Tasmania Congratulations on Tassie License. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5

[Chief]

---

GO TO PART 2 of this thread:

Tasmania - Tasmania Devils, welcome to the AFL. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Labor declares support for Stadium 6/5

Continued from Part 1: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/congratulations-on-tassie-license-mens-team-to-enter-2028-womens-team-tba-other-details-tba-3-5.1226653/ Was going to draft up a Summary but this is pretty good...

www.bigfooty.com

---

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Don't juice the AFL dividend and let clubs go insolvent

So you would be happy having a competition with about 7or 8 clubs in it that’s about how many would be self sustainable

 

[Matchu]

I don't personally believe a merger would be on the cards for Southport and the Suns now. Whilst the Power and Magpies were separate entities, spiritually it was still the same club whereas Southport and GC are just too distinct from each other. A takeover of the Suns by the Sharks could work in theory but it would need shit tonnes of ground work to go into it to make it feasible. It would also rule out any merger with a struggling Vic side which I think would be more suitable considering the position certain clubs are at. I'm still of the opinion that the Gold Coast Kangaroos (with Tassie added to keep it at 18) would be the best way forward.

The time for Southport becoming GC17 was in 2008 and it would have gone a fair way to remedy a lot of the problems the Suns have experienced which you mentioned along with a proper culture which could have prevented K. Hunt and others going off the deep end due to the lifestyle up there. People have to remember that Southport did try getting into the AFL for 20 years before the Suns were established by the AFL and were without doubt the richest state league club in the country (although pokies inflated the finances a bit) along with having over 20,000 members when they tried getting a team in 96. How the AFL didn't have the sense to just promote the Sharks really shows how inept they were at expansion when it comes to the Gold Coast (and GWS to a lesser extent).


The AFL have done a really good job of ******* up expansion since 1987 and Tasmania and GC are the two most prominent examples of that.

It's an interesting to discussion to have. The prospect of Southport entering the AFL in 2011, presumably becoming known as the 'Gold Coast Sharks' and having their spiritual home/training facilities in Southport. It certainly would have made things very interesting when it came to recruiting Nick Riewoldt to become their inaugural marquee player. It would have been an almost identical situation to Gavin Wanganeen:

• Wanganeen was a Port Adelaide junior and became a Premiership player for the Magpies in 1990 with a two-goal grand final performance before being drafted to Essendon and becoming an AFL greats while Port remained in the state league. Six years later he returned to captain his junior club in their inaugural AFL season.
• Nick Riewoldt was of course a Southport junior and became a Premiership player for the Sharks in 2000 with a two-goal grand final performance before being drafted to St Kilda and becoming an AFL greats while Southport remained in the state league. Nine years later he would have had the opportunity to return to captain his junior club in their inaugural AFL season.

The hypothetical 'Gold Coast Sharks' probably would have had a better shot at bringing home/retaining other Southport juniors like Kurt Tippett, Daniel Merrett, Dayne Beams and Lachie Weller.

 

[Established1870]

It's an interesting to discussion to have. The prospect of Southport entering the AFL in 2011, presumably becoming known as the 'Gold Coast Sharks' and having their spiritual home/training facilities in Southport. It certainly would have made things very interesting when it came to recruiting Nick Riewoldt to become their inaugural marquee player. It would have been an almost identical situation to Gavin Wanganeen:

• Wanganeen was a Port Adelaide junior and became a Premiership player for the Magpies in 1990 with a two-goal grand final performance before being drafted to Essendon and becoming an AFL greats while Port remained in the state league. Six years later he returned to captain his junior club in their inaugural AFL season.
• Nick Riewoldt was of course a Southport junior and became a Premiership player for the Sharks in 2000 with a two-goal grand final performance before being drafted to St Kilda and becoming an AFL greats while Southport remained in the state league. Nine years later he would have had the opportunity to return to captain his junior club in their inaugural AFL season.

The hypothetical 'Gold Coast Sharks' probably would have had a better shot at bringing home/retaining other Southport juniors like Kurt Tippett, Daniel Merrett, Dayne Beams and Lachie Weller.

