20th AFL Team

[Canberra Pear]

Norwood seems to be stating that they will be ready to enter at the same time as Tasmania, which if true means they have a head start on WA3, NT/North Australia or Canberra. But I don’t see how Norwood is better than WA3 or Canberra, given the significantly bigger population of both of these regions.

If the AFL Commission wants to have Team 20 in an AFL heartland, then surely WA3 is a better option than Norwood?

Norwood won't be ready to enter in 2028.

For one thing, they don't have an AFL standard list. Having two teams enter in 2028 would be terrible for the draft, and I would expect they'd want at least a couple of years gap after how the Suns/Giants draft years went.

 

[agiel]

Population - Perth has 2.3 million to Adelaide’s 1.5 million. As for who is more passionate, I don’t know but having Optus Stadium as well as a chance to have 6 derby matches (as opposed to the current 2), makes WA3 a more viable proposition than Norwood?

Regional population, 2022-23 financial year

Statistics about the population and components of change (births, deaths, migration) for Australia's capital cities and regions

www.abs.gov.au

Purely based on population then Perth is definitely the better option to expand a known market.

Norwood is a known quantity I feel they have exisiting supporters, and I know crows and port supporters that would change over.

As for rivalry, Norwood v Port is HUGE. If WA3 were to happen what would be the rivalry? Does a Mandurah side (aka Peel Thunder) have an exisiting rivalry with a Freo team (as a former ‘state’ side)?

 

[Coolangatta]

“I think a lot of people like the even numbers (with a 20th team) but there’s nothing that says you have to. And what we want to do is, if we expand, do it in a sustainable way.”

Didn't know Walshawk is the CEO of the AFL; hi Andrew.

Anyway, might be reading too much into it but it sounds like the AFL weren't even thinking about Tasmania yet, let alone anywhere else.

Despite me suggesting like 100 ****in different expansion teams in the past before, in practicality it's glad to hear they want to expand in a sustainable way, but it's not just about sustainability, it's about demand, too.

Still no confirmation Canberra or Norwood want a team, we know NT and NQ do but yeah nah.

I think it'd be funny with this talk of WA3 and then it turns out no one here in WA (where it actually counts the most) actually wants it.

So, sorry Vic's, ain't shit you can do about the Eagles getting bigger and bigger and bigger until they eat the AFL and take over the world, flyin' high in every corner of the planet.

Their current on field shitness is just to lull us all into a false sense of security for the dynasty that will come. I'm sure that's what the diehards would like to tell themselves, at least.

 

[Canberra Pear]

This article popped up from the Daily Mail claiming activity behind the scenes for Canberra.

Expansion in the AFL could happen quicker than many footy fans anticipate - and Canberra may end up being a shock choice as the league's 20th franchise.

With the Tasmanian Devils set to join the competition in 2028, the likes of Norwood in South Australia, the Northern Territory and a reported 'consortium out of Perth' are set to launch bids alongside the ACT.

The nation's capital already boasts fulltime sporting organisations in the Raiders (NRL) and Brumbies (Super Pacific Rugby) - and prominent figures behind the scenes are believed to be also eyeing off an AFL team long term.

Not sure how much I trust the Daily Mail breaking AFL news, or whether it's just rumours that have grown legs, but would be very exciting if true.

 

[Babylove]

I think there is little doubt we are going to go to 20 teams. Although we don’t have to history says the AFL dislikes odd numbers so the likelihood is that when the AFL announced the 19th licence it was almost a given that a 20th licence would follow.

At the moment it seems we have 5 realistically possible destinations the NT, ACT, North Queensland, WA3 and SA3.

And the business cases for the 5 can split almost into two types. The NT, ACT and North Queensland will almost have infrastructure requirements that they will need to fulfil similar to Tassie in their bid, as well as doing a case to show that there are enough AFL fans in their respective areas to sustain an AFL team. In someways because of this these three are more risky and dependent on bigger government spend, but have more potential to bring more fans to the game and to increase the talent pool.

