VIC fans - merge, relocate or relegate?

[Johnny Bananas]

What is the point of this thread?

To find out which of the options is considered the least worst. The reason I mentioned Victorian fans is because their team can merge with another one in the same city who isn't a bitterly despised rival, and they'd still have the opportunity to see 11 home games without catching a flight.

I would like to think that you are right, but I doubt it. I am not suggesting adding more teams, but don't see any Victorian teams moving any time soon. On top of what happened to Fitzroy, who as I explained above were probably like West Torrens in the WWT merger

I don't see any Victorian teams moving in practice anytime soon either. But equating West Torrens with Fitzroy? Spare me. Moving games 4km up the road is very different to losing every home game played in the state. Also, Fitzroy continued to exist as a separate club afterwards and only lost its football operations, unlike both Woodville and West Torrens.

the AFL would have seen what happened when the NRL kicked out South Sydney and people from all clubs marched down the streets demanding they be let back in. They also forced the merger of Balmain and Western Suburbs. The NRL have never really recovered from that. The would have looked at that more closely than we probably give them credit for.

Getting rid of Souths was an absolutely moronic move by the NRL, equivalent to getting rid of Richmond from the AFL. Balmain were financially dead and would have just been relegated anyway. I'm not sure what you mean by the NRL not having recovered from that, they definitely have. What they haven't recovered from is the Super League War killing their momentum. In fact I'd argue the NRL could have gone further with their rationalisation. Manly and Cronulla are both bigger basket cases than any AFL club.

 

[Kwality]

Probably a bit of both, I do get that minimizing clubs in one area (vic) would equalize the comp more. It's the cost of doing it, not so much in $ terms it's more sentimental terms to 100's of 1000's fans who lose their club.

Further what gives non vic fans the right to demand that?, those clubs and their fans were in this league first! Vic fans of those clubs have every right to vent their opposition to such things,........................... first in best dressed comes to mind.

Been there.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Been there.

Explain.................... my tip is it's about Subiaco.

 

[Kwality]

would have just been relegated anyway.

Was there relegation, where to?

Manly and Cronulla are both bigger basket cases than any AFL club.

Dont Cronulla own their venue?

 

[Kwality]

Explain.................... my tip is it's about Subiaco.

Had that conversation before.

 

[PJays]

The population of Geelong is 200k. On that basis Tasmania could support two teams.

That's a poor argument. Geelong has just as many fans in Melbourne as they do in Geelong. It's only an hour down the road- closer than Hobart is to Launceston.

 

[Sttew]

Easier to just fold Footscray, North Melbourne, Melbourne and St Kilda rather than merge them.

And be left with no club bearing the name, 'Melbourne'....wash your mouth with soap

 

[Bjo187]

That's a poor argument. Geelong has just as many fans in Melbourne as they do in Geelong. It's only an hour down the road- closer than Hobart is to Launceston.

But aren't there nearly a million tasmanian expats living in other australian states too?

 

[nick1408]

That's a poor argument. Geelong has just as many fans in Melbourne as they do in Geelong. It's only an hour down the road- closer than Hobart is to Launceston.

It may be a poor argument but it's the exact same argument made prior.

Edit: Tasmania (whilst they have a net population gain from interstate migration) typically lose ~1000 people per quarter to Victoria - less than an hour from Launceston by plane and around an hour from Hobart.

 

[PJays]

But aren't there nearly a million tasmanian expats living in other australian states too?

I doubt it?

Wouldn't translate to bums on seats or many memberships either. A flight to Tassie is not equivalent to a 1 hr drive to Geelong. Plus Geelong plays 8 or 9 times a year in Melbourne. Fans from Melbourne can watch them regularly with ease. If you're a Melbournian Tassie expat, wouldn't get as many chances to watch them.

 

[PJays]

It may be a poor argument but it's the exact same argument made prior.

It's totally different.

Tassie is more geographically isolated than Geelong.

I'm saying Geelong has a 1/10th share of 6.4mil Victorians. Tassie has 515k, with many of the footy fans already committed to North or Hawthorn. Or even other teams.

It makes no sense to chop a Melb team with 40k members and 100k fans, to make way for a smaller Tassie team.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Had that conversation before.

Subiaco still exists South Melbourne does not. If that's what you're implying.

 

[nick1408]

It's totally different.

Tassie is more geographically isolated than Geelong.

I'm saying Geelong has a 1/10th share of 6.4mil Victorians. Tassie has 515k, with many of the footy fans already committed to North or Hawthorn. Or even other teams.

It makes no sense to chop a Melb team with 40k members and 100k fans, to make way for a smaller Tassie team.

It makes no sense to chop a Melbourne team full stop as Carringbush2010 has stated well. Tasmania have a population big enough to support their own team. I doubt Geelong have 1/10th share in Victoria but I have no data to back that, although I can say Geelong do not have a 100% monopoly on support in the Geelong region, just as any potential Tasmanian side wouldn't have a 100% monopoly. What would happen is some supporters would jump ship to the local side as what happened with other new teams.

 

[cub]

Wont have to worry about that

 

[telsor]

Probably a bit of both, I do get that minimizing clubs in one area (vic) would equalize the comp more. It's the cost of doing it, not so much in $ terms it's more sentimental terms to 100's of 1000's fans who lose their club.

Further what gives non vic fans the right to demand that?, those clubs and their fans were in this league first! Vic fans of those clubs have every right to vent their opposition to such things,........................... first in best dressed comes to mind.

It reminds me of the people who move into the 'cool' inner city areas, because of the culture and nightlife, and then demand the local pub stop having live music because it's too loud.

You begged to join knowing what the deal was, and the way things were is a big part of why you wanted to join so much!

