I wouldn't relocate Bulldogs. They represent the West of Melbourne which is still an important growth area as well as rural West Victoria e.g. Ballarat.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
20th AFL Team
- Thread starter lionshine
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Moderator
- #3,877
I just can't see this happening at all...let alone by 2035. Its far more likely that we'll have 20 teams by 2035.
- Moderator
- #3,878
How's the AFL going to do this exactly? They've never been able to relocate a club against their will.
Cubs2Lions
Norm Smith Medallist
Other than the current model that's in place, there's four different routes that the AFL must consider taking regarding the future of the smaller Victorian clubs (Melbourne, North Melbourne, St. Kilda and Western Bulldogs) out there and expand the game further in the future:
1) Rebranding clubs into directional regions: If the AFL wants to keep 10 teams, North Melbourne and St. Kilda must follow the Western Bulldogs blueprint of rebranding their club to be more representative of their directional compass in Victoria and taking secondary home games outside of the CBD into country regions.
Northern Kangaroos would encompass the club to represent the Northern suburbs and regions and would take home matches into regions of Bendigo or Albury-Wodonga whereas the Southern Saints (as the VFLW namesake) would represent more in the fast-growing Southern/South-Eastern suburbs and regions and take home matches into Dandenong.
Only problem with the idea is the lack of infrastructure currently in place and it would cost too much to build or upgrade boutique stadiums in the N & S/SE of Victoria these days. Furthermore, it doesn't eliminate the amount of clubs in Victoria compared to interstate ones.
2) Relocating clubs interstate: If the AFL becomes bigger and wants to be anything like American sports, they must consider the prospect of smaller clubs relocating into interstate of growing cities and regions that only have limited representation of the sport and this model has worked in the past with South Melbourne (Sydney Swans) and Fitzroy (Brisbane Lions).
Not going to throw darts of where these small clubs should be relocated in the future but the AFL will not want to have another GC and GWS-sized independent team in regions such as NSW, QLD, NT and possibly NZ someday given there's been minimal support of both teams in those regions nearly 15 years later (even if it's slowly growing and meant to be generationally).
It should be noted that relocating a team into WA3, SA3, TAS and possibly ACT as well would be a mistake given the sport already the sport has a decent footprint in those regions, it's more about expansion into RL states than anything else with relocation and limiting the advantage that Victorian clubs have over the competition.
3) Merging clubs internally: If the AFL wants to limit the amount of clubs in the Victoria without adding interstate, the smaller Victorian clubs (the 4 mentioned above) would have to merge internally and or with the bigger Victorian clubs out there in some frankestein model.
While I joke that the St. North-Western Victorian Demons would be a massive powerhouse in the competition, merging clubs with others in the same state probably won't work in this professional day and age now unless it's some Melbourne Centrals hybrid that Mr north man mentioned.
An example of this model being unsuccessful before is the Northern Eagles of the NRL back in the early 00s. The club lasted 3 years before the license went back to Manly while North Sydney continues playing it's trade back in reserve grade (for now). Even the Wests Tigers have been a failure of a club for the past 10-15 years even though they were created from Balmain and Western Suburbs back in the NSWRL days.
While this does limit Victoria's influence in the AFL landscape and gives them the opportunity to create new teams elsewhere, the AFL won't want either a smaller competition with less games ($$$$$) or small new club licenses like GC and GWS.
4) Eliminating clubs and replacing them elsewhere: As mentioned before, this is the least likely option to happen as the AFL can't force the small Victorian clubs out of the AFL competition given the legal challenges that would occur and it would cause many disheartened fans to leave the sport altogether even if the clubs were demoted into the VFL for example.
From all that though, the AFL will probably do nothing with possible relocation of smaller Victorian clubs and as Roylion states, we'll have 20 teams more likely by 2035 with 10x in Victoria and 10x non-Victorian. However, the AFL needs to be very carefully in not killing the goose of the competition and it's why North Melbourne and St. Kilda should at least consider the prospect of relocating into bigger markets from themselves especially in growing states and regions.
1) Rebranding clubs into directional regions: If the AFL wants to keep 10 teams, North Melbourne and St. Kilda must follow the Western Bulldogs blueprint of rebranding their club to be more representative of their directional compass in Victoria and taking secondary home games outside of the CBD into country regions.
Northern Kangaroos would encompass the club to represent the Northern suburbs and regions and would take home matches into regions of Bendigo or Albury-Wodonga whereas the Southern Saints (as the VFLW namesake) would represent more in the fast-growing Southern/South-Eastern suburbs and regions and take home matches into Dandenong.