SA3 (possibly Norwood on recent reports) and WA3 have a slightly different case to build. They don’t need as much infrastructure included, mostly just training facilities if they don’t already have them, and they don’t need to prove there are enough AFL fans in their markets. However, it is almost certain that a 3rd team in both WA and SA would get a majority of their fans crossing from the Eagles and Crows respectively. It’s unlikely they’ll get many from Freo and Port given that the core supporter base for both those clubs are based out of WAFL and SANFL allegiances, and whilst there may be some SA or WA footy fans that either don’t have an AFL team or an out of state team who might be more inclined to pick up the third team than the current local teams, the majority of their fans will probably make the switch from Eagles and Crows. So both the SA3 and WA3 teams will need to show in their business cases that the market can sustain both the new club and the Crows/Eagles in the market without either creating two weakened teams or having the new team come in at the expense of the pre-existing team.

As far as the entry point, everything from the AFL suggests they don’t want a second team coming in top of the Tassie Devils to quickly so I think the earliest entry time for a 20th team is likely to be about 2029.

Of course the AFL could surprise us and take all 5 options take us to a 24 team competition with 23 rounds of every team playing each other once. Unlikely, but you never know.

 

[Coolangatta]

I think there is little doubt we are going to go to 20 teams. Although we don’t have to history says the AFL dislikes odd numbers so the likelihood is that when the AFL announced the 19th licence it was almost a given that a 20th licence would follow.

At the moment it seems we have 5 realistically possible destinations the NT, ACT, North Queensland, WA3 and SA3.

And the business cases for the 5 can split almost into two types. The NT, ACT and North Queensland will almost have infrastructure requirements that they will need to fulfil similar to Tassie in their bid, as well as doing a case to show that there are enough AFL fans in their respective areas to sustain an AFL team. In someways because of this these three are more risky and dependent on bigger government spend, but have more potential to bring more fans to the game and to increase the talent pool.

SA3 (possibly Norwood on recent reports) and WA3 have a slightly different case to build. They don’t need as much infrastructure included, mostly just training facilities if they don’t already have them, and they don’t need to prove there are enough AFL fans in their markets. However, it is almost certain that a 3rd team in both WA and SA would get a majority of their fans crossing from the Eagles and Crows respectively. It’s unlikely they’ll get many from Freo and Port given that the core supporter base for both those clubs are based out of WAFL and SANFL allegiances, and whilst there may be some SA or WA footy fans that either don’t have an AFL team or an out of state team who might be more inclined to pick up the third team than the current local teams, the majority of their fans will probably make the switch from Eagles and Crows. So both the SA3 and WA3 teams will need to show in their business cases that the market can sustain both the new club and the Crows/Eagles in the market without either creating two weakened teams or having the new team come in at the expense of the pre-existing team.

As far as the entry point, everything from the AFL suggests they don’t want a second team coming in top of the Tassie Devils to quickly so I think the earliest entry time for a 20th team is likely to be about 2029.

Of course the AFL could surprise us and take all 5 options take us to a 24 team competition with 23 rounds of every team playing each other once. Unlikely, but you never know.

That would be amazing. It may turn out that all five of those options are keen, so if we were ever gonna go to 24 teams, that’d be the combo, unless others in the future come knocking on the door. Given how big the AFL is becoming, I think any more expansion teams that might come in after have to follow the Tassie model and go hard for it instead of the AFL going to where they aren’t asking for a team in the first place.

As for team 20 coming in by 2029, that’s literally the worst thing you could do if you wanted Tassie to have a breather. Tassie is probably coming in by 2028. I think because of the next media rights deal, 2032 is the earliest we’ll see team 20. 2033 if it’s Canberra, even longer if the AFL decide to leave it at 19 indefinitely.

 

[Badger17]

This article popped up from the Daily Mail claiming activity behind the scenes for Canberra.



