20th AFL Team

[Canberra Pear]

Potential catchment areas for teams in each city. This clearly does not demonstrate what the population in those areas are though. But atleast it demonstrates where they are in relation to each other.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AussieMaps/s/PyaLDXiXZy

Edit: though it is wrong, as it is missing Ballarat, Bendigo and Albury/Wadonga.

View attachment 2057050

Yeah, there must be some specific definitions because I would've thought Ballarat and Bendigo would be in there, too. Or the data's a bit old.

Hard to tell on a small map, but I think there would be about 1 million in the Canberra segment. Probably similar in the Newcastle segment.

Sunshine Coast or Townsville might top 500k depending where Central Queensland splits.

Everywhere else without a team would probably have less than 500k.

 

[Bjo187]

Potential catchment areas for teams in each city. This clearly does not demonstrate what the population in those areas are though. But atleast it demonstrates where they are in relation to each other.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AussieMaps/s/PyaLDXiXZy

Edit: though it is wrong, as it is missing Ballarat, Bendigo and Albury/Wadonga.

View attachment 2057050

Interesting that Canberra appears to go into western sydney? How is that right though, wouldn't that be Parramatta?

 

[Canberra Pear]

Interesting that Canberra appears to go into western sydney? How is that right though, wouldn't that be Parramatta?

I think that border is somewhere around Orange.

 

[Walshawk]

Potential catchment areas for teams in each city. This clearly does not demonstrate what the population in those areas are though. But atleast it demonstrates where they are in relation to each other.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AussieMaps/s/PyaLDXiXZy

Edit: though it is wrong, as it is missing Ballarat, Bendigo and Albury/Wadonga.

View attachment 2057050

It you live over 1000km away are you really in a catchment area?


If reckon if you live more than an hour’s drive/PT away you are not likely to buy a membership or turn up most weeks.

 

[kranger]

The new Tasmania AFL team is going to be split for location between Hobart and Launceston. A 150min drive between locations but covers the state of 500,000.

The idea of a Northern Australia or North Queensland team gets thrown about. Where the team would have to fly between locations and cover a population of less than 500,000 combined. Generally playing in cities with a population around 100,000.

But what about a Lake Macquarie team? Obviously interest in Aussie Rules in this area is low, but it wouldn’t be much worse than North Queensland, but atleast it is a bigger population.

A team for both the Hunter Valley and the Central Coast in NSW, is a population of over 875,000 and growing. So much bigger than the above two teams split between localities.



Newcastle to Gosford is a 90min drive, and connected by the same train line. A similar experience as the Cats playing in Geelong and Melbourne from a travel perspective.

The team could play half the games in Gosford and half in Newcastle. Or they play all of them in a central location putting the whole population within a 45min drive for every game.

A central single stadium in Morisset consolidates the spend on infrastructure and makes the experience more familiar for patrons each home game.



A station on the train line. An exit from the highway. Locate the stadium at the Showgrounds next to the town centre.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

The new Tasmania AFL team is going to be split for location between Hobart and Launceston. A 150min drive between locations but covers the state of 500,000.

The idea of a Northern Australia or North Queensland team gets thrown about. Where the team would have to fly between locations and cover a population of less than 500,000 combined. Generally playing in cities with a population around 100,000.

But what about a Lake Macquarie team?

A team for both the Hunter Valley and the Central Coast in NSW, being a population of over 875,000 and growing. So much bigger than the above two split team localities.

View attachment 2059268

Newcastle to Gosford is a 90min drive, and connected by the same train line. A similar experience as the Cats playing in Geelong and Melbourne from a travel perspective.

The team could play half the games in Gosford and half in Newcastle. Or they play all of them in a central location putting the whole population within a 45min drive for every game.

A central single stadium in Morisset consolidates the spend on infrastructure and makes the experience more familiar for patrons each home game.

View attachment 2059272

A station on the train line. An exit from the highway. Locate the stadium at the Showgrounds next to the town centre.

View attachment 2059276

Always considered a future team that encompasses Newcastle, Central Coast & Northern NSW region as be named "Northern Sydney" similar to how the GIANTS were "originally" meant to represent Western Sydney and our currently called Greater Western Sydney (what a mouthful).

