Long-term future of the AFL.

Remove this Banner Ad

RedV3x

Premiership Player
Dec 14, 2015
3,245
808
AFL Club
Fremantle
So you want Darwin to have a stadium equal to 40% of its population? That would be like Melbourne having a 2.5m capacity MCG.
Not really. The smaller the centre the larger percentage rollout of the population.
For the Nauru, the figure would much higher.
 

Walshawk

Club Legend
Mar 24, 2017
2,513
2,738
Blackburn
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Not really. The smaller the centre the larger percentage rollout of the population.
For the Nauru, the figure would much higher.
Sure, but 70K is still ridiculous for Darwin. As is 35K - still more than 20% of the population. The MCG capacity was never more than 1O% of Melbourne's population.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

RedV3x

Premiership Player
Dec 14, 2015
3,245
808
AFL Club
Fremantle
Sure, but 70K is still ridiculous for Darwin. As is 35K - still more than 20% of the population. The MCG capacity was never more than 1O% of Melbourne's population.
Agreed, but Waverley was designed to be 150,000 and even Subiaco was initially designed to be huge.
Today the focus has shifted from huge crowds to lower capacity sellouts and higher ratings.
 

RedV3x

Premiership Player
Dec 14, 2015
3,245
808
AFL Club
Fremantle
Auckland will be in line for a team, city of close on 2m building a new stadium enabling them to host games. Opens the game to a new market.
Hawthorn and the AFL invested in N.Z. and then the Saints took over. They got a decent crowd at the 400,000 population and windswept Wellington.
Participation numbers were impressive.
Auckland was derailed by the failure to build a new stadium and then Covid hit.
AFL NZ has a nominal national league and now have a women's competition.
Is the the new stadium now going ahead ?
It might be a little soon to rebound.
 

Seedsfan

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
13,249
8,052
AFL Club
Collingwood
Hawthorn and the AFL invested in N.Z. and then the Saints took over. They got a decent crowd at the 400,000 population and windswept Wellington.
Participation numbers were impressive.
Auckland was derailed by the failure to build a new stadium and then Covid hit.
AFL NZ has a nominal national league and now have a women's competition.
Is the the new stadium now going ahead ?
It might be a little soon to rebound.
At the moment they are saying after covid they will start work on all the grounds. The AFL will benefit big time off the growth and strength of kiwi cricket as there is a massive push to get the ground done so Auckland can host international cricket
 

weewilly

Team Captain
Jul 18, 2003
366
167
Other Teams
Swans
Just came across this in the AGE today. That is a massive increase for any sport in such a short time!

Nicole Livingstone, the AFL’s general manager for women’s football.
"The number of women and girls playing Australian football increased by 722 per cent from 73,000 participants in 2010 to 600,000 today"
 

BringBackTorps

Club Legend
Jan 5, 2017
2,743
1,717
AFL Club
GWS
Just came across this in the AGE today. That is a massive increase for any sport in such a short time!

Nicole Livingstone, the AFL’s general manager for women’s football.
"The number of women and girls playing Australian football increased by 722 per cent from 73,000 participants in 2010 to 600,000 today"
Yes, there has been a massive increase in female AF around Australia since 2010- but the 600,000 figure is a fluff no.
The no. of females playing club & school comp. AF- the only real, & crucial criterion- is a minority of the 600,000 figure.

ALL sports in Australia cite fluff nos. for both males & females,, jnr & snr- where the big majority of each sports' "participants" are derived from one-off Gala Days, community events etc; & school phys. ed programs etc.
Soccer is worst, stats-wise, since it is played c. 10.5 months pa; is less tiring/injury prone- so players can play twice pw, with different entities; & has indoor & outdoor versions (Therefore much easier for the same soccer player to be counted multiple times- no sport cross checks names against various formats of each sport).

For Ausplay statistics, also be aware it is a survey that only interviewed 25,000 people; &, worse, if a person answers that they played the sport only once in the last 12 months, they are counted as a "participant" in that sport! Thus why Ausplay has such large nos. in athletics, & other obscure, sports.

