The 20th AFL TEAM (Who is NEXT?) Part 2

The AFL have announced that the 19th team have will be entering the AFL. The Tasmania Devils will be the 19th team entering the AFL. But of course, this does beg a few questions, the most important one being which location will hold team 20? How many teams are in the AFL? Now there will be 19 teams in the AFL from 2028.
👇PART 1 The 20th AFL TEAM (Who is NEXT?)👇
• The 20th AFL TEAM (Who...
👇AFLX Video👇
• The WORST Decision the...
Shop Now 👇BR Designs👇
sites.google.c...
Use code '20TEAM' for 10% off your purchase for the next 48 hours.
Follow The Channel Socials
Channel Membership
/ @boundaryrider
Patreon
/ boundaryriders
Spotify
open.spotify.c...
The Twinners Podcast
/ @the_twinners
Instagram
/ boundryriders
Tik Tok
/ boundryriders
#afl

[@boundaryrider]

👇PART 1 The 20th AFL TEAM (Who is NEXT?)👇 kzbin.info/www/bejne/qqepmZRvYtpggJY

[@ChannelBlaino]

The GWS deal with Canberra ends in 2032. That timing I think is ideal for the 20th team. Tasmania comes in 2028, they have 5 years to build themselves as a brand and establish themselves and then Team 20 Canberra comes in once the Giants deal expires. Gold Coast suffered because GWS came in so close together, it is good to have a few years for Tassie to establish themselves first. Plus Canberra can represent the entire Riverina region as well, not just Canberra

[@CAD390]

If Canberra is to have a standalone team after the deal with gws folds, the act government better build a new stadium 🏟

[@DaRoy71]

Freo had Had Jesse hogan they had the chance

[@canberrapear7219]

@@CAD390 Don't need a new stadium, just an upgrade to Manuka, which the ACT Government is already looking to do for a BBL team.

[@canberrapear7219]

You've undercounted Canberra's population. 467k is just the ACT. You've got to count our NSW suburbs, too. We've got about 560k within an hour of Manuka. Also, screw the Giants. They've been good to get AFL games, but they're on the nose with many Canberrans. A team of our own would be waaaaay more popular.

[@derekbos4404]

I am a Norwood fan, but been living in WA for 10 years. Realistically, as both West Coast and Fremantle consistently get crowds of 50k+, even when not flying, they could more likely sustain a new club which may draw 25k+ However, Norwood being an established identity, home and fan base, I believe would require no promotion at all to consistently get crowd of close to 20k as a start up. I think these are the best two options. I would love to see a genuine national comp, but the other suggested tartups would endure literally decades of growing pains 😮

[@rossskuthorp1302]

West Coast has won 4 flags, not 3

[@finnpamm8507]

I think one thing you consistently tend to forget is that Port Adelaide resulted from one SANFL club, the Adelaide Crows, which resulted in 8, so this surely does not mean that Port Adelaide will lose members, and you also don’t point out that Norwood is Port Adelaide's biggest rival in the SANFL. Having a third club in South Australia also means you don’t have very many cons, realistically Norwood dragging in a profit almost instantly compared to a brand-new club entering the league, and also means it’s already got a support base,, which is quite large if you go back to the 90s they had membership of over 15,000 , that might not be where it is now, but I’m sure if they entered the AFL, this would have good repercussions. That’s why I think a 3rd Club in South Australia would work perfectly. Yes, membership numbers would drop, but realistically, more people will be attending football games, and not to mention, having a club with a board is a great thing and probably what the AFL will go with. That’s why I’m almost 90% sure Norwood will be the 20th club in the AFL.

[@rhysh2639]

It won't happen. Andrew Dillon basically hinted that (while he respects the history of Norwood) he doesn't see them as sustainable. The AFL won't put another side in SA or WA because there's nothing to be gained. It does not grow the game as Adelaide is already an AFL-mad city that already has 2 teams. Adelaide and Port can't even sell out Adelaide Oval as it is. Growing the game is important because it increases the talent pool. The AFL were even hesitant to give Tasmania a team because it's already an AFL state, despite not having a team. It was people power that got them the team, as most AFL followers from all over the country were pushing for a Tasmanian team....and rightly so! I can see Canberra as the most likely option for team 20, they have roughly the same population as Tasmania, yet all in one spot. They are also close to the Riverina region (which has a strong history with the sport). There's already an NRL and a rugby union side in Canberra, the only thing missing is an AFL team, the locals there are screaming out for one. The GWS deal is set to expire in 2032, I can see the AFL wanting a full-time team there so GWS can focus solely on Western Sydney. I think the AFL has said many years ago that a Canberra team is a long-term goal and GWS will only play there until that happens.

[@chadchadderton]

Norwood are not a sustainable AFL franchise, that's just the reality of the situation. 15k members in the 90s is not a "quite large" amount of support... especially considering 95% of those members are crows fans. You're right, Port Adelaide wouldn't lose members... But the court room crows would, and still even then it wouldn't be a significant enough of members to sustain Norwood in that market anyways. There is also no evidence to suggest that Norwood are "almost instantly" going to post a profit like you claimed.

[@rhysh2639]

@@chadchadderton Exactly! Andrew Dillon even hinted that while he respects the history of Norwood, they are simply not sustainable and they have NO intention of making them the 20th team. He said this during Gather Round.

[@eddielong8663]

There is in absolutely no way whatsoever that a third Adelaide-based club be considered before a third Perth-based club. Seriously, it wasn't much more than a decade ago when the Power was struggling to get bums on seats to home matches with just one other AFL competitor in town. A third dimension will do more harm than good for a long time. Perth population - 2.3 million Adelaide population - 1.4 million Simple mathematics. Not that difficult to research up. And with Perth's population consistantly having grown so much more than Adelaide's since it levelled up and overtook Adelaide back in the early 80's, it may well end up becoming twice the size of Adelaide one day. In which case might even make it eligible for two more teams. Not just one more. Sounds radical right now, but not when Perth surpasses 3.0 million. The only current issue with three teams in Perth right now is deciding on whether to go northern outer suburbs or southern outer suburbs, as both regions are spreading outwards at more or less the same pace. So one club for each catchment in future solves the problem.

