If the AFL really wants to grow it needs to embrace lower crowds

PS NZ would without hesitation appropriate our code as theirs while it is accurate to say there are significant power brokers in NZ who would ensure re branding of our game was conditional to any expansion on their behalf. Not unlike the Kiwi Fruit appropriation........

......the vast majority of those playing the code in NZ were from Australia courtesy of the Gold Rush while the footy disappeared from their once war broke out as Australians returned to these fatal shores. Again these novel and irrelevant anecdotes are no reason to entertain any proposal to gift NZ AFL status. This is exactly the sort of hard sell I allude to, the hyperbole around a non existent heritage for our game. My issue is that if the hard sell was ever realised the games domestic demographics would be expediently overlooked beyond what they are now, for what is essentially a nation of anti Australian sentiment, holding no affinity for our code beyond it being a novelty to be parodied. For heavens sake, Canberra the NT and Tassie to name a few are still to be represented at the highest tier of our game and yet we continue to be insulted with theses sorts of red herring proposals.

Wow. Simply weird to accuse a non existent NZ entity to want to “appropriate our game”. And yes a NZ team makes little commercial sense. Without NZ players the seed would just not germinate. But you are entirely wrong to state there is no NZ affinity or history with the game. In the 1870s when all football codes were fluid and people were experimenting with the new idea of “football “ NZ had a number of clubs that played what was then known as Victorian rules. This was before Rugby had even been fully codified. One NZ club played with its own version in which the ball had to be bounced every 4 yards. In 1888 a celebrated all Maori team toured Victoria and the UK playing under a number of rules- especially rugby and Vic rules. It played 8 games of Victorian rules in Melbourne winning three matches including one against South Melbourne the reigning premiers of the day. After the 1870s the game was taken over in NZ by Rugby, in no small part because wet weather meant many Vic Rules matches had to be abandoned due to rain and muddy fields ( still a consideration). Nevertheless in the early 20th century there was a revival of the code in NZ with a number of clubs. In 1908 Melbourne staged a Jubilee celebration to mark 50 years of Australian rules football. Teams from Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia, NSW, Tasmania, Queensland and New Zealand competed. The grand final was between Victoria and WA but New Zealand won 6 of its 11 matches on that tour. Sadly after World War 1 the code withered in NZ. More’s the pity. I personally wish the Bledisloe Cup was a premier international contest of Australian Rules rather than Rugby Union football.

.....that should read 440k

Absolutely and categorically NO to NZ. That would bleed the available talent no end while they do not deserve any consideration to be afforded membership of our indigenous code at any tier, let alone the elite tier, certainly not before all domestic options are fulfilled. FNQ has far more affinity with our indigenous game than NZ does, in fact so does Pluto. NZ have long denigrated our game, they are not integral to our Federation while there have been some Kiwi power brokers during past pie in the sky negotiations to gift NZ an AFL entity demanding firstly that the AFL re brand by dropping all reference to 'Australia' before they would consider supporting any proposal to expand to NZ. They would appropriate our code as their own which would be the beginning of the end to the cultural identity of our great game, to be sure. Any hard sell of NZ as some Australian Footy sleeping giant is a nonsense and dramatically overstated. They already have been afforded way too much privilege in terms of piggy backing on our domestic leagues at the expedience of respective established local heartlands.

Hobart is a far more suitable city to base an AFL entity I believe Adam. I know that there are huge infrastructure challenges across the city given these have not kept up with its exponential growth but Hobart is the obvious base for any Tasmanian AFL brand. Any effective infrastructure will simply be integral to future planning I would expect. Personally as a visitor to your beautiful state, I prefer Hobart over Launceston, the latter being more a charming and vibrant country town but lacking the cosmopolitan dynamic that Hobart offers.

Canberra is catching Newcastle and offers a compelling Australian Footy culture, over 100 years of heritage in fact. Definitely a better option than Newy.

Concur. Newy is a League bastion and a footy monoculture in that respect but it is a great city and may one day be in the mix.

I believe the talent pool is suffering and that any premature expansion would compromise the quality of the competition at the elite tier further, to be sure. I also feel strongly that the AFL have been complicit in a neglect of the GR through their expedience of the games heartlands. These include Tassie the ACT and the NT who already provided them with effective markets to expand with some substance behind them. This option would have served the code in a very different way, rather than the myopic criteria to grow by television, which is only about the filthy lucre and flies in the face of valuing any cultural capital. The GC and GWS are already failures while Sydney and Brissy are both relocations that have brought much pain to the devoted but ultimately proved more successful.

