The AFL wants 22 teams. Name your next four.

[Badger17]

A minimum of 500k people needs to be baseline IMO.

In conjunction with: a stadium that’s hosted AFL games and even more population requirements if the market is already covered.

For example, 1.5 million people would not make a 3rd Adelaide club viable because the new club wouldn’t get a third of the share of support.

So looking at all of that, a 3rd Perth team is the only viable option for a 20th club until Manuka gets an upgrade.

Beyond that, possibly a second Brisbane club in a few decades as they’ll have the population and the stadium but they’ll need to have the demand.

Anywhere else like Sunshine Coast etc is out of the question until they have a stadium and host games there.

And no way can Sydney support a third team yet when the Giants are struggling. Two teams might be the best you can get out of them even long term, as much as the AFL wishes otherwise.

I can't see Manuka getting an upgrade that makes it properly capable of hosting an AFL side fulltime without it coming with the guarantee of an AFL license. Yeah it's capacity will be increased to 20k if the cricket stuff goes through, which isn't a given BTW, but it'd need plenty of quality of life improvements and another increase in capacity to host an AFL side fulltime.

I wouldn't completely rule out a new stadium if the AFL insisted on having one built in a different location to Manuka, but it'd have to be something bare minimum.

Any talk of roofs and/or billion dollar state of the art stadiums is nonsense. The ACT simply isn't in a position to fund something like that, and unlike Tasmania the electorate would absolutely crucify any government that tried it. The rectangular sport people would, rightfully frankly, openly revolt if they tried to build a new stadium as well, but I think Barr is too arrogant to care about that TBH.

 

[Aussie in exile]

I can't see Manuka getting an upgrade that makes it properly capable of hosting an AFL side fulltime without it coming with the guarantee of an AFL license. Yeah it's capacity will be increased to 20k if the cricket stuff goes through, which isn't a given BTW, but it'd need plenty of quality of life improvements and another increase in capacity to host an AFL side fulltime.

I wouldn't completely rule out a new stadium if the AFL insisted on having one built in a different location to Manuka, but it'd have to be something bare minimum.

Any talk of roofs and/or billion dollar state of the art stadiums is nonsense. The ACT simply isn't in a position to fund something like that, and unlike Tasmania the electorate would absolutely crucify any government that tried it. The rectangular sport people would, rightfully frankly, openly revolt if they tried to build a new stadium as well, but I think Barr is too arrogant to care about that TBH.

I think I'm right in saying that the Raiders and the Brumbies want an upgrade to the stadium they play in, but Barr has no love for the Rugby codes so that won't happen.

 

[Badger17]

I think I'm right in saying that the Raiders and the Brumbies want an upgrade to the stadium they play in, but Barr has no love for the Rugby codes so that won't happen.

It's a bit more complex than that.

It'd be more accurate to say that all sports have struggled since Barr became Chief Minister except the ones he takes a personal interest in.

It's not that he has a particular vendetta against the rugby codes, it's just that he and his party allow their own personal interests to dictate their decision making and the electorate doesn't hold them to account because of the unique circumstances of local politics in the ACT.

 

[Aussie in exile]

It's a bit more complex than that.

It'd be more accurate to say that all sports have struggled since Barr became Chief Minister except the ones he takes a personal interest in.

It's not that he has a particular vendetta against the rugby codes, it's just that he and his party allow their own personal interests to dictate their decision making and the electorate doesn't hold them to account because of the unique circumstances of local politics in the ACT.

Perhaps the electorate should, as they have voted them in.

 

[Professor Knowall]

Perhaps the electorate should, as they have voted them in.

Hang on - aren’t you the one that rants and raves that taxpayers money shouldn’t be spent on stadiums whenever a new oval stadium or re-development is proposed - yet here you want Barr to be held to account for not funding a new rectangle stadium?

He should be your political hero for not prioritising funds for stadiums.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Hang on - aren’t you the one that rants and raves that taxpayers money shouldn’t be spent on stadiums whenever a new oval stadium or re-development is proposed - yet here you want Barr to be held to account for not funding a new rectangle stadium?

He should be your political hero for not prioritising funds for stadiums.

Lets see if he upgrades the Cricket ground shall we.

 

[LordLucifer]

A minimum of 500k people needs to be baseline IMO.

In conjunction with: a stadium that’s hosted AFL games and even more population requirements if the market is already covered.

For example, 1.5 million people would not make a 3rd Adelaide club viable because the new club wouldn’t get a third of the share of support.

So looking at all of that, a 3rd Perth team is the only viable option for a 20th club until Manuka gets an upgrade.

Beyond that, possibly a second Brisbane club in a few decades as they’ll have the population and the stadium but they’ll need to have the demand.

Anywhere else like Sunshine Coast etc is out of the question until they have a stadium and host games there.

And no way can Sydney support a third team yet when the Giants are struggling. Two teams might be the best you can get out of them even long term, as much as the AFL wishes otherwise.

