An AFL team in the NT would be like the NFL giving a franchise to North Dakota. It probably makes more sense to keep the GCS playing a couple of home games in Darwin plus one in Cairns. They could merge with North Melbourne to form the North Queensland Roos, or NQR's for short. NQR supermarkets could sponsor them. 

I like the idea of having an NT team.  heavy focus on Indigenous players, that would outrun teams at home in sweltering humidity and heat

But then the brain takes over and the population just isnt there

Good to get a grounding....

https://www.aflnt.com.au/sites/default/files/uploads/NT AFL Team Scoping Report.pdf

 

 

6 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Relocate GCS to Darwin.  They have two games there, it is their Academy zone.

Efficient ... GCS can also be enriched by what the NT offers in terms of talented footballers, who will gain a good deal from training at the AFL level. There are some really talented footy exponents up there to augment the GCS team (who most probably have to re-name themselves but keep the jumper) as we all could acknowledge.

 

6 hours ago, praha said:

Tassie is different to GC. Tasmania is not a growth area in anything. Most people leave in their 20s for more opportunity. The initial interest there is strong but historically teams just don't survive there because the economics can't keep up with the rest of the country. NT would be the same. GC is sustained growth corridor so there's more upside if you commit long term. But Tasmania will have a huge honeymoon period before eventual struggles. 

OMG, could you be any more condescending?

Historically? what teams are you actually talking about here?  The only team on the national scene that 'hasn't survived' I can think of in the last 30 years is the Tassie Devils basketball team.

Tasmania economically is one of if not the strongest performing state in the country for quite some time... 

Tasmania named Australia's strongest state economy for seventh quarter in a row (9news.com.au)  

Most people leave in their 20s for opportunity? 

22 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

The biggest issue with the NT entering that I can see is that they play AFL in the off season to the rest of the country. Whilst a stadium could be built, the local competition is still out of step isn't it?  

1 hour ago, Ouch! said:

OMG, could you be any more condescending?

Historically? what teams are you actually talking about here?  The only team on the national scene that 'hasn't survived' I can think of in the last 30 years is the Tassie Devils basketball team.

Tasmania economically is one of if not the strongest performing state in the country for quite some time... 

Tasmania named Australia's strongest state economy for seventh quarter in a row (9news.com.au)  

Most people leave in their 20s for opportunity? 

Love Tassie, and they deserve a team.

Some economic size figures:

• Tasmania GDP - $34 Billion
• NT GDP - $ 25 Billion
• Victoria GDP - $ 474 Billion
• Queensland GDP - $ 366 Billion

10 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Relocate GCS to Darwin.  They have two games there, it is their Academy zone.

You don't get the 20 team set up then, nor would you have the QLD rivalry. As small as it is...

As for the idea that the NT Government needs business support as part of its funding blueprint is a concern already. ie. they don't want to be the only one holding the funding can. I can't see NT getting their own team.

51 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Love Tassie, and they deserve a team.

Some economic size figures:

• Tasmania GDP - $34 Billion
• NT GDP - $ 25 Billion
• Victoria GDP - $ 474 Billion
• Queensland GDP - $ 366 Billion

I totally get that, my point was more the condescending ill formed comments about every team in Tas apparently has failed thru history, the majority of people leave Tas in their 20s. 
I have no doubt however that the models being used for the business case are acutely aware of economical implications of a team in Tassie, as would those trying to put a case together for the NT.  

An NT team could have remarkably positive social benefits, the positive local role models, a chance to play top level AFL without leaving home and the inspiration this could provide helping keep kids off the streets and even in school could be massive- making tax spend on team justifiable 

The Northern Kangaroos. Surely. Play 6 games in NT and 5 in Vic.  

24 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

The Northern Kangaroos. Surely. Play 6 games in NT and 5 in Vic.  

If North aren't keen on Tassie they're going to be even less excited about NT...

Anything more than 18 teams is madness.

7 hours ago, Demonland said:

 

That car parking space looks about right.

11 minutes ago, The Lobster Effect said:

If North aren't keen on Tassie they're going to be even less excited about NT...

Yes it wasn’t meant to be a serious option.  I have been to Darwin for the footy on 3 occasions and a permanent team there wouldn’t work. 

