Expansion 3rd Sydney AFL side prediction

[cos789]

That's too much, 1 or the other, or heck, a combination, but not both.

There's enough argument about what exactly defines the WS.
Newcastle, Central Coast and Hunter boundaries are a blurr.

.

 

[Dirty Bird]

There's enough argument about what exactly defines the WS.
Newcastle, Central Coast and Hunter boundaries are a blurr.

.

It's not the boundary aspects, it's how close they are to each other without enough interest or population support for 2+ teams. Especially for our game in that environment. It's like putting a full time team in Hobart and Launceston. But WITHOUT the initial interest.

 

[cos789]

It's not the boundary aspects, it's how close they are to each other without enough interest or population support for 2+ teams. Especially for our game in that environment. It's like putting a full time team in Hobart and Launceston. But WITHOUT the initial interest.

Yes, in fact you'd need all groups working together.

.

 

[LordLucifer]

Sydney has a population of 4.5 million people and now have two AFL teams.

If the development of the game keeps going on at the pace it is, then it is a no-brainer to have a third team here and probably by 2022.

 

[wikipediaAFLproject]

It's not the boundary aspects, it's how close they are to each other without enough interest or population support for 2+ teams. Especially for our game in that environment. It's like putting a full time team in Hobart and Launceston. But WITHOUT the initial interest.

Perhaps a team based in the city then??

Sydney has a population of 4.5 million people and now have two AFL teams.

If the development of the game keeps going on at the pace it is, then it is a no-brainer to have a third team here and probably by 2022.

30 years for the first ... im going to say 2030 the team should be in place. And should be based in the Shire, pretty much giving the Swans the North (area where they currently have most support), the Giants the West (where they are currently based), and then the Shire team could take everything south of the bridge, including parts of the Inner West.
If the Swans are pushing for a flag at the same time as the Giants in 6 years or so, then the rivalry will become HUGE ... the AFL should be pushing the swans to make this happen.

 

[bunsen burner]

As early as 10 years.

A few points:

- Sydney has 4.5m people. That's a massive market.
- To truly be a national code the AFL has to conquor Sydney
- Anyone who thinks Tasmania, Cairns, Ballarat, or any other two bit town has enough population to sustain a team is kidding themselves. And why go into Victorian country towns? Pretty sure those populations are loyal to AFL.
- It's too late to put another team into Perth or Adelaide. Those territories are already spoken for and very few will jump ship.
- The only new teams the AFL should be considering are in Sydney
- Sydney's older generation 35+ are pissed. They have grown up following league and are struggling with accepting another game being bigger and better. There is much resistance to change. But the younger don't have near as much resentment for AFL and that is when the older generation are constantly in there ear. What's going to happen when the 35+ year old generation are 55+? They will be irrelavent and no one will give a make-up **** about them. The current young generation will have the voice, which means again, the next generation will be even more open to AFL. Throw in squillions of AFL grass roots cash and 4 teams in Sydney will work.

Swans
GWS
Souths (South Sydney, St George, Cronulla/Sutherland, Wollongong)
Norths (North Shore to Central Coast and Hunter)

I don't think GWS has to be proven by then (because that will take 30 years). I'd wait until there's enough AFL cash to bank roll it comfortably. If that came as quick as 5 years I'd do it then.

 

[bunsen burner]

It's like putting a full time team in Hobart and Launceston. But WITHOUT the initial interest.

Launceston population: 110,000
Hobart population: 210,000

To make money you pretty much have to get a quarter of the city's population to the game every second week.

They are just not bigger enough populations to sustain a team. You can't have a joint team because the travel in between is too far.

Have you also considered the AFL is about growth? There's limited room to grow the game in these areas. But Sydney? It might be far far harder but the upside is massive. The AFL needs a bigger presence in Sydney.

 

[wikipediaAFLproject]

As early as 10 years.
- Anyone who thinks Tasmania, Cairns, Ballarat, or any other two bit town has enough population to sustain a team is kidding themselves. And why go into Victorian country towns? Pretty sure those populations are loyal to AFL.

The AFL needs to still focus on these areas though. Demographics change. One area im quite concerned about is Dandenong an area where AFL multicultural programs need to be promoted. Hobart is also an area where I believe a bit more needs to be done to maintain support.

- It's too late to put another team into Perth or Adelaide. Those territories are already spoken for and very few will jump ship.

Having strong state leagues here is a HUGE bonus ... less national teams is sometimes better.

