20th AFL Team

[Bjo187]

The good thing is, like with anything, if there is competition (in this case 4 locations), the AFL will be able to squeeze a good deal out of government for any of the options.

You've gotta remember the afl is unmatched for traveling supporters, plus places like Perth will wanna use Optus stadium more to help pay for it etc.

 

[eastfreo75]

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.

Split West Coast Eagles into two teams, Perth Eagles and West Coast Warriors.

Solves the issue of fan support.

 

[Coolangatta]

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.

I mean, 3rd WA and SA licenses could come in sooner than that, we could have 22 teams by 2050. I don't know if the Crows are gonna get big enough to justify a Norwood coming in and swooping in on fans, though. The SANFL will probably be screwed by that stage, maybe a new franchise targeting the southern districts of Adelaide would be the best bet by then -- Southern Sharks. Keep the name vague enough like that and maybe all the non-Crows and Port people will get behind them as the de-facto state team that Adelaide never quite captured the way the Eagles did WA.

NT and NQ in the 2070s.

 

[Canberra Pear]

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

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

By Caden Helmers

Picture the GWS Giants charging onto Manuka Oval with a cheer squad roaring behind the goal posts - only this time they're the away team.

The AFL is poised to target a new expansion location to bring a 20th team into the league following a long-awaited move into Tasmania - so what about Canberra?

Canberra could be a dark horse in expansion conversations - but there is just one problem.

The Giants call Canberra their second home, and they return to Manuka Oval to face St Kilda on April 13 in their first of three games in the capital this year. While we're here, kids get in free next weekend.

The ACT is the biggest region in the country without a team to call its own and boasts a bigger population than Hobart, which will be home to the Devils when they join the AFL in 2028. Canberra crowds are typically larger than those the Giants attract in Sydney and the capital can attract emerging talent from the Riverina.

But right now, we're in Giants territory. The ACT government and GWS have struck a 10-year, $28.5 million deal which is built on bringing games to Manuka Oval - which equates to more per game than the government provides the Canberra Raiders and ACT Brumbies.

That deal has been a divisive topic in Canberra, with Raiders and Brumbies officials declaring "we're not comparing apples with apples" when probed about the funding provided to GWS by Chief Minister Andrew Barr's government.

Moving the Giants out of Canberra would splinter a fan base and rip a huge amount of cash away from the western Sydney club.

Cricket ACT and the AFL are eager to work with the ACT government to build a new eastern stand at Manuka Oval - which has a capacity of 12,000 - and upgrade the viewing experience for fans, with Cricket ACT chairman Greg Boorer determined to secure a Big Bash licence in the capital.

Darwin might be football's sentimental favourite - but an expansion bid in the Northern Territory capital will have to overcome hurdles like a smaller population, stadium renovations and an unsuitable climate.

If we want to be sentimental, why not give the home of Alex Jesaulenko a team to call its own? Why not recycle yarns about the days Nathan Buckley and James Hird traded best and fairest awards while playing junior football together at Ainslie?

Once again the Giants are being listed as the major hurdle. The quicker they get on their own two feet in Sydney, the better off we'll be for a Canberra bid.

 

[Fire]

Is the problem with Manuka space? When I look at it on google maps it doesn't look like there is any space thats not accounted for, unless they decided to merge the two lanes of Canberra avenue and took over the pool. But even then, thats just a footprint. I don't see any room for 25-30k people to enter/leave, let alone amenities like parking or bus rinks. In the middle of suburbs. Would be a pretty miserable place to go to even if you did get a good upgrade in.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Once again the Giants are being listed as the major hurdle. The quicker they get on their own two feet in Sydney, the better off we'll be for a Canberra bid.

Rightly so.
They are never going to grow their fan base by much by playing 3 games a season in Canberra.

 

[Canary]

Has anyone read the Duffield piece in Code Sports? I don't have a subscription (and am loath to provide my hard-earned to the Murdochs) but curious to hear what he has to write about the WA3.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Once again the Giants are being listed as the major hurdle.

