Would Tasmanians adopt a new team?

[Cmarsh]

I still believe it's a travesty that we're pretending to be a national competition without a Tasmanian team.

This is a position I've never comprehended. Every US major competition does not have a team in every state, far from it in fact. Yet no one would question if their competitions are considered national.

 

[Wooljay]

This is a position I've never comprehended. Every US major competition does not have a team in every state, far from it in fact. Yet no one would question if their competitions are considered national.

The below images may give you an idea of the slight differences between the two countries.

United States:

Australia:

You don't need every city to have a a team to be a national competition, but it's a joke in an 18 team comp that one single team can't represent a state that has proven to be capable of financially supporting one.

Meanwhile, we have teams withering in Western Sydney, Gold Coast and parts of Victoria in the "heartland".

 

[Furn2]

So Basically the current teams should support a Tassie team so they can have a second team to watch when they are bored ?

Tassie adds nothing to the overall pie, unless they are going to play exclusively on Monday nights or something.

 

[yyou]

Seeing firsthand what happened in WA,
but never even visiting Tassie,
I'm guessing many would switch, but keep a second club, particularly if that 2nd club is doing well
I don't think bf gives a good sample as most on here are probably more passionate than the run of the mill supporter.
As time wears on & the club becomes more established & usually successful,
numbers would continue to grow
But of course I could be completely wrong

 

[Wooljay]

So Basically the current teams should support a Tassie team so they can have a second team to watch when they are bored ?

Tassie adds nothing to the overall pie, unless they are going to play exclusively on Monday nights or something.

Replace 'Tassie' with GWS and you have exactly the same valid argument.

We aren't breaking into 'rugby heartland' with GWS, we're just funneling money into an empty pit of disinterest.

We support a number of Victorian teams, I bet Tassie would be more financially sustainable than at least 4 Vic teams.

 

[Colonial]

Replace 'Tassie' with GWS and you have exactly the same valid argument.

We aren't breaking into 'rugby heartland' with GWS, we're just funneling money into an empty pit of disinterest.

We support a number of Victorian teams, I bet Tassie would be more financially sustainable than at least 4 Vic teams.

Incorrect

They couldnt be more different.

 

[Wooljay]

Incorrect

Four years in, and barely any growth in membership numbers and an actual fall in average home crows since year 1.

And a broad and all encompassing disinterest from the bulk of the population.

Bleak outlook.

 

[Furn2]

Replace 'Tassie' with GWS and you have exactly the same valid argument.

We aren't breaking into 'rugby heartland' with GWS, we're just funneling money into an empty pit of disinterest.

We support a number of Victorian teams, I bet Tassie would be more financially sustainable than at least 4 Vic teams.

Tassie already consume footy at the same level as the footy states.

It's like if you had a store in Melb and sold well there but you sold at the same level online to tassie.

Would you put a store in tassie ?

No you'd put it somewhere where you don't sell much at all.

 

[Colonial]

Four years in, and barely any growth in membership numbers and an actual fall in average home crows since year 1.

And a broad and all encompassing disinterest from the bulk of the population.

Bleak outlook.

Judging way to soon on a large long term project.

As for last paragraph thats garbage. Again.

We have a great out look especially with the amount of kids involved.

Youre coming off as a crybaby.

 

[Wooljay]

Tassie already consume footy at the same level as the footy states.

It's like if you had a store in Melb and sold well there but you sold at the same level online to tassie.

Would you put a store in tassie ?

No you'd put it somewhere where you don't sell much at all.

Which is why I didn't pose my statement as being business-centric. Obviously If you already have the entire market share somewhere you attack a different segment of the market.

I'm purely talking from an integrity and equity standpoint - of which the AFL is fairly devoid of.

Judging way to soon on a large long term project.

As for last paragraph thats garbage. Again.

We have a great out look especially with the amount of kids involved.

Youre coming off as a crybaby.

It's only a long term project if it's even moderately sustainable.

I'm coming off as someone who is interested in seeing a national competition and not just pointless expansion exercises in markets that barely care enough about one team, let along two. Barely scraping 10k people to home games is an indictment, and between the WSW and rugby I can't see the AFL stealing a whole lot of market share anyways.

Gold Coast is probably even a worse case, but at least they're only really contending with the Titans.

To be fair, I don't even think there is a talent pool to sustain 18 clubs as it is. Genuinely think the AFL is going to be start seeing a serious decline in the quality of the competition as it spreads itself thin.

 

[1990crow]

Too many Melbourne sides, one should relocate.

 

[Colonial]

It's only a long term project if it's even moderately sustainable.

