Canberra would definetly be my pick. It will be one of those small cities that will have an increased growth rate due to current housing issues in the current state capitals (although housing isn't cheap in the ACT either). Player like Soldo, Steele and Green are all from the ACT as well proving it has potential to produce more players.
I agree with you. The appetite is there as shown by GWS games. It also feels like it makes sense to have a team for our national game in the nations capital.
Canberra should be considered not simply on the basis of its population along with Qbyn but also on the fact that is a geographic hub that services a broader rural community much of which is heartland Rugby League. This an untapped market both in terms of eyeballs but also in terms of future players the AFL needs to consider using a combination of GWS and a Canberra based team in almost a pincer movement to raise the profile of the game in rural and remote NSW. When I moved to Canberra the town was evenly divided between Australian Rules and Rugby League, however with the entrance of the Raiders in 1982 it has become a town that heavily supports one team, the Raiders, and these fans have a second team either a Sydney NRL Team, the Brumbies or an AFL team. Putting a team permanently in Canberra will pretty quickly bring back support and may actually give the AFL the edge. Remember this is about much more than Canberra it is about using Canberra's position as a regional hub to raise the profile of AFL in regional NSW.
Thank you for saying the part about GWS needing to play at home. They play 8 games in their “heartland” a year. Thats not enough. They disappeared from home from March 16 to May 18 this year. Who wants to follow a team that isn’t there for 2 months. Yes they played the Swans at the SCG in that block but that’s it. Teams like GWS and the Suns (who also just disappear for extended periods) need to be playing as close to every second week as possible at home to build up support. I also understand that they have to leave for 6 weeks, but even that seems excessive. I’m assuming the Royal Show needs a ‘bump in’ and ‘bump out’ but if you are clever you could at least try to get the last possible day before they have to leave, make sure you play the Swans and get back in as soon as possible, along with the Blacktown option mentioned.
Establishing Canberra as the 20th AFL team while reallocating Greater Western Sydney Giants' games from Canberra back to Western Sydney offers multiple strategic advantages for the AFL. This move could intensify the AFL's presence and growth in Western Sydney, an area with a high potential audience but currently underrepresented in terms of local game offerings. The Giants have already shown significant influence in the region; however, the current arrangement that includes playing several games in Canberra may dilute the potential impact and fan base consolidation in Western Sydney. Greater Western Sydney's coach, Adam Kingsley, has expressed the need for a stronger local league presence to boost grassroots participation and overall interest in the AFL within Western Sydney. This area represents a largely untapped market with a population of 2.5 million people, providing a unique opportunity for substantial growth in viewership and fan engagement
Canberra makes the most sense. Population is the largest, it’s surrounded by some fairly strong afl towns. Travelling won’t be an issue. If it wants to finally conquer NSW it needs to conquer the ACT.
Canberra population while it includes Queanbeyan there probably undersells the actual footprint. There's another couple hundred thousand people in the surrounding couple hours of drive distance, and heading west it's stronger footy country
Very interesting and succinct. Canberra makes a lot of sense. Head office dropped the ball IMO in the 80s regarding Canberra which was at the time 50/50 split between rugby league and AFL . population growth, already reasonable crowds and already suitable stadium make it very doable. Head office is very quiet regarding this option, I hope they pursue it
People forget that this decision has nothing to do with population, it's participation. Both Canberra and Darwin won't work, as the AFL want sustainability and both these options won't offer that. Norwood ticks that box, are strong financially, have strong support, very successful and are the best club outside the AFL.
Have a Riverina team based in Canberra and play a couple of home games in Albury/Wodonga and Wagga. That region will have 1 million people in a decade. With a lot of existing AFL fans that would love their own team. A lot of seriously good players have come from that region.
Robertson Oval or Lavington would be great options to play games and widen their supporter base just depends on GWS because junior academies are set up all across the Riverina.
