Expansion Joondalup Falcons in the AFL?

[Bunk Moreland]

Pretty simple Google research for this discussion. 2021 population

Sydney	4,856,693​
Melbourne	4,778,716​
Brisbane	2,484,947​
Perth	2,150,403​
Adelaide	1,383,209​
Gold Coast–Tweed Heads	706,673​
Newcastle–Maitland	509,894​
Canberra–Queanbeyan	482,250​
Sunshine Coast	355,631​
Central Coast	340,203​
Wollongong	305,880​
Geelong	289,400​
Hobart	230,353​
Townsville	181,665​
Cairns	155,638​
Toowoomba	143,994​
Darwin	135,305​
Ballarat	111,702​
Bendigo	102,899​
Albury–Wodonga	97,676​

I maintain you want to be looking toward 1 million people before the AFL really looks to go there.

They're being absolutely bullied into Tassie, they have no interest in going there economically.

Geelong obviously stands out. No way they'd get a new club today. Probably a Melbourne club looking to relocate some home games. But 150 years of establishment and history goes a long way.

Perth could happen but is a some way off. Canberra mayyybe... but you'd want a fair but of growth. Maybe with a couple of games at Albury if there's also growth there.

 

[Coolangatta]

Pretty simple Google research for this discussion. 2021 population

Sydney	4,856,693​
Melbourne	4,778,716​
Brisbane	2,484,947​
Perth	2,150,403​
Adelaide	1,383,209​
Gold Coast–Tweed Heads	706,673​
Newcastle–Maitland	509,894​
Canberra–Queanbeyan	482,250​
Sunshine Coast	355,631​
Central Coast	340,203​
Wollongong	305,880​
Geelong	289,400​
Hobart	230,353​
Townsville	181,665​
Cairns	155,638​
Toowoomba	143,994​
Darwin	135,305​
Ballarat	111,702​
Bendigo	102,899​
Albury–Wodonga	97,676​

I maintain you want to be looking toward 1 million people before the AFL really looks to go there.

They're being absolutely bullied into Tassie, they have no interest in going there economically.

Geelong obviously stands out. No way they'd get a new club today. Probably a Melbourne club looking to relocate some home games. But 150 years of establishment and history goes a long way.

Perth could happen but is a some way off. Canberra mayyybe... but you'd want a fair but of growth. Maybe with a couple of games at Albury if there's also growth there.

Sure but then why did they add Gold Coast who only had 500k people? And if the answer is because about 3 million people live within an hour of the Gold Coast, then that changes the way we look at the numbers.

It has to be about who lives close enough to a population of around 500k.

You're spot on about Tassie, the whole state is what, around 550k, they don't live near millions of people, but they forced the AFLs hand.

They also have to factor in traditional versus non-traditional markets. If you look at the club funding numbers, 6 Victorian clubs are doing fine, that's about 800k people per club if you add Geelong who has the benefit of being close to the biggest footy market in Australia.

Can WA handle 3 footy clubs at that rate given that one is a juggernaut? Maybe, but the AFL could play it safe and not look at WA3 until Perth hits 3 million, unsure if they could replicate Melbourne's success, aided by tradition which WA3 probably won't have.

Then you've got Adelaide and Port, that's 650k per club, and they're doing alright.

Given that Brissy is still struggling at a population of 2.5m, even 1m is a risk in places like Newcastle, etc that aren't traditional.

Investing in areas that love footy who have populations of around 500-600k is probably going to work out better in the long-term than somewhere with a population of 1m+ that doesn't care about footy. GWS are struggling and Sydney has almost 5m people.

If the AFL can resist the temptation of more media rights money then maybe they could just leave it at 19 teams for a long time, as long as hopefully Canberra is next up. There'd be close to 1 million people living near and within Canberra by the 2040s. I'd be okay with Canberra not entering in the 2030s if the AFL deemed it too risky, but then they come in around the 2040s. I don't think GWS will be moved there because they do have high Auskick participation rates and lots of kids sporting the merchandise, so interest will grow there, you'd think.

