20th AFL Team

[Bjo187]

The North West (Devonport, Burnie etc) is probably the strongest grassroots footy region in the whole of Tasmania and together with Northern Tas (Launceston and surrounds) they have a combined population of approx 270k. Devonport (1 hr) and Burnie (1.5 hrs) are very much within driving distance of Launceston and I’m certain that footy fans from those regions will vote with their feet in support of the Devils.

Four Devils’ games per season will be played at an upgraded UTAS (23k). There are already thousands of NW coasters who attend Hawthorn games. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if there are 5k+ NW Coasters attending Devils games in Launceston, particularly since the Hobart games are far more inaccessible for them. There will surely be membership packages that target supporters who only plan to attend games on their side of the state (e.g. South 7 games, North 4).

Connecting with the whole state has been a core tenet of the Devils ever since the business case was released and it has continued since the club’s board was announced. The board have also been backing this up with their actions so far (e.g. holding cultural fabric sessions all over the state, the club launch being held simultaneously at multiple sites, rotating board meetings between cities etc). The model that’s going to work for Tassie really is very different to what will work for most other clubs, so it’s pleasing that the board are in-tune with this notion so far.

If the 20th club is called Canberra and plays minimal games outside of the capital, then could we expect a similar level of buy-in from people who actually reside in another state? Particularly when a significant percentage of them may follow other codes in addition to/ instead of AFL. Simply, I believe there are more nuanced factors at play in addition to the obvious ones, population and distance. If Canberra’s population keeps growing at current levels then there’ll come a point in time when they won’t even need to worry about the regions anyway.

They'd be a natural connection with snsw through the academy anyway, I just feel one game in the region from the start will bring in a few hundred thousand extra potential fans, which wouldn't be a bad thing for a smaller club to tap into that potential.

On another note, I saw Ainslie football club has revenue of around 30 million per year, they own pokies and a golf club. Would the afl be smart in aligning with the club, unlike the stuff up of not using Southport on the gold coast? Obviously they'd be called Canberra in the big comp, but it would give the club some culture and not cost as much starting another team from scratch again.

 

[Coolangatta]

They'd be a natural connection with snsw through the academy anyway, I just feel one game in the region from the start will bring in a few hundred thousand extra potential fans, which wouldn't be a bad thing for a smaller club to tap into that potential.

On another note, I saw Ainslie football club has revenue of around 30 million per year, they own pokies and a golf club. Would the afl be smart in aligning with the club, unlike the stuff up of not using Southport on the gold coast? Obviously they'd be called Canberra in the big comp, but it would give the club some culture and not cost as much starting another team from scratch again.

Saints colours, though.

Bring on the St Kilda-Ainslie merger

 

[Badger17]

They're not too culturally similar, but an AFL team wouldn't be the first to link in.

The Raiders play an annual game at Wagga. And the Brumbies have played a few preseason matches.

The Raiders do not play annual games at Wagga. They played three games there as quid pro quo for funding from the NSW Gov, but that deal has ended.

It was never intended to be a long term relationship, it wasn't particularly successful, Wagga was only chosen as the host because other, better, hosts already host regular NRL matches, and neither side looked to renew the deal once it was done.

The Brumbies attempts to expand their fanbase into Southern NSW post 2004 are one of the major reasons why they're struggling now despite being the most successful Australian Super Rugby side.

20 years ago the Brumbies were legitimately bigger than the Raiders, then they burnt through a ton of good will by dumping their ACT patriot image to try and be the team for everything south of Sydney, and ended up with absolutely nothing to show for it. Now they're borderline irrelevant in Canberra and close to going semi-pro along with the rest of Australian Rugby Union. You don't want to follow down that path.

I do agree with this. There's not an actual need for Canberra to sell games.

I think Southern NSW helps with the romance of the bid. Tasmania and the NT is romantic. Canberra by itself is not. But it doesn't need to be. The bid should be based more on facts and numbers than romance.