The contact codes of AF, RL, & RU are MUCH less likely to have had persons play only once in 12 months - because these contact sports are "dangerous" to play, particularly for "fly-ins"; & they require much more commitment/training/experience, to be safe on the field (cf soccer, basketball, athletics etc. -where it is much easier to "waltz" into a club/school game as a fill-in, & be safe; &, also, possibly competitive).

 
Last edited:

weewilly

Team Captain
Jul 18, 2003
366
167
Other Teams
Swans
Yes, there has been a massive increase in female AF around Australia since 2010- but the 600,000 figure is a fluff no.
The no. of females playing club & school comp. AF- the only real, & crucial criterion- is a minority of the 600,000 figure.

ALL sports in Australia cite fluff nos. for both males & females,, jnr & snr- where the big majority of each sports' "participants" are derived from one-off Gala Days, community events etc; & school phys. ed programs etc.
Soccer is worst, stats-wise, since it is played c. 10.5 months pa; is less tiring/injury prone- so players can play twice pw; & has indoor & outdoor versions (therefore much easier for the same soccer player to be counted multiple times- np sport cross checks names against various formats of each sport).

For Ausplay statistics, also be aware it is a survey that only interviewed 25,000 people; &, worse, if a person answers that they played the sport only once in the last 12 months, they are counted as a "participant" in that sport! Thus why Ausplay has such large nos. in athletics, & other obscure, sports.

The contact codes of AF, RL, & RU are MUCH less likely to have had persons play only once in 12 months - because these contact sports are "dangerous" to play, particularly for "fly-ins"; & they require much more commitment/training/experience, to be safe on the field (cf soccer, basketball, athletics etc. -where it is much easier to "waltz" into a club/school game as a fill-in, & be safe; &, also, possibly competitive).

I was just reporting what she said. It is up to others to disprove the figures!
In any case as you say ALL the other sports fudge their figures as well.
 

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,351
5,441
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
18 teams is already a lot.
At the risk of stating the obvious, 20 is even more.
There is momentum for a Tassie team, so it looks like we will get to 19 teams in the next five years.
Meaning, unfortunately, we might have to contemplate a 20th.
You'd have to think that that would represent the maximum number of teams the AFL can support.
Next to zero chance that the 20th team will be from Canberra.
If you're looking at a team coming in which pays for itself from day one, then a 3rd Perth team would be no. 1, and daylight would be 2nd.
 

RedV3x

Premiership Player
Dec 14, 2015
3,245
808
AFL Club
Fremantle
18 teams is already a lot.
At the risk of stating the obvious, 20 is even more.
Yes. Consider an even distribution for success - a premiership every 20 years.
That's like an emotional anchor.
The solution (to expansion).
1. Relocation - not very palatable.
2. Mergers - even less palatable.
3. Promotion/relegation - totally impractical
4. Conferences - the likely solution.
Australian Football does not reward mediocracy - it's the premiership or failure.
American Football rewards conference winners as small as four with accolades etc.

There is momentum for a Tassie team ........
Who gets the nod is a completely separate thought and already endlessly debated.
 

Cubs2Lions

Club Legend
Jan 12, 2021
1,020
1,857
Adelaide
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
South Adelaide
4. Conferences - the likely solution.
Australian Football does not reward mediocracy - it's the premiership or failure.
American Football rewards conference winners as small as four with accolades etc.
How would conferences work though in AFL though given the amount of teams we have currently now + future expansion?
 

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,351
5,441
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
How would conferences work though in AFL though given the amount of teams we have currently now + future expansion?
In the Australian context, conferences are an idiotic idea.
Hopefully the failed experiment in the AFLW has cured us of thinking about conferences forever.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,351
5,441
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
Why do you say that ?



Where was the fail ?
You had a situation where one club lost all its games against all the teams it played from the other conference, but yet qualified for finals despite having fewer wins than at least one club from the other conference which missed out on finals entirely.
It's about as dumb a system as you can possibly imagine.
What we have currently is miles better.
There were seasons in the Super Rugby when they had conferences where a similar thing happened.
 