A common misconception is nevertheless still a misconception.

If the ACT Government commit to building a $715m roofed AFL stadium with 23k seats, Canberra would be granted the 20th licence tomorrow.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

A common misconception is nevertheless still a misconception.

If the ACT Government commit to building a $715m roofed AFL stadium with 23k seats, Canberra would be granted the 20th licence tomorrow.

the most popular female sports team in Canberra, Canberra United soccer team which was a member of the national women’s soccer competition since it started 16 years ago and who have won 2 premierships, are struggling to survive. The ACT Government has only provided $125,000 (an advance on the annual $250k funding for Canberra United). If our Chief minister Barr, in an election year cannot assist Canberra United, there is zero chance the ACT Government which is burdened by the $$ spent on the Trams, will build this stadium!

Don’t let Canberra United die: The push to stop Capital Football from falling into a $500,000 hole | Riotact

The first steps have been taken to link up a passionate fundraising group and Capital Football to keep Canberra United…

the-riotact.com

 

[glengowan]

I mean, 3rd WA and SA licenses could come in sooner than that, we could have 22 teams by 2050. I don't know if the Crows are gonna get big enough to justify a Norwood coming in and swooping in on fans, though. The SANFL will probably be screwed by that stage, maybe a new franchise targeting the southern districts of Adelaide would be the best bet by then -- Southern Sharks. Keep the name vague enough like that and maybe all the non-Crows and Port people will get behind them as the de-facto state team that Adelaide never quite captured the way the Eagles did WA.

NT and NQ in the 2070s.

No other team than Norwood would work in SA. The Crows are 100% the de-facto state team, as West Coast is in WA. They've just been poorly performed on-field in comparison, but the support is there. State-wide too.

In SA, before the Crows, it has always been Port, then Norwood, then the rest. Port have been smart enough (once Koch entered) to build on their tradition to capitalise on the move to Adelaide Oval and build up a supporter base to challenge the Crows. Prior, during the tarps era, they were half way in between being a 2nd SA side instead of being Port Adelaide and it almost sent them out of existence.

Norwood would be popular enough, but they'd need to hold on to all of their tradition and do it that way from the start. They'd need to be able to play half of their games out of Norwood Oval and for that to be profitable. Is that possible with 10k capacity and on a ground that has no footprint to expand? Whilst Port and Crows would remain bigger drawing clubs in the AFL, Norwood would have to work with an expectation they can fill Norwood Oval 5 or 6 times a year, fill Adelaide Oval against Port and Crows, and then get about 25-30k against bigger drawing clubs at Adelaide Oval a few times per year. They'd be a club that, at best, would average home crowds similar to the Brisbane Lions and North Melbourne I reckon.

The advantage Norwood have is they have big, national level, sponsors already - Coopers, Wolf Blass, Vilis etc. that have been Norwood forever. They have a boutique stadium, proven to be popular as an AFL venue during Gather Round, in a perfect location just a few km from the city on the eastern side in a popular cafe/entertainment strip. Opposite to where the Crows will build at Thebarton, which is a few km on the western side and where Port are based at Alberton, in the outer north-western suburbs. They have a rivalry with Port as old and fierce as Carlton and Collingwood. It would match the Showdown - so as far as one-off events go, that is a benefit. They have a big (in SA terms) supporter base, generations old. Being the 20th team, that would also add another game to the calendar each week and make fixturing easier - how much would that be worth?

I don't think any other 3rd SA team would get close to that. I can't see any other "new club" around Australia being bigger, at least initially, except possibly a 3rd WA club - due to their passion for footy (much like SA), their bigger population, and their stronger economy. WA could potentially do the composite side, as they did for Freo, and make it work. Plus the WA time zone lends itself to potential double header Friday nights, or Sunday night time slots for the rest of Australia.