Romantic to whom exactly?

This isn't romance, it's over-promising to potential investors in an attempt to seal the deal. You're basically saying "back us and not only do you get Canberra, but we'll open the Riverina up to you as well", which sounds nice on paper, but in practice it's highly unlikely that you can actually pull it off.

As far as country NSW is concerned the Riverina is way down the list market and population wise anyway, so it's a weird choice in the first place.

As a general rule anywhere the NRL have teams or are playing regular games is a good indicator of where most of the money and action is for sports and entertainment in NSW/ACT. Newcastle/Hunter, Wollongong/South Coast, and Western NSW is where the bulk of the population and money is outside Sydney metro area and ACT/Capital Region.

The South Coast is a brilliant idea for a preseason or AFLW match. There's not one individual town bigger than Wagga, but they collectively have a similar population to the Riverina. It's also full of Canberrans and would be incredibly popular to travel to (a lot of Canberrans already have another house down there anyway).

The South Coast starts at Wollongong and goes to the Victorian border with Eden being the largest population in the South. So yeah it's population is much larger than the Riverina's, and it's more evenly spread out than the Riverina's once you're south of Wollongong.

If the AFL could convince the government to build a stadium capable of hosting AFL matches somewhere on the South Coast people would definitely travel it's length for an annual game or two. You'd draw a strong crowd from Canberra, inland, and Sydney as well.

As the largest city Wollongong would be the obvious host, and would certainly work, but if you could hold it somewhere more central like Batemans Bay it'd attract people from the length and breadth of the region, and probably be better for tourism and the local economy than holding it in Wollongong.

It's all academic though, as there's about as much chance of the NSW government upgrading one of the stadiums on the South Coast into a 10-15k capacity for a single AFL game a year as there is in the Riverina.

 

[Badger17]

They'd be a natural connection with snsw through the academy anyway, I just feel one game in the region from the start will bring in a few hundred thousand extra potential fans, which wouldn't be a bad thing for a smaller club to tap into that potential.

On another note, I saw Ainslie football club has revenue of around 30 million per year, they own pokies and a golf club. Would the afl be smart in aligning with the club, unlike the stuff up of not using Southport on the gold coast? Obviously they'd be called Canberra in the big comp, but it would give the club some culture and not cost as much starting another team from scratch again.

That's basically how the Raiders work, with the Raiders effectively being an extension of the Queanbeyan Blues. Back in the day you would have said that the Blues own the Raiders, but these days it's more the other way around.

Partnering with a club like Ainslie or Eastlake could work if you went about it the right way, but it could also alienate people if you fumbled it.

If the AFL team ever got the reputation for just being Ainslie or Eastlake's team in the AFL, instead of being the team for the whole of Canberra, it'd kill support. So there would have to be a very clear boundary between the AFL side and the local club, with the AFL side being run by neutral people as an independent organisation that's parent company just happens be Ainslie or Eastlake.

BTW, there's no chance that playing an annual game in the regions would result in a few hundred thousand extra fans for a Canberra side. At best playing annual games in Wagga, for example, would result in a small fanbase in Wagga and surrounds, but that's about it.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

BTW, there's no chance that playing an annual game in the regions would result in a few hundred thousand extra fans for a Canberra side. At best playing annual games in Wagga, for example, would result in a small fanbase in Wagga and surrounds, but that's about it.

Maybe those regions would be better suited to hosting pre-season matches for a Canberra team.

Initially though, Canberra should be playing all their home matches for the first decade or so, with the only decision being if that would be at an redeveloped Manuka Oval (most likely) or new multi-purpose stadium in Civic (City).

 

[Badger17]

Maybe those regions would be better suited to hosting pre-season matches for a Canberra team.

Initially though, Canberra should be playing all their home matches for the first decade or so, with the only decision being if that would be at an redeveloped Manuka Oval (most likely) or new multi-purpose stadium in Civic (City).

