By Matthew Stephen -
October 24th 2009 @ 1:11am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Related coverage
Will AFL expand to a twenty team comp?
AFL chief Andrew Demetriou has, for the first time, raised the prospect of a 20-team competition for the AFL at some point in the distant future.
The Gold Coast AFL side will make its long awaited debut in the competition in 2011 with the Greater Western Sydney club to do likewise the following season, bringing the number of teams in the competition to 18.
Tasmania has lobbied, thus far unsuccessfully, for a license and arguably currently has the infrastructure to facilitate a club. It makes sense that they would be granted the next and 19th license to enter the competition whenever that may be – if ever.
Although premature as it may be – as we are yet to welcome teams 17 and 18 to the league – the question looms as to where any potential 20th side would be located.
Canberra, North Queensland, Western Australia and even the Northern Territory all loom as possibly locations for what would surely be the final license for entry into the league.
One does, however, feel that the AFL has missed their opportunity to make their move on the market in the national capital.
Canberra already has successful NRL and Super 14 sides and it is difficult to comprehend that there is room for an AFL side in the small region.
North Queensland, now with an A-League and NRL side, may also be too small to accommodate an AFL side however there is a stable following in the region and the AFL have already shown an interest in expanding to compete with rival codes.
Demetriou did hint at Western Australia being a prime location for the potential 20th side.
Having already seen two clubs reach success – at least off the field – there is a strong case for a third team in the football strong state. There is an enormous array of talent coming out of the state draft after draft and with little competition from other codes West Australia could afford a third side.
The game has a huge following in the Northern Territory and it could be argued that a side could well survive. It would certainly be a struggle financially but with such a strong culture of footy in the region the AFL may be willing to pour millions as they have for Western Sydney.
A twenty team competition does make some sense, in particular in terms of the fixture. It could be an easy 19 week season with every side playing each other on one occasion throughout the season.
This would seem the fairest system of fixturing: you would play every team once home and once away over a two year period.
This would also free up three weeks under the current fixture model which could allow for a state-of-origin contest every season.
A lot comes back to the success of the two teams that will enter the league in 2011 and 2012.
The AFL is already helping numerous clubs in Victoria to survive, and if they need to do the same with the newest clubs in the competition, it may be deemed inappropriate to hand out more licenses.
But then this hasn’t stopped the AFL in launching the eighteen team competition.
One final piece of food for thought: do we dare consider a New Zealand team?
Get Australia's best AFL opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(55)
Kurt said | October 24th 2009 @ 4:33am | Report comment
Interesting article Matthew, I think you’re pretty much on your money with your assessment of potential locations for a 20th side. Canberra, NT and NQ are unlikely to be able to support a locally based AFL team – as you say, Canberra’s a League / Union town, NQ is obviously massive league country and NT will lack the population base and corporate support for the foreseeable future. That leaves WA, which may indeed warrant a third side at some point. It’s a massive growth area, and both the Eagles and Dockers are well supported, the latter primarily people with psychological issues related to fear of success.
tifosi said | October 24th 2009 @ 5:08am | Report comment
20 teams?
They should be looking to get rid of the dead weight first before thinking of more expansion.
Redb said | October 24th 2009 @ 5:17am | Report comment
I wish you wouldnt talk about Carlton like that it upsets them
Redb said | October 24th 2009 @ 5:27am | Report comment
Gvien the new stadium deal it will be interesting to see how the ’struggling’ Melb clubs go in future years. I suspect a lot better than previously.
So it is possible for a 20 team comp but no timeline has been given. If 1 or 2 Vic clubs need relocation as a lifeline in th next decade then options are there.
Tassie is ready to go.
Nth QLD is not far fetched some would beleive and unlike the NRL and A League, the AFL would set up base in Cairns where it shares a 50-50 popularity standing with RL. Nth QLD would then tap into PNG and NT as strong pathways, at least until NT was strong enough in its own right.
Canberra unfortunately resides a little too close to Sydney (2 clubs) and like Tassie to an extent loyalties are split amongst existing AFL clubs. It’s not lost to other codes they just need to find the right mix in the future. It would be fair to say though that Tassie makes more sense for now.