I'm coming off as someone who is interested in seeing a national competition and not just pointless expansion exercises in markets that barely care enough about one team, let along two. Barely scraping 10k people to home games is an indictment, and between the WSW and rugby I can't see the AFL stealing a whole lot of market share anyways.

Gold Coast is probably even a worse case, but at least they're only really contending with the Titans.

To be fair, I don't even think there is a talent pool to sustain 18 clubs as it is. Genuinely think the AFL is going to be start seeing a serious decline in the quality of the competition as it spreads itself thin.

Guess its a good think the AFL are in charge.
You dont see what types of people are coming through the gates. Young families with lots of kids.
Yep the talent is. Hense why they are trying to get NSW and QLD to get more numbers.
You say all this but want a tassie team in a state that has no growth or population. Their stadiums are rather small too arent they.
But hey lets kill of existing clubs on the off chance the Tassie can turn it around.

 

[Wooljay]

Guess its a good think the AFL are in charge.
You say all this but want a tassie team in a state that has no growth or population. Their stadiums are rather small too arent they.
But hey lets kill of existing clubs on the off chance the Tassie can turn it around.

The population and growth haven't got a whole lot to do with it in regards to creating a financially sustainable club. Ideally we'd be just removing a franchise that no one cares about or wanted in the first place - barely 'existing' clubs.

York Park has a capacity of 21k, only 4k shy of GWS' home ground and 8k more than Manuka. Bellerive has about 16k capacity iirc. Plus, they'd actually fill it or at the very least come close. A far cry from what GWS are able to do.

.

 

[Experimental]

On a private Suns facebook group with 1000+ members, someone asked what everybody's first AFL team was/is. It was interesting just how many people replied that they used to support Swans/Hawks/Blues/Saints/whatever for their whole lives before following the Suns as a 'second team' due to being a local, but they've now changed allegiances and regard the Suns has their team.

I'm much the same. Used to be a Bombers fan and I started to follow the Suns as a second team before following them 100% as a local.

For many, it's taken a few years. I'm positive that people who even now say they'll always be a one-eyed-whatever supporter, they'll change their minds if a Tassie team were to be introduced.

 

[Colonial]

The population and growth haven't got a whole lot to do with it in regards to creating a financially sustainable club. Ideally we'd be just removing a franchise that no one cares about or wanted in the first place - barely 'existing' clubs.

York Park has a capacity of 21k, only 4k shy of GWS' home ground and 8k more than Manuka. Bellerive has about 16k capacity iirc. Plus, they'd actually fill it or at the very least come close. A far cry from what GWS are able to do.

.

Again?

Growth is a major major component.
To think otherwise means you still think the comp is part time.

No one cares about? If true then who am I? Theres obviously 15k give or take who do care about them. And thats just members.

So the stadiums are smaller.
Yet you want to kill off clubs with bigger grounds and populations with growth.

This is strange since the catchcry of most tassie supporters is trying to pull at the heart strings yet in the same breath want to kill off clubs.

Dont get me wrong. Im for tassie but not for killing off an existing club for shits and giggles.

 

[Wooljay]

Again?

Growth is a major major component.
To think otherwise means you still think the comp is part time.

No one cares about? If true then who am I? Theres obviously 15k give or take who do care about them. And thats just members.

So the stadiums are smaller.
Yet you want to kill off clubs with bigger grounds and populations with growth.

This is strange since the catchcry of most tassie supporters is trying to pull at the heart strings yet in the same breath want to kill off clubs.

Dont get me wrong. Im for tassie but not for killing off an existing club for shits and giggles.

Growth only matters if you're a) capturing it, and b) sustaining it. Looking at the code representation in WS, I'd be amazed if the Giants capitalise on it anyways.

Are there 15k members? Considering GWS' attendance averages out to about 10k, and assuming the away fans make up at least 25% of that, that's definitely a worry.

Look ideally the expansion clubs stay in the comp and we accommodate Tassie, but I think we're starting to see a serious loss in talent across the comp. We just don't have the recruiting pool to maintain the quality, and it's showing.

 

[Colonial]

Growth only matters if you're a) capturing it, and b) sustaining it. Looking at the code representation in WS, I'd be amazed if the Giants capitalise on it anyways.

Are there 15k members? Considering GWS' attendance averages out to about 10k, and assuming the away fans make up at least 25% of that, that's definitely a worry.

Look ideally the expansion clubs stay in the comp and we accommodate Tassie, but I think we're starting to see a serious loss in talent across the comp. We just don't have the recruiting pool to maintain the quality, and it's showing.