A new stadium in Civic is a pipedream. There simply isn't the space or political will to make it happen, and even if there was it'd almost certainly be a rectangular stadium not an oval.

In saying that, a new stadium isn't completely out of the question, it just wouldn't be built in Civic. Manuka or Phillip Oval would probably be the top candidates for the location of a new oval stadium.

Playing pre-seasons in the regions is a good idea, and would probably be inevitable.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

The Raiders do not play annual games at Wagga. They played three games there as quid pro quo for funding from the NSW Gov, but that deal has ended.

It was never intended to be a long term relationship, it wasn't particularly successful, Wagga was only chosen as the host because other, better, hosts already host regular NRL matches, and neither side looked to renew the deal once it was done.

The Brumbies attempts to expand their fanbase into Southern NSW post 2004 are one of the major reasons why they're struggling now despite being the most successful Australian Super Rugby side.

20 years ago the Brumbies were legitimately bigger than the Raiders, then they burnt through a ton of good will by dumping their ACT patriot image to try and be the team for everything south of Sydney, and ended up with absolutely nothing to show for it. Now they're borderline irrelevant in Canberra and close to going semi-pro along with the rest of Australian Rugby Union. You don't want to follow down that path.

Romantic to whom exactly?

This isn't romance, it's over-promising to potential investors in an attempt to seal the deal. You're basically saying "back us and not only do you get Canberra, but we'll open the Riverina up to you as well", which sounds nice on paper, but in practice it's highly unlikely that you can actually pull it off.

As far as country NSW is concerned the Riverina is way down the list market and population wise anyway, so it's a weird choice in the first place.

As a general rule anywhere the NRL have teams or are playing regular games is a good indicator of where most of the money and action is for sports and entertainment in NSW/ACT. Newcastle/Hunter, Wollongong/South Coast, and Western NSW is where the bulk of the population and money is outside Sydney metro area and ACT/Capital Region.

The South Coast starts at Wollongong and goes to the Victorian border with Eden being the largest population in the South. So yeah it's population is much larger than the Riverina's, and it's more evenly spread out than the Riverina's once you're south of Wollongong.

If the AFL could convince the government to build a stadium capable of hosting AFL matches somewhere on the South Coast people would definitely travel it's length for an annual game or two. You'd draw a strong crowd from Canberra, inland, and Sydney as well.

As the largest city Wollongong would be the obvious host, and would certainly work, but if you could hold it somewhere more central like Batemans Bay it'd attract people from the length and breadth of the region, and probably be better for tourism and the local economy than holding it in Wollongong.

It's all academic though, as there's about as much chance of the NSW government upgrading one of the stadiums on the South Coast into a 10-15k capacity for a single AFL game a year as there is in the Riverina.

All of this is kind of silly though when you just can't look at population centres, you have to look at how many people are interested in the game of footy. Wollongong and the South Coast are north of the Barassi line, Riverina isn't.

There just isn't as many footy fans living in Wollongong. It's a city of 300,000 people with two Aussie Rules clubs with four teams. The population might be longer but there are common sense fewer people willing to go to an AFL game there than in Wagga (or Albury or whatever).

Riverina may be "well down the list population wise" but an AFL game is simply going to be of far less interest of people who are culturally not interested in the sport in the areas you outlined.

The interest in the AFL is a little bit higher down the South Coast but still majority League.

It seems silly to be pointing out what is obvious.

 

[Bjo187]

That's basically how the Raiders work, with the Raiders effectively being an extension of the Queanbeyan Blues. Back in the day you would have said that the Blues own the Raiders, but these days it's more the other way around.

Partnering with a club like Ainslie or Eastlake could work if you went about it the right way, but it could also alienate people if you fumbled it.