With expansion the AFL knows the crowds will be more boutique like at 10-20K rather than the world class 50-80K a Collingwood, Carlton or Essendon can pull. And that’s just fine.
Redb
Pippinu said | October 24th 2009 @ 7:48am | Report comment
It really does seem premature to be talking about more than 18 teams.
A Tassie team can go at the drop of the hat – but that only makes 19 (assuming a Melbourne team has fallen over in the meantime).
Port still has problems.
It’s true that WA has strong population growth, so a 3rd team down the track is not so far fetched.
Cairns shows great potential – if it continues growing – that really is way out into the future (but then again, 20 year plans are nothing unusual for well run businesses).
Matthew Stephen said | October 24th 2009 @ 8:59am | Report comment
It does seem premature as I think its important that they look at how the new sides survive befroe even considering further expansion but as you point out every business has 20 year plans and that is what the AFL is these days a business. Demetriou is a money maker and he will do whatever he can to generate more income for the competition but at what cost to other clubs already struggling. But hey they are all still alive in Melbourne currently and we are getting two more sides.
Michael C said | October 25th 2009 @ 8:07pm | Report comment
A little harsh…because, after all, where does the money go? Back into the game development. It’s so internalised (within Australia) the spend – such that the AFL aren’t willing to bankroll a trip to Ireland or South Africa (penny pinching??? – - or, a clear statement that the homefront is the priority).
Remember, the AFL ain’t privately owned. Nor are the clubs.
Is that money making? or, ensuring the sustainability of the league…….given the market they are in put’s them up against privately owned HAL ‘franchises’ and the likes of Frank Lowy and Clive Palmer, privately owned NRL clubs with massive pokies venues, etc etc.
bever fever said | October 24th 2009 @ 10:30am | Report comment
IMO WA could come close to supporting a third side, many footy fans i know dont either bother to try and get tickets to the footy here, they are to hard to get, but where the team would base itself (geographically)is a problem.
I have heard that the Eagles membership is becoming an aged one, as basically the only way to become a member is for someone to die as their is a a substantial waiting list, the dockers are not too far behind.
It’s not like the MCG, in that if you feel like going to a game of footy you just rock up.
I would say Nth QLD is a possibility a long way down the track, i think both the Lions and the GC are tapping into the far north and if Cairns started up a lot of these PNG, far north QLD players would be snapped up denying the Brisbane clubs.
Tassie would be a goer straight away you would think.
lauboy said | October 24th 2009 @ 10:58am | Report comment
Re your final thought, Matthew.
NZ treats AFL like pilates — good for keeping fit between the rugby seasons! And how’d you sell the game to NZ? As Australia’s only indigenous game? Aerial ping pong?
Pippinu said | October 24th 2009 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
No doubt that there’s a marketing challenge there that is akin to selling sand to the Arabs.
Conclusion: Not in my lifetime (and if NZers want to play a bit of aussie rules to stay fit in between rugby seasons – that’s great – no harm there to anyone).
On the other hand – if a substantial group of NZers wish to become equal partners and come up with a brand new name – I reckon that would be most welcome as well.
oikee said | October 24th 2009 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
HeHe, i cant beleive you guys beleive the hype dished out to you lot. Look, as you mentioned, Perth is ripe for the pickings for a rugby league team, no room left in the AFL teams for supporters. So a start-up league team would be a instant success. No wonder the crowds (15 thousand) turned up for the games taken to Perth. So more Demiteiou spin. He knows he has left the Kennell door wide open for other codes now.
Western Sydney and Gold Coast are going to be that much of a shock to AFL. well, i dont know if they will ever recover. A weakened 18 comp will forever dampen the AFL, just another plugfest game added to a already swamped market. The game goes way to long and fans will quickly start turning off.
As i have done in the past.
These days, i just dont have enough patience to sit through a 3 and half hour telecast, lifes to short.
All i can say is the pickings are sweak for other codes, we will have a super 14 melbourne soon, and another a-league hearts for melbourne, wont be long before the NRL can introduce another league team down their,.. The door is swinging baby, and its swinging wide.