 

[pz5151]

Joondalup (WA) - population 9,090:

Joondalup - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Burnie (Tas) - population 27,000
Launceston (Tas) - population 110,000
Hobart (Tas) - population 232,000
Kingston (Tas) - population 10,000

Joondalup can have an AFL team after Kingston gets one. Sounds reasonable.

Collingwood - population 9,179

 

[pz5151]

By 2040 the population of Melbourne will be 6.5mil

That's roughly double what it was in 1996. Evidence enough that it's high time we brought Fitzroy back.

I know you're joking but if you look at where the population is booming (outer West/North-West and far South-East), this will give any of the weaker clubs an opportunity to become larger. St Kilda should be lobbying the league to base themselves out further from the city (like Waverley) and the Bulldogs/North should be pushing to have a smaller ground built in those new regions. They could pick up that next generation of migrants as supporters in a generation if they play it smart. Hawthorn only became financially successful off the back of finding a specific location for themselves. It would also give the clubs some actual identity instead of the increasingly nondescript franchise identity that is becoming the norm.

 

[pz5151]

Instead of 9 games per round and 22 rounds…. OR 192 contests prior to finals; I am proposing 10 games for 19 rounds…. OR 190 contests prior to finals.
That 2 games loss across the entire season is nothing compared to the increased interest in Tas & WA. The increase value of TV rights into WA and Tas will offset the two game loss.

It's not as simple as that. The TV networks only have a certain number of games they would want to show a weekend. Free to air seem to be happy with 3 or 4 a weekend, Thursday night, Friday night, Saturday night and Sunday afternoon as a maximum. A shorter season with more games is a less attractive option for them.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Just being given an AFL licence pretty much guarantees you 20k members especially in a footy state.
Port Adelaide have gone from 3k members to 50k plus being in a national comp.
Collingwood, Richmond etc have gone from 10k odd members in the VFL days to 100k because they are in the national comp.
A third club in WA won't have any problems getting a membership whether that be another club made up out of nothing or an existing club like West Perth.
Do we need another Franchise here? Don't really care to be honest but if it was West Perth Trading as the Joondalup Falcons I would sign up tomorrow.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Which is why I don't think there'll be a WA3 or SA3.

Tasmania, Canberra, NT/NQLD, Newcastle, Sunshine Coast, and New Zealand are markets that could, in theory, attract new fans, though I'm happy to hear feedback on why I'm wrong about that.

WA3 and SA3 would just redistribute the existing market, though that's not to say they wouldn't work because you can possibly poach tens of thousands of supporters from big clubs who have fans that can't see their team play.

And if the AFL can't break new ground in all the markets I mentioned, then they may need a 22nd or 24th team to even up the odds. I don't say 20th because Canberra should be considered long before WA3, if ever.

This point of attracting newer fans is ridiculous. GWS and Gold Coast have shown that you can't just plonk a team where people are and expect them to be successful it's like saying - put a team in Shanghai they have 26 million people! Think of how many fans we would get!

You can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

Instead, you have to go where the fans are - Perth. Plain and simple.

 

[Coolangatta]

I don't see why they couldn't just keep the competition to 20 teams permanently (still have your rivalry round, magic round, etc.) Develop the state leagues into professional leagues, get good TV rights deals, and once each state league (WAFL, SANFL, VFL, bring back NEAFL) have clubs who all have AFL standard grounds, facilities, etc, they can be promoted into the AFL.

Random playoff like VFL champ v SANFL champ, WAFL champ v NEAFL champ, winners promoted, losers playoff for third promotion, relegate three AFL clubs. Instead of creating new plastic franchises, use existing teams with history and tradition. Though, NT Thunder coming back as NT Crocs in the state leagues would be cool, and maybe for growing areas that don't have state licenses they could apply, but make the stadium aspect a deal breaker.

It'd take 30-50 years to make it happen but is it not possible?

I think it's better than creating a second division and filling it with teams with no history.

 

[Coolangatta]

This point of attracting newer fans is ridiculous. GWS and Gold Coast have shown that you can't just plonk a team where people are and expect them to be successful it's like saying - put a team in Shanghai they have 26 million people! Think of how many fans we would get!

You can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

Instead, you have to go where the fans are - Perth. Plain and simple.

