Relocation

[napsyd]

Originally posted by k.t.frog
as sydney is not ready for a 2nd team, you can be sure the afl is doing everything in its power to get one there, because until aussie rules conquers that town those at the afl cannot rest, poor boys.

Ahh, now I think we are hitting on the real reason for the Swans salary cap advantage.

Bigger salary cap (should) result in a premiership.

Premiership results in more fans AND tall poppie backlash.

Enter new team to catch the AFL hype and snaffle disgruntled supporters. Probably utilise a working class background team in the West to counter the Swans more inner city Chardonnay set image.

And there you have it, instant second team! Easy as...

 

[Pessimistic]

My next question is why relocate a team ? Why not set up a new one with a local identity - it would be much much cheaper.

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by Pessimistic
My next question is why relocate a team ? Why not set up a new one with a local identity - it would be much much cheaper.

I don't think the AFL needs another team, either from a balance of structure POV or a financial one. Another team would surely see the death of at least one struggler.

The only way we'll see an entirely new team will be if one of the strugglers falls over and refuses to move to save themselves.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Sydneyfan
I agree, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Casey LGA in the southeastern fringes of Melbourne's metropolitan area one of the three fastest growing regions in Australia.

Yep. Doing my bit Though if norf think they're getting their mits on my kids they've got another thing coming!!!

 

[fabulousphil]

IMHO there are four options for relocation.

* Canberra-----previously a footy stronghold the ACT has a good standard comp in place, close to the riverina (another AFL region) some of the clubs have plenty of money especially Ainslie which pulls millions from the pokies yearly.

* Tassie -------- a footy stronghold, provider of many great footballers to the mainland and hosting AFL club games already

* Cairns-------- An Aussie rules enclave if you like in a sea of rugby, a strong local comp, very financial club also built from pokies and close to PNG which IMO will start to provide a few players to the AFL in the near future

* Southport------ Second biggest club in QLD, got more than a few million in the bank, has already been courting AFL clubs to move north.

Realistically without major AFL help its not going to happen in the near future.

My best bet is Canberra but then the best you could hope for in the way of crowds would be 12 to 15 thousand which is probably not enough.

 

[Rob]

Originally posted by Pessimistic
My next question is why relocate a team ? Why not set up a new one with a local identity - it would be much much cheaper.

Where would this new club get players? Unless it happens in the same year an existing club either falls over or a couple of clubs merge, the first 3 or 4 years of a (say) Gold Coast club would be bordering on the ridiculous.

It's hard enough to start a new club in an existing footy area with a large population, let alone a smaller regional centre.

 

[P0RT P0WER]

I think Southport, the Gold Coast is Australia's biggest growing area and nearly the biggest in th e world, the amount of people that travel from the Gold Coast each Fortnight to watch the Lions because it is all they have got deserve their own team. Southport have been trying to set up a structure with the AFL to get a team in the AFL within the next decade, they have a lot of money and seem to be the most prepared. The Southport Saints sounds good with Hometown boy Reiwoldt as the inaugral captain.

 

[OldSchool]

Re: Re: Relocation

Originally posted by TheSheik


I think your rationale was pretty good but I differ on a few points.

Firstly, I reckon it will be Footscray, they will be based at Stadium Australia in the western region of Sydney and play all of their home games there. Therefore, they can retain their new name of the Western Bulldogs with no real problems. Also, the Canterbury Bulldogs in the NRL play their home games at the showgrounds which is also within the Olympic Park precinct so there will be some obvious marketing spinoffs.

I can't agree with your concept of palying games at Manuka Oval, it just wouldn't make sense for a team that is based in Sydney. They need to play all of their games in Sydney and build up a loyal and sizeable membership base. Games down there will not help that cause whatsoever.

It has been touted before but the Doggies do not have a great name up there. Could they get the sponsors ?
You don't think Southport is the go for the Doggies ?
The local competition would benefit greatly by another group of players

 

[Bulldog1954]

It seems unfair that loyal North and Bulldog fans always have to worry about death, when the newest club in the league only gets 27,000 to a final against a high drawing club. Ohh well, thems the breaks

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by Bulldog1954
It seems unfair that loyal North and Bulldog fans always have to worry about death, when the newest club in the league only gets 27,000 to a final against a high drawing club. Ohh well, thems the breaks

I guess it must just be that loyal Port supporters do more for their club to keep them afloat.

