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

[sherrinorburley]

Yawn - keep trying.

My case is measured and consistent and, unlike you, I actually know what I'm talking about.

You can try to paint that as "going around in circles", but I don't think anyone reading your drivel will be fooled.

Run along now and find another pretty picture to post.

I dont think, i Know more about footy than you. Like most frontrunning sheep that believes and follows, you know sweet FA!

Here ya go,

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I dont think, i Know more about footy than you. Like most frontrunning sheep that believes and follows, you know sweet FA!

How can you be a front-runner who follows?

It's no fun for me when you make yourself look stupid.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Like the dog chasing its own tail.

Queensland are represented. NSW are represented. Capiche?

The attitude you have of not wanting a truly national competition is obvious in regards to Tassie & NT. Wont be Australia wide comp until they are.

Perhaps not. But would people be so supportive of a divided island getting a side if we didn't have states? States are for Origin football; please bring it back; and leagues below the AFL and have little to nothing to do with club footy. The whole "national competition" argument is ridiculous. Why is getting Tasmania in more important than Western Sydney, Newcastle, Gold Coast - all of which have more Australians (same nation) than Tasmania? (And, no I'm not advocating Newcastle as a near term expansion. It will take long enough, and be expoensive enough, to get the GC and WS operating securely. If GC can be done at all.)

Tassie doesn't seem to stack up currently on either financial or growth criteria (personally, I'm happy to see either one of these as reason enough for expansion; but growth must have the prospect of being eventually financially viable), and will get worse down the track. (Being state government promoted and full of those who have already announced it should happen, I have little faith in the independence of the business case being developed; but it should at least provide some guidance. I suspect the biggest mistake will be to treat Tasmania as a signle market, which it unfortunately is not.) Nor does it provide the growth of the game - and Gibbke is correct in that this is a very minor consideration for the AFL, but it should be a big consideration for supporters of the code.

On neither count, viability or the code's growth (or even the far less important league growth), does Tasmania stack up. I don't like it, and if it did happen I'd possibly get a membership of Tasmania as a second team (especially if Launceston based, so when I head home I could go to the odd game) because the absolute last thing the state needs is for a club to start up and fold within a few years. Tasmania has enough problems attracting sustainable investment, without something as high profile as an AFL side going belly-up.

It probably won't result in much bigger TV rights deals initially, as WS and GC will probably not have much support in the early years, Again, that should grow with time; while Tasmania's advertising share is small and shrinking as a proportion - plus the AFL broadcast already controls those timeslots like in no other state.
I don't think the AFL's almost exclusive focus on the TV rights is a good thing for a number of reasons, but that is their focus and with regards to tasmania its the right call - at least until, and probably even after, the unlikely event that the FFA announce a Tasmanian side (which Fox don't want because they don't operate drectly in Tasmania, just like the major commercial networks.)

 

[thegreenmachine]

It's not about how quickly a team can be set up.

It's about how big a benefit can be reaped long-term.

On that score, Tassie is a non-starter.

And who cares what the majority thinks? Since when is that the litmus test for what makes sense and what doesn't?

Obviously you don't, and nor should I care about your posts, because I can't ever remember agreeing with any of them. And another thing, I was thinking to myself that this wasn't necessarily your worst thread, but you've let yourself down once again with yet another smart arse remark towards the end of your argument.
I disagree strongly that Tasmania is a non-starter as far as long-term benefits. With the population of Australia growing rapidly everywhere, there's no reason to suggest that Tasmania won't be a big enough place to have an AFL team in the long term. There's no guarantee that the AFL will succeed in West Sydney. It took Sydney decades to establish themselves, and they still haven't set a foothold in the Western Suburbs.

Short of Hobart getting an extra 300,000 people, something not forecast to ever happen, there is absolutely no way Tasmania will be getting an AFL team.

Any team put there would need AFL and government life support for life. It would absolutely BLEED money.

Putting team in Gold Coast and Western Sydney is absolutely the right way to go. People who think it's a bad idea should stop living in the 80s.