With a Northern Sydney club as well, they can possibly get state government funding to upgrade NSO in a 20-25k stadium and play their big-Victorian club home matches there while the rest of their matches in Newcastle and / or Central Coast.

Personally though, the location would probably be ideal as the 22nd or 23rd team behind ACT, WA3 & possibly NQ as well, once GWS starts improving their numbers, with there also needing a fair bit of state government funding needed especially given the federal government won't help most likely with that ordeal.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The new Tasmania AFL team is going to be split for location between Hobart and Launceston. A 150min drive between locations but covers the state of 500,000.

The idea of a Northern Australia or North Queensland team gets thrown about. Where the team would have to fly between locations and cover a population of less than 500,000 combined. Generally playing in cities with a population around 100,000.

But what about a Lake Macquarie team? Obviously interest in Aussie Rules in this area is low, but it wouldn’t be much worse than North Queensland, but atleast it is a bigger population.

A team for both the Hunter Valley and the Central Coast in NSW, is a population of over 875,000 and growing. So much bigger than the above two teams split between localities.

View attachment 2059268

Newcastle to Gosford is a 90min drive, and connected by the same train line. A similar experience as the Cats playing in Geelong and Melbourne from a travel perspective.

The team could play half the games in Gosford and half in Newcastle. Or they play all of them in a central location putting the whole population within a 45min drive for every game.

A central single stadium in Morisset consolidates the spend on infrastructure and makes the experience more familiar for patrons each home game.

View attachment 2059272

A station on the train line. An exit from the highway. Locate the stadium at the Showgrounds next to the town centre.

View attachment 2059276

Neither place cares about the game. And if they did, Newcastle would surely get the team on its own. They have far more corporate support and it's easy enough to get to Newcastle from the Central Coast by train.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

The new Tasmania AFL team is going to be split for location between Hobart and Launceston. A 150min drive between locations but covers the state of 500,000.

The idea of a Northern Australia or North Queensland team gets thrown about. Where the team would have to fly between locations and cover a population of less than 500,000 combined. Generally playing in cities with a population around 100,000.

But what about a Lake Macquarie team? Obviously interest in Aussie Rules in this area is low, but it wouldn’t be much worse than North Queensland, but atleast it is a bigger population.

A team for both the Hunter Valley and the Central Coast in NSW, is a population of over 875,000 and growing. So much bigger than the above two teams split between localities.

View attachment 2059268

Newcastle to Gosford is a 90min drive, and connected by the same train line. A similar experience as the Cats playing in Geelong and Melbourne from a travel perspective.

The team could play half the games in Gosford and half in Newcastle. Or they play all of them in a central location putting the whole population within a 45min drive for every game.

A central single stadium in Morisset consolidates the spend on infrastructure and makes the experience more familiar for patrons each home game.

View attachment 2059272

A station on the train line. An exit from the highway. Locate the stadium at the Showgrounds next to the town centre.

View attachment 2059276

Whilst a plausible idea, I think the AFL’s intentions for the location of the 20th team were clearly spelt out in its fan survey - NT, Canberra, WA, SA, NQ.

I really do think it’s realistically between Canberra, WA3 and NT (mainly due to the fan and media preference for this). Sydney 3, Brisbane 2, New Zealand, Newcastle, Sunshine Coast etc are not in the running for team 20.

 

[kranger]

Always considered a future team that encompasses Newcastle, Central Coast & Northern NSW region as be named "Northern Sydney" similar to how the GIANTS were "originally" meant to represent Western Sydney and our currently called Greater Western Sydney (what a mouthful).

With a Northern Sydney club as well, they can possibly get state government funding to upgrade NSO in a 20-25k stadium and play their big-Victorian club home matches there while the rest of their matches in Newcastle and / or Central Coast.

Personally though, the location would probably be ideal as the 22nd or 23rd team behind ACT, WA3 & possibly NQ as well, once GWS starts improving their numbers, with there also needing a fair bit of state government funding needed especially given the federal government won't help most likely with that ordeal.

