A general view of Etihad Stadium during an AFL match. Slattery Images.
Focus all you like on the Gold Coast Suns, Greater Western Sydney Giants, Melbourne Storm and whoever else joins the NRL in its mooted expansion; the NRL and AFL have enough cash and invested interests to ensure they’ll survive and, eventually, flourish relative to their market, for they are too important to fail.
It’s the heartland clubs that are the real concern.
While the NRL and AFL now call themselves national leagues (bit of a stretch for the NRL), they are still, obviously, heavily weighted in New South Wales and Victoria respectively given the fact they evolved from state competitions.
And it’s that imbalance and congestion in those states that will, if they aren’t already, stretching the leagues, raising yet again the inevitable dilemma of relocation/expansion.
Can, in the long-term, the AFL really sustain nine clubs in suburban Melbourne? And how about the 10 NRL clubs around Sydney?
In the AFL, the plight of the VFL strugglers – clubs such as Melbourne, North Melbourne and Western Bulldogs – remains and ongoing concern; highlighted recently by the debate over equalisation.
The proposed mergers and relocations of the 1980s and 1990s, pushed by the AFL Commission, in the end only shed two VFL clubs (South Melbourne Football Club and Fitzroy Lions) from the competition, as North Melbourne, Richmond, Melbourne and Hawthorn – the latter two coming close to a merger as the “Melbourne Hawks” – fought gallantly for their survival.
North Melbourne, meanwhile, resisted heavy pressure to relocate to the Gold Coast, and are now one of the clubs forced to look outside of their home state for extra revenue and support, committing to its second home in Tasmania.
While this strain on Victorian clubs was an inevitable result of the move to a national competition – as the AFL Commission predicted but could, seemingly, do little about – ground maximisation, the other buzz-word from the AFL’s growth period, would also help wear away at the smaller clubs.
While the move away from suburban grounds into the two mega city stadiums of the MCG and Docklands (Etihad Stadium) has helped contribute to record crowds and gate-takings for the league – which will become so much more valuable once the AFL owns Docklands lock, stock and barrel come 2025 – what effect has it had on the pecking order in Victoria?
The move away from the Whitten Ovals, Waverley Parks, Princes Parks and Windy Hills has eroded the suburban ties that link the VFL clubs with their real roots.
New generations grow up sparsely spread across Melbourne, moving to new suburbs even further from the city and the VFL bases; moving regularly throughout their lives and not necessarily connected to the one area.
With all clubs playing out of the city, the connection Victorians had with their local clubs has weakened, with the risk we are seeing a funneling of support into only a handful of power clubs – think Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon and Richmond – at the expense of the smaller clubs, who are left trying to fill stadiums of 56,000- and 100,000-plus with under 30,000 members/attendees.
In the NRL, suburban grounds are very much still in play, however the likes of Cronulla, Penrith and Manly still feel the pinch of financial constraints, while the Sydney Roosters’ crowd average sits at a paltry 14,934. A number of the NRL’s Sydney suburban clubs rely on profits from leagues clubs and other revenue streams to keep the footy club going.
The situation is more desperate when you consider the NRL’s national footprint pales in comparison to the AFL’s – only three clubs outside of New South Wales and Queensland (Melbourne Storm, Canberra Raiders and New Zealand Warriors).
If the NRL is serious about expansion into foreign lands in West Australia, South Australia and the like, then relocation may become a necessity to balance out the competition.
It remains to be seen whether all these clubs crammed into such small suburban markets can survive as the leagues grow nationally.
But with the expansion of rival codes with generic clubs representing and pulling support from the wider city (think Storm, Rebels, Heart, Victory, Tigers and more in Melbourne), the pressure is building on the smaller, more vulnerable, specific area clubs. This reality is what’s lost in the code war rhetoric, for it’s a very real threat.
If the AFL and NRL were designed from scratch, then they clearly wouldn’t be as heavily weighted in their states of origin.
So at what point do the AFL and NRL cut their losses and do away with or, more likely, relocate the suburban clubs?