The population of Hobart is around 200,000 people. Why wouldn't they ever get a population of 300,000? You don't always have to rely on AFL and Government support. Sponsors will always jump on board and it won't just be from local companies. Many sponsors of AFL clubs are from international countires anyway. I'm all for expansion, even in new areas, but will it work? In the Gold Coast, yes. West Sydney? I've got my doubts.
p.s. It's a Tasmanian team, not a Hobart one, the population would be around 500,000.

 

[sherrinorburley]

It's no fun for me when you make yourself look stupid.

again..............

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Obviously you don't, and nor should I care about your posts, because I can't ever remember agreeing with any of them. And another thing, I was thinking to myself that this wasn't necessarily your worst thread, but you've let yourself down once again with yet another smart arse remark towards the end of your argument.
I disagree strongly that Tasmania is a non-starter as far as long-term benefits. With the population of Australia growing rapidly everywhere, there's no reason to suggest that Tasmania won't be a big enough place to have an AFL team in the long term. There's no guarantee that the AFL will succeed in West Sydney. It took Sydney decades to establish themselves, and they still haven't set a foothold in the Western Suburbs.

The population of Hobart is around 200,000 people. Why wouldn't they ever get a population of 300,000? You don't always have to rely on AFL and Government support. Sponsors will always jump on board and it won't just be from local companies. Many sponsors of AFL clubs are from international countires anyway. I'm all for expansion, even in new areas, but will it work? In the Gold Coast, yes. West Sydney? I've got my doubts.

Ever? Quite possible. In the forseeable future, no. ABS projections range from a small increase to a small decrease in both Hobart's and Tasmania's population. This is a 2001 release, and things have unexpectedly changed for the better in Tasmania since then, so the figures will presumably have altered but probably not by a lot.
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@...E393EDD90BE6F5EDCA256AE0007949FF?OpenDocument
"Tasmania's population is projected to grow, under Series A, from 470,800 at 30 June 1999 to 479,800 at 30 June 2018 and decrease to 479,300 by 30 June 2021. Under Series B and C the population will decline to between 434,500 and 457,000."

"The population of Greater Hobart SD, 194,400 at 30 June 1999, is projected to be between 180,000 and 200,200 by 30 June 2021."


Its not a question of getting sponsors, although that is harder in Tasmania without any national management in place. (As the NBL Devils showed, they consistently got pledges from local management only to get the sponsorship knocked back in the boardrooms of Sydney and Melbourne.)
Its the value of those sponsors that's an issue. There is little point buying corporate boxes at a premium rate when none of your clients have any decision makers in the state. They might have factories or whatever, but they don't have any of the key buyers, etc. So they sell at a much reduced price. Nor are the opportunities to schmooze with the players worth as much if your client base is elswhere. That, at least, is lessened as that can happen at away games.
The major TV networks, including Foxtel, don't operate in the state leaving only the less lucrative (from network and AFL rights perspective) on-sold rights, and a Tasmanian side would rarely be on FTA in more than one major market, plus a virtually irrelevant market (or more accurately markets) in Tasmania - despite the number of Tasmanians living in Melbourne. So primary sponsors and others relying on exposure don't get the same value as a mainland club (even a Victorian one that's only on FTA half the time).


As for GC/WS. There's no doubt that Western Sydney will start a long, long way behind the GC. But in 30 to 40 years I would expect that WS will be going strong, but I'm unsure about the GC.
Remember the bulk of this GC growth will be Sydney people moving, so both need to attract the same people. Its just on the GC they need to attract people whose loyalties may well be with their former area, but just moved for the sun and sand. And will the Vic, SA, Tas brigade turn up to 11 or 12 games a year as neutrals?
Due to its much greater population, WS only needs to attract a tjird to a quarter of the per capita market to equal the GC support made up mostly of NSW and Qld people; with a sizeable share of Vic and SA, and a stronger starting point (in pure population numbers) as the main positives.

 

[sherrinorburley]

I disagree strongly that Tasmania is a non-starter as far as long-term benefits. With the population of Australia growing rapidly everywhere, there's no reason to suggest that Tasmania won't be a big enough place to have an AFL team in the long term. There's no guarantee that the AFL will succeed in West Sydney. It took Sydney decades to establish themselves, and they still haven't set a foothold in the Western Suburbs.