@@KerrySkullOKeeffe-qd8qo yeah the academies would need to alter, and Riverina could have the whole Murray river region including the Victorian side of the border
If anything, put the 20th team in Canberra. Also put a stop in adding new teams in to the AFL for the next 20 years from the point of set team first AFL game, but with the proviso of having of examining of having a ten year fine look in the viability of the 9 Melbourne teams. In that there is a desire in having a Darwin based team. It should be done within the context of either moving a Melbourne team, like a North Melbourne, or Western Bulldogs, or relegation a Melbourne team down to the VFL and making room for an establishment of a new non-Victorian team. Personally the better option for now is to look at the Melbourne team that is the worst performance on the bases of home game attendance, dependence on AFL handouts, win loss ratio, and average memberships, and look at the stats over the space of ten years. What ever team, or teams that are repeatedly rank the worse. Only then make a deal to move that team
What matters most regardless is money and whether we like or not that's a fact. With Perth hitting 3 million within ten years the whole divide of Eagles and Dockers supporters is a non issue. They already have a stadium that probably will be upgraded to 80,000 capacity and i believe an agreement will be reached for the 3rd WA team.
I want Darwin, I know there is doubts about Darwin and NT is growing place. But you make a great point about the amount of team above the Barassi line.
WA won't be going for the third licence, they've just come out and said so. Norwood are ready,as proven by their success in holding 2 Gather Round games.
Did you not listen to the video? Perth's population is already considerably bigger than Adelaide's, and constantly pulling further away. A third Perth club might not be priority for team 20, but to suggest that bringing in a third Adelaide-based club before a third Perth-based club is ludicrous. No, it's not fair to make judgements based on population figures, but it is what it is.
@@eddielong8663 I certainly did listen to the video actually. You obviously don't know too much about Norwood then if you believe a Perth based side would be ahead of them. No club outside the AFL has the credentials that Norwood boast, let alone their history and success. I get sick of telling people that participation, not population are important for the next licence. The AFL clubs have stated that they don't want more composite sides. The AFL are keen on festivals like the Gather Round scenario, which Norwood hosted successfully. This is an advantage that SA holds over everyone else. Ties with community are important and Norwood are very supportive with their zone on the west coast. Norwood won the Ken Gratton Community award from the AFL which is a massive plus for Norwood's bid. Norwood still have a huge following as witnessed by their grand final crowds since 1997 when Port Adelaide were admitted. Norwood tick the important boxes.
This is by far the best video I've seen on the subject. Just a point about economics, I think median income is a better indicator of viability. GSP is good for a rough guide at an economy, but it's inflated by the top end. Median income shows how much money the average supporter will actually have to spend of memberships and merchandise. And by median income, fans in Canberra have 40% more than in Perth.
NT is s good idea...most revenue comes from TV rites, not attendance. The air conditioned stadium in Darwin will be built. Socially it will be a great boost for the Territory and will be far more interesting for the AFL following public than any other option. Like many others, I think that there are too many teams in Melbourne and clubs such as North Melbourne and St Kilda that have had little success and small membership, should be relocated. NT Kangaroos? North Queensland Saints? That way we could remain an 18 team competition..... for a while. Canberra is just too boring a proposition to consider.
You wouldn't be saying that about the Saints and Roos if you just happened to be a lifeling member with either those two clubs. With that said, the Roos should've relocated to the ACT ages ago. Back in the 90's when the competition was transitioning from the old system to the well-run business it is now. It's almost as if the success the Roos had in the late 90's ended up being detrimental in a weird sort of way. It gave the club a false sense of security while other struggling Melbourne-based clubs were making hard decisions on their futures. Once North's on-field success slowly faded away, there really wasn't much else for them sadly, and all they could do was go back to the old "shinboner spirit" rubbish.
@@eddielong8663 My Grandad played for The Saints but they have really struggled both on and off the field from day 1. The Swans still have a very large following from the old South supporters...so a relocation can still work. North missed out on an enormous opportunity to be the Gold Coast Kangaroos when the league offered them a very lucrative $100 million deal. It would have worked as the old Kanga supporters would still have been able to see their side every 2-3 weeks in Melbourne. The AFL is still too Melbourne centric and this needs to change...and I'm Victorian.
As a Norwood and Crows supporter it’s a nice dream but I can’t see it happen, I think Canberra is a no brainer it has support for AFL and as explained is within close proximity to other towns out side of the ACT that have big interest in Aussie Rules
I feel having a 3rd team in Perth or Adelaide will kill off the showdown and Perth derby. It’s a bit like a league soccer where the 3rd team killed the Sydney and Melbourne derby.
Canberra is the obvious choice. I’m biased as I live there but what outsiders may not realise is that a lot of people from Sydney, Melbourne, etc relocate to Canberra for work. A lot of the population comes from AFL heartland and earns a good income. I think attendances would be pretty solid, especially if the team wasn’t garbage like GC have been for most of their existence.
