18 Team Competition - Yes or NO !

[BenDoolan]

Er... No.

[Rossoneri]

Why wasnt the Carlton c*** Mike Fitzpatrick there? And why when he was being questioned did he leave on the mobile phone into his car?

[Windy_Hill]

A. The AFL is entertaining the thought of cutting the number of rounds to 17. Idiots Alternatively we get closer to having all sides play each other twice in a 22 round season

B. We are struggling as it is to sustain clubs in Brisbane and Sydney (The former with the lowest membership in the league, the latter with the fickle-ist.) I believe both clubs have recently reported record profits and memberships???

C. The only thing that makes those two abovementioned clubs viable is the Melbourne-based support, something these new clubs will have to do without. Can you explain in detail your basis for this statement - to me it sounds more like a personal theory rather than fact

D. Splitting the Sydney market in two will have an effect on the Swans that I don't think the AFL have even taken into account. Alternatively it will provide Sydney with a local rival that may inject some West Coast/Freo type intensity into the local fixture. It will also give the Sydney market week in, week out Aussie Rules thus placing the game in the media glare constantly and not just every second week

E. Every single Gold Coast-based franchise in a national competition has failed. Simple as that. Time to change that trend then I guess

F. Carrara isn't up to AFL standard, in fact it isn't even close really. Perhaps, so lets see the AFL bring it up to standard, not a difficult challenge when you see the great job they did in helping the MCC build the MCG
G. Homebush is home to 4 NRL clubs. Your point being?

H. Sydney games do not rate in Sydney. They usually come in 4th on Saturday Nights, sometimes worse. Perhaps because Aussie Rules remains a significantly better game to watch live, in which case, we should be playing more live games in the new frontiers such as Sydney. As long as the TV stations are happy to pay the money, who cares if it rates or not

I. How many players are we going to lose to these new clubs? Maybe one or two, but if they are uncontracted and there move to a new club helps to ensure the future of our club, then its a small price to pay. What if for just one year, the new clubs had priorty over non-contracted players. These guys are moving on anyway however in this case they are simply moving on to predetermined clubs. We would have lost them anyway. However, according to reports, the Gold Coast club is likely to be made up from a bunch of very talented under 16's who recently won the National Championships


J. How many games are we going to lose to these two clubs with salary cap concessions/player zones/draft picks? From memory Essendon won its first 15 games over Brisbane. A squad that incidentally had 7 Essendon players. During the same period we played in 2 Grand Finals

K. Will it cost us a Grand Final? No

L. If West Sydney was such a sure thing, why are there not consortiums falling over themselves to be granted a license? The AFL has already indicated that new licenses will be set up in the traditional manner, ie, Membership based and therefore you will not have provate consortiums falling over themselves. Having said that, the West Sydney council is reported to be extremely keen to secure an AFL team in its region highlighting the fact that there are 300,000 people living within 30 minutes of the area's centrepoint. It is also the second fastest growing region in Australia behind, er, the Gold Coast!!

M. Why have the clubs not been consulted about this? Instead, we have Fitzpatrick spillng the beans in the Sunday paper. Not a great way to conduct business. Of course the clubs have been consulted. The AFL has been outlining its expansion plans for the last 5 years. The only clubs that are bleating are those with an agenda. In otherwords, publicity sluts Colless and MAcGuire

N. Where are the financials that show that these two clubs will be sustainable? Probably in research documents that you have not read

O. What reassurances has the AFL given existing clubs about their future in their respective markets? You mean like how the AFL has gone to struggling Melbourne based clubs and said, "hey, this isnt working for you here in Melbourne, but will will financially underpin your 2 Bit operation by largely paying for you to relocate the club to a new stadium, with guaranteed fnancial benefits" Go and have a chat to the Kangaroos.

And finally, is it really worth the effort? If it delivers a viable, long term future for our great game then of course its worth it

[MH_Bomber]

What I cant stand is now we have so called journalists now becoming the AFL cheer squad for all their plans. Case in point Caro on the Offsiders. An objective journalist would actually consider the viablility of the 2 new teams in these Rugby League dominated states. Having lived in Sydney for 7 years, in my opinion, a 2nd team is not viable. There is a small sub-section of Sydneysiders that have warmed to them but that has taken nigh on 30 years. A second side, especially in the West, would be seen as encroachers from Victoria.

Everytime I see anything on the viability angle they feature this mayor of Blacktown. Is he the only local advocate for it up there ?

