New team ideas and teams that should not be in the A league

[nobbyiscool]

Gold Coast will get another team eventually, city's too big to rule out forever. Gold Coast United mostly failed because owner Clive Palmer was a self-obsessed buffoon who publicly talked s**t endlessly. If I lived there I sure as s**t wouldn't have gone to their games.

Dunno about that - I certainly don't think it's any sort of priority. GC United are another team whose headstone sits in the graveyard of professional sporting teams on the Gold Coast. It'd take a brave/stupid person to invest money in another team there.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

The other failed teams were all rugby league clubs (last century when there was too many competitions/teams/not enough funding) or NBL teams (enough said).

The city itself is now a significant size (6th biggest in Australia). The Suns and Titans won't be going anywhere.

 

[nobbyiscool]

The Titans nearly fell over about 5-6 years ago - although you're right, the drastically increased funding from their tv deal probably ensures they're here to stay.

I could see a scenario where we no longer have 2 AFL teams in Qld within 10 years though.

 

[Mr_Bojangles]

What about if Hayne jumped from the Titans to a new Gold Coast A-League franchise?

 

[The City Boyz]

What about if Hayne jumped from the Titans to a new Gold Coast A-League franchise?

Ikr...

 

[Steven Gerrard]

Ambitious! Would take a very long time though. Liverpool could even win the league by then.

Lol very funny re Liverpool. But I did say in 50 years.

 

[nobbyiscool]

My wish list for the A-League is that in 50 years we have a thriving, fully professional league with big crowds generating billions from free to air tv money and consisting of the following clubs:

Adelaide United
Second Adelaide club
Perth Glory
Fremantle (or another second club out of Perth)
Melbourne Victory
Melbourne City
South Melbourne
Geelong
Sydney FC
WSW
South Sydney
Wollongong
CCM
Newcastle
Canberra
Brisbane Roar
Brisbane Strikers
Gold Coast
Tasmania
Northern Territory

A 20 club league, 38 rounds which means not having to wait as long in between seasons, every mainland capital city would have at least 2 derbies a year, the two biggest cities would have 6 a year, every state and mainland territory would be represented making it the only truly national league in Australia and you'd have links to the old NSL with Strikers, Wollongong and South Melbourne.

Don't scrap the cap but increase it significantly so the bigger clubs can take advantage of their off-field success without outright buying the trophy, scrap the finals, top 4 for Asia and no relegation. Even in 50 years I can't see Australia being able to support more than 20 clubs so I don't think relegation is ever going to come in.

About 10% of my wish list will come to fruition by 2066.

I know this is wildly hypothetical, and I'll ignore my disagreement on you excluding NZ.

But it raises another interesting question. Would people prefer:
- the above option, with a few traditional clubs, but mainly "made up" franchises, OR
- would you prefer a promotion/relegation approach to growth if and when the league reaches that point (with the "NPL National/B League" model breaching the gap between state leagues and the A-League.)

I think the second of those options is probably more likely, but I'm more interested in what people would prefer.

 

[Punchy Bassett]

Can't see Adelaide being big enough for another team anytime soon.

 

[wally funk]

My wish list for the A-League is that in 50 years we have a thriving, fully professional league with big crowds generating billions from free to air tv money and consisting of...

A 20 club league, 38 rounds which means not having to wait as long in between seasons, every mainland capital city would have at least 2 derbies a year, the two biggest cities would have 6 a year, every state and mainland territory would be represented making it the only truly national league in Australia and you'd have links to the old NSL with Strikers, Wollongong and South Melbourne.

Don't scrap the cap but increase it significantly so the bigger clubs can take advantage of their off-field success without outright buying the trophy, scrap the finals, top 4 for Asia and no relegation. Even in 50 years I can't see Australia being able to support more than 20 clubs so I don't think relegation is ever going to come in.

In 50 years, I just hope we have a 12-14 team league, with teams thriving on and off the field (comparative to AFL or NRL levels). Whether that involves NZ, Canberra, Wollongong - who knows.

I agree the cap needs to increase a lot when (or if) possible. We're never going to be able to compete with the world's biggest leagues financially, but more wiggle room within the cap means more chances to attract greater international players in their prime.

 

[sverik25]

I think in the long run, the best scenario would be to have 16 teams playing each other twice to give 30 games per season and scrap the finals (leave that stuff to the FFA Cup).

Something like these teams I reckon would be good:

Existing 10
5th Sydney/NSW team
3rd Melbourne/Vic team (possibly Geelong, although not sure if that would work)
Canberra
North Queensland
Auckland (yes, I know a team has failed there before, but with new branding and a better stadium I think it would work. Would definitely be good for the Nix)
2nd WA/SA team/Tasmania

 

[Established1870]

I think you're all overrating Tassie and them dropping off from footy to support an A~League side. Even if it was all of Tasmania and not just North or South, they'll still go in droves to watch footy instead, even if it's only FIFO sides like North and the Hawks.