Spot on !!

 

[LordLucifer]

Been down in Melbourne for the past two weeks and listened to a bit of local radio, naturally footy was the main topic.

Got me thinking about the future structure of the competition which I originally thought should be capped at 22 clubs with a 21-round season. This also had me butting heads with other posters who suggested there should be another team in WA.

However, I've had a tweak on my original thoughts, here is how I think it should be with the possible new locations :

WA
Metro - 2
Regional - 1 (Peel)

SA
Metro - 2
Regional - 1 (Barossa Park)

VIC
Metro - 6
Regional - 1

TAS
Metro - 1
Regional - 0

ACT
Metro - 1
Regional - 0

NSW
Metro - 3 (North Shore/Northern Beaches)
Regional - 2 (Central Coast & Illawarra)

QLD
Metro - 2 (North Brisbane)
Regional - 2 (Sunshine Coast)


24 teams playing each other once in a 23 round season followed by a Final 12 series.

 

[Tackle Bag]

W.A third team
Canberra
S.A third team
Maybe nth QLD in 20 years??

 

[Coolangatta]

Canberra
3rd Perth team
2nd Brisbane or Sunshine Coast team

Depends on if SC ever builds a stadium and someone plays 3-4 games there a year with good crowds.

 

[hampton]

19. Tasmania 2028
20. WA3 2032
21. Canberra 2038
22. Sunshine Coast 2044

 

[Fire]

19. Tasmania 2028
20. Canberra 2030
21. Brisbane 2 2036
22. New Zealand 2038


We do not need any more clubs from vic/sa/wa. And the NT is not viable without it somehow being a permanant government commitment. FNQ is too sparse, and anywhere else in NSW is not ready yet.

All that being said, 22 teams is 2 teams too many for now. I'm just meeting the brief.

 

[hampton]

Imagine you are the head of a new breakaway australian football competition. If you could start a 20 team competition from scratch, without constraint - where would you put teams? You can bribe existing clubs to join your new rebel competition, and / or start new clubs as you see fit.

I would have..

VIC

• Collingwood Magpies
• Carlton Blues
• Richmond Tigers
• Essendon Bombers
• Geelong Cats

NSW

• Sydney Swans
• West Sydney NEW CLUB
• Newcastle NEW CLUB
• Illawarra NEW CLUB

QLD

• Brisbane Lions
• Ipswich NEW CLUB
• Southport Sharks NEW CLUB / PROMOTION
• Cairns NEW CLUB

SA

• Port Adelaide
• Adelaide Crows

WA

• West Coast Eagles
• Freemantle Dockers

ACT

• Canberra NEW CLUB

Tas

• Tasmanian Devils

NZ

• Auckland NEW CLUB

 

[eth-dog]

Imagine you are the head of a new breakaway australian football competition. If you could start a 20 team competition from scratch, without constraint - where would you put teams? You can bribe existing clubs to join your new rebel competition, and / or start new clubs as you see fit.

I would have..

VIC

• Collingwood Magpies
• Carlton Blues
• Richmond Tigers
• Essendon Bombers
• Geelong Cats

NSW

• Sydney Swans
• West Sydney NEW CLUB
• Newcastle NEW CLUB
• Illawarra NEW CLUB

QLD

• Brisbane Lions
• Ipswich NEW CLUB
• Southport Sharks NEW CLUB / PROMOTION
• Cairns NEW CLUB

SA

• Port Adelaide
• Adelaide Crows

WA

• West Coast Eagles
• Freemantle Dockers

ACT

• Canberra NEW CLUB

Tas

• Tasmanian Devils

NZ

• Auckland NEW CLUB

You wouldn't get 4 NSW or Queensland. 2 max. No NZ. I'd say Hawks come in for 6 Vic most likely. Then add Norwood and Sturt from SA and 2 more for WA

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Imagine you are the head of a new breakaway australian football competition. If you could start a 20 team competition from scratch, without constraint - where would you put teams? You can bribe existing clubs to join your new rebel competition, and / or start new clubs as you see fit.

I would have..

VIC

• Collingwood Magpies
• Carlton Blues
• Richmond Tigers
• Essendon Bombers
• Geelong Cats

NSW

• Sydney Swans
• West Sydney NEW CLUB
• Newcastle NEW CLUB
• Illawarra NEW CLUB

QLD

• Brisbane Lions
• Ipswich NEW CLUB
• Southport Sharks NEW CLUB / PROMOTION
• Cairns NEW CLUB

SA

• Port Adelaide
• Adelaide Crows

WA

• West Coast Eagles
• Freemantle Dockers

ACT

• Canberra NEW CLUB

Tas

• Tasmanian Devils

NZ

• Auckland NEW CLUB

I would put teams where there's a cultural history stretching back to the 19th century of communities in those towns having an interest in Australian football.