Expansion Canberra

[Giant YoYo]

My goodness, he's alive, Richard Goyder speaks. My filter can't get past the security, can anybody else see this article?

View attachment 2122529

Tasmanian team may not be the last as AFL eyes growth in ACT and NT

The AFL’s expansion plans are on a roll, with record crowds, booming memberships and the first non-Victorian grand final in 18 years.

www.afr.com

Tasmanian team may not be the last as AFL eyes growth in ACT and NT​

AFL chairman Richard Goyder says it would be only logical for the league to consider adding another team to the competition after the long-awaited Tasmanian Devils are bedded down, if the code keeps growing as it has in a landmark year for the league’s expansion plans.

Speaking ahead of Saturday’s grand final – the first time since 2006 that two non-Victorian teams have faced off – Mr Goyder said it had been a record-breaking season for membership, television ratings and participation in the home-grown code.

“We’ve had closer games, we’ve had record crowds, we’ve got record membership, one in 20 Australians is a member of an AFL club, television viewership is up double digits in Sydney, and 7¾ million people went through the turnstiles for our home and away games,” Mr Goyder told The Australian Financial Review in an exclusive interview.

In 2028, Tasmania will become the last state to have an AFL team. Victoria has 10 teams while the other four states have two teams each. Canberra and the Northern Territory are yet to be represented, but football fans have long speculated about their inclusion.

“People say there will be an uneven number of teams after Tassie joins … I wouldn’t say its top of the agenda [but] you never say never,” Mr Goyder said, in the AFL’s strongest comments that it would be open to the push.

“If the game continues to develop on the trajectory it has, logically in the future whoever the commission is at the time will probably want to look at it.”

Mr Goyder said the AFL would first press to have more games in Far North Queensland and the Northern Territory while Tasmania is bedded down as the 19th club in 2028.

“We would like to have more footy played in the NT, we play in Darwin and Alice Springs. We would like more footy played in northern Queensland. And with the women’s game, there are a lot more opportunities too.”

AFL v NRL
The comments can only fuel the perennial debate among fans about which of the two largest domestic football competitions – the AFL and the NRL – is best, the largest, and the most representative.

Both leagues have unchallenged territory – Victoria belongs to AFL, for example, and NSW is NRL heartland – and both also have aggressive expansion strategies. Witness NRL’s season opener in Las Vegas.

The AFL launched its season this year with a special round featuring NSW and Queensland teams in their home states. Two seasons ago, it pinched an NRL idea and played every game due one week in the same city in a promotional AFL Gather Round.

Australian Rugby League Commission chairman Peter V’landys this week hit back at claims the NRL was losing the battle to AFL in rugby league heartland, after Channel 7 commentator Brian Taylor reignited the feud by pointing to the packed Sydney Cricket Ground while the NRL game next door was half empty.

More than 44,000 fans turned out to watch the Swans fight their way into the grand final, according to independent crowd data website Austadiums, while 19,124 watched the NRL’s Sharks beat the Cowboys at Allianz Stadium. Austadiums data shows the AFL averaged 38,056 people at a match this season, while the NRL averaged 20,207. More than 8 million fans watched live AFL matches, while 4 million attended NRL games.

But the AFL has much bigger stadiums than NRL, so even if more fans wanted to go they couldn’t compete with the AFL numbers. And the codes are at different points in their finals’ series. The AFL’s grand final takes place this weekend, while the NRL has another week to go.

The ratings game
TV ratings are tricky to measure because of difficulties getting reliable numbers across multiple free-to-air and paid broadcasts. Data from measurement provider OzTAM shows that 938,000 people tuned into the two AFL preliminary finals, while 634,000 NRL fans viewed the league semi-finals.


It is difficult to provide like-for-like comparisons of the two sports. Rugby league fans can watch the finals on Channel 9 or 9Now. Channel 7 doesn’t hold the digital rights to AFL matches, which means it can’t be accessed on 7Plus. Those wanting to watch require a Kayo or a Foxtel subscription.

Foxtel’s subscription television ratings are also not publicly available, leaving Kayo, Foxtel Go and Foxtel Now as the measure of audience consumption. Foxtel also uses a different measurement provider – Kantar – to aggregate these numbers.

Both codes are big business for broadcasting. The AFL secured a record television deal in 2022, with Seven West Media and Foxtel winning the media rights from 2025 to 2031 in a historic deal worth $4.5 billion.

The NRL’s current five-year deal with Foxtel, Nine Entertainment, Sky New Zealand and other international and radio partners is worth more than $2 billion and is not due to expire until 2027.

