Next To Re-Locate?

[- PC -]

''They are not as advanced as the Gold Coast but it is not a matter of if we have a second team in Sydney it is a matter of when."

From the ''conference'' thread

Either a new team bringing the competition to 18 teams or 2 teams move , 1 to the Gold Coast and 1 to Sydney

Which Melbourne based team would be the most likeliest to be ''asked'' to move to Sydney? My bet would be for obvious reasons the Western Bulldogs

There is already a supporter base on colour and name scheme alone with the Canterbury Bulldogs. There are no geographical ties to any 1 region ( which is why Melbournes stand alone branding was brilliant)

Hawthorn and St Kilda have worked the Tassie market ( why oh why doesnt the AFL bring a team out of Tassie????)

Who, if the competition stays at 16 teams will be asked to move to Sydney?

 

[Rockster]

just how has Richmond worked the tassie market , i cant recall them playing any "home" games in tassie

 

[- PC -]

just how has Richmond worked the tassie market , i cant recall them playing any "home" games in tassie

Cheers edited. Was thinking Tassie Tigers

 

[Mofra]

Of course people are going to suggest the Bulldogs, but does anyone seriously think the AFL will happily give up their presence in the fastest growing region of Victoria & hand it to soccer on a platter? The AFL knows who their biggest threat is, and it is not Rugby League.

 

[lionbear]

Bulldogs are setting them selves up with ground re developments and so forth, they will be a Victorian clubs for many years to come because they will eventually be the team for the whole of the Western Suburbs.

I don't know who the two teams who will be in trouble are going to be. If Kangaroos do manage to become a strong Victorian club, well who is in the barrel next could be anyone.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Of course people are going to suggest the Bulldogs, but does anyone seriously think the AFL will happily give up their presence in the fastest growing region of Victoria & hand it to soccer on a platter? The AFL knows who their biggest threat is, and it is not Rugby League.

The biggest threat to the Doggies out West is Essendon.They have the Brand and exposure to be a serious threat to "own" the west.

 

[Mofra]

LionBear you've nailed that is the problem. St Kilda's relocation to Frankston will almost guarantee their survival once they start developing facilities out there - another fast growing area they can try to exploit (also noted their "loss" was largely on the back of writedowns & provisions so it doesn't reflect their 07 cashflow).
Richmond's move into Craigieburn will set them up, obviously the big 3 are safe, Hawthorn are posting record profits & have fantastic facilities in a growth corridor. Melbourne are improving and in addition they have a historical link with the original VFL.

It will be tough to see who struggles next, but aside from North the other Melb clubs are improving off field.

 

[lionbear]

It will be tough to see who struggles next, but aside from North the other Melb clubs are improving off field.

Thats a good call Mofra, I think one thing is guaranteed over the next couple of years, we are going to know how many true supporters North have because if they don't get on now, they never will.

 

[Peel Supporter]

"Keep your eye on the red and the blue"

Melbourne members voted to merge in 1996.
While other clubs are building a "home" bases, Melbourne are still training at the Junction Oval and have poor membership and crowds. The name is their strength, but by all the other standards they are at the business end of the food chain, I think. Not wishing it on them.

 

[Demonheart]

"Keep your eye on the red and the blue"

Melbourne members voted to merge in 1996.
While other clubs are building a "home" bases, Melbourne are still training at the Junction Oval and have poor membership and crowds. The name is their strength, but by all the other standards they are at the business end of the food chain, I think. Not wishing it on them.

Wow, just wow. You managed to get almost all of your facts wrong, impressive effort.

Melbourne members voted for a takeover.
Melbourne is moving into new training facilities which will be as good as any other club.
Melbourne had a record membership in 2007 in one of their worst on field performances over the last decade.

Keep up the good work

 

[Rob]

Whoever the biggest basketcase is at the time.

 

[Whispers]

There doesn't need to be any more mergers or re-locations. In a few years time, due to WA's developments and population growth south of Perth, I reckon they could secure a team down their to make it a three club state. I can't see Sydney having a second team because people aren't as interesting AFL up there. They basically jumped on the bandwagon when the Swannies won in 05, hence the brain explosion from the AFL to transfer a club up their.

Gold Coast is still alive however. Introducing Southport would make much sense, well, atleast more sense then re-locating North Melbourne or any other Victorian club. They have finacial support, could easily create a supporter base and a growing population, not to mention access to money and tourism in the region. Why doesn't the AFL spend the $100 million on creating a Southport or Gold Coast FC?

My suggestion is to invest and create not transfer and re-locate.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The reality is that it will be whoever is down at the wrong time and lack the supporter numbers to put up more than token resistance.

All teams are going to promote their viability and act all confident but behind board room doors, there is and will be some hair pulling going on.

Now that the Roos have stood firm, the Dogs and Dees might feel under more pressure than ever so are moving to promote their brand and market heavily.

No team is going to roll over and die for quite a while yet IMO.

The AFL could announce a viability criteria like the NRL did I suppose. The NRL wanted to cut 3 teams and it was a race to prove viability. Wests and Balmain were in the gun so merged collecting incentives along the way. Norths and Manly also merged. Souths were left without a merger partner and on the bottom of the viability ladder. History will not be much of a factor ... Souths were booted with little regard albeit temporarily. In the 80s the ARL wanted to cut a team, Cronulla warded them off, Wests went to court to prevent it and then third in line Newtown disappeared without a whimper because the plaster covering the cracks meant they hadn't the strength to fight.

