Tasmanian Team

[BDA 23,031]

13 hours ago, Mickey said:

People in Tassie will support a team, regardless of whether it's in Tassie or not

This is the accepted wisdom but the task force have refuted saying other sports, in particular basketball, are attracting the youngsters at increasing rates. If you’re not attracting the junior players to AFL they will not in turn become supporters. Maybe the task force are exaggerating this point but it does stand to reason. 

[Demon trucker 1,800]

9 hours ago, Colm said:

 

Relocated to Hobart area almost 3 years ago. Great city to live and work in. Real good work/life balance. Has heaps going for it in terms of restaurants, cafes and culture. Only gets 50mm more rain per year than Melbourne. Zero traffic compared to Melbourne. 
A case could be made that if a young 18 wanted to sow some wild oats he would have more option in the big city, but don’t clubs try to discourage that anyways. 
Loved living in Melbourne and I’m not saying anything bad about it,and there clearly must be reasons the AFL has not put a team in Tasmania yet. I just don’t see that quality of life here and ability to retain players is one of them. 
 

I think Tassie has a higher female to male population then Melbourne. 

[BDA 23,031]

11 hours ago, BW511 said:

Geelong appeals to those who surf or like that lifestyle.

Being in Ocean Grove, Barwon Heads, Torquay, Anglesea, Aireys Inlet or even Moggs Creek is very different to Hobart.

Let’s not forget, Tassie and particularly Hobart is bloody cold and wet in winter. Would take a very special type to want to relocate down there to play

Players in the Gold Coast have the beach lifestyle, weather and surfers paradise. Hasn’t done much for retention up there.

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 11,019]

23 hours ago, pineapple dee said:

Allow Tasmania to field their own AFL team or drop the name Australian Football League, simple as that.

I'm all for a Tassie team, but I think the above is a fairly flawed statement.

It could also be said that the NT and to a lesser extent ACT, could also make fairly legitimate claims to requiring a team for it to be a truely Australian competition.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

16 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

It could also be said that the NT and to a lesser extent ACT, could also make fairly legitimate claims to requiring a team for it to be a truely Australian competition.

The ACT would probably have a team now (instead of Gold Coast) -- it was Aussie Rules territory -- but a previous AFL admin dropped the ball and now it's firmly rugby league.

If the AFL ignore Tassie, at grass roots level at the least, the pipeline of support to the top level (players, supports, $$$) will dry up. But that's the way it's looking.

[Cards13 9,117]

11 hours ago, BW511 said:

Geelong appeals to those who surf or like that lifestyle.

Being in Ocean Grove, Barwon Heads, Torquay, Anglesea, Aireys Inlet or even Moggs Creek is very different to Hobart.

Let’s not forget, Tassie and particularly Hobart is bloody cold and wet in winter. Would take a very special type to want to relocate down there to play

Exactly, especially at RFA or FA time you’d think players would head to warmer climes but I could be wrong. 

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 11,019]

23 hours ago, pineapple dee said:

Drop the Gold  Coast Suns. No future for them. 

Ironically, having two league standard grounds /stadiums in SEQ Qld went a long way to saving season 2020.

I'm a solid believer in the future of the Suns and based on the demographic, projected population growth and a strong grass roots Aussie Rules presence in that part of the world.  However, I do struggle to justify the huge sums of money spent on subsidies for the Suns in the present, particularly  with the general austerity measures the AFL has put in place due to COVID.  It's going to be a very long term project you suspect.  You would assueme that the AFL probably has set a hard timeline of finacial KPIs to determine if they continue with the Suns or cut their losses, but it's unlikely to be ever made public.

[BW511 2,724]

2 hours ago, Better days ahead said:

Players in the Gold Coast have the beach lifestyle, weather and surfers paradise. Hasn’t done much for retention up there.

If you could live that life and play for a side (Geelong) that makes finals every year, you’d be on the first flight outta there too

[Mickey 4,757]

15 hours ago, BlackAttack said:

Who cares about growing the game? 
 

