The Cut the Teams/Too Many Teams in Victoria thread

[madmug]

pre Adelaide Oval thought Port Adelaide was in real trouble but since the move to AO Port is a lock

this thread is all hypothetical but if the league reduced to 12 teams there would 2 teams in Adelaide , 2 in Perth and 6 in Melbourne / Geelong with the Hawks playing some games in Tasmania plus Swans and Lions

No doubt. If it were to be reduced to 12, the league structure would be something similar.

But it never will reduce back to 12. Not one club would want to leave the cocoon of the AFL, even if it were for the health & benefit of the whole league. The media deal allows for 9 games per week. So that's that.

Given we have 18, as I've said, its silly to not have3 in WA & 1 in Tas. If that is only able to be done with a move to a 20 team league, then so be it.

 

[telsor]

60,000 members to 62,000 members equals 70:30.

Port's financials will be fine this year. Port came from a very dark place (kind of like Richmond a few times over the last 20 years), there were some very good reasons for both Adelaide clubs to not declare profits last year, but we'll be fine going forward. Lack of understanding of issues outside your own duck pond as usual.

I was talking about the support more broadly and you know it. Are you suggesting that if the 'average man on the street' in SA was polled, support would be anywhere near even?

 

[Papa G]

No doubt. If it were to be reduced to 12, the league structure would be something similar.

But it never will reduce back to 12. Not one club would want to leave the cocoon of the AFL, even if it were for the health & benefit of the whole league. The media deal allows for 9 games per week. So that's that.

Given we have 18, as I've said, its silly to not have3 in WA & 1 in Tas. If that is only able to be done with a move to a 20 team league, then so be it.

Have always thought 15 is the magic number. 8 Vic, 2 SA, 2 WA, 1 each Tas/Sydney/Brisbane.

 

[Papa G]

I was talking about the support more broadly and you know it. Are you suggesting that if the 'average man on the street' in SA was polled, support would be anywhere near even?

It ain't 50/50, but it ain't the oft quoted 70/30 either.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

No doubt. If it were to be reduced to 12, the league structure would be something similar.

But it never will reduce back to 12. Not one club would want to leave the cocoon of the AFL, even if it were for the health & benefit of the whole league. The media deal allows for 9 games per week. So that's that.

Given we have 18, as I've said, its silly to not have3 in WA & 1 in Tas. If that is only able to be done with a move to a 20 team league, then so be it.

18 teams representing about 10m people is too many teams for elite sport ...

i agree it will not reduce but it should !!

 

[The Blue Baggers]

Have always thought 15 is the magic number. 8 Vic, 2 SA, 2 WA, 1 each Tas/Sydney/Brisbane.

more likely an even no. 14 ,

MCG - Carlton , Collingwood , Richmond , Melbourne
Docklands - Essendon , St Kilda
MCG / Tasmania - Hawks
KP - Geelong
AO - Crows , Port
Perth - Eagles , Freo
SCG - Swans
Brisbane - Lions

 

[Rob]

So we can assume you won't need heavy AFL subsidisation?

You'd ****ing hope so.

 

[madmug]

18 teams representing about 10m people is too many teams for elite sport ...

i agree it will not reduce but it should !!

Well it says AFL, so it is supposed to represent the whole 24 million of us. Its just the fact that some of us are more 'represented' than others.

Its that discrepancy that needs some adjustment.

WA3 & Tas1. Yay!

 

[The Darkman]

WA3 & Tas1. Yay!

Good that you're flying the flag.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

Well it says AFL, so it is supposed to represent the whole 24 million of us. Its just the fact that some of us are more 'represented' than others.

Its that discrepancy that needs some adjustment.

WA3 & Tas1. Yay!

Yes but half the country follows rugby

 

[madmug]

Yes but half the country follows rugby

Its not absolutely one or the other for a lot of people. What we want is as many kids as possible, all over the country, playing Aussie rules & as many watching & following a team. If they happen to also watch A-League or NRL. then so what as long as we get a look in & grow our game all over the country, over time.

 

[telsor]

Well it says AFL, so it is supposed to represent the whole 24 million of us. Its just the fact that some of us are more 'represented' than others.

Its that discrepancy that needs some adjustment.

WA3 & Tas1. Yay!

So 24 million of us, all equally represented....So we need 48 teams (and climbing) for Tas to get one?

 

[telsor]

It ain't 50/50, but it ain't the oft quoted 70/30 either.

Does it really matter what the exact number is?

The quote that fired you up was about a reduction to 12 teams (with 6Vic, 2WA, 2SA, 1NSW & 1QLD), and me saying Port would be the minnows of such a comp because while WA would have 1.2M per club and Vic 1M per club, SA would have 0.8M and the split wasn't even.

Call it 60:40 if you like...That still makes Port's support base ~640K Vs the 1M+ of other clubs (and in a market that's growing slower).

Throwing your dummy out of the pram over an unimportant detail doesn't change the basic point.

 

[madmug]

So 24 million of us, all equally represented....So we need 48 teams (and climbing) for Tas to get one?

You really are dishonest aren't you.

That is not at all what I said, nor indicated. Just exagerating to be smart, is not 'smart.

