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

---

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Never relocation. We don't need anyone's castoffs. We've had enough of rental teams as it is.

Besides the fun watching, It'd be WW3 with Victorian supporters backstabbing other sides to be kicked out of the promised land.

Anyway Its a disappointing state of affairs to be sure, but it is what it is. The AFL & clubs, some more than others, are facing an existential threat. Just having a professional league survive is the priority for footy at the moment.

At least Norf & the Awks will get the arse from here, finally. They can join the shyte fight for survival somewhere else.

Given the envisioned state of the economy, will the 10 Vic clubs make it through? It really appears that serious.

If we don't get our own team I expect North and Hawks to be here for a lot longer,they have both indicated they would be happy staying for years to come if we don't get a team.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

If we don't get our own team I expect North and Hawks to be here for a lot longer,they have both indicated they would be happy staying for years to come if we don't get a team.

Na I have a feeling the fifo games have pretty much ran there course mate if there is no chance of a afl team in the foreseeable future I don’t see the point in continue with them put the resources into the nbl team maybe if basketball gets to the popularity level it can down here in the future the afl might blink !

 

[madmug]

If we don't get our own team I expect North and Hawks to be here for a lot longer,they have both indicated they would be happy staying for years to come if we don't get a team.

Well in the short term neither of them will be here, maybe not at all this season. No loss there.

In the longer term Politically, Hawthorn may still play in Launceston. That despite back stabbing the Tassie push, even before this virus.

So games in Launceston will probably continue in some form or other. Otherwise no one would visit the place in winter.

North Melbn are gone. No more AFL, again, in Hobart

Another city dumps North! Why does everyone hate them so much?

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Well in the short term neither of them will be here, maybe not at all this season. No loss there.

In the longer term Politically, Hawthorn may still play in Launceston. That despite back stabbing the Tassie push, even before this virus.

So games in Launceston will probably continue in some form or other. Otherwise no one would visit the place in winter.

Well in the short term neither of them will be here, maybe not at all this season. No loss there.

In the longer term Politically, Hawthorn may still play in Launceston. That despite back stabbing the Tassie push, even before this virus.

So games in Launceston will probably continue in some form or other. Otherwise no one would visit the place in winter.

North Melbn are gone. No more AFL, again, in Hobart

Another city dumps North! Why does everyone hate them so much?

North Melbn are gone. No more AFL, again, in Hobart

Another city dumps North! Why does everyone hate them so much?

.
I don't see North leaving Hobart,they have indicated several times recently they plan on staying for the long term if Tasmania doesn't get a team.They would need to find another place to play games,Hobart has by far been their best interstate home to date and no where else will be as successful.

 

[madmug]

.
I don't see North leaving Hobart,they have indicated several times recently they plan on staying for the long term if Tasmania doesn't get a team.They would need to find another place to play games,Hobart has by far been their best interstate home to date and no where else will be as successful.

They might want to. First thing is to survive this season. They won't be here this year. After this year Government will have bigger priorities than both Awks & norf.

Awks may stay because of the politics of Launceston. My preference is to get rid of both of them.

Norf at least, are Gawn.

 

[The_Reaper]

Financials might force some Melbourne mergers which would open the door for Tassie

 

[madmug]

Financials might force some Melbourne mergers which would open the door for Tassie

Maybe. Whatever happens Tassie should not be helping Hawks or North.

Apart from the obvious point that they should be looking after Tasmania, not some Melbourne suburban footy teams. Especially since those two were backstabbing Tasmania's own attempts to enter the league,

The other 'fairly important' political point is, I believe the Tas public probably would burn down parliament if the Government wasted money on the AFL at this time.

The AFL is of no value to Tassie this year at least.

So good luck Hawks & North but sink or swim on your own in Melbourne.

 

[Rob]

Financials might force some Melbourne mergers which would open the door for Tassie

If that actually happens then I doubt the AFL would want to take the risk on a new team. They couldn't afford to.

 

[Established1870]

Financials might force some Melbourne mergers which would open the door for Tassie

If certain teams need to merge then it makes sense to merge struggling Victorian clubs with interstate clubs in budding areas (come on down Gold Coast Kangaroos). Personally think two Vic clubs might have to bite the bullet for the league to have solid finances going forward.

 

[madmug]

If certain teams need to merge then it makes sense to merge struggling Victorian clubs with interstate clubs in budding areas (come on down Gold Coast Kangaroos). Personally think two Vic clubs might have to bite the bullet for the league to have solid finances going forward.