In 2024, the Nine Network had an average television audience of 521,600 for the home and away NRL series, up 11 per cent on the previous year. There are still two weeks to go in the NRL finals, but the average audience for Nine is 759,100.

Seven says the home and away AFL season average audience was 547,000, while Foxtel’s AFL streaming average was 239,000. Finals coverage to date is also larger than NRL: Seven is averaging 968,000 viewers and Foxtel’s online services have an average of 410,000. The Foxtel numbers don’t include people with set-top boxes, so the total is almost certainly even bigger.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

Thanks for the post - from what the AFL Chairman says it would seem that the AFL Commission is far more focused on having more games in NT and NQ, and is happy to kick the issue of the 20th team down the road. Surely the Commission must have some sense of whether there should be a 20th team, and possible feasible options?

 

[Bjo187]

Thanks for the post - from what the AFL Chairman says it would seem that the AFL Commission is far more focused on having more games in NT and NQ, and is happy to kick the issue of the 20th team down the road. Surely the Commission must have some sense of whether there should be a 20th team, and possible feasible options?

You'd hope so, but at the pace Dillon and goyder move I wouldn't put it past them to not even be thinking of it yet.

 

[Canberra Pear]

The headline got me excited, but it was bit of a nothing piece.

Expansion will come eventually and there will be more games to sell after Tasmania. Not a lot of new info.

We already knew Hawthorn were gearing up for FNQ.

 

[Cmarsh]

You'd hope so, but at the pace Dillon and goyder move I wouldn't put it past them to not even be thinking of it yet.

What's the rush?

 

[Bjo187]

What's the rush?

There's no rush for a new team, but getting all the data and analysis of the potential options should be happening now, to rule in or out potential options in the future. They don't need to share that publically, but they should 100 percent be doing their intel now and having that help shape the future direction of the sport in the next decade.

 

[The Educator]

There's no rush for a new team, but getting all the data and analysis of the potential options should be happening now, to rule in or out potential options in the future. They don't need to share that publically, but they should 100 percent be doing their intel now and having that help shape the future direction of the sport in the next decade.

It is also about creating the competitive tension. Ideally for the AFL there would be at least 2 "movements" for the 20th club so that they can extract the best outcome out of the winning bid (i.e including stadium, training facility etc).

Opening it up now can also influence whatever might end up happening with stadia spend in Canberra. If Canberra is going to have one top class stadium, ideally it would be an oval one.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Following on the conversation about what Ainslie in the AFL could look like.

I stumbled across St Kevin's guernsey, which is what I image an Ainslie rebrand could look like in the AFL.

This is one of the guernseys Ainslie currently uses.



St Kevin's College has a similar pattern. And blue, green and gold, which would work for Canberra.

The below example would need thinner stripes, and probably a lighter blue and yellow, but it shows that the colour scheme can work in the Ainslie guernsey.



If you called them the Canberra Owls, or Canberra Griffins etc. With the above colour scheme. I feel like that would be different enough from the Ainslie brand that people could separate the two.

But having the pattern would be enough that Ainslie could still see themselves in the uniform. And the Tricolours could become their unofficial secondary nickname like the Bloods are to Sydney.

 

[kalex6251]

^^^ would ACT Senators / canberra senators appeal?

[edit] side note, long thought west sydney rangers would have worked well but GWS Giants got the nod .... and here we are

 

[Canberra Pear]

This Tweet right here sums up why the Canberra-Giants partnership is detrimental to a team of our own.

Footy journo Max Laughton is a smart guy. He admits that Canberra would be the right pick for Team 20 over WA3, but says it won't happen because of the Giants.

The Giants don't need Canberra, but that perception is really hurting our chances.

 

[Bjo187]

This Tweet right here sums up why the Canberra-Giants partnership is detrimental to a team of our own.

Footy journo Max Laughton is a smart guy. He admits that Canberra would be the right pick for Team 20 over WA3, but says it won't happen because of the Giants.

The Giants don't need Canberra, but that perception is really hurting our chances.

I think the afl will know though, that the giants will be better if fully focused on Sydney once they hit that 20 year mark. Those conversations would already be happening at the giants i think and therefore being relayed to the afl.

 

[Giant YoYo]

The Giants don't need Canberra, but that perception is really hurting our chances.

Totally agree.

I'm not a fan of it being used as a reason for Canberra to not get their own team. It isn't reason alone for Canberra to not get their own team, IMO.

It's also stifling our growth in Sydney.

Reckon without Canberra there would be a greater focus on footy in Western Sydney as there'd be nowhere to hide (and the focus would be on Western Sydney). Hey, we might be seeing much more growth in WS by now!