How is Canberra the obvious choice ? GWS are a reasonably successful team but haven't built up a strong following or big supporter base for over 10 years. How long then will it take Canberra to attract crowds, 20 years ? Who's going to pick up the shortfall for that whole period ? It is and has been a development league, so the step to the AFL is way too far. The other killer is that NSW is a rugby state, hence why GWS struggle.
In my ideal scenario, I would relocate North Melbourne (sorry Roos fans, but an under-20k crowd average for a footy team in VIC just isn't good enough) to North Queensland, of which it's unofficial proposed-state flag shares the same colours of the Kangaroos team (blue and white) and could still be called North (officially the North Queensland Kangaroos). This would give the Roos more financial backing from the league and a new frontier to take hold of, while still keeping their history in the same way that South Melbourne did when it moved and became the Sydney Swans. The overall number of teams in Melbourne would reduce to 8. Then, with the introduction of the Tasmanian team as the 19th team in the competition, I would introduce a Canberra team as the 20th. As a result, the majority of teams in the AFL would be outside of VIC for the first time in the history of the league.
I am not disagreeing with you or having a go, but how would you overcome the financial issues of a 3rd Qld team? Until you spend time there it is difficult to understand how much Qld loves Rugby League and is very one eyed in this passion. The Broncos are the only sporting club in Australia that posts a profit each year and they have a supporter base that challenges and often exceeds Collingwood in numbers. With the introduction of the Dolphins who are an established club ala Port Adelaide who bring a solid supporter base and provide options to Brisbane fans who do not like the Broncos plus of course the benefits of a local rivalry. Plus there is huge support for some of the old Sydney Clubs in Qld, I remember seeing a home game for the Gold Coast against the Dragons and despite the Dragons being the visiting team from NSW the game sold out and the crowd was 2/3 Dragon's supporters. In that environment the commercial pressures for a new Qld team would be difficult and unfortunately the North Melbourne brand is pretty devalued at the moment. What do you think would be the strategies to ensure that the team is not like the Swans who spent 20 years as a basket case before they improved to be a big AFL Club? Noting that the Swans had the advantage of the biggest and richest city in Australia without any other AFL competition and it still took almost two decades. Do you think the AFL just needs to suck it up and fund them until they are successful or do you think there is another way? Interested in your perspective.
I agree with pretty much everything in this video. Canberra will be my best bet… but if it’s proven to be too deep into the “too hard” basket because of GWS, stadium issues, then Norwood would get the nod. I so totally think a Perth3 would work on paper… a true northern burbs representative side while the Eagles solidify themselves as the blanket WA side, but WAFC are just looking after their self interests and have no foresight.
The thing is that it is in the too hard basket. Far too many questions than answers for Canberra to have it's own licence. It has to be sustainable, which means that Canberra will require funding support from the AFL. GWS represents Canberra and support is average even when GWS is more than competitive and winning games. It's still not even in the top five sports for adults to follow. Squash is bigger in Canberra than the AFL ! It's still situated in a rugby state which also doesn't help their cause.
Disagree with your comments. The Giants need to be the team to service NSW and Canberra. Pull up their socks. Eddie McGuire is spot on there. Play home and away matches there and commit to the area over an extended period. Give Canberra 6-8 matches per year with Giants Sydney and North... playing matches there. That way GWS pull their weight. Get rid of the G too, and add Canberra to the name.
Adelaide doesn't have the supporter base for three clubs. Do people still barrack for Norwood in the SANFL? Would Norwood have to change their colours as they are too close to Melbourne's design. I think SANFL has more support than WAFL.
Regarding your opening table, it's unreasonable to divide Adelaide's and Perth's populations by a third while ignoring the competition a Canberra team would face from the Raiders.
The thing abour Canberra is that it isn't just wealthy. It is stable. WA booms and busts with resource cycles. The ACT is pretty insulated from things like that. It also has very, very high disposable income compared to most place so Canberrans have unusually high recreational budgets. I know a bunch who hold GWS memberships in addition to their main team even though they really care about them.
Tasmania FC recently released who bought their foundation jumpers. $90-$100 for what will be most people's second or third team. Per capita, Canberrans bought more than folks in Victoria, SA or WA. The market of AFL fans in Canberra is incredibly underutilised.
@@canberrapear7219 yep, I know people who support their old family team, hold GWS membership and something like Gold Coast as well. Not a shock at all that they'd back Tassie!