 

[telsor]

It makes no sense to chop a Melbourne team full stop as Carringbush2010 has stated well. Tasmania have a population big enough to support their own team. I doubt Geelong have 1/10th share in Victoria but I have no data to back that, although I can say Geelong do not have a 100% monopoly on support in the Geelong region, just as any potential Tasmanian side wouldn't have a 100% monopoly. What would happen is some supporters would jump ship to the local side as what happened with other new teams.

Geelong is increasingly just an outer suburb of Melbourne. People commute from there to jobs in Melbourne every day, and often it's quicker and easier than getting into central Melbourne from Pakenham or Lillydale.

 

[nick1408]

Geelong is increasingly just an outer suburb of Melbourne. People commute from there to jobs in Melbourne every day, and often it's quicker and easier than getting into central Melbourne from Pakenham or Lillydale.

Yeah, which is why I feel there is no room for another side in the west of Melbourne. Geelong is about as far out of the city as what Penrith is from Sydney. The difference is it's a lot easier coming from Geelong.

In saying that; just because people are commuting from doesn't mean they are cats supporters. just like everyone in Richmond isn't tigers supporter. Geelong does have a big catchment area but to say they have 1/10th of the support in Victoria (as was the original argument) is a poor argument I feel. I don't think even Collingwood or Richmond could argue that - but I have no proof otherwise.

 

[PJays]

Geelong does have a big catchment area but to say they have 1/10th of the support in Victoria (as was the original argument) is a poor argument I feel. I don't think even Collingwood or Richmond could argue that - but I have no proof otherwise.

That's not what I was arguing. I was merely taking the Victorian population of 6.4million, and saying this averages to 640k per team.

People are suggesting 10 teams is too many for Victoria. I'm merely pointing out that on population per head, a Tassie team would have less than Victoria's teams currently do. And there's already 2 teams playing in Tassie who have been there for many years. And the North and South of Tassie don't particularly like each other, either.

 

[Engimal v3]

Best option by far is relegation to the VFL. If North relocated or merged, I wouldn't follow them anymore. Would prefer they fold over those two options.

 

[juss]

Lets agree to disagree, I see Kevin Murray, I see a direct heritage, you choose not to, all good. Doesnt mean one or other is right or wrong, its why reading widely is useful, not accepting an opinion blindly.

The reality of the national comp today is that is not the VFL but there is no doubting the heritage of the majority of the teams. Bit like Ports history in the SANFL, you can deny it when it suits your purpose.

Sure, we can agree to disagree. Factually, SM doesn't exist though. The Sydney Swans do.

 

[Rich01]

Geelong is increasingly just an outer suburb of Melbourne. People commute from there to jobs in Melbourne every day, and often it's quicker and easier than getting into central Melbourne from Pakenham or Lillydale.

Yep, just like Fremantle is an outer suburb of West Coast.

 

[BronCrow]

Nothing like West Torrens really.

Fitzroy has far more history than the Brisbane Bears, it is actually quite similar. Because it didn’t happen in the AFL it just didn’t get the media coverage.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[BronCrow]

To find out which of the options is considered the least worst. The reason I mentioned Victorian fans is because their team can merge with another one in the same city who isn't a bitterly despised rival, and they'd still have the opportunity to see 11 home games without catching a flight.


I don't see any Victorian teams moving in practice anytime soon either. But equating West Torrens with Fitzroy? Spare me. Moving games 4km up the road is very different to losing every home game played in the state. Also, Fitzroy continued to exist as a separate club afterwards and only lost its football operations, unlike both Woodville and West Torrens.


Getting rid of Souths was an absolutely moronic move by the NRL, equivalent to getting rid of Richmond from the AFL. Balmain were financially dead and would have just been relegated anyway. I'm not sure what you mean by the NRL not having recovered from that, they definitely have. What they haven't recovered from is the Super League War killing their momentum. In fact I'd argue the NRL could have gone further with their rationalisation. Manly and Cronulla are both bigger basket cases than any AFL club.

I agree with you, no Victorian side is going to be moving. I never stated otherwise.

What does how far away you are from your home have to do with anything. The WWT merger in the opinion of a lot of West Torrens supporters was a takeover, and Woodville lost little to nothing. A lot feel like they lost their club. Fitzroy have continued in some regard, but to my knowledge, they lost all their previous history to the merger with Brisbane, and had to start from zero.

Yes, absolutely it was moronic to set rid of Souths. Just as moronic to get rid of Balmain. Souths financial position was no better than Balmain’s though. What you say about Rugby League not having recovered from is the momentum that was killed of by Super League. Obviously I didn’t make that obvious enough. That rationalisation that you say could go further in the NRL will never happen for the same reasons that they will never happen in the AFL. The first thing the NRL need to worry about is getting juniors from Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia playing the game, like the AFL have in non heartland areas.



On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Off Tap]

Wouldn't it be better to add two extra teams into the competition instead of getting rid of any?

One in Tassy and another possibly from WA. Not sure of NT could sustain enough supporter base to succeed to have their own side.

20 teams play 19 rounds.

Each team plays each other once during the year and then switch corresponding home grounds the following year.

190 games in the home and away season compared to current 198.

Opens up the opportunity for two conferences as well.

Top 4 or 5 play in finals. Winner of each conference plays off for the flag.

Evens out any fixturing issues/biases that we currently have.

Also have a conference All-Stars game instead of SOO if there's enough interest from players. Prefer SOO but that's a dead duck at the moment.

 

[Papa G]

The s**t tin Vic clubs act as a buffer for central Politburo. Nice to have as a line of defense but expendable if the barbarians invade.