The teams which will go are the Giants and the Suns. Nobody watches or cares about them.

North has heritage and a loyal core of support. Certainly, larger core support than the suns or GWS.

5 hours ago, Oxdee said:

I wonder how much of hawthorns success could be attributed the the introduction of gws and gc?

Plenty, same with Geelong.
And ya don't want to be at the bottom of the ladder when Tassie comes in.
Be stuck there like we were and the teams up the top will be stuck there like Geelong and Hawthorn when the 2 you mentioned come in..

Have been wondering about the whole north and clarkeson appointment.Was it always the AFL plan to get him to north then North to tassy with a ready made coach and half a team to fast track the new tas team

6 hours ago, Oxdee said:

I wonder how much of hawthorns success could be attributed the the introduction of gws and gc?

some, not all, but also the co-introduction of free agency at the same time as the introduction of the northern franchises sucking the life out of about five to seven draft years (if you include the access to 17 year olds that gw$ were granted)

Edited April 29, 20241 yr by whatwhat say what

1 hour ago, BDA said:

The teams which will go are the Giants and the Suns. Nobody watches or cares about them.

North has heritage and a loyal core of support. Certainly, larger core support than the suns or GWS.

Do we know that to be fact or just an assumption?  

10 hours ago, daisycutter said:

my biggest beef is the odd number of 19 creates more problems such as fixture fairness and extra byes. and with 19 teams there is still only 9 games per week to monetise but the cost of running the whole show goes up by about 5% with no revenue increase (leaving out inflation which affects both costs and revenue)

Had not thought of that but obviously true.

Of course they could introduce another Mickey Mouse Round.

 

11 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

This was us 10 years ago… couid be us again one day.  We need to support the roos not dig their grave. 

This is what is annoying, it's just a game of musical chairs. 

I'm a bit like this as well in that I want the remaining Victorian clubs to stand shoulder to shoulder even at the expense of a Tassie team that may or may not work. I'm aware this is one of my rare moments not based on logic or business sense but that's how I feel. 

7 hours ago, dee-tox said:

Another beat up. Roos are a couple of decent key backmen and a goal sneak or two away from being very competitive. Get games into the kids. There's no hurry. Paul Roos had three years and he never made finals...

True, but it’s hard to see any improvement. Clarkson is a mere mortal, it seems 

North will come good. 

I personally believe we are more likely to find a 20th team than see one disappear. The fixture is already a dog's breakfast, a 19th team for 4-5 years won't make a huge difference. 

The AFL is bringing in tons of cash and essentially increases in value as a product daily. In fact they choose how much money they wish to make, small tweaks to the pricing of tickets & peripherals can bring in millions with the punters not even noticing. Not to mention round zeros, gather rounds and whatver else. Another bright idea to creat $ is only a 2 hour worshop away.

I'd hazard to say they are actively looking for places to invest to avoid taxes they'd otherwise be obliged to pay.  

Not unlike a government the AFL knows they can spend now and get it back later, they get credit at low rates, easily and the big end of business cue up to be involved. The Gold Coast, GWS and AFLW business cases would have predicted decades of red, but on they press with support from all sorts of sectors 'because it's the right thing to do. 

North will be ok...🤞

6 minutes ago, Dee*ceiving said:

North will come good. 

I personally believe we are more likely to find a 20th team than see one disappear. The fixture is already a dog's breakfast, a 19th team for 4-5 years won't make a huge difference. 

The AFL is bringing in tons of cash and essentially increases in value as a product daily. In fact they choose how much money they wish to make, small tweaks to the pricing of tickets & peripherals can bring in millions with the punters not even noticing. Not to mention round zeros, gather rounds and whatver else. Another bright idea to creat $ is only a 2 hour worshop away.

I'd hazard to say they are actively looking for places to invest to avoid taxes they'd otherwise be obliged to pay.  

Not unlike a government the AFL knows they can spend now and get it back later, they get credit at low rates, easily and the big end of business cue up to be involved. The Gold Coast, GWS and AFLW business cases would have predicted decades of red, but on they press with support from all sorts of sectors 'because it's the right thing to do. 

North will be ok...🤞

How will North be ok?

The big clubs make big money and are getting tired of being held back by the competitive balance issues tailored to low earning clubs.

