2nd Sydney team effect on the swans

[robbieando]

As I said the reason a 2nd team in Sydney should happen is if it can stand on it own two feet and not rely on AFL funding. Just to help development in Western Sydney is not a good enough reason. For the move to take place the AFL will expect the team to be able to fund itself, not rely on the AFL. As I said if the move was for development it would be better off in Tasmania because of the fact that at least there is a huge amount of support for a team. When the Hawks and Saints play down there they get full grounds, while North proved that another team doesn't have the needed about of public support.

As I said there is nothing to suggest a 2nd team in Sydney is needed other than the fact they is a Stadium in Western Sydney. Again if they are plenty of people who want it OK lets have a 2nd team, but don't tell me that a 2nd team is needed because there are 2 million people who MIGHT follow the team

[nicko18]

Originally posted by robbieando
but don't tell me that a 2nd team is needed because there are 2 million people who MIGHT follow the team

that's the most convincing argument i've ever heard for a 2nd team.

[scurrilous]

Originally posted by Beaussie
Robbie I think I shall cease discussing the merits of a second Sydney AFL team with you. Your continual negativity towards what I amongst others see as further development in NSW is no longer worth a response.

ROFLMAO
That's a classic statement that one. "I'm not going to debate with you anymore because you don't agree with me ". Sooky sooky wah wah. "I'm taking my bat and ball and going home"

ahahahahaaaaaa

[footyhead]

The fact is that a lot of people are very emotional about this issue, and why wouldn't they be? So It's bit hard to have a civil conversation about this topic.
But the decision will not be up to us. It will come from the western Sydney Bulldogs themselves and the AFL.

[cos789]

First of all a second AFL side in Sydney is not going to hurt the Swans .They have members who will remain Swannies .New supporters will a choise .Dockers and Port get some disgruntled Eagles and Adelaide supporters .Sponsors will choose the Swans as they are the successful encumbents .The Swans will gain from two derbies a year .The derbies in SA and WA have grown to be THE games .There will be a spinoff from having an AFL game in Sydney every week .The growing number of juniors will be able to identify with THEIR team .
The new team will struggle ,but Sydney loves a winner .
All interstate teams are in the 8 at the moment .Melbourne teams are going to struggle more .If you're going to get 10k at a game , let it not be at the MCG but Canberra or Sydney and we can use expansion as an excuse .If the finances can be worked out ,then the sooner the better .As for the Roos experiment ,they couldn't have done it worse if they tried .All the WB have to say is we''ll play to the biggest crowd .If Melbourne responds ,then they've gained respite ,if they don't they've got a new home .

[sharp9]

Small article in the Age this morning talking about things such as the Bulldogs don't have enough footballs to train with - their only luxury (the spa) hasn't worked since November etc.

Dwayne russell says that the only reason they haven't folded is that it is cheaper for the AFL to pay a couple of mill a year to keep them afloat than to pay the compensation to the broadcasters if therre are less than 16 teams. that agreement has three more seasons afther this one. Sooooo the AFL has to spend a lot of money (for nothing essentially as the Dogs will surely fold) or they can spend a similar amount relocating them - which has the outside possibility of saving the Dogs and keeping a sixteen team comp for the long term.

But for the 16 team agreement the Dogs would surely merge with Geelong or the Kangaroos. At least with those merger ideas there are no horrendous animosities AFAIK.

But why not whack them in West Sydney or Tasmania and see if it takes off? There's not a lot to lose because the only options are expensive ones anyway.

[swan_song]

Penga...I'm with you 14 teams, home and away...very fair draw.
We could then get rid of the Hawks and the Bombers....yippppppppppeeeeeee

[Angelic Upstart]

Originally posted by swan_song
Penga...I'm with you 14 teams, home and away...very fair draw.
We could then get rid of the Hawks and the Bombers....yippppppppppeeeeeee

I'd vote for Collingwood and St Kilda myself

[tez]

IMO the club should do all it can to prevent a second AFL team
being relocated to the Western Subs of Sydney.

[1] Any club that relocates into Western Sydney is walking
into the fastest and largest growth area in Australia.
Over 3000 building sites were released in Menangle alone
last month and other south western subs to come.

[2] The Swans heartland in the Eastern Suburbs will not
yield any signifcicant future growth as evidenced by
club membership over the last 5 years.

The relocation of a second AFL club to Western/Sth Western
Sydney can only be at the expense of the Swans. This the
area the club should be allocating a good part of their
promotional budget

[Rizzo]

Super 12s have been getting stronger and stronger and there is a danger that the much maligned world game could get its act together with a broom going through Soccer Australia. Lots of competition is an already tight market.

The Rugby World Cup is going to be huge at the end of this year.

Can't see it happening...

[Bart]

Originally posted by Rizzo

The Rugby World Cup is going to be huge at the end of this year.

Correct. Don't anyone underestimate how big this is going to be

[barry]

Originally posted by Bart
Correct. Don't anyone underestimate how big this is going to be

But its effect will be similar to the games on atheletics. Bugger all. Having it at the end of the season means it will be hard to leverage off.

I also think many of the "worldly-ness" myths will be exposed to non-union people in the southern states when they see the No 5 and No.6 ranked teams go head to head (Tonga v Samoa).