Both codes have more markets to conquer if they continue expanding nationally. And while relocation is often ridiculed as a farcical mirage for the club sent packing to a faraway land, the alternative is bankruptcy and complete non-existence.
(For a great example of how relocation impacts the fans left behind, listen to this great program from Radio National.)
So, for example, could the Sharks of Cronulla – $13.5 million debt and reliant on land and facility redevelopments to get out of debt – move to Adelaide, if the NRL deems a team in South Australia necessary for the growth of the game?
Why not? When it comes to relocation in order to facilitate further expansion and streamline the competition, codes and heartland clubs may have no choice.
Follow Adrian on twitter @AdrianMusolino
steve howard
Guest
the brisbane bears came good making a prelim.against the premiers north melbourne in 1996!
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
GOGWS Not really ,it isyour generalisation I took issue with. Your wording "a bunch of failures a very nice generalisation indeed "in WA,NSW QLD and SA.Then you go on ïts only remaining expansion club Melbourne losing money hand over fist"then you mentioned NZ going broke as well,hence my Swans and Bears retort. I explained the financial situation of tthe Storm, that part not all of the money used from the $8m News gets from their profit share supports the Storm.Part used for grassroots.I also mentioned the Crown sponsorship as being one of the largest in oz sport and in the NRL .The fact that Gauci is happy with the financials of the club and how it is progressing is another valid point.So your argument does not hold water there.The value of having a team there ,more than makes up for it by virtue of the Tv deal. Judging by its competitive posiution on the ladder,the crowds it has been getting after the salary cap debacle,it can hardly be classified a failure. Expansion clubs and how convenient to ignore them,include Canberra,Newcastle. Auckland,Nth Qld and Titans(the latter superseding the Chargers(which had over $3m in the bank at the time of closing),the Seagulls,Giants).Please spell out they the current teams are failures. The Titans have today just announced another sponsorship deal with iSelect. http://www.titans.com.au/?s=article-display&id=42975 So much for their failure. Now lets look at the others under the Super league influence. You can classify the Rams and the Mariners as failures.Both hastily conceived ,,and the Mariners being set up where a one team town was alreay in situ.The Crushers were given no chance in such a short time line,and now have bid teams from all over Brisbane wanting to get involved. . As to the Reds and I quote john Sackson the Reds CEO(formerly involved in setting up the Dockers).His views amplified by Gallop and others within the code "There is a misconception that the Reds failed here back in the 90s. In actual fact they didn't fail.they were a victim of the politics and the fallout from the SL establishment war. The average crowds at the less than ideal WACA was 17,500 people a game and crowds as high as 25,26,000 ,so its very fertile ground". Hobbs the chairman of the Reds now noted" We need to emphasise the Western reds didn't fail.Back then we had 18,000 registered members and an average crowd at the WACA of 17,500.We also had to pay for flights and accommodation of visiting teams,which was just ridiculous.and since then we have had a massive influx of people from strong league states which take up permanent residency in WA from Qld,NSW NZ and the UK. Lets face it we have had over 19 kids from our junior ranks leave our state in the past 10 years to go east and play both 1st grade and top level league". The failures are in reality the hastily convened ones eg the Rams,Mariners and Crushers. The situation in 2011 the 2nd of September and the current lie of the NRL land and the teams bidding from the respective areas, .The ones who struggled or were shut down as part of a pece deal,have either been relaced by successful ones,or having fresh bids to be included in an expanded game. It boils down to definition of failure,if there are clubs now in place operating successfully then expansion has worked.If there are new teams from other areas wanting to get in such as the Reds and the Bears,suggest the expansion model via bidding has reinforced the view that so called failures ,were always there to grow in the first place. In effect there is only one area in this country,where expansion is not likely to take place for ages:Adelaide.The other areas where expansion has happened or temporarily ceased,cannot be considered failures as of 2011. I agree with your last para.the numbers of players and officials needed in a NRL club is far less. TheNRL will only move into areas,that can show they have the necessary financial and community support.A conservative yet financially repsonsible thing to do. With at least 7 areas currently bidding and I understand a couple more have popped up,the happenings for expansion in the past,have little relevance to the rush to get on board today.