You wouldn't put a team in Shanghai because it's the AFL. Granted, I did mention New Zealand but they're our little brother/neighbour, though I wouldn't lose any sleep over them never having a team.

Trial international round again and try and grow the game overseas, but they can have their own leagues, competitions, etc. In a day where we're long gone maybe they could have a world tournament for Aussie Rules.

Also, GWS and Gold Coast are long-term investments, Cochrane himself said something about the Suns being half way through their phase. There are a lot of kids in these areas who are interested in footy, so it's too early for any of us to say whether they were a waste of time or not.

 

[RedV3x]

Pretty simple Google research for this discussion. 2021 population

Sydney	4,856,693​
Melbourne	4,778,716​
Brisbane	2,484,947​
Perth	2,150,403​

Perth could happen but is a some way off. Canberra mayyybe... but you'd want a fair but of growth.

On population Br2 and Syd3 would be miles in front.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

On population Br2 and Syd3 would be miles in front.

IF the current clubs were at capacity. GWS in particular is nowhere near it.

 

[Tigerlaird]

Pretty simple Google research for this discussion. 2021 population

Sydney	4,856,693​
Melbourne	4,778,716​
Brisbane	2,484,947​
Perth	2,150,403​
Adelaide	1,383,209​
Gold Coast–Tweed Heads	706,673​
Newcastle–Maitland	509,894​
Canberra–Queanbeyan	482,250​
Sunshine Coast	355,631​
Central Coast	340,203​
Wollongong	305,880​
Geelong	289,400​
Hobart	230,353​
Townsville	181,665​
Cairns	155,638​
Toowoomba	143,994​
Darwin	135,305​
Ballarat	111,702​
Bendigo	102,899​
Albury–Wodonga	97,676​

I maintain you want to be looking toward 1 million people before the AFL really looks to go there.

They're being absolutely bullied into Tassie, they have no interest in going there economically.

Geelong obviously stands out. No way they'd get a new club today. Probably a Melbourne club looking to relocate some home games. But 150 years of establishment and history goes a long way.

Perth could happen but is a some way off. Canberra mayyybe... but you'd want a fair but of growth. Maybe with a couple of games at Albury if there's also growth there.

If Geelong with that population can have one whole team, then Adelaide can have three teams.

 

[WilloTree]

Interestingly, Freo's membership is up from 50.302 to 56,105. Optus holds 60,000

Freo will be full in a couple of years.

You can't buy a seat to Eagles games. The wait-list is the length of the Swan River.

If we're looking at 2033, WA 3 is a no-brainer.

 

[RedV3x]

IF the current clubs were at capacity. GWS in particular is nowhere near it.

"On population Br2 and Syd3 would be miles in front."

 

[RedV3x]

Freo will be full in a couple of years.
You can't buy a seat to Eagles games. The wait-list is the length of the Swan River.

So a lot of people looking at the WAFL

 

[Purple Suit]

Sure but then why did they add Gold Coast who only had 500k people? And if the answer is because about 3 million people live within an hour of the Gold Coast, then that changes the way we look at the numbers.

It has to be about who lives close enough to a population of around 500k.

You're spot on about Tassie, the whole state is what, around 550k, they don't live near millions of people, but they forced the AFLs hand.

They also have to factor in traditional versus non-traditional markets. If you look at the club funding numbers, 6 Victorian clubs are doing fine, that's about 800k people per club if you add Geelong who has the benefit of being close to the biggest footy market in Australia.

Can WA handle 3 footy clubs at that rate given that one is a juggernaut? Maybe, but the AFL could play it safe and not look at WA3 until Perth hits 3 million, unsure if they could replicate Melbourne's success, aided by tradition which WA3 probably won't have.

Then you've got Adelaide and Port, that's 650k per club, and they're doing alright.

Given that Brissy is still struggling at a population of 2.5m, even 1m is a risk in places like Newcastle, etc that aren't traditional.

Investing in areas that love footy who have populations of around 500-600k is probably going to work out better in the long-term than somewhere with a population of 1m+ that doesn't care about footy. GWS are struggling and Sydney has almost 5m people.