I think the history with Port Adelaide when we entered was a lot more revered and the PAFC means a lot more to South Australians then Southport does to Queenslanders despite their history, size and success. Gavin coming back to us when we came into the comp along with some highly touted juniors staying put in the SANFL to get drafted by us was testament to our pull whereas I don't believe Southport would have had that luxury. Tippett for example would have likely still chased the dollars at the Swans and Merrett was a one club man for the Lions at that stage.

Riewoldt comes across as Tasmanian first with everything he's said and his push for Tasmania in the AFL speaks volumes. I could imagine with a different CEO and list manager in place that the Sharks would have had better success building a talented list with a good culture and strong backing behind the scenes from both the club and the AFL. It would have had a lot more initial success then the Suns if given the license but I think player recruitment and retention would have still been an issue like it is for all Northern clubs. Southport's pre-existing infrastructure would have given them a better base compared to what the Suns had though.

All in all, Southport should have been GC17, the AFL ****ed it up royally and we're still dealing with the fallout until the Suns become a successful side (which could still be years away) when an established GC side who knows what success is and have plenty of independent financial backing would have done a lot more by now on the field.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

So you would be happy having a competition with about 7or 8 clubs in it that’s about how many would be self sustainable

It's not me who has to be happy, it's the banks

 

[madmug]

It's not me who has to be happy, it's the banks

You'd think the AFL will want all 18 teams to present the 'product' for the media rights & more importantly, maximise paying bums on seats.

Next question is how much financial downsizing will be required to allow the less financially stable to survive.?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

You'd think the AFL will want all 18 teams to present the 'product' for the media rights & more importantly, maximise paying bums on seats.

Next question is how much financial downsizing will be required to allow the less financially stable to survive.?

this is the million dollar question

we can cut lists to 35 people, but what happens with back and front ended contracts?

reality is too that to drop the cap by a third we will need to do more than drop the 7 shittiest players on a list. wage cuts will be needed, from existing contracts, from the better paid players. so far the AFLPA is talking reductions on a spot basis, but permanent reductions

also what happens to the academy players? clubs and the afl have invested shitloads into this system, is it scaled back or eliminated?

for the footy dept, reducing the soft cap by a third will be massive, and assistant coaches and development coaches can only take things so far. rehab staff, and injury prevention staff (ie dieticians, psychologists, etc) are going to be hard to remove given the current pressures on players to get every %age out of their capabilities.

then you have the reserves comps. noone gives two ****s about the Blues torching Preston (as they effectively killed that club years ago), but talk Port may have to torch the Magpies shows the consequences of these calls. the notion the single most successful Australian rules football club in the land is even being talked about as a cost saving shutdown (and I hope it doesnt happen - love to hate the magpies) shows this isnt nickel and dime shit.

its easy to talk about reductions at the top level, but I think clubs and players will start pushing back when specific real world consequences start bobbing up

 

[Engimal v3]

People in the media like Caro and even Barrett wouldn't be mentioning mergers or clubs folding if they didn't hear about it being discussed privately in AFL HQ.

You simply must be pulling my leg

 

[Tasmanian saint]

It's not me who has to be happy, it's the banks

And the tv networks were the majority of afl revenue comes from who want more games not less like your suggestion

 

[Ned_Flanders]

And the tv networks were the majority of afl revenue comes from who want more games not less like your suggestion

Let's see what the tv deal looks like first. We are already seeing networks wanting to tear up or renegotiate existing deals for other codes

 

[madmug]

Let's see what the tv deal looks like first. We are already seeing networks wanting to tear up or renegotiate existing deals for other codes

Yes the networks cant pay what they ain't got. The clubs can't pay what they ain't got.

The players will need to show some common sense & decency, otherwise supporters/ sponsors might walk away due to their perceived greed in tough times.

Players need to be careful. they need to show they care about the game & others in a worse position than themselves.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

I think the history with Port Adelaide when we entered was a lot more revered and the PAFC means a lot more to South Australians then Southport does to Queenslanders despite their history, size and success. Gavin coming back to us when we came into the comp along with some highly touted juniors staying put in the SANFL to get drafted by us was testament to our pull whereas I don't believe Southport would have had that luxury. Tippett for example would have likely still chased the dollars at the Swans and Merrett was a one club man for the Lions at that stage.