GoGWS
Roar Guru
mmm...you're being a bit fast and loose with the truth there....did I in fact suggest all expansion clubs were a failure?......what I said there were a bunch of RL failures, not all failures...an expansion RL club that has worked is the Brisbane Broncos... where I do think the NRL has an advantage in expansion is running costs and size of operation...RL start up clubs require substantially less off-field and on-field staff and lower costs....just to put things into perspective, a couple of seasons ago I saw an article that confirmed that Broncos revenue (the highest in the NRL) was less than North Melbourne (the lowest in the AFL)....so when the NRL does expand if can do on a much lower cost base...the money being poured into GWS could support three NRL teams....so the NRL has the advantage in this way...it can move into areas at far lower cost...
PAW
Guest
It would be great to see an NRL team in Adelaide. It would be a massive step for the game down here. I have been associated with the SARL for 1 year now and I can tell you its a tough market, however, we are now putting some structures in place and making progress. I see the best way forward down here in Adelaide is for a relocation. I would say a team like the Sharks or Roosters...or dare I say Bulldogs. Along with a relocation should come TV air time. Apart from midnight on Friday there is no free to air RL. This is something that is being looked at now by the NRL (or whatever they decide to call it after November), and we expect more free to air time for the next TV rights deal. I can say the market in Adelaide may be tough, however, there are more than plenty of people down here that are open to supporting a local team, they just want to be guaranteed the proper & necessary long term support from the league. The RAMS have left a bitter taste in the mouths of the locals here, but its certainly nothing that cant be fixed. The RAMS actually had a good following down here, and the player numbers were very healthy. The RAMS were just not supported for the long haul... The word trickling down is that the next expansion will also involve a big incentive for a relocation (ie. a Sydney team). There has been a lot said about the recent AFL expansion into traditional RL regions. The NRL now need to look at opportunities in traditional AFL regions, and from my personal experience there are plenty!! I definitely believe the codes can co-exist quite happily, after all there's no use in getting all bitter about it. I say, move on and embrace the best of both!
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Dingo Illawara merged ,because the struggling leagues club could not provide the funding one of the major reasons.I suggest to you the emerged entitiy has been an outstanding success. North Sydney Bears were not shut down by their own doing.They have a ground at Gosford,and a bid team anxious to get back in the comp. Yeah the West Tigers,you apparently conveniently overlooked that so called "failed " merger that won the grand final in 2005>the crowd at the packed ANZ stadium were Tigers supporters in abundance.The same merged team gets full houses at leichardt and at campbelltown.So much for a failure. You have a shot calling the äppalling 'named "West Tigers,when we have the Greater Western Sydney Giants that encompasses Canberra.Oh wait there is a team called the Western Bulldogs . If you spent a little time reading the thread,you will find an AFL flag waver came on board,in his own inimitable style,suggesting all expansion clubs were failures. Warriors really.Cowboys sure.Raiders LOL,Newcastle please,Titans privately owned,record sponsorship,stll doing ok despite the crowds this year(have replaced the Chargers/Seagulls/Giants) so there is a financially backed team on the GC. . His comments were thus BS. As to the others I have already elaborated The Rams considered failures.The Reds see http://www.sportsnewsfirst.com.au/articles/2011/05/11/tallis-wants-nrl-team-in-perth/ Read exactly what I stated.in my previous posts".If these(NRL) are considered failures then the Lions and Swans are hardly success stories." IOW I drew the same analogy.
