Expansion What is the perfect setup for a football code in Australia?

[Gibbke]

If there was a single football code with a league of 20-24 teams as people are suggesting here, I honestly think there would be a marginal case for two Tasmanian teams.

If you just looked at the population, it wouldn't make sense - but if you take into account how parochial northern and southern Tasmanians are, it would be one of the most intense "local" rivalries in the country!

Not sure...we already have local leagues playing intra state games, and they get marginal interest...it's been a long time since they were the real deal...we just keep breaking the mould, because yes, you'd think it would be a big game, like a derby or a showdown...but...

 

[littleduck]

Depends what football code you're talking about.

This thread is about the ideal setup for a truly national football competition for a truly national game so it doesn't matter which brand of football it may be.

If Aussie rules - there's far too many teams in QLD and NSW in comparison with WA. And I'd probably give the NT a team too if you're trying to be truly national. Plus get rid of the Kiwi teams.

If League - too many teams in WA, SA and Vic. WA and SA could probably only support 1 and Vic 2.

If Union - there's just far too many teams full stop for the level of interest in club level around Aus.

If soccer - the proportions are probably a bit closer to the mark, though WA is struggling to even pull crowds for 1 team at the moment. But 24 is just too many teams for a comp that is currently only supporting 8.

You're right, but I treated this thread as a hypothetical national football competition that we all supported from the north to south and east to west without their being 3 competitive rivals.

All in all 24 teams in any sport is way too much for Australia's population to support.

If there was only one football, doesn't matter which one, I think 24 is about right and perhaps could be extended closer to 30.

 

[gocats63]

ur talking about 3 teams in vic
atm there are 10 teams, average members 30-35 thou
thats like 90-100 thousand members per club
leaves no room 4 expantion of the sport (as in new members)
and no room for people who like to go to a couplea games a season, and they'll slowly lose interest in teh game.
and wat would happen to the dome?

and if u put 2 in nsw, they'd only get like 30k, bit lopsided?

 

[David Votoupal]

The A-League is realistically going to max out at 12 teams, possibly 14 at a pinch. Gold Coast and Townsville very much set, West Sydney and Wollongong next, Canberra and South-East Melbourne possibilities (provided SE Melb can build its own stadium).

 

[pcpp]

16 Teams

4x Sydney
1x Newcastle
4x Melbourne
2x Brisbane
1x Gold Coast
2x Adelaide
2x Perth

 

[00Stinger]

If there was one major football code only in Australia there would be
+24 teams
+2 divisions with 12 teams in each
+Top 5 finals
+Bottom 1 maybe 2 get relegated/promoted

6 Melbourne teams
1 Geelong
1 Canberra
5 Sydney
3 brisbane
1 Gold Coast
1 Nth Queensland
2 Perth
2 Adelaide
1 Tasmania
1 Newcastle

 

[Tim_in_Philly]

... the Swans never get more than 50k to Telstra Stadium.

5 of the last 7 games there have drawn 59,000 or more.

 

[Chuq]

6 Melbourne teams
1 Geelong
1 Canberra
5 Sydney
3 brisbane
1 Gold Coast
1 Nth Queensland
2 Perth
2 Adelaide
1 Tasmania
1 Newcastle

I would think 4 max in any one city, 2 max in Brisbane.

Extras in Central Queensland, Sunshine Coast, Wollongong or Darwin.

 

[Luc]

If there was one major football code only in Australia there would be
+24 teams
+2 divisions with 12 teams in each
+Top 5 finals
+Bottom 1 maybe 2 get relegated/promoted

I think that once you get up around the 20 team mark any code would have to start looking at 2 division, promotion, relegation, etc.

Without it, there are a lot of teams that have nothing to play for in the latter half of the season (though you could say that already, with a 16 team comp!).

 

[chinggis77]

All this talk of 20, 24 or even 18 teams is rubbish.

A national league should be an elite league - ie for the best of the best. Ideal league for Australia, which has a small population by international standards, is 10 - 12 teams.

AFL has too many ordinary players at the moment (to pre-empt most of you - my team is the prime example). If you cut down from 16 to 12 teams in the AFL now (won't happen I know but we are talking about ideal worlds here) you would have a cracker of a competition with high quality games every week.

Remember how good origin was - particularly some of the SA/Vic games - thats what we could be having every week. Imagine if you got rid of 25% of the worst players in the AFL - i.e. all those hacks who don't have the skills, ability etc (yes I know, lots of Freo's list).

We don't need teams in every city.

Absolutely stupid idea to add 2 more teams to the AFL. 18 is too many. Quality of the game will deteriorate unless we dramatically build the number of juniors playing the game.

 

[Chuq]

All this talk of 20, 24 or even 18 teams is rubbish.

A national league should be an elite league - ie for the best of the best. Ideal league for Australia, which has a small population by international standards, is 10 - 12 teams.

But at the moment we have over 50 professional football teams. 24 is half that amount! Remember we are talking about "if there was a single football code in Australia"

Plus going by the rest of your post you make the assumption that the teams will have 18 players... we are talking about "if there was only one football code in Australia.." it could have 11, 13, 15 or 18 players
(of course the squads would be larger)

 

[THRILLHO]

Brisbane get about 21k to games and the Swans never get more than 50k to Telstra Stadium.

Why wouldnt you do the most marginal of research before posting? In '07, the Swans averaged over 60 000 for their three Stadium Australia games.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Australian Football
7 Melbourne (or 6 Melbourne, plus 1 Melbourne/Geelong)
3 Perth
2 Adelaide
(roughly 1 per 0.5m in AF states)
1 Brisbane
1 Sydney
gives a 14 team comp. So, I'd go with 26 rounds and a final 4.