FNQ cannot sustain any sport side outside rugby league or footy (because the AFL have money). WA/SA won't get second sides because they wouldn't be able to sustain them due to lack of support.

Problem with lumping in more NSW and Vic sides is creating an NRL situation where there's too many sides based in one particular area and people from Adelaide and Perth will just hop off completely. We love AFL but hate the Vic centric nature of it. Parochialism is still alive and well in Australia. Just listen to Graham Cornes.

One side from Wollongong and tell Newcastle and CCM to GAFG and actually get better finances and support otherwise I'd think about relocating them. Canberra is a maybe. Would get support and finances but wouldn't be a powerhouse. Same with a second Brisbane side (Ipswich anyone?). Gold Coast was an abject failure and if the FFA put another team there then frankly they deserve to go out of business for being such idiots.

Auckland getting a side would be interesting. Two NZ sides could set the league up nicely over the Tasman. Dunno about Geelong but something tells me they'd be miniscule unless the Cats got involved with them. There should really only be one more Vic side but in saying that City should have been South Melbourne from the start.

And finally, if people think Darwin could sustain a top level soccer club, then they should stop commentating on this thread. It would be the equivalent of the AFL giving a team to Pluto.

 

[Zidane98]

Realistically the A League can support two more teams. For me another QLD team is definitely needed. And the other spot would go to either Canberra or Wollongong.

I'd leave any future expansion for at least another 10 years or so after this. And the "Nix need to stay in the league.

 

[FAITH]

Can't see Adelaide being big enough for another team anytime soon.

some talk of the old west adelaide and adelaide city combining to make a 2nd team, it would basically be like wsw or port adelaide

 

[Established1870]

Realistically the A League can support two more teams. For me another QLD team is definitely needed. And the other spot would go to either Canberra or Wollongong.

The last expansion period showed that neither FNQ nor the Gold Coast are decent options (FNQ doesn't have the money and GC was owned by a complete idiot). Ipswich should be the only place considered. Canberra yes. Wollongong maybe (Wollongong Mariners?).

some talk of the old west adelaide and adelaide city combining to make a 2nd team, it would basically be like wsw or port adelaide

We went in alone. This arrangement would be more like Freo and God knows Aussie sports doesn't need another Freo.

 

[Zidane98]

Logan City could work for an A League team.

 

[NUFC Tiger]

I think you're all overrating Tassie and them dropping off from footy to support an A~League side. Even if it was all of Tasmania and not just North or South, they'll still go in droves to watch footy instead, even if it's only FIFO sides like North and the Hawks.

FNQ cannot sustain any sport side outside rugby league or footy (because the AFL have money). WA/SA won't get second sides because they wouldn't be able to sustain them due to lack of support.

Problem with lumping in more NSW and Vic sides is creating an NRL situation where there's too many sides based in one particular area and people from Adelaide and Perth will just hop off completely. We love AFL but hate the Vic centric nature of it. Parochialism is still alive and well in Australia. Just listen to Graham Cornes.

One side from Wollongong and tell Newcastle and CCM to GAFG and actually get better finances and support otherwise I'd think about relocating them. Canberra is a maybe. Would get support and finances but wouldn't be a powerhouse. Same with a second Brisbane side (Ipswich anyone?). Gold Coast was an abject failure and if the FFA put another team there then frankly they deserve to go out of business for being such idiots.

Auckland getting a side would be interesting. Two NZ sides could set the league up nicely over the Tasman. Dunno about Geelong but something tells me they'd be miniscule unless the Cats got involved with them. There should really only be one more Vic side but in saying that City should have been South Melbourne from the start.

And finally, if people think Darwin could sustain a top level soccer club, then they should stop commentating on this thread. It would be the equivalent of the AFL giving a team to Pluto.

Given we have new ownership this season, I think we should be fine financially. The support and potential for good crowds exists - just need to get people back onboard after the tumultuous last few seasons under Tinkler and then the FFA.

 

[Forever North]

It's not fair to say that Canberra hardly gets a crowd - the Brumbies get around 17-18k when they're winning. In any case, a football team would be marketing itself to a completely different crowd than rugby does. Rugby occurs to the middle-management public service types, whereas football would appeal to Canberra's diverse migrant community and to younger families.

In my previous post, I also failed to mention that the ACT Government is pretty damn good at negotiating sweet deals so teams will play games in Canberra. While it's not as good as owning your own stadium (like South Melbourne does), an ACT team wouldn't have to pay much at all to use Canberra Stadium.