The people of Tasmania deserve to have a team to support and watch every week like we do.

The AFL do.

I agree with you. I'd love a Tassie team, and I signed the petition saying so. It'd automatically become my second team, in a way the other expansion teams never could.

 

But the AFL is first a foremost a business. They care about growing the game into areas it isn't entrenched at the moment, and couldn't care less whether Tassie deserves a team or not.

[Mickey 4,757]

4 hours ago, Better days ahead said:

This is the accepted wisdom but the task force have refuted saying other sports, in particular basketball, are attracting the youngsters at increasing rates. If you’re not attracting the junior players to AFL they will not in turn become supporters. Maybe the task force are exaggerating this point but it does stand to reason. 

But will a Tassie AFL team fix that? Are they so sure having an AFL team will fix the huge issues with grass roots footy in Tassie? Maybe it will. But there is so much work that needs to be done to support local footy first.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,457]

TV networks don't care about Tassie, ratings in Tas do nothing to move the needle for them. If it's not going to increase the league's broadcast rights (either short or longer term) there's not much of a case.

They probably will and should get a team eventually but they'll probably be the 20th team after a 19th team is decided on. Either that or the AFL moves North down there.

[Uncle Fester 2,848]

18 hours ago, Mickey said:

Finances aren't the only thing causing the AFL to drag their feet.

Tassie doesn't give them anything the don't already get. It doesn't grow the game. You could argue GC and GWS don't either, but they are at least in non-AFL states, so there is that argument.

People in Tassie will support a team, regardless of whether it's in Tassie or not.

Grow the game... grow the game... grow the game...

[censored] growing the game. How about giving it back to the people that love it before they get bored and wander off, rather than spend millions on teams that bore us real footy fans and bore those that are meant to join in?

 

 

 

[BDA 23,031]

1 hour ago, Mickey said:

But will a Tassie AFL team fix that? Are they so sure having an AFL team will fix the huge issues with grass roots footy in Tassie? Maybe it will. But there is so much work that needs to be done to support local footy first.

I don’t know tbh. You could be right but the Task Force suggest it will positively impact participation rates.

[BDA 23,031]

3 hours ago, BW511 said:

If you could live that life and play for a side (Geelong) that makes finals every year, you’d be on the first flight outta there too

I'd also swap gold Coast for Hobart if it meant i was in a team that played finals every year. 

[Diamond_Jim 12,718]

6 hours ago, Better days ahead said:

This is the accepted wisdom but the task force have refuted saying other sports, in particular basketball, are attracting the youngsters at increasing rates.

Basketball has been prominent in the younger ages for decades. It doesn't translate to interest in professional basketball and many younger players  give up as they quickly realise it is dominated by height. (Have never understood why junior leagues should not have height divisions as well as age.) Strangely enough at the under 8 level it is the little guys who are often far more co-ordinated.

[Diamond_Jim 12,718]

5 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

You would assueme that the AFL probably has set a hard timeline of finacial KPIs to determine if they continue with the Suns or cut their losses, but it's unlikely to be ever made public.

Not even the clubs know the answer to that one which is why some clubs want to reign in the power of the AFL.

[Queanbeyan Demon 6,958]

I remember all these arguments for and against teams being established in foreign territory in 1980 when South moved to Sydney. 40 years on and the jury is well and truly in. The same will apply for the Bums and the Greater Waste of Resources. The AFL will have a timeline that is measured in decades, not years, for them to work. 

So far as Tassie goes, see george_on_the_outer's post on page one of this thread. 

Edited November 29, 2020 by Queanbeyan Demon
Typo

[BScotti 178]

On 11/28/2020 at 9:00 AM, george_on_the_outer said:

Unless a side relocates, the finances just don't add up.

They want access to the AFL $12M distribution, their Government to tip in $8M, but where does the rest of the $40-50M per year needed to run an AFL club come from? 

It isn't memberships, that barely scrapes together a couple of million for any club. 