Rugby League
6 Sydney
2 Brisbane
1 Gold Coast
1 Newcastle
1 Melbourne
1 Canberra ????
1 North Qld ????
1 Woolongong ????
1 Perth ????
12 or 14 teams of the 15 listed?????
Its a tough call, but probably 12 with either Canberra or Nth Qld in. Nth Qld to get the nod?
Final 4 after either 22 or 26 rounds, depending on the number of teams.


Association Football
This is the tough one. The code is set to acheive enormous growth, but too many clubs means having low player payments to keep regional city teams viable.
3 Sydney
2 Melbourne
1 Perth
1 Brisbane
1 Adelaide
1 Gold Coast
1 Newcastle
10 teams (for now); could soon be expanded to include
4th Sydney team
3rd Melbourne team
2nd Perth team
plus 1 of
North Qld ???
Canberra ???
Geelong ???
Hobart ???
Probably Canberra would be the first of those, particularly if RL went the Nth Qld option.
Maybe, a long time from now, 20 teams with two divisions and promotion/relegation like real "soccer" nations have.


Rugby
No change to the S14 teams, unless ACT was dumped for Vic; or S14 expands so a 2nd NSW team could be entered



If the whole nation had one dominating code (we all know it doesn't, but some seem to have had a stab at this as well)
9 Sydney
7 Melbourne
3 Perth
3 Brisbane
2 Adelaide
1 Gold Coast
1 Newcastle
and two others to give two divisions of 14 each
1 Sunshine Coast ?
1 Canberra ? favoured
1 North Qld ?
1 Geelong ? favoured
1 Hobart ?

 

[MickyCrow]

Why not introduce the AGL- Australian GridIron League and the GAAA Gaelic Athletic Association of Australia league. Then we can have the AFL, AGL, NRL, GAAA, A-League, Super 14- dont forget the ARC (Australian Rugby Championship League) they wanted to set up for union

7 football leagues in Oz... we can do it

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Australian Football
7 Melbourne (or 6 Melbourne, plus 1 Melbourne/Geelong)
3 Perth
2 Adelaide
(roughly 1 per 0.5m in AF states)
1 Brisbane
1 Sydney
gives a 14 team comp. So, I'd go with 26 rounds and a final 4.

You need 2 clubs in each area to maintain interest through derbies, allow one club to rebuild while maintaining interest in the code, and have a game of footy every weekend. So QLD and NSW need 2 sides.


So I agree with you on everthing above expect add GC and WS to make 16 team comp.

That means Vic loses 3 clubs. I think Mergers are the way to go.

Your formula of 0.5m people per club in AFL states is spot on.
In Sydney, its 2m per club.
In South East Qld, its about 1m per club.
The later two reflect the penetration of AFL in those markets fairly well I think.

 

[Chance]

I reckon the best the AFL can do without having to start over again - Of all Victorian teams, the poorer clubs need to merge ie 2 of Melbourne, North Melbourne, Western Bulldogs and maybe St.Kilda (althought they are probably in a good financial position). This would leave Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, Richmond, Hawthorn and Geelong as Victoria's representatives.

Then they newly merged teams, say Melbourne & Nth Melb to move to the Gold Coast and St.Kilda & Bulldogs to move to West Sydney with all other interstate teams staying as is.

Obviously supporters of my proposed merged teams would strongly disagree but I think Melbourne, Nth Melb and Bulldogs will struggle to keep up in the long run. I have just thrown in St.Kilda because of their history and lack of winning culture. I could throw in Richmond instead but despite their lack of success recently, they are one of Melbourne's big 4 along with Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon and these teams would probably draw 80,000 each time they play.

 

[sm007]

If the AFL could start over, which of course would never happen, I think they'd structure it somewhat along these lines.

Victoria - 8 teams (still easily enough support to handle this many)
Queensland - 2 teams (room enough for growth)
NSW - 2 teams (also room for growth)
WA - 2 teams (2 established)
Tas - 1 (crying out for a team, deserves it thoroughly and has the support)
SA - 2 teams (one established, one still room to grow but has the support for it)
NT - 1 team (with a decent stadium, it's possible considering the obsession with footy up there)


That'd give 18, well balanced. Final 8 would stay though.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

You need 2 clubs in each area to maintain interest through derbies, allow one club to rebuild while maintaining interest in the code, and have a game of footy every weekend. So QLD and NSW need 2 sides.


So I agree with you on everthing above expect add GC and WS to make 16 team comp.

That means Vic loses 3 clubs. I think Mergers are the way to go.

Your formula of 0.5m people per club in AFL states is spot on.
In Sydney, its 2m per club.
In South East Qld, its about 1m per club.
The later two reflect the penetration of AFL in those markets fairly well I think.

Yes, but the reason I dropped it back to 14 was to allow for each team to play each other twice. If 16 teams (and starting afresh) then a 2nd Sydney side and probably a 2nd SE Qld one would have gone in.

And this is only if starting fresh. As things are, killing any club (through merger, takeover or death) weakens the code; so I would not support any methods of decreasing the number of clubs in any market. And support going to 18 teams; the fixture is already uneven, two new teams won't add to that; with GC and WS the best long term options. (Though I have doubts over GC longh term, and WS in the short to medium term but none whatsoever longer term for WS.)

 

[krudmonk]

Barring the obvious choice of peaceful coexistence, it's pretty nice right now. The regions most attracted to their respective games have greater saturation, while those "across the line" have their own outlet for the more foreign game.