I'd love to see Norwood in. As a club, they deserve to be on the big stage - similar to how Tasmania, as a state, deserve to be in the AFL. However, the AFL is a business and unless they can show that a smaller club can make it work long term in the AFL, the potential benefits of a 3rd WA club or expanding in to new AFL areas, I would think, would be more appealing to those making the decisions on a 20th team.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Has anyone read the Duffield piece in Code Sports? I don't have a subscription (and am loath to provide my hard-earned to the Murdochs) but curious to hear what he has to write about the WA3.

I haven't been able to get behind the paywall, but here's a clip of him speaking on SEN.

He's pushing for WA3, but in the Southwest based in based in Bunbury.

He says there's 374k people and it could be their version of Geelong.

This website has the Southwest having only 194k, so he must be including Peel, which veers into Freo territory.

 

[Canary]

I haven't been able to get behind the paywall, but here's a clip of him speaking on SEN.

He's pushing for WA3, but in the Southwest based in based in Bunbury.

He says there's 374k people and it could be their version of Geelong.

This website has the Southwest having only 194k, so he must be including Peel, which veers into Freo territory.

Ah, interesting thanks for the clip. I'd have thought he would have been advocating for north or south of Perth but I actually don't mind the South West option for the reasons he outlined. Providing they get rail connection from Mandurah + speed up the current snail paced Australind service it would be a pretty great twilight option for day trippers. It would require significant investment though, so I don't know why the argument is that over Gather Round.

I doubt it's a feasible priority over some other areas though, as much as I'd love to see it.

 

[VolgaBoatman]

For WA3 - so there are 90k in Bunbury, around 42k in Busselton (20 mins from Bunbury), around 25-30k in Dunsborough, Margaret River, Augusta area (45-60 mins from Bunbury). It's growing at around 2-2.5% per year - so a strong regional growth area. He's probably including towns all the way down to Albany, which are a lot further away to get to the 370k mark - e.g. the Great Southern.

Mandurah is only an hour away, plus a few other other country towns such as Harvey, Collie etc.

If you plan for it in the 2030s timeframe - then I think it's doable for sure.

His suggestion is 9 home games and the derbies against Eagles + Dockers at Optus. There is an airport now in Busselton that has direct flights to Melbourne and Sydney - and the South Wet is a major tourist destination.

He thinks this is a better bet to get behind than trying to bring Gather round to WA, as it's likely if that happens it would only be occasionally in WA and cost the State Government up to $30million dollars per year, which is better spent on a 3rd team to attract interstate fans on a more regular basis.

 

[Bjo187]

Love the Intel from the s.a and w.a fans with good local knowledge. Without knowing the landscape, what do people think of using west perth as team 20?

It gives the club some history (oldest football club in w.a), is in a growth area, has a good stadium that can be upgraded, gets the best home crowds of any wafl club and it gives a base supporter group to build off of, so it's not starting from scratch like gws and gold coast did (which was a mistake imo). It also has some former players with big profiles in the w.a landscape. The other advantage is it could be called Perth and is close enough to the city to capture fans from all over the city. A few games at Joondalup, a few at Optus.

 

[Canary]

If WA3 is the option, I'd much prefer it be in the South West as Volga Boatman suggested mostly as a flavour difference. Of all potential Metro Perth locations, Joondalup is, imo, the best. I wouldn't call it Perth as there is no identity really to build off there - West Coast IS Perth. A Joondalup Falcons team tapping into the northern suburbs woud be the smartest option. This it the area that I grew up in and it is absolutely viable. There were so many kids growing up who followed a vic club (myself included) for whatever reason but probably principally because Greater Perth is a massive area that 2 teams can't reasonably service from a community perspective.

 

[VolgaBoatman]

Love the Intel from the s.a and w.a fans with good local knowledge. Without knowing the landscape, what do people think of using west perth as team 20?