Not sure how much I trust the Daily Mail breaking AFL news, or whether it's just rumours that have grown legs, but would be very exciting if true.

There's definitely some talks going on behind the scenes, there's too much smoke to that fire for it not to be the case. What we don't know is how serious those talks are. If the whispers around town are true it'll cause one of the biggest political shitstorms since self governance, which would be entertaining if nothing else.

I really don't get why Canberra is a 'shock choice' to so many people inside AFL circles either.

We're the only place without an existing AFL side that could realistically sustain one anytime soon. The NT is a romantic pipedream. Talk of NQ is a fantasy and any objective person who has spent time there could tell you that. Newcastle would be an even more expensive uphill battle than GWS, GC, or NQ. Which leaves Canberra, Perth, and Adelaide as the only realistic options, and at that point it really depends on which direction the AFL wants to go.

 

[Canberra Pear]

There's definitely some talks going on behind the scenes, there's too much smoke to that fire for it not to be the case. What we don't know is how serious those talks are.

If the whispers around town are true it'll cause one of the biggest political shitstorms since self governance, which would be entertaining if nothing else.

Intriguing. Are you able to divulge what whispers you've heard? I clearly hang around the wrong people.

And do you know if the smoke is coming more from AFL Canberra or the ACT Government? Or some other source?

 

[Babylove]

That would be amazing. It may turn out that all five of those options are keen, so if we were ever gonna go to 24 teams, that’d be the combo, unless others in the future come knocking on the door. Given how big the AFL is becoming, I think any more expansion teams that might come in after have to follow the Tassie model and go hard for it instead of the AFL going to where they aren’t asking for a team in the first place.

As for team 20 coming in by 2029, that’s literally the worst thing you could do if you wanted Tassie to have a breather. Tassie is probably coming in by 2028. I think because of the next media rights deal, 2032 is the earliest we’ll see team 20. 2033 if it’s Canberra, even longer if the AFL decide to leave it at 19 indefinitely.

Wasn’t it Tassie we’re coming in, in 2027 with the stadium ready in 2028? Or is it 2028 with the stadium in 2029? The AFL has said they’d be happy for Tassie to come in a year ahead of the stadium. I reckon they’ll want at least a two season gap between two teams, how much more depends on how much longer the AFL is prepared to go with an odd number. I believe the longest gap in modern history is the gap between the Crows and Freo entering which I think was about 3-4 seasons I think so I doubt they’d go much longer than that, and I doubt they’d launch a team in an Olympic year if it’s a home Olympics so presuming that Brisbane do go ahead with staging the games I doubt a 2032 launch is likely.

 

[Badger17]

Intriguing. Are you able to divulge what whispers you've heard? I clearly hang around the wrong people.

And do you know if the smoke is coming more from AFL Canberra or the ACT Government? Or some other source?

RL and RU people are generally more up to date on the stadium debate, probably because Bruce is literally falling down and spewing raw sewerage at this point.

The talk is that the push to upgrade Manuka in pursuit of a BBL license is a bit of a front. Don't get me wrong, Cricket ACT want the BBL license and would need significant upgrades to Manuka to make that feasible and Barr/Labour is supportive of that. However he and others supposedly also see it as an opportunity to explore larger upgrades to Manuka, or even a push for the new stadium to be 'multipurpose', as part of a bid for an AFL license using the justification of attracting multiple permanent tenants for the increased costs.

If the rumours are true, and to be clear they are just rumours, it'd result in a massive political fight over resources between the rectangular sports and oval sports as the ACT Gov can't afford to build both a new rectangular stadium and an oval stadium without delaying the light rail, which Labour can't afford to do and the Greens wouldn't allow them to do even if they could. Nobody serious can see the Federal government chipping in real money for two new stadiums in Canberra either.