Sponsorship is a major input, but it needs a bucketload to still get to the break-even point. 

The AFL is subsidising GWS / GC to the tune of $30M each per year.  And they are doing that to "create" television time, that the networks are prepared to pay.  Even they cannot afford another money drain, which wouldn't create more air time to sell ( you need two teams for that).

North is already half way there.  That is probably the best chance for the Tasmanians.  Especially if their government swings the support money to them instead of splitting it with Hawthorn.

 

Completely agree.  It is the only way to provide a balanced, fiscally sound and truly national competition. also reduces the talent drain which would occur if a 19th team was added not to mention the complexity of an odd number of teams and reducing the Victorian bias assuming it is a Victorian team that relocates.  Surely it has to be North Melbourne.

The opportunity to inject mature talent, favourable draft conditions, financial incentives etc that GWS and GC had into an existing team with a good but not great supporter base should be a sound decision for all (except some Nth melbourne members).

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,525]

Can't access the article, but it's hard to see how it (romance aside) works.
Hobart, with a population of 206,000 and Launceston with 106,000 is going to struggle to attract enough members.
Then, you have them being 2.5 hours apart, so it's a matter of picking one or the other.
Tasmania has the lowest population and smallest economy of any Australian state.

I'm pushing 40; I'd love to live in Tasmania. 
It's quiet, there's plenty of good food, cheese, wine and scenery.
It'd be a much tougher sell to convince 23 year olds earning hundreds of thousands to live there.

 

[Pates 9,686]

8 hours ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Can't access the article, but it's hard to see how it (romance aside) works.
Hobart, with a population of 206,000 and Launceston with 106,000 is going to struggle to attract enough members.
Then, you have them being 2.5 hours apart, so it's a matter of picking one or the other.
Tasmania has the lowest population and smallest economy of any Australian state.

I'm pushing 40; I'd love to live in Tasmania. 
It's quiet, there's plenty of good food, cheese, wine and scenery.
It'd be a much tougher sell to convince 23 year olds earning hundreds of thousands to live there.

 

I might be wrong but I think it’s also been decreasing in population, or at the very least growth is minimal. 

Edited November 30, 2020 by Pates

[Supermercado 2,802]

From a purely ruthless perspective, if the AFL really want a team there they should turn the tap off on a Victorian club and force them to merge with Gold Coast. The Suns get the influx of players that should help them become a good side and a spot in the league opens for a brand new Tasmanian team.

I can't see the locals going mad for a warmed up corpse of a club parachuted from interstate - and from the perspective of running the joint imagine having to balance the north and south of your own state AND a faction of Victorian based fans of the relocated side?

[Axis of Bob 11,912]

Tasmania should already have a team but adding a team doesn't make sense.

People in Tassie already follow footy, so most of the benefits will be cannibalised from existing (mostly Victorian) teams. The time to do it was in the creation on the AFL but it just doesn't make sense anymore. Adding a team to create a bye for nearly no benefit to the competition isn't going to fly. It will have to come from a relocation from Victoria.

Throwing money at a 500,000 population (or, about 10% of Melbourne) in order to reduce the revenues for the rest of the clubs for no real benefit? It's a nice romantic argument of 'fairness' but, unfortunately, it just doesn't stack up.

 

[Clintosaurus 7,936]

Only chance of us getting a team is either Norf or Gold Coast being relocated. Not sure either will work though.

[dpositive 1,838]

Ross is the ideal place to locate a truly Tasmanian team.

Historically Ross was the location of the troops who were placed there to attend to needs of nNorthern settlers and Sothern convicts. Two cultures that still exist to divide their internal leagues etc. and allow both Hawks And Roos to gain support.

Get the Tassie industries to support this central location to provide access to their attractive tourism offerings a showroom built around a sports ground with attractions to get their locals to travel a small difference through their own communities and it could really fly.

Theres plenty of room around Ross and I think it's in a bit of a rain shadow so has a mild climate.

[Demonland 73,835]