The population of Hobart is around 200,000 people. Why wouldn't they ever get a population of 300,000? You don't always have to rely on AFL and Government support. Sponsors will always jump on board and it won't just be from local companies. Many sponsors of AFL clubs are from international countires anyway. I'm all for expansion, even in new areas, but will it work? In the Gold Coast, yes. West Sydney? I've got my doubts.
p.s. It's a Tasmanian team, not a Hobart one, the population would be around 500,000.

Good post.

Some more common sense from an ex-Magpie great

JAMES BRESNEHAN
June 11, 2008 12:00am

COLLINGWOOD goalkicking legend Peter Daicos believes Tasmania has the facilities, corporate backing and supporter base to operate its own team in the AFL.
The "Macedonian Marvel", a star of the Magpies' 1990 premiership, says a Tassie team could be based either at Bellerive Oval in Hobart or at Aurora Stadium in launceston because the facilities were comfortably up to AFL demands.

Daicos wants the AFL to consider shifting its plans to plant a new team in western Sydney and start one in Tasmania instead.

"If Tasmania is able to fit the criteria, and from what I know I think it can, you have a very good case for your own team," Daicos said.

"It seems like you've been bypassed, yet the state has been part of the football landscape for many years and I'd love to see a team here.

"The great thing about Tasmania is there is no other team in direct competition."

Daicos believes a second team in Sydney would not do the Swans any favours.

It would chew into the AFL's war chest, which was bolstered by its landmark $780 million TV rights deal.

"They've already got a team in Sydney, and if they the AFL put a second in there they would end up robbing Peter to pay Paul," Daicos said.

"If you look at the model for the Sydney Swans, that has taken 28 years to refine.

"It has only been in the past three or four years they have been successful.

"And that's with a hell of a lot of concessions and a little bit of hand-holding that they've been able to get by with huge support from the AFL.

"A second team in Sydney could take just as long to get going."

Daicos has held Tasmanian football in high regard since he was coming through the junior ranks.

"As a kid, when I first learned to love the game, I gravitated to the players who were playing in the VFL as it was known back then and a lot of them came from Tassie.

"Tassie, South Australia and Western Australia have always figured in a lot of the big State of Origin games.

"I played my first State of Origin game against Tassie at North Hobart Oval, that was back in 1981," Daicos said.

He also has business ties to Tasmania through his Sportzstats Counter hand-held learning device.

"You have the corporate backing here, businesses would love to get behind it, people love their footy and they'd be very parochial about supporting their team.

"I have no doubt corporate-wise and the people who live here would get behind their football team," Daicos said.

 

[cos789]

It's not about how quickly a team can be set up.

It's about how big a benefit can be reaped long-term.

On that score, Tassie is a non-starter.

And who cares what the majority thinks? Since when is that the litmus test for what makes sense and what doesn't?

Port Adelaide is testament to that an established hugely successful club with a huge SANFL following , quick out of the blocks ,but struggling to grow .

Tassie would be similar except that it would continue to grow any new possible support . It's that future potential to grow that is an issue .

Really there are no stats on what people think . Deffinately people think Tassie deserve at team .Some people think it would be successful long term.
Some people think it should be the 18th team .
Maybe they should be looking at the 19th team .

.

 

[sherrinorburley]

As the previous post mentioned. SA's second team is not growing and that's in an AFL area.

Another ex-footballer who should know more than anyone

JAMES BRESNEHAN
June 04, 2008 12:00am

FORMER Sydney Swan Andrew Dunkley believes another AFL team in the harbour city would damage his former club and is destined to fail.
A 217-game veteran of the Sydney Swans, Dunkley also said yesterday that Tasmania deserved an AFL team ahead of the Gold Coast.

The AFL plans to plant new teams on the Gold Coast in 2011 and in Sydney in 2012. Tasmania is fighting for the Sydney-bound licence. "If the Gold Coast can put its hand up for a team, why not Tassie?" said Dunkley, who now lives in Gippsland.

Follow our campaign to get a Tassie AFL team "Tassie is a strong AFL area, a lot stronger that Queensland."