James said | October 24th 2009 @ 7:02pm | Report comment
Whatever you say Oikee…whatever you say….
macavity said | October 24th 2009 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
NQ…. AFL territory…. lol
seriously, is there lead in the water down there?
Pippinu said | October 24th 2009 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
The article doesn’t say it straight out – but the reference is to Cairns, not Townsville.
This is the wikipedia article on AFL Cairns:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFL_Cairns
To quote:
” The Australian Football League Cairns is a semi-professional Australian rules football league that includes clubs from the Cairns region in Queensland, Australia. It is widely regarded as the strongest regional Australian rules football league in Queensland and has a large base at Cazaly’s Stadium which has staged pre-season Australian Football League matches.
The league has significant coverage in local media such as The Cairns Post. Each year the Grand Final attracts between 2,000-3,000 spectators.
The league has produced many notable players at VFL/AFL level, including Colin Judd (Hawthorn), Craig Brittain (North Melbourne), Troy Clarke, (Brisbane Bears), Mark West (Western Bulldogs), Che Cockatoo-Collins, Donald Cockatoo-Collins, David Cockatoo-Collins, Jason Roe, Courtenay Dempsey and Jarrod Harbrow. ”
That’s actually not a bad list of players that come from Cairns – the new Gold Coast team would happily take every one of them if they were available.
Anyway, similar to what I posted above in relation to NZ – not in my life time.
macavity said | October 24th 2009 @ 4:25pm | Report comment
I read that too….not like AFL fans to over exaggerate their reach…
I had a look at the Cairns Post site too. Only AFL article was the AFL talking up having a team there, although there was a little bit in the archives. Back page and many of the articles were league. To be fair though, the Black Diamond Cup gets media coverage here, and no one is proposing to put an AFL club here!
Never know what will happen in the future, but in all but the very long term it would seem AFL is nearing saturation.
Pippinu said | October 24th 2009 @ 4:35pm | Report comment
The Black Diamond Cup is a unique piece of Australian sporting history – be proud of it!!
Redb said | October 24th 2009 @ 7:15pm | Report comment
I go to Cairns regularly and was recently up there post the Grand Finals of both the major local sporting comps, sorry to upset you but the Cairns Post newspaper had both the Aussie Rules and Rugby League winners on the front page.
Give it time and there is plenty to nurture for AFL up there whilst league concentrates on Townsville.
Redb
prowling panther said | October 24th 2009 @ 9:46pm | Report comment
never quite understood why the cows don’t take premiership games to Cairns. It can be any game against dull opposition like the sharks and they instantly sure up the support of the whole town.
And why the hell theyre the cowboys I will never know. They should be the NQ crocs. We don’t want bloody Yank names in an Aussie comp. Sorry got carried away…
Dogs Of War said | October 24th 2009 @ 9:55pm | Report comment
They have before….
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/venues/cazalys.html
Stadium isn’t that big.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cazaly%27s_Stadium
gazz said | October 24th 2009 @ 4:30pm | Report comment
No 3rd WA team. WCE are in the business of winning premierships and you’ve seen what the Dockers presence has done to that. Another club would hurt us.
Pippinu said | October 24th 2009 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
although it would one day be nice to have a team that actually has Perth in its name.
East Perth Royals anyone??
ren said | October 24th 2009 @ 7:16pm | Report comment
bunbury bogans or mandurah rats, then all will be forgiven AD
James said | October 24th 2009 @ 7:01pm | Report comment
I think the AFL knows roughly that, in AFL states, it needs about 500k of population per team. Yes Geelong only has about 200k but we know there are also many Geelogn supporters in Melbourne too. Adelaide (2 teams, 1 million plus). Tassis has it as well (500k…although there is the north south divide that must be overcome to make it successfull). Perth is heading towards 1.5 million, waiting lists for West Coast, Fremantle gets amazing support ($35k crowds), given its record is very poor….so possibly after Tasmania, Perth is logical.
Darwin (or NT rather) does have the highest AFL participation rates (per capita), but its population is just a little too low (120k). According to wikipedia, its population is expected to grow to about 200k by 2030, so there is a possibility there long term. Canberra is made up of many people all over Australia, but I agree that West Sydney should establish itself first.