- The only new teams the AFL should be considering are in Sydney
- Sydney's older generation 35+ are pissed. They have grown up following league and are struggling with accepting another game being bigger and better. There is much resistance to change. But the younger don't have near as much resentment for AFL and that is when the older generation are constantly in there ear. What's going to happen when the 35+ year old generation are 55+? They will be irrelavent and no one will give a make-up **** about them. The current young generation will have the voice, which means again, the next generation will be even more open to AFL. Throw in squillions of AFL grass roots cash and 4 teams in Sydney will work.

Exactly. Football should focus on getting support from the younger generations, the ones who dont yet have an agenda. Currently we are beginning to see the initial fruits of the start of Auskick turning into members ... the floodgates should open in about 5 years. Then the other football supporters will come out of the woodwork.

I don't think GWS has to be proven by then (because that will take 30 years). I'd wait until there's enough AFL cash to bank roll it comfortably. If that came as quick as 5 years I'd do it then.

I like your thinking. But I think 10 years minimum. Enough time for Giants to establish themselves on the sporting landscape, not just the balance sheet.

 

[The Passenger]

i would say the next round of expansion clubs will be in about 15 years, maybe a little bit earlier, maybe a little bit later... all depends on the AFL's financial situation.

but it will happen. that is 100% guaranteed. and i would be surprised if we were sitting here in 2032 with no additional teams in the competition.

and when the next round of expansion teams happen, i will say that at this stage it's a 90% shot there will be a third sydney team in that market. GWS being an absolute disaster would be the only thing that would stop it.

I'd reckon Perth would be the favourites at this stage for a second team but it's some way out and you never know.

bunsen is right re; the populations of some these places. unless you've got 500k then you're going to be pushing shit up a hill to get a team. is that right or wrong?? well it's just the financial reality. the footy romantic in me would love to see tassie with a team, but the financial pragmatist just doesn't see what they could bring to the table.

 

[LordLucifer]

By the time the next expansion club comes around (which reckon will be 2022) there will be a new set of TV deals in place plus there will be a greater focus on moving clubs out of Melbourne (or a merging a few of them) so that there is a more even spread around the country.

Whilst it annoys the bejesus out of me, the AFL seems to take a lead from U.S. sports a hell of a lot where they tend to have one team per city (ie. per sport) which makes them more viable options in the long term. It is for that reason that I believe there will be some minor rationalisation in the future with a small reduction in the number of Melbourne clubs and new teams or 'planted' ones springing up in other areas to keep the overall number of clubs in the competition reasonably consistent.

 

[wikipediaAFLproject]

By the time the next expansion club comes around (which reckon will be 2022) there will be a new set of TV deals in place plus there will be a greater focus on moving clubs out of Melbourne (or a merging a few of them) so that there is a more even spread around the country.

TV is going online. Its going to be a game changer in sport across the world. Will be very interesting to see how it all folds out.

Whilst it annoys the bejesus out of me, the AFL seems to take a lead from U.S. sports a hell of a lot where they tend to have one team per city (ie. per sport) which makes them more viable options in the long term. It is for that reason that I believe there will be some minor rationalisation in the future with a small reduction in the number of Melbourne clubs and new teams or 'planted' ones springing up in other areas to keep the overall number of clubs in the competition reasonably consistent.

A reduction in the number of Victorian teams (and an overall reduction) will help strengthen the state leagues.

 

[cos789]

IMO there will be new AFL teams.
You cannot accurately put a timeline on it but moreover list some scenarios.
As someone suggested Sydney is about a generational change, kids growing up knowing there is a choice.
Sydney North and East is represented by the Swans.
Sydney West is represented by GWS.
Sydney South is open to the Illawarra.
Previously an AFL team model needed a population catchment area of 400k.
So the number of Melbourne teams is not an issue but rather the (uneven) distribution.
The landscape is changing with the introduction of "boutique" grounds - Geelong, GC and Skoda.
It's fair to say that there will a Tasmanian team playing out of a boutique ground/s.
Similarly it's fair to say that AFL will venture out into the Vic countryside but on a part time basis.
It's logical to say that some "struggling" Melbourne teams will enter into arrangements and the number of teams will decrease by puesdo relocations.
Other AFL possibilities have been put forward.
They need a population base and they need to follow a now familiar formulae. an escalating investment simultaneously from the top and bottom end. I would suggest that GC and GWS would (have to) be settled in and be cost neutral. Talking in terms of TV rights periods is probably the sensible approach. Another Sydney team could feed off the general developments now evident in Sydney but other alternatives would be more like starting from scratch.