However, Dunkley's main concern was that there was no room in the harbour city for another AFL outfit.

Having experienced AFL football in Sydney for 12 years, Dunkley does not believe a second Sydney team would work.

"It will struggle," Dunkley said.

"The demographics are all wrong, and rugby league is too powerful.

"It wouldn't kill the Swans but it would make it very hard for them.

"They've got a lot of support out western Sydney way."

Dunkley said the Swans needed all the support they could get in a rugby league-mad state.

"If another AFL club turns up and pinches 20 per cent of their Swans members, it will make it very hard on the club," he said.

Dunkley believes the Tasmanian Government is on the right track in its drive to snare the western Sydney licence.

"Tassie deserves to have its own team," he said.

"It's great they're having a crack at getting one and it might get it with the support of the government."

Dunkley supported a future Tasmanian team being based at the home ground of his former club, North Launceston, a venue which has since morphed into Aurora Stadium.

"I went down there last year, for the first time since I'd left, and it was fantastic, a beautiful set-up," Dunkley said.

"It's a beautiful surface, a credit to Tasmanian football to have a facility like that."

Dunkley joined the growing list of former stars, community leaders and financial experts who support the proposal of a Tasmanian team, which was started by the Mercury in April.

The AFL agreed last month to accept a formal submission from the State Government about Tasmania getting a licence.

The government also launched the It's Time website where people could register their support for the team. Go to the website at tassiefootyteam.com.au.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

The population of Hobart is around 200,000 people. Why wouldn't they ever get a population of 300,000?

I said an extra 300,000. Greater Hobart would need 500,000 for the idea to have any base merit.

p.s. It's a Tasmanian team, not a Hobart one, the population would be around 500,000.

If you think more than, say, a thousand people are going to drive hours across the state every second week to watch then you have rocks in your head. Sure, in the first year the number doing so would be quite good but once the novelty of the first season wears off there will not be many people willing to do it.

 

[dyl_tigerman]

If you think more than, say, a thousand people are going to drive hours across the state every second week to watch then you have rocks in your head. Sure, in the first year the number doing so would be quite good but once the novelty of the first season wears off there will not be many people willing to do it.

thats exactly right... people don't understand that it is a few hours between hobart and launceston and even a plane ride across if you want.... tasmania deserve a team before west sydney do so y dont we give them one ... it has to be hobart or launceston it can't be tasmania as the state won't all be involved if it is predominantly in one city...

 

[opng]

thats exactly right... people don't understand that it is a few hours between hobart and launceston and even a plane ride across if you want.... tasmania deserve a team before west sydney do so y dont we give them one ... it has to be hobart or launceston it can't be tasmania as the state won't all be involved if it is predominantly in one city...

And this is where the people that count can kill off the rediculas, childish north/south thing by playing a split of 5/6 games between hobart and launceston, having lived down there for 30 odd years i found it one of the most overblown things id ever seen. And for what its worth i dont think they've got a chance at the next two licenses but should still go ahead with the push to gain a foothold and build a foundation for when the next license after GC17 & WS18 becomes available.

 

[dyl_tigerman]

And this is where the people that count can kill off the rediculas, childish north/south thing by playing a split of 5/6 games between hobart and launceston, having lived down there for 30 odd years i found it one of the most overblown things id ever seen. And for what its worth i dont think they've got a chance at the next two licenses but should still go ahead with the push to gain a foothold and build a foundation for when the next license after GC17 & WS18 becomes available.

first thing cos u lived there is there really a hatred between north and south and secondly what would be the point of a 5/6 split because they wouldn't get a real home ground advantage as every week they are playing at a different ground ie.

Hobar - Mcg - Lanceston - Brisbane - Hobart etc and also training and finals thier would be mass argument and riots if one end got finals over the other... that is why i say keep the team to one city to stop all the plaing around and crap that goes on....

 

[thegreenmachine]

I said an extra 300,000. Greater Hobart would need 500,000 for the idea to have any base merit.



If you think more than, say, a thousand people are going to drive hours across the state every second week to watch then you have rocks in your head. Sure, in the first year the number doing so would be quite good but once the novelty of the first season wears off there will not be many people willing to do it.