 

[Bulldog1954]

We have been around for over 100 years kept afloat by guess who, the fans. Remember 1989 when the "fans" raised over 2 million dollars to save the club. The reason we are in trouble is because we have the least fans in the league, however we have the most loyal fans in the league proven by the fact that we have the highest member to supporter ratio in the league. We also got over 50,000 to a final against Sydnet and over 60,000 against the Crows. And Choccos theoryu that the Power fans r poor doesn't buy, we are as working class as they come. And we will not be moving interstate in the next few years

 

[Stealth bomber]

I wish the AFL would really get off this idea that to create new clubs, you have to destroy old ones first.

Just create a couple new clubs from scratch and leave the old ones as they are, then have a 20-22 round draw where everyone plays each other once. Have your bloody second NSW and QLD sides, and then some.

 

[Mr Eagle]

Originally posted by Stealth bomber
I wish the AFL would really get off this idea that to create new clubs, you have to destroy old ones first.

Why is there a need for any new clubs? Let the Vic strugglers fall as they may, then have a 12-to-14 team comp where everyone plays everyone twice per season.

e.g.
West Coast, Freo, Adelaide, Port, Sydney, Brisbane, plus Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon, Hawks, Richmond, Melbourne

or some such...

 

[sainter]

Originally posted by Mr Eagle

Why is there a need for any new clubs? Let the Vic strugglers fall as they may, then have a 12-to-14 team comp where everyone plays everyone twice per season.

e.g.
West Coast, Freo, Adelaide, Port, Sydney, Brisbane, plus Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon, Hawks, Richmond, Melbourne

or some such...

You'll be waiting a long, long time.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by Bulldog1954
We have been around for over 100 years kept afloat by guess who, the fans. Remember 1989 when the "fans" raised over 2 million dollars to save the club. The reason we are in trouble is because we have the least fans in the league, however we have the most loyal fans in the league proven by the fact that we have the highest member to supporter ratio in the league. We also got over 50,000 to a final against Sydnet and over 60,000 against the Crows. And Choccos theoryu that the Power fans r poor doesn't buy, we are as working class as they come. And we will not be moving interstate in the next few years

So check me on this....you claim you can get bigger crowds than Port, but you still can't get the same amount of support & stability off the field, yet you say your supporters are more loyal and better to the club than Port fans. The maths doesn't add up.

 

[CoastBhoy]

southport got about 18,000 people to a practice game between brissy and the demons about 2 yeaers ago

 

[Roylion]

Originally posted by fabulousphil
IMHO there are four options for relocation.

* Canberra-----previously a footy stronghold the ACT has a good standard comp in place, close to the riverina (another AFL region) some of the clubs have plenty of money especially Ainslie which pulls millions from the pokies yearly.

* Tassie -------- a footy stronghold, provider of many great footballers to the mainland and hosting AFL club games already

* Cairns-------- An Aussie rules enclave if you like in a sea of rugby, a strong local comp, very financial club also built from pokies and close to PNG which IMO will start to provide a few players to the AFL in the near future

* Southport------ Second biggest club in QLD, got more than a few million in the bank, has already been courting AFL clubs to move north.

Realistically without major AFL help its not going to happen in the near future.

My best bet is Canberra but then the best you could hope for in the way of crowds would be 12 to 15 thousand which is probably not enough.

I agree, except I'd remove Cairns from the list and substitute Sydney. The AFL has already made it clear that a second side in Sydney is desirable....even more so than Brisbane/Gold Coast. Personally, given the progress of Australian Rules, I think it will be Brisbane/Gold Coast before Sydney

IF a club had to make a choice NOW between staying in Melbourne and relocating (with AFL assistance of course) to another base, I really can't see past Southport, as a viable choice.

My opinion is that sometime in the next 20 years, there will fully relocated/new teams in Sydney, Southport and possibly Canberra. Tasmania will probably continue to host AFL games, for Melbourne based clubs, or perhaps even host more games.