People in SEQ can already follow the Lions/Suns & Broncos/Titans & Reds & Roar. People in Victoria have a choice of 10 AFL clubs & Storm & Rebels & 2 soccer teams to follow. So its not an all or nothing choice. Certainly its true that some have a lot 'more' choice than others

The fact that People in Tassie have nothing to represent them in their overwhelmingly favorite sport, as you know, is true, but was not really part of the point.

 

[telsor]

You really are dishonest aren't you.

That is not at all what I said, nor indicated. Just exagerating to be smart, is not 'smart.

People in SEQ can already follow the Lions/Suns & Broncos/Titans & Reds & Roar. People in Victoria have a choice of 10 AFL clubs & Storm & Rebels & 2 soccer teams to follow. So its not an all or nothing choice. Certainly its true that some have a lot 'more' choice than others

The fact that People in Tassie have nothing to represent them in their overwhelmingly favorite sport, as you know, is true, but was not really part of the point.

That's what comes from living in a really small, isolated market.

Should the AFL also put a team in Broome because there are no national level sports teams located within a thousand miles?

 

[sverik25]

That's what comes from living in a really small, isolated market.

Should the AFL also put a team in Broome because there are no national level sports teams located within a thousand miles?

Did you really just compare Broome with Tasmania? Broome has a population of 13,000. That's less than even Burnie.

The thing is, with Tasmania's level of engagement with and passion for football, 500,000 Tasmanians are probably at this stage the equivalent of 2,000,000, possibly more, Sydneysiders.

 

[madmug]

Did you really just compare Broome with Tasmania? Broome has a population of 13,000. That's less than even Burnie.

The thing is, with Tasmania's level of engagement with and passion for football, 500,000 Tasmanians are probably at this stage the equivalent of 2,000,000, possibly more, Sydneysiders.

Yes buts thats what you get when you try & make a general point & someone makes an exaggeration of it as a way of trying to belittle the original point.

Its a dishonest way to discuss an issue, but thats what some people are like when they sit behind a keyboard.

I've said in a smaller AFL, if it were 16 clubs or less, Tassie would be lucky to be included. But at 18 clubs its a disgrace for Tassie not to have its own team.

Indeed Tassie is the largest distinct area of the country that has no professional football team representing it. Yet in the recent past we have had 4 Melbourne suburban clubs coming here to play for money. We currently have two. That is just pathetic.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

Its not absolutely one or the other for a lot of people. What we want is as many kids as possible, all over the country, playing Aussie rules & as many watching & following a team. If they happen to also watch A-League or NRL. then so what as long as we get a look in & grow our game all over the country, over time.

its not absolutely but there is a fair % that only follow one , that's why one team in Sydney and Brisbane should be enough

fwiw - i think tasmania deserve a team in their own right (either fully relocated team or new team).

 

[telsor]

Did you really just compare Broome with Tasmania? Broome has a population of 13,000. That's less than even Burnie.

The thing is, with Tasmania's level of engagement with and passion for football, 500,000 Tasmanians are probably at this stage the equivalent of 2,000,000, possibly more, Sydneysiders.

The argument was that being isolated and not having a national sporting team meant they SHOULD have an AFL team...

Yeah, Broome was extreme, but I could have used any number of places...Albury, Darwin, FNQ.

Yes, 500K Tasmanians are more engaged that 2M Syndeysiders (I'd say more like 4M), but the hope/plan since the Swans were first moved up there is to convert the locals, and converting 1% of Sydney matters more than all of Tas because they're new fans, while a tas team would just be shuffling existing fans from one club to another.

 

[telsor]

Yes buts thats what you get when you try & make a general point & someone makes an exaggeration of it as a way of trying to belittle the original point.

Its a dishonest way to discuss an issue, but thats what some people are like when they sit behind a keyboard.

and when I made 5-6 suggestions about how to push the decision makers towards giving Tas a team soon, who obsessed about the most extreme one and ignored the rest?

 

[madmug]

and when I made 5-6 suggestions about how to push the decision makers towards giving Tas a team soon, who obsessed about the most extreme one and ignored the rest?

No, your comment was to exaggerate by making a smart arse comment about getting 48 teams so Tassie can have one.

Inflammatory, childish, stupid & totally no relationship to my point., nor any relationship to things you' said previously.

Also as far as isolated goes, we are not as isolated as FNQ, but at least they have an NRL team. Darwin is also very isolated but only 140k, Albury? My comment about us being the largest distinct area without a 'football' team is true & being an Aussie rules area of 515k, it is an AFL disgrace.

Your 5-6 suggestions were 1) steal a club at an AGM, 2) sell 30k memberships, what were the rest? Does it matter, totally ridiculous & never had to be done by anyone else. Trying to belittle our efforts with silly comments reflects on you.

Maybe we should copy an old Victorian method, & rattle a few tins outside the MCG, that might work. Yes begging, thats a method.

 

[The King!]

Just get rid of every vic team to the vfl and start again with 4-6 fresh ones

 

[madmug]

Just get rid of every vic team to the vfl and start again with 4-6 fresh ones

Dont go their. just dont!

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Just get rid of every vic team to the vfl and start again with 4-6 fresh ones

Assume that means replacing Sydney as well

 

[madmug]

Assume that means replacing Sydney as well

It starts! I told you