[@zaco21_]

Relocate North Melbourne to Canberra instead of an expansion team, they can play a couple home games In Melbourne to please the roo fans. Have a North Australian based team where they play most their games in Darwin then can play other games in Cairns, Alice Springs and Townsville

[@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu]

Agreed 100 percent

[@eddielong8663]

The Roos should've done that ages ago. They could've become a great relocation story like the Swans. Still not too late for them, but the window is closing. It's almost as if the success the club had in the late 90's has ended up doing more harm than good in a strange way. Gave the club a false sense of security in an era when much in the AFL was getting bigger and was becoming more corporately professional. Once the success faded away, the club went back to using a negative connotation long-associated with it (poor-man's team) and trying to spin that around as a positive. Didn't work.

[@Adam-XL]

A couple of games doesn't 'please the roos fans' 90% of them would be done if they relocated, whether you think thats sensible or not thats the reality.

[@blackdogRexy]

One region which is rarely mentioned in AFL expansion vids is Ballarat which will be up around 150k population in 10 years time. Personally I think North Melbourne would be well suited to moving there with a 7 games in Ballarat and four in Melbourne arrangement to keep the clubs fans and capitalise on the revenues of larger drawing games like the Pies and Blues. There would also be support from areas like Maryborough and Melton which are both only an hour away. Plus of course it rids the league of another Melbourne side which is long overdue.

[@boundaryrider]

Yeah but I think if they wanted to relocate NM they would’ve moved them down to Tassie. But I think the AFL should explore more games at suburban grounds. Love the country atmosphere of those games

[@Sammy25100]

Not another Victoria team. There's already 10. This isn't the VFL any more. Footy has become our national game and I think a new team needs to do its part to ensure that (e.g. Tasmania).

[@ChannelBlaino]

North will always struggle for growth in Melbourne, they're a small suburb, with Carlton and Essendon neighboring them who will always have more pull power, and that just the local suburbs, broader speaking they are very small and the bigger Melbourne clubs will always hold sway. Ballarat would suit them well, they can have an entire city plus neighboring towns they could appeal to and I'm sure the AFL could throw in a sweetner perhaps, re-develop MARS stadium , incentivise them wish cash and TV rights the AFL could perhaps work out a deal with 7 regional branches that ensure all Ballarat games are shown free to air in Ballarat perhaps.

[@Shaun-o8g]

​@@boundaryriderAFL were hoping, praying, that Tassies would embrace Nth as a relocated club.

[@debuthunter5389]

Ballarat would have to be a push out of one of the Melbourne teams, like the Western Bulldogs.

[@Sammy25100]

Canberra makes alot of sense but the GWS deal gets in the way. The issue a new team is going to face is gaining the support of fans. Think about GWS and Gold Coast, which are both big market teams. GWS have had a lot of success in its brief history and the AFL has had them on life support since they were founded.

[@tomw4637]

To be fair, Tasmania had a deal with NM and Hawthorn and they still got a team. If anything it having GWS play there keeps footy relevant until they can have their own team.

[@debuthunter5389]

The prime place for the Roos to relocate to - finally.

[@LukeEvans-et4fl]

My ideal 20th team would definitely be along the lines of the Northern Crocs as suggested in the Previous video. However I also feel that the team would thrive best, and also seek to gain the best support in terms of fans if alongside Darwin and Cairns, Port Moresby would be included. PNG's potential for future footy players is far greater than that of New Zealand and works to include the largest area of potential fans.

[@chadchadderton]

having a team spread across 3 different cities in 2 different countries is nonsensical.

[@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu]

I agree 100 percent but could we leave PNG out if the equation

[@hazardousmaterials1284]

Excellent summary! If you don’t mind a suggestion from a Yank fan of AFL, I think a viable option would be having the 20th team be an official traveling team - at least for a few years. That way, they can take their time to feel out if these other options in WA, SA, etc. might work. But most importantly, a traveling team in the AFL could have the best name ever - the Walkabouts! It would be perfect!

[@boundaryrider]

Cheers man. That is a very unique idea. I do think it would b hard to get a supporter base with a main location but I do see what u mean about putting the feelers out for a few years and see if they can attract a fan base somewhere

[@debuthunter5389]

My take for years has been a Northern Crocs team based out of Joondalup. It has to be Perth-based for logistics, population, potential membership and sponsor base etc. However, they have the ability to create a direct relationship with Northern Australia, playing the occasional games up there, and Perth being a good location for indigenous talent to settle, as it is one of the major cities with the highest indigenous population %, and lifestyle. This would give north of Australia an actually aligned team, not just a random club from Melbourne playing a game or two for no reason. It would also open up a lot of major mining, oil and gas, resources companies etc for sponsorship. Fremantle are the South of Perth team. So Bunbury etc would not work. Fremantle claim south of the river. That's that. West Coast Eagles over the years became the Metro Perth team, with their base centralized. I think the opinions about Fremantle struggling to get players is not exactly correct. Those names you listed as going to West Coast are no-namers. And Freo already have a solid core and strong list. Their history was slightly mismanaged, but Freo has never been short of support. And they have brought in multiple high talent key forwards, who just didn't pan out, unfortunately. How many other clubs poach gun key forwards from other clubs? Very few. Freo got Jesse Hogan, Cam McCarthy, Jack Anthony, Scott Gumbleton and a bunch of dudes who were very good at times but just didn't pan out. I completely agree about WA being much more viable than SA. Canberra seems like a potential place for it, but I definitely feel it is a prime place for a team to relocate a team. If the AFL say that "GWS Giants" are for the ACT, they have to rebrand! Why would someone go for a team that isn't from their city, and doesn't actually represent their city...? Just because they're told they should? LOL. It would be a prime opportunity for the Kangaroos to finally make a move. Having the kangaroo represented in Australia's capital, as well as being the only actual inland team, means they can also affiliate with the red centre. Lean into being at the heart/core of Australia, rather than just being the most pointless suburban team in Melbourne. NZ is absolutely an option. They did all their previous exhibition games etc all in Wellington, which only has a 212,000 people. Auckland has 1.6 million people, and a better climate. It MUST be in Auckland. It might seem like a long way, but its only a 2 hour time difference from the east coast, less time difference than Perth is, and geographically closer. Australia and NZ also have a free movement agreement for people to live, work, travel etc. Makes sense.