Taking a step back, the fact a Canberra team has been mentioned a couple times recently by the league suggests that regardless of perception, it is being considered. Just means the public calls for it may not be as loud as they otherwise could be.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Totally agree.

I'm not a fan of it being used as a reason for Canberra to not get their own team. It isn't reason alone for Canberra to not get their own team, IMO.

It's also stifling our growth in Sydney.

Reckon without Canberra there would be a greater focus on footy in Western Sydney as there'd be nowhere to hide (and the focus would be on Western Sydney). Hey, we might be seeing much more growth in WS by now!

Completely agree. I know I'm biased for what's best for a Canberra team, but I do think it would also be the best thing possible for the Giants in Sydney, too. Consistent home games; more solid identity; no relocation jabs.

And 33 games a year in NSW/ACT is best for all of us

Taking a step back, the fact a Canberra team has been mentioned a couple times recently by the league suggests that regardless of perception, it is being considered. Just means the public calls for it may not be as loud as they otherwise could be.

True. Under McLachlan, Canberra was always "Giants territory", but the wording has definitely changed under Dillon.

I think the other big change is Tasmania. Canberra was "Giants territory" when there was no expansion on the horizon. The shift in language has coincided with the expectation of an inevitable 20th team.

 

[Canberra Pear]

^^^ would ACT Senators / canberra senators appeal?

[edit] side note, long thought west sydney rangers would have worked well but GWS Giants got the nod .... and here we are

Personally, not a fan.

The politicians are people's least favourite thing about Canberra. It's not something I'd lean into (at least that heavily).

 

[Giant YoYo]

Completely agree. I know I'm biased for what's best for a Canberra team, but I do think it would also be the best thing possible for the Giants in Sydney, too. Consistent home games; more solid identity; no relocation jabs.

I don't think you're that biased, I think you make some good points for the good of the game with an ultimate goal of a Canberra team

I reckon we can agree that it's mutually beneficial for all of us that the Giants to get their act together in their respective Sydney heartland. I still hope the Giants/AFL are paving the way for a potential Canberra team by way of setting up the infrastructure and professional footy know how in Canberra, or at least, that's what I hope.

I wouldn't wish for any other team to have to go through what the Giants did by having to essentially start from scratch. I reckon it's setting up a Canberra for greater success from the outset and this is beneficial to us all.

And 33 games a year in NSW/ACT is best for all of us

Totally agree.

Longer term, looks like the ACT and NSW Govt are looking to improve the train line from Sydney to Canberra to bring down the travel time to being competitive with car. I think that would be a huge win. I know it's been talked about to death but I reckon the proposal is probably the closest thing to becoming a reality as high speed rail is just not going to happen.

I've been on the VLine to Geelong and Ballarat for footy games in the last year and loved it.

Would definitely love to go down more often for footy games in Canberra for games I've wanted to see if there were a team

Reckon it also opens up the catchment for the team having a viable mode of public transport for footy fans. Some selected quotes:

Railway between Canberra and Sydney has long been an issue, and it's among Labor's pre-election promises

The ACT and NSW governments announce they'll work together on improving the railway line between Canberra and Sydney, but this is not a new subject for either.

www.abc.net.au

ACT and NSW governments commit to improving Canberra-Sydney train line, but high speed rail won't be the focus​

ACT Labor has announced plans to work with the New South Wales government to reduce the travel time on the rail line between Canberra and Sydney.

Experts have previously called the line "rather decayed" and said more people would elect to travel by train if the line were improved, and the journey time more comparable to other methods.

ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr said it was "one of the busiest intercity, interstate services in Australia [with] 280,000 passengers".

True. Under McLachlan, Canberra was always "Giants territory", but the wording has definitely changed under Dillon.

I think the other big change is Tasmania. Canberra was "Giants territory" when there was no expansion on the horizon. The shift in language has coincided with the expectation of an inevitable 20th team.

Absolutely.

I think Tassie has really helped there.

I think the data may also be indicating that it's holding back the Giants growth and they're actually not growing as quickly or by much as they thought (in both the Sydney or Canberra markets).

From April 20, 2015 - https://www.smh.com.au/sport/afl/gw...r-10000-canberra-members-20150413-1mjyyp.html

Greater Western Sydney chief executive David Matthews has set the ambitious goal of having 10,000 Canberra-based members by 2018, which would put the AFL club on a par with the Canberra Raiders and ACT Brumbies.

Giants have only just cracked 7k in Canberra in 2024, 6 years after the 10k goal and 3k short. So ambitious, it was.