Fitzroy really should have bitten the bullet at the end of 1986 and relocated as the 'Brisbane-Fitzroy Lions' to Queensland. It may well be that other clubs may see the writing on the wall and voluntarily relocate. Ideally I'd like to see all exisitng clubs remain in Melbourne. Unfortunately I can see many parallels between Fitzroy's experience in the 80's and 90's and a couple of clubs in Melbourne already.

In my view relocation is far preferable to merger or worse extinction. Perhaps if a suitable equal merger between two Mebourne based clubs was arranged, supporters of both clubs might be appeased. However in a merger, as in the Bears and Fitzroy's cases, the history of both clubs ends and a new history begins.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by Bulldog1954
We have been around for over 100 years kept afloat by guess who, the fans. Remember 1989 when the "fans" raised over 2 million dollars to save the club. The reason we are in trouble is because we have the least fans in the league, however we have the most loyal fans in the league proven by the fact that we have the highest member to supporter ratio in the league. We also got over 50,000 to a final against Sydnet and over 60,000 against the Crows. And Choccos theoryu that the Power fans r poor doesn't buy, we are as working class as they come. And we will not be moving interstate in the next few years

Bravo Bulldog1954.

It rolls so easily off the tongue to say relocate Bulldogs, relocate Kangaroos, get rid of this Melbourne clubs, get rid of that Melbourne club.

The people who take it as a fait accompli that these clubs will just move, dont seem to understand the facts.

The facts are that up to three quarters of a million Melbournites will be disenfranchised if, for example North and the Dog are relocated or go under. The equilevant would be relocating the crows out of Adelaide.
Can the AFl afford to p.iss off so many supporters of the game in its heartland?

Would the economic imperialists who propose these moves, even consider that the AFL and teams like the Bulldogs and the Roos are built on passion and emotion?

We saw the lack of passion displayed by some interstate sides during the past finals series, where their supposed supporters couldn't be bothered turning out to watch them play in a final. The inclusion of interstate finals almost turned out to be a disaster and the finals only came alive in the last two weeks of the series. It was no co-incidence that the focus by then was back on Melbourne.
Passion drives the competition not just dollars and cents.
Supporters and potential players will be lost to other sports in their thousands if clubs are relocated.
The overall financial pie will srink and all supporters of all clubs will be worse off.

The League does not consist of the four big Melbourne Clubs and the six interstate clubs.
The League is based on a sixteen team competition with ten based in Victoria.

Get used to it.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by Joffaboy
The facts are that up to three quarters of a million Melbournites will be disenfranchised if, for example North and the Dog are relocated or go under. The equilevant would be relocating the crows out of Adelaide.

Or indeed of replacing the elite status of 8 SANFL clubs and expecting the state to follow one new club with no history. We keep hearing that the Dogs have the smallest supporter base, so in theory, there would be much less losses than you've stated.

We saw the lack of passion displayed by some interstate sides during the past finals series, where their supposed supporters couldn't be bothered turning out to watch them play in a final.

You mean the lack of passion that saw a Port first week final outdraw an Essendon one in Melbourne? Or the passion that sees a Kangaroos first round home final get much the same or worse crowds as one played interstate? Get some perspective.

The inclusion of interstate finals almost turned out to be a disaster and the finals only came alive in the last two weeks of the series.

Interesting theory there, considering you're claiming that Melbourne, North Melbourne & Essendon had no interest in their finals at the MCG this year.

As for the finals only coming alive for the prelims - when has this ever not been the case?

It was no co-incidence that the focus by then was back on Melbourne.

Indeed, considering thats where Collingwood play. I don't reckon it had much to do with the Kangaroos, who according to you played earlier in a final with no interest shown whatsoever.

 

[Mr Eagle]

Originally posted by sainter
You'll be waiting a long, long time.

So? If the clubs I earmarked for the chopping block can continue to fund themselves (without being propped up by the AFL), let's just leave it as is...

 

[Jabber]

Originally posted by Mr Eagle
So? If the clubs I earmarked for the chopping block can continue to fund themselves (without being propped up by the AFL), let's just leave it as is...

Yep - I don't see any more Waverleys for the AFL to sell.

 

[napsyd]

I have no doubt that teams like the Kangaroos and the Dogs have proud histories.

I have no doubt that

Passion drives the competition not just dollars and cents.

But I also have no doubt that passion is nothing without dollars and cents.