North Queensland is non AFL territory, so perhaps it would be ideal for a folded Victorian team to relocate.
So I see CG and WS (2011, 2012), perhaps Tassie and another Perth team at about 2020, and Canberra and Darwin at about 2030. And North Qld for any Vic team (probably North – great dual branding there) that doesn’t make it. Although Redb makes a good point that given the stadium deals have been fixed, the biggest money drain for Vic clubs has been resolved.
Paul J said | October 24th 2009 @ 7:23pm | Report comment
Perth is a growth city but as already stated there are not many options in WA outside the capital city. If the AFL can not be bothered going to Tassie due to it’s small population then why bother going to ACT or NT?
Qld is the growth state and will take over Victoria’s population in 20 years, any future AFL expansion lies in Qld. The GC team may well be more important to the AFL than WS.
Apart from a 3rd perth team the AFL has reached saturation (very successful saturation). Out of 60 junior development officers on the AFL’s books only one is allocated to each WA & SA and none to Tassie. The AFL knows that to remain king in 20 years time they must grow the game in NSW & Qld. That’s the challenge.
Westcoast929406 said | October 24th 2009 @ 7:50pm | Report comment
Andrew Demitriou every year floats these Expansion ideas to test the waters- Its all talk.
The AFL has to get the two new teams bedded down before 2020 before anything else happens. It may take longer than that.
West Sydney will be the litmus test for all of the AFL`s policies – procedures – philosphies and know how.
Obviously the author of this article has not read my last post on NZ AFL expansion – Where the almost hysterical reaction from some posters was extraordinary.
We keep getting told the Kiwis will not accept our game under any circumstances ever. I hope the Author realises that and stop floating ridiculous ideas. Shame on you Matthew Stephen.
Republican said | October 24th 2009 @ 9:08pm | Report comment
If this half baked idea that our game should be contemplating off shore expansion then at least be half sensible about where this would be most productively embarked on if we must contemplate this at all.
NZ, who collectively are adverse to all that is Australian would compromise the game to the point of it degenerating into something more akin to their grovel ball game affectionately known as ‘Thugby Union.’
PNG and Saffa have the raw talent and enthusiasm for our game unlike those South Sea Poms but come on, Canberra would be a fantastic place for our national game to expand to. The powerful symbology of this should not be underestimated by the AFL bankers since the Sasanaac codes have a presence their but to our shame, not the national game. Yes the ACT is a small demo then so too is Tassie,NQ and the NT, but the game is far stronger in the ACT than it is in NQ who are League centric and probably the NT as well – and on a par with Tassie these days, to be sure.
I believe Tassie must finally be acknowledged and indeed rewarded, for its footy cred over many many years above and beyond all on comers however I don’t reckon WS is going to take root myself, so in that respect the ACT should be seriously considered to that end.
The time is ripe for the AFL to muscle in on the nations capital since the rugby codes are only keeping their heads above H20 these days with Union in serious trouble for patronage and grassroots while League plods along in a ‘ground hog day’ like fashion.
The Aust Footy GR are of a high standard in the ACT and I think it an insult and bordering on sacrilegious to mention a backwater i.e NZ in the same breath. NZ is a sovereign country who are NOT part of Australia despite the very mercenary relationship they have managed to garner over many years. Conversely, we have local demos chomping at the bit and brimming with talent who are lining up to join in the celebration of this great institution with their fellow Australians.
Please do not de value what is more than just a game and integral to who we are, by entertaining such countries as NZ at the expedient expense of our own, even in jest.
macavity said | October 25th 2009 @ 7:32am | Report comment
RL just had its most successful season ever. Hardly “groundhog day”.
once we get our independence and get our funding right, its on like donkey kong.
Westcoast929406 said | October 24th 2009 @ 10:09pm | Report comment
Republican,
NZ will be for many years be a talent pool “only” offering kids an alternative professional career to Rugby and Soccer football.
That is the same for SA and PNG even though SA will grow into something bigger after we eventually get into all of their Provinces.