.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Launceston population: 110,000
Hobart population: 210,000

To make money you pretty much have to get a quarter of the city's population to the game every second week.

They are just not bigger enough populations to sustain a team. You can't have a joint team because the travel in between is too far.

Have you also considered the AFL is about growth? There's limited room to grow the game in these areas. But Sydney? It might be far far harder but the upside is massive. The AFL needs a bigger presence in Sydney.

That wasn't my point, I wasn't suggesting putting a team in Tassie.

I was just saying putting a team in Newcastle and say Gosford is like putting a team in Launceston and Hobart. They're too close together and eat into each others support making them unviable. Sure, do 1 but not both.

 

[Brasher]

Another team in Sydney will do a lot for balancing the national competition's landscape. I think a third team in Sydney is inevitable. Exactly when and whether this is a new club or a relocated one will come down to the financial payback.

If it takes $100M (picking a number out of the air here) to establish a new club what returns will the AFL see in terms of net increase to crowds, television rights, corporate involvement? If it is an attractive return on investment it may happen sooner than you think. Of course, the financial stability and success (as opposed to on field success) of the Swans and GWS will dictate this and whether the market is already saturated or their is demand going begging.

A more cost attractive model maybe to move one of the existing Melbourne clubs to Sydney. This would be cheaper and should realise benefits in a shorter period of time as this club will come with existing infrastructure, a fan base and a playing list.

In the end, I'm pretty sure it will be a guy with a spreadsheet that will determine where the next club is born or relocated to and not, as much as I wish they would, because of strong grass root following (e.g. Tassie) or untapped population centres (Canberra).

 

[TriX78]

IMO there will be new AFL teams.
You cannot accurately put a timeline on it but moreover list some scenarios.
As someone suggested Sydney is about a generational change, kids growing up knowing there is a choice.
Sydney North and East is represented by the Swans.
Sydney West is represented by GWS.
Sydney South is open to the Illawarra.
Previously an AFL team model needed a population catchment area of 400k.
So the number of Melbourne teams is not an issue but rather the (uneven) distribution.
The landscape is changing with the introduction of "boutique" grounds - Geelong, GC and Skoda.
It's fair to say that there will a Tasmanian team playing out of a boutique ground/s.
Similarly it's fair to say that AFL will venture out into the Vic countryside but on a part time basis.
It's logical to say that some "struggling" Melbourne teams will enter into arrangements and the number of teams will decrease by puesdo relocations.
Other AFL possibilities have been put forward.
They need a population base and they need to follow a now familiar formulae. an escalating investment simultaneously from the top and bottom end. I would suggest that GC and GWS would (have to) be settled in and be cost neutral. Talking in terms of TV rights periods is probably the sensible approach. Another Sydney team could feed off the general developments now evident in Sydney but other alternatives would be more like starting from scratch.

.

Is that a silent prayer you have every day before breakfast, lunch, afternoon tea and dinner?

 

[wikipediaAFLproject]

Another team in Sydney will do a lot for balancing the national competition's landscape. I think a third team in Sydney is inevitable. Exactly when and whether this is a new club or a relocated one will come down to the financial payback.

If it takes $100M (picking a number out of the air here) to establish a new club what returns will the AFL see in terms of net increase to crowds, television rights, corporate involvement? If it is an attractive return on investment it may happen sooner than you think. Of course, the financial stability and success (as opposed to on field success) of the Swans and GWS will dictate this and whether the market is already saturated or their is demand going begging.

A more cost attractive model maybe to move one of the existing Melbourne clubs to Sydney. This would be cheaper and should realise benefits in a shorter period of time as this club will come with existing infrastructure, a fan base and a playing list.

In the end, I'm pretty sure it will be a guy with a spreadsheet that will determine where the next club is born or relocated to and not, as much as I wish they would, because of strong grass root following (e.g. Tassie) or untapped population centres (Canberra).

The complex thing with a third team however, is that there will be weekends when two matches are played. How will that affect the crowds?? Is there enough support to play two matches on the same weekend and an average of approximately 18,000?
It might be better off for the AFL to, in about 8 years, play some extra matches up there between two Victorian teams, on the same weekend as some Giants/Swans matches. Get some more interest flowing. And then move one of the clubs up here ... Sydney Saints has a nice ring to it!

