I've been saying it for a year, but "Cumberland" has enough links to this part of the world to make sense, but is unused enough to be the fresh ground that can be built on. No link to Canberra, but then 3 games hardly deserves a reference in the name, does it?
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
WSYD The western Sydney team won't be branded as western Sydney, but what else can they call it?
- Thread starter Gunnar Longshanks
- Start date
- Tagged users None
BuntonRules
long term substance abuser
Veteran
Brisbane Lions - Cam Rayner Player Sponsor 2019
Brisbane Lions - Hugh McCluggage Player Sponsor 2018
Brisbane Lions - Jarrod Berry Player Sponsor 2017
Brisbane Lions - Ben Keays Player Sponsor 2016
Brisbane Lions - Jayden McGrath Player Sponsor 2015
Brisbane Lions - Pearce Hanley Player Sponsor 2014
Brisbane Lions - 2013 Elliot Yeo Player Sponsor
- Dec 30, 2008
- 7,083
- 9,714
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Whitsunday SeaEagles
Best name so far. Play all your home games in Sydney, and schedule 3 away games for Melbourne teams to sell in Canberra.
The team should certainly NOT be called West Sydney. The name is too "confined" geographically. The name needs to be broad, to encompass as many potential fans as possible.
The team, should be - and will - be called "New South Wales." The New South Wales Football Club, hopefully, with a nickname to come after. State based names and even names covering large regions are common in professional sport.
* North Queensland Cowboys.
* A Tassy AFL side would certainly be called "Tasmania" not Hobart.
* Western Bulldogs
* The Western Force, NSW Waratahs and Queensland Reds from the Super 14's
* The Utah Jazz
*Minnesota Timberwolves, Vikings and Twins (Minnesota is a state)
* Arizona Cardinals, and Diamondbacks (not Phoenix)
* Florida Marlins
* Carolina Panthers (there is a state called North Carolina and South Carolina. Calling them "Carolina" effectively ties up the support from two states)
*Texas Rangers.
The team, should be - and will - be called "New South Wales." The New South Wales Football Club, hopefully, with a nickname to come after. State based names and even names covering large regions are common in professional sport.
* North Queensland Cowboys.
* A Tassy AFL side would certainly be called "Tasmania" not Hobart.
* Western Bulldogs
* The Western Force, NSW Waratahs and Queensland Reds from the Super 14's
* The Utah Jazz
*Minnesota Timberwolves, Vikings and Twins (Minnesota is a state)
* Arizona Cardinals, and Diamondbacks (not Phoenix)
* Florida Marlins
* Carolina Panthers (there is a state called North Carolina and South Carolina. Calling them "Carolina" effectively ties up the support from two states)
*Texas Rangers.
The team, should be - and will - be called "New South Wales." The New South Wales Football Club, hopefully, with a nickname to come after. State based names and even names covering large regions are common in professional sport.
* North Queensland Cowboys.
* A Tassy AFL side would certainly be called "Tasmania" not Hobart.
Call the Tassie side what you like 'Island relies' 'two head terrors' I dont care, just give us a goWe are ready, have two stadiums, a sweet sponsor
BRING IT ON
- Aug 16, 2006
- 5,094
- 6,695
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I don't mind Sydney University's jersey, so that could work out. The down side is that the ground only holds 500 people. Then again, that should amply accommodate the general interest in Sydney toward a second team.
- Aug 16, 2006
- 5,094
- 6,695
- AFL Club
- Geelong
OK, but the AFL have been talking for months about putting a team in Western Sydney for the specific purpose of winning a share in that Market. In fact, they have been very upfront about it, and have themselves referred to the projected team as Western Sydney (a commonsense thing to do if your stated plan is to win over people of that geographoical area).
Now the team will apparently service Canberra as well or even the entire NSW and ACT area. It seems like a bit a of a back-flip...
As for not geographically confining your market, go ask the "Kangaroos" how well that idea served them.
And they can still do that. That doesn't mean the team has to be called Western Sydney. They can still service that area, conduct clincs in the school in Western Sydney, have their training and administration based there.
But the name simply has to be "New South Wales."
Calling them Western Sydnesy essentally says that anyone outside Western Sydney is not welcome to support them. It will be called "News South Wales."
I'm only in favour of them playing 3 games in Canberra if they are away games against Victorian teams. I think the new team must play 11 home games in Sydney.
Not relevant. The Kangaroos were playing home games all over the country. Stupidly so. With the new Western Sydney team, we are talking simply about what they will be called.
North Melbourne changing their name to the Kangaroos didn't count against them. What counted against them was playing home games outside Melbourne, disregarding their Victorian supporters. The Roos have always had a weak brand, anyway. It doesn't matter what you call the 'Roos really. It makes hardly any difference to any aspect of their club in real terms.
Now I'm not in favour of the new Sydney team playing home games in Canberra, but calling them NSW (regardless of where they play most of their home games) will be a better option than the more constrictive "West Sydney."
NSW is a broad name, encompassing a region, not restriced to a specific area like West Sydney which is a region they will be based in and service, anyway! Even when they are called NSW,
Make no mistake, they will be a West Sydney team. They will just be called New South Wales.