Well guess what, I don't think that you're always going to get that many people from one end of the state travelling to another end to attend games. I never suggested that did I? In Hobart at least, you would get enough people to attend the games I'm quite confident in that. Why do you need a big population anyway? Look at Geelong (population similar to Hobart) and Fremantle (25,000) and they have established AFL teams.

And this is where the people that count can kill off the rediculas, childish north/south thing by playing a split of 5/6 games between hobart and launceston, having lived down there for 30 odd years i found it one of the most overblown things id ever seen. And for what its worth i dont think they've got a chance at the next two licenses but should still go ahead with the push to gain a foothold and build a foundation for when the next license after GC17 & WS18 becomes available.

Agree with everything you said there, including splitting the games. We're highly unlikely to get the 18th licence (unless someone can pull a rabbit out of a magician's hat) and I'll still be hoping that the other 2 teams succeed for the good of our code.

Port Adelaide is testament to that an established hugely successful club with a huge SANFL following , quick out of the blocks ,but struggling to grow .

Tassie would be similar except that it would continue to grow any new possible support . It's that future potential to grow that is an issue .

Really there are no stats on what people think . Deffinately people think Tassie deserve at team .Some people think it would be successful long term.
Some people think it should be the 18th team .
Maybe they should be looking at the 19th team .

.

That's probably a more realistic thing to look at in the future. I'm just arguing why we could/should be no.18.

 

[opng]

first thing cos u lived there is there really a hatred between north and south and secondly what would be the point of a 5/6 split because they wouldn't get a real home ground advantage as every week they are playing at a different ground ie.

Hobar - Mcg - Lanceston - Brisbane - Hobart etc and also training and finals thier would be mass argument and riots if one end got finals over the other... that is why i say keep the team to one city to stop all the plaing around and crap that goes on....

Like i said before there's no hatred its just plain childish crap, like when your a kid arguing with your brother/sister "im better than you". Its a crompromise that might shut em up. If its played only in one town, hobart or launceston aint no city, youd end up losing the other half of the state. You contract it so you have a 5/6 split alternating each year. And at finals time it basically is played at which ground has the highest average attendence over the seaon, you have 2 finals same again you alternate. Geelong have a split between skilled and TD, it seems to work with them. All this should have been ironed out with the Devils, but they stuffed that one up.

 

[Chuq]

Ever? Quite possible. In the forseeable future, no. ABS projections range from a small increase to a small decrease in both Hobart's and Tasmania's population. This is a 2001 release, and things have unexpectedly changed for the better in Tasmania since then, so the figures will presumably have altered but probably not by a lot.
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@...E393EDD90BE6F5EDCA256AE0007949FF?OpenDocument
"Tasmania's population is projected to grow, under Series A, from 470,800 at 30 June 1999 to 479,800 at 30 June 2018 and decrease to 479,300 by 30 June 2021. Under Series B and C the population will decline to between 434,500 and 457,000."

The population of Tasmania is currently about 493,000 which shows how completely out of touch these figures are.

 

[Ricardo]

Look at Geelong (population similar to Hobart) and Fremantle (25,000) and they have established AFL teams.

Geelong do have a similar population to Hobart but more importantly we have Melbourne about 1 hour up the road with a population of well over 3 million + sorrounding regions such as Ballarat (85k) and the Werribee area (110k+ just 35 mins from Geelong).

I'd love to see a Tassie team as would most football supporters, but it'd be hard for them to keep up with the other clubs (membership, corporate support, sponsors), not to mention the AFL has its eyes set up North.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

They should have one, but wont get one, simple.

they should of had a team admitted instead of Fremantle (no offence freo fans)

 

[Chuq]

I'd love to see a Tassie team as would most football supporters, but it'd be hard for them to keep up with the other clubs (membership, corporate support, sponsors), not to mention the AFL has its eyes set up North.

Do people read the threads before commenting... a recent survey showed 23% of Tasmanians would considering buying a membership. Thats over 110,000 people. Even half that number would be more than the highest membership of any AFL club.