.......they would play P.M. fixtures J.B. which would placate the Tele Behemoths as well. Footy is no longer a Winter code truth be told since the pre season is Feb and I can testify that Canberra in Feb is stinking hot.

.......I hope you are correct Chris. The AFL are the epitome of a neoliberal behemoth or at least are beholden to them, while they espouse the very same philosophy as the D.a's of the world of which there are to numerous to counter. These are the brave neo rationalists of our time that prescribe to the dictum 'the market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve' while they are desensitised to quality and substance and have devolved 'consumer' while we mere 'supporters' are scrambling to justify our very existence. More power to you I say.

.....nevertheless there are some fairly obscure demographics represented in the NFL. I know that population is a factor comparing the U.S. market with ours but I do believe the NT, Tassie and Canberra would be patronised well in this respect, moreso than the GC and GWS. The footy pedigree and established market of these three will ensure a real rivalry which can't be concocted with the likes of GWS and that does impact on television viewership. Perhaps this is about quality v quantity and which of approach will endure over time.

......unfortunately this is correct. The AFL as with all governing bodies today only view 'growth' through the lens of television rights. Paradoxically this is killing codes in the traditional heartlands. The AFL should be leading from the front as supposed custodians of our indigenous game to create some equity i.e. a balance of commercial and cultural capital. God knows they can afford it when you consider the good $'s being thrown after bad on plastic illusions i.e. GWS.

.....exactly and thats what is so wrong about sport today - its dependancy on tele networks.

.......to make the game 'truly national' - you MUST include the nations Capital surely?

This is no revelation in terms of propositions. I certainly concur re a more boutique approach to growth. These vacuous stadiums rarely fulfil their potential in terms of capacity while going a tad retro to a smaller fit, you simply spread the capacity across venues, offering a more tribal atmosphere. Our game needs this right now, to go part way in braking the shackles of a sanitised culture that overly commodifies sport through a dependancy on BIG TELE. As a long suffering footy supporter from Canberra (population 44K with a regional potential of up around 700k including the Riverina) I would dearly love to see the nations capital affirmed in this way, while Tassie must be afforded membership of the big league as a priority, before considering any other options. I see the NT included here as well, based on their second to none per cap support for the code as well as the incredible GR pedigree they have at their disposal. That said, population would be a negative in throwing their hat in the ring but any proposal could be a shared arrangement between Cairns and Darwin perhaps?

Interesting read Chris. The ability to provide sufficient talent for 22 teams is a big challenge… but populations grow so could be a goer in time. NT – just too hot, and small population. Perhaps have struggling Melbourne clubs host non-vic teams, like Hawks and North in Tassie, in Darwin (3-4?) and Alice Springs (1) on a regular basis, partly subsidised by AFL and state govt. Tassie team/Melbourne consolidation – stay at 18 teams, but reduce Melb teams by 1 (merger or “relegation” to vfl) and introduce Tassie Devils 20 teams- perhaps in 10 years have a 3rd WA team (2nd largest heartland state) and Tassie Devils join at same time. And have a 19 round comp with 2 lots of split rounds.

My thoughts would be to increase the number of teams to 20 and introduce a conference style system. It doesn't have to be region based as such.

I'm just not convinced that bigger equals better. Do we really have enough talent in the country to support 18 teams as it is? Are we making the game a better product by diluting its talent base? Also, as an South Australian who has lived in Sydney for about half of my life, I can say with some certainty that there is not the demand for a third team there. Sydney siders love their Rugby League, and its being managed well at the moment, delivering an improved product. They're not for turning. GWS would suffer if a third team were introduced, and may lose any growth potential it has. I also worry about the impact of further expansion on second tier leagues like SANFL and WAFL. These competitions have recovered somewhat from the last expansion, and have loyal followings. The dilution effect of AFL expansion would surely impact those comps as well. I'd rather see the AFL focused on improving the product, and the spectator experience. I'd be open to a team in Tassie as long as there was a commensurate reduction in Melbourne based clubs, or if Gold Coast fails, which they may. Territorians love their footy but there just isn't the population to make a sustainable business case. Perhaps either Adelaide or Port could adopt them in the same way Hawthorn has with Tassie.