I think its disgusting the conditions imposed on Tasmania to get their team approved when the Geelong stadium was allowed to exist for so long without electricity or running water
Should we expand to 20 teams or reduce to 18. The AFL have tried to get North Melbourne to relocate for many years now, whether to Tasmania of the Gold Coast. The Melbourne market is too saturated. Sydney is by far the largest growth market and a 3rd team in Sydney will be the focus, in 25 years from now. So teams like North Melbourne, The Western Bulldogs and St Kilda have that long to prove their value to the competition. If they can't then they will face the choice of merger, relocation or death.
Agree. They should have bean relocated a long time ago. Instead of expansion teams, they should have moved North Melbourne to Canberra , Bulldogs to western Sydney (they already rebranded as “Western”, and the name Bulldogs shouldn’t be a problem given that the Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs are from another area of Sydney and play a different sport). and St. Kilde to Gold Coast. And yes, in the long run, a third NSW team, preferably Sydney of course, by far biggest potential market, seems inevitable. But at the moment, they should just support GWS and wait till they are fully embraced. Together with Gold Coast, they still have the by far smallest crowds and lowest number of members. Wouldn’t make sense to create/admit a new team when an existing team hasn’t even build a decent following.
Perth is going to hit 3 million before 2034. The question in Perth is whether they can utilise the South West cities like Bunbury and Busselton for games, considering they're 100 to 140 minutes away from Optus Stadium by car. But for any team based in Mandurah is 60 to 100 minutes away.
Ballarat would be a great spot simply because you get the Melbourne and Geelong away fans to boost attendances and it is an AFL stronghold. And Ballarat and the west of Melbourne is the fasting growing region in the nation. In 50 years time Melbourne and Ballarat will be one big conurbation.
I reckon they want a roof in Tassie not just for the wind, but because they want to maximise attendance to guarantee the club's success. It's a smaller market that doesn't grow the game to new fans, so they need it to succeed. Without a roof, crowds WILL drop on cold and windy days.
NT should have it just send the Saints to Canberra so the congestion in Melbourne is released amongst the teams or give Canberra the team but send north Melbourne to Darwin. NT has the highest participation for footy although the registration is the lowest but that fix itself once/ if a team is announced yes it’s romantic that’s why we all want it he’ll if the afl wants to they can get an academy in png as they love our game to 2nd behind league and as for the aboriginals and just in general people living in the NT they may not want to move down to the cold depths in Melbourne also u might see the likes of the Rioli’s go up north and others alike for culture reasons
Or Merge saints and north and send them to the NT 18 teams leaves possible more teams in the future 3rd wa? And either another east coast team or international one
For Joondalup team all matches at Optus Stadium. No one will put money in to develop Joondalup for footy. The Stadium deals will ensure that all matches must be there. Only 30km away. Perth is one of the longest cities in the world so Perth people are used to traveling. Interestingly, a lot of Dockers fans are also based in suburbs in the area too. But would hurt the Eagles more. If they could convert all the English to AFL then you would actually grow the game. Train is going to Yanchep soon which is further up.
Joondalup has more English people than anywhere in Aust. Top 5 suburbs. Many English and S Africans. They love soccer. But they love their sport and beach, so not really a concern. West Perth is at Joondalup. A club with a strong and passionate supporter base traditionally. It would be tempting to use West Perth name. Red with blue sash. Unfortunately, WAFL has struggled for 30 years. So by the time West Perth come in, their traditional fans would all be over 65 and probably not switch. Their kids are often lost to WAFL. All matches at Optus Stadium. No one will put money in to develop Joondalup for footy. The Stadium deals will ensure that all matches must be there. Only 30km away.
We don’t need more teams, we need less…… too many teams for a National Competition that are based in Melbourne. Ideally some of the Melbourne teams need to merge. Leaving 2 teams in Perth, 2 teams in Adelaide, 2 in Queensland, 2 in NSW , 1 in Tasmania, 7 in Victoria. 16 Teams that is more than enough and television and venue arrangements would be much more realistic.