Sponsorship has also been discussed elsewhere, the Tas bid team has a major household name all but signed up.

AFL (Andrew D in particular) - yes, that is the problem.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Both Gold Coast and Western Sydney sides are essential to the future expansion of the game. They must be included in the competition before Tasmania, Canberra or any other side is admitted.

If the AFL miss the boat in these two huge untapped markets now they will forever rue it. There is no doubt that both GC and WS will be hugely successful in the medium to long term but the time to act is right now while rugby league is floundering, particularly in WS. Tassie can come later - there is no urgency there.

What are you taking, it makes you sound extraordinarily optomistic, almost to the point of insanity!

 

[JoondalupJ]

The issue is people can rally from all points of Tassie for a one-off game, but a full-time team means people will be asked to do it every second week. The passion then gets blown out of the water by financial concerns (can you afford to go to the footy that often), time-pressures (can you afford the time to spend every second weekend travelling to the footy), and also the reality that you get the opportunity to be more discerning about the games you attend, particularly if you are constantly travelling from a fair way away from the ground.

You don't have to ask footy fanatics to to go to footy every week they kill to go every week. Fair dinkum!!!!!! Also its good to hunt customers when they REALLY want to buy the product you can't help but win. Join the AFL and they will come!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JoondalupJ]

I might have to take back my statement about GC/WS's uselessness...there were some pretty good players in that list you posted in the other place! Having said that, that's what they've produced after nearly 30 years. Queensland has 40+ players in the AFL this year (the majority rookies). It's rising, but it's got less to do with the AFL sides and more to do with junior development, and the fact that many of those NSW players are from country areas that might be geographically in NSW, but who've been Australian Rules towns for many decades (unlike WS). Spend more on turning the Rams and Qld (and their respective feeders) into top junior sides, and you'd get more draftees. The only difference between these two new sides and the Bears and Swans early years will be the level of support they are given, which will be more than every other side combined has ever gotten - Andy himself said $100m or however long it takes...without it, there would be nothing - you might as well start expansion sides in South Africa and Dubai, because they'd be not much worse...!

These two AFL sides are there for the tv, I won't take that back, because it's written all over the fixture list, the tv guide, and smeared across every word uttered by Andy in the last 3 years...and the spin just doesn't add up through stats or logic...if he came clean and said "we're putting two sides in and paying all their bills because they'll make the AFL a $hItload of cash which we can use to make the AFL better, ensure we keep all of the existing sides, and buy me a gold-plated mansion to match my car", I'd have no problem with that! Sounds like honest business and commonsense, not the backstabbing and cloak and dagger c r a p that's characterised the AFL's every move since they tried to sticky tape Footscray and Fitzroy together, stabbed Fitzroy in the back while giving Carlton a free ride for worse debts incurred for less honourable reasons which the AFL itself punished them for, and tried to sell out North...

As for Tassie and no urgency, I think they have a major problem down there. It's a rock and a hard place - watch footy stagnate even further through the incompetence/AFL pandering of the administration as they dubiously manage footy after their AFL bid is rejected (99% certain), or alternatively get a side into the AFL (the long shot) and watch it struggle and die young...what a kick in the guts for true footy pedigree and some of the most passionate footy fans you'll find anywhere in Australia...

If the AFL boss was genuine he'd load Tassie with concessions and build another AFL club in the heartland of Aussie rules country footy known as Albury/Wodonga and all the way up the bloody Murray river to Mildura into SA ( The Murray, which might actually get saved now) and down the other end to the ocean.There is a massive following of Aussie football just north of the Murray in NSW and a massive following of footy south of the Murray in VIC-bloody-TORIA and into SA. I think they follow aussie rules in SA hey? Why put two teams in QLD and NSW rugby states ,when they already have the Swans and Lions. West Syd is a joke Andy Dim or Dem is also a ,well I call him names ,he just needs removing.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Obviously you don't, and nor should I care about your posts, because I can't ever remember agreeing with any of them. And another thing, I was thinking to myself that this wasn't necessarily your worst thread, but you've let yourself down once again with yet another smart arse remark towards the end of your argument.

Sorry, mate - but who are you?

Since when are you the arbiter of anything?