Rutherford Hayes
Senior List
Just seems to me like the AFL is doing this to try and influence any new stadium developments in Canberra. With NRL and Super 14 clubs there already, as well as Canberra United in the W-League and the potential for an A-League club, it's likely that any new development would be a rectangular stadium, which doesn't do anything for the AFL.
- Aug 16, 2006
- 5,094
- 6,695
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Dan 26, you make some solid points here. I suppose it is possible for a team based in Western Sydney to have appeal to that specific market, and by branding itself "New South Wales" (or perhaps "ACT/New South Wales") also extending its market appeal beyond the western Sydney region. Its a form of double dipping, but it might well work.
Having said that, if the AFL go with NSW over Western Sydney then they run the risk of missing out on capitalising on Western Sydney's fairly fierce sense of identity and "civic pride". (And keep in mind that western Sydney is itself double the size of Brisbanes population and then some). Further, your general Western Sydneysider may not go to too many matches, but they will love a Western Sydney versus Sydney derby. In fact, i believe that derby (which will be more or less drawn along "class lines") has the potential to be the first port of call for many people in the West getting behind the team.
But who knows, perhaps NSW is best in the long run. Either way, having lived in Sydney for a long time and having seen how culturally important Rugby is to Sydney and the state, i think the whole enterprise is pretty ambitious. As i say in an above post, it seems to be riding on two of the "new markets" Western Sydney offers - children of new immigrants, and the areas incredibly large amount of new families/new home buyers. And to a lesser extent, the possibility of swaying the areas indigenous population from League to our game.
Having said that, if the AFL go with NSW over Western Sydney then they run the risk of missing out on capitalising on Western Sydney's fairly fierce sense of identity and "civic pride". (And keep in mind that western Sydney is itself double the size of Brisbanes population and then some). Further, your general Western Sydneysider may not go to too many matches, but they will love a Western Sydney versus Sydney derby. In fact, i believe that derby (which will be more or less drawn along "class lines") has the potential to be the first port of call for many people in the West getting behind the team.
But who knows, perhaps NSW is best in the long run. Either way, having lived in Sydney for a long time and having seen how culturally important Rugby is to Sydney and the state, i think the whole enterprise is pretty ambitious. As i say in an above post, it seems to be riding on two of the "new markets" Western Sydney offers - children of new immigrants, and the areas incredibly large amount of new families/new home buyers. And to a lesser extent, the possibility of swaying the areas indigenous population from League to our game.
Cumberland is actually a very good name for the team.
Most of the Sydney metro area is in Cumberland County. The Cumberland Plain virtually is Western Sydney. It takes in Campbelltown, Penrith, Windsor and Parramatta.
The only problem is that it's dropped out of usage a bit - but it would represent a better branding opportunity long term if the AFL was prepared to market it properly. There's already a "Wests", a "Western" and a "West Coast" in the NRL and AFL - there hasn't been a team called "Cumberland" for 101 years.
I always thought they could have gone with "Perth City" in 1986 since the original intent was to have "Perth" in the team's name, with WAFL/WA footy fans simply calling them "City" to distinguish the new VFL side from the WAFL's Demons.
"West Coast" has worked out better though I reckon, depsite it's American connotations.
numchuks
Norm Smith Medallist
Veteran
North Melbourne - 2020 Taylor Garner and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2020 Aileen Gilroy Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2016 Daw & Anderson Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2015 Daw & MacMillan Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - North 2012 Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - North 2011 Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - North 2010 Player Sponsor
- Mar 3, 2008
- 6,447
- 6,271
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Celtics.
Nothing else. Just call them Celtics.
Nothing else. Just call them Celtics.
the team name will just be the mascot's name, no area, no "football club" on the end due to the new way AFL is branded nation wide. if there's an alternative, the club will be calls Mascot Name AFL.
ie
Cockatoos AFL
Koalas AFL
Zapperwapperdingdongmarketingploy AFL
ie
Cockatoos AFL
Koalas AFL
Zapperwapperdingdongmarketingploy AFL
Only one team in the area, and based in a city with a small population, so they need to appeal to a broader audience.
See above.
A terrible example, they have one of the smallest supporter bases in the AFL, and are dominated in the West by Essendon.
All 1 team states.
All 1 team states, except Florida - I think the Rays are based there as well. But Florida were the only team there when they started up, so it's not really a valid comparison.
You may have a valid suggestion if it was the first team in NSW, but it aint. Who is going to support an AFL team in Sydney called 'New South Wales' that doesn't already support the Swans? If anything, 'Western Sydney' might be too generic, let alone NSW. But the idea is to create an anti-Swans, and NSW probably wouldn't do that.
Doesn't work for Canberra, therefore, why bother?
bigrob
Senior List
Agreed that a key aim is to develop a rivalry with the Swans, who should be regarded as 'inner' city. Established, fairly wealthy, not as blue-collar as NRL. The opposite to this is 'Outer' which also what we traditionally know as the non-members area.
So maybe: Sydney Outer, NSW Outsiders. It has a rebel ring to it as well, and would be useful for nicknames and mascots - Outer Sight, Outer Space, etc.