I dont understand this notion of growth ad infinitum. Surely the number of teams is sustainable as it is with the 850 odd million they got for the rights. I dont give a stuff about population growths in those areas. This growth is just systematic of the non affordability of housing in other markets and the Gold Coast has always been seen as the Miami of Australia - a retirement village with a nice climate. They are misreading the conditions needed for the development of new sustainable teams.

My last point is, CANT WE JUST LEAVE IT ALONE for a good while. There has been tumultuous changes in the nature of our game over the last 25 years. No sooner do you get used to something then some new rule or "innovation" comes in. The National comp, 4 on the interchange, new kick in rule, interpretation of holding the ball, 3 umpires, the final 8, new tribunal system - a lot has happened in a short time. I really think we need at least a 5 year no more changes period to just settle the code down a bit.

[swoodley]

A. The AFL is entertaining the thought of cutting the number of rounds to 17. Idiots Alternatively we get closer to having all sides play each other twice in a 22 round seasonThen why not have 24 teams and then we could still have a nice 22 round season

B. We are struggling as it is to sustain clubs in Brisbane and Sydney (The former with the lowest membership in the league, the latter with the fickle-ist.) I believe both clubs have recently reported record profits and memberships???

C. The only thing that makes those two abovementioned clubs viable is the Melbourne-based support, something these new clubs will have to do without. Can you explain in detail your basis for this statement - to me it sounds more like a personal theory rather than fact

D. Splitting the Sydney market in two will have an effect on the Swans that I don't think the AFL have even taken into account. Alternatively it will provide Sydney with a local rival that may inject some West Coast/Freo type intensity into the local fixture. It will also give the Sydney market week in, week out Aussie Rules thus placing the game in the media glare constantly and not just every second weekFremantle V West Coast rivalry is based on the long standing rivalry between Fremantle and Perth suburbs/areas....it has been a long term rivalry. Does such a rivalry exist in Sydney?

E. Every single Gold Coast-based franchise in a national competition has failed. Simple as that. Time to change that trend then I guessAgree....the new NRL & NBL Franchises seem to have started off nicely

F. Carrara isn't up to AFL standard, in fact it isn't even close really. Perhaps, so lets see the AFL bring it up to standard, not a difficult challenge when you see the great job they did in helping the MCC build the MCGAgree again although this has been a long term issue that the AFL has not appeared to want to solve

G. Homebush is home to 4 NRL clubs. Your point being?Could it be that if 4 NRL clubs use the venue on a regular basis, then the playing surface will get chopped up and b be in poor condition for AFL games?

H. Sydney games do not rate in Sydney. They usually come in 4th on Saturday Nights, sometimes worse. Perhaps because Aussie Rules remains a significantly better game to watch live, in which case, we should be playing more live games in the new frontiers such as Sydney. As long as the TV stations are happy to pay the money, who cares if it rates or notThe AFL will care and the stations will certainly care if their ratings are poor. If this happens we can expect the TV stations to "request" the AFL fixture be such that the likes of Essendon play the expansion team in Sydney each year to help boost ratings. That's not good for bomber supporters outside of Sydney

I. How many players are we going to lose to these new clubs? Maybe one or two, but if they are uncontracted and there move to a new club helps to ensure the future of our club, then its a small price to pay. What if for just one year, the new clubs had priorty over non-contracted players. These guys are moving on anyway however in this case they are simply moving on to predetermined clubs. We would have lost them anyway. However, according to reports, the Gold Coast club is likely to be made up from a bunch of very talented under 16's who recently won the National ChampionshipsWhich current contracted Essendon players would you be happy to lose Windy? (and I don't mean players that no-one wants) as the new clubs will chase the best available talent. Yes there is talk that the Gold Coast team will have access to the best local youngsters but that also impinges on other clubs rights to an open draft.


J. How many games are we going to lose to these two clubs with salary cap concessions/player zones/draft picks? From memory Essendon won its first 15 games over Brisbane. A squad that incidentally had 7 Essendon players. During the same period we played in 2 Grand FinalsLosing games to the new club(s) is not the issue...how will our draft choices be affected and will we lose players because the new clubs will be able to outbid us in a contract war?