I admire your zeal for the ACT which had Aussie Rules early when Canberra became the official Capital from Melbourne bringing with it public servants from that city.(Or those that wanted to go).
I noted recently that the Swans had appointed a AFL ambassador to the ACT from their player base – Also in the same article was the fact that our game for the first time was now played in every high school there.
Do you think GWS will play anymore than 2 away games there even though they have recruiting rights to that talent pool.
It appears that currently the AFL is not looking in the ACT direction for expansion.
Michael C said | October 25th 2009 @ 8:14pm | Report comment
The main thing that these points normally comes from is some asking Demetriou a question….
e.g. on Tassie,
or on 20 teams,
and Demetriou’s stock standard reply is “Never say never”.
i.e. he doesn’t rule it out…….which get’s interpreted as that’s now part of the plan. It’s amazing how one wishy washy quote can often drive a whole frenzy of speculation.
SideShowBob said | October 25th 2009 @ 11:28pm | Report comment
Tassie should be 19th. Despite all reservations, you can’t keep denying a football heartland for too much longer.
If we are talking 2020 and beyond, the 20th license, IMHO, should go much further west to Johannesburg, South Africa. At that point, the AFL should be looking to capitalise on the generation length grassroots investment made in the Rainbow nation. What better way to provide a roadmap to elite local talent and open up a new unsaturated sporting markets than to grant a license to a thriving metropolis of over 10 million people.
Redb said | October 26th 2009 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Agree on Tassie for the 19th.
But on your next call that is way out to left field. Logisiticially it would be a nightmare and very costly. Let’s actually get a few South Africans into the AFL before we even consider a SAF team before NT, Nth Qld, 3rd WA or even NZ.
Redb
Pippinu said | October 26th 2009 @ 10:05am | Report comment
The award for most left field idea must go to a Ronald Dale Barassi, who back in the mid 70s made a number of outlandish predictions about where the game would be 25 years hence.
One of them was on the money – two teams operating out of Sydney (his timing is a bit out).
But he also mentioned a team playing out of Nauru!!! (plus a couple of other choice predictions).
Redb said | October 26th 2009 @ 10:11am | Report comment
There is often too bigger gap to jump straight to the AFL. I like what the QAFL are doing with NT Thunder, perhaps add an PNG and a Nauru team in time to the QAFL. If the teams grow to critical mass levels they can apply for an AFL Licence.
Redb
James said | October 26th 2009 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
Nauru will never happen!! It only has 10,000 people. And I think PNG will go Rugby league first. I really would like to see Darwin make it.
SideShowBob said | October 26th 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
Redb,
Too much thinking inside the box. In 10-15 years improvements in flight technology are only going to lead to faster travel times and lower costs. I would be very surprised if there weren’t a handful of South Afticans plying their trade in the AFL by then (there are apparently 16,000 who have gone/are going through the FootyWild (Auskick) program there at the moment). Don’t forget the team doesn’t need to be comprised purely of locals. In the professional age, Australian based players can relocate. Western Force, anyone?
If the AFL is going to take the plunge in a non-Australian market at some point in the future, I feel it is going to be there. With not much else left appealing in Australia after a TAS19 license, Jo’burg, with its 15 million in the greater area by 2015, may be the place they do it.
Just saying. Time will tell, eh?
Redb said | October 26th 2009 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
SSB,
Just trying to be realistic, it’s possible but a few would be ahead in my view.
South Africa needs to produce some players for the AFL, get a structured adult league up and running which produces a mature competition in its is own right. Much better to have 8 -10 South African sides going at each other than spin one off to Australia.
As rugby is now discovering the allure of international club comps is not that strong, putting them in one conference, NZ v NZ or SAF v SAF and its works a lot better. From what I’m, reading both the domestic rugby club comps (Air NZ Cup & Currie Cup) are proving ever popular as Super 14 wanes a little.
My plan/goals for South Africa development would be: continue to build at grass, develop local leagues, build to a premier Footywild/AFL league played at province or sub province level, produce players to be drafted into the AFL and then eventually play Australia at test level in X number of years.