I would leave northern Sydney and even northern NSW out of it.

Leave Sydney with only two teams, split east and west between the Swans and GWS. That leaves a population of 2.5m each similar to Lions in Brisbane. No need to interfere there, hopefully GWS can tap into that Western Sydney population and become as big as the other two.

Northern NSW might be attracted to supporting a Lake Macquarie team, but they are too far away and with no big centres of population to warrant playing games there. Focus the attention into the Hunter Valley and Central Coast, like how GWS and Suns should leave Canberra and Darwin respectively to focus on their base territory.

Use this Lake Macquarie team like GWS to grow the sport in the area. The difference being, like the Suns, the smaller population will always mean they are on the smaller side compared to their cousins based in the larger city.

Edit: I should mention, I’m thinking a Lake Macquarie team is number 21. Canberra should be team 20.

 

[RedV3x]

Newcastle would surely get the team on its own. They have far more corporate support and it's easy enough to get to Newcastle from the Central Coast by train.

Yes, Newcastle has the history and the local league and is seen as the centre of Australian Football in that area.
Newcastle has the transport connections.
The AFL desperately need to stage some events there to start the ball rolling.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

I would leave northern Sydney and even northern NSW out of it.

Leave Sydney with only two teams, split east and west between the Swans and GWS. No need to interfere there.

Northern NSW might be attracted to supporting a Lake Macquarie team, but they are too far away and with no big centres of population to warrant playing games there. Focus the attention into the Hunter Valley and Central Coast, like how GWS and Suns should leave Canberra and Darwin respectively to focus on their base territory.

Use this Lake Macquarie team like GWS to grow the sport in the area.

Edit: I should mention, I’m thinking a Lake Macquarie team is number 21. Canberra should be team 20.

Lake Macquaire would be an interesting concept for Team 21 but the AFL will probably more likely call it Northern Sydney (if they plan of having 4 clubs in NSW with NESW cardinal directions) or Newcastle (similar to Geelong model with Melbourne clubs + splitting NSW in East / West like you mentioned).

Reckon it'll all come down to the timeframe of when teams 21-22 and whenever it comes earlier than expected or takes longer for those teams to enter (most likely option). Was going to post in the "name next 4 clubs thread" soon in more detail but in short, the 19-22 teams IMO would be Tasmania, Canberra, Perth / WA3 (if WAFC obliges with funding) and either North Queensland or NSW3, with Darwin being part of a joint-venture with smaller Victorian club in-between team 20th & 21st.

Canberra definitely deserves the 20th team though (if WA3 isn't happening) given how much untapped potential there is in the R.A.M.S regions (Riverina, ACT, Murrumbidgee, Southern NSW) and being heaps more viable than cities like Darwin & Cairns currently but that could change in 20-30 years depending on various reasons.

 

[RedV3x]

i have said this before but deciding on future configurations of the AFL depends on what model AFL you are chasing.
Atm the AFL is a mixture of powerhouse and boutique models.
We have W.A., S.A., Brisbane, Sydney, Geelong and powerhouse Melbourne clubs.
The potential for the Suns and the Giants to capture a significant part of their surrounding population is getting more confident.
The "boutique" Melbourne teams survive on the large number of Melbourne derbies.
The potential for "boutique" Melbourne teams to grow depends on increasing market share or some new arrangement.
Tasmania will be the next boutique model but in all probability it will become strong like Geelong.

IMO, any new team has to be centred around a population centre, a city.
Canberra is an obvious choice. Auckland is a possibility if the AFL returned to it's pre-Covid effort.
The AFL has neglected to do anything with a good possibility in Newcastle.

It is imperative that boutique AFL clubs start real associations with regions like Bendigo, Ballarat, Albury-Wodonga, Cairns and N.T. etc and not just take money for playing games away from home.

With the AFLW, i believe there is a great possibility to have an Irish team - the Sydney Celtics that would be a huge boost to the game in Sydney, nationally and internationally.