If the AFL and Cricket Australia went for it, which wouldn't be a given, it'd basically pit the cultural and institutional power of the Raiders and RU supporting elites, maybe with the backing of David Pocock and/or Liberals and their political connections, against the Labour/Greens coalition with support of the AFL and Cricket establishment. It'd end up being an even bigger political football than Mac Point has been, and it's totally avoidable.

 

[Coolangatta]

Wasn’t it Tassie we’re coming in, in 2027 with the stadium ready in 2028? Or is it 2028 with the stadium in 2029? The AFL has said they’d be happy for Tassie to come in a year ahead of the stadium. I reckon they’ll want at least a two season gap between two teams, how much more depends on how much longer the AFL is prepared to go with an odd number. I believe the longest gap in modern history is the gap between the Crows and Freo entering which I think was about 3-4 seasons I think so I doubt they’d go much longer than that, and I doubt they’d launch a team in an Olympic year if it’s a home Olympics so presuming that Brisbane do go ahead with staging the games I doubt a 2032 launch is likely.

2028 with the stadium in 2029.

As for the gap, I beg to differ, you've heard Andrew Dillon's recent comment, right? He said, "there’s nothing that says you have to (expand to 20)."

Sounds to me like he's happy to leave it at 19 unless a good opportunity presents itself.

I'm sure there will be a 20th team eventually. I didn't think of the Olympics, that's a good point you've made; if it's WA3 it could be as soon as 2030 or 2031, but if it's ACT it won't be until 2033.

 

[Coolangatta]

RL and RU people are generally more up to date on the stadium debate, probably because Bruce is literally falling down and spewing raw sewerage at this point.

The talk is that the push to upgrade Manuka in pursuit of a BBL license is a bit of a front. Don't get me wrong, Cricket ACT want the BBL license and would need significant upgrades to Manuka to make that feasible and Barr/Labour is supportive of that. However he and others supposedly also see it as an opportunity to explore larger upgrades to Manuka, or even a push for the new stadium to be 'multipurpose', as part of a bid for an AFL license using the justification of attracting multiple permanent tenants for the increased costs.

If the rumours are true, and to be clear they are just rumours, it'd result in a massive political fight over resources between the rectangular sports and oval sports as the ACT Gov can't afford to build both a new rectangular stadium and an oval stadium without delaying the light rail, which Labour can't afford to do and the Greens wouldn't allow them to do even if they could. Nobody serious can see the Federal government chipping in real money for two new stadiums in Canberra either.

If the AFL and Cricket Australia went for it, which wouldn't be a given, it'd basically pit the cultural and institutional power of the Raiders and RU supporting elites, maybe with the backing of David Pocock and/or Liberals and their political connections, against the Labour/Greens coalition with support of the AFL and Cricket establishment. It'd end up being an even bigger political football than Mac Point has been, and it's totally avoidable.

Why can't they build a new stadium for the rugby and upgrade Manuka for the footy or is that too expensive? No need for two stadiums. If it comes down to one or the other than yikes, that will get ugly.

 

[Babylove]

2028 with the stadium in 2029.

As for the gap, I beg to differ, you've heard Andrew Dillon's recent comment, right? He said, "there’s nothing that says you have to (expand to 20)."

Sounds to me like he's happy to leave it at 19 unless a good opportunity presents itself.

I'm sure there will be a 20th team eventually. I didn't think of the Olympics, that's a good point you've made; if it's WA3 it could be as soon as 2030 or 2031, but if it's ACT it won't be until 2033.

Don’t be surprised if Andrew Dillon’s rhetoric is more about pushing the bar up on the 20th licence rather than actually being happy to stay at 19. And even if that isn’t the case you wait until Tassie comes in and the whinging starts over the unfairness of when clubs get their byes and how the league handles the issue of a handful of teams getting two byes due to the uneven numbers and other issues like Gather Round. If they haven’t already committed to a 20th team by then they’ll do it pretty soon after.

 

[Badger17]

Why can't they build a new stadium for the rugby and upgrade Manuka for the footy or is that too expensive? No need for two stadiums. If it comes down to one or the other than yikes, that will get ugly.