10 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

Good to get a grounding....

https://www.aflnt.com.au/sites/default/files/uploads/NT AFL Team Scoping Report.pdf

 

 

All the talk about pop etc isn't really relevant. This proposal is suggesting the team would basically be govt funded. And as these things tend to go, plucks a number out of thin air in economic and social benefit to justify the public funding. 

3 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Yes it wasn’t meant to be a serious option.  I have been to Darwin for the footy on 3 occasions and a permanent team there wouldn’t work. 

3 times.

 

Aren’t you the expert…

16 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

they used to joke about the NT Government saying that if you got one side of a street offside you could lose your seat.

Interesting dilemna though in the sense that we are demanding that the State governments of Tasmania and NT fund new teams while the competition itself fully funds GCS and GWS

Much of the Govt funding is foundation and set up costs. Although it is obvious the AFL would be supporting both Tas and NT each year like it does the GC and GWS.

Unfortunately still some Clubs  are going to depend upon the AFL to bolster them in some years if they are not prennislly successful. 

GWS it appears have a good fan base in Canberra and really an amalgamation like in the NRL of Illawarra /Dragons at least half home games seems logical and serves the ACT population all of which are reasonably well heeled. 

To grow new Clubs the AFL need bums on seats not 30,000 members ( some of which might be Canberra based) and 4,000 turning up at Homebush which is a disaster and AFL should be looking at same as 6,000 for Gold Coast home games. 

These figures are not sustainable but at least Tas and  NT are afl footy based in contrast to Western Sydney and Gold Coast. 

14 hours ago, Ouch! said:

I totally get that, my point was more the condescending ill formed comments about every team in Tas apparently has failed thru history, the majority of people leave Tas in their 20s. 
I have no doubt however that the models being used for the business case are acutely aware of economical implications of a team in Tassie, as would those trying to put a case together for the NT.  

Fair enough, I actually think Tasmania has huge potential to grow its population, economy and brand (tourism, research, migration), if they could align on a more progressive vision (and message) to drive it. 
And an AFL team would assist them to do this.

10 weeks into a season and we have two teams with one win, one of which is in dire straights off the field, one team on two wins, and two teams on three wins. This is the case most seasons. I’m all for a team in Tassie but not in the NT, and we must remain at 18 clubs.

I strongly object to a 19th team if it means a rolling bye.

Assuming 22 games each team will need two byes and if my mathematics is correct three teams will get their second bye in the last three weeks of the season.

The ladder is integral to our game and a rolling bye will make a mockery of the concept.

Twenty teams.... where is the money coming from? TV rights? Do the sums ....no pay TV model can work in Australia unless it is a loss leader. There are 8 million households. Assume market penetration of 25% gives you 2 million. Assume $50 a month subscription for 6 months and you get $600M. The present rights are around $500M a year. The market penetration level I have used would be impossible to achieve for a service providing one sport only.

If you use a foxtel cable model and put sport on top of a basic entertainment service you need to charge at least $70 a month. At that price market penetration drops again.

The other traditional revenue source was free to air advertising. This source has been savaged by digital advertising which can be delivered to targeted markets far more effectively than FTA TV ads.

The pandemic showed us that the players aren't interested in pay cuts so where do the cuts come from.Community football has got less each year. Plus we have the increasing commitment to and cost of the AFLW.

Growing the pie is a wonderful model but in reality at some stage the pie is all gristle and no meat.

Perhaps the 20th team could come from New Zealand !!! 😎

Edited May 27, 20222 yr by Diamond_Jim

My grandfather originally from Queenstown - toughest ground in Australia (look it up). 
Tassie is pretty but slow state. Covid gave it a kick along as a respite island within an island. 
I used to be involved aero medical evacuation. Cases that would be high end, but routine elsewhere, needed to be urgently flown to Melbourne. 
Virtually impossible to see a GP in North West of State. 
Lowest level of Australian school retention in the country in same region.

Anyone with half a brain aspires to mainland big smoke.  Growth comes from retirees downsizing from Syd/Mel and chucking $1/2 m in to their super. 
I believe there is still a serious North/South divide.  
 

B.  Verdun Howell

HB  Brent Crosswell Barry Lawrence

C. John Greening Ian Stewart

HF Darrel Baldock Royce Hart 

FF Peter Hudson

R Percy Jones Max Walker

 

 Be grateful they never tried to field a team in the sixties