Renegade
Guest
Hahaha i see your point of view. In all seriousness though, the dogs would almost certainly stay in Sydney. I'm not a dragons fan however i'm sure majority of their fans and players would be upset if they moved away from wollongong - just about all their juniors are from the illawarra region.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
I love that post. :D Brilliant! :D
DanielS
Guest
This was just a little free thinkng on my part but i was under the impression the Dragons had a stronger link to kograh rather than with the Gong. That would keep the bulldogs in sydney. (I will be honest the only thing i think of when i hear bulldogs NRL is that chaser skit with Chris selling Balaclavas, Knuckle dusters and butterfly knives to the supporters)
amazonfan
Roar Guru
Ian, you may very be right that the deal isn't impressive for other clubs, however it's a record for Melbourne. That is what is important. The fact that Melbourne has signed a record sponsorship deal indicates that it is in pretty good darn health and it's not going anywhere! :D
amazonfan
Roar Guru
Absolutely, I think it's great. :D
amazonfan
Roar Guru
I'm a Melbourne supporter, and I don't know any Melbourne supporter who thinks the club needs to merge. I don't think you should judge the club's supporters or members based on this business associate. Anyway, there is really no need for Melbourne to merge. We're in very good health.
Dingo
Guest
I forgot to mention the Illawarra Steelers, I know they "merged" with St george but there are more people claiming to be St George supporters than Illawarra supporters. Also North Sydney Bears, where are they now? Balmain Tigers another "merger", but how many Balmain supporters claim the appallingly named Wests Tigers as their team? 10 teams have effectively folded from the ARL/NRL/Superleague since 1997. And you have the audacity to suggest that the Bears/Lions and Sydney Swans are effectively failures.
Jack Russell
Guest
No problem? The Dogs, North and Melbourne have been on AFL life support for around a decade. If the AFL wasn't as flush with money as it is then they would have gone to the wall, ala Fitzroy.
sledgeandhammer
Guest
Good point Bakkies, this article seems to have completely forgotten about the success of super rugby expansion in Perth & Melbourne.
JamesP
Guest
". in South Africa there is also great portential for AFL to over take soccer as the number 1 sport for the impoverished black people" Pull your head in mate...
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Whats even more amazing is that seemingly sensible people like sheed, turbodewd and so on spout the same ideas - and its not even like they are being paid to hold them.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Bakkies, Because having a bad year cripples you in the AFL. Just ask any West Coast Eagles supporter ... Seriously, if you dont think Gold Coast will improve, you havent been paying any attention to this season. Likewise, Adelaide and Port are just having a down year - the move to Adelaide Oval, and the related decoupling from the SANFL, will do both teams good.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
To put this in perspective, that $6m over 3 years is about what Cronulla gets from their Leagues club in good years.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
The Cattery, I have a business associate who is a Dees member. He said he voted for the last merger, and thinks Melbourne need to merge. If your own members wont die in a ditch for you, then good luck to you - you'll need it.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Big Ben You can play around with description" failure ",in whatever configuration you choose. Using the examples with the Lions Bears and Swans intially ,they are on a par. Funny few wish to bring up the problems ,associated with them over the years,when we are told all expansions are a success.. If teams are asked to shut down as part of a peace deal,through no fault of their own ,such as the Reds,Crushers and Chargers with money in the bank,is a sign of failure ,then that is not my definition. If I am a good employee,and my company shutsdown due to cheap imports.I am deemed a failure in your eyes!And ditto the company. The Reds will be back ,they have the financial backing,and support to be successful,without propping up by the head body.I repeat the NRL/ARL and even the current Reds bid team maintain the old Reds were not a failure.You disagree,that's life. The Rams and Mariners were failures.Both hastily conceived by SL,not by the real historical administration. The Seagulls and Giants failed because they were in nthn NSW not Qld,and hardly representative of the GC proper.They have been revived under theTitans and previously the Chargers .IOW there is now a strong NRL presence on the GC,communitywise,grassroots wise,spondsorshipwise and the crowds are down due to their lowly position on the table.If that is classified as a failure ,you be my guest.It is in contrast with the views of the NRL admin and the Titan's mgt Now getting on to the other supposed "failures".Cowboys show me where they are a current failure,ditto Warriors and the Storm or even the Raiders. None of these teams were propped up,given huge sums of money in establishment finance by the head body. Like many I suggest you ignore the immediate and long term affects of the SL war,which had a big bearing on events.