If the AFL team ever got the reputation for just being Ainslie or Eastlake's team in the AFL, instead of being the team for the whole of Canberra, it'd kill support. So there would have to be a very clear boundary between the AFL side and the local club, with the AFL side being run by neutral people as an independent organisation that's parent company just happens be Ainslie or Eastlake.

BTW, there's no chance that playing an annual game in the regions would result in a few hundred thousand extra fans for a Canberra side. At best playing annual games in Wagga, for example, would result in a small fanbase in Wagga and surrounds, but that's about it.

Yeah that's exactly the point, you basically acquire the clubs assets and income but become your own identity over time because the brand of the afl team is so much bigger than the local league team, who would still keep their local name in the local comp underneath the Canberra afl team.

It's like the ridiculous situation with Southport, the afl were worried the other gold coast community clubs don't like them, but now Southport don't play is the qafl anyway and got elevated to the vfl. They would have had different colours anyway, but a better jumper going off the sharks template, a better name, 60 mill in revenue coming in through their club and hotel, a better location for their stadium and a winning culture. I am sure if they were the sharks they would have been playing in finals by now too. It was a big mistake that has cost the afl significant financial assistance, culture and success, still 14 years later.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Yeah that's exactly the point, you basically acquire the clubs assets and income but become your own identity over time because the brand of the afl team is so much bigger than the local league team, who would still keep their local name in the local comp underneath the Canberra afl team.

It's like the ridiculous situation with Southport, the afl were worried the other gold coast community clubs don't like them, but now Southport don't play is the qafl anyway and got elevated to the vfl. They would have had different colours anyway, but a better jumper going off the sharks template, a better name, 60 mill in revenue coming in through their club and hotel, a better location for their stadium and a winning culture. I am sure if they were the sharks they would have been playing in finals by now too. It was a big mistake that has cost the afl significant financial assistance, culture and success, still 14 years later.

I think there was some ickiness with Southport being such a pokies dominated, traditional club. It wasn't just about unique branding, it was about GC's strategies of kids and families and growing Auskick numbers and academies etc that just wouldn't work with "this club is basically an extension of a casino of sorts".

I don't think it was a mistake, because the only thing that Southport could offer is pokies money that the AFL would avoid having to fund Gold Coast, but given that there's been no issue with funding GC and the AFL isn't running out of money, it's fine.

 

[Canberra Pear]

The North West (Devonport, Burnie etc) is probably the strongest grassroots footy region in the whole of Tasmania and together with Northern Tas (Launceston and surrounds) they have a combined population of approx 270k. Devonport (1 hr) and Burnie (1.5 hrs) are very much within driving distance of Launceston and I’m certain that footy fans from those regions will vote with their feet in support of the Devils.

Four Devils’ games per season will be played at an upgraded UTAS (23k). There are already thousands of NW coasters who attend Hawthorn games. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if there are 5k+ NW Coasters attending Devils games in Launceston, particularly since the Hobart games are far more inaccessible for them. There will surely be membership packages that target supporters who only plan to attend games on their side of the state (e.g. South 7 games, North 4).

Connecting with the whole state has been a core tenet of the Devils ever since the business case was released and it has continued since the club’s board was announced. The board have also been backing this up with their actions so far (e.g. holding cultural fabric sessions all over the state, the club launch being held simultaneously at multiple sites, rotating board meetings between cities etc). The model that’s going to work for Tassie really is very different to what will work for most other clubs, so it’s pleasing that the board are in-tune with this notion so far.

If the 20th club is called Canberra and plays minimal games outside of the capital, then could we expect a similar level of buy-in from people who actually reside in another state? Particularly when a significant percentage of them may follow other codes in addition to/ instead of AFL. Simply, I believe there are more nuanced factors at play in addition to the obvious ones, population and distance. If Canberra’s population keeps growing at current levels then there’ll come a point in time when they won’t even need to worry about the regions anyway.

I know they're apples and oranges. There's no way that Canberra will match Tasmania for parochialism. I have no doubt that plenty of fans from the Northwest will travel to Launceston.