K. Will it cost us a Grand Final? NoWhat Windy said

L. If West Sydney was such a sure thing, why are there not consortiums falling over themselves to be granted a license? The AFL has already indicated that new licenses will be set up in the traditional manner, ie, Membership based and therefore you will not have provate consortiums falling over themselves. Having said that, the West Sydney council is reported to be extremely keen to secure an AFL team in its region highlighting the fact that there are 300,000 people living within 30 minutes of the area's centrepoint. It is also the second fastest growing region in Australia behind, er, the Gold Coast!!

M. Why have the clubs not been consulted about this? Instead, we have Fitzpatrick spillng the beans in the Sunday paper. Not a great way to conduct business. Of course the clubs have been consulted. The AFL has been outlining its expansion plans for the last 5 years. The only clubs that are bleating are those with an agenda. In otherwords, publicity sluts Colless and MAcGuireDisagree here Windy...is this your personal opinion or based on fact. From what I've read, it appears that the clubs and media were all surprised by Fitzpatrick's announcement, especially the detail in terms of time frames and possible set up of the teams.

N. Where are the financials that show that these two clubs will be sustainable? Probably in research documents that you have not read

O. What reassurances has the AFL given existing clubs about their future in their respective markets? You mean like how the AFL has gone to struggling Melbourne based clubs and said, "hey, this isnt working for you here in Melbourne, but will will financially underpin your 2 Bit operation by largely paying for you to relocate the club to a new stadium, with guaranteed fnancial benefits" Go and have a chat to the Kangaroos. The Kangaroos situation is dead and buried and so you're not really answering the question Windy. The AFL has come out and said we're gooing to have two more clubs and the TV money will cover everything. But will that cover finding two new major sponsors and the whole raft of lesser sponsors...will Victorian clubs lose out on sponsors who want to be see as players in the more attractive new markets?

And finally, is it really worth the effort? If it delivers a viable, long term future for our great game then of course its worth it

[dom_105]

--snip--

You do make some good points, but at the end of the day it dosen't really matter either way. The AFL is GOD, It's not even their way or the highway, it's their way or their way.

However, I am a little bemused in how the AFL has handled this whole operation, and how they are running the game. Technically, it is us, in our capacity as club members, who are at the top of the AFL hierarchical structrue. Why shouldn't the AFL say "Look, here are the figures that we are working with, here is how it is going to work" at the very minimum. Shouldn't that be our right?

[canberrabomber]

I don't have a problem with the AFL investigating potential new locations for a football team.

However, the number of clubs should not rise above the current level. If the AFL wants to introduce a club into a new area it has to be as a result of an existing team:

(a) relocating;
(b) going bust;
(c) having its licence withdrawn; or
(d) merging or reaching an alternative commercial arrangement with the new 'team'.

[tom9779]

Yes.

It is inevitable that there should be an AFL team in West Sydney and the Goldcoast.

I mean why not?

West Syd prob has a population of over 1 million people(prob close to two).
Gold Coast region would also be pushing the million mark.

these areas deserve a footy team...I mean what else have the got?? rugby league? gimme a break. soccer has ignored them....

the AFL will do it right...excellent ideas coming out of building it...starting with a junior team for a couple of years before hand.

My reservations are not with carrarra, a small upgrade and it will be a fine venue.

my problem is with western sydney.....i mean homebush is a HORRIBLE place to watch sport. I personally think that team will struggle to pull a crowd.

[Windy_Hill]

my problem is with western sydney.....i mean homebush is a HORRIBLE place to watch sport. I personally think that team will struggle to pull a crowd.

From what I have read, the proposal is to re-model the Olympic Baseball stadium ito a boutique AFL stadium with seating of about 10,000. This will be good in ensureing you dont have 1/4 full stadiums which have no atmosphere.

[grassy1]

Mainly filled by folk not even TRUE to the game.Only in it for the PERKS and PORK BARRELL.

Pollies and Businessmen.Yeah,great atmosphere those 10 000 will make.Most of 'em will be inside.

It MUST BE Be NICE to the AFL WEEK in here!CHRIST!Do people here NEED THEIR BLOODY HEADS READ!

[Jazz_84]

The Brisbane Bears method was a disgrace and embarrassing to the code and so you would figure that the AFL will not use that method again.

bet they do... name your price?



Gold Coast can't support a team, simple as that... with the Titans up there already a Gold Coast AFL team wouldn't even reach 10,000 members

im getting really pissed off with the amount of proposed changes, how can they expect to expand the game while destroying it at the same time...

