20th AFL Team

[Rab D Nesbitt 7,335]

Bring in a Hobart and Launceston side. Instant rivalry, ten games each round, neither likely to the called the Devils as they’re not representing a whole state. 
 

Yeah I know, funding etc etc….

[ElDiablo14 3,373]

For me it's easy:

GSW to relocate to Canberra, I believe it's important to have representation in the nation's capital and compete with the NRL. They can still play few games at Giant's stadium. Sydney is not big enough market to warrant 2 AFL teams, yet.

GC should fold and AFL to rethink their expansion strategy, effectively leaving the league with 18 teams... For now.

[beelzebub 22,282]

25 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Bring in a Hobart and Launceston side. Instant rivalry, ten games each round, neither likely to the called the Devils as they’re not representing a whole state. 
 

Yeah I know, funding etc etc….

The odd thing is.... youre kinda right.

Tis a bit Hatfields and McCoys isnt it.

Not sure theres the money , or even the ability for the two to survive, but most certainly the division of passion.

It would/ will irk some in northern Tassie to support a team that may come tobe seen as that "Hobart" mob.

 

[ElDiablo14 3,373]

3 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

The odd thing is.... youre kinda right.

Tis a bit Hatfields and McCoys isnt it.

Not sure theres the money , or even the ability for the two to survive, but most certainly the division of passion.

It would/ will irk some in northern Tassie to support a team that may come tobe seen as that "Hobart" mob.

 

Surely they'll play a good portion of their home fixture at UTAS?

[daisycutter 28,681]

Just now, ElDiablo14 said:

Surely they'll play a good portion of their home fixture at UTAS?

a 7:4 split has been mooted,  but who knows

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,533]

18 hours ago, beelzebub said:

The odd thing is.... youre kinda right.

Tis a bit Hatfields and McCoys isnt it.

Not sure theres the money , or even the ability for the two to survive, but most certainly the division of passion.

It would/ will irk some in northern Tassie to support a team that may come tobe seen as that "Hobart" mob.

 

Presumably the team won't be called "Hobart" for that reason. Naming it "Tasmania" is all encompassing, although it diminishes the possibility of a second team ever being located in that State.

[Orion 332]

18 hours ago, ElDiablo14 said:

For me it's easy:

GSW to relocate to Canberra, I believe it's important to have representation in the nation's capital and compete with the NRL. They can still play few games at Giant's stadium. Sydney is not big enough market to warrant 2 AFL teams, yet.

GC should fold and AFL to rethink their expansion strategy, effectively leaving the league with 18 teams... For now.

None of that will ever happen 

[Neil Crompton 4,817]

With Tassie ticked off, we  now have all States represented in our competition. As such, I’d beware of the temptation of locating a 20th team in one of our two Territories, ie Canberra. The reason is that this will only promote the push for a team in the one remaining Territory, namely the NT, and probably rightly so if Canberra gets the nod. However NT would then become the 21st team, which would then lead to calls for a 22nd team to balance out the draw again. Therefore if we must have a 20th team, I believe it should come from one of the existing States (although I’d prefer to see 18 teams only).

[Jaded No More 58,886]

50 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

With Tassie ticked off, we  now have all States represented in our competition. As such, I’d beware of the temptation of locating a 20th team in one of our two Territories, ie Canberra. The reason is that this will only promote the push for a team in the one remaining Territory, namely the NT, and probably rightly so if Canberra gets the nod. However NT would then become the 21st team, which would then lead to calls for a 22nd team to balance out the draw again. Therefore if we must have a 20th team, I believe it should come from one of the existing States (although I’d prefer to see 18 teams only).

As nice as it would be to have a team representing the NT, it is just unrealistic. Population wise, finance wise, weather wise, even sponsorship wise, it's going to be an uphill battle. Let's not even talk about player retention. We think Tassie will have it hard, NT will be much much harder. At least Tassie is a 40 min flight from Melbourne. 