So you think Don Scott was right after all? Melbourne & Hawthorn?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

If certain teams need to merge then it makes sense to merge struggling Victorian clubs with interstate clubs in budding areas (come on down Gold Coast Kangaroos). Personally think two Vic clubs might have to bite the bullet for the league to have solid finances going forward.

How does it make sense for the fans of those Vic clubs to have fewer opportunities to see their team play each year because they'll be based outside Victoria, when two of the poorest Vic clubs merging would still give them the same number of games to go to?

 

[Established1870]

How does it make sense for the fans of those Vic clubs to have fewer opportunities to see their team play each year because they'll be based outside Victoria, when two of the poorest Vic clubs merging would still give them the same number of games to go to?

I just don't think it makes sense to merge struggling Victorian clubs together. What would North Melbourne/WB or Melbourne/St Kilda bring to the league? Look at the merged teams in the NRL like West Tigers or Manly when they were just the Northern Eagles. West Tigers are still s**t house and the Northern Eagles lasted two years before going back to Manly.

Merging teams like North with teams like GC means that these clubs going forward have a strong base in two states and would actually help get GC settled like when Fitzroy merged with the Bears. Another thing people seem to forget is that whilst a a fair amount of fans were lost, both Brisbane and Sydney still hold big swathes of supporters in Victoria because of the Fitzroy/SM links. I think that aspect is really overblown when discussing moving teams like North and St Kilda who do not add as much to the national game as a strong GC side or potential Tasmanian side would.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I just don't think it makes sense to merge struggling Victorian clubs together. What would North Melbourne/WB or Melbourne/St Kilda bring to the league?

Higher average crowds, since the combined crowds of two of the small Vic teams will make up 40-45k, putting them on the level of Carlton and Hawthorn.

Look at the merged teams in the NRL like West Tigers or Manly when they were just the Northern Eagles. West Tigers are still s**t house and the Northern Eagles lasted two years before going back to Manly.

That's because in both cases, one half of the merger was bankrupt and got bought out by the other. Plus Wests Tigers has a fanbase from two very distant areas, and no centralised major stadium that's easy for both areas to access. And Manly and Norths despised each other and shunned the merged entity, it'd be like Carlton and Collingwood merging, people were appalled.

Merging teams like North with teams like GC means that these clubs going forward have a strong base in two states and would actually help get GC settled like when Fitzroy merged with the Bears.

Explain how it "gets GC settled". It does absolutely nothing to improve their home crowds because their fanbase is now split across two different states.

Fitzroy-Bears was simply a takeover, not a merger. The main financial benefit to Brisbane came from taking Fitzroy's best players to win premierships, as well as the AFL supplying cash, not because of Victorian members. In 2001, Roy Morgan research found "85% of Brisbane Lions support comes from Queensland while only 7% comes from Victoria". I daresay more Fitzroy fans would have stayed on if they'd merged with North and still had 11 home games a year.

Another thing people seem to forget is that whilst a a fair amount of fans were lost, both Brisbane and Sydney still hold big swathes of supporters in Victoria because of the Fitzroy/SM links.

Why is that the biggest consideration rather than their home crowds? I can assure you Gold Coast are more interested in generating bigger home crowds than growing a fan base in Victoria.

 

[Established1870]

Higher average crowds, since the combined fanbases of two of the small Vic teams will make up 45k.

I wouldn't say that it would necessarily equate to higher crowds if two Vic teams merge, especially teams like North and WB. I don't see stronger sides like Essendon (who geographically would be the best bet for a NM merger) wanting to muddle their history either.

That's because in both cases, one half of the merger was bankrupt and got bought out by the other. Plus Wests Tigers has a fanbase from two very distant areas, and no centralised major stadium that's easy for both areas to access. And Manly and Norths despised each other and shunned the merged entity, it'd be like Carlton and Collingwood merging, people were appalled.

Going to be honest, I wasn't well aware with the backstory behind the two. I just knew they both were formed from mergers and didn't set the world on fire so thanks for the added info on Wests and Manly.

