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

[Ricardo]

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.

Yes i have read the thread, one survey means little, very hard to read into that, but i will say their membership wouldn't be a big problem, i shouldn't have included it, if they can generate the same as Geelong ($600k @ 22k average) than they'll be in a better position than a lot of Vic clubs.

If the AFL weren't eyeing off the GC and WS than Tassie may get a team, but the odds are stacked against them and with the big $$ and future growth of both the GC and WS i'd do the same as the AFL execs, doesn't mean to say Tasmania don't deserve it, just IMO they can't compete well into the future, 30-50 years down the track.

I think Hearts to Hearts made some good points as well in regards to corporate support, attracting premium $$ from corporate boxes.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

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.

Geelong is 75km from Melbourne (a city of 3,800,000 people) and plays three home games in Melbourne. The Cats have also been around for almost a century and a half so they have a very established fan base.

Fremantle is a suburb of Perth (a city of 1,500,000). It's only 19km south west of the CBD. Like West Coast it plays its game at Subiaco Oval (4km west of the CBD).

Your comparison is poor.

 

[9Monkeys]

I understand the economics, and on them alone yes West-Sydney and the Gold Coast make perfect sense for the AFL (and their bottom line).

That said, I'd love to see a Tasmanian team in an expanded 18 team competition (with GC) on traditional grounds. Theirs is a proud football history and it would be great to see them represented at the highest level.

 

[rotto]

The problem for the AFL is that their is too many victorian teams needing to be supported by the AFL. Rather have, a team from Tasmania than a struggling team drawing on the resources of the AFL. Its a real joke that alot of Vic teams cant get aleast 20k crowd to a game vs an interstate team.

Also, its a total shame that all Victoria teams have poker machines taking advantage of the disadvantaged in society. Its the Victoria attitude that has held back a team from Tassie. A Tassie team is more finanically viable than 3 or 4 Vic teams.

Its a national comp not the extend VFL.

 

[thegreenmachine]

Sorry, mate - but who are you?

Since when are you the arbiter of anything?

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.

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.

I'm a noone, just a bigfooty member like yourself. I was just commenting on your performances on this site that's all. Though mind you, I have to give credit where it's due, the points you make aren't that bad. True, the AFL are looking to expand into new areas and into areas where the population is growing fast. Look at the Gold Coast in particular. As I've said, I'm all for that and the AFL should be commended for looking to try and grow the code in new areas, even in west Sydney. And I'll say this again, I'll be hoping that these new clubs will succeed for the good of our game.

Geelong is 75km from Melbourne (a city of 3,800,000 people) and plays three home games in Melbourne. The Cats have also been around for almost a century and a half so they have a very established fan base.

Fremantle is a suburb of Perth (a city of 1,500,000). It's only 19km south west of the CBD. Like West Coast it plays its game at Subiaco Oval (4km west of the CBD).

Your comparison is poor.

Well sorry but we'll have to disagree that Tasmania isn't big enough. And are you sure that Fremantle is a suburb of Perth or is it a town?

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Rubbish, all that can be changed.

While most those particular problems can be changed, they are very real and not "rubbish". But even with good management, there's next to no chance of tassie raising the money required; and I suspect wouldn't be able to raise Fitzroy-style money because of much wider issues that have nothing to do with current (and previous) inept management of football in the state.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

Well sorry but we'll have to disagree that Tasmania isn't big enough. And are you sure that Fremantle is a suburb of Perth or is it a town?

There is the "City of Fremantle" which is a local government locality along with the other 29 "Cities", "Towns", and "Shires" which make up Perth's metropolitan area.

Fremantle was a separate distinct city decades ago (due to the main seaport being there) but it's just a suburb of Perth these days. A suburb rich with history, restuarants and high housing prices, but a suburb all the same.

The vast majority of Fremantle Football Club supporters would have never lived in Fremantle.

 

[sherrinorburley]

The problem for the AFL is that their is too many victorian teams needing to be supported by the AFL. Rather have, a team from Tasmania than a struggling team drawing on the resources of the AFL. Its a real joke that alot of Vic teams cant get aleast 20k crowd to a game vs an interstate team.

Also, its a total shame that all Victoria teams have poker machines taking advantage of the disadvantaged in society. Its the Victoria attitude that has held back a team from Tassie. A Tassie team is more finanically viable than 3 or 4 Vic teams.

Its a national comp not the extend VFL.

I think you will find most Victorian teams would prefer to travel to Tassie instead of double time to NSW/Queensland.

The money the AFL have made from all the clubs should be enough reason to give them(all existing clubs) authority where the next license(s) go to.

Not wasting ___loads of cash on a second Sydney side which will take members away from Sydney 1. Same with GC and Brisbane.
It makes no sense for the addition of these teams.

A Tasmanian team makes perfect sense.

 

[cos789]

The vast majority of Fremantle Football Club supporters would have never lived in Fremantle.

But there are actually a large number Freo supporters living in Fremantle .
How many people live in Perth (CBD) ? Even less follow football .