[@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu]

No Darwin deserves its own stand alone team.

[@debuthunter5389]

@@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu - deserves?

[@eddielong8663]

You were doing well until you said anything about New Zealand. Kiwis will forever want little to do with Aussie Rules, and I'm perfectly okay with that. On the topic of the Roos escaping to Canberra however? 👍. I've been thinking that for years. In fact it should've been done a long time ago. They turned down the offer to relocate to the Gold Coast. Western Sydney failed them. Southern Tasmania is currently failing them. Canberra is already approaching half a million people and it's still surprisingly booming, so this is really the final option left for the Roos. They should do it now before the AFL plonks a brand new 20th club there.

[@harrykatsaros]

The only way to grow footy in NSW is with more teams. More teams means more coverage on TV, radio and newspapers and more live games being broadcasted. The main barrier at the moment is that people there have never even tried watching the sport. Live games on TV are few and far between, which is something that the AFL should have been addressed as part of the last broadcast deal. Part of that deal should have been that all AFL games on Channel 7 get aired nation wide. And then there’s just no coverage of it on the news or on ancillary programming like Footy Classified, The Sunday Footy Show, etc. None of these programs air in NSW. So even if you wanted to get into Aussie rules it’s very hard to find a way in. There’s 10 foot walls up all over the place.

[@ToddHull-n4i]

We don't want to watch the ugly ridiculous game ,it's got no hope in NSW stay on your side of the Barassi line .

[@ToddHull-n4i]

The 7 th largest city in Australia Newcastle id love if they tried to get a team there hahaha no one even knows what AFL is there they'd be ran out of time as soon as they got of the plane

[@ttt-One]

imagine if fiji got an afl team

[@rhysh2639]

Team 20 will be Canberra. The GWS deal ends in 2032; perfect timing for a full-time Canberra-based team. Estimated population of over 500,000 currently (almost as much as the whole of Tasmania) and continuing to grow. It is by FAR the most reasonable option. Canberra is a sports-mad city and a local team will definitely get bums on seats!

[@ChannelBlaino]

They can also represent the whole of the Riverina region, places like Wagga. Maybe they could even play 2 or 3 games in Wagga a year as well. GWS can then do a few games in Newcastle instead.

[@rhysh2639]

@@ChannelBlaino Yeah they definitely could.....but the team should be called "Canberra" though, no acronyms or hyphenated names.

[@ChannelBlaino]

@@rhysh2639 Agreed.

[@BurningMad]

The only thing that holds Canberra back is that Manuka is old and small. The ACT gov might not be willing to spend money upgrading it because the Raiders and Brumbies already want a new stadium. If they can make that happen Canberra is a certainty.

[@rhysh2639]

@@BurningMad Cricket Australia also wants Manuka upgraded. There's plenty of time. I don't see a 20th team in the AFL until at least 2031 (at the absolute earliest).

[@joshmc5882]

Freo lured Modra over from Radelaide, but haven't had too much success attracting non-WA natives apart from that.

[@monty8322]

Big ups for West Coast with their 3 premierships. Can't wait to see their fourth premiership

[@BDub2024]

There must be games held in New Zealand. Fact. If Hawthorn Hawks are smart they'll move straight to Wellington for home games (now Launceston deal will be over). Then try to get the stadium in Auckland sorted. Hawks could start with 2 games per year being funded by NZ Tourism, and aim for 4 matches. The supporters gained could be priceless for growing the club. I'm not convinced St Kilda can get that done. Imagine the Saints jumper with a white map of NZ down the middle instead of a white panel. Sensational. You don't try to make big profits, but you work on building fans and selling merchandise and lifting profile. Even Melb should try to jump in.

[@GeorgeMrgManHine]

Why does the 20th team have to be from interstate, how about getting a team from the VFL. Put it simply, 2 divisions. AFL Division 1 VFL Division 2 That way teams can drop in and out of either division. Or even have WA, SA, TAS as division 2

[@jackhudson2237]

Does Victoria need more teams with clubs like North melbourne, bulldogs and Saints being as lowly supported as they are?

[@debuthunter5389]

I have a really thought out proposal for a 2 tier system, but it's based on 2 leagues of 10 teams each. Let me know if you want to hear more.

[@BG-id2cv]

Then how do you construct a draft with multiple divisions? The #1 draft pick certainly won't want to go to a side that finished bottom of the ladder in Division 2.

[@jackhudson2237]

@@BG-id2cv exactly, ideas are better when they're thought through...

[@debuthunter5389]

@@BG-id2cv - a system with VFL as division 2 isn't good. A breaking up of the current league into 2 works well imo, and I honestly spent a hell of a long time on my plan haga

[@huwgrossmith9555]

Joondalup has a reliable metro train line. Bunbury does not.

[@robdogs4743]

Do you think Norwood joining would really take fans away from Port? I’d imagine every redlegs fan also goes for the crows in the AFL, not Port Adelaide

[@boundaryrider]

I mean the majority would be Crows but there would b some Norwood fans who barrack for Port

[@chadchadderton]

@@boundaryrider Highly doubtful.

[@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu]

​@@boundaryriderI'm sorry. Port and Norwood hate one another with a passion

[@helvijssaukants3479]

@@boundaryrider You can pretty much guarantee every Norwood/Sturt supporter went on and supported the Crows

[@Mrbear12354]

Thanks mate your great

[@TBoneTony]

They did have games in New Zealand during ANZAC day between St Killda and Carlton during the mid 2010s, however the crowds were poor and I personally think there needs to be more support else there may be no Phoenix rising in New Zealand in the AFL.