If the AFL can resist the temptation of more media rights money then maybe they could just leave it at 19 teams for a long time, as long as hopefully Canberra is next up. There'd be close to 1 million people living near and within Canberra by the 2040s. I'd be okay with Canberra not entering in the 2030s if the AFL deemed it too risky, but then they come in around the 2040s. I don't think GWS will be moved there because they do have high Auskick participation rates and lots of kids sporting the merchandise, so interest will grow there, you'd think.

The issue is there are 10 teams in Vic so 4 miss out and are only viable when they are good onfield. 500K per team in a footy state just works but it should probably be 600-800K minimum. Eventually population growth will catch up but you can't keep just adding teams forever.

WA could easily handle another considering the waiting list at the Eagles. Especially if they just make it Perth or target North of the River considering Freo is mainly South. If they did it within the next 3 years they might have a few WC members jumping ship based on where they are likely to be at with the rebuild.

I'd be bringing in WA3 with Tassie so TV rights funds the Tassie team and the AFL only need to fund the WA team for a short period before they are standing on their own two feet or the WAFL just fund the team and collect the money in the future as per WC / Freo.

 

[Coolangatta]

The issue is there are 10 teams in Vic so 4 miss out and are only viable when they are good onfield. 500K per team in a footy state just works but it should probably be 600-800K minimum. Eventually population growth will catch up but you can't keep just adding teams forever.

WA could easily handle another considering the waiting list at the Eagles. Especially if they just make it Perth or target North of the River considering Freo is mainly South. If they did it within the next 3 years they might have a few WC members jumping ship based on where they are likely to be at with the rebuild.

I'd be bringing in WA3 with Tassie so TV rights funds the Tassie team and the AFL only need to fund the WA team for a short period before they are standing on their own two feet or the WAFL just fund the team and collect the money in the future as per WC / Freo.

Maybe, but WC members jumping ship isn't a guarantee, it's still a risk.

Canberra will be over 600k by 2033 after the GWS deal expires, that's if you include the greater region. But then you'll have Perth with over 2.4m by then, there's your 800k per club in a footy state. I still prefer Canberra as it takes us closer to a national comp, and Perth isn't a gimme and it'll be a head **** deciding where to put them and what to call them.

If it's true that a fair chunk of Eagles supporters support the Falcons then they could work as "Joondalup Falcons" as a north of the river team still playing out of Optus, but they'd need to use WP colours and be affiliated with them: probably better to just call them West Perth so that you get those X % of Falcon-Eagles supporters more likely to jump ship as Joondalup isn't 100% like-for-like.

Then again, you look at Adelaide who started from scratch and think to yourself, something like Perth Quokkas could in the long-run get a bigger support base than a team with specific ties to one WAFL club. Would Norwood have been as big as the Crows at AFL level today? Who knows.

 

[Purple Suit]

Maybe, but WC members jumping ship isn't a guarantee, it's still a risk.

Canberra will be over 600k by 2033 after the GWS deal expires, that's if you include the greater region. But then you'll have Perth with over 2.4m by then, there's your 800k per club in a footy state. I still prefer Canberra as it takes us closer to a national comp, and Perth isn't a gimme and it'll be a head * deciding where to put them and what to call them.

If it's true that a fair chunk of Eagles supporters support the Falcons then they could work as "Joondalup Falcons" as a north of the river team still playing out of Optus, but they'd need to use WP colours and be affiliated with them: probably better to just call them West Perth so that you get those X % of Falcon-Eagles supporters more likely to jump ship as Joondalup isn't 100% like-for-like.

Then again, you look at Adelaide who started from scratch and think to yourself, something like Perth Quokkas could in the long-run get a bigger support base than a team with specific ties to one WAFL club. Would Norwood have been as big as the Crows at AFL level today? Who knows.

Canberra isn't a footy state, it'll be worse than the Gold Coast. They don't pack out the few games they get a year at the moment.

I recon WA3 would be the safest bet for a team to succeed unless they decide to relocate a team, that would be a disaster.

 

[Coolangatta]

Canberra isn't a footy state, it'll be worse than the Gold Coast. They don't pack out the few games they get a year at the moment.