The problem for the AFL if they start removing concessions and announce a viability criteria, is that rather than trap the Roos under the criteria, they may well trap a couple of other teams when they have no intention of removing 3 clubs. You may find another club not as uncomfortable gets caught out as the clubs who know they are in the gun artificially inflate their viability leading up to any deadline and suddenly they 'appear' to be on the bottom of the viability ladder.

This has a long way to go yet.

 

[Whispers]

The reality is that it will be whoever is down at the wrong time and lack the supporter numbers to put up more than token resistance.

All teams are going to promote their viability and act all confident but behind board room doors, there is and will be some hair pulling going on.

Now that the Roos have stood firm, the Dogs and Dees might feel under more pressure than ever so are moving to promote their brand and market heavily.

No team is going to roll over and die for quite a while yet IMO.

The AFL could announce a viability criteria like the NRL did I suppose. The NRL wanted to cut 3 teams and it was a race to prove viability. Wests and Balmain were in the gun so merged collecting incentives along the way. Norths and Manly also merged. Souths were left without a merger partner and on the bottom of the viability ladder. History will not be much of a factor ... Souths were booted with little regard albeit temporarily. In the 80s the ARL wanted to cut a team, Cronulla warded them off, Wests went to court to prevent it and then third in line Newtown disappeared without a whimper because the plaster covering the cracks meant they hadn't the strength to fight.

The problem for the AFL if they start removing concessions and announce a viability criteria, is that rather than trap the Roos under the criteria, they may well trap a couple of other teams when they have no intention of removing 3 clubs. You may find another club not as uncomfortable gets caught out as the clubs who know they are in the gun artificially inflate their viability leading up to any deadline and suddenly they 'appear' to be on the bottom of the viability ladder.

This has a long way to go yet.

You're good....

 

[- PC -]

Another quality post TODN

I think the NSL/SA league also did the viability test.

 

[Tas]

The biggest threat to the Doggies out West is Essendon.They have the Brand and exposure to be a serious threat to "own" the west.

Geelong is also targeting Western suburbs as they are central communities between Geelong and Melbourne which can support their games at either location.

It is harder for South, East and Northern suburbs to be financial members of Geelong.

 

[Portia]

The Melbourne Melbournes would have to be the most likely club to get shunted off to somewhere else.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

There is already a supporter base on colour and name scheme alone with the Canterbury Bulldogs. There are no geographical ties to any 1 region ( which is why Melbournes stand alone branding was brilliant)

You really think that using an existing NRL brand would endear the club to people in Sydney? More likely they would ignore the Footscray/Western Bulldog history, and see them as leeching off a successful club.

There are two very good reasons why the Bulldogs are safe.
1) Financially, they're getting their house in order.
2) Eddie won't let the AFL hand over the whole of the western suburbs to Essendon.

The fact that the AFL didn't manage to kill us off also means they might do a rethink, and look at actually expanding the competition rather than killing clubs and looking to replace them. If anything, the likes of Melbourne and the Bulldogs are more secure now than they were on Wednesday - because by Friday morning the AFL would have otherwise started on their next target.

 

[maroon and blue]

When you think of it, we are fixated with diminishing teams in Vic, to create teams interstate. But why? Is this old thinking? Melbourne is tipped to overtake Sydney as the major pop capital in the near future. There is growth in football in FNQ and the Gold Coast. The current urban myth has been predicated on no growth in Melb but it has turned around. Now is the time to take an agressive approach to the games expansion, and when the the time is right the anvil will drop and a new team will be introduced in Sydney. We may even be worrying about a 19th team.

 

[Rob]

There doesn't need to be any more mergers or re-locations. In a few years time, due to WA's developments and population growth south of Perth, I reckon they could secure a team down their to make it a three club state. I can't see Sydney having a second team because people aren't as interesting AFL up there. They basically jumped on the bandwagon when the Swannies won in 05, hence the brain explosion from the AFL to transfer a club up their.

The difference being that there is an obvious part of Sydney that cannot be serviced by the Swans. In Perth, what areas are crying out for an AFL team? If you start a new club here, where are the supporters going to come from?

 

[Diamond Joe]

The difference being that there is an obvious part of Sydney that cannot be serviced by the Swans. In Perth, what areas are crying out for an AFL team? If you start a new club here, where are the supporters going to come from?

Where did all the supporters come from for Fremantle?

P.S. Fremantle has a population of about 7,000. So don't even try and say they all came from there.

 

[Rob]

Where did all the supporters come from for Fremantle?

P.S. Fremantle has a population of about 7,000. So don't even try and say they all came from there.

South v North.

That's why it's been so successful.

 

[Whispers]

South v North.

That's why it's been so successful.

I was thinking of Rockingham, Mandurah, Bunbury either one of those places... I don't have much knoweldge on the area but by reports in news articles, it these particular places or region that are becoming heavily populated.

 

[RoyalBlue]

Honestly, if Melbourne weren't called Melbourne, they'd be in deep shit.

And that is no offence to some very good Dee people who have supported us.

 

[Papa G]

Honestly, if Melbourne weren't called Melbourne, they'd be in deep shit.

And that is no offence to some very good Dee people who have supported us.

Melbourne should be the first one's busted out of the league - they have all of North Melbourne's financial problems without the balls, guts and determination the roos have. They are a shit organisation that came from a position of a power club in the 1950's and just totally frittered it away and really it seemed no one even cared. The only arguement you ever see from them is that they are the oldest club or that they are called Melbourne and on that pretence they have a God given right to be in the league. Gardner's comments just reinforce this attitude.