Relocation ?

[That Guy]

Hi guys, I was just wondering if someone in the know could answer the following questions for me.

1. What are the chances of 1 of the 8 Melbourne-based AFL teams relocating to another city in the near future?

2. If they were to relocate, which city would they most likely relocate to? Tasmania ?, Gold Coast ?, NZ ?

3. And lastly, which of the clubs would be most likely to move?

 

[grayham]

Hi guys, I was just wondering if someone in the know could answer the following questions for me.

1. What are the chances of 1 of the 8 Melbourne-based AFL teams relocating to another city in the near future?

2. If they were to relocate, which city would they most likely relocate to? Tasmania ?, Gold Coast ?, NZ ?

3. And lastly, which of the clubs would be most likely to move?

The AFL is fully committed to continued expansion. The whole set up of the organisation and code is to enable it to place teams in new hostile environments and enable them to be competitive and financial from day one. Its a highly flexible arrangement.
Basically:
- All Players are obtainable via draft, so no locals required.
- Salary cap (min and max), so price wars for players are limited
- Salary cap concessions for non-AFL states.
- Centralised revenue. It doesnt really matter if a club makes a loss, as almost all revenue comes via the AFL and is distributed as they see fit.

So as long as the new area has a ground to play on, it can take an AFL team.

Most likely areas are Western Sydney and the gold coast. Both will be tough markets to crack, but a lot easier than what the swans or bears initially faced.

The only things that are stopping a melbourne team being relocated, is public sentiment. The AFL is in a long campain to try and prove the unviability of the dogs and roos, so they will surrender, but the roos seemed to have turned it around and may be safe. Dogs and Demons look in trouble.

I doubt any clubs will die, but relocation would be the most likely event, probably to western sydney within 5 years. GC in 10 maybe.

 

[XXXX]

Roos are most likely to up the number of games they play in Canberra .If they had any sense they would re locate .Clubs have been tessting the waters for a while .G.C and W. Syd stand out as low risk.Bullodogs seem open to the idea .

 

[The Observer]

Grayham, has the AFL or struggling Melbourne clubs considered entering a Fitzroy/Brisbane style merger with clubs outside Melbourne?

I was listening to someone from the Tasmanian Football league on JJJ last year and they said that Hawthorn have a strong relationship with Tasmania, often taking some home games there. The woman said that the major challenge in attracting an AFL franchise to Tassie was that Launceston and Hobart both wanted to host the team. Why not have Hawthorn relocate there aand share its home games between the two cities?

 

[Up the mighty Phins]

Tasmania would not be able to sustain an AFL team on its own right. Its population is far too small and the costs of running a team would too much for a small market.

 

[Stormin Norman]

Tasmania would be a great place for an afl team all they need is some backing from tassie sponsors and tassie have a couple of big comanys down there cascade and cadbury. also there juniors are much better than nsw or qld i think they deserve it.

 

[The Observer]

AFAICT Tasmania's population is just under 500,000.
Melbourne has a population of 3.4 million but has 9 AFL teams, giving each an average popluation catchment area of 377,777 people.

Victoria's total population in 1996 was 4, 414, 198. For the 10 AFL teams, that leaves an average population catchment area of 441, 420 per club.

Whether there is the money in Tasmania to finance the team is an important question. As Stormin Norman pointed out though, there are a number of big companies based there that could get behind the team and may enjoy the national exposure that AFL would give them.

 

[The Observer]

Also, the South Island of New Zealand has roughly the same population as Tassie, and it supports two professional Rugby Union franchises - the Crusaders (based in Christchurch) and the Highlanders (based in Dunedin).

 

[XXXX]

Basically you need 500k popultaion to run an AFL side .
Thus WA and SA are cruising .Victoria is feeling the pinch .Tassie does have the population and is a totally AF state ,it's just a question whether the fans will travel .
Canberra has 500k but there's RU and RL to dilute the sporting fever .
Brisbane and Sydney have the population and enough are seeing AFL as their sport .The GC has 400k and growing and AF sympathetic .So there's no real standout candidate .Future growth is an issue along with stadium size .The GC has a good setup in Southport and would lead to a big derby with the Lions .Unfortunately sympathy is not an AFL strongpoint so Tassie might continue to suffer .

 

[Stormin Norman]

the gold coast dont deserve a team tassie 1st then canberra maybe a 3rd wa or sa team b4 a gold coast team. st kilda were thinking of playing a home game there but there is some rule thing the afl have that games can only be played in brisbane for 10 yrs. brisbane should think of playing one game there when that rules runs its course.

 

[That Guy]

Also, the South Island of New Zealand has roughly the same population as Tassie, and it supports two professional Rugby Union franchises - the Crusaders (based in Christchurch) and the Highlanders (based in Dunedin).

I see your point and I would like to see Tasmania get an AFL side, however thats like comparing apples with oranges in that it is a different sport in a different country with a different population.

 

[TheFirstRabbitoh]

The Southport Sharks from the AFL Queensland have next dibs on an AFL license, they turn a massive profit and send their end of year balance around to struggling Melbourne clubs in the hope of enticing someone to move.