I disagree strongly that Tasmania is a non-starter as far as long-term benefits. With the population of Australia growing rapidly everywhere, there's no reason to suggest that Tasmania won't be a big enough place to have an AFL team in the long term.

Tasmania may one day have a population large enough to support a side, but that's not the point.

The bottom line is that the AFL should target the fastest-growing areas, which is what it's doing.

We need to expand the code's audience - setting up a side in Tassie wouldn't do that.

There's no guarantee that the AFL will succeed in West Sydney. It took Sydney decades to establish themselves, and they still haven't set a foothold in the Western Suburbs.

Since when is it about guarantees?

There's never going to be a guarantee.

There was no guarantee that the Swans would find an audience.

There was no guarantee that the Brisbane side would find an audience.

But if we had failed to expand into NSW and Queensland, just because there were "no guarantees", the code would now be in a much weaker position.

 

[JoondalupJ]

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).

Rubbish, all that can be changed.

 

[sherrinorburley]

It makes perfect sense for a Tasmanian team as articles like these and many more to come point out. Ironic how attitudes like the OP is actually helping the Tassie cause with the exposed lack of facts. AD & his cronies with their media buddies/ego's are all that stand in the way for Tassie

GREG BARNS
May 12, 2008 12:00am

WHY is the AFL so reluctant to seriously entertain the prospect of an AFL team based in Tasmania rather than western Sydney or the Gold Coast?
Tasmania, with a population of 500,000, is twice the size of Geelong, and its people are passionate about Australian rules football.

Not only is Tasmania wedded solidly to AFL, but it has produced, and continues to produce, some of the greatest AFL players of all time such as St Kilda champion Daryl Baldock, triple Brownlow medallist Ian Stewart and modern day stars like Richmond's Matthew Richardson and Melbourne's Russell Robertson.

Follow our campaign to get a Tassie AFL team
It was only after relentless public pressure from the media and the Tasmanian Premier Paul Lennon in recent months that the AFL decided to allow Tasmania to put a bid on the table for one of the next two licences on offer.

But one gets a sense that AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou is simply paying lip service to Tasmania's lobbying, and is instead fully focused on the next two AFL teams coming from Sydney and the Gold Coast.

If the AFL is not taking Tasmania's bid for an AFL side seriously, it should be because to the average football supporter, it seems that the choice for the AFL is either take a big risk in banking on growing support in western Sydney and the Gold Coast on the one hand, or heading down the low-risk path of basing a team in a community that is already loyal to this brand of football.

In business terms, that choice can be put like this: build on the strength of your brand by expanding further into your established market, or throw caution to the wind and attempt to flog your product in a market already saturated with rival products.

The Swans have in part been able to establish a comfortable niche in Sydney.

With a population of almost two million, western Sydney is a different proposition.

This is the epicentre of rugby league, and soccer and rugby union are already gearing up to compete in this market. Rugby league teams like Penrith, Parramatta and West Tigers have firm roots in western Sydney.

Rugby union officials are looking at playing a Super 14 team out of Parramatta, and the A-League soccer competition is well down the path of establishing a team in western Sydney.

In short, the AFL has a real battle on its hands to get support in what is already a crowded sporting market.

Similar arguments could be made about the Gold Coast where all three codes of football compete in a market that is fast growing, but which still only has a population of less than a million people.

Contrast the positions of western Sydney and the Gold Coast with that of Tasmania.

The AFL is damned lucky that it has a virtual monopoly on football in Tasmania.

An AFL team based in Tasmania has a ready-made supporter base and does not have to worry about other football codes seeking to chip away at that base year in and year out.

The risk for the AFL if it does not take Tasmania seriously is that it will in fact be seen to have taken the Tasmanian AFL supporter for granted for too long.

Such a climate would prove fertile territory for soccer to take hold in the state.

Already A-League soccer, sensing the AFL's arrogant disdain for its Tasmanian followers, is making noises about inviting Tasmania to enter a team in the A-League.

Tasmania deserves to be rewarded for its unstinting support for AFL football.

If the AFL ignores this argument, it risks losing the cradle of so much of its talent.