Expansion Does anyone think Tasmania should have a team before the Gold Coast and Western Sydney?

[Hodgepodge]

Normally i'd agree a TAS side should be introduced first, but hopefully the two new teams in West Sydney and Gold Coast will help to further cripple rugby. That's fair payback for them introducing the News Limited Storm down here and bombarding the radio with ads for every home game they have all season.

 

[Goldhawk]

Unfortunately Tasmania isn't big enough to support an AFL based team due to the population and economy to sustaining a competitive team.
The best solution seems to be what Hawthorn is incorporating now at least they get some exposure to AFL footy by having 4 games down there.
One only has to look at what has happened to their basketball team,they also couldn't compete with the big boys from the mainland and eventually folded.

 

[elbusto]

Unfortunately Tasmania isn't big enough to support an AFL based team due to the population and economy to sustaining a competitive team.
The best solution seems to be what Hawthorn is incorporating now at least they get some exposure to AFL footy by having 4 games down there.
One only has to look at what has happened to their basketball team,they also couldn't compete with the big boys from the mainland and eventually folded.

Goldhawk 2 things

1. Thanks for the picture of the ass - i neded that

2. Here in Tassie the momentum is growing - my work mates and I thought we had no chance initially but I think we could support a Team given the change of heart driven by the local paper the Mercury - we have amazing support here for an AFL Team - we are all behind it - West Sydney is no place for an AFL Team go there and have a look around - its a Soccer area with League as a 2nd place stronghold - Tassie is ready now - believe me - I did not think so a couple of months ago - but its all happening down here

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Goldhawk 2 things

1. Thanks for the picture of the ass - i neded that

2. Here in Tassie the momentum is growing - my work mates and I thought we had no chance initially but I think we could support a Team given the change of heart driven by the local paper the Mercury - we have amazing support here for an AFL Team - we are all behind it - West Sydney is no place for an AFL Team go there and have a look around - its a Soccer area with League as a 2nd place stronghold - Tassie is ready now - believe me - I did not think so a couple of months ago - but its all happening down here

But what's the incentive for the AFL to go with Tassie?

It's not going to grow the game.

There's no room for expansion.

 

[genghiskhan]

But what's the incentive for the AFL to go with Tassie?

It's not going to grow the game.

There's no room for expansion.

1) If Collingwood can build a nation wide following, why can't Tasmania?

2) If takes six times as much effort to get a new customer as develop an existing on. Tasmania's fans and industries are currently under developed.

3) Good for the image of the AFL to have a passionate team and an extra state locked in as an AFL state.

4) Sometimes you need to look beyond the dollar and just do what's good for the image of the code. Tasmania would be good for the image.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

1) If Collingwood can build a nation wide following, why can't Tasmania?

Because they're based in Tasmania, and are unlikely to attract much support outside that state. Collingwood's support-base is the result of years of work. How do you expect Tasmania to match that?

2) If takes six times as much effort to get a new customer as develop an existing on. Tasmania's fans and industries are currently under developed.

How are they under-developed?

There's still not sufficient scope for growth in that state. The population isn't growing very quickly, nor will the AFL be able to bring many new fans to the game.

3) Good for the image of the AFL to have a passionate team and an extra state locked in as an AFL state.

Pffftttt... what does that even mean?

Good for the image? Could you be any more vague?

The AFL cares more about what's good for the next TV rights deal.

4) Sometimes you need to look beyond the dollar and just do what's good for the image of the code. Tasmania would be good for the image.

This is the same as your third point. Why make a list if you're just going to double up?

And what's this "image of the game" crap? That's totally ambiguous.

I could say it's "good for the image of the game" for it to expand north rather than south and increase its profile in new frontiers.

"The image of the game", whatever that means, has nothing to do with this discussion.

 

[huntos]

But what's the incentive for the AFL to go with Tassie?

It's not going to grow the game.

There's no room for expansion.

Precisely.

The reason why the AFL is placing teams in these "markets" is because it gives them the best opportunity to grow the game.

Every sport in the country is going to Western Sydney and the Gold Coast even if they can't afford it, Rugby Union is dead in the water at club level and is mooting Gold Coast clubs.

If the AFL wanted greater TV revenue it would place in another Perth club and use the money made from that to subsidize a club from Tasmania, but another club in Perth doesn't gift the sport with quantities of new young footballers. Which are needed to grow the game and the league.

You only need to look at players like Daniel Merritt, Nick Rewoilt and Tom Williams to understand that there is talent there for the game, the Brisbane Lions success has shown young kids in Queensland that there is a future in the game if they stick to their guns. Nothing suggests in Tasmania that a AFL club will improve the quality of footballers around Australia, the same pathways which have boded Tassie football in good sted 50 years ago still exist.

As much as it hurts of Tassie the AFL needs to look out for the future of footy, just because some pigheaded rugby league boss comes out as claims that its League territory shouldn't scare off the positive work the AFL has done in getting young kids to participate in the game. 100 years ago Rugby Union chiefs were spouting the same crap. Unfortunately the game ran out of money - now its back with a vengeance and "AFL is the gorilla in the room" according to the turncoat banker John O'Neal. They are running scared that a Chris Judd is going to appear from Sydney's Western suburbs and lead a contemporary revolution (comparatively a small one compared to soccer and the current numbers of rugby league) which will secure it's future in Sydney for the next 50 years.