Only problem with the idea is the lack of infrastructure currently in place and it would cost too much to build or upgrade boutique stadiums in the N & S/SE of Victoria these days. Furthermore, it doesn't eliminate the amount of clubs in Victoria compared to interstate ones.
2) Relocating clubs interstate: If the AFL becomes bigger and wants to be anything like American sports, they must consider the prospect of smaller clubs relocating into interstate of growing cities and regions that only have limited representation of the sport and this model has worked in the past with South Melbourne (Sydney Swans) and Fitzroy (Brisbane Lions).
Not going to throw darts of where these small clubs should be relocated in the future but the AFL will not want to have another GC and GWS-sized independent team in regions such as NSW, QLD, NT and possibly NZ someday given there's been minimal support of both teams in those regions nearly 15 years later (even if it's slowly growing and meant to be generationally).
It should be noted that relocating a team into WA3, SA3, TAS and possibly ACT as well would be a mistake given the sport already the sport has a decent footprint in those regions, it's more about expansion into RL states than anything else with relocation and limiting the advantage that Victorian clubs have over the competition.
3) Merging clubs internally: If the AFL wants to limit the amount of clubs in the Victoria without adding interstate, the smaller Victorian clubs (the 4 mentioned above) would have to merge internally and or with the bigger Victorian clubs out there in some frankestein model.
While I joke that the St. North-Western Victorian Demons would be a massive powerhouse in the competition, merging clubs with others in the same state probably won't work in this professional day and age now unless it's some Melbourne Centrals hybrid that Mr north man mentioned.
An example of this model being unsuccessful before is the Northern Eagles of the NRL back in the early 00s. The club lasted 3 years before the license went back to Manly while North Sydney continues playing it's trade back in reserve grade (for now). Even the Wests Tigers have been a failure of a club for the past 10-15 years even though they were created from Balmain and Western Suburbs back in the NSWRL days.
While this does limit Victoria's influence in the AFL landscape and gives them the opportunity to create new teams elsewhere, the AFL won't want either a smaller competition with less games ($$$$$) or small new club licenses like GC and GWS.
4) Eliminating clubs and replacing them elsewhere: As mentioned before, this is the least likely option to happen as the AFL can't force the small Victorian clubs out of the AFL competition given the legal challenges that would occur and it would cause many disheartened fans to leave the sport altogether even if the clubs were demoted into the VFL for example.
From all that though, the AFL will probably do nothing with possible relocation of smaller Victorian clubs and as Roylion states, we'll have 20 teams more likely by 2035 with 10x in Victoria and 10x non-Victorian. However, the AFL needs to be very carefully in not killing the goose of the competition and it's why North Melbourne and St. Kilda should at least consider the prospect of relocating into bigger markets from themselves especially in growing states and regions.
- Moderator
- #3,880
The administrator surrendered the licence.
Any attempt to "cull" clubs by forcing them to merge would need a very good reason (more than just wanting to keep a certain number of clubs) or there would be prolonged legal action through the courts.
The league has a legal duty to its incumbent clubs to look after their interests to a significant extent.
If, for example, the AFL cuts North's funding to force an expulsion, that will be legally challenged - especially if the same rules aren't then applied to clubs like the Western Bulldogs, Melbourne, Brisbane, Gold Coast, and GWS. The AFL aren't going to remove Brisbane, Gold Coast and GWS.
- Moderator
- #3,882
They're not going to, apart from perhaps following the Dogs direction and playing the odd home game in regional Victorian centres.
Talking realistic interstate relocations and mergers of smaller Melbourne clubs is largely pointless. It's just not going to happen. There will be a 20th team entering the AFL from outside Victoria somewhere - most likely in the early to middle 2030's.
- Moderator
- #3,883
Other clubs cannot force any other club to relocate against their will. All the AFL can do is withdraw a licence.
North members will never agree to that and without the agreement of the board who are elected by the members, it just won't happen.
Amalgamation doesn't really achieve anything except less teams.
Your team identity is lost in an amalgamation.
Relocation help keeps a large part of the club intact.
N.M. aren't even doing that. It's like they're continually looking for a the magic fix.
FYI
Ballarat. Bendigo and Albury Wodonga are roughly the same size each as Bunbury and Busselton combined.
- Moderator
- #3,886
But the QEO in Bendigo and Albury Sports ground have very low capacities of 10,000 and 7,000 compared to Optus Stadium of slightly over 60,000.
And Optus has a low capacity compared with the MCG.
J.E. Hands memorial Park has a capacity of 5,000
Ballarat and bendigo are closer to Melbourne than Bunbury is to Perth.
What's your point ?
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
And Busselton has an airport with direct flights to the east coast and is the fastest growing tourism sector in Australia. What's your point?