Depending on a slidiing scale of success along these lines (may not get to the last level in our lifetime) there any number of positives for the game
Redb
Michael C said | October 26th 2009 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
re WA :
Joondalup mayor talks up third AFL franchise in WA
So, if he reckons going north is better than south through Mandurah…….is there actually half a chance of BOTH??? How cool would that be, 4 WA teams, a real break away ‘conference’ to break the East Coast (time zone) dominance.
Michael C said | October 26th 2009 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
btw –
re any talk of extra teams etc…..Oikee on an RL thread talks about the AFL leaving WA wide open (with Freo and WCE effectively over subscribed) and the implication that people have to find something to support.
We should note that the WAFL this year attracted 245,289 attendees.
First time over 200,000 since 1994. That previous figure was 241K. Back when Freo joined, the attendance dropped overnight to 160K. A 33% drop…..but, requiring a 50% increase to return to those levels.
Of course now, the WAFL is structured up as a 9 team 23 round comp, but each team plays 20 games.
So, 90 matches plus finals – - 245K
And just under 23K to the Grand Final
The AFL has to be very careful to not smash the 2nd tier all the time, or too soon.
However, a 10 year plan/build up might be very interesting to see unfold – if the AFL announced an in principle desire to have Joondalup and Tassie in by 2022…….
SideShowBob said | October 26th 2009 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
Redb,
Don’t disagree with most of your roadmap, just your timeframes. I can see most of these structures being established within 20 years, as the first 3 you mention have already been done for a few years now, though admittedly it varies with geography. The half dozen (sub-)provincial feeder/farmer league sides in a similar tier 2 structure to the VFL, SANFL & WAFL is a critical requirement and would be a part of that roadmap, it just wouldn’t be the “big league” (ie AFL).
Granting an AFL license there at some point in the next 2 decades is a tough decision for the traditionalists and the conservative minded, but nethertheless the right decision in line with where the game will eventually head in this century. Why enter a massive new market (people & $) with anything buy your best available product?
Perhaps a lesson we can take from NFL Europe.
– SSB
20 Team AFL said | October 26th 2009 @ 1:30pm | Report comment
There should be 20 Teams in the AFL by 2020/25.
But where?
1. (19) – 3rd WA Team – Yep has to be. What does it give?
6 Perth “Derbies” each year.
Also
11 Weekends with 2 Perth matches
= 17 weekends with either a Derby or 2 games to attend – a good effort at increasing AFL market-share in a mature market.
What else does it get? The prospect of a 3rd WA AFL Team should ensure that a 65K oval stadium is built and provides a good counter-argument to those that would argue that the 3 professional (Super 14, A-League, NRL (to come)) teams deserve their own ground – certainly not ahead of 3 big-time AFL sides that attract far bigger crowds.
2. (20) – Newcastle/Central Coast) – By 2020 over 1.5 million people in this area – It will clearly then be the biggest area in Australia without an AFL presence. Assuming West Sydney are by the middle of the decade following the next decade – ie 2023-2025 attracting decent average crowds – this is where the AFL has to go for the eyeballs.
What about Tasmania? North Queensland? Well, these places will just have to wait – but, they might not have to wait. I still think providing a relocation package to Tasmania may come in handy for a Vic side someday.
If the AFL strengthens its presence around the country, it will come to rely less on the Melbourne stronghold to drive the game. I say less, but of course it will still be the most significant driver of the game.
With a strengthen presence around Australia, it may become more likely that the AFL could squeeze the weakest team out of Melbourne into some sort of co-location in Tasmania.
11/12 games in Tassie, 7/8 games in Melbourne etc. I really think that’s the only way Tasmania can get a team in the AFL – even if many calling for a Tasmanian team don’t like that scenario.
So, where does that leave us?
AFL 20 Teams – which finally allows an even an uncompromised draw!