[Diamond_Jim 11,995]

23 hours ago, daisycutter said:

a 7:4 split has been mooted,  but who knows

was reading that today..

How can you justify a billion dollar stadium on 7 games a year?

The politics of playing in the two cities is obvious but this is quickly becoming a taxpayer funded monster

[Demonland 66,372]

 

[Gawndy the Great 7,678]

12000 rocked up but how much were tickets? Given how hell bent the AFL is on making money, i cannot see how Darwin is commercially viable given Gold Coast is probably 10x more appealing and is still yet to turn a profit in its 2nd decade. 

We still have clubs that are not profitable in the existing 18 teams and unlikely ever to be profitable. Plug those holes before you go ahead and hand out another license. 

[Diamond_Jim 11,995]

27 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

12000 rocked up but how much were tickets?

The NT would have paid in part by purchasing memberships. This allows them to give out free tickets. How many is the secret

[Dee*ceiving 1,043]

I wouldn't be surprised if half of those 12,000 tickets were giveaways and corporate hospitality related. 

On 03/05/2023 at 16:24, Bombay Airconditioning said:

So currently we have the two most recent expansion clubs struggling on and off the field. Relying heavily on AFL funding to survive, low memberships, a concerning trend of quality players requesting a trade at seasons end, stuck in the bottom half of the ladder for what seems like eternity and last season we had the Suns trading Jack Bowes and pick 7 to Geelong to ease salary cap pressures. Who exactly and how much are they paying these players to find themselves in this position? I thought I read years ago that clubs that were in these positions had an AFL appointment accountant assigned to them to try and avoid these situations.

In addition we have

Hawks : Intentionally tanking over 2-4 year period to cash in before Tassie’s draft concessions come into play.

North : Less than six months ago they were a Clarko signature away from becoming irrelevant. Currently struggling in terms of their playing list.

W.C.E : In addition to injuries they have an aging list and previous poor trades and starting to hurt them.

I must be watching a different game if anyone thinks a 19th or 20th is a good idea for our competition. The argument that an extra game will generate X amount of extra funding is ridiculous, on average there will be 3-4 games a week not worth watching. What are the main reasons players are leaving the Suns and GWS? Are they home sick / family reasons? Do they not like where they’re living ? Or are they chasing success at a successful club? Possibly a combination of these things, but I think ultimately the latter. What makes so many people think player retention won’t be an issue for a Tasmanian team. I’m all for a team in Tasmania but another club must make way, 18 teams must be the maximum, we don’t have the population or talent to  justify further expansion.

 

I agree, that tenth game is unlikely to warrant an audience but the reality is businesses will spend money to have their logos on jumpers, footballs and hoardings at the ground. There will also be logos on the grass, on the LEDs outside and inside the stadium plus radio and TV coverage with yet more advertisements (mostly Ladbrokes, Sportsbet and TAB)...I could go on. 

The 20th team/tenth game will generate $$$. Maybe not enough to put teams 19 and 20 in the black in year 1 (I suspect GWS/GC business case is yet to turn a real profit) but the AFL doesn't need business cases that pay for themselves in 3 years like normal businesses.

I do wonder if the AFLW could ever run in the black as a standalone. Perhaps someday but probably not while we're still driving cars with combustion engines. 

[Rab D Nesbitt 7,335]

A roofed stadium would help deal with the humidity and temperature problem. We could get out of playing there however by agreeing to an annual clash in Alice Springs (for our usual $800k fee of course). 

[whatwhat say what 19,631]

i'm almost certain attendance at games has minimal impact upon a club's bottom line

it's tickets sold, corporate functions, sponsorship dollars, control of the gate, ownership of the hoardings...

attendance? looks good in a press release

[Sir Why You Little 34,818]

3 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

12000 rocked up but how much were tickets? Given how hell bent the AFL is on making money, i cannot see how Darwin is commercially viable given Gold Coast is probably 10x more appealing and is still yet to turn a profit in its 2nd decade. 