Seedsfan

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
13,249
8,052
AFL Club
Collingwood
You had a situation where one club lost all its games against all the teams it played from the other conference, but yet qualified for finals despite having fewer wins than at least one club from the other conference which missed out on finals entirely.
It's about as dumb a system as you can possibly imagine.
What we have currently is miles better.
There were seasons in the Super Rugby when they had conferences where a similar thing happened.
You can’t compare Australian rules to super rugby. Teams in different conferences had different salary caps obviously they are from different nations where the strength of the game is different

I think conferences in the AFL could work. Especially if we keep seeing expansions. If say we get to 24 teams you could keep the 22 week season with you playing all of your conference opponents twice
 

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,351
5,441
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
You can’t compare Australian rules to super rugby. Teams in different conferences had different salary caps obviously they are from different nations where the strength of the game is different

I think conferences in the AFL could work. Especially if we keep seeing expansions. If say we get to 24 teams you could keep the 22 week season with you playing all of your conference opponents twice
Can't really see the merit.
At 20 teams, you simply have a 20 round season, that's 200 games, spread across 24 weeks so that you get a Thursday night game in very round.
I can't for the life of me see what benefit conferences bring, especially when 18 of the 20 teams will be in the Eastern half of the continent.
 

RedV3x

Premiership Player
Dec 14, 2015
3,245
808
AFL Club
Fremantle
At 20 teams, you simply have a 20 round season,
If teams play each other once that would be a 19 game season.
If teams were grouped into fours or fives then you would have 22, 23 or 24 game season.
The extra games could be set from your conference or rotated annually.
 

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,351
5,441
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
If teams play each other once that would be a 19 game season.
If teams were grouped into fours or fives then you would have 22, 23 or 24 game season.
The extra games could be set from your conference or rotated annually.
19 rounds plus one rival round (where the cities with two teams get to play each other a 2nd time), is a near perfect outcome.
Much better than any crappy conference idea.
 

RedV3x

Premiership Player
Dec 14, 2015
3,245
808
AFL Club
Fremantle
19 rounds plus one rival round (where the cities with two teams get to play each other a 2nd time)
So 20 teams divided into 10 conferences.

a near perfect outcome.
If you wanted to maintain the current 22 round length then 5 conferences of 4 teams.
5 X 4 = WA + SA, NSW +Qld, Geelong+ Tas + NZ+ NM, 8 Melbourne teams divided by two.
 
Last edited:

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,351
5,441
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
So 20 teams divided into 10 conferences.



If you wanted to maintain the current 22 round length then 5 conferences of 4 teams.
5 X 4 = WA + SA, NSW +Qld, Geelong+ Tas + NZ+ NM, 8 Melbourne teams divided by two.
But in that brief example, you see the sheer stupidity of conferences.
Why does Geelong and North have to join Tassie and NZ?
It's just nonsensical.
You can imagine all the fans in the Cattery: you beauty - we get to play the Kiwis twice this year. How goods that?! And not just this year...forever!
 

RedV3x

Premiership Player
Dec 14, 2015
3,245
808
AFL Club
Fremantle
But in that brief example, you see the sheer stupidity of conferences.
No. I see it as stupid that you call people who propose conferences as stupid.
So you're saying your 10 team conference idea is stupid ?

Why does Geelong and North have to join Tassie and NZ?
it doesn't. it's just a suggestion.

You can imagine all the fans in the Cattery: you beauty - we get to play the Kiwis twice this year. How goods that?! And not just this year...forever!
You can imagine all the fans in Brisbane: you beauty - we get to play the Suns twice this year. How goods that?! And not just this year...forever!
That was your model.
Remember "where the cities with two teams get to play each other a 2nd time".
Sydney would have guaranteed wins against the Giants in your model but times have changed.
The Suns will most probably improve as well.
Depending how the AFL approaches things Tassie, Canberra, Auckland or any new team could be easy beats for a while.
Perth3 would be a gimme under your model.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad