Ultimate shape of the AFL

[Sanecow]

My master plan for the AFL is:

No changes:
- Two Adelaide teams
- Two Western Australian teams
- One Brisbane team

Big changes in NSW / ACT:
- A team in Canberra (Kangaroos?)
- A team in Western Sydney (Relocation?)

A team in Tasmania (Hawks?)

Six teams in Melbourne from:

- Carlton
- Collingwood
- Western Bulldogs
- Essendon
- Geelong
- Melbourne
- Richmond
- St Kilda

One to move to Western Sydney or fold.

The order it will happen is probably:

1. Inside five years. Roos move to Canberra. Low membership plus the recent games there and name change etc are foreshadowing the move.

However Kangaroos' coach Dean Laidley was not critical of the poor turn-out from his club's fans for what was the club's first finals game in three years.

"That's all the supporters we've got," he said of the 25,000 crowd.

Source

2. Inside ten years. A Melbourne team (Guesses: Melbourne? St Kilda?) in financial trouble will be faced with folding or moving to Sydney's west. Probably a fold and a new team in Sydney's west to avoid any "Melbourne stigma".

3. Longer term. A team (Hawks?) to relocate to Tasmania. Requires a big name sponsor.

I can't see reduction of the Melbourne market to fewer than six teams being good for the game though.

[cruiser]

I agree with relocating the Roos to Canberra and the sooner the better. AFL will need to invest some money in a venue first and probably a new ground rather than Manuka, which is too small and badly located insofar as parking goes.

I think the Western Bulldogs should relocate to Western Sydney.

Tassie most definately needs its own team. I tend to agree that Hawks would be most logical choice given their lower support in Melb. Demons are too Melbourne, Richmond (Tassie Tigers?) have too many supporters, as does the Saints.

[ROK Lobster]

Canberra cannot support an AFL side. With markets secured in Sydney and Brisbane the AFL have no need to further develop the East Coast. 2 sides on Adel and Perth ensure that there is at least 1 game each week in every time zone across the viewing nation. Next stop NZ - 2 sides by 2020.

[msabenny]

don't get beaussie started on a second team in sydney

[Charlie]

Plan A) Work towards the viability of the current 16 clubs in their current form.

Plan B) Selectively and reluctantly cut teams from the current 16 if and only if 1) they are demonstrated to be non-viable and 2) there is an existing market to be filled.

The people who go on about there being too many Melbourne teams overlook the fact that the AFL was originally the VFL, and that the league is nothing without its clubs. Further, the current administration was installed at the behest of the clubs to serve the clubs' interests. It is therefore not the prerogative of the AFL to ditch clubs at will.

Any other markets (and there aren't any viable ones at present) will simply have to live with the fact that they are of secondary importance.

[cruiser]

Originally posted by Charlie
Plan A) Work towards the viability of the current 16 clubs in their current form.

Plan B) Selectively and reluctantly cut teams from the current 16 if and only if 1) they are demonstrated to be non-viable and 2) there is an existing market to be filled.

The people who go on about there being too many Melbourne teams overlook the fact that the AFL was originally the VFL, and that the league is nothing without its clubs. Further, the current administration was installed at the behest of the clubs to serve the clubs' interests. It is therefore not the prerogative of the AFL to ditch clubs at will.

Any other markets (and there aren't any viable ones at present) will simply have to live with the fact that they are of secondary importance.

I would have expected less Victorian arrogance from you Charlie.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by cruiser
I would have expected less Victorian arrogance from you Charlie.

What on earth has it got to do with 'Victorian arrogance'?

Simply, each club has a right to exist, as constituent members of the competition's governing body. Each club has a right, if at all financially possible, to exist in its preferred form (which is, of course, it's current one). Therefore, the AFL's responsibility is to the existing clubs first and foremost. Any other market is of secondary interest to that goal.

Sydney wants a second team? Get in line. Simple as that. Sydney doesn't, on its own, justify eliminating a team that has a greater (ie, absolute) right to its place in the competition.