The short answer is that they couldn't afford it. They'd be forced to do it all at once, but the light rail is bankrupting the ACT so they can't afford to do it all at once.

They can't delay the light rail for political reasons, Bruce Stadium has desperately needed replacing for over a decade at this point, and everybody seems certain that the AFL would demand major upgrades of Manuka, or maybe a knockdown rebuild, and a roof like they did in Hobart.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

RL and RU people are generally more up to date on the stadium debate, probably because Bruce is literally falling down and spewing raw sewerage at this point.

The talk is that the push to upgrade Manuka in pursuit of a BBL license is a bit of a front. Don't get me wrong, Cricket ACT want the BBL license and would need significant upgrades to Manuka to make that feasible and Barr/Labour is supportive of that. However he and others supposedly also see it as an opportunity to explore larger upgrades to Manuka, or even a push for the new stadium to be 'multipurpose', as part of a bid for an AFL license using the justification of attracting multiple permanent tenants for the increased costs.

If the rumours are true, and to be clear they are just rumours, it'd result in a massive political fight over resources between the rectangular sports and oval sports as the ACT Gov can't afford to build both a new rectangular stadium and an oval stadium without delaying the light rail, which Labour can't afford to do and the Greens wouldn't allow them to do even if they could. Nobody serious can see the Federal government chipping in real money for two new stadiums in Canberra either.

If the AFL and Cricket Australia went for it, which wouldn't be a given, it'd basically pit the cultural and institutional power of the Raiders and RU supporting elites, maybe with the backing of David Pocock and/or Liberals and their political connections, against the Labour/Greens coalition with support of the AFL and Cricket establishment. It'd end up being an even bigger political football than Mac Point has been, and it's totally avoidable.

Agree about the political conflict especially in the context of the October Territory election this year, and a Federal election next year.

The very real prospect of our long established Canberra United female soccer team going bust, and the continuous delays due to financial issues in getting a Canberra Aleague men’s soccer team (even with there being a decision by the Aleagueto have a Canberra expansion team), is also raising the political temperature.

Part of the issue is the men’s A League team is being held up by not having a plan for the stadium. As an independent trying to work out how we can sort this out, it’s frustrating … when we shell out millions for GWS to come and play a few games here.”

Pocock says federal and ACT Labor governments have achieved little for Canberra voters | Riotact

Independent senator David Pocock has used a tourism forum appearance to take a major swipe at federal and local Labor…

the-riotact.com

 

[MelbourneGWS]

2028 with the stadium in 2029.

As for the gap, I beg to differ, you've heard Andrew Dillon's recent comment, right? He said, "there’s nothing that says you have to (expand to 20)."

Sounds to me like he's happy to leave it at 19 unless a good opportunity presents itself.

I'm sure there will be a 20th team eventually. I didn't think of the Olympics, that's a good point you've made; if it's WA3 it could be as soon as 2030 or 2031, but if it's ACT it won't be until 2033.

Yes, I think if there’s a 20th team it will be timed to be part of the new media deal to maximise the $ for the AFL. So Tasmania in 2028/29 and then a gap before Team 20.

Also think that given the comments of Dillon, it is very unlikely for there to be more than 20 teams for the foreseeable future. There maybe 4-5 possible candidates (WA3, Canberra, Norwood, NT and North Australia), for being Team 20, but there is no chance of all or most of them being admitted as speculated by a couple in this thread.

 

[_Cerberus_]

Redlegs is such a s**t name. If Norwood enter, they need to change their name and colors. Don't need another Melbourne Demons top.

 

[pOleK]

In an ideal world, we have 2 fewer Vic teams and already have third WA and SA teams and Canberra included with the current Tassie license to make 20. To the smaller clubs in Melbourne's credit, they've all turned it around off-field, plus I don't think anyone wants to go through the heartache of another Fitzroy scenario.