My main argument is that when people compare the populations of Canberra and Tasmania, they're also apples and oranges, despite being similar in total numbers.

There will be crossover between the markets, but for the most part, Tasmania won't sell too many 11-gamer memberships. The membership numbers will be buoyed by smaller memberships at the secondary ground (like GWS currently).

Canberra has fewer fans per capita, but will benefit from the fans being in the one area, all being able to attend the same stadium, and being able to sell 11-game memberships.

Tasmania will definitely do well, it's footy mad and it'll sweep over the state. Canberra and Tasmania are similar sized. Tasmania is footy mad, but I think our centralised geography is an equaliser. I think the end result with be quite similar, despite such different circumstances.

 

[HBFlanker]

Newcastle.

But id change it to Central Coast.

Encompass the whole area. Population of less than Canberra, but so much more room for growth.

 

[Bjo187]

I think there was some ickiness with Southport being such a pokies dominated, traditional club. It wasn't just about unique branding, it was about GC's strategies of kids and families and growing Auskick numbers and academies etc that just wouldn't work with "this club is basically an extension of a casino of sorts".

I don't think it was a mistake, because the only thing that Southport could offer is pokies money that the AFL would avoid having to fund Gold Coast, but given that there's been no issue with funding GC and the AFL isn't running out of money, it's fine.

I don't have an issue with it, at the time pokies weren't as big of an issue as they are now, the majority of afl clubs owned them.

It's these assets that would have decreased the burden on funding from the afl and when that happens they could have poured millions more into the grassroots on the gold coast. You've also gotta remember, the suns didn't even have a proper gym until Tony Cochrane got involved to source funding from the qld government in about year 7, so they lost so many players due to that, the sharks have a great gym.

If in the future the pokies became an image issue, they could have sold out of them and bought other new assets as a replacement. The hotel, restaurant etc would still make decent money for the club and it's simply the culture in the northern states to have these league type clubs.

Do you honestly think a gc local is gonna say 'nuh I won't support the sharks coz they have pokies', when pretty much every nrl club in nsw and qld basically run off pokies? It's really just handicapping yourself for something the significant majority wouldn't care about anyway, at least not back in 2008 when the new club was being started.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

they could have sold out of them and bought other new assets as a replacement.

But this was never going to happen with the Sharks as the team. The Southport Sharks are their pokies venue. That's the point. The footy club is arguably just an extension of the club. To suggest that the Southport Sharks AFL team move on from them would result in it ceasing to be the Southport Sharks.

Do you honestly think a gc local is gonna say 'nuh I won't support the sharks coz they have pokies',

When combined with other factors, yes, especially when trying to bring their kids along to games.

 

[Canberra Pear]

The Raiders do not play annual games at Wagga. They played three games there as quid pro quo for funding from the NSW Gov, but that deal has ended.

It was never intended to be a long term relationship, it wasn't particularly successful, Wagga was only chosen as the host because other, better, hosts already host regular NRL matches, and neither side looked to renew the deal once it was done.

The Brumbies attempts to expand their fanbase into Southern NSW post 2004 are one of the major reasons why they're struggling now despite being the most successful Australian Super Rugby side.

20 years ago the Brumbies were legitimately bigger than the Raiders, then they burnt through a ton of good will by dumping their ACT patriot image to try and be the team for everything south of Sydney, and ended up with absolutely nothing to show for it. Now they're borderline irrelevant in Canberra and close to going semi-pro along with the rest of Australian Rugby Union. You don't want to follow down that path.

Romantic to whom exactly?

This isn't romance, it's over-promising to potential investors in an attempt to seal the deal. You're basically saying "back us and not only do you get Canberra, but we'll open the Riverina up to you as well", which sounds nice on paper, but in practice it's highly unlikely that you can actually pull it off.

As far as country NSW is concerned the Riverina is way down the list market and population wise anyway, so it's a weird choice in the first place.