And if you're going to use those as the reasons for the NRL mergers being failures, then it's fair to say that they would also factor heavily in any merger of Melbourne clubs in the AFL. Neither WB or St Kilda have a club in their vicinity who would be a good fit geographically aside from Geelong for the Dogs nor would a lot of members from either side support a merger in general. The only reason Fitzroy fans wanted to merge with North was because the Lions were sadly doomed at that stage and it was their only chance of staying in Melbourne. The reactions to Fitzroy/Footscray or the Melbourne Hawks are more appropriate when gouging how fans would respond to a merger.

Explain how it "gets GC settled". It does absolutely nothing to improve their home crowds because their fanbase is now split across two different states.

Fitzroy-Bears was simply a takeover, not a merger. The main financial benefit to Brisbane came from taking Fitzroy's best players and the AFL supplying cash, not because of Victorian members. In 2001, Roy Morgan research found "85% of Brisbane Lions support comes from Queensland while only 7% comes from Victoria". I daresay more Fitzroy fans would have stayed on if they'd merged with North and still had 11 home games a year.

It settles GC because it would give them a boost financially from at least a few thousand new members (they would get some people from NM supporting the club) and it would allow them to potentially fix player retention if they had an established culture in place. Having a presence in Melbourne like Sydney and Brisbane have wouldn't hurt them either.

I agree with how you've described the Fitzroy-Bears situation and I honestly think the same should happen to North or whatever small Vic club is in financial darkness (but let's be real it'll probably be North) and the Gold Coast. I think the Suns have been successful off the field in growing the game and their academy graduate numbers and the rise in football in traditional rugby areas in the region say as much. However, merging with a struggling Victorian club, IMO, would be a good way for them to get a lot of internal stability much the same way Brisbane got. The only reason Brisbane went to s**t afterwards was because the AFL, in particular the clubs, cut them off at the knees when you won three in a row.

I've always been of the opinion that GC should have been Southport or a relocated North and in this time of crisis and uncertainty, if it comes to, I feel the AFL could right some wrongs in regards to the Suns and set them up to be strong off the field in the long term (unless they win three in a row and Eddie shits his pants about it).

 

[Gigantor]

Tasmania bid dead in the water for another decade.

 

[Established1870]

Tasmania bid dead in the water for another decade.

Yeah as unfortunate as it is, Tassie won't be getting in for the foreseeable future because of this.

 

[madmug]

Yeah as unfortunate as it is, Tassie won't be getting in for the foreseeable future because of this.

We really cant tell the future. We had hoped for a team in 2025.

The important issue right now is club & League survival. We can look at a Tas team & make plans of some sort by the end of the year when we see the lie of the land. ie, an intact AFL, or a decimated AFL, or something in between.

No one can count on a big Government bail out. Maybe to help the league but I can't see the clubs getting much.

Some clubs were struggling in the good times. How they look in 6 months is anybody's guess.

 

[Established1870]

We really cant tell the future. We had hoped for a team in 2025.

The important issue right now is club & League survival. We can look at a Tas team & make plans of some sort by the end of the year when we see the lie of the land. ie, an intact AFL, or a decimated AFL, or something in between.

I honestly think this will push back a Tasmanian side until 2030 at the earliest (and I think that's optimistic). The league's coffers are going to be hit hard and I genuinely don't see some clubs surviving so the AFL will be doing all they can to keep the existing 18 afloat.

The best Tasmania can do in the mean time is keep building and building for the eventual day an AFL side comes to the state. Build a strong state league, clearer pathways for juniors and do everything possible to become a financially viable proposition that the AFL can't say no to. I really want to see Tassie in the league because they deserve to be here so this is definitely a kick in the guts in terms of seeing that happening any time soon unfortunately.

 

[telsor]

Financials might force some Melbourne mergers which would open the door for Tassie

If clubs close, or even if they come close, no new clubs will come in for a least 10 years unless their business plan is VERY strong ... far better than the Tas plan was. (base AFL distribution for example)

League (& clubs) wont go for it until their own finances are strong again.

 

[telsor]

Tasmania bid dead in the water for another decade.

And as I've been saying or years, the more time that passes, the weaker Tas's case becomes.

 

[madmug]

And as I've been saying or years, the more time that passes, the weaker Tas's case becomes.

I think you should be thinking about survival of whats there at the moment.

The future may be markedly different, no one knows.

Right now the AFL are looking at a huge Government support package.

Funny how that is the fall back. Business sponsorship ain't the be all & end all now is it!!!!

Right now a Tassie bid is simply in a state of abeyance.

We don't know the future.

Tas Gov may feel the need to push its case to rebuild tourism. Who knows.