[@rhyst1836]

I wish Bunbury did have a team but there is not enough fans

[@PhillipGWhite]

How about the south west as a whole “south west pelicans”

[@rhyst1836]

@@PhillipGWhite yea that could work

[@nerdtalker3231]

I would love to see afl become global That would be incredible

[@tomw4637]

Too many Victorian teams. Relocate one (probs North Melbourne) to Canberra once GWS deal ends and bring in a new team to Darwin. Make Canberra v GWS a derby game, maybe that can be the second Anzac Day clash in the capital. Sydneysiders can get there easily for away games, and Victorian north fans could probably come up for home games in Canberra or Albury-wodonga. Plus they’d play plenty in Melbourne. Darwin can play a couple in Alice, and maybe play the Gold Coast in Cairns. 20 teams, 10 games, no byes, first fully national sport so pretty much everyone has a team to support.

[@debuthunter5389]

Absolutely this. Kangaroos being represented in the nation's capital. To me it's an ideal scenario.

[@chadchadderton]

A lot of holes in this proposal though... A darwin team is a nice fantasy, but won't be remotely sustainable at this point or the very near future. A "derby" game is two teams from the same city/area... so Canberra vs GWS can't be a "derby" game. If North do relocate (not the worst option) they wouldn't play "plenty" in Melbourne considering a) you're taking a side out of Melbourne and b) even with what would be the remaining 9 sides, you don't play them all in Melbourne regardless. "20 teams, 10 games" how does that work? Why do teams only play 10 games a season?

[@BurningMad]

No team is going to relocate again. They all get so much money from shared TV revenue that they're all financially secure. This includes North Melbourne.

[@debuthunter5389]

@@BurningMad - yes they get it from the AFL share but the Roos TV games don't bring in their share of the revenue to the AFL. They have to be spoonfed still

[@BurningMad]

@@debuthunter5389 yes but that's irrelevant, the AFL will fund them as much as is necessary from the shared revenue pool.

[@planetpetey]

Good job mate. Appreciate the effort and the error corrections. Only thing I disagree with is your name for a 3rd WA team. The warriors? Really? Nah it’s gotta be the Dugites.

[@boundaryrider]

Interesting what are Dugites

[@planetpetey]

@@boundaryrider Dugites are deadly green toned brown snakes endemic to the South West and in particular the northern suburbs of Perth.

[@planetpetey]

@@boundaryrider Dugites are a deadly green toned brown snake endemic to South West WA in particular the northern suburbs of Perth

[@rmar127]

What the afl needs before a 20th team is to stabilize the teams that they currently have. Having teams embrace Bendigo or Ballarat would give them a better financial footing. For instance, having a team like north Melbourne play half their home games at Bendigo’s Queen Elizabeth Stadium would give them a strong local presence. In addition, their Melbourne based supporters wont miss out on much footy as they’ll still be playing in Melbourne more weeks than not. Similarly The dog could play half their home games Mars Stadium. In addition, i could see the Saints playing a few games in regional eastern Vic, ie in places like Pakenham or Taralgan. If in the Future that there is ever a Canberra based team, theyd almost certainly have to play a couple of games a year in Wagga to help get that region invested into them.

[@peterkotsonis2535]

Or we should just get rid of North Melbourne because it's a club that can't attract fans and constantly gets league handouts

[@theflyingdropbear2009]

as I have been saying to a number of people, the 20th team, will be a team that surprises many.

[@brownie69420]

How about a newcastle/ Central Coast team or another team in Western Vic like Ballarat

[@BDub2024]

In the south west the only town that could host it would be Bunbury. This is two hours from Perth and one hour from Mandurah. Regardless the population wouldn't be large enough to be a sole south west team. Another alternative is to base the team at Mandurah Peel and call it South West Thunder.The team would then utilise Mandurah and South West population. Mandurah is 80km from Perth, so probably couldn't have every game at Optus Stadium. Some games could be in Bunbury too. Problem is that the only way from Bunbury to Mandurah is by car. Mandurah are not really south west, and Bunbury/Busselton mightn't want to barrack for a team based in Mandurah. Also Mandurah is a sleepy kind of town despite it being the fastest growing region. Peel Thunder doesn't exactly get much support. Its over an hour by train from Mandurah to Optus Stadium. It would take investment in stadium in Mandurah and Perth. Also There are a lot of Dockers fans in the southern part of the city including Mandurah, which is a concern.

[@jamesberos7413]

combine north and devils, stay at 18 teams, give tassie a competitive start

[@charlieking8644]

they'll never combine demons with anyone because they are too big of a club

[@debuthunter5389]

@@charlieking8644 - they are talking bout Tassie Devils, not Melbourne Demons.

[@chadchadderton]

@@charlieking8644 luckily he didn't say demons did he.

[@BurningMad]

But Tasmanians don't care about North. They want their own identity.

[@eddielong8663]

Obvious troll comment. No Tasmanian wants that. And I doubt they'd be many Roos supporters who'd want it either. They'd rather see their club leave the comp with dignity as opposed to being used as a boost for a club that probably won't even require it.

[@Dlxxx159]

New Zealand Silvers, like Carlton Blues

[@jamesmunn867]

Auckland based with a 20,000+ oval stadium also used for international cricket win win most viable compared to anywhere else 🏟️🇳🇿👍

[@trevorbower4716]

Port are still struggling financially with the Adelaide crows taking most of the south Australia's fan base

[@finnpamm8507]

That's just untrue Port are in the best financially they have been in the last 20 years Alberton oval has been upgraded to a state of the art a facility.

[@chadchadderton]

That's not true at all. Port have recorded positive financials every year since covid, in fact financially they've been in a much better position than the crows as of late (in terms of financial growth not overall status) It's true port once were struggling financially, but they've literally wiped 9 million of debt away in the past 3 years and are set to be debt free in a year or so... and that is because of their 'relative' financial success of late.

[@BurningMad]

As others have said, this is not true. It's been more than a decade since Port were in trouble. The shared TV revenue is more than enough to sustain a team.