AFL West – 5 Teams (WA – 3; SA – 2) – Farmer/Ebert League
AFL North – 5 Teams (NSW – 3, QLD – 2) – Voss/Goodes League
AFL South – 5 Teams (VIC – 4, TAS – 1) – Hudson/Coventry League
AFL Central – 5 Teams (VIC – 5) – Barassi/Whitten League
(Note, all VIC teams rotate each year between the South or Central Divisions based on overall ladder positions from the previous year)
Draw
Play each team Home and Away in your League – 8 Matches (4 Home & 4 Away)
Play each team in other 3 Leagues once – 15 Matches (7 Home, 7 Away & 1 “Development” Match)
Fixture
11 Home Matches, 11 Away Matches, 1 “Development Match”
(Development Match – (9 in total) – Matches played in Cairns, Auckland, Jo’Burg, Darwin, Canberra, etc.)
24 Rounds – 23 Matches.(230 Total Matches)
Each team has 1 Development Match – and then a bye the following week (or previous week)
Works perfectly.
Michael C said | October 26th 2009 @ 3:31pm | Report comment
I like the thought processes here.
Matthew Stephen said | October 26th 2009 @ 4:50pm | Report comment
The idea is good. Certainly does make the fixture fair and makes sure everyone plays each other as well as maintaining the rivalry that each teams will have against state oppostition. This would certainly help the game in the Northern states as the state rivalry would be huge. The Victoria groups would have limited room to move season to season however with certain clubs having to stay together such as Collingwood v Essendon which will always be a twice a year match up.
Redb said | October 27th 2009 @ 7:30am | Report comment
Some excellent strategic thinking. Given the bulk of handling 20 teams something would have to change no doubt.
I do share a concern that Vic club rivalries could be dismantled if the conferences fail to capitalise on the Ess, Coll, Carl, Rich rivalry. Probably go with two conferences of 10.
Dont agree wth Newcastle/Central Coast ahead of Northern Australia be it Cairns or Darwin. 3rd WA ahead of Tassie?
I’d run with Tassie and 3rd WA (strongest WAFL club).
Redb
20 Team AFL said | October 27th 2009 @ 11:38am | Report comment
I welcome tinkering to those ideas of course – I just think 23 matches over 24 rounds works almost perfectly.
Also, I don’t see how 10 team divisions make it better.
Surely you can’t put all the Vic teams in One Division and all the teams from other states in the other Division!
That would be completely unfair (I’m a Vic) – Travel differences would be huge!
4 Groups of 5 for me works best – where the new teams are of course is a matter for debate, but 5 in the West and 5 in the North makes perfect sense to me.
Maybe Newcastle/Central Coast isn’t the place, maybe it is North Queensland?? Or even North Sydney? I just think if the AFL wants to be taken seriously, you need to make inroads in Sydney. 3 Teams in NSW I think is better than 3 teams in QLD – in this concept.
As for Tasmania – I want them in there, but I think the best way to accomplish that is with a co-location team from Melbourne.
The full plan by the way calls for strengthened 2nd Tier Leagues.
You can add – with 18 teams, the AFL should go to 25 Rounds of 9 Matches (225 Matches in total)
Huge step up from current 176 Matches, but should help secure the higher TV Rights – and if they scrap the NAB Cup (As promised, its only an increase of 34 Matches)
Redb said | October 27th 2009 @ 11:47am | Report comment
Just re-read your draw ideas I guess you could still maintain a degree of the old rivalries. The rotating idea is a good one to keep it fresh.
Would also like to see a minor premier status lift for each league.
Redb
Michael C said | October 27th 2009 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
and looking at ‘conferences’, the US NFL and MLB both run first the conference/league split, and then each conference/league is sub-divided into functional sub groups/pools whatever of about 5-6 teams.
ANd if there’s no mid year break for SoO, then, run whatever season a bit like the NRL (26 rounds, but ‘only’ 24 matches) or SANFL/WAFL (23 rounds, ‘only’ 20 matches). A slightly longer season CAN be absorbed with a couple of intra-season breaks for teams.
James said | October 26th 2009 @ 4:27pm | Report comment
I like your thinking, but I would have Darwin and/or Canberra over Northern QLD. Population up there is too disperesed over a wide area i.e Cairns – Townsville is 350 km. Townsville to Mackay is 386kn. Mackay to Rockhampton is 336km.