Will be something very special when Sydney has 2 AFL matches every weekend, not to forget all local football being played here already. Imagine the day when the AFL announce that for the 200th anniversary of the code there will be SoO, NSW vs Victoria! And then imagine if NSW won!

 

[Mountain Giant]

Simply due to infrastructure I can't see a third team in Sydney. I doubt another stadium would be built anywhere and having two teams play out of one stadium is stupid.

I hope a team gets put into Canberra next. I can't really see it happening, but it would be better for Aussie Rules in Sydney and for the Giants if they always played in Sydney. Having them play in Canberra weakens their brand in Sydney and it takes away from the point of one game in Sydney each weekend, which is HUGE.

By the way, I know of three Aussie Rules grounds and about 20 Soccer grounds within 10 km of me but not one rugby league ground (apart from Panther's home ground).

 

[Dirty Bird]

By the way, I know of three Aussie Rules grounds and about 20 Soccer grounds within 10 km of me but not one rugby league ground (apart from Panther's home ground).

That's a fair point.
I used to live at Glenmore Park, besides where the Panthers played there wasn't too much out there.

For footy there was where the Penrith Swans/Rams played, Emu Plains whatevers (Lions?) and the Blue Mountain Kangaroos, but other sports? There's a rugby oval next to Glenmore Park shopping centre, but besides that, I can't think of many.

And this was in 2000! when I moved closer to the city, the developments in Footy in the last 12 years may have led to footy dominating league at a junior level that far west.

 

[FootyJunkie]

North Sydney FC, playing at North Sydney Oval with all the trees.

 

[Jstonewall]

Not really sure where your at Mountain Goat, but Dirty Bird is talking about the Penrith District. Penrith Junior League utilises more than 22 grounds in the Penrith district. There are also school grounds. But I am otherwise willing to accept the vaguely made point that Footy (I guess AFL) could now be dominating League that far out west. Indeed.

 

[millsy29gopies]

There will be a third Sydney AFL side, maybe in 2112 though.

 

[IanW]

One of the roles the NEAFL fills is building the foundation for possible AFL sides.

The NT Thunder, for example, are creating a history and an infrastructure to support a future bid.

The Hills Eagles could be doing the same thing.

Tasmania and the ACT both have arguments for their own sides, and its a defensible proposal that the funding they are currently giving AFL sides is a decent chunk of what they would need to have a viable AFL side.

Those four and a third WA side are the candidates for the next wave of AFL expansion. If Launceston can keep getting 20-22 000 to York Park, I'd say they'd be the favorites to be next cab off the rank.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

No more teams thankyou

I'm afraid for you it's probably inevitable. If it ends our absurd fixture then I don't have a problem with us having 20 teams. Tasmania and a third side from WA would be the front runners.

I think a third NSW side would be 20+ years away and a third QLD side probably even further away.

 

[Brasher]

The complex thing with a third team however, is that there will be weekends when two matches are played. How will that affect the crowds?? Is there enough support to play two matches on the same weekend and an average of approximately 18,000?
It might be better off for the AFL to, in about 8 years, play some extra matches up there between two Victorian teams, on the same weekend as some Giants/Swans matches. Get some more interest flowing. And then move one of the clubs up here ... Sydney Saints has a nice ring to it!

Will be something very special when Sydney has 2 AFL matches every weekend, not to forget all local football being played here already. Imagine the day when the AFL announce that for the 200th anniversary of the code there will be SoO, NSW vs Victoria! And then imagine if NSW won!

Good point, but how about double headers at ANZ Stadium?

 

[Sydney Bloods]

I can not see room for a third Sydney team, who would they represent? Why should people support them?

Clearly GWS is let's say lost, they kinda want to be west, kinda want to be hills district, kinda want to be ACT

Sooner or later they will have to choose, the AFL won't allow them to go to canberra full time as it represents a retreat. Now considering the hills district is likely to be split support wise between Sydney and GWS the team to eventual drop the 'Greater' and just become the Western Sydney Giants.

So where does the third team sit? Who do they appeal to? Once the giants drop the greater (we're talking 20 years) and become a dirty rotten filth side like collingwood representing all the houseo's, then Sydney is split.

So where does the third team fit who do they represent?

West australia, Tassie, Darwin, Brisbane, hell Logan would all end up with a new team before Sydney would get a third team.