 

[Teen Wolf]

The "boutique" Melbourne teams survive on the large number of Melbourne derbies

Nonsense. They survive on TV money, memberships and sponsorships. North Melbourne made a $1m operating profit across 2020-21, Western Bulldogs $3m. Collingwood lost $2.5m, Fremantle lost more than $4m--these are the clubs which benefit most from derbies, not small Melbourne teams.

It is imperative that boutique AFL clubs start real associations with regions like Bendigo, Ballarat, Albury-Wodonga, Cairns and N.T. etc and not just take money for playing games away from home.

No it isn't. Those regions get what they are willing to pay for. If they want to strengthen ties with an AFL club, the onus is on their councils/governments. Either way, the clubs are in good shape.

With the AFLW, i believe there is a great possibility to have an Irish team - the Sydney Celtics that would be a huge boost to the game in Sydney, nationally and internationally.

In a post brimming with absurdly inaccurate statements, this is the one most detached from reality (with an honourable mention to the part about Auckland).

 

[RedV3x]

They survive on TV money, memberships and sponsorships.

Yes, boutique clubs do survive on smaller attendances, smaller memberships and smaller sponsorships.
Yes, boutique clubs do survive on TV rights distributed equally, but the the TV rights really depend upon the number of big games between the biggest following clubs.
Some of the big clubs receive income through their own media efforts.

I have to laugh that you so readily propose that N.M. is indeed a "boutique" club.
I have to laugh that N.M. probably has made the highest number bad calls when addressing their future.

 

[RedV3x]

Those regions get what they are willing to pay for. If they want to strengthen ties with an AFL club, the onus is on their councils/governments.

i really hope that you don't hold any official position at N.M.
That is really a horrendous attitude to hold especially when an AFL club has the most to gain.

 

[RedV3x]

(with an honourable mention to the part about Auckland).

Are you so young (you sound very childish) that you don't know about Auckland ?
I can recall all the various N.M. follies - can you ?.

 

[Teen Wolf]

the TV rights really depend upon the number of big games between the biggest following clubs.

Wrong again. Broadcasters would rather a close match featuring a small club (Vic or otherwise) than a blowout between two big clubs, and the ratings support that preference. Hence a) one-third of the fixture is no longer locked in until the ladder takes shape, and b) big club Richmond have no Friday night games this year.

Also, the TV rights depend most on Foxtel. From next year, they pay $400m p/a compared to Seven's $240m. The crucial extra $160m is therefore derived from matches where clubs are hidden from free-to-air in their local market--at least one of which is a small Melbourne club more often than not (and never a non-Vic club, including Tasmania and the hypothetical 20th team).

 

[RedV3x]

Wrong again. Broadcasters would rather a close match featuring a small club

Wrong again. Broadcasters would rather a close match featuring a big clubs.

Also, the TV rights depend most on Foxtel. From next year, they pay $400m p/a compared to Seven's $240m. The crucial extra $160m is therefore derived from matches where clubs are hidden from free-to-air in their local market--at least one of which is a small Melbourne club

The crucial extra $160m is therefore derived from matches where clubs are hidden from free-to-air in their local market--at least one of which is a small Melbourne clubbut more likely to be a big Melbourne club.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Wrong again. Broadcasters would rather a close match featuring a big clubs.

I actually have facts and figures to go with my claims (you should try it some time).

Most-watched grand finals of all time, 1st to 7th:
1996 (NM d Syd)
2005 (Syd d WCE)
2006 (WCE d Syd)
2016 (WB d Syd)
2012 (Syd d Haw)
2021 (Melb d WB)
2009 (Geel d StK)

Where oh where are the big 4 Melbourne clubs??

The crucial extra $160m is therefore derived from matches where clubs are hidden from free-to-air in their local market--at least one of which is a small Melbourne clubbut more likely to be a big Melbourne club.

Clearly not the case, if you can count. In rounds 0 to 23 this year, there are 86 games involving a Victorian team with no FTA coverage into their home state. The 4 biggest Melbourne clubs feature 37 times. The 4 smallest Melbourne clubs feature 49 times.

 

[Bjo187]

Redv3x V teen wolf, I'll get the popcorn, this will go for a while !