I mean, if you read the online discussion there's not a whole lot of footy fans currently happy with the current arrangement, I have no doubt that both the club and AFL would be very much aware of the discourse.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

I reckon we can agree that it's mutually beneficial for all of us that the Giants to get their act together in their respective Sydney heartland. I still hope the Giants/AFL are paving the way for a potential Canberra team by way of setting up the infrastructure and professional footy know how in Canberra, or at least, that's what I hope.

I think the data may also be indicating that it's holding back the Giants growth and they're actually not growing as quickly or by much as they thought (in both the Sydney or Canberra markets).

From April 20, 2015 - https://www.smh.com.au/sport/afl/gw...r-10000-canberra-members-20150413-1mjyyp.html

Greater Western Sydney chief executive David Matthews has set the ambitious goal of having 10,000 Canberra-based members by 2018, which would put the AFL club on a par with the Canberra Raiders and ACT Brumbies.

Giants have only just cracked 7k in Canberra in 2024, 6 years after the 10k goal and 3k short. So ambitious, it was.

I mean, if you read the online discussion there's not a whole lot of footy fans currently happy with the current arrangement, I have no doubt that both the club and AFL would be very much aware of the discourse.

I sincerely respect your well considered opinions, even if I don’t completely agree!. Whilst we may agree to disagree on the Giants in Canberra issue, I think the Giants will be very happy with their sellout crowds here at Canberra as it shows that their strategy of having 3 games in their Canberra home is working. If Giants were drawing North Melbourne levels of crowds in Hobart, then this would certainly cause the Giants, AFL and our government to rethink their current approach.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I sincerely respect your well considered opinions, even if I don’t completely agree!. Whilst we may agree to disagree on the Giants in Canberra issue, I think the Giants will be very happy with their sellout crowds here at Canberra as it shows that their strategy of having 3 games in their Canberra home is working. If Giants were drawing North Melbourne levels of crowds in Hobart, then this would certainly cause the Giants, AFL and our government to rethink their current approach.

Yep, that what I think people suggesting Canberrans don't like the current arrangement or that they're not "truly" GWS fans are missing.

Maybe all of that can be true but as long as they keep physically showing up to games, it's a distinction without a difference.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Yep, that what I think people suggesting Canberrans don't like the current arrangement or that they're not "truly" GWS fans are missing.

Maybe all of that can be true but as long as they keep physically showing up to games, it's a distinction without a difference.

The point is that it's a cheap victory without real growth.

If the Giants played home games at Marvel, they'd get another 10k members and boost their crowd average, but they're not gaining any actual fans, and they're doing a disservice to Western Sydney.

 

[Walshawk]

I sincerely respect your well considered opinions, even if I don’t completely agree!. Whilst we may agree to disagree on the Giants in Canberra issue, I think the Giants will be very happy with their sellout crowds here at Canberra as it shows that their strategy of having 3 games in their Canberra home is working. If Giants were drawing North Melbourne levels of crowds in Hobart, then this would certainly cause the Giants, AFL and our government to rethink their current approach.

Of course the Giants would be happy with their Canberra crowds, but it does nothing to grow the game in Sydney, which is the whole point of their existence.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

The point is that it's a cheap victory without real growth.

If the Giants played home games at Marvel, they'd get another 10k members and boost their crowd average, but they're not gaining any actual fans, and they're doing a disservice to Western Sydney.

But it's a convenient given that:

• It's better to create some links than to have no links at all. Canberra is geographically somewhat closer to Western Sydney than other locations, there's academy tie-ins and GWS should slowly become the most supported team by 2031, as kids become adults. For some fans, it's good to have a common team to see every week, especially as for the most hardcore fans, the drive between Sydney and Canberra is not as great as other homes. Big clubs are never playing in Canberra irrespective of opposition so that's beside the point.
• I would argue that they are still gaining some fans, generationally so. GWS would be the most supported team among children in Canberra. Claims of there not being any true GWS fans is belied by the fact that there are large amounts of GWS merchandise in Canberra games. If they were not true fans they'd be wearing neutral colours.
• GWS is a loss-making enterprise, so AFL is basically diverting the fact that Canberra is a profit-generating enterprise (through both profitable ticket-selling matches and ACT government payments) to slightly mitigate some of those losses to GWS. GWS is effectively owned by the AFL, so the money is all circular and would have to find its way to GWS anyway.
• This also partially solves the problem of what to do when the Show is in Sydney and the ground is unavailable. This is more of the problem of GWS being able to grow the game in Sydney than being the "fault" of Canberra, too.
• This guarantees three Canberra games a year in the long term. Only one match per year was being played immediately before GWS entered the league.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

Of course the Giants would be happy with their Canberra crowds, but it does nothing to grow the game in Sydney, which is the whole point of their existence.