There is the "City of Fremantle" which is a local government locality along with the other 29 "Cities", "Towns", and "Shires" which make up Perth's metropolitan area.

There are vast differences in city sizes . Fremantle is a city and surrounds .
Perth is virtually CBD with no suurounds under the Perth banner .
Freo actually is a living city , with a lot more going for it .
Perth is virtually deserted out of business hours .

Fremantle was a separate distinct city decades ago (due to the main seaport being there) but it's just a suburb of Perth these days. A suburb rich with history, restuarants and high housing prices, but a suburb all the same.

Biggest joke I've ever heard .

Regardless of that , I don't know what people are arguing about .
TAssie is a football state and the same reason we have AFL teams in WA
and SA apply . Unfortunately there is more to be gained (and more to be risked ) by expanding into the GC and consolidating Sydney at this time .

.

 

[Gibbke]

Quite frankly I couldn't give a stuff what the motives are behind Andy's decision.

Why do you think league fans and administrators are so terrified of new AFL sides entering their territory? I can guarantee you it's not just a marketing ploy to bring people back to their game as some have suggested. The fear that they are showing is genuine.

As I've said many times the support for rugby league in NSW especially is very soft as evidenced most vivdly by low crowd figures. TV ratings do not demonstrate strong followings. People DO change their sport of choice. I did and so did many of my friends. If a better option is available then eventually people will go for it. Why is that so hard for people to understand?

I am beginning to think you are a RL troll in disguise Gibbke.

Takes a rugby league administrator to know one, I guess...isn't that what you are? Or did you stare one down face to face and see the "fear" in his eyes...?

And if you don't give a stuff about Andy's motives, then your head is in the sand, bud...if you didn't barrack for the arm-chair ride, hefty concessions, draft priority, bought for $10 Sydney Swans, you'd understand how difficult it is for every other team to survive, and you might look a little more cynically at the administration of this very big and very corporatised professional sporting competition...

By the way, RL trolls don't do this:
www.tassiedevils.moonfruit.com

 

[Gibbke]

Of course it's about TV rights.

I think it's a bit rich for you to be so condescending and then come up with that as your big 'intelligent' explanation.

What other great mysteries do you plan unravel today?

Worst of all, it's premised on the idea that people aren't aware of the significance of the TV rights deal - that that's some dark secret that only clever little you knows about.

There's nothing wrong with the AFL wanting the biggest pay day possible when those rights get renegotiated. Good luck to them. That TV money is what is going to allow us to keep smashing the rival codes.

I'm condescending? I'm answering you in your language. And you're the one telling us all you're a Footy Jedi on a mission to enlighten the rest of us plebs, you silly f###! A secret? I've said so many times that the answer is staring people in the face and isn't being acknowledged, that yes, it does get a bit long-winded and boring, doesn't it...

I didn't see a lot of code smashing last night...although I do know the AFL charged 3-4 times more than League did for their rights...

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I'm condescending? I'm answering you in your language. And you're the one telling us all you're a Footy Jedi on a mission to enlighten the rest of us plebs, you silly f###! A secret? I've said so many times that the answer is staring people in the face and isn't being acknowledged, that yes, it does get a bit long-winded and boring, doesn't it...

Who has rejected the idea that TV rights are central to the issue?

I think you're rebutting an argument that no-one has actually made.

It's a given that TV rights are a massive factor. It's not a new idea. It goes without saying.

I didn't see a lot of code smashing last night...although I do know the AFL charged 3-4 times more than League did for their rights...

Look at the bigger picture.

AFL is dominant on every metric.

 

[Gibbke]

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....

I believe the opposite, actually! It should be etched in stone from the very start exactly what the roster will do each year. 22 games, 11 at home, 5/6 split alternating each year, strict alternation of finals or alternatively say from the start that only one region gets them, and make exceptions only because of things such as ground redevelopment (another story)...

The big killer in Tassie is the way the footy administrations change their minds every 5 minutes...you could fill a book on the different directions the SW League took in its 15 season history, and the Devils of today function nothing like they did in 2001...cutting a long story short, the North has dropped the Devils like a spud, and both because and as a result, all of the matches are played in Hobart (curtain raisers you need to be a Hawk member for, and sold games to the NW Coast really don't count)...

So split the games, and do not change things, and I believe you won't see people default to their biases...they might even see the team as Tassie and not Expanded Hobart...the trouble is noone ever sticks to progressive change down there in regards to the rivalry, they just let it disintegrate every time...

 

[Gibbke]

Who has rejected the idea that TV rights are central to the issue?

I think you're rebutting an argument that no-one has actually made.

It's a given that TV rights are a massive factor. It's not a new idea. It goes without saying.

Look at the bigger picture.

AFL is dominant on every metric.

Go and reread the last couple of pages of threads. There are many who deny tv has anything to do with it. You'll see many people who will tell you that the reasons for expansion are promotion, a demographic just waiting to be converted as the AFL dances on the bones of every other sport, all sorts of crap...