[@trevorbower4716]

That's why port get $5 million extra in head out from the afl like a long with Sydney and the expansion clubs and smaller Victorian clubs. 9 clubs got $10.5-12 million last year most of that is the tv revenue money

[@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu]

Not true. Port recorded a profit last season and are very financially viable

[@kyalking1313]

From what I’ve heard many Canberra people don’t like the giants!

[@johnhynes7784]

The real issue with the Giants was local AFL clubs (and sydney and Qld too) spent a TON of money starting the NEAFL to give the Northern state AFL team reserve grades a game each week. In return it was a smaller and local step for local kids to play at a higher level and play in fromt of AFL affiliated people. As soon as an expanded VFL came calling, they dropped the NEAFL like a hot potato, of course they still want the annual money. Give local clubs 3 million to split between them once and stop the rubbish. GWS hardly engage locally any more, they just use kids as cannon fodder for the one in 3 or 4 years they can draft. I thought they would be great for Canberra, now I wish they would stay in Sydney and leave us alone.

[@debuthunter5389]

Also they are a GWS team that isn't based in Canberra nor does it represent Canberra at all in name. It's a Sydney team, but everyone's being told "you have a team, GWS". Pfft. Lol.

[@canberrapear7219]

I'd say the majority of Canberra AFL fans accept the Giants as a second team, but very few would have them as a first time. A team of our own would be immensely more popular.

[@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu]

Why haven't you considered a Northern team based in Darwin that had an arrangement with northern Queensland similar to how GWS have an arrangement with Canberra

[@boundaryrider]

U must have missed part 1 mate. That was one of my big talking points. Just check the pinned comment In part 1 we discuss the NT, North Australia, SA & WA

[@BDub2024]

West Perth Falcons football club is based in Joondalup but refuses to be called Joondalup, despite both locations being 28km apart. The club would have to be using West Perth colours and probably be called Falcons another bird of prey. The WAFL team has a large supporter base that is parochial, but no one watches WAFL anymore. And most West Perth fanatics are aged 50 upwards. So by the time the 20th team joins it would be very hard to convince people to swap from Eagles / Dockers to West Perth.The old WP fans will be well into their 60s... But a club with a new identify at Joondalup wouldn't work. While its the northern suburbs certainly, it doesn't really have a regional parochialism. Its all part of the suburbs of Perth that stretches almost all the way to Yanchep (53km north now). Joondalup has only existed for 40 years, that's how fast Perth has grown and its come from nothing. A lot of English and South Africans up there and they love soccer and rugby, but certainly you've got a lot of people in that coastal strip that love sport in general. So has to be West Perth and there is some argument that the fans are now too old and too entrenched with other AFL clubs. Certainly a relocated club would work.. Other possibilities is Swan Valley region which is also expanding. But less likely.

[@seven7264]

Hear me out: 11th Victorian team.

[@debuthunter5389]

L O L

[@kyalking1313]

2032 so 2035 for a Canberra team

[@masontroyadams3534]

Maybe another team in the west of Melbourne would be good. Considering all the Melbourne based teams are based in the east besides from the Bulldogs, another team in the west would be good, as AFL is still very popular and many western suburbs play in different leagues, meaning population, popularity or home grounds wouldn't be an issue.

[@boundaryrider]

Yeah but I doubt the AFL would add a 9th VIC team. Don’t mind the idea of more games in country VIC tho. Barely see any other than 2/3 games in Ballarat a year

[@debuthunter5389]

Lol. Geelong?

[@chadchadderton]

all teams are based in the east? except for ya know... essendon, north, collingwood, calrton and melbourne. except for all those teams right

[@masontroyadams3534]

@@chadchadderton didn't mean east, meant just the west of Melbourne in general has not many teams.

[@masontroyadams3534]

@@boundaryrider yeah i agree, apart from population, a team in places like Ballarat or Bendigo would be awesome

[@MoZZa1788]

The only way to grow the game more would be a northern Australia team. Combine darwin and north Queensland.

[@Sammy25100]

I see the logic but the hard part about that is getting both northern Queensland and NT to identify with the shared team. A team needs a strong sense of identity and connection to the place it's based in. I think that could be an issue for a combined, cross-state league. North Queensland is Rugby League country and I don't think they'll buy into that idea.

[@debuthunter5389]

How? Where would the stadium be? How do they play through the hot wet seasons? Where is the population density? How many people/players will want to move up there?

[@chadchadderton]

Shared teams are arguably the most illogical suggestions when talking about expansion.

[@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu]

​@@debuthunter5389an indoor stadium is the answer and the dry season is at the same time as the Melbourne winter A non issue

[@debuthunter5389]

@@ScottTrowbridge-xh8pu - there were more questions asked than just that

[@Max_Noble]

have you thought of possiblya gippsland team?

[@irenenamoc3192]

Ends May 30, 7:50am :)

[@PhillipGWhite]

West coast premiership wins 92 94 06 18 Losses 91 05 15

[@ToddHull-n4i]

Rugby League will definitely be the dominant code across Australia within 20 yrs its growing way faster then AFL and lets face the facts Rugby League is the much better product .

[@boundaryrider]

Let’s face facts. Rugby league is not the better product

[@Adam-XL]

lol couldnt even sell out a state of origin game in South Australia

[@ToddHull-n4i]

@@Adam-XL who gives a fuck about South Australia .No one

[@Adam-XL]

@@ToddHull-n4i doesn't matter who gives a fuck about it or not, not sure how NRL will be the dominant code when they cant even field a side in S.A and W.A

[@gregrobins5615]

You've dismissed Norwood too quickly, they are in advanced talks with the AFL already. As I've said before, the AFL clubs aren't that keen on more composite sides joining the competition, so Norwood are a big chance to get the nod being the best club outside the AFL. A rivalry with Port Adelaide is an attraction as is Norwood's ability to attract big sponsorship deals. An established, successful club like Norwood gives the competition another positive opportunity to promote the competition as being truly national, without another made up side put in just to fill the gap. Norwood have been trying since the early 80's so certainly deserve the next licence over another franchise. Who will follow the WA club anyway ?

