawthorn is a recognised Victorian club but has 2 other significant membership bases.. one in Tassie, One in Qld.

The AFL is a club competition, not a state competition....players come from anywhere, so can supporters. The state borders should not be seen as limiting our growth or any other clubs growth...particularly the Victorian Clubs.

There won’t be any clubs other than Tassie playing game in Tassie. That is not even a remote possibility.

 

[speedpeck23]

We only play in Tassie cause the state government give us a truck load of cash. That'll stop when they get a team. We aren't going to stay to make a loss.

Hawthorn payed for the corporate stand albeit small, we get a clean stadium. We have 9000 Tassie members...to excommunicate them would be backward thinking. We may even have a higher profile because we refuse to leave Tassie.... attract another sponsor.

 

[speedpeck23]

There won’t be any clubs other than Tassie playing game in Tassie. That is not even a remote possibility.

Why not ??

 

[Blackhawk42]

Why not ??

Because Tasmania wants the entire state to be Devils supporters. As do the AFL. Greater attendances. Greater membership base. Greater chance of attracting free agents due to the unique tribalism.

They don't want every Hawthorn fan in Tassie remaining loyal to the brown and gold. That sounds pretty crazy, but it's true. They won't reach the heights of the first statement without severing all current ties with existing clubs.

 

[cryptor]

I’d be interested to know. Any Tasmanians in here that jumped on Hawthorn due to the Tassie deal?

Will you be jumping ship to the Tassie team if it gets up? Does the state of Tasmania or the AFL influencing Hawthorn’s departure effect your decision? Would you buy memberships to both clubs? If so, which would be primary?

 

[Randy Campbell]

We only play in Tassie cause the state government give us a truck load of cash. That'll stop when they get a team. We aren't going to stay to make a loss.

Do you think it would work for The Northern Territory?

The NT Hawks.

 

[Noneedforaname]

Because Tasmania wants the entire state to be Devils supporters. As do the AFL. Greater attendances. Greater membership base. Greater chance of attracting free agents due to the unique tribalism.

They don't want every Hawthorn fan in Tassie remaining loyal to the brown and gold. That sounds pretty crazy, but it's true. They won't reach the heights of the first statement without severing all current ties with existing clubs.

Has anyone actually said that?

 

[Changa10]

I’d be interested to know. Any Tasmanians in here that jumped on Hawthorn due to the Tassie deal?

Will you be jumping ship to the Tassie team if it gets up? Does the state of Tasmania or the AFL influencing Hawthorn’s departure effect your decision? Would you buy memberships to both clubs? If so, which would be primary?

I’d be surprised if there are many that jumped on board because Hawks started playing games in Launceston. Most Tasmanians would have already supported a VFL/AFL team before that. Maybe it helped increase supporters as kids jumped on though.

I can’t speak for all Tasmanian Hawks supporters, but i won’t be changing teams. I will likely attend some Tassie games, but i will die a Hawks supporter!

 

[TazHawk15]

I’d be surprised if there are many that jumped on board because Hawks started playing games in Launceston. Most Tasmanians would have already supported a VFL/AFL team before that. Maybe it helped increase supporters as kids jumped on though.

I can’t speak for all Tasmanian Hawks supporters, but i won’t be changing teams. I will likely attend some Tassie games, but i will die a Hawks supporter!

Same here.

Most Tasmanian have an AFL side and a lot will just make Tassie their 2nd team.

What it really is about is capturing the hearts and minds of kids and if they do that then in the future they will have a very strong membership/following.

 

[Walshawk]

Has anyone actually said that?

I have not heard anyone at AFL or Tas govt specifically say it, but it seems so obvious that it does not need saying. I think any journo asking that would be embarrassed to ask such a question. Maybe we can get Tom Browne to ask.
Some clues:-
Tas govt talks about redirecting the Hawks and North funding once they get a team (as recently as Monday).
Experienced journos like Caro & GW have mentioned numerous that Hawks would leave Tas as soon as the licence is announced (North would stay on until the team actually enters)
The whole point of a team is to unify and boost Tas footy. Having Hawthorn or North playing there (even without funding) will do nothing to help the Devils. It will compromise their attendances, their membership, etc.
I have read every article and listened to every word in the media discussing this and there has not been a single suggestion that Hawks or North would have the opportunity to stay on. It goes against the whole concept.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

I know there are far bigger and more sombre issues at play today - however, I am not loving the idea of having to look for a new major sponsor in light of today's events.

 

[Big Hotdog]

I know there are far bigger and more sombre issues at play today - however, I am not loving the idea of having to look for a new major sponsor in light of today's events.

A law firm or PR company perhaps?

 

[pattymalone00]

I know there are far bigger and more sombre issues at play today - however, I am not loving the idea of having to look for a new major sponsor in light of today's events.