As a general rule anywhere the NRL have teams or are playing regular games is a good indicator of where most of the money and action is for sports and entertainment in NSW/ACT. Newcastle/Hunter, Wollongong/South Coast, and Western NSW is where the bulk of the population and money is outside Sydney metro area and ACT/Capital Region.

The South Coast starts at Wollongong and goes to the Victorian border with Eden being the largest population in the South. So yeah it's population is much larger than the Riverina's, and it's more evenly spread out than the Riverina's once you're south of Wollongong.

If the AFL could convince the government to build a stadium capable of hosting AFL matches somewhere on the South Coast people would definitely travel it's length for an annual game or two. You'd draw a strong crowd from Canberra, inland, and Sydney as well.

As the largest city Wollongong would be the obvious host, and would certainly work, but if you could hold it somewhere more central like Batemans Bay it'd attract people from the length and breadth of the region, and probably be better for tourism and the local economy than holding it in Wollongong.

It's all academic though, as there's about as much chance of the NSW government upgrading one of the stadiums on the South Coast into a 10-15k capacity for a single AFL game a year as there is in the Riverina.

The Raiders do not play annual games at Wagga. They played three games there as quid pro quo for funding from the NSW Gov, but that deal has ended.

It was never intended to be a long term relationship, it wasn't particularly successful, Wagga was only chosen as the host because other, better, hosts already host regular NRL matches, and neither side looked to renew the deal once it was done.

The Brumbies attempts to expand their fanbase into Southern NSW post 2004 are one of the major reasons why they're struggling now despite being the most successful Australian Super Rugby side.

20 years ago the Brumbies were legitimately bigger than the Raiders, then they burnt through a ton of good will by dumping their ACT patriot image to try and be the team for everything south of Sydney, and ended up with absolutely nothing to show for it. Now they're borderline irrelevant in Canberra and close to going semi-pro along with the rest of Australian Rugby Union. You don't want to follow down that path.

Fair points. The Brumbies tried to please every everyone and it backfired.

I don't think a small presence would hurt, (preseason game, training camp etc), but I agree that a presence in Canberra shouldn't be sacrificed to try to please everyone.

Romantic to whom exactly?

This isn't romance, it's over-promising to potential investors in an attempt to seal the deal. You're basically saying "back us and not only do you get Canberra, but we'll open the Riverina up to you as well", which sounds nice on paper, but in practice it's highly unlikely that you can actually pull it off.

It was more to please the AFL media. But at the end of the day, there's only one romantic bid for Team 20, and it's not viable. So the romance doesn't matter in the scheme of things.

And still more romantic than a third team from Perth.

As far as country NSW is concerned the Riverina is way down the list market and population wise anyway, so it's a weird choice in the first place.

As a general rule anywhere the NRL have teams or are playing regular games is a good indicator of where most of the money and action is for sports and entertainment in NSW/ACT. Newcastle/Hunter, Wollongong/South Coast, and Western NSW is where the bulk of the population and money is outside Sydney metro area and ACT/Capital Region.

The South Coast starts at Wollongong and goes to the Victorian border with Eden being the largest population in the South. So yeah it's population is much larger than the Riverina's, and it's more evenly spread out than the Riverina's once you're south of Wollongong.

If the AFL could convince the government to build a stadium capable of hosting AFL matches somewhere on the South Coast people would definitely travel it's length for an annual game or two. You'd draw a strong crowd from Canberra, inland, and Sydney as well.

As the largest city Wollongong would be the obvious host, and would certainly work, but if you could hold it somewhere more central like Batemans Bay it'd attract people from the length and breadth of the region, and probably be better for tourism and the local economy than holding it in Wollongong.

It's all academic though, as there's about as much chance of the NSW government upgrading one of the stadiums on the South Coast into a 10-15k capacity for a single AFL game a year as there is in the Riverina.