So we don't live in a perfect world but the 20th license for expansion's sake has to be Canberra. It just makes sense. Financially, location, population-wise. The ability to coincide a bid with a BBL team helps and then you have Sydney and popular AFL population centres in regional NSW just a few hours away.

And then further down the line, I'm talking 50 years from now, I can see the AFL getting to a point where we finally get to an even fixture with licenses 21-24 in the form of:

21-22: WA and SA 3rd licenses
23-24: NT and NQ hopefully being somewhat more realistic than they are today.

 

[Bjo187]

Agree about the political conflict especially in the context of the October Territory election this year, and a Federal election next year.

The very real prospect of our long established Canberra United female soccer team going bust, and the continuous delays due to financial issues in getting a Canberra Aleague men’s soccer team (even with there being a decision by the Aleagueto have a Canberra expansion team), is also raising the political temperature.

Part of the issue is the men’s A League team is being held up by not having a plan for the stadium. As an independent trying to work out how we can sort this out, it’s frustrating … when we shell out millions for GWS to come and play a few games here.”

Pocock says federal and ACT Labor governments have achieved little for Canberra voters | Riotact

Independent senator David Pocock has used a tourism forum appearance to take a major swipe at federal and local Labor…

the-riotact.com

This guy sounds like your typical anti afl moron with that comment. The 2 million odd given to the giants each year is holding up a hundreds of millions stadium for an A league team? Really? Lol. A new stadium that will be mostly empty anyway going by A league standards, plus it would get next to no traveling tourists, which is the whole point in government funding for the giants..

 

[MelbourneGWS]

This guy sounds like your typical anti afl moron with that comment. The 2 million odd given to the giants each year is holding up a hundreds of millions stadium for an A league team? Really? Lol. A new stadium that will be mostly empty anyway going by A league standards, plus it would get next to no traveling tourists, which is the whole point in government funding for the giants..

Unfortunately David Pocock is popular here and is one of only two senators for ACT. Before he beat the Liberals Zed at the 2022 Federal elections, the ALP and Liberals used to each get one of the senate seats since ACT got senate representation in 1975 (you need 33% plus one vote to get a Senate seat).

David used to play for the Brumbies and also played for the Australian Rugby Union team. I don’t follow the Rugby codes (Australian Rules and Soccer are my sports), but I gather he’s quite famous and popular before he ran and broke the ALP and Liberal Senate duopoly.

 

[Rob]

Zero chance Norwood get a licence for a myriad of reasons. Support, population, money, take your pick. They might have a good rivalry with Port, but that doesn't make up for the likely sub 10k crowds against North or GWS.

And importantly, they don't expand the game.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

Under a paywall, but the comments are accessible by all

Could Canberra be the AFL's final frontier? Making the case for expansion

There is a case to be made for Canberra's inclusion in the AFL.

www.canberratimes.com.au

 

[JT_the_Man]

While I'm not exactly seeing a clear cut choice for a 20th team, I'd expect one probably within 5 years of Tassie joining. TV dollars talk, that's an extra game every week.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

Zero chance Norwood get a licence for a myriad of reasons. Support, population, money, take your pick. They might have a good rivalry with Port, but that doesn't make up for the likely sub 10k crowds against North or GWS.

And importantly, they don't expand the game.

Yes. And WA3 would draw bigger crowd for derbies at a bigger Optus Stadium in a state which has a bigger economy and population than SA.

 

[Rob]

Yes. And WA3 would draw bigger crowd for derbies at a bigger Optus Stadium in a state which has a bigger economy and population than SA.

A 3rd WA team is a different question, but probably has less issues due to the amount of money in WA. The matter of support remains though. As the AFL have shown with Tassie, they don't want to be propping up teams in heartland areas like they do in NSW, Queensland and with the smaller Vic clubs. So who's doing that for Norwood and the 3rd WA team, assuming they're not going to be coming in and getting 30 or 40k a game? I can't see the state government doing that like in Tassie.