Moved Thread Too many Victorian clubs

[Tulip]

By the time the next TV deal comes, the networks won't be too interested in showing the likes of WB, Port, Melbourne & co because they simply don't rate. 1 game too many.

There is virtually no interest in these clubs by your core supporter and neutrals. I'd say it will be a consideration when the rights are up.

It's going to be a new market & form of media when this occurs. Having more teams and the correlation between that and more $ for the rights won't hold true.

6th highest attendance out of the 18 clubs with 37,000 this season.

Sit down.

 

[Tulip]

The OP clearly hasnt thought through the fact that the AFL is in the process of buying a medium-sized stadium in Melbourne.

This stadium will need to have teams to play in it.

You can make more money playing big teams in the MCG, so we presumably dont want big teams playing there.

But having a number of Melbourne-based teams that draw about 30 000 or so would be perfect.

So, in short, killing or moving a Melbourne team loses the AFL money.

Is this true?

Whose going to play there?

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

I agree. There are too many VIC clubs. You would have to think either North Melbourne or the Bulldogs should be relocated or stripped of their licenses if they fail to become profitable by the next rights deal.

You would have to throw Port in that lot too. I get no pleasure in saying the club is in a right mess.

 

[Donakebab]

Yes that's it. Bash Collingwood because a Collingwood supporter brought this up. At the end of the day, this isn't going to solve the problem. We are all aware of this problem regardless of what team we barrack for. I guess this is like reducing the earth's population for earth's sake but who gets to decide who gets culled and who stays.

You didn't offer any solution to the so called 'problem', you just trotted out the same old rubbish that something should be done about the have nots, so of course people are going to take a whack at you.

 

[Bluelegs]

The OP clearly hasnt thought through the fact that the AFL is in the process of buying a medium-sized stadium in Melbourne.

This stadium will need to have teams to play in it.

You can make more money playing big teams in the MCG, so we presumably dont want big teams playing there.

But having a number of Melbourne-based teams that draw about 30 000 or so would be perfect.

So, in short, killing or moving a Melbourne team loses the AFL money.

Source? Why would a medium sized stadium spike more interest than a large stadium?

 

[Topper Harley]

"Please eliminate 3. I am not a crackpot."

 

[Hearts to hearts]

I believe any overpopulation problem in AFL, or in the world to use the OP's analogy, is better addressed with some inventive thinking than with killing those that are living already, however inconveniently.

Great thread idea, though. Five stars from me.

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

"Please eliminate 3. I am not a crackpot."

 

[Pat_Footy]

You would have to throw Port in that lot too. I get no pleasure in saying the club is in a right mess.

South Australia is large enough to support two clubs. Port will grow in time. Obviously they are presenting their brand poorly at the moment, however coaches/players/game styles evolve. Victoria cannot support all of their clubs. North has been suckling at the teet of the rich clubs for far too long. They just sit in line every Wednesday with their hands outstretched demanding a centrelink payment. Why should WA clubs/supporters/fans be propping up North Melbourne? North imo should be relocated to either Tasmania or even another country.

 

[The_Flying_Egg]

Yes that's it. Bash Collingwood because a Collingwood supporter brought this up. At the end of the day, this isn't going to solve the problem. We are all aware of this problem regardless of what team we barrack for. I guess this is like reducing the earth's population for earth's sake but who gets to decide who gets culled and who stays.

U poor thing. Bashing Collingwood won't solve the problem but starting the thousandth thread on this topic without offering any original thought will fix the games woes!!!!!

 

[sherb]

Yes that's it. Bash Collingwood because a Collingwood supporter brought this up. At the end of the day, this isn't going to solve the problem. We are all aware of this problem regardless of what team we barrack for. I guess this is like reducing the earth's population for earth's sake but who gets to decide who gets culled and who stays.

The easiest thing in the world to do is imply that a club or clubs be relocated, merged or whatever when your club isn't one of those involved.

In addition, you've identified a supposed problem which has been discussed to death here already. Also, you haven't offered any opinion yourself regarding solutions.

You've left yourself wide open here. And fair enough.

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

South Australia is large enough to support two clubs

Absolutely

Port will grow in time.