Not likely to happen any time soon though, not at least until the old-school generation of footy fans has died out a bit in Melbourne - most clubs would rather die than merge or relocate.

 

[Stormin Norman]

The Southport Sharks from the AFL Queensland have next dibs on an AFL license

a 2nd qld team wouldn't work it would fail because theres not enough support in qld for one. then only reason it worked in wa is because there is a huge afl following in wa. and the reason it worked in sa is because even though port were only playing in the sanfl there was almost as much support for them as the crows they were and still are one of aus biggest teams. a second qld team would do aswell as the hunter mairners and the south qld chargers fail waist of time and money.

 

[XXXX]

People have been arguing this point on the basis of population which is really inconclusive as to who is the most likely .
From recent stats it's better to look at player participation .
Both NSW and QLD have particpation nmbers approaching WA and SA and with growth rates easily to surpass those states in one to two years .
Tasmania of course has lower numbers and virually no movement .
So Sydney and Brisbane have the population ,players and future growth .

 

[CyberKev]

At the moment, any talk of further AFL expansion outside Victoria is based more on romanticism than realism.

The AFL has done a fine job in creating a genuinely national competition, but it has come at a high cost, has taken a lot of patience, and (for mine) has yet to be firmly stabilised in its current format.

Demographic projections may indicate that both Sydney and Brisbane will be soundly placed to house a second AFL side in future years, but we would be at least 10 years from being in a position where this option could be seriously viable.

The current Brisbane side has been very successful on the field, but has not yet shown that it is capable of standing on its own two feet off the field. The region needs time for extensive further development to be implemented re: its feeder competitions; and Sydney also needs further work in this area. We also need time to assess the long-term pulling power of the Brisbane Lions when its glory days fade and it comes back to the pack.

In short, I'll want to see both sides stabilise and strengthen a hell of a lot further before risking diluting the markets with fledgling and vulnerable competition.

Tasmania? The talk on Tassie has been going on since I started seriously following the sport in the mid-seventies and will continue on regardless. Despite lacking the glamour of its Northern cousins, I think the Apple Isle could support a side in terms of spectators and young talent and, given the flexible nature of contemporary economics, I wouldn't consider it an impossibility to raise enough financial backing to support a side either.

Despite this, it would appear that AFL honchos are obsessed with getting extra sides into the Northern states. They'll have a crack at it at some stage, and I only hope that they don't delude themselves as to their true strength and capacity in these still hostile states, as they could quickly undo many years of hard work and financial sacrifice if they rush this one.

CyberKev

 

[Alan Shore]

Very well said CyberKev.

Especially if the Charges come back to the NRL in 2006 - the Southport Sharks can kiss their dreams goodbye. Carrara will become a rectangular stadium and I don't think there's any other suitable venue there unless they built their own.

 

[CyberKev]

Tamazoid

Agreed... Of course, I don't think that the AFL would consider Carrara an option under any circumstances, after getting their fingers burnt playing a battling Bears line-up out of the venue. Any second side out of QLD would have to be located in Brisbane and would play out of the Gabba, much the same as the two WA & two SA sides play out of the same venue in each of those states.

I find the mere thought of putting a second side in QLD as bizarre right now :? The AFL sold their soul to the corporate money men years ago and its difficult to imagine any hardline financial bottomliner giving approval to such a course of action. It makes poor economic and structural sense, would almost certainly fail, and could achieve little at this point other than detract from the economic stability of the league and agitate the current member clubs no end.

All I can think of is that perhaps the AFL wants to gamble on getting a second side in front of the Brisbane public before the Lions reach the point of being unchallengable by any new franchise entering the market. For sure they do not have the luxury of relying on Port's long established SANFL history in Adelaide, or Fremantle's status as a prime nursery area for any new side to use as a fallback in the Sunshine State.

Even if that is what they are thinking of, I still think that their best option is to give Brisbane (as a city) further time to develop economically and surge population wise. As this is happening they need to pump resources into building up local feeder competitions in the hope of getting the region into shape to be able to support another side in another 20 years or so. A relocated side won't cut it, they will need a side with a solid core of local talent that can project a distinct localised image that may be attractive to new fans and those disenchanted with the Lions club.

It will take time and is definitely not an initiative that should be entered into half-arsed and/or post-haste

CyberKev

 

[xxxx!]

So what do you think the imminent conditions were when South Melbourne went to Sydney or when the Bears were formed ? Were they better or worse than todays ?
IMO the Bears at Carrara showed the worst case scenario .Today we have the option of Southport's involvement ,playing games at both the Gabba and Carrara depending on which is the most suitable ,relocation as a much better option to formation from scratch ,not to mention the increased interest in AFL in QLD and the prospect of creating the market grail of the local derby .Not so far-fetched now .

 

[Mark Rudd]

The AFL aint planning on expanding.


Just dreams by AFL fans.

 

[CyberKev]

The AFL aint planning on expanding.


Just dreams by AFL fans.

They're thinking about it to the level of throwing it up in occasional conversations, but I agree with you that its not a fleshed-out line of thought at this stage and is certainly not a priority. Nor should it be...

CyberKev