They should have moved North Melbourne to Canberra before the NSWRL created the Raiders. Canberra Kangaroos sounds good, it’s only a one our flight from Melbourne so even the old North supporter base could travel to home games pretty regularly, relatively similar climate, a relatively high amount of people with Victorian roots and as already mentioned a very interesting and promising market. Would have also been great strategically for Aussie Rules/VFL, you’d have moved the Barassi line significantly northeast for good. Now it is harder to have a Canberra team with two other top tier professional football (Rugby) teams there. But given that Canberra/ACT is still a relatively populous area and growing quickly (if the current trend continues, they’ll reach the million within 20 years), it would still make the most sense. A Canberra AFL team would probably overtake the Brumbies quickly given that Rugby Union is on a steep decline, and could enter the (almost) untapped AFL market there. GWS have up to 11 thousand attendance there, that is more than two thirds of the average Raiders attendance, and that even though GWS are still mostly seen as a “foreign” team and play only 2-3 games there per season, and usually small games. In the long term, 20-30 years, they could probably overtake the Raiders (maybe even relatively easily). And there is still (as mentioned) the wider area around/southwest of the ACT, which largely Aussie rules territory, with cities like Wagga Wagga being less than a 3 hours drive away. So supporters from that area could still attend numerous home games a season if they are passionate enough and playing games in the Rivera region wouldn’t a difficult ting since Canberra residents can easily drive there for a few games if they want.
Why do people keep bringing up North Melbourne as the only option for relocation. It's not hard to do a little research before coming up with these suggestions. The Raiders were playing in the NRL before the Swans were shipped to Sydney, so South Melbourne would have been the first option.in those days. Also, in the early to mid 1980's North were in a reasonably healthy position both on and off the field, it was teams like Footscray, Fitzroy, Richmond and St Kilda that were rattling tins trying to keep their clubs afloat, so they too would have been options for relocation ahead of North. And dare I say it, St Kilda would be a better option for relocation these days as well as they still have a sizeable debt while North is in a far more financially secure position.
@@Leftfield71 oh I would relocate of other teams too. I just feel Canberra and the Kangas are a match. The Raiders entered the NSWRL the same year the Swans moved to Sydney (1982). And: “The prospect of North Melbourne playing home games in Canberra was first raised publicly as early as 1984, with the club expressing an interest in playing a role in developing a national competition.” It is not crazy what I am saying, the VFL/AFL have been thinking of relocating North since the 80s. Canberra was one of the most reasonable options.
Joondalup wouldn’t work. South west WA is (I think) the most compelling. I agree Bunbury doesn’t have a large enough population, but, it would be a south west team with an identity that encompasses Dunsborough, yallingup, Margaret River, Busselton etc. It’s already a brilliant tourist destination for surfing and wine. Boutique 25,000 seat stadium at Bunbury and you’re sorted. Maybe called the South West Sharks.
If the sparsely populated region south of Perth is getting a club, then Ballarat and Bendigo should each be getting their own clubs as well. Oh, and Albury-Wodonga also gets to have its own club that represents the Riverina. See where this is going?
@@eddielong8663 That’s not the point at all. This is the point: VIC - There’s no way another team will be considered in Victoria AFL - should they want a 20th team WA - footy mad state SW WA - pop 375,000 Are people/tourists already drawn to the area? Yes! World class surf and world class wine. Proximity to Perth - 2 hours Would players like to live there? I think yes It’s not about giving every small town a team. It’s about the best location for a team
I reckon Dillon said a nothing comment really meant to dampen the talk. Fact is that it won't be even considered for a number of years. WAFC has been doing their sums and there has been govt analysis too, due to the role govt has in funding footy. WAFC funds junior footy development and competitions in WA. Eagles and Dockers are owned by WAFC and each pay dividends on the profit each year. Eagles are the major contributors. 3 clubs doesn't necessarily mean more profits for WAFC long term. Stadium deal and corporate support is critical for profitability. A decrease in corporates and attendances could really hurt the Stadium deal. You can't get the crowds dropping or you will see less revenue for the clubs and therefore less dividends to the WAFC which they don't want. So not that straight forward. Govts also help fund the WAFC as part of them leaving Subiaco Oval and own the Stadium, but aren't the operators. Three clubs mind you also make the revenue stream more predictable, as having Eagles and Dockers near the bottom is disastrous for WAFC finances. Then the AFL are under pressure to fund WA footy more, like they do to the rest of Australia. So they may be interested in a third team from Perth, if it meant they didn't have pay for junior development. AFL don't like spending.