Personally, I don't really consider Wollongong in relation to Canberra. It's much closer to Sydney, even has a direct train line.

I think Nowra is the furthest north I'd put a preseason game. The Showground there is probably already capable of a preseason match.

But would definitely be keen on Batemans if they could ever upgrade it enough.

 

[Walshawk]

Newcastle.

But id change it to Central Coast.

Encompass the whole area. Population of less than Canberra, but so much more room for growth.

Only problem with Newcastle is that there are very few AFL fans. It is just about the most RL mad community on the planet. Also, Central Coast is the name of the area around Gosford.

Reckon they could start by upgrading the faculties at Sportsground No.1 and hosting one match.

 

[HBFlanker]

Only problem with Newcastle is that there are very few AFL fans. It is just about the most RL mad community on the planet. Also, Central Coast is the name of the area around Gosford.

Reckon they could start by upgrading the faculties at Sportsground No.1 and hosting one match.

Yeah i get that, but you could argue Perth is the same for AFL and the NRL are now heading there too.

in 10 years time (id even bet on 5 years) the population of Newcastle/Central Coast/Gosford will explode, as more and more families are priced out of the northern beaches and Sydney itself. Its already happening.

Could get too big to ignore.

 

[Coolangatta]

Yeah i get that, but you could argue Perth is the same for AFL and the NRL are now heading there too.

in 10 years time (id even bet on 5 years) the population of Newcastle/Central Coast/Gosford will explode, as more and more families are priced out of the northern beaches and Sydney itself. Its already happening.

Could get too big to ignore.

But Perth has history with testing as a rugby league market. Newcastle has not with AFL games. And Perth is much bigger.

It will take another decade just to test Newy as a secondary market. Madness to consider them for team 20 when Canberra is right there.

 

[HBFlanker]

But Perth has history with testing as a rugby league market. Newcastle has not with AFL games. And Perth is much bigger.

It will take another decade just to test Newy as a secondary market. Madness to consider them for team 20 when Canberra is right there.

Completely agree on these points. Just throwing it out there. Certainly wouldnt have an issue with player retention. One of the most amazing parts of Australia up there.

 

[Coolangatta]

Completely agree on these points. Just throwing it out there. Certainly wouldnt have an issue with player retention. One of the most amazing parts of Australia up there.

If we ever go beyond 20 teams, Newcastle would be worth a look. But I’d be very cautious. Same thing with Auckland. If the AFL can’t get Western Sydney to be a success, you wouldn’t try it with much smaller populations than them.

 

[RedV3x]

If we ever go beyond 20 teams, Newcastle would be worth a look. But I’d be very cautious. Same thing with Auckland. If the AFL can’t get Western Sydney to be a success, you wouldn’t try it with much smaller populations than them.

Western Sydney is easily the hardest market to crack.
Newcastle has history and is a hub for Australian Football.
Likewise Auckland has history (surprise) and is a hub for Australian Football.
But it's about the 20th team a.t.m.

 

[RedV3x]

All of this is kind of silly though when you just can't look at population centres,

Yes, there are many factors and it would be silly to suggest looking at existing fans is the only criteria.

 

[Badger17]

All of this is kind of silly though when you just can't look at population centres, you have to look at how many people are interested in the game of footy. Wollongong and the South Coast are north of the Barassi line, Riverina isn't.

There just isn't as many footy fans living in Wollongong. It's a city of 300,000 people with two Aussie Rules clubs with four teams. The population might be longer but there are common sense fewer people willing to go to an AFL game there than in Wagga (or Albury or whatever).

Riverina may be "well down the list population wise" but an AFL game is simply going to be of far less interest of people who are culturally not interested in the sport in the areas you outlined.

The interest in the AFL is a little bit higher down the South Coast but still majority League.

It seems silly to be pointing out what is obvious.

There's definitely a more dense population of AFL fans in the Riverina than on the South Coast, however significantly less people would travel to watch a game in Wagga than would be willing to take a weekend down the coast to catch a game.