It gives the club some history (oldest football club in w.a), is in a growth area, has a good stadium that can be upgraded, gets the best home crowds of any wafl club and it gives a base supporter group to build off of, so it's not starting from scratch like gws and gold coast did (which was a mistake imo). It also has some former players with big profiles in the w.a landscape. The other advantage is it could be called Perth and is close enough to the city to capture fans from all over the city. A few games at Joondalup, a few at Optus.

Back in the day West Perth was definitely one of the bigger clubs, so might have been viable at the end of the 90's perhaps but I doubt that support is that strong anymore. I think the state government would only support a 3rd Perth team if they were at Optus - the more events there the better. At the moment it's got around 30-35 event days 22 AFL (+1 Final perhaps), 1 x WAFL GF, 5 Scorchers games (+1 Final perhaps), between 4-6 days of international cricket, 2-3 concerts (or WWE), perhaps 2 international Soccer matches. I've read that 40 is the magic number for events. Obviously the larger the crowds the better.

Saying that to build support - having a local team in Joondalup would make sense - it's hard (but not impossible) to move fans from existing support - definitely some Freo fans were West Coast fans at some point for example. If they're truly a local team of the northern suburbs then maybe that is possible. There are also quite a few West Coast fans who still see it as supporting Western Australian football - so may go to the games if their more accessible.

The round ball game though is pretty popular up there as well - whole suburbs seem to be transplanted from the UK (or Ireland) - though that hasn't translated into support for Perth Glory - they all still want to follow the premier league - so may also support an AFL team.

Anyway, I agree with Mark Duffield on a South West team. Unfortunately we don't have anyone in the government with the true passion or will to push this with the AFL - there is definitely a "WA deserves to be treated better" mindset rather than us to go and advocate for it. The AFL will just go where a government really wants to it (and is prepared to back it up with cold hard cash !). Maybe if Basil Zempilis (god help us) ever becomes premier, then the one thing he might be good it is to try and get us more events in WA.

 

[Bjo187]

Back in the day West Perth was definitely one of the bigger clubs, so might have been viable at the end of the 90's perhaps but I doubt that support is that strong anymore. I think the state government would only support a 3rd Perth team if they were at Optus - the more events there the better. At the moment it's got around 30-35 event days 22 AFL (+1 Final perhaps), 1 x WAFL GF, 5 Scorchers games (+1 Final perhaps), between 4-6 days of international cricket, 2-3 concerts (or WWE), perhaps 2 international Soccer matches. I've read that 40 is the magic number for events. Obviously the larger the crowds the better.

Saying that to build support - having a local team in Joondalup would make sense - it's hard (but not impossible) to move fans from existing support - definitely some Freo fans were West Coast fans at some point for example. If they're truly a local team of the northern suburbs then maybe that is possible. There are also quite a few West Coast fans who still see it as supporting Western Australian football - so may go to the games if their more accessible.

The round ball game though is pretty popular up there as well - whole suburbs seem to be transplanted from the UK (or Ireland) - though that hasn't translated into support for Perth Glory - they all still want to follow the premier league - so may also support an AFL team.

Anyway, I agree with Mark Duffield on a South West team. Unfortunately we don't have anyone in the government with the true passion or will to push this with the AFL - there is definitely a "WA deserves to be treated better" mindset rather than us to go and advocate for it. The AFL will just go where a government really wants to it (and is prepared to back it up with cold hard cash !). Maybe if Basil Zempilis (god help us) ever becomes premier, then the one thing he might be good it is to try and get us more events in WA.

Funny you mention that zemplis is a former West Perth player himself, Lord mayor, but I read stokes wants him to be premier. So a combination of stokes, zemplis (government) backing West Perth would be very powerful.

On Optus I agree, you'd only have 3 or 4 games at Joondalup to draw on local support.

 

[Coolangatta]

Funny you mention that zemplis is a former West Perth player himself, Lord mayor, but I read stokes wants him to be premier. So a combination of stokes, zemplis (government) backing West Perth would be very powerful.