Let Gold Coast and Brisbane play some home and away matches in NT. That would give them up to 6 matches a year, which is frankly more than enough. Then see what crowds they average. See how many people pay for the tickets and the revenue generated. In addition if GC playing there a few times a year they would be selling memberships. How many? NT has a moveable population, so people stay for short periods. I doubt they'd swap AFL clubs to support Darwin.
West Perth used to be the Cardinals (Cardies) but changed their name to Falcons. Pity. West Perth is the iconic name if you want WAFL supporters support... but how many thousand fans would that be? There is already a team called Perth Demons, so it won't be called Perth. The fans and club have refused over 30 years to rename it Joondalup. So naming the team is critical. You have to weigh up how much advantage they would get from being linked to West Perth. Versus any support from linking to Joondalup, which is only about 35 years old area anyway. While there is a big hub there now, I'm not sure if there is any real regional pride with it. The northern suburbs go on and on. Its just that a place called Joondalup was named and then appeared about 35 years ago.
South West isn't an option. The stats often include from Mandurah to Albany, which is a large area, but spread out. Combine a Mandurah Peel team with Bunbury? South West Thunder (after Peel Thunder). But a Mandurah team won't convince South West people as Mandurah is now outer metro area. You can't travel by public transport from Mandurah to Bunbury. Mandurah is a sleepy town that doesn't seem to attend footy in numbers . WAFC won't want to develop stadiums in Bunbury and Mandurah. Mandurah would hurt Freo more. Then would also have to play some matches at Optus too, which is 90km from Mandurah an 200km from Bunbury. Then Busselton Dunsborough will end up being bigger into the future, but that's further from Perth. I can't see it.
Is there a possibility for a team to come in that doesn't have a specific location to represent? This has happened with the Dolphins in the NRL. There was a lot of hoopla when the Dolphins were brought in as to where they represented. Is it Brisbane? Moreton Bay? Redcliffe? perhaps the Sunshine Coast. The best option was to not decide at all and in doing so allow the team to represent a greater area and attract more fans. Perhaps this concept for a team could be taken a step further and play in various places and serve as a team across a region, state or further. Could a state team be brought in, namely for QLD or NSW? On the east coast crowd numbers are far lower and tv viewership is far more important, why not embrace the possibilities that this allows and have a team that plays out of different smaller stadiums. GWS has played some great matches out of Canberra recently, similar stadiums with smaller capacity would be advantageous for future teams. Just as West Coast don't represent a city/suburb/town but the entire coast, could there be an East Coast team? The East Coast Pirates playing out of Wollongong, Central Coast, Sunshine Coast, Newcastle, Cairns and Townsville. Of course Sydney, Brisbane, Gold Coast etc would be represented by an 'east coast' team and would collectively represent over 10 million people. Maybe that is too many places to play amongst, perhaps 3 or four cities? A novel concept certainly but why not at least consider something like this as individually these cities won't be getting a team in coming decades but collectively have more people than NT, WA, SA and Tasmania combined. With that many people how could some type of regional team not be considered. Certainly it would be more valuable for the competition than a third SA or WA team. Is the AFL community being a bit dull by looking at individual cities in the country and considering which city could have a team? I'm sure there are ideas that haven't been presented or variations on current ideas that could solve the issue that the AFL has going forward of having so many people on the east coast but not quite an obvious enough or big enough city that makes itself a clear option for the next team. This idea isn't completely novel as there exists the New England Patriots, Golden state Warriors, Western Bulldogs and West Coast Eagles, amongst many others that don't have a specific city to represent. You could argue that even the suburban teams in Melbourne are divorced from their locations as all teams but Melbourne and Richmond don't play out of the location they represent. I'm sure many non Victorian fans of Melbourne teams wouldn't know where their team is on a map! Or am I talking nonsense?
I’d like Darwin and Canberra to someday have a team so that every state and territory is in the league and the only state worthy for a third team is WA and after that just have low supported Victoria teams relocate
Restructure the afl and other league's. Restructure the local leagues and make 2-3 leagues like the epl with relegation and demotion between leagues. Afl top tier and then afl div 1 & 2. We have more than enough teams to get it done. A bit more media spotlight and funding for local teams. Plenty of historic teams to make up div 1 & 2. 20 teams each league. Some rebranding on some teams and youd have a nice mix of Australian clubs
In all these conversations about expansion there is always a list of candidates which don't quite make the mark. There is too many teams in the comp as it is and talent is being diluted, spilt the league and create a relegation system so these near candidates get a chance to get up and grow.