[@boundaryrider]

I understand they have had talks about becoming the 20th team but u have to remember they would impact both Port Adelaide and especially the Crows supports. Most (if not all) Norwood supporters have an affiliation with an AFL team (especially in SA). So while bringing them in would b great, would they b able to take supporters back from the sides they already barrack for in the AFL? And on the other side will that then impact the supporter numbers of the already established SA AFL sides.

[@boundaryrider]

Btw I’m from SA and would love an extra team here and More spotlight on SA footy. Extra game every week here most likely is also awesome for the state. I just think there is a lot in the way of a 3rd team here that’s all

[@gregrobins5615]

@@boundaryrider Yes it would affect the Crows more than Port but is that Norwood's fault ? 145 year history of success and being established means that they have generations of supporters who would drop the Crows in an instant and join Norwood again. I can tell you that Norwood are leaving no stone unturned to get the next licence.

[@gregrobins5615]

@@boundaryrider There will always be negatives but in Norwood's case, the positives outnumber them. The AFL are impressed with Norwood's community links, allowing the Crows join the SANFL and letting the Crows women's team play at Norwood. Plus the success of the Gather Round games at Norwood have helped put Norwood at the front of a possible queue.

[@ChannelBlaino]

I always felt it should of been Port Adelaide and Norwood who got the AFL licenses, even if it was a Norwood-Sturt merger , would of been great to see the two most powerful SANFL clubs, with a rich established history is mighly impressive that rival the great Victorian rivalries like Carlton & Collingwood.

[@NebSdoo]

What do you think are the chances that instead a Vic team (Roos) merges with the Suns instead of offering a 20th license?

[@boundaryrider]

Possibly a relocation and a slight chance of a merge with someone in the future for North but I doubt it’s with the Gold Coast. I think if the AFL we’re going to think of ideas about the Gold Coast they would’ve a few years ago. I think now they are now setting themselves up as a team for the future. Good young kids coming thru. A former premiership coach and leader to build a club. I think they’ll explode in a few years if not this year. I don’t think North would be keen on merging with the Suns. More chance of a merge with Tassy if I’m being honest

[@NebSdoo]

@@boundaryrider i hope you’re right, i’m a qld footy fan and would much rather GCS get running on their own and north go rural or something. Sunnies need to find a support base in Vic though i reckon before they can trully explode in the comp.

[@boundaryrider]

Yeah I agree. I think it’ll take a while tho to grow in VIC. But I think if they start becoming successful (aka making finals and doing well in them) then I think the support there will come

[@BurningMad]

Zero. There won't be any more mergers or relocations ever. North were made a huge offer to move to the Gold Coast in 2007 and they said no. That was when they had huge debt, and now they have none, the TV money will keep them viable.

[@eddielong8663]

The Roos were given a shot at relocation to the Gold Coast. They turned it down, and they shouldn't be given a second chance. There's no way they'd want to merge with the Suns anyway. And I'm sure the Suns wouldn't want to share history with the Roos either. If i were a supporter of either club, I'd rather see my club bow out of the competition with grace instead of being forced to merge with another struggler. The ACT is the last relocation option for the Roos. And it's probably a better place for an AFL team to be than the Gold Coast anyway tbh.

[@andredecock8361]

Where are the fan bases coming from

[@russellhorsefield9199]

Lets bend it like Bendigo would like to a good choice.

[@AllenGuyRBLX]

Ballarat/Western Victoria (even Bendigo) bid, perhaps could you see it a possibility?

[@boundaryrider]

I think a team would have to relocate there from VIC tbh mate. I doubt we would see a 9th VIC side. But I think we need to explore more games in country VIC. Widely unused which is a shame

[@jesfel14]

@@boundaryrider I agree with more games in country Victoria The only way it would work long term is if one of the Melbourne-based teams moved to Ballarat/Bendigo full time

[@jamielmorgan8533]

Too many clubs in Vic as it is

[@planetpetey]

Maybe they should shift a troubled Vic club like North Melbourne to Ballarat?

[@tonyforde355]

How to pronounce Joondalup and Wanneroo: Joon-dal-up Wanna-roo

[@BDub2024]

I think if a club like North relocated (even if it was 5 games a year in Perth) then it would actually build support. North do have some support in Perth, especially in the 50 plus age bracket. North vs Eagles, North vs Dockers, North vs Sydney and North vs Brisbane and North vs Adelaide would get some support. They could even play the Eagles and Dockers home and away... the more games they play in Perth the more of an advantage they gain.

[@debuthunter5389]

Teams need to build upon an identity, rather than watering it down. Problem is, they have been stubborn and refused to capitalize on new opening markets, and instead trying desperately to hold onto their tiny stake they have left in Melbourne.

[@BDub2024]

@@debuthunter5389 I need to finish your video and will reply further.

[@BDub2024]

@@debuthunter5389 North want to receive and not give back. Moving deep into the suburbs is a no brainer and it was a massive missed opportunity. They were inept at the other markets like Tassie but they still have a chance. They could play Sydney and GWS home and away each year and it would give them 4 matches in Canberra. They could then host another home match there. Suddenly they would have 5-6 matches in Canberra each year. Really bed it down so the Canberroos fans can see that they're serious. Canberra gets serviced and North wins some fans in Canberra and NSW. Giants want to hold Canberra but might encourage them to lift their game too. If you have GWS playing Saints home and away in Canberra, then you have the matches in a neutral venue so Saints aren't too disadvantaged, and Canberra get extra games.

[@BurningMad]

North tried this in Sydney in the 90s, it didn't work. You can't build a fanbase when you're a part time team in a city that already has a full time team.

[@BDub2024]

@@BurningMad thats my point. North refuse to commit. They think by changing their name to Kangaroos and playing a few home matches in Sydney then they'll reclaim it. They want everything on a platter without the hard work. See how poorly they did Hobart. Compare it to Hawthorn in Launceston. They messed up Ballarat and now Bulldogs seized it. I think GWS can and should control Canberra and even change their name to W Syd Canberra.. But if North play enough games in Canberra and commit to the place then they will benefit (like Hawthorn did in Launceston). But what's my preference? That they move from Arden St into the northern parts of Melbourne which have high immigration. Commit to social work in the area, utilise the footy facilities, have a big presence etc.. Whether they want to try to win over Bendigo and country Victoria through to Albury Wodonga is something different.