Riewoldt comes across as Tasmanian first with everything he's said and his push for Tasmania in the AFL speaks volumes. I could imagine with a different CEO and list manager in place that the Sharks would have had better success building a talented list with a good culture and strong backing behind the scenes from both the club and the AFL. It would have had a lot more initial success then the Suns if given the license but I think player recruitment and retention would have still been an issue like it is for all Northern clubs. Southport's pre-existing infrastructure would have given them a better base compared to what the Suns had though.

All in all, Southport should have been GC17, the AFL f’ed it up royally and we're still dealing with the fallout until the Suns become a successful side (which could still be years away) when an established GC side who knows what success is and have plenty of independent financial backing would have done a lot more by now on the field.

Yeah I know despite what a lot of us might think the Gold Coast are here for good now but surely the afl can admit they got all of the branding of the club terribly wrong at the start the name colours jumper mascot is terrible I don’t understand why the afl don’t change all this and relaunch them similar to what freo did !

 

[madmug]

Yeah I know despite what a lot of us might think the Gold Coast are here for good now but surely the afl can admit they got all of the branding of the club terribly wrong at the start the name colours jumper mascot is terrible I don’t understand why the afl don’t change all this and relaunch them similar to what freo did !

Not sure what that'd achieve. Why do you suggest changes? What sort of changes do you think?

AFL & especially clubs like GC have bigger problems right now anyway.

 

[Rob]

So you would be happy having a competition with about 7or 8 clubs in it that’s about how many would be self sustainable

Rubbish. The AFL base distribution can cover the salary cap. Above that most is discretionary spend. Allow clubs to use cash during trade week and you've got sustainable clubs. Wouldn't be quite as balanced as we have now, but if the option is broke clubs there might not be a choice.

 

[BringBackTorps]

1.

Ok, but it's not that simple. You'll have clubs making mega profits, which will have the AFLPA licking their lips for a slice. So you risk industrial action because of an obsession with smaller clubs not overspending?

The massive cuts, from 2021 onwards, to the 18 AFL clubs' Football Departments (not including player wages, or medical/rehab. staff), other areas of Club operations, & the AFL HQ itself, will be permanent (see my point 2 below).
These cuts are essential, to ensure the "eternal" financial viability & stability of ALL 18 clubs & 18 AFLW teams- & the 19th Tas. team (hopefully established c. 2025.

You have raised a valid point, however, that with all 18 Clubs having much lower operating costs, a few will regularly make "mega profits".
It is fair & reasonable that clubs all want to increase their popularity, membership, profile- & to grow AF generally. The AFL would also desire that all clubs seek to "strive" (the "animal spirits of capitalism"), grow their Club, & maximise revenues & profits.

Clubs, however, must always adhere to the AFL-designated Football Department hard cap & salary caps.

For Clubs that make a net profit above a figure designated by the AFL for a 3 years minimum period consecutively, the AFL should implement a "Club Australian Football Exclusive Grassroots Zone Promotional Program- CAFEGZPP" in specified areas of NSW, Qld., NT & NZ (& perhaps USA, PNG, Pacific, & Europe).

This CAFEGZPP would allow these very profitable clubs to, if they wished:-

. adopt a specific town or region in NSW, Qld., or NT etc.- which is not directly represented by an AFL club.
Examples are Cairns, Townsville, Central Qld, Sunshine Coast, Newcastle, Central Coast, Wollongong/Illawarra...or NZ, USA.

If a Club adopted a Zone, it would have full responsibility for promoting AF in its Zone for 10 years- but only if it spent at least triple what the AFL was usually spending on GR AF in this Zone eg spend $15m in Cairns (10 years x $1.5 m pa).
The Club would automatically have first pick on any players (maximum 2 pa) who are drafted from this Zone (&, besides these 2 selected, all others go into the normal Draft).