South Melbourne don't own their own stadium per se but have a substantial stake in it and did leverage a great long term leasing deal when Lakeside was redeveloped for athletics a few years ago. We may get between 500-1500 at h/a games nowdays but we don't lose money because of it. The original Bob Jane stadium came about because South were asked to vacate their old Middle Park ground due to the construction of the GP track. Total cost of that was around $10 million of which the club/members/fans contributed around half. So the club has a substantial equity at the current venue and it would cost the government many, many millions to ever get rid of us. Not that they would because the club is well run, has been part of the local community for over 55 years and has a great junior/woman's set up. As for any A League ambitions, of course the club would love to be part of the top tier again. Our biggest strength and funnily enough most other Hal clubs biggest weakness is our stadium deal. A 8000 crowd there would generate more income than say a 15-20k crowd at any of the bigger HAL venues. We would also have the advantage of a fully functional social club(soon to be rebuilt) that could generate year round income as well. South has the ready made football and admin infrastructure at its front door, no start up costs required. But more importantly it has football knowledge and passion. Biggest club in the land MV as well as the Socceroos have South Melbourne fingerprints all over them. Don't really know what the FFA are thinking in regards to expansion, pro/relegation etc. However South will be ready when the time comes.

(BTW if anyone is keen on seeing a decent soccer match the local NPL grand final is on next sun 11/09 at Lakeside between South and Oakleigh, k.o @5pm. Both sides beat teams 1 and 2 in the semi's over the weekend. Should also get a good crowd, 4-5000).

 

[tigs2010]

I know this is wildly hypothetical, and I'll ignore my disagreement on you excluding NZ.

But it raises another interesting question. Would people prefer:
- the above option, with a few traditional clubs, but mainly "made up" franchises, OR
- would you prefer a promotion/relegation approach to growth if and when the league reaches that point (with the "NPL National/B League" model breaching the gap between state leagues and the A-League.)

I think the second of those options is probably more likely, but I'm more interested in what people would prefer.

Promotion/Relegation would be great in terms of interest for teams down the bottom. However, I can't help but feel clubs will just die when they're relegated. How would Wellington survive playing in a 2nd tier Australian comp?

 

[ArachKing05]

I'm Victory since day dot, but it doesn't dampen my enthusiasm for this happening someday:

 

[nobbyiscool]

I don't even know where to begin with that.

So I'll probably just say that I hope you're too young to remember Carlton, and particularly Collingwood in the NSL.

 

[ArachKing05]

I don't even know where to begin with that.

So I'll probably just say that I hope you're too young to remember Carlton, and particularly Collingwood in the NSL.

And seeing as you do remember them, you should appreciate that the reasons why they failed were nothing inherent to them being from 'another' code per se.

 

[nobbyiscool]

And seeing as you do remember them, you should appreciate that the reasons why they failed were nothing inherent to them being from 'another' code per se.

Yeah. They absolutely were. Especially in the case of Carlton.

 

[ArachKing05]

Let's see:

1) Australia was still in the backwater shithole of the OFC (and all the problems that were par for the course in stifling the game's growth here)
2) The NSL...well...what can we honestly say about it (esp. @ that point in history)that hasn't already been...but let's go anyway - semi-pro status, care-factor of roughly 0.000000000001% among Oz sporting public, populated by mono-ethnic clubs with next to no interest in engaging with the wider community (and here's the kicker; that's ALL there was to support in the major capitals, Perth and Brisbane excepted)
3) The utter lack of intercontinental club competition for any confed not UEFA or CONMEBOL (FIFA World Club Championship wouldn't debut until Carlton SC's 2nd-last year of existence)at that time
4) Collingwood entered the comp as a mongrel-outfit w/Heidelberg Utd (having to incorporate the Bergers' gold into the kit, and the Warriors nickname...I needn't tell anyone the symbiosis between Collingwood and the 'Magpies' nickname)
5) Carlton was a better-done venture, but their financial troubles were in no small part due to Peter Jess(player-agent) pocketing the lion's-share of the transfer-fees for Bresciano, Colosimo and Grella; seriously, look it up.

I think you get the basic gist, and can't have a closed-mind about it. Seriously, the only things stopping it from coming to fruition in today's Oz soccer landscape are the cold-feet and pride of the parties involved.

 

[Punt Road Feral]

When you compare NSL to the HAL you only have to look at the rises of cities like Newcastle and Brisbane to show the professionalism helped big time.

Both cities were getting crowds of around 3000 at the time and by season 1 the Jets got around 8000avg and Brisbane had around 13000.

In a sense, clubs like Carlton SC were ahead of their time.

 

[ArachKing05]

When you compare NSL to the HAL you only have to look at the rises of cities like Newcastle and Brisbane to show the professionalism helped big time.

Both cities were getting crowds of around 3000 at the time and by season 1 the Jets got around 8000avg and Brisbane had around 13000.

In a sense, clubs like Carlton SC were ahead of their time.

Poetically speaking, that is exactly why they failed.