We are, these things take time. Compared to all the melbourne clubs and swans were, we are ahead of where everyone of them were at 5 years old.

See just from your comments you show that you dont know whats happening up here.

Hense why we are trying to grow the talent pool.

Every time theres expansion the crys of but the talent pool come flooding in. After a few years the perfect number is adjust again to include all the current teams at the time.


Edit. So what DOES Tassie add? In potential or anything? Not taking the piss but asking a valid question.

Lots of "look into your heart they deserve a team" but not much else.

 

[dinger]

On a private Suns facebook group with 1000+ members, someone asked what everybody's first AFL team was/is. It was interesting just how many people replied that they used to support Swans/Hawks/Blues/Saints/whatever for their whole lives before following the Suns as a 'second team' due to being a local, but they've now changed allegiances and regard the Suns has their team.

I'm much the same. Used to be a Bombers fan and I started to follow the Suns as a second team before following them 100% as a local.

For many, it's taken a few years. I'm positive that people who even now say they'll always be a one-eyed-whatever supporter, they'll change their minds if a Tassie team were to be introduced.

Funny you say this, because I know 4 Bombers fans who live up in the Gold Coast who went through the exact same transition and now consider the Suns their 'first' team. The ordeal in the past 3-4 years certainly doesn't help.

I think Tasmania deserves a team and I think it'll be great for business instead of having these two semi official teams in NM and Hawks. People said the same thing about Port (ie: No-one would get behind them due to support of previous teams/hatred for Port in the SANFL) as an excuse to not let us in and we winded up doing well. Similar to GWS and GCS, its not about the current generation, its about the next one and that's what should be worked towards.

 

[JackOutback]

Too many Melbourne sides, one should relocate.

Obvious answer is obvious, but I don't think the AFL wants to kill off a team again, like they did Fitzroy. It opens all kinds of wounds that the AFL would rather not deal with. And, of course, no one wants their club to die. But for a national competition, that would be the answer right there.

 

[Forward Press]

The obsession with Tasmanian team doesn't make sense. The only logical argument is 'well we have teams in 5 out of 6 States' - conversely:

1 - Tasmania doesn't have a primate capital city like the other States. Hobart has less than 40% of the Tasmanian population and a very sizable amount live in Launceston - where would the Tassie team be located?
2 - Tasmania as a whole has less people than Gold Coast and the GWS region. And in terms of future projected populations, the gap is expected to widen even more.
3 - Tasmania already no doubt has fans supporting Hawthorn, and to a bit of a lesser extent North and St Kilda. Yes, a lot of those fans would also support and buy memberships for a Tassie team, but all of them?

 

[telsor]

We are, these things take time. Compared to all the melbourne clubs and swans were, we are ahead of where everyone of them were at 5 years old.

Really? What other clubs, at 5 years, were getting ~2/3 of their funding from the league?

Oh, and while it is a bit later than than 5 years (sorry, earliest figures I could find), in 1921, the *average* attendance was 16,325 ( 4 games a week, so ~65K each week...or about 10% of Melbourne's population at the time....Meanwhile GWS gets about 0.2% of Sydney's population...

Also, in 1987, 5 years after relocation, Sydney drew 21,986 on average.

Tell me, on what basis do you think you're ahead of all the Melbourne clubs and Swans a 5 years old?

 

[telsor]

1 - Tasmania doesn't have a primate capital city like the other States. Hobart has less than 40% of the Tasmanian population and a very sizable amount live in Launceston - where would the Tassie team be located?

So many jokes....and people say I lack self restraint.

 

[JackOutback]

The obsession with Tasmanian team doesn't make sense. The only logical argument is 'well we have teams in 5 out of 6 States' - conversely:

1 - Tasmania doesn't have a primate capital city like the other States. Hobart has less than 40% of the Tasmanian population and a very sizable amount live in Launceston - where would the Tassie team be located?
2 - Tasmania as a whole has less people than Gold Coast and the GWS region. And in terms of future projected populations, the gap is expected to widen even more.
3 - Tasmania already no doubt has fans supporting Hawthorn, and to a bit of a lesser extent North and St Kilda. Yes, a lot of those fans would also support and buy memberships for a Tassie team, but all of them?

It makes sense if you think of AFL as a sport and not a business.

 

[Forward Press]

It makes sense if you think of AFL as a sport and not a business.

Yes, but the AFL is a money-making venture.

 

[telsor]

It makes sense if you think of AFL as a sport and not a business.

Yet people who say it isn't a business seem keen to SPEND the AFLs money ...