Any opinions based on anything prior to this health/economic situation are Moot.

Simple really, all bets on anything re footy anywhere, are off. Its a whole new world, for good or other.

We just dont know.

 

[telsor]

I think you should be thinking about survival of whats there at the moment.

The future may be markedly different, no one knows.

Right now the AFL are looking at a huge Government support package.

Funny how that is the fall back. Business sponsorship ain't the be all & end all now is it!!!!

Right now a Tassie bid is simply in a state of abeyance.

We don't know the future.

Tas Gov may feel the need to push its case to rebuild tourism. Who knows.

Any opinions based on anything prior to this health/economic situation are Moot.

Simple really, all bets on anything re footy anywhere, are off. Its a whole new world, for good or other.

We just dont know.

Yes, anything could happen.

But the fundamental issue with a Tas team (relatively small population/economic base) and the long term trend that is seeing that get worse as times goes on are unlikely (note, not impossible, but unlikely) to change significantly. As time goes on, it is most likely to get worse (from this perspective anyway).

Given any major change in the AFL from this would probably mean fewer teams, then that gap becomes even more significant. It's easier to measure up to 1/19th of the market than 1/16th, and having just lost teams, the league & clubs will be even more focused on the quality of the business plan and any new clubs capacity to add significantly to the collective whole.

But yes, anything could happen.

 

[madmug]

Yes, anything could happen.

But the fundamental issue with a Tas team (relatively small population/economic base) and the long term trend that is seeing that get worse as times goes on are unlikely (note, not impossible, but unlikely) to change significantly. As time goes on, it is most likely to get worse (from this perspective anyway).

Given any major change in the AFL from this would probably mean fewer teams, then that gap becomes even more significant. It's easier to measure up to 1/19th of the market than 1/16th, and having just lost teams, the league & clubs will be even more focused on the quality of the business plan and any new clubs capacity to add significantly to the collective whole.

But yes, anything could happen.

I have said on numerous occasions that in an 18 team competition, its a disgrace that Tasmania didn't have an AFL team. Also If the AFL were still a 14-16 team comp I've said I doubted Tassie would get a gig.

All bets are off now with any sort of structure the AFL might have by next season. If per chance we lose 3 or 4 clubs, I'd doubt very much Tasmania would be part of whatever that reduced league remains. My reasons above, & my long held position applies. So I agree with you on that.

If the AFL were forced to let its weakest expansion, or VFL clubs die, they may look at its heartland for more certain community support, the TasTeam may look like a reasonable option. The bulk of people across the footy world want a Tas team. The Government do too as part of the tourism industry. Government surety looks a lot more attractive now, doesn't it!!

Anyway, One hopes no club goes under.

 

[madmug]

Ibid--
The other thing here is that club operations may change after the dust settles with this issue.

AFL clubs have become bloated. You don't need to have a footy department spending $25mil on staff.

Maybe the footy will become the main thing, not all the staff & hangers on that drain the footy industry.

It may/should become cheaper to run an AFL club. Even before the idea of reducing to 16 a side footy.

Who knows

 

[telsor]

I have said on numerous occasions that in an 18 team competition, its a disgrace that Tasmania didn't have an AFL team. Also If the AFL were still a 14-16 team comp I've said I doubted Tassie would get a gig.

All bets are off now with any sort of structure the AFL might have by next season. If per chance we lose 3 or 4 clubs, I'd doubt very much Tasmania would be part of whatever that reduced league remains. My reasons above, & my long held position applies. So I agree with you on that.

If the AFL were forced to let its weakest expansion, or VFL clubs die, they may look at its heartland for more certain community support, the TasTeam may look like a reasonable option. The bulk of people across the footy world want a Tas team. The Government do too as part of the tourism industry. Government surety looks a lot more attractive now, doesn't it!!

Anyway, One hopes no club goes under.

Actually, government funding is going to be a lot less attractive.

By the time this is over, state and federal governments will have run up a fortune in debts, due to both extra spending and lost revenue. The public will also be on them to deal with the economic issues and things like improved medical preparedness. They're not going to have a lot of money left over to divert to backing sports teams.

This will be even more true in Tas because other states will be even more serious about pursuing the Federal government for a more even GST share, meaning the subsidy for Tas could get cut significantly. Given that roughly 1/6th of the total Tas government budget revenue is the *EXTRA* GST they get, even a relatively small cut could prove to have a major impact.