GWS should be playing a couple of home and away matches there each year. Perhaps against North and Saints. That would be 4 matches in Canberra straight away. Giants would still be playing 9+1 matches in Western Sydney that is enough. Sydney could also do that with a home or away match. Suddenly that's six matches in Canberra per year. I don't know if North want to get involved too... and so on. That helps make GWS more sustainable and stops AFL propping up as much. Western Sydney Canberra makes more sense as a name too.
@@bgrossman Not enough. Canberra need to get 6 matches at least. Its easily done by clubs like North and Melbourne playing GWS home and away in Canberra. That's 4 straight up. Then Sydney could play North home and away too. GWS would have 4 matches in Canberra, North 4 matches, Sydney 2... AFL set up a commitment for those clubs regularly then you'll see fans supporting Giants, North , Sydney...
A team In Canberra would be good but the is so much competition with union and league it would struggle a lot to get crowds gws is a event because only 3 game but 14 wouldn’t get good crowds do note im from Canberra an I wouldn’t switch teams as would most people I know so that could be another competition
I wonder could they split a NT/NQL team? Prob Canberra though makes sense Theres a LOT of money in Darwin, they could afford it and the Alice would 100% get on board with an NT team. Im a born and bread territorian, people travle to the Alice for sports all the time.
Auckland not as left field as Newcastle being almost 2 million is when it comes to a population alternative to Rugby which is how the AFL works to compete with the Opening Round concept along with broadcasting rights with growth of the sport across the ditch 🇳🇿 otherwise the rest won’t stack up Canberra the next likeliest smaller alternative!! 🥝
The question, will New Zealanders like Aussie Rules? NSW and QLF are still new territory where AFL/Aussie rules isn’t well known let alone popular, but they are still Australian states. A new country adds a whole other dimension and many new issues.
@@LomuHabana it’s popular especially in Auckland if you haven’t seen the amount switching over from Rugby to AFL then you haven’t a clue about the revenue it has in the 🇳🇿 market! 🙄 it’s on the same continent and they have been playing the code there since the 1800s! Do some more research than get back to me or watch the actual video
@@jamesmunn867 why so offended because of legitimate? That sport has been played for ages doesn’t mean it is gonna be a mainstream sport anytime soon. That the number of players switching to AR is going up doesn’t (necessarily) mean it is gonna be more than just a niche sport.
@@LomuHabana you’re the one that appears offended don’t throw stones at glass houses your opinion just appears insular and boring go out and do some more research champ!!
@@jamesmunn867 I am not offended, I posed a legitimate question, didn’t even give my opinion. You were going off as if it was crystal clear that AFL and NZ will be a great success.
A Canberra Team is ideal except it seems that GWS Giants have already claimed a stake in the nation's capital city. How about Townsville in North Queensland but not has high as Cairns?
I prefer GWS re-naming to the Canberra Giants and relocating to Canberra with a new side in Sydney. Their Sydney numbers are piss poor. 13K at Manuka vs 7K at ENIGE. The new Sydney team would need better marketing and more of an identity
Seeing footy in Perth is the most expensive in Australia. So a third team and with less people on waiting lists to see games, could mean less revenue for the clubs and WAFC very quickly. But WAFC despite rhetoric is doing their sums along with govt, so ask them in 2-3 years. Its a waste of time now.
If AFL cares about profit incentive they will choose North Sydney. If AFL chooses by population potential, they will choose North Sydney. If the AFL cares about combating the popularity of rugby in New South Wales, they will choose North Sydney. If the AFL chooses sentimentality, they will choose Northern Territory. They will not choose sentimentality, they are a corporation.
If West Perth would be the WAFL affiliate, you could take leaf out of history and call the new side the Perth Metropolitan Football Club. West Perth was the successor to the Metropolitan Football Club in the early years of the WAFL, would be a way to finally get the “Perth” name to appear in the fixture
I like all these options but this isn't really the big issue. The big issue is the dead weight teams in Melbourne that really need to go back to the VFL level or merge. Clubs like north are really starting to be an issue and when they used to be necessary to make up the numbers, once the league expands enough those clubs go from propping up the numbers to being a ball and chain. Yeah I know what North, bulldogs, saints etc fans think of this but I'm actually not attacking them, I still miss Fitzroy, I'm just looking at (what I see as) the reality. 20 teams is far too many, 18 already sucks, 16 is probably about right. more teams means worse teams with longer waits between drinks, 18 seems to have crossed that tipping point IMO. leagues with more teams like the NFL, NBA etc in the US have captive markets for support, the afl in Melbourne doesn't.