[@DaRoy71]

Football was more popular in the act before the raiders

[@AussieSports123]

Albury

[@mysteryunknownguy]

hobart koalas , darwin dingoes

[@darcymulgrew8425]

i recond geraldton

[@Lachy_Plowman32]

Not enough people and it takes ages to get there

[@khozt]

Just revive South Melbourne or Fitzroy

[@debuthunter5389]

In Melbourne? Lol no chance.

[@khozt]

@@debuthunter5389 well apparently everywhere else is no chance bruz

[@doylersafl8728]

I've always thought the AFL should split into a 2 conference system with the victorians in one and all the others in another, therefore both comps have room to expand and no-one gets kicked out

[@debuthunter5389]

You wouldn't want an uneven balance between the 2 conferences though... How does fixturing work, and then teams in one conference has less chance of winning.

[@chadchadderton]

well that just doesn't seem logistically smart.

[@BurningMad]

Oh yay, so the Vic teams can get even more of an advantage by not ever having to leave Melbourne and Geelong, while the WA and QLD teams all have to fly to each other's states at least once a year? I think Victorian teams get enough of an advantage already without having to do them even more favours at the expense of everybody else.

[@doylersafl8728]

@BurningMad alright, do you want a 26 or more round competition with players injuring themselves left, right, and centre because of the fixture congestion then? You can't avoid long travel times between states no matter what format the comp is in, when there's only 10 teams in each conference, you might only have 15 rounds with 10 home games, it's really not that hard to get around. And it's not like we're spliting up rivals by dividing the competition, pretty much every traditional vic rivalry is with another Vic team and its the same for the interstate teams (Derby, showdown). The interstate teams might only have to travel across the country once a season which is a lot better than it currently is, and it's a lot easier to split the draft if the talent pool is uneven and some teams aren't winning games

[@eddielong8663]

Nice idea in theory. The idea of some kind of super grand final between the the two teams that each won their respective Premierships, is interesting. But part of the appeal to the AFL is that it's a one-league show. Great players from opposing sides are garenteed to face off with one another atleast once every season. Split the comp into two leagues and this aspect is removed. The conference system works in the US thanks to the huge population that can sustain it. It likely won't work here though.

[@AJWRAJWR]

What about the Cunnamulla Camels?

[@irenenamoc3192]

4:23

[@waziammm]

There are a bunch of team options which would struggle to be competitive at the top level, but could be viable at second tier in a relegation system. The AFL bloating the league to 19 teams and ravenous with its appetite for more games per year I do wonder if behind close doors they are working towards a system like this? (That well connected people at Norwood keep driving their bid makes me wonder if they know something we don't?) Also on the international front, as a thought exercise has anyone considered Indonesia as an option? They have a large growing young population, no existing hard-liner dedicated code, and travel is feasible. (Hell WA-FIFO workers could fill a few stands there!). The AFL seem so eager to jump to large saturated markets like China and the US where Aussie Rules is completely alien, when the league could be grown organically in the adjacent SE Asia, have I missed something?

[@chadchadderton]

A promotion-relegation system isn't feasible in Australia, let alone with Aussie rules. But I do agree 19 teams is too many. Indonesia is a terrible call to be frank. Soccer is BY FAR the dominant code in Indoenesia... I mean the sport is utterly massive there. But generally speaking Indonesians don't really fall for professional sports, and especially not "westernised" sports. Regardless of market saturation, there is no room for footy to grow in SEA, despite the sport not being big there.

[@eddielong8663]

Yeah, right. And I'm sure you yourself would continue to support your own team if it was your team that was constantly stuck in the second tier league because it could never be good enough to break into the top league, eh? This isn't England. And the AFL isn't the EPL. We're Aussies. Despite what we like to think of ourselves, the numbers reflect that we are in fact NOT underdog supporters. We won't give pitty full-time support to struggling clubs that'll hardly have a chance of breaking into a top tier league let alone never having a realistic shot at winning a Premiership.

[@ToddHull-n4i]

Newcastle is Australia's 7 largest city ....lol they would get ran out of town

[@zippyspinifex]

hear me out, having a Northern Tasmania club and a Hobart club would be awesome.

[@debuthunter5389]

But not at all viable. You want a failed sentimental option, or a sustainable viable option? Lol.

[@BG-id2cv]

It would be brilliant...all this "not viable" rubbish...most of AFL revenue for player payments comes from the billion $ TV rights and not memberships or match attendances (though they do obviously contribute). A Northern Tassie Vs a Southern Tassie game on tele would be a ratings winner year in and year out.

[@chadchadderton]

@@BG-id2cv yep, and they would play twice a year... outside of that the ratings for a small state splitting two teams would be terrible. You were the one who mentioned how important the ratings on TV are, and you yourself explained why two tassie teams wouldn't work.

[@BG-id2cv]

@@chadchadderton I don't know where you got the "...and you yourself explained why two tassie teams teams won't work"...please direct me to where I wrote that....must be confusing me with someone else. Your statement "outside of that, the ratings for a small state would be terrible" is really a guessing don't you reckon? ..as any lover of AFL will watch any game no matter who or where it's played. I'm Victorian and I'll watch any game of AFL no matter who the teams are....and I'm not the only one...there are many many avid AFL game watchers and the TV rights $$$ proves it.

[@eddielong8663]

Are you even from Tasmania? I can assure you as someone who grew up there, the North-South divide is laughably exaggerated. It was just used by the AFL as an excuse to refuse granting the State a club of its own for so long.

[@AdrianHoliday]

Perth Metro Mets

[@boundaryrider]

Perth Mets wouldn’t b too bad

[@AdrianHoliday]

@@boundaryriderit would reference the old Metropolitan FC that West Perth had succeeded

[@BDub2024]

The critical thing is WAFC's opinion. They own the Eagles and Dockers and get paid a dividend each year to support WA junior football development in WA. Also both clubs have a very good stadium deal. Now you would think that 3 clubs mean more money, but that is not necessarily the case if it affects the support of Eagles and Dockers and therefore attendances and therefore stadium deals. So unless WAFC get behind it then its not going to happen.