On Optus I agree, you'd only have 3 or 4 games at Joondalup to draw on local support.

Basil as premier!? Talk about a ****ing nightmare, guy's a toffee nosed, arrogant w***er and a useless prick.

Not a chance in hell West Perth joins the AFL, they hate the AFL and refused to rebrand themselves as the Joondalup Falcons even though that's where they're based now.

They'd refuse to change their name or colours, and they aren't anywhere near the club they were in the 80s and 90s. It'd alienate all the people who hate West Perth.

The best chance of Perth 3 succeeding is a brand new team, a fresh start. I'm really coming around to the name Perth Miners in black and gold with a trim of white but that's just me.

Talk of South West WA as team 20 is ludicrous, I'm surprised by the support for it here.

Yes, I've advocated for it as team 22 myself before, but it does nothing to address the issue of 50k Eagles members not being able to get a seat to games.

How many of those members are from the south west and how many are gonna make a trek down south to watch the new kids in town play? How will that solve the issue of Eagles members being starved of live action? They still will be! It's not like they're gonna build a 40k stadium down there and I can't see that many Eagles fans jumping ship.

Essentially, it doesn't stop the already massive Eagles from becoming even bigger, and the whole appeal of WA3 as team 20 in the first place is that it already has Optus, saving a big expense. Optus is the whole point, they'll want the majority, if not all of the new games to be played there, let's not kid ourselves.

It's either Perth 3 or nothing. If it's all too hard, give it to Canberra instead, that's where it should go anyway; there might be people over here who do want WA3 but a lot of locals don't want it or don't care.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Basil as premier!? Talk about a ******* nightmare, guy's a toffee nosed, arrogant w***er and a useless prick.

Not a chance in hell West Perth joins the AFL, they hate the AFL and refused to rebrand themselves as the Joondalup Falcons even though that's where they're based now.

They'd refuse to change their name or colours, and they aren't anywhere near the club they were in the 80s and 90s. It'd alienate all the people who hate West Perth.

The best chance of Perth 3 succeeding is a brand new team, a fresh start. I'm really coming around to the name Perth Miners in black and gold with a trim of white but that's just me.

Talk of South West WA as team 20 is ludicrous, I'm surprised by the support for it here.

Yes, I've advocated for it as team 22 myself before, but it does nothing to address the issue of 50k Eagles members not being able to get a seat to games.

How many of those members are from the south west and how many are gonna make a trek down south to watch the new kids in town play? How will that solve the issue of Eagles members being starved of live action? They still will be! It's not like they're gonna build a 40k stadium down there and I can't see that many Eagles fans jumping ship.

Essentially, it doesn't stop the already massive Eagles from becoming even bigger, and the whole appeal of WA3 as team 20 in the first place is that it already has Optus, saving a big expense. Optus is the whole point, they'll want the majority, if not all of the new games to be played there, let's not kid ourselves.

It's either Perth 3 or nothing. If it's all too hard, give it to Canberra instead, that's where it should go anyway; there might be people over here who do want WA3 but a lot of locals don't want it or don't care.

That Perth Miners concept is cool. In regards to South West, what if they had a boutique stadium in Bunbury to hold about 20k and then had a split of 7 games Bunbury and 4 Optus?

If Perth can attract 50k+ to Richmond and Essendon during Covid, then surely a South West WA club could attract a decent crowd against Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond etc in addition to the derby games?

Eventually when the league expands to 25 rounds then the split could be 8-4 or even 7-5. This model is unlikely to get state government support cause they wouldn’t want to invest in a new facility, but it ticks a few boxes in terms of taking footy and footy tourism to SW WA, giving Perth based footy fans the chance to attend more games, and also gets some more high-drawing games to Optus.

 

[Coolangatta]

That Perth Miners concept is cool. In regards to South West, what if they had a boutique stadium in Bunbury to hold about 20k and then had a split of 7 games Bunbury and 4 Optus?