How is North an issue? Yeah they've been through a bad patch (not all their fault) but so do a lot of teams. Look at Demons a few years ago, or Eagles recently. North have no debt and have been profitable for a decade+ straight. Saints on the other hand receive more funding from the AFL and are in debt. Also North have won more premierships than Saints and Bulldogs combined
@@bgrossman The issue is that the league has already expanded too far, and if there are clubs that should go then that's the smaller clubs in Melbourne like north, bulldogs and saints. The more you water it down the worse the football is, the longer time there is between drinks for fans, many more lower table games that no one will watch etc etc etc. If the AFL was actually a new league and not just a VFL rebrand then these teams would never have been admitted. Its not a problem with north at all, its a problem with the league structure which has been flawed since it crossed state lines. You can't have your cake and eat it too, you just can't expand without consequences for the product. I mean maybe its nostalgia but I think the league gets worse every time it gets bigger, maybe not football wise, but certainly the stories and rivalries etc just get further apart, and weaker, 18 teams has already crossed a tipping point IMO. If you disagree that's fine, but no one can argue against the fact that there is a tipping point somewhere.
Ask nearly any Canberran, they don't see GWS as a Canberran team. As for draft picks, Canberra and Southern NSW has 41 players in the AFL. Canberra would finally be somewhere players from the Riverina could move to while still being close to home.
It won't be, my bet is USA the Falcons. The biggest number of registered Afl players on this planet is USA. They would seek a base a little more like home.
Sorry but this vid is really, really uncritical of Canberra as an option. The ACT Government is already pouring money into a new rectangular stadium for the 2 rugby codes + A-League expansion team, there’s zero money or government interest in expanding Manuka let alone build a new oval stadium from scratch which alone should make expansion to Canberra a total non-starter. You can’t seriously think the AFL would be ok with say a Canberra vs. Collingwood final in front of 13k at Manuka, and Canberra is too small to justify having two brand new stadiums. The NT at least has clear government support for both the team and a new fit for purpose 20k+ oval stadium in Darwin. Canberra might have a bigger market than the NT, but it‘s also competing against 3 other codes for supporters and corporate sponsorship, while an NT team would have a monopoly on its market and at least corporate backing from some of the resources industry. Canberra is a public service town, there wouldn’t be much more corporate support in comparison after being divided with the Raiders, Brumbies, and A-League. Also kinda strange to compare GWS’s decent supporter base they’ve build in Canberra over a decade now to the Suns in Darwin who have only played for 6 matches over 3 years with their deal, and are completely outnumbered by supporters of the other team if they’re decent e.g. Geelong this season. The Suns have a fraction of the support in the NT that the Giants have built in Canberra, and also have the obvious alternate market of Cairns/Nth Qld. And even despite distance, it’s crazy to suggest that people in Alice wouldn’t have any connection to an NT team even if it’s mostly playing in Darwin, while people in Wagga and Albury would apparently be all in on a team from Canberra. Albury is closer to Melbourne than it is to Canberra…
Darwin makes no sense. A top tier player may be forced to play there if they are picked from the draft but once their minimum term expires they will leave. Plusbthe max crowd you would get would be 10k per game.
Finally a comment with common sense. If the Suns have had enough of a retention issue in what is supposed to be one of the most popular locations in the nation... apparently, what hope would a club based in Darwin have?
Forget 20 teams.... not enough quality players..... one of the Victorian sides needs to amalgamate with GWS or the Suns (North Melbourne/St. Kilda).... GWS and GC are running at a loss... their crowds are not strong enough..... the AFL is really a rebrand of the VFL.... and you can drive through Collingwood, Richmond, Carlton, Hawthorn, St Kilda, North Melbourne and Essendon in a quick 15 km drive...and all these home games played at 2 grounds in the centre of Melbourne.. how is this a representative NATIONAL competition?...... time for some hard-ball decision making.... South Melbourne to Sydney worked after some serious pain and Fitzroy to Brisbane likewise painful but now successful.
Melbourne Uni to Canberra Uni (century+ gap) is on a par with South Melbourne being the Sydney Swans. Apparently if the colours are the same, anything goes! ⚫️🔵