The AFL is not dominant on every metric, Footy Jedi, not when the NRL GF outrates the AFL every year in Sydney and Brisbane, and Seven won't touch Nine's League Doubleheader on Friday with a pole bigger than the plastic lightsaber you've got stuck up your arse...

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Go and reread the last couple of pages of threads. There are many who deny tv has anything to do with it.

Who says that?

I'd be surprised if you can point to someone who actually insists that TV has nothing to do with it.

The AFL is not dominant on every metric, Footy Jedi, not when the NRL GF outrates the AFL every year in Sydney and Brisbane, and Seven won't touch Nine's League Doubleheader on Friday with a pole bigger than the plastic lightsaber you've got stuck up your arse...

On any national metric.

Of course rugby out-rates AFL in Sydney and Brisbane.

But Australia-wide, the AFL is number one in every department.

I'm not suggesting that AFL is number one in NSW and Queensland. But nationally it is.

 

[Gibbke]

I'd be surprised...

On any national metric.

Well, I won't hit you for not qualifying metric, just did something similar in another thread myself, but as for the other bit, go browsing and set faces for stun...

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Well, I won't hit you for not qualifying metric,

I think it's pretty clear that's what I was talking about, given my previous sentence was "look at the bigger picture".

And on any national metric, AFL smashes the other leagues.

but as for the other bit, go browsing and set faces for stun...

It's your argument, mate.

Why should I go digging for your evidence?

If it exists, you should be able to point to it.

And don't you mean "set phasers"?

 

[9Monkeys]

... cold shower boys.

 

[FootyJunkie]

Gold Coast is laughable...Western Sydney is just plain dumb

AFL just have $$$$ in their eyes

Tasmanian Devils or whatever you would call them, would get heaps of support if it entered the big league

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Gold Coast is laughable...Western Sydney is just plain dumb

AFL just have $$$$ in their eyes

What's wrong with the AFL being motivated by profit?

If the AFL wasn't flush with cash, who would subsidise stuggling Victorian clubs?

The AFL being loaded is a good thing. They should do everything they can to maximise their TV rights revenue.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Gold Coast is laughable...Western Sydney is just plain dumb

AFL just have $$$$ in their eyes

Tasmanian Devils or whatever you would call them, would get heaps of support if it entered the big league

The challenge would be to sell annual memberships. It seems that every club needs their membership to exceed 30,000.

For Tasmania to get that many paying members would be equivalent to a combined West Coast Fremantle membership of 120,000 (no double ups) and Tasmania would need to draw from across the state compared to a single major metropolitan zone.

When comparing support zone population people need to understand that Tasmania has distinctly separate centres. They do not have the population within a comfortable commuting distance and also have no viable public transport system. Any event that has a social aspect to it would require an overnight stay for a significant part of the target market.

 

[Wallaby]

A quick couple of questions to any tassies on here: -

1. Has the Tassie team in the VFL got much local support/interest down there?

2. Has the VFL Tassie team had a detrimental effect on the local comp(s)?

 

[kenrosewall]

A quick couple of questions to any tassies on here: -

1. Has the Tassie team in the VFL got much local support/interest down there?

2. Has the VFL Tassie team had a detrimental effect on the local comp(s)?

Wallaby, I suggest you got to the Tassie Footy thread and look at the discussion on the Devils.

1. There is support in the south, none in the north.

2. It's divided people's interests which is never a good thing for administration of lower level leagues.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

A quick couple of questions to any tassies on here: -

1. Has the Tassie team in the VFL got much local support/interest down there?

2. Has the VFL Tassie team had a detrimental effect on the local comp(s)?

1. It did have initially. Thanks to centralisation it has none in the north, and thanks to the constant readjustment of what the club means it has dropped in the south as well; but there is still support there.

2. The VFL side was created via the destruction of the (struggling) state league, so it was born of a detrimental effect. Since then with centralisation players have been ripped out of the northern league, and the VFL side has taken away much the little media attention local footy got in the south - as well as taking the best players out of the competition.

3. The VFL side and any prospective AFL side are completely different things and, while some things can be learned regarding the snubbing of half the state and the ineptitude of football management, not much can be read into the decline of the Devils support - other perhaps than the novelty factor has worn off, which may also affect an AFL side, especially when it comes to membership and the numbers prepared to travel.

 

[Gibbke]

1) I think it's pretty clear that's what I was talking about, given my previous sentence was "look at the bigger picture".
And on any national metric, AFL smashes the other leagues.
2) If it exists, you should be able to point to it.
3) And don't you mean "set phasers"?

1) The sign of a weak argument is not being clear in the first place. Quite easily, the first time you brought up the words "any metric" makes you think "hang on, what about GF ratings in each city", stuff like that. Any impartial observer would see this...

2) I already have. I'm not linking up every goddamned thread to this one when it's only 3 clicks away for you - I told you where it is, and in any case, if you're so authorative on the subject, why haven't you done this already...?

3)...you're joking, aren't you...? Let me guess - in addition to not bothering reading other posts, you don't watch tv either...?