Remove this Banner Ad

The next Melbourne stadium

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

...inane monologues worthy of [PLAYERCARD]Brett Kirk[/PLAYERCARD].

And hey, before hitting us over the head with another bout of buzzwords, read the OP:

time will come to look at replacing [Marvel] as Melbourne’s second stadium
Click to expand...
One option is to level it and rebuild on the same site
Click to expand...
The other option is to relocate to somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Thread is not about a "third mega-ground".
 
Teen Wolf said:
...inane monologues worthy of Brett Kirk.

And hey, before hitting us over the head with another bout of buzzwords, read the OP:





Thread is not about a "third mega-ground".
Click to expand...

Let’s cut through it.

Marvel Stadium isn’t getting replaced. Not in 5 years. Not in 10. Probably not in the next 25.

The AFL owns it outright. It just poured money into upgrades. And every internal feasibility report confirms the same thing: a new 30,000-seat venue doesn’t make economic sense — not in a city already anchored by the MCG and Marvel. Full stop.

There’s no land identified. No government partner. No viable business case.

This idea keeps reappearing on forums like it’s gospel, but just because a BigFooty poster floats it doesn’t mean it’s in the works. That’s not “reading the tea leaves.” That’s mistaking your wishlist for AFL strategy.

As for “inane monologues worthy of Brett Kirk” — fair play. But that’s rich coming from the kind of poster who drops a mic after misreading the thread. This isn’t about fantasy stadiums or mega-ground number three. It’s about Marvel’s future. And the future is: it stays.

The AFL’s real focus? Fixture contrast. Venue storytelling. Scarcity-based programming. You’re chasing demolition rumours while the actual shift is already underway — just not where you’re looking.
 
DidakDelight said:
As for “inane monologues worthy of Brett Kirk” — fair play. But that’s rich coming from the kind of poster who drops a mic after misreading the thread.
Click to expand...
It's accurate, as is my reading of the thread. You, on the other hand, are still oblivious to the topic.

But thanks for telling us Marvel isn't being replaced within the next 5-25 years, as if we didn't know.
 
Teen Wolf said:
It's accurate, as is my reading of the thread. You, on the other hand, are still oblivious to the topic.

But thanks for telling us Marvel isn't being replaced within the next 5-25 years, as if we didn't know.
Click to expand...
Right — so we’re in agreement that Marvel isn’t going anywhere in the next 20–25 years. That’s not a revelation, it’s the starting point. Which makes the real question: if the AFL isn’t building another stadium, what are they planning instead? That’s what this thread’s about. And that’s what’s already unfolding — even if not everyone’s across it.

You keep saying I’ve misread the topic, but haven’t actually said what your contention is. If you’re clear on the AFL’s direction, let’s hear it. Because so far, you’ve repeated a premise everyone agrees on, while swinging at tone and calling it insight.

And hey — if the goal here is just to be the guy who slaps down anything more than two paragraphs as “a Brett Kirk monologue,” then fair play. But maybe hold the mic-drop poses until you’ve said something that couldn’t have been copy-pasted from page one.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

DidakDelight said:
if the AFL isn’t building another stadium, what are they planning instead? That’s what this thread’s about.
Click to expand...
No it isn't, ffs. The thread is about Melbourne's 2nd stadium from 2050 onward.

Will Marvel be torn down and rebuilt in the same location? Or will the AFL sell the land to a property developer and move to a new location?

Those are the two options. Note waffle about "fixture contrast" and "venue storytelling" isn't one of the options.
 
Alright, so here’s what I’m hearing:

You’re zeroed in on that 2050 Marvel scenario — one line from the OP — as if it’s the only thing worth discussing. No wiggle room for how the AFL’s actually evolving right now or over the next couple of decades.

That’s not conversation. That’s tunnel vision.


Look, North Melbourne just played at Hands Oval in Bunbury — a prime example of the AFL’s broader playbook in action. Boutique venues, heritage atmospheres, building hype through scarcity and story — it’s happening now. It’s real. It’s pulling crowds and revenue. Not some distant pipe dream.

Marvel will be replaced one day. No argument there. But the question is: what happens until then? And the AFL’s answer is not just about concrete and steel, it’s about experience and narrative layering.


So I’m curious: Is the black-and-white “Marvel knocked down or relocated” frame just easier to debate? Or is it a genuine reflection of where you see the league going?

Because you’ve clearly got the smarts to engage beyond that — I’m keen to hear it.
 
There's bones of old planning and agreements in the north. IIRC the original plans for a ground between the nkw Greensborough and Mernda lines were scotched because someone owned land in Waverly. Sir Kenneth Luke, you mf.

I think the space is still there. There's the same potential for a spur line so the ground has a two direction entry and exit station, as well as some road access.

Dan has probably spent all the development money for 20 years ahead, but it might be a popular pork barrel to deliver a community hub/stadium in the expanding north.
 