[tom9779]

my problem is with western sydney.....i mean homebush is a HORRIBLE place to watch sport. I personally think that team will struggle to pull a crowd.

From what I have read, the proposal is to re-model the Olympic Baseball stadium ito a boutique AFL stadium with seating of about 10,000. This will be good in ensureing you dont have 1/4 full stadiums which have no atmosphere.

what i heard was the baseball field was to be used as a training venue and for NAB cup/practice games...not big enough for a proper AFL match.

[tonysoprano]

No, no, and no.

Biggest worry: the AFL split the league into conferences resulting in teams in same conference not having the potential to play eachother in a GF.

I don't want it to be like the MLB, or the gridiron. Imagine not seeing an Ess v Coll or Ess v Carlton GF ever again!

[j-mac31]

these areas deserve a footy team

Based on what?

Surely they should turn out in huge numbers for practice/pre-season/exhibition matches before they get anywhere near "deserving" teams.

Tasmania deserves a team far more, being a footy state for 150 years or whatever.

Darwin deserves a team before GC or W. Sydney.

[Windy_Hill]

Looks like Tom9779 and I have suddenly found 16 new friends


Silence from presidents means 18-team AFL
Caroline Wilson | March 14, 2008

GEELONG president Frank Costa likened the threat from soccer and the two rugby codes to a fruit and vegetable war, while Brisbane Lions chairman Tony Kelly said he and his club would learn pretty quickly to hate the new enemy from the Gold Coast.

But in what can only be described as the quickest and most successful sale of the pre-season, the 16 AFL presidents yesterday to a man put their hysteria aside and voted unanimously to change football history and support an 18-team competition.

Maybe it was the impassioned call to arms delivered by outgoing commissioner Colin Carter, reminding the clubs to build into the past while racing into the future, or perhaps it was the detailed hour-long presentation by Mike Fitzpatrick and Andrew Demetriou that allayed their fears.

But the result of yesterday's meeting was that the presidents not only supported Fitzpatrick's vision, they also told him to step on the accelerator.

So what happened to the mutinous threats that followed the AFL chairman's revelation in The Age last month that he would be pushing for two new teams and a revised competition by 2012?

The clubs said they had been overlooked or even ignored and questioned the wisdom of the push.

Where would all the players come from, they asked, and how could the game afford all of this?

Some commentators said Fitzpatrick was bluffing, others said he had put his foot in it and embarrassed Demetriou. All that was forgotten yesterday.

In fairness, the presidents had made some impact before the meeting with a detailed series of questions delivered to the AFL by Collingwood conduit Eddie McGuire and all were addressed or placed on the drawing board. Neither McGuire nor Jeff Kennett, the two most outspoken Victorian club leaders nor Sydney's stand-in president had any major issues with Fitzpatrick yesterday.

It is remarkable to think how quickly the competition has moved since North Melbourne rejected relocation last December. The commission clearly had become impatient with the slow progress and the question must now be asked why the Gold Coast has no full-time AFL executive based at the game's new frontier as it does in Sydney.

But it seems clear Queensland will have a second franchise in place by the end of the season and a focal point for which the local community can cheer and feel a part. The AFL has registered the Gold Coast Football Club as a name and the team will be run by a group including the current three-man bid committee of former Lions chairman Graham Downie, Southport director Allan McKenzie and lawyer and community leader John Witheriff.

The push for two clubs entering in the same year was strongly supported by the presidents who, like the AFL, do not relish a season punctuated by weekly byes. And while western Sydney would seem to be several years behind the Gold Coast in terms of preparation, the yet-to-be-conceived new Sydney club has several advantages on the Gold Coast.

For a start, it has a massive stadium that once hosted the Sydney 2000 Olympics and a friendly landlord awaiting the extra games with open arms.

It also has a smart new home base, which should be ready in a year.

Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy but exhilarating journey.

[boncer34]

Just actually got round to reading the thread and I agree 18 teams is the way to go. Tassie's gotta get over that whole North
South rival thing before they get a side which atm I'm noticeing doesn't look like its gonna happen.

However Windy- 2 points

1) The new sides concept has already cost us a flag in '01. I firmly believe Brisbane couldn't have had that side if they hadn't had the extra cash.

2) Brisbane recorded a record membership last year? I thought they had dropped off a bit but anway. Sydneys membership is a flow on result of winning. You watch mate, the memberships will drop off once they hit a rough patch again.