. additionally, GR regd. AF competition player nos. must also increase by a minimum agreed % pa eg minimum 10% increase pa.
(Failure nullifies CAFEGZPP recruitment that year, for the parent Club).

This CAFEGZPP and/or the nominated Zone will have to be regularly reviewed- to ensure no CAFEGZPP club is gaining undue competitive advantages.
eg If NT started producing a lot of gun footballers, NT may have to be split between into 2 Zones: Darwin inner metro; & rest of NT, including Tiwi Islands.

The AFL must resist unreasonable pay demands from the AFLPA, as they are very well paid, cf the median Australian wage. If the players are unhappy, they can play AF in another comp.; or dig ditches. There are plenty of keen players who would willingly take their place in the AFL.




2. Further general references here on the massive cuts, from 2021, on AFL Club spending (& AFL HQ itself).

This reduced Club expenditure will greatly increase the financial viability, sustainability, & competitiveness of a Tas. 19th team (& all other "small" AFL teams). This will enhance its chances of being approved by the AFL, since the "financial risk" to the AFL would be greatly diminished.

Ignore point 4. Tasmania will have their own team before Sydney obtains a 3rd team.

A Third Team In Sydney - It's Only a Matter Of Time !!

Well, it's funny how little it seems to take to annoy you. Annoy me? You make it too easy.

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Mr Taswegian]

1.
The massive cuts, from 2021 onwards, to the 18 AFL clubs' Football Departments (not including player wages, or medical/rehab. staff), other areas of Club operations, & the AFL HQ itself, will be permanent (see my point 2 below).
These cuts are essential, to ensure the "eternal" financial viability & stability of ALL 18 clubs & 18 AFLW teams- & the 19th Tas. team (hopefully established c. 2025.

You have raised a valid point, however, that with all 18 Clubs having much lower operating costs, a few will regularly make "mega profits".
It is fair & reasonable that clubs all want to increase their popularity, membership, profile- & to grow AF generally. The AFL would also desire that all clubs seek to "strive" (the "animal spirits of capitalism"), grow their Club, & maximise revenues & profits.

Clubs, however, must always adhere to the AFL-designated Football Department hard cap & salary caps.

For Clubs that make a net profit above a figure designated by the AFL for a 3 years minimum period consecutively, the AFL should implement a "Club Australian Football Exclusive Grassroots Zone Promotional Program- CAFEGZPP" in specified areas of NSW, Qld., NT & NZ (& perhaps USA, PNG, Pacific, & Europe).

This CAFEGZPP would allow these very profitable clubs to, if they wished:-

. adopt a specific town or region in NSW, Qld., or NT etc.- which is not directly represented by an AFL club.
Examples are Cairns, Townsville, Central Qld, Sunshine Coast, Newcastle, Central Coast, Wollongong/Illawarra...or NZ, USA.

If a Club adopted a Zone, it would have full responsibility for promoting AF in its Zone for 10 years- but only if it spent at least triple what the AFL was usually spending on GR AF in this Zone eg spend $15m in Cairns (10 years x $1.5 m pa).
The Club would automatically have first pick on any players (maximum 2 pa) who are drafted from this Zone (&, besides these 2 selected, all others go into the normal Draft).

. additionally, GR regd. AF competition player nos. must also increase by an agreed % pa eg minimum 10% increase pa.
(Failure nullifies recruitment CAFEGZPP that year, for the parent Club).

This CAFEGZPP and/or the nominated Zone will have to be regularly reviewed- to ensure no CAFEGZPP club is gaining undue competitive advantages.
eg If NT started producing a lot of gun footballers, NT may have to be split between into 2 Zones: Darwin inner metro; & rest of NT, including Tiwi Islands.

The AFL must resist unreasonable pay demands from the AFLPA, as they are very well paid, cf the median Australian wage. If the players are unhappy, they can play AF in another comp.; or dig ditches. There are plenty of keen players who would willingly take their place in the AFL.




2. Further general references here on the massive cuts, from 2021, on AFL Club spending (& AFL HQ itself).

This reduced Club expenditure will greatly increase the financial viability, sustainability, & competitiveness of a Tas. 19th team (& all other "small" AFL teams). This will enhance its chances of being approved by the AFL, since the "financial risk" to the AFL would be greatly diminished.

Ignore point 4. Tasmania will have their own team before Sydney obtains a 3rd team.

A Third Team In Sydney - It's Only a Matter Of Time !!

Well, it's funny how little it seems to take to annoy you. Annoy me? You make it too easy.

www.bigfooty.com

The soonest Tasmania will get a team will be 2030,the conravirus will take a long time for the AFL to rebuild,I honestly believe we are looking at 10 to 20 years.

 

[Jazny]

I will be switching to supporting basketball and soccer if we dont get a team soon... I just watch afl and I am kind of bored by it now.

 

[BringBackTorps]

1.

The soonest Tasmania will get a team will be 2030,the conravirus will take a long time for the AFL to rebuild,I honestly believe we are looking at 10 to 20 years.

I disagree.

The Tas. Business Case (which has not been challenged, let alone rebutted, by any AFL or MSM expert) stated the 19th team will add:-

. "... a windfall of $110m per year to the Tasmanian economy, & add hundreds of jobs".

. $19m pa to AFL broadcast rights, due to the creation of 11 extra H & A games pa (assuming similar terms to the current rights' deal).

The 2025 Tas. team viability has not changed, in material terms, since the Business case was publicly released on 6.2.20.
(I concede, however, if Australia was still- very unlikely- in recession c.2025, private sponsorship & advertising rates will be much lower- possibly endangering the Tas. bid)

Because the AFL does not have a professional AF competitor anywhere else in the world, it is "the master of its own destiny" ie it has full control of its costs to run a competition, & how it should operate. It has an "automatic stabiliser" in unforseen events/emergencies to reduce costs (& AFL grants) to Clubs.

Oh, by the way, the Fed. govt. is flying helicopters all over Australia, dropping $50 notes on everyone.
Does Tasmania want some of this "stimulus" & generosity- probably hundreds of millions$ in 2 Tas. stadia upgrades. The AFL certainly would!



2. SEN Radio 31.3

G. Lyons strongly repudiates the "suggestion" from C. Wilson that NMFC might relocate to Tas. permanently., instead of Tas. getting its own 19th team.

Garry Lyon's question mark over Caroline Wilson's North Melbourne relocation report

Caroline Wilson suggested AFL clubs want North Melbourne to relocate to Tasmania.

www.sen.com.au

With no games, AF journalists must be "controversial" to generate attention/ clicks on articles. What else can they talk about, now that the $600m line of credit ensures the future of all 18 AFL Clubs, & 14 AFLW teams, in 221.

 

[Established1870]

You simply must be pulling my leg

Purple works directly for AFL Media so I seriously doubt he'd mention merger talk without having the go ahead and he's always prefaced it with "AFL wants 18 clubs going into 2021". I can't stand him at the best of times but with his ties I would suggest he has heard at least something.

Wilson might be a different story.

 

[Roylion]

Purple works directly for AFL Media so I seriously doubt he'd mention merger talk without having the go ahead

Of course he would. If there was any serious merger talk from the AFL or any of its constituent clubs, he'd be all over it. Beyond vague speculation related to finance there isn't.

Wilson might be a different story.

James Brayshaw, Corey McKernan and Ben Buckley have all savaged her comments on North Melbourne so will be interested to hear her response.

 

[Established1870]

Of course he would. If there was any serious merger talk from the AFL or any of its constituent clubs, he'd be all over it. Beyond vague speculation related to finance there isn't.

There really wouldn't be as many rumblings about the subject if the AFL weren't considering it to some extent. Obviously a fair portion of it has been pulled out of thin air but usually when there's smoke there's fire and there's smoke coming from somewhere about it for most journos to be talking about it.

James Brayshaw, Corey McKernan and Ben Buckley have all savaged her comments on North Melbourne so will be interested to hear her response.

I like Caro and I do actually agree with her stance on North but I seriously wonder at times why in the blue hell she goes after them so much, especially compared to other clubs in Victoria who do actually have a worse situation then North.

 

[Roylion]

There really wouldn't be as many rumblings about the subject if the AFL weren't considering it to some extent.

They're not. Gill McLachlan has just been interviewed by 7 News and has categorically rejected both any North Melbourne relocation to Tasmania and mergers. It's complete media speculation. They have to have something to talk about with no onfield football and airtime to fill.

Obviously a fair portion of it has been pulled out of thin air

A "fair portion"? All of it has been pulled ut of thin air.

The media logic is....

AFL in financial trouble because of coronavirus --> mergers back on the table

but usually when there's smoke there's fire and there's smoke coming from somewhere about it for most journos to be talking about it.

"Most journos"? Who? It's complete speculation for reasons Ive already described.

I like Caro and I do actually agree with her stance on North but I seriously wonder at times why in the blue hell she goes after them so much, especially compared to other clubs in Victoria who do actually have a worse situation then North.

It doesn't add to her credibility as a fair minded investigative journalist. She needs to make sure her claims have sufficient basis to credibly defend them, other than vague "club sources". Otherwise she comes across as merely as a football shock jock and gossip columnist. It's particularly noticeable when she talks about North Melbourne.

Here's the logic...

AFL in financial trouble because of coronavirus --> North plays in Tasmania --> Tasmania needs / wants a team ---> North Melbourne to relocate to Tasmania.

 

[big_e]

There really wouldn't be as many rumblings about the subject if the AFL weren't considering it to some extent. Obviously a fair portion of it has been pulled out of thin air but usually when there's smoke there's fire and there's smoke coming from somewhere about it for most journos to be talking about it.



I like Caro and I do actually agree with her stance on North but I seriously wonder at times why in the blue hell she goes after them so much, especially compared to other clubs in Victoria who do actually have a worse situation then North.

She was the AFL's mouthpiece during the Gold Coast stuff and we've never let her forget how badly wrong she was.

 

[raymond35]

I will be switching to supporting basketball and soccer if we dont get a team soon... I just watch afl and I am kind of bored by it now.

Watch Australian basketball and soccer and you'll REALLY know what boredom is.

 

[Established1870]

They're not. Gill McLachlan has just been interviewed by 7 News and has categorically rejected both any North Melbourne relocation to Tasmania and mergers. It's complete media speculation. They have to have something to talk about with no onfield football and airtime to fill.

I don't know about you but I'd wager Gill McLachlan is as credible as Barrett and Wilson when it comes to talking about subjects like this. Not saying what's being rumoured is true but why would he confirm the stories when it would just lead to essentially a revolt from fans who might think their club is next on the firing line? At this stage it would do more harm then good to admit anything about this is being talked about. And I'm sure as a Fitzroy fan, you of all people would know that the AFL is prone to saying one thing and doing something else.

A "fair portion"? All of it has been pulled ut of thin air.

The media logic is....

AFL in financial trouble because of coronavirus --> mergers back on the table

Aside from what's credible and what's bullshit (and I'd wager most of what's reported swings to being bullshit), there would still have to be some talk about this at AFL HQ that has gotten to some journalists reporting on this.

"Most journos"? Who? It's complete speculation for reasons Ive already described.

Barrett, Wilson, McClure and pretty much every other journo who's on TV or in the newspaper.

It doesn't add to her credibility as a fair minded investigative journalist. She needs to make sure her claims have sufficient basis to credibly defend them, other than vague "club sources". Otherwise she comes across as merely as a football shock jock and gossip columnist. It's particularly noticeable when she talks about North Melbourne.

Here's the logic...

AFL in financial trouble because of coronavirus --> North plays in Tasmania --> Tasmania needs / wants a team ---> North Melbourne to relocate to Tasmania.

I agree and when I hear Caro or anyone just blindly say "club sources" you get more then a feeling that they've pulled what they're talking about from their arses but even then, it's not like Wilson is entirely wrong about North Melbourne (although again, there are clubs in worse situations).

 

[Established1870]

She was the AFL's mouthpiece during the Gold Coast stuff and we've never let her forget how badly wrong she was.

She was attacking you lot before GC was a thing IIRC and I fail to see how she was "wrong" on a lot of things regarding North.