The plan also needs to ultimately win over NRL fans, potential or existing, so the rebel feel could be harnessed towards this end. AFL will eventually win in traditional NRL heartlands, simply because it's a superior game, (and because it's uniquely Australian) but it will take decades. Concessions will, and must, be made. Strong Victorian clubs will survive, and a couple of weak ones will die. Take the long view. It's called evolution.
So maybe: Sydney Outer, NSW Outsiders. It has a rebel ring to it as well, and would be useful for nicknames and mascots - Outer Sight, Outer Space, etc.
The plan also needs to ultimately win over NRL fans, potential or existing, so the rebel feel could be harnessed towards this end. AFL will eventually win in traditional NRL heartlands, simply because it's a superior game, (and because it's uniquely Australian) but it will take decades. Concessions will, and must, be made. Strong Victorian clubs will survive, and a couple of weak ones will die. Take the long view. It's called evolution.
The problem is that Western Sydney alone will not be able sustain an AFL club, in terms of local community support alone. Trying to get support from Canberra is a waste of time. Canberra is a world away from Sydney, people don't seem to understand that. Drawing support from NSW in general provides the best opportunity. North Coast, South Coast, Wagga, Hunter, North Sydney, all have more AFL support than West Sydney. Play some games around the state but be based in the west, no problem. Branding this way though will severely impact on the ability of the swans to grow.
- Moderator
- #96
Trade as:
RAMS FC
Similar to the way the Roos were marketed a few years ago. Trade as the RAMS, but be registered at the NSW-ACT FC.
The fact of the matter is that not too many Sydney people will support them until they are good.
Southern NSW...Albury, (Wodonga), Wagga... big Aussie Rules areas.
Play in Sydney, Canberra, Albury, Wagga
RAMS FC
Similar to the way the Roos were marketed a few years ago. Trade as the RAMS, but be registered at the NSW-ACT FC.
The fact of the matter is that not too many Sydney people will support them until they are good.
Southern NSW...Albury, (Wodonga), Wagga... big Aussie Rules areas.
Play in Sydney, Canberra, Albury, Wagga
Most US teams using state names do so because they play in large conglomerate municipaities. It's not because they're the only show in town.
Texas isn't a one-team state in baseball. The Rangers moved to the Arlington-Dallas-Ft. Worth area after the Houtson Astros had been around a while. The Florida Panthers (Miami) started up after the Tampa Bay Lightning. Arizona, Florida, Golden State, Minnesota and Tampa Bay are all designed to appeal to a larger audience. New York is debateably the same thing. I'm not sure NSW would do that here.
The AFL is right to try and avoid the 'West Sydney' tag. They don't want a repeat of the B-team problems that have arisen in SA and to a lesser extent in WA. The AFL allowed Adelaide, Brisbane, Sydney and West Coast when the national competition was in its early stages. The names are reflective of a then still Vic-centric head office not thinking of potential expansion problems down the road. Personally, I'd have no problem with the second Sydney team also being called Sydney. It wouldn't be a problem for fixtures anymore than the Roos were or the Bulldogs. You could just put 'Gold Coast v Celtics' or whatever the team happened to be called.
I haven't bothered trawling through previous posts, but the name that would cover the region would be Cumberland, covers the area from Parramatta to Penrith in a pretty straight line. I have lived out here all my life (Blacktown, now in the Hawkesbury) and that name seems to sum it all up perfectly, without angering certain groups.
By the way, i drive past the site of the ground every day, the 6 MASSIVE light towers are up, and the stand, it looks impressive, can't wait to play local footy on there, hopefully this year in finals.FOr the record, i will buy a season membership but i don't agree with the idea, many other areas that have earned their spot before West Sydney.
By the way, i drive past the site of the ground every day, the 6 MASSIVE light towers are up, and the stand, it looks impressive, can't wait to play local footy on there, hopefully this year in finals.FOr the record, i will buy a season membership but i don't agree with the idea, many other areas that have earned their spot before West Sydney.
Because it worked a treat for them eh?
I reckon it will be the West Sydney AFLFC trading as the NSW Pioneers. Their colours need to be powder blue and dark blue.
They should play half their games at Homebush and half at Blacktown - I know it is not going to be up to 'AFL' capacity of standard but it will be better than half of the NRL grounds and will draw just similar crowds (8K - 10K).
Blacktown is the best place to develop a strong, loyal core following and hopefully discover some soul. If it works they could build a basic 5K stadium on the outer wing and increase capacity to 15K.
Swans should bring all games back to the SCG (now a 49K capacity).
Canberra for away games only.
They should play half their games at Homebush and half at Blacktown - I know it is not going to be up to 'AFL' capacity of standard but it will be better than half of the NRL grounds and will draw just similar crowds (8K - 10K).
Blacktown is the best place to develop a strong, loyal core following and hopefully discover some soul. If it works they could build a basic 5K stadium on the outer wing and increase capacity to 15K.
Swans should bring all games back to the SCG (now a 49K capacity).
Canberra for away games only.
Similar threads