 

[unstable punt]

I'm still struggling to see the benefit of a team on the Gold Coast or West Sydney.

the GC is okay but West Sydney will be a disaster and Tassie should be in before WS

 

[kenrosewall]

Nothing suggests in Tasmania that a AFL club will improve the quality of footballers around Australia, the same pathways which have boded Tassie football in good sted 50 years ago still exist.

Ha....your joking?.....right?

 

[elbusto]

Ha....your joking?.....right?

has to be -there is tremendous potential down here apart from what already is in the AFL

 

[1903]

Ha....your joking?.....right?

I think he was trying to say that there has always been a pathway to the VFL/AFL so having an AFL team in Tassie wont change that , so overall there will be no added benefit . The benefit of course is that more of the home grown AFL talent will remain to Tassie to further enhance Tasmainian football and perhaps more importantly promote the state . IMO the state government realises this and is backing an AFL team for Tasmania as it's overall aim with the sponsorship of the hawks as a poor second .

 

[sherrinorburley]

Here in Tassie the momentum is growing - my work mates and I thought we had no chance initially but I think we could support a Team given the change of heart driven by the local paper the Mercury - we have amazing support here for an AFL Team - we are all behind it - West Sydney is no place for an AFL Team go there and have a look around - its a Soccer area with League as a 2nd place stronghold - Tassie is ready now - believe me - I did not think so a couple of months ago - but its all happening down here

Yes.
But. The AFL have a crapload of money they will waste on the new GC & Sydney sides mainly because they will be able to control them easier than a Tasmanian side. It's obvious they are investing and will set it up to get big returns at the cost of the other teams in the competition.

Tasmania should have had a side in years ago to get closer to a true national competition. Along with NT represented, forget ACT, it will be.

Until then its just ego's and a second Queensland & Sydney side

 

[genghiskhan]

Because they're based in Tasmania, and are unlikely to attract much support outside that state. Collingwood's support-base is the result of years of work. How do you expect Tasmania to match that?

As Kevin Sheedy pointed out when arguing for a Tasmanian team, the Green Bay packers represent a city of 100,000 people, have the lowest potential television audience, yet are one of the most popular teams in the NFL. Admittedly, it has a long history.

I agree that there is little chance that Tasmania could come in and match Collingwood in five years, or even ten. But a team should be created in the mind that it will still be around 100 years from now.

How are they under-developed?

There's still not sufficient scope for growth in that state. The population isn't growing very quickly, nor will the AFL be able to bring many new fans to the game.

How many Tasmanians are members of AFL clubs? How many Tasmanian companies sponsor AFL clubs? How much Tasmanian government money go to the AFL? yes, Hawthorn takes a bit, but Hawthorn could never develop Tasmania as effectively as a new team. Tasmania has plenty of people with no interest in football. Give them a team, and they may get drawn in along with Tasmanian companies and the Tasmanian government.

The Gold Coast, on the other hand, is a saturated market. Getting new fans requires a conversion, which is like converting a Muslim to a Christian. Converting religions is more difficult than giving an agnostic a religion, and sport is no different.

Pffftttt... what does that even mean?

Good for the image? Could you be any more vague?

The AFL cares more about what's good for the next TV rights deal.

This is the same as your third point. Why make a list if you're just going to double up?

And what's this "image of the game" crap? That's totally ambiguous.

I could say it's "good for the image of the game" for it to expand north rather than south and increase its profile in new frontiers.

"The image of the game", whatever that means, has nothing to do with this discussion.

Image is everything and you lose credibility when you try to say otherwise. If you have had any experience in NSW or Queensland you would know Australian rules is referred to as the Mexicans game, or a Victorian game. Queenslanders and New South Welshmen use that negative image to justify their rejection of the code, and pressure others to likewise reject the code.

Southerners have never understood the importance of image and that's why football developed very little in NSW and Queensland for 150 years. Well, that's my explanation. Maybe it just didn't develop because they had rugby union/league and football looked shit by comparison. It is not as though they never had exposure to it so didn't know what they were missing out on

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

has to be -there is tremendous potential down here apart from what already is in the AFL

Except that football in Tasmania has become an absolute shambles in recent times. The old "pathways" don't exist. They were improvd for a while with a state league, but the clubs - with TFL and AFL help - ran themselves into the ground and Tasmanian football is a disaster.
Even if the finances stacked up, and I can't see how they can come close, current management of the game in the state is utterly inept; even giving state MPs a run for their money in the incometence stakes (and Tas parliament is the one place in the nation that makes the NSW parliament look like the home of the gifted and pure).

 

[elbusto]

Except that football in Tasmania has become an absolute shambles in recent times. The old "pathways" don't exist. They were improvd for a while with a state league, but the clubs - with TFL and AFL help - ran themselves into the ground and Tasmanian football is a disaster.
Even if the finances stacked up, and I can't see how they can come close, current management of the game in the state is utterly inept; even giving state MPs a run for their money in the incometence stakes (and Tas parliament is the one place in the nation that makes the NSW parliament look like the home of the gifted and pure).

I could not agree more - the State Government should have sponsored an A League Team -thats about our only real hope IMHO! Sad but true.

 

[cos789]

I agree that there is little chance that Tasmania could come in and match Collingwood in five years, or even ten.

Why ? Every other team can match Collingwood
why would Tasmania be any different .

.

 

[huntos]

Does anybody believe that we could get a Gold Coast and western Sydney club with a Tasmanian club to follow after?

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Image is everything and you lose credibility when you try to say otherwise.

Whatever, champ.

You lose credibility when you base an argument on wishy-washy buzzwords.

The whole "you lose credibility when you disagree with me" line is pretty playground. I don't think it fools many people.

Try again.

If you have had any experience in NSW or Queensland you would know Australian rules is referred to as the Mexicans game, or a Victorian game. Queenslanders and New South Welshmen use that negative image to justify their rejection of the code, and pressure others to likewise reject the code.

Southerners have never understood the importance of image and that's why football developed very little in NSW and Queensland for 150 years. Well, that's my explanation. Maybe it just didn't develop because they had rugby union/league and football looked shit by comparison. It is not as though they never had exposure to it so didn't know what they were missing out on

And how would introducing a Tasmanian side change any of this?

AFL needs to strengthen its position in NSW and Queensland. I think everyone accepts that as a long-term objective. Bringing in a Tasmanian side would be pointless - no pay-off.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Does anybody believe that we could get a Gold Coast and western Sydney club with a Tasmanian club to follow after?

No.

I don't think there will ever be good enough reasons for a Tassie side.

 

[genghiskhan]

Whatever, champ.

You lose credibility when you base an argument on wishy-washy buzzwords.

The whole "you lose credibility when you disagree with me" line is pretty playground. I don't think it fools many people.

Try again.

And how would introducing a Tasmanian side change any of this?

AFL needs to strengthen its position in NSW and Queensland. I think everyone accepts that as a long-term objective. Bringing in a Tasmanian side would be pointless - no pay-off.

Whatever you you need to do to feel better about yourself, champ.

But you don't fool many people by defining 'image' as as a wishy-washy buzz word. Well, perhaps you fool yourself into thinking you are more enlighted than the accountants, marketers and business managers who consider image a basic principle of marketing. Sorry if the truth hurts, it may help with how you define your self worth, but not how others define your self worth.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

But you don't fool many people by defining 'image' as as a wishy-washy buzz word.

That's exactly what it is.

Go ahead and define it more concisely.

You won't be able to.

Well, perhaps you fool yourself into thinking you are more enlighted than the accountants, marketers and business managers who consider image a basic principle of marketing.

The AFL has a brand image.

But you bandy it about as though it's tangible and easily observed.

It's a whole hot-potch of perceptions. The idea that a Tasmanian side would be "good for the image of the game" is pie in the sky stuff. As arguments go, it's a non-starter.

You're imposing an unsophisticated cause-and-effect thinking on something that is far less tactile than that.

It's not a case of "Tasmanian side = improved image". That's laughably simplistic.

Sorry if the truth hurts, it may help with how you define your self worth, but not how others define your self worth.

Undergraduate waffle.

Try again.

 

[genghiskhan]

That's exactly what it is.

Go ahead and define it more concisely.

You won't be able to.

The AFL has a brand image.

But you bandy it about as though it's tangible and easily observed.

It's a whole hot-potch of perceptions. The idea that a Tasmanian side would be "good for the image of the game" is pie in the sky stuff. As arguments go, it's a non-starter.

You're imposing an unsophisticated cause-and-effect thinking on something that is far less tactile than that.

It's not a case of "Tasmanian side = improved image". That's laughably simplistic.

Undergraduate waffle.

Try again.

When you deal with an self-declared Einstein that makes opinions but doesn't back them up, it is best to let the Einstein maintain his dream. This one is for you champ

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

When you deal with an self-declared Einstein that makes opinions but doesn't back them up, it is best to let the Einstein maintain his dream. This one is for you champ

Pretty transparent admission of defeat.

I wonder if you'll fool anyone.

I've supported my opinions with argument. You haven't. Anyone reading over this thread will see that.

 

[Alberton_Magpie]

Everyone says that Gold Coast and Western Sydney should be first for growing the game, well lets have a look at something very simple-

a good percentage of TASMANIANS want an AFL team

a very small percentage of GOLDCOASTERS and WESTERNSYDNIANS want an AFL team

TASMANIA is an AFL State

Im sorry but its obvious that Tasmania deserve to be the 17th Team and Gold Coast the 18th

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

a very small percentage of GOLDCOASTERS and WESTERNSYDNIANS want an AFL team

TASMANIA is an AFL State

Im sorry but its obvious that Tasmania deserve to be the 17th Team and Gold Coast the 18th

What does deserve mean in this context?

The AFL should put the team in whichever location most strengthens the code.

That isn't Tasmania.

All these other arguments about who deserves what don't plug into anything that actually matters.