Not true. I know some here assume that the Giants were setup to grow the game in Western Sydney, but that is not the case.

Our constitution clearly states that our specific focus is “developing and growing the game of Australian Football in the Western Sydney region and its surrounds, the state of NSW and the ACT”. WS is not the sole focus.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

But it's a convenient given that:

• It's better to create some links than to have no links at all. Canberra is geographically somewhat closer to Western Sydney than other locations, there's academy tie-ins and GWS should slowly become the most supported team by 2031, as kids become adults. For some fans, it's good to have a common team to see every week, especially as for the most hardcore fans, the drive between Sydney and Canberra is not as great as other homes. Big clubs are never playing in Canberra irrespective of opposition so that's beside the point.
• I would argue that they are still gaining some fans, generationally so. GWS would be the most supported team among children in Canberra. Claims of there not being any true GWS fans is belied by the fact that there are large amounts of GWS merchandise in Canberra games. If they were not true fans they'd be wearing neutral colours.
• GWS is a loss-making enterprise, so AFL is basically diverting the fact that Canberra is a profit-generating enterprise (through both profitable ticket-selling matches and ACT government payments) to slightly mitigate some of those losses to GWS. GWS is effectively owned by the AFL, so the money is all circular and would have to find its way to GWS anyway.
• This also partially solves the problem of what to do when the Show is in Sydney and the ground is unavailable. This is more of the problem of GWS being able to grow the game in Sydney than being the "fault" of Canberra, too.
• This guarantees three Canberra games a year in the long term. Only one match per year was being played immediately before GWS entered the league.

Exactly. My kids and most of their school aged friends only know the Giants as their AFL team, and the Giants Recruits scheme and the school visits have deepened this relationship. The Giants also publicly regard themselves as Canberra’s AFL team, and by the time the current 21 year contract with our government expires in 2032, the members and relationship with our region would have intensified further.

 

[Giant YoYo]

I sincerely respect your well considered opinions, even if I don’t completely agree!. Whilst we may agree to disagree on the Giants in Canberra issue, I think the Giants will be very happy with their sellout crowds here at Canberra as it shows that their strategy of having 3 games in their Canberra home is working. If Giants were drawing North Melbourne levels of crowds in Hobart, then this would certainly cause the Giants, AFL and our government to rethink their current approach.

I appreciate that and respect yours also. You're a great advocate for the club in Canberra and I appreciate your posts.

I go down to Canberra for Giants games and appreciate the Canberra links so hopefully my posts do not come across that I am against Canberra.

Just to clarify, I didn't mean the club, I meant footy fan discourse. I fully understand the clubs/AFLs position on this (and that they're happy with the sellouts/crowds, growth etc in Canberra) and I fully appreciate footy fans turning up to games in Canberra. Although, just because footy fans turn up to the Giants game in Canberra doesn't mean these fans wouldn't want more by way of their own team.

If the options for Canberra are having the Giants play 3 games versus no games at all, I imagine Canberras would be happy with the status quo. If the options are having the Giants play in Canberra versus Canberra having their own team, I'd be surprised if Canberrans would prefer the Giants there rather than their own team.

On the flip side, if the options are for Giants to play 8 games in Sydney and 3 in Canberra or no Giants team in Sydney, then of course I'd support the current arrangement.

I don't believe that 3 AFLM and 2 AFLW games are enough for Canberra but I'm happy to be corrected.

I speak from someone who doesn't enjoy the Giants not playing home games in Sydney for 2 months during the easter show and I actually couldn't imagine going through the extended periods of no games that Canberrans do. If the Giants were a bigger club in Sydney I'd probably be a lot more comfortable in the current arrangement but from a small club/ growth perspective, I see the impacts it is having.

I am supportive of the current arrangement because I understand the reasons for, fundamentals around and all the positives of it but that hopefully doesn't preclude me for wanting more for Canberra or Sydney. Most of what I am discussing is regarding future years, not next year or the year after but rather once we get closer to the 2030s there should be a plan for Canberra that may not include the Giants.

If Canberrans are happy with the arrangement I will reserve posting about my support for a Canberra team because at the end of the day, it's up to Canberrans to make their wishes clear.

Similarly how I'd like more games in Sydney (and a solution found) because of the year in and year out momentum killer (that the club has spoken about) that is the Easter Show in Sydney.