I'm not so sure. They seem to have allienated many of their traditional SANFL supporter base and not grown a new supporter base. This isn't a Crows supporter simply bashing Port while they're down, I have genuine concerns for the club.

 

[Ghost of Grinter]

I think most fans would agree there is 1 or 2 Vic sides that need to go.
Has been this way for a while.

 

[Pat_Footy]

U poor thing. Bashing Collingwood won't solve the problem but starting the thousandth thread on this topic without offering any original thought will fix the games woes!!!!!

It's a very relevant topic of discussion. Either a new discussion should be started or another thread bumped. In this case, a new thread was started which I applaud.

 

[IanW]

Source? Why would a medium sized stadium spike more interest than a large stadium?

Bluelegs,

Go get a quote of another 30 000 seats for Docklands stadium, will you ?

Docklands is the stadium that the AFL is going to own. Its not that big - not compared to the MCG.

Regrettably for the AFL, the owners of the MCG didnt want to sell.

 

[ChrisFooty]

You are forgetting something - AFL is a predominantly a Victorian sport, along with a few other smaller states. Where are you going to plonk the new teams? In the two northern states AFL is a minor sport? You would not want to reduce the current number of teams, as that would have a negative impact on the next tv rights deal.

 

[Bluelegs]

Bluelegs,

Go get a quote of another 30 000 seats for Docklands stadium, will you ?

Docklands is the stadium that the AFL is going to own. Its not that big - not compared to the MCG.

Regrettably for the AFL, the owners of the MCG didnt want to sell.

misread it sorry thought you said they were going to build a stadium

 

[Pat_Footy]

You are forgetting something - AFL is a predominantly a Victorian sport, along with a few other smaller states. Where are you going to plonk the new teams? In the two northern states AFL is a minor sport? You would not want to reduce the current number of teams, as that would have a negative impact on the next tv rights deal.

Chris please.... North have been a leach for as long as I can remember. They are suckling at the breast of the profitable clubs. There is a complete saturation in Victoria. For the good of the game, North needs to become the new Tasmanian team.

 

[Tas]

Given the club needs to be financially viable and have a strong supporter base to survive lets move Collingwood. Sounds like a pro idea.

 

[lemons123]

As a Victorian, I've found myself pretty bored with the competition the past 2 seasons, because I really don't care about interstate teams. Vic teams are interesting because I know people who support them and are passionately involved with the clubs, but who in Victoria really cares about teams like GWS or the Gold Coast?

The problem isnt too many teams, it is more a lack of teams elsewhere. I think the best path for the AFL would be to eventually go down a US-style conference path to increase the number of VIC vs VIC games or WA vs WA games. I personally just have no interest in watching meaningless franchises that no one I know supports. I'm sure its the same for non-victorian fans when their club plays teams like the dogs or north.

Removing Victorian teams would simply decrease the interest in the state, and not increase it nationally

 

[LeverPuller]

Original thread title.

Original thread.

----------------------------------

Original responses.

----------------------------------------

Is it too much to ask?

 

[ChrisFooty]

Chris please.... North have been a leach for as long as I can remember. They are suckling at the breast of the profitable clubs. There is a complete saturation in Victoria. For the good of the game, North needs to become the new Tasmanian team.

North Melbourne will play a handful of matches per season in Tasmania, along with Hawthorn. That is a strong enough presence for AFL in Tasmania, with no other sport coming close to challenging it popularity wise. There is not enough money in Tasmania for an AFL club full time, the state's economy is in recession and there's no sign of a pick-up.

 

[TheKanga]

I don't get your argument, what is so wrong about the amount of Victorian Clubs?
I think the 10 Victorian teams are fine. There is no need to change things.

 

[Pat_Footy]

I don't get your argument, what is so wrong about the amount of Victorian Clubs?
I think the 10 Victorian teams are fine. There is no need to change things.

Were you asleep through the "re-allocation of funds" issue?
How many million did North get from the other clubs?

 

[lemons123]

Were you asleep through the "re-allocation of funds" issue?
How many million did North get from the other clubs?

North are currently paying off Etihad Stadium for the AFL and are entitled to the funds. Pretty sure they only got like a million more then Carlton.