If Perth can attract 50k+ to Richmond and Essendon during Covid, then surely a South West WA club could attract a decent crowd against Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond etc in addition to the derby games?

Eventually when the league expands to 25 rounds then the split could be 8-4 or even 7-5. This model is unlikely to get state government support cause they wouldn’t want to invest in a new facility, but it ticks a few boxes in terms of taking footy and footy tourism to SW WA, giving Perth based footy fans the chance to attend more games, and also gets some more high-drawing games to Optus.

Sure, it's not a bad idea, for team 22, I'm all in for South West Sharks.

But yes, it'd have to be a 7-4 split. That's 6 Optus games per year, two home derbies, two away derbies, and two home games against rotating Pies, Tigers, Blues, Bombers, whoever else they think could draw a big crowd.

FWIW I wouldn't put the stadium in Bunbury either, I'd put it in Busselton. No disrespect to Bunbury, it's got great footy pedigree and I have relatives who live down that way, but Busso is just so much better for tourism and it's more of a hub/link to the SW than Bunbury is IMO.

 

[Coolangatta]

Long-term, I'd go 20. Canberra, 21. New Zealand 22. South West WA.

Sydney already has an AFL presence.

The Eagles are still gonna have a lot of locked out members, though; maybe they should just add two WA teams in the near future at the same time, Perth Miners around 2042-3 and SW Sharks around 2045-6.

I doubt they'd do that, but for sure a WA3 side down south would sell out 20k easily. The stadium would want to be built for extension to 40k cause it'd max that out quite easily, eventually.

 

[Bjo187]

Basil as premier!? Talk about a ******* nightmare, guy's a toffee nosed, arrogant w***er and a useless prick.

Not a chance in hell West Perth joins the AFL, they hate the AFL and refused to rebrand themselves as the Joondalup Falcons even though that's where they're based now.

They'd refuse to change their name or colours, and they aren't anywhere near the club they were in the 80s and 90s. It'd alienate all the people who hate West Perth.

The best chance of Perth 3 succeeding is a brand new team, a fresh start. I'm really coming around to the name Perth Miners in black and gold with a trim of white but that's just me.

Talk of South West WA as team 20 is ludicrous, I'm surprised by the support for it here.

Yes, I've advocated for it as team 22 myself before, but it does nothing to address the issue of 50k Eagles members not being able to get a seat to games.

How many of those members are from the south west and how many are gonna make a trek down south to watch the new kids in town play? How will that solve the issue of Eagles members being starved of live action? They still will be! It's not like they're gonna build a 40k stadium down there and I can't see that many Eagles fans jumping ship.

Essentially, it doesn't stop the already massive Eagles from becoming even bigger, and the whole appeal of WA3 as team 20 in the first place is that it already has Optus, saving a big expense. Optus is the whole point, they'll want the majority, if not all of the new games to be played there, let's not kid ourselves.

It's either Perth 3 or nothing. If it's all too hard, give it to Canberra instead, that's where it should go anyway; there might be people over here who do want WA3 but a lot of locals don't want it or don't care.

Well basil made it to lord mayor somehow (i agree he is very annoying) and is backed by the most powerful man in w.a, so it's a good start.

Why do west perth 'hate the afl'? Also the suggestion that people hating west perth is even relevant these days when they'll be playing in a different league with a slightly different identity is a stretch. Kids wouldn't even know or care about it, which is the generation this club is going after. It's the same as the Southport claim and I think everybody agrees starting the suns from scratch instead of using Southport under the gc name was a massive error. The funny thing is, Southport don't even play in the qafl now anyway, so there is nothing for these so called people to hate.

 

[Coolangatta]

Well basil made it to lord mayor somehow (i agree he is very annoying) and is backed by the most powerful man in w.a, so it's a good start.