Say for example they upped the soft cap by 100%... not unreasonable. North could not raise it. It would require AFL money

"I think the AFL should move North out of there, pay them the money and start bulking up those games in Tasmania and send some of the big clubs down once a year to get the Tasmania people lined up and excited (for their team in 2028)

When McGuire was probed further on this comment and was asked if Collingwood should be one of those teams to play in Tasmania, McGuire answered:

"I wouldn't have thought so"

7 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

How will North be ok?

The point is, they can run in the red for some time, like a whole bunch of things do across the AFL today. 

The onfield stuff will turn around, put good people in charge who work hard and smart and the wheel turns. You could tell that story of every club in the league to varying degrees and of the old VFL teams 20+ times over each. 

I'm 42 and Melbourne alone has gone from basket case to contender ~5 times in my lifetime alone (without specifically counting). 

They will eventually have to become solvent but my point is it's ok if that takes years and they don't have to do all of it themselves. Other factors will assist, eg. TV & gambling revenue that will continu to grow year on year (plus many other financial gains the league will identify/grow)

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by Dee*ceiving

2 hours ago, BDA said:

The teams which will go are the Giants and the Suns. Nobody watches or cares about them.

North has heritage and a loyal core of support. Certainly, larger core support than the suns or GWS.

I hope you are correct. It sucks how teams like South and Fitzroy have been erased in a few minutes in a comfortable meeting somewhere. All that history, blood sweat and tears gone for the pursuit of a $.

Then you have fools complaining these clubs weren't sustainable or " financially viable"

Not like Gws and Gcs are. Afl has been pumping money into these hand over fist and they still have little supporter base. I'm not sure I even know where the Giants are based and I live in NSW.

First and foremost 18 cubs is plenty. I don't want any more. It just makes it harder for clubs to win a flag than the original 12.

12 was perfect. Almost spiritual in significance. But now we have it, I'll accept 18 for a national competition. So Gcs makes way for Tassie and Gws could go for a team in Nt, Sa or Wa.

If North have to go which I don't believe they do surely a merge with a SA team would be better.

For a truly national comp it's probably lopsided to have ten Vic teams and only two in other Ozzy rules states.

2 minutes ago, Dee*ceiving said:

The point is, they can run in the red for some time, like a whole bunch of things do across the AFL today. 

The onfield stuff will turn around, put good people in charge who work hard and smart and the wheel turns. You could tell that story of every club in the league to varying degrees and of the old VFL teams 20+ times over each. 

I'm 42 and Melbourne alone has gone from basket case to contender ~5 times in my lifetime alone (without specifically counting). 

 

But North have been down since 2016, they were offered a Lifeline before that, but turned it down. 
The Major problem is other clubs need young talent as well, as well as a Brand new Club. 
The onfield turn around won’t just happen, they have already done 4 years on the bottom

It smells of Fitzroy to me

More clickbait for Eddie, LOL

2 hours ago, BDA said:

The teams which will go are the Giants and the Suns. Nobody watches or cares about them.

North has heritage and a loyal core of support. Certainly, larger core support than the suns or GWS.

Giants and Suns aren't going anywhere.

11 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Apart from a couple of good defenders, North have a list with excellent promise. Clarko is a good coach. If the AFL support them as they did us with Jackson and Roos, I can't see why they cannot rise, if they can keep the list together

We need to be careful assuming we are safe. The next 3 years with a bunch of key retirements could prove disastrous if not replenished.

I heard at various times over the last 6 years that North, St Kilda and us have been in the firing line for folding or relocation.

Our success has saved us... for now

No home base, aging stars,, membership ok but not near matching the big clubs.

It's a long road to the top, but a fast road back down

Good god, I'm sounding like SWYL now! 🤔

This is a big concern of mine as well.

May, Gawn & Viney will be gone soon.  The first two are absolutely irreplaceable where as Viney's output could be replaced however remains a heart and soul player.

We're all hoping for long and successful careers from Trac and Oliver however all aware of Clayton's challenges.

I do fear we may start dropping off during the times of compromised drafts (again).

2 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

I hope you are correct. It sucks how teams like South and Fitzroy have been erased in a few minutes in a comfortable meeting somewhere. All that history, blood sweat and tears gone for the pursuit of a $.