 

[Walshawk]

Yes, Newcastle has the history and the local league and is seen as the centre of Australian Football in that area.
Newcastle has the transport connections.
The AFL desperately need to stage some events there to start the ball rolling.

Footy is doing ok on the Central Coast, probably more popular there and in Newcastle compared to western Sydney (certainly more active Auskick centres). Agree any action there needs to be in Newcastle. It is insane that such a large population centre has never hosted a game.

 

[RedmanWasHere]

Wrong again. Broadcasters would rather a close match featuring a small club (Vic or otherwise) than a blowout between two big clubs, and the ratings support that preference. Hence a) one-third of the fixture is no longer locked in until the ladder takes shape, and b) big club Richmond have no Friday night games this year.

To me, this infers the AFL (and broadcasters) would have a want for rigging games.

 

[RedV3x]

I actually have facts and figures to go with my claims

But you don't have any logic for analysis do you.

Most-watched grand finals of all time, 1st to 7th:

You mean apart from the appearance of the great interstate club Sydney Swans.

2009 (Geel d StK)
2021 (Melb d WB)

Geelong is a big club.
Other "much-watched finals" due to the long absence from the premiership picture.

Where oh where are the big 4 Melbourne clubs??

You've cherry picked 7 games that all of which bar one absolutely back-fired on you.
Clearly the case, if you can count.

In rounds 0 to 23 this year, there are 86 games involving a Victorian team with no FTA coverage into their home state. The 4 biggest Melbourne clubs feature 37 times. The 4 smallest Melbourne clubs feature 49 times.

Yes, EXACTLY. The stakeholders realise that the small Melbourne clubs aren't worth the exposure at the expense of more-watched Melbourne clubs.
Thanks for the "facts" which back my claim not yours.

 

[Teen Wolf]

You mean apart from the appearance of the great interstate club Sydney Swans.

Geelong is a big club.

Sorry, I thought you said the small Melbourne clubs "survive on the large number of Melbourne derbies". I didn't realise Sydney and Geelong are involved in any Melbourne derbies.

20+ years of data shows big Melbourne clubs aren't a prerequisite for big ratings. Therein lies good news for the highly ambitious NT bid.

Yes, EXACTLY. The stakeholders realise that the small Melbourne clubs aren't worth the exposure at the expense of more-watched Melbourne clubs.

FTA exposure for Victorian clubs is largely dictated by on-field performance, less so the size of a club's supporter base (example: the Tigers have 5 more Fox exclusive games this year than the Dees). It just so happens two of the big 4 Melbourne clubs finished top 4 last year while the smallest Melbourne club finished 17th, thereby skewing the ratio this year.

 

[RedV3x]

Sorry, I thought you said the small Melbourne clubs "survive on the large number of Melbourne derbies".

I did indeed say that and any person with logical processes would garner that fact.

I didn't realise Sydney and Geelong are involved in any Melbourne derbies.

You're the one that posted that the Sydney Swans figured in five out of seven "most-watched" grand finals.
They are your "facts" about grand finals and grand finals are abonus that no club can rely on.
Clubs rely on the income generated from tyhe home and away season and it is refutable logic that Melbourne clubs are blessed with the greatest number of derbies ensuring greater mutual crowds. Greater mutual crowds directly and indirectly leads to greater income.

20+ years of data shows big Melbourne clubs aren't a prerequisite for big ratings.

Obviously big Melbourne clubs aren't a prerequisite for big ratings but big drawing clubs, well performing clubs or critical games are a needed for big ratings. A small Melbourne club not performing well and not in a position to leverage a critical result is never going to rate well.

Therein lies good news for the highly ambitious NT bid.

Onfield success is everything. Even then, a N.T. team is stretching things.

FTA exposure for Victorian clubs is largely dictated by on-field performance, less so the size of a club's supporter base

Which you then discredit by saying...

the Tigers have 5 more Fox exclusive games this year than the Dees.

You said it - the larger supported club has more exposure.

It just so happens two of the big 4 Melbourne clubs finished top 4 last year while the smallest Melbourne club finished 17th, thereby skewing the ratio this year.

Wouldn't that be a somewhat typical year ?