[@BurningMad]

The Eagles have 100 000 members, they can't fit them all in the stadium. It shouldn't be a problem if their fanbase dips slightly. Freo is more of a concern but at least Joondalup is well away from Freo, if they base the third team there.

[@BDub2024]

@@BurningMad You need to think of WAFC not WCE. Because Freo and especially Eagles pay dividends to WAFC to develop junior development, and anything that risks it is a concern. The AFL don't help 'WA juniors enough, so WAFC is reliant on Eagles and Dockers. Having three clubs won't necessarily mean more money to the WAFC. It may mean that Eagles and Dockers paid dividends are less and the new club can't pay any.dividend. Or smaller crowds even by a small amount may impact the next stadium deal which then mean less profits to Eagles and Dockers and therefore less dividends paid to WAFC. Don't worry the WAFC will do their sums. But if it doesn't stack up for WAFC financially then it won't happen.

[@BDub2024]

@@BurningMad General admission at Optus Stadium is about $60 I think. Also, for many years it was always difficult to get into Subiaco Oval. It would be often a full house for tickets sold (even if people don't turn up). Then any tickets that were available were premium seating. So people never spontaneously turned up at the ground. Same with Optus Stadium really. All ticket purchases are done at home with booking fees etc. Anyway all that impacts crowd numbers.

[@BDub2024]

@@BurningMad Freo's fan base while largely south is also reasonably big in the northern suburbs in suburbs from Duncraig Greenwood and further north... If it was Mandurah/Peel South West for a team then it would hurt Fremantle. Mandurah is 68km from Fremantle. Mandurah is 70km to Perth. But by and large suburbs around Rockingham down to Mandurah are more likely to be Fremantle

[@BurningMad]

@@BDub2024 it necessarily will mean the WAFC having more money if not all Eagles members in Perth can buy tickets for games. If some of them became supporters of the third club, they could buy tickets for games since there would be more games.

[@DaRoy71]

Melbourne can’t get a tall foward either

[@BDub2024]

Andrew Gillon recently said last week there is no plans for a third AFL team from WA. Instead they're looking at giving extra home matches and make Eagles Dockers having a different involvement for Gatherround (perhaps that means a Western Derby in Perth during Gatherround to stop travelling).

[@BG-id2cv]

Is Andrew Gillon a cross between Andrew Dillon and Gillon McLughlin?! A mixed marriage of an Old Xav and a Uni Blues footballer ..the ultimate silver spooner if ever there was one!

[@BDub2024]

@@BG-id2cv ha ha that's funny.

[@angelojoshua276]

AFL expansion to other countries is ridiculous.

[@debuthunter5389]

New Zealand already has a team in Australia's soccer, baseball, basketball and rugby competitions. NZ is the only viable overseas option.

[@benjaminallan4767]

no point going to other countries because then it’s not called AFL anymore. ( Australian football league ) which means it’s our own county sport

[@jamesmunn867]

@@benjaminallan4767 will still be called the AFL regardless never made any differences with A-League and NRL as it’s still based on the code name Australian Rules Football

[@chadchadderton]

@@debuthunter5389 While NZ might be the most viable overseas option, that doesn't really make it a viable expansion option. NZ has teams in soccer, basketball and rugby competitions because they're all more popular sports than footy... and even then soccer is struggling despite recent investment. The only outlier is baseball, but that's a semiprofessional setup so it's not even remotely comparable.

[@jamesmunn867]

Auckland the most viable location for New Zealand not little Wellington has a 1.8 million population there and needs an oval stadium built like Wellington to also accommodate Cricket so like Tasmania the game will sustain itself in the long term and boost broadcasting rights and is slightly closer to Victoria than Western Australia is 🇳🇿👍

[@chadchadderton]

That's the thing, Wellington would be the go to location because of the stadium. No one is going to want to invest in a large enough footy stadium in Auckland considering it won't be used for cricket.

[@jamesmunn867]

@@chadchadderton it will be used for cricket to house more of a crowd for matches Wellington isn’t viable being the small size it is but Auckland would be otherwise

[@chadchadderton]

@@jamesmunn867 Auckland wouldn't be viable, especially considering you would have to build a brand new stadium and the cost of that would be astronomical because NZC won't put much into the funding given their desire to use eden park above all else in Auckland.

[@jamesmunn867]

@@chadchadderton yes it actually would be viable has the population of almost 2 million to stack it up without any other rival sport outside of the NRL and the AFL already stated so as a long term prospect and boost broadcasting rights Australialasia wide like the A-League, Basketball, Netball the AFL needs to expand further the cricket stadium would be government funded as proposals have already been made a 20,000+ stadium is in the works there and no doubt the AFL with St Kilda will jump onboard it

[@chadchadderton]

@@jamesmunn867 It would not be viable. Just because Auckland has a sizeable population does NOT make it a viable option for the AFL. Viability comes from local interest, ability to develop players, sponsorship and tv viewership deals, participation in the region, facilities and possible attendance. Auckland fails in all those areas. You can't just say "no doubt" when there is clearly serious doubt about the viability of the sport in Auckland and New Zealand as a whole.

[@frustralia4293]

Has got to be Northern Territory frillnecks. Then every state is accounted for.

[@boundaryrider]

ICYMI. We did talk about the NT in part 1

[@debuthunter5389]

NT is not a viable option for the national competition.

[@frustralia4293]

@@debuthunter5389 why not

[@frustralia4293]

@@debuthunter5389 why not?

[@debuthunter5389]

@@frustralia4293 - very low population density, hot humid conditions for football, unlikely to get most people/players wanting to move up there

[@huwgrossmith9555]

Wann er oo

[@wokesoicy2940]

north syd

[@debuthunter5389]

LOL

[@ToddHull-n4i]

Canberra is Rugby League heartland

[@johnhynes7784]

Stop talking about Canberra. It struggles to support 6 local first grade sides. Essendon district alone has 5 times