We still have clubs that are not profitable in the existing 18 teams and unlikely ever to be profitable. Plug those holes before you go ahead and hand out another license. 

It’s got nothing to do with ticket sales. It’s about Corporate Sponsorship and Broadcasting Deals

[Gawndy the Great 7,678]

38 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It’s got nothing to do with ticket sales. It’s about Corporate Sponsorship and Broadcasting Deals

Yes it is, but how are you doing either in Darwin.
I get the romanticism of it and if it didn’t further compromise an already compromised competition I’d be all for it - I think footy could do a lot for the communities living there. 

[Sir Why You Little 34,818]

5 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Yes it is, but how are you doing either in Darwin.
I get the romanticism of it and if it didn’t further compromise an already compromised competition I’d be all for it - I think footy could do a lot for the communities living there. 

I don’t think it will work up there. But it has nothing to do with Bums on Seats, and that includes GC and GWS. Yes the AFL pump money into these franchises, but the overall return on the Broadcasting Rights puts the entirety in the Black. 
Tasmania and a 20th Club may be a different situation, it will depend on future Broadcasting Rights 

[Skuit 9,377]

17 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Yes it is, but how are you doing either in Darwin.
I get the romanticism of it and if it didn’t further compromise an already compromised competition I’d be all for it - I think footy could do a lot for the communities living there. 

This is the key point. The argument is that the Territory and Federal governments would cover any operating shortfall due to an expected return on investment in areas such as health and justice.

From a corporate perspective, the pressure on energy company sponsorship makes things a little harder, but I imagine there would be massive interest from organisations country-wide keen to attach their names to an Indigenous-focused team.

On field, it would be hoped that a local team would unearth hidden talent and encourage more participants, such that the pool isn't diluted to the extent of the AFL's other recent expansion teams. Playing a Territory brand of football should also keep audiences engaged. 

Lastly, a lot of people are concerned about the Top End climate, but it's a national competition and there are numerous other quirks of our game (non-uniform ground dimensions, etc.) which make it interesting. Clubs will get better at playing up north and negating the effects. 

[BoBo 2,236]

Does anyone else remember an interview with Cyril Rioli where he was asked if he was the best player from his community and he responded by laughing and basically saying there were heaps of better players than him? I *think* he even said his cousin was way better than him? 

So extrapolating outwards, this would suggest that there are a lot of people from indigenous communities that don’t end up playing professionally. If we’re worried about a shallowing of the pool of players, here’s an option:
 

If one of those reasons is having to move 1000’s of km away or not having infrastructure set up to pipeline them to an AFL club as to why some of these guys don’t end up playing professionally, wouldn’t a NT club at least give access/incentive to these remote communities? 
 

 

(Edit: Rioli didn’t seem like he was just being humble when he said what he said)

 

Edited May 17 by BoBo

[layzie 29,620]

Talent pool etc

[leave it to deever 16,089]

Alice Springs is too small for a team but couldnt they be co  based in Darwin as well?

The AFL goes to a lot of trouble promoting the game in the NT. And locals do their bit attending games hosted there.

Would be great for them to have their own club.

Edited May 18 by leave it to deever

[Demon17 4,633]

On 03/05/2023 at 17:12, ElDiablo14 said:

For me it's easy:

GSW to relocate to Canberra, I believe it's important to have representation in the nation's capital and compete with the NRL. They can still play few games at Giant's stadium. Sydney is not big enough market to warrant 2 AFL teams, yet.

GC should fold and AFL to rethink their expansion strategy, effectively leaving the league with 18 teams... For now.

You describe the solution well. Giants are not grabbing market in Western Sydney and never will. Gc folding likewise for the same reasons.

But requires afl to admit mistakes. They are incapable of that. And a 20th team in Darwin with a population a bit over 100k is fanciful.

[DemonicFinalFantasy 207]

The Perth Miners, full of FIFO workers.