So OK, let's just all leave everything as is, and one day in two years, or five years or ten years we'll all wake up to the story of how one of these proud clubs, with it's great history and it's passion and emotion has succumbed to the pressures of the dollars and cents.

Had their board read the writing on the wall they could have relocated, played 11 games in say Sydney, 6 in Melbourne and 5 on the road. They could have marketed themselves beautifully, drawn good crowd support wherever they played. It could have been like playing a home game every week.

But no. Instead, the supporters cry their tears for what might have been, left with nothing but their passion, emotion and history.

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by Joffaboy


The people who take it as a fait accompli that these clubs will just move, dont seem to understand the facts.

The facts are that up to three quarters of a million Melbournites will be disenfranchised if, for example North and the Dog are relocated or go under. The equilevant would be relocating the crows out of Adelaide.
Can the AFl afford to p.iss off so many supporters of the game in its heartland?

If the Kangaroos and the Dogs have three-quarters of a million supporters each then you'd have to assume all the other teams have over a million - making Melbourne's population about 8.5 million people all of whom follow the footy. I don't think so.

(Even if you assume 3/4 million between them that's still means there are more footy supporters than people in Melbourne)

Originally posted by Joffaboy

Would the economic imperialists who propose these moves, even consider that the AFL and teams like the Bulldogs and the Roos are built on passion and emotion?

So were Fitzroy and South Melbourne. Port seem to have 100 odd years of passion behind them not that anyone in Melbourne seems to acknowledge it.

Originally posted by Joffaboy

We saw the lack of passion displayed by some interstate sides during the past finals series, where their supposed supporters couldn't be bothered turning out to watch them play in a final.

Seemed pretty clear they couldn't afford to go. If you take out the AFL members from matches in Melbourne the paying crowds were pretty much the same in both Adelaide and Melbourne.

Originally posted by Joffaboy

The inclusion of interstate finals almost turned out to be a disaster and the finals only came alive in the last two weeks of the series. It was no co-incidence that the focus by then was back on Melbourne.

In case you hadn't noticed one of the Preliminary finals was in Brisbane. I for one was more interested in the Port v Brisbane semi.

Originally posted by Joffaboy

Passion drives the competition not just dollars and cents.
Supporters and potential players will be lost to other sports in their thousands if clubs are relocated.
The overall financial pie will srink and all supporters of all clubs will be worse off.

Will the "overall financial pie" shrink by the entire total of the current supporter body? I don't think so. A substantial number will continue to follow the club in their new location as many Fitzroy/South Melb supporters do. Many more will choose to support another team. Some indeed will be lost to the game, but they will probably be offset by new supporters in the relocated area.

Originally posted by Joffaboy

The League does not consist of the four big Melbourne Clubs and the six interstate clubs.
The League is based on a sixteen team competition with ten based in Victoria.

Probably the only national competition in the world (except the NRL) with such a concentration of teams in one city. We have a sixteen team competition with an unsustainable number of teams based in one particular city. Go look at the NSL and NBL and see what happened to the teams where there were too many in one city.

Originally posted by Joffaboy

Get used to it.

Get used to what?

 

[scoreboardend]

Originally posted by ozzult


I reckon that wouldn't be a bad move, not sure how Dogs supporters feel. I reckon it wouldn't leave that bitter taste in their mouth if the name was still the same.

If they change our name back to what it should be FOOTSCRAY i`ll be in it.

 

[Pessimistic]

Originally posted by Mr Q


Probably the only national competition in the world (except the NRL) with such a concentration of teams in one city. We have a sixteen team competition with an unsustainable number of teams based in one particular city. Go look at the NSL and NBL and see what happened to the teams where there were too many in one city.

Get used to what?

Plenty of examples and they just reflect countries which have huge concentrations of population in urban areas.

Scotland for example.

Or brazil. I think they maintain 'state' leagues there and have a national champoinship which is like the european championship


The melbourne clubs are sustainable because of the huge amount of supporters, connections and history they have. The problem is the large differences between them financially.

If you take the clubs in each year making losses, the non victorian clubs are represented there in ratio to the competititon

Surely the fact that brisbane have won tw flags and posted two corresponding losses suggests the management of the league as the whole needs looking at ?