I recon WA3 would be the safest bet for a team to succeed unless they decide to relocate a team, that would be a disaster.

Well, we'll see.

The only thing we can be certain of is that there'll be a 20th team because the AFL will want more money from the next media rights deal.

New media rights deal starts in 2025, Tassie should come in 2027, so I'd expect to see the same thing for the 20th team.

New media deal starts 2032, team 20 enters somewhere from 2032-4.

edit: Perth YeahNahs coached by Ben Cousins could be a force.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Canberra isn't a footy state, it'll be worse than the Gold Coast. They don't pack out the few games they get a year at the moment.

I recon WA3 would be the safest bet for a team to succeed unless they decide to relocate a team, that would be a disaster.

FFS, I'm sick of this view. Canberra's not a footy state to the same extent as Victoria or WA, but we're not a rugby state either.

As has been pointed out already, Canberra likely leans to AFL, despite not even having a real team to support (GWS doesn't count). Gold Coast had a tinge of Aussie Rules because of the expats moving up. Canberra was founded by Aussie Rules fans. We would be immediately more successful than the Gold Coast.

We're not packing out every game? Neither's Hobart. We still sell out a third of our games and get higher crowds than Western Sydney. Crowds would be much higher for a team we actually cared about.

 

[blueboy25]

The Joondalup falcons could work but to have them playing a Optus stadium straight away wouldn't be great. They would need to upgrade Joondalup Arena if they could and that's a big if. A $25k stadium would be perfect.

Would also to add an events stop to the train line between Joondalup and Currambine stations.

I'm not going to switch from Carlton to Joondalup but I would try and head along to a few games a season which I think a lot of people would do.

 

[eastfreo75]

Maybe, but WC members jumping ship isn't a guarantee, it's still a risk.

Canberra will be over 600k by 2033 after the GWS deal expires, that's if you include the greater region. But then you'll have Perth with over 2.4m by then, there's your 800k per club in a footy state. I still prefer Canberra as it takes us closer to a national comp, and Perth isn't a gimme and it'll be a head * deciding where to put them and what to call them.

If it's true that a fair chunk of Eagles supporters support the Falcons then they could work as "Joondalup Falcons" as a north of the river team still playing out of Optus, but they'd need to use WP colours and be affiliated with them: probably better to just call them West Perth so that you get those X % of Falcon-Eagles supporters more likely to jump ship as Joondalup isn't 100% like-for-like.

Then again, you look at Adelaide who started from scratch and think to yourself, something like Perth Quokkas could in the long-run get a bigger support base than a team with specific ties to one WAFL club. Would Norwood have been as big as the Crows at AFL level today? Who knows.

Not all of the East and South Fremantle fans supported the Dockers and I expect the same with West Perth fans.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

"On population Br2 and Syd3 would be miles in front."

Hence the stupidity of looking at population. As i said, doesn't matter if there are a billion campaigners in Sydney or Brisbane, they're not going to the footy.

 

[eastfreo75]

Hence the stupidity of looking at population. As i said, doesn't matter if there are a billion campaigners in Sydney or Brisbane, they're not going to the footy.

Would you support WA3 team or just stay with the Blues?

 

[Purple Suit]

FFS, I'm sick of this view. Canberra's not a footy state to the same extent as Victoria or WA, but we're not a rugby state either.

As has been pointed out already, Canberra likely leans to AFL, despite not even having a real team to support (GWS doesn't count). Gold Coast had a tinge of Aussie Rules because of the expats moving up. Canberra was founded by Aussie Rules fans. We would be immediately more successful than the Gold Coast.

We're not packing out every game? Neither's Hobart. We still sell out a third of our games and get higher crowds than Western Sydney. Crowds would be much higher for a team we actually cared about.

It's not so much Canberra vs Gold Coast but Canberra vs Tasmania. They seem to get more supporters but have there own issues. I don't think the AFL would want to have two more struggling teams, they might need to add a team with the best chance of succeeding over another low drawing team. An extra game should increase tv money which might offset the 1st team.

I would have thought Canberra could be in line for a big bash team first over an AFL team. Having uneven teams in that league won't matter due to the scheduling and shorter turn around.