Cyclops said:
There's bones of old planning and agreements in the north. IIRC the original plans for a ground between the nkw Greensborough and Mernda lines were scotched because someone owned land in Waverly. Sir Kenneth Luke, you mf.

I think the space is still there. There's the same potential for a spur line so the ground has a two direction entry and exit station, as well as some road access.

Dan has probably spent all the development money for 20 years ahead, but it might be a popular pork barrel to deliver a community hub/stadium in the expanding north.
Click to expand...

Where abouts between Greensborough and Mernda lines?
 
EBERT THE KING said:
Where abouts between Greensborough and Mernda lines?
Click to expand...
Now you've got me. I recall it being pointed out to me, one of the flat lands in the green wedges and closer to Lalor. Maybe near that quarry in Thomastown? Feels a bit too far west though. Still large stretches of beautiful open green across the North east, sometimes we walk the dog (and jnr) out that way. There's little mobs of roos in several of them.

Back then the lines terminated closer in (IIRC Lalor was the end of the line on what is now the Mernda line in the 1950s), so I think the idea was to swing a loop around from there to Mcleod or somewhere like that (Mcleod might be too hilly, maybe a spur between there and Greensie). Really stretching the memory now, though, there might have been a short spur already around there?

One mate was in Vic Gov bloke who was supposedly ITK said the rail deal was a handshake for a northern stadium when it was mooted in the 50's, and when the VFL bought farmland in Mulgrave in the 60's that deal was rescinded.

The Wiki page gives an extremely truncated version of events, even the architects page is more informative, so the League has put the various shenanigans behind them. Certainly the Victorian Government tended to favour the MCC in the tussle over where to hold the Grand Final, which affected planning for Waverley.

Looking back I see Alan Aylett as a realist, and he made sensible changes. probably Waverley was the best of a bad lot of options, but to my mind there is still something fishy about the location.
 
Marvel and MCG are the two most profitable stadiums in Australia. There won’t ever be another oval stadium built here. Makes no sense at all. With AAMI we have the smaller stadium concerts sorted.

If Marvel is condemned in say, 2050, it is more likely to be rebuilt where it is, as there is no other suitable inner city land available.
 
DidakDelight said:
Let’s cut through it.

Marvel Stadium isn’t getting replaced. Not in 5 years. Not in 10. Probably not in the next 25.

The AFL owns it outright. It just poured money into upgrades. And every internal feasibility report confirms the same thing: a new 30,000-seat venue doesn’t make economic sense — not in a city already anchored by the MCG and Marvel. Full stop.

There’s no land identified. No government partner. No viable business case.

This idea keeps reappearing on forums like it’s gospel, but just because a BigFooty poster floats it doesn’t mean it’s in the works. That’s not “reading the tea leaves.” That’s mistaking your wishlist for AFL strategy.

As for “inane monologues worthy of Brett Kirk” — fair play. But that’s rich coming from the kind of poster who drops a mic after misreading the thread. This isn’t about fantasy stadiums or mega-ground number three. It’s about Marvel’s future. And the future is: it stays.

The AFL’s real focus? Fixture contrast. Venue storytelling. Scarcity-based programming. You’re chasing demolition rumours while the actual shift is already underway — just not where you’re looking.
Click to expand...
Explain what fixture contrast is in laymans terms. Add in venue storytelling while you are there. This isn't some corporate retreat, use plain english.
 
Cyclops said:
probably Waverley was the best of a bad lot of options,
Click to expand...

It was a different time. There was little help and mostly hindrance.
The VFL decided to build a 150,000 capacity stadium when attendances were omni-important
but the government reneged on extending the rail line out there.
The WAFL had the land and built the three tier stand at what was to be the centre of a re-aligned 80,000 capacity stadium. AFL killed the WAFL so we got a new stadium at Subiaco that was inadequate as soon as it was finished.
The WAFL built a stadium at Joondalup but again the government reneged on building a station close-by, a decision that has implications for those suggesting Joondalup as an AFL site.
The SANFL built Football Park surrounded by similar politics.

We could've had a much better and earlier result for football with logic and co-operation.
 
RedV3x said:
It was a different time. There was little help and mostly hindrance.
The VFL decided to build a 150,000 capacity stadium when attendances were omni-important
but the government reneged on extending the rail line out there.
The WAFL had the land and built the three tier stand at what was to be the centre of a re-aligned 80,000 capacity stadium. AFL killed the WAFL so we got a new stadium at Subiaco that was inadequate as soon as it was finished.
The WAFL built a stadium at Joondalup but again the government reneged on building a station close-by, a decision that has implications for those suggesting Joondalup as an AFL site.
The SANFL built Football Park surrounded by similar politics.

We could've had a much better and earlier result for football with logic and co-operation.
Click to expand...
Indeed, the MCC has enormous clout in Victoria.

Just on the "reneged " bit, as I understand it that's where various versions exist. A version I've heard is there was no guarantee and such assurances as were given concerned an earlier version than Waverley.