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by Charlie
The people who go on about there being too many Melbourne teams overlook the fact that the AFL was originally the VFL

Absolutely, that's why there will always be a core of teams in Victoria. (There aren't many "national" sporting leagues in the world that have over half their teams based in one city ) I think it's an important aspect of our game that there is one absolutely obsessed city and care needs to be taken not to destroy that. But, despite resistance since (pre-)1982, an increase in teams outside Victoria is obviously the direction the AFL is going. A local derby tapping into the East v West vibe in Sydney would only be good for the game in NSW.

Originally posted by Charlie
Sydney doesn't, on its own, justify eliminating a team that has a greater (ie, absolute) right to its place in the competition.

A team could relocate and fill the role. South Melbourne and Fitzroy weren't "eliminated", were they? Not in my mind or I wouldn't be following the Swans still.

I don't really feel the need to argue for the plan since I am not suggesting what I want, but rather where I predict the AFL will go.

What I would love to see is teams in PNG, NZ and Darwin (WCE fly to NZ to play on a Sunday, then back home and off to PNG the following Friday!) but unlike the other three items, I think it's a bit pie-in-the-sky.

[timbo]

The dogs should move to sydney, no name change needed.

A team in Tasmania is riskier than a team in canberra. It's going ok at the moment but they're at only 4 games a year.

What happens at finals time when the Canberra and Tasmanian teams want home finals in their 15,000 seated ovals. AFL will most likely make them play in the nearest 50,000+ stadium.


The most critival change to make at the moment is a team in Southport. It is imperative, especially with a Gold Coast team starting in 2007. They have the supporter base the have promised to facilitate for an AFL extension or relocation.

So in the end aim for the two unpenetrated and larger markets at the moment which are south east Queensland and western Sydney.

[EMJ]

I can't see the AFL setting any of the above up - they are too controlled by Collingwood.

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by janpa
I can't see the AFL setting any of the above up - they are too controlled by Collingwood.

Collingwood would like nothing more than a bigger chunk of the Melbourne market.

[hammo]

The next relocation will be to the Gold Coast, followed by Western Sydney.

There is no way an AFL team will play out of Tasmania or Canberra - neither has the population or corporate clout to support a team.

Candidates for relocation would be Melbourne and Kangaroos.

All it will take is for the AFL to turn off the special subsidies it provides these clubs and there would be little choice for them but to move.

[Sanecow]

I haven't been paying any attention to thoughts of a Gold Coast market. Is there any real interest in AFL there? Why isn't an AFL team playing regularly in the area as the Hawks and Roos do with Tassie and Canberra? I'm interested to know why the suggestion is even there?

[Troy G]

I believe that North Qld is a market that could easily support a team perhaps based in Cairns away from the NQ Cowboys in Townsville. They could also have strong development links to the NT and play a few games there each year perhaps also becoming a regular opponent against the Aboriginal All-Stars in that game.

On the subject of national promotion, all the AFL's Grand Final Week activities each day are happening at Federation Square in Melbourne.

Given that it's a National Competition isn't it time that GF Week activities weren't solely based in Melbourne? They get the game itself after all!

Also if (when) Sydney win Friday..Melbournians -and Melbourne centric media- will be celebrating and paying tribute to Non-Victorian teams all week, a trend that will continue in future years.

I'd like to see a different official AFL Grand Final community based function in each major AFL city in the lead-up to gather momentum eg. Monday-Brisbane, Tuesday- Sydney, Wed- Adelaide, Thurs-Perth and Friday- Melbourne.

[Damien]

Originally posted by Sanecow
I haven't been paying any attention to thoughts of a Gold Coast market. Is there any real interest in AFL there? Why isn't an AFL team playing regularly in the area as the Hawks and Roos do with Tassie and Canberra? I'm interested to know why the suggestion is even there?

Gold Coast is always mentioned because of the amount of southern state residents who relocate there and the massive junior participation rates for Auskick

(Nick Reiwoldt's family migrated from Tasmania as 1 example 10 years).

So there is already a strong interest in AFL there, so to harness that support, the thinking from some people is that a team for the coast is now required.

The AFL's thinking is that the Lions is enough for now along with live TV coverage (which the coast generally get).

The NRL is so scared of the AFL on the Gold Coast, they have rushed in a new team from 2007.