On the other hand if you drew a rough circle around the area that would be open to traveling to the South Coast to watch an AFL game it would start in Wollongong (arguably even Sydney), go out around Canberra, then down to Eden. Within that circle would be a population of over a million people, and definitely more AFL fans as a whole than exist in the Riverina.

If you did it right accommodation in every little town within roughly an hour or so of the ground would be scarce for that weekend, and you could really make an event out of it if you held it on a long weekend. The same wouldn't be true of a game held in the Riverina.

As I said before neither is realistic, so it's all pretty irrelevant anyway.

 

[Badger17]

Yeah that's exactly the point, you basically acquire the clubs assets and income but become your own identity over time because the brand of the afl team is so much bigger than the local league team, who would still keep their local name in the local comp underneath the Canberra afl team.

It's like the ridiculous situation with Southport, the afl were worried the other gold coast community clubs don't like them, but now Southport don't play is the qafl anyway and got elevated to the vfl. They would have had different colours anyway, but a better jumper going off the sharks template, a better name, 60 mill in revenue coming in through their club and hotel, a better location for their stadium and a winning culture. I am sure if they were the sharks they would have been playing in finals by now too. It was a big mistake that has cost the afl significant financial assistance, culture and success, still 14 years later.

You make it sound so simple, but I've seen it backfire before.

The Tuggeranong Vikings have launched multiple sides in national and other state leagues and it always fails because they alienate the rest of the Canberra RU community whose support they need to make it a success.

So it can work, but you need to be careful and to have the right people involved. It can all go to poo very quickly if ego is allowed to gey involved.

 

[Badger17]

Fair points. The Brumbies tried to please every everyone and it backfired.

I don't think a small presence would hurt, (preseason game, training camp etc), but I agree that a presence in Canberra shouldn't be sacrificed to try to please everyone.



It was more to please the AFL media. But at the end of the day, there's only one romantic bid for Team 20, and it's not viable. So the romance doesn't matter in the scheme of things.

And still more romantic than a third team from Perth.



Personally, I don't really consider Wollongong in relation to Canberra. It's much closer to Sydney, even has a direct train line.

I think Nowra is the furthest north I'd put a preseason game. The Showground there is probably already capable of a preseason match.

But would definitely be keen on Batemans if they could ever upgrade it enough.

I don't really consider Wollongong to have close ties to Canberra either, but it is the largest population centre on the South Coast, and odds are that Destination NSW would be more willing to invest in hosting large events there than in Batemans Bay.

In other words, realistically if such games were to occur at all, it's more likely that they'd happen in Wollongong than Batemans Bay even though Batemans Bay would be the ideal location in my opinion.

BTW, the for the most part the AFL media are, frankly, embarrassingly clueless when it comes to anywhere north of the border between Victoria and NSW. Their opinions should count for little.

 

[Canberra Pear]

There's definitely a more dense population of AFL fans in the Riverina than on the South Coast, however significantly less people would travel to watch a game in Wagga than would be willing to take a weekend down the coast to catch a game.

On the other hand if you drew a rough circle around the area that would be open to traveling to the South Coast to watch an AFL game it would start in Wollongong (arguably even Sydney), go out around Canberra, then down to Eden. Within that circle would be a population of over a million people, and definitely more AFL fans as a whole than exist in the Riverina.

If you did it right accommodation in every little town within roughly an hour or so of the ground would be scarce for that weekend, and you could really make an event out of it if you held it on a long weekend. The same wouldn't be true of a game held in the Riverina.

As I said before neither is realistic, so it's all pretty irrelevant anyway.

Just read a story from 2022 that 3500 Canberrans have a second address in the Eurobodalla Shire.

That's essentially just holiday homes. Be plenty more former Canberrans that have moved for retirement or now that remote work has become more prevalent.

Could definitely tie-in well for a Canberra preseason match.