Even though now it feels far from mind mind the selfish part would love 11 games in Melbourne but also it really does feel like a bad time to be looking for a new sponsor

 

[Gibbke]

There is no reason why the Hawks would have to leave Tassie. 23 weekends and 12 of them would be vacant. Tasmanians would not complain if there were extra games, and remember too that Launceston, as the Hawks perennial home, will be very much the junior partner in venues if they build the new stadium in Hobart. The deal was always a Launceston business proposal, nothing to do with AFL Tas, so there's no reason to think there wouldn't be an open door to renegotiation...

 

[speedpeck23]

Because Tasmania wants the entire state to be Devils supporters. As do the AFL. Greater attendances. Greater membership base. Greater chance of attracting free agents due to the unique tribalism.

They don't want every Hawthorn fan in Tassie remaining loyal to the brown and gold. That sounds pretty crazy, but it's true. They won't reach the heights of the first statement without severing all current ties with existing clubs.

Mate, it's about competition. You need to have the opposition in each other's face.....create the argy bargy. Best way for Tassie Devils grow massive membership is to have Hawthorn having a presence in Launceston. You do understand rivalry ? see Hawthorn V Geelong, Hawthorn v Essendon, Collingwood v Carlton, Everton v Liverpool, Roosters v Rabbitohs

 

[Blackhawk42]

Mate, it's about competition. You need to have the opposition in each other's face.....create the argy bargy. Best way for Tassie Devils grow massive membership is to have Hawthorn having a presence in Launceston. You do understand rivalry ? see Hawthorn V Geelong, Hawthorn v Essendon, Collingwood v Carlton, Everton v Liverpool, Roosters v Rabbitohs

It won't happen. Tasmania pays us as our major sponsor. Their government will be allocating all footy related funds straight into their own football side.

We've been the major tenant for over 20 years. The rivalry will exist no matter what.

 

[speedpeck23]

I have not heard anyone at AFL or Tas govt specifically say it, but it seems so obvious that it does not need saying. I think any journo asking that would be embarrassed to ask such a question. Maybe we can get Tom Browne to ask.
Some clues:-
Tas govt talks about redirecting the Hawks and North funding once they get a team (as recently as Monday).
Experienced journos like Caro & GW have mentioned numerous that Hawks would leave Tas as soon as the licence is announced (North would stay on until the team actually enters)
The whole point of a team is to unify and boost Tas footy. Having Hawthorn or North playing there (even without funding) will do nothing to help the Devils. It will compromise their attendances, their membership, etc.
I have read every article and listened to every word in the media discussing this and there has not been a single suggestion that Hawks or North would have the opportunity to stay on. It goes against the whole concept.

You don't seem to get that it's a competition. You need an opponent. Just like I am arguing with you now... will make you more determined to comeback at me with a counter argument....and I will return the argument with some other statement.... then we have a contest...or a game on our hands. A footy match requires 2 teams in the one arena fighting over the patch of ground, along with an umpire to at least attempt to make sure the game is played by the rules. Fortunately, although sometimes hard to believe, footy is pretend, it's only a game.... that's what makes it so great...yet we play to win like our whole life depended on it. So don't take it too seriously.....there are more important things in life.

 

[speedpeck23]

It won't happen. Tasmania pays us as our major sponsor. Their government will be allocating all footy related funds straight into their own football side.

We've been the major tenant for over 20 years. The rivalry will exist no matter what.

What sort of rivalry do you get when a club walks away from it's supporter base ?

 

[Blackhawk42]

What sort of rivalry do you get when a club walks away from it's supporter base ?

Rivalries don't NEED to exist.

It will all come down to the financials.

The Tassie government are putting in $12m over 12 years to get the Devil's off the ground and in a brand new stadium.

Where is the money to pay Hawthorn?
We can't play multiple seasons a game down there on our own dime.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Rivalries don't NEED to exist.

Someone needs to let the AFL know this with their desperation to make the Bulldogs/GWS rivalry a thing to make GWS somehow relevant.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Someone needs to let the AFL know this with their desperation to make the Bulldogs/GWS rivalry a thing to make GWS somehow relevant.

That one happened organically IMO.

The Boyd and Griffin fiasco.
Dogs future captain Callan Ward leaving to start at the Giants.
The 2016 preliminary final which I still think is top 2 greatest games of all time.
Toby Greene punches Caleb Daniel in the jaw as a 'spoil attempt'.
Greene boots Dalhaus in the head.
Bont breaks Nick Haynes throat and isn't suspended.
Greene rakes Bonts eyes and isn't suspended.

It's had a lot.


The Sydney derby took ages to feel like anything special. Wasn't until the Giants knocked them off in the 2016 QF that it became a bit of a spectacle.

 

[ziad]

A law firm or PR company perhaps?

definitely a law firm