Darwin metropolitan area including Palmerston is on track for 200k by 2020. These guys are AFL MAD. According to Wikipedia “7% of all Northern Territorians in 2007 participated in Australian rules football, the highest participation in Australia (The sport also produces more professional Australian rules footballers per capita in the Australian Football League than any other state or territory)
Canberra already has 350k, and while is not AFL dominated, it at least has people from all over Australia workign for the government. Also produced a couple of AFL Legends by the names of Alex Jesaulenko, and James Hird among others
Republican said | October 26th 2009 @ 6:36pm | Report comment
Thanks for the vote of confidence in Canberra James!
Republican said | October 28th 2009 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
Westcoast929406
The GWS fixtures for Canberra that are being bandied around are five to six games / season.
Sydney are very protective of this nursery and will try to ensure their ever growing Canberra support base does not change it’s allegiencies siignificantly to the GWS franchise.
GWS will be relying on the ACT grassroots for many years to come it would seem.
The bankers at the AFL are not in the least bit interested in considering the ACT as a future base for expansion sadly and that is why I perish the thought of any off shore backwater i.e. NZ gleaning elite status over ANY Australian demo especially the nations capital. There are plenty of influential ex AFL players and others who have been championing Canberras consideration as a great option for any AFL expansion plan but to no avail.
The ACT GR are of a very good standard indeed. The ACT rep side defeated Vic country in this years Aust Country Champinships, being runners up the previous against them as well which is naught to be sneezed at.
Go the mighty Claremont!!
Cheers
James said | October 29th 2009 @ 9:45am | Report comment
Story in the Age today about NT wanting a combined team with Tassie for an AFL licence
http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/territorys-bold-afl-bid-falls-on-deaf-ears/2009/10/28/1256405426010.html
I think best to give Darwin another 20 years to get its population over 250k, and then investigate.
First step was establishing a representative side which they have done: NT Thunder, which plays in the QAFL.
Republican said | October 29th 2009 @ 11:50am | Report comment
James
Far better the NT or ACT are supported to this end before an off shore licence is considered.
I note that the AFL are going ahead with a “World” team to compete in our Nationl Under 16 Championships. This will be in Div 2 and could be the thin edge of the wedge as far as our own loyal demos being expediently overlooked by the bankers in cashing in on any corporate potential a city i.e. Auckland. may offer as opposed to Canberra – The Nations Capital!
This scenario should be avoided at all costs as it would disenfranchise generations of devout supoorters of our national game throughout the country.
bever fever said | November 2nd 2009 @ 8:48am | Report comment
5 big options before any thought is given to anything o/s,
Tassie
Canberra
Nth QLD
Darwin
3rd WA team
Not in that order though.
And they all have their own issues.
Tassie football fragmented north and south
Canberra is very close to GWS
Where Perth team would be placed
Population density/support for Nth QLD and NT
My own view is that WA could support a new team but i have no idea where to put it, traditionally Eagles north, Dockers south.
There is plenty of money and supporters but no seats/memberships at the ground.
bever fever said | November 3rd 2009 @ 11:26am | Report comment
The AFL in essence is a victim of its own sucess in ways, whilst in the NRL and A league smaller cities are able to sustain (sometimes just) clubs because of smaller salarys, football spending etc, you just cannot do this in the AFL where the turnover needs to be much larger, the salarys overall higher, the list bigger, the stadiums bigger, and so it goes on.
ATM you need a city of at least half to three quarters of a million to sustain a club, cant see Darwin or Cairns happening for a long time…. then of course you need the corporate backing.
oikee said | November 4th 2009 @ 4:26pm | Report comment
Love the entheusassem , you guys are going to find it hard to prop up 18 teams, as i mentioned earlier, with the other codes moving down south, all this will be wishful thinking in 20 years.
Just be thankful you have a game called aussie rules.
As soon as rugby soccer and league internationals start moving into your heartland, (as it is) “at least your premier is not stupid, and even Bracksey seen the light”, you will understand the world order. Trust me, league had it pushed down our throats for years.
I will say once again, their is season memberships available for the Storm. Buy them now, and in 20 years time you can sell them at a premium. cheers.
Pippinu said | November 4th 2009 @ 4:42pm | Report comment
Buy a season’s ticket now and sell it in 20 years at a premium????
To who? Collectors of memorabilia?