Then you have fools complaining these clubs weren't sustainable or " financially viable"

Not like Gws and Gcs are. Afl has been pumping money into these hand over fist and they still have little supporter base. I'm not sure I even know where the Giants are based and I live in NSW.

First and foremost 18 cubs is plenty. I don't want any more. It just makes it harder for clubs to win a flag than the original 12.

12 was perfect. Almost spiritual in significance. But now we have it, I'll accept 18 for a national competition. So Gcs makes way for Tassie and Gws could go for a team in Nt, Sa or Wa.

If North have to go which I don't believe they do surely a merge with a SA team would be better.

For a truly national comp it's probably lopsided to have ten Vic teams and only two in other Ozzy rules states.

GWS & The Suns earn the AFL Millions of dollars through the Broadcasting Deal, they are not going anywhere. The money the AFL puts into these clubs is way smaller than the Revenue from the Broadcasters

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

But North have been down since 2016, they were offered a Lifeline before that, but turned it down. 
The Major problem is other clubs need young talent as well, as well as a Brand new Club. 
The onfield turn around won’t just happen, they have already done 4 years on the bottom

It smells of Fitzroy to me

If I remember correctly we spent more than 4 years down the bottom. 2007 to 2017 was absolute misery. Best finish was maybe 12th(?) and again, without counting, 3 times dead last? 6+ times bottom 3 or 4? 

North have resigned Larkey, have some decent kids and a wise old coach. 3 - 4 more top 30 draft picks at the end of this year and 2025 and 3-4 smart FA pick ups (the don't need to be superstars) and the wheel will turn. 

IMV, the long term viability of all the existing clubs would have been considered by the AFL before signing off on Tasmania and I'd be stunned if relocating an existing team wasn't considered as an option.  

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

GWS & The Suns earn the AFL Millions of dollars through the Broadcasting Deal, they are not going anywhere. The money the AFL puts into these clubs is way smaller than the Revenue from the Broadcasters

That is doubtless true, but how much less would that revenue be if there was no GWS or Suns?  Surely if there are few members supporting those teams, there also aren't many in NSW/QLD watching those matches. So the extra profit to broadcasters must come from supporters of other teams being prepared to watch their own team play against almost anything.  I guess that may be sufficient.

6 minutes ago, Deeko2 said:

May, Gawn & Viney will be gone soon.

May and Gawn are 32 and Viney 30?.    They are getting towards the end of their careers but the word 'soon' may be premature.  If they were at Geelong would be considered youngsters.

6 minutes ago, Deeko2 said:

This is a big concern of mine as well.

May, Gawn & Viney will be gone soon.  The first two are absolutely irreplaceable where as Viney's output could be replaced however remains a heart and soul player.

We're all hoping for long and successful careers from Trac and Oliver however all aware of Clayton's challenges.

I do fear we may start dropping off during the times of compromised drafts (again).

That's always a risk but the bottom out can be avoided. We've actually been really successful at obtaining/retaining draft picks and then injecting them into a settled senior side in recent years: Kozzie, Bowey, JVR, Windsor, Howes, Tholstrup, etc 

 

13 hours ago, Oxdee said:

The league is barely able to sustain 18 teams. There isn’t enough sponsorship, members or players to facilitate a 19th team. Americas population is 10x Australia’s and only has 32 teams. 

A 19th team in Tasmania isn't taking away members from anybody else really, it's creating new members that would never be members

9 minutes ago, sue said:

That is doubtless true, but how much less would that revenue be if there was no GWS or Suns?  Surely if there are few members supporting those teams, there also aren't many in NSW/QLD watching those matches. So the extra profit to broadcasters must come from supporters of other teams being prepared to watch their own team play against almost anything.  I guess that may be sufficient.

I think the pertinent question is...

"are there more eyeballs on the product in those regions this year than there were last year and what does the forecast suggest for 5 years time?"

When those numbers decrease year on year over a 5 year period then there would be reason to worry. But my main point is, the AFL won't let that happen. They can't afford to let that happen.

When that happens the first thing that occurs is executive bonuses get slashed (ouch) and then when it doesn't get corrected  executives get marching orders (big ouch!).  

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by Dee*ceiving