Of course I could be wrong.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Cyclops said:
Indeed, the MCC has enormous clout in Victoria.
Click to expand...

To expand on that cricket has enormous clout in Australia.

Even though Australian Football has driven underwritten stadium expansion across Australia,
and Australian Football owned their own stadiums
and it can be seen that the sports are seasonally different,
it's cricket that still comes out best to the detriment of Australian Football.

. .
 
A third stadium would only help the smaller clubs be profitable, and the AFL need those clubs to be downtrodden, as those are the clubs that won't talk back when the head honchos make terrible decisions (as those clubs dont want to give up the hush money, sorry, I mean additional funding)

If a stadium is to be built it will be where the league can piggy back on a state driven push to "revitalise" an area, most likely the dandenong region.
 
New stadiums in Melbourne only make sense if the 9 clubs all agree that they play games based on expected attendence, and not on this tired notion of having a home ground. They're neutral venues now, so why bother playing pretend. The clubs should be looking at their bottom line.

But you can't block the interstate clubs from playing at the MCG until the grand final goes on a rotation policy (every 2nd year interstate - 1in8 at each of Optus/AO/SCG/GABBA). After that, you get the MCG based on merit of bringing a crowd.

The AFL needs to build a 30k seat stadium today, that can replace Princess Park and be used by AFLW, VFL and low drawing AFL games. I like Gosch's Paddock for this. Have a grassy hill and keep it feeling a little suburban.

Then in 25 years time, once Marvel reaches end of life (it will happen - structures don't last forever without money being spent) - the afl needs to find land for a 60k seat stadium. Somewhere like E-Gate next to North Melbourne station would be good. The land marvel is on will pay for itself over and more.

To appease the power brokers, both new stadiums would need to have an MCC and AFL Members Reserve. Doesn't get built without.
 
Lots of great ideas in this thread… my read is

1. A 3rd stadium of 20k (edit: 10-15k) will be for AFLW only.

It will be purpose built to a smaller surface size so no AFL teams will ever play on it.

Why?

Because AFLW is looking a financial (but politically impossible to fold) bust losing 50mill a year

a bespoke stadium will help reduce match day costs (eventually), improve spectator experience, and lead to games not affected by weather as they are atm

My guess is Gotchs paddock or E-gate.

Such a ground could probably be used for women’s cricket too

Melbourne Showgrounds could probably be converted but too far out of the cbd

Wherever it is it won’t have a roof to keep cost down

2. A 3rd AFL stadium is not needed in Melbourne because there is still a solid chance a smaller club will relocate interstate to Canberra or elsewhere in the next 10-20 years

TAS and a probable team 20 will only spread resources, player pool, prime time fixtures etc thinner for smaller Melbourne clubs

What’s more a team like the bulldogs would probably prefer to play small drawing games vs interstate teams at Ballarat… as the secondary market is lucrative in terms of growing supporter base… and it offers a kardinia park like home ground advantage as no one else plays there

In this scenario 8 Melbourne clubs become 7 (or even 6 decades from now)… and the MCG and a secondary 50k stadium like marvel is enough 👍
 
Last edited:
RedV3x said:
No way.



A bespoke stadium can only increase match day costs
because it has no other way to defray costs.
Click to expand...

No other way to defray costs… except host other women’s sports like big bash

AFL already talking about an AFLW stadium

www.afl.com.au

AFL considering new boutique stadium in Melbourne

The AFL is open to developing a new boutique stadium to be the home of AFLW as it looks to consolidate venues
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au

And I doubt that means buying whitten oval or ardern st

But perhaps my initial estimate of 20k size is off… and a boutique AFLW stadium is 10k fully seated
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.



Interesting video. Docklands seems a good example of a stadium that despite its location and surroundings, just isn’t integrated. Worse, it actively blocks off surrounding areas and stops them being integrated.

Rebuild it or move elsewhere?
 
Bunk Moreland said:
it actively blocks off surrounding areas and stops them being integrated.
Click to expand...

Docklands stadium is bounded on three sides by roads and a railway to the fourth.
It is surrounded by multi-storey buildings.
IMO it could have had a better initial design and could still bettered but you're way off the mark.
 
RedV3x said:
Docklands stadium is bounded on three sides by roads and a railway to the fourth.
It is surrounded by multi-storey buildings.
IMO it could have had a better initial design and could still bettered but you're way off the mark.
Click to expand...

Don't think i'm way off the mark, but it's perhaps more accurate to say it's part of the problem than the entire problem.

Docklands is a lesson in how not to plan.
 
It's not the AFL's job to worry about Docklands the suburb, though. The location checks all the boxes for a stadium, or at least certainly for a city's no.2 stadium.

When the expiration date arrives, there's no way the league would want to move elsewhere unless forced by unreasonable logistics/commerce of a rebuild at the site.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top