Why do west perth 'hate the afl'? Also the suggestion that people hating west perth is even relevant these days when they'll be playing in a different league with a slightly different identity is a stretch. Kids wouldn't even know or care about it, which is the generation this club is going after. It's the same as the Southport claim and I think everybody agrees starting the suns from scratch instead of using Southport under the gc name was a massive error. The funny thing is, Southport don't even play in the qafl now anyway, so there is nothing for these so called people to hate.

It's not just West Perth, it's the WAFL that don't like the AFL. Every time the Eagles have tried to use an affiliate it hasn't worked. The WAFL was never the same after the Eagles came into it, it's a shadow of the league it was.

The issue with West Perth and Joondalup is engagement. The Falcons have neither the money nor pull to be promoted to the AFL. Yes, they could receive a significant boost in funding and all that, but the Falcons don't even want to be in Joondalup. The only reason they're there is because the club was failing in Leederville and are still pissed their arch rivals the Royals are using that as their base now, and that rivalry goes a long way back.

It's their home out of spite and necessity and that's not a good look.

If you want to engage kids and a new generation of fans and immigrants from Britain and South Africa, a fresh start with a club that actually gives a shit about being a proud representative would be the way to go IMO.

No need whatsoever to promote West Perth, it should've happened 40 years ago along with East Perth but it didn't, and it almost did! Would've already had 3 WA teams with the Royals, Falcons and Fremantle. SA could've been set up with Port, Norwood and probably Sturt, but I understand at the time there were limited licences because there wasn't enough rationalisation of Vic clubs so they went for new clubs representing the state.

It would be sad if the Falcons get in but not the Royals, and it'd kill the WAFL because you'd be removing that rivalry from the competition as the Falcons would be joining the AFL reserves league and exiting the WAFL. Do they really want to do that?

Joondalup Dragons is a hypothetical name they could use to try and reel in some UK migrants.

I do agree about Southport, but only because they were really the only club of significance in the QAFL so it's not like they were screwing over other big rivals and they had the $$$ and still do. GC Sharks, and they should've been allowed to wear the black and white, **** Collingwood.

 

[Canary]

To be clear, I don't think "promoting" a WAFL club is the right decision by any stretch of the imagination. Any new licences should be entirely new ventures. I say Joondalup Falcons as it's a good shorthand, but Joondalup Dragons or w/e that's fine. I personally think calling a prospective new team "Perth" would be a mistake as to me it screams catch-all corporate franchise, although I would love to be proven wrong. I think for new clubs to have a chance they need to have the capacity to develop an organic identity, which I think all non-VFL teams have managed to do with some success (despite a rocky start for GWS, beginning with the name!). Joondalup, or Mandurah, at least has a strong sense of place. Would it work? No idea. No-one does. But, I think being scared to try because of the existing teams and the belief that WA only works as a two-team state is bollocks. It clearly has the population and football heritage to support three teams, and the sooner this national competition moves away from a paternalistic attitude towards its non-Victorian states the better.

 

[Coolangatta]

To be clear, I don't think "promoting" a WAFL club is the right decision by any stretch of the imagination. Any new licences should be entirely new ventures. I say Joondalup Falcons as it's a good shorthand, but Joondalup Dragons or w/e that's fine. I personally think calling a prospective new team "Perth" would be a mistake as to me it screams catch-all corporate franchise, although I would love to be proven wrong. I think for new clubs to have a chance they need to have the capacity to develop an organic identity, which I think all non-VFL teams have managed to do with some success (despite a rocky start for GWS, beginning with the name!). Joondalup, or Mandurah, at least has a strong sense of place. Would it work? No idea. No-one does. But, I think being scared to try because of the existing teams and the belief that WA only works as a two-team state is bollocks. It clearly has the population and football heritage to support three teams, and the sooner this national competition moves away from a paternalistic attitude towards its non-Victorian states the better.

I'd love to see the WA public decide the name and mascot, but I have no idea how feasible it'd be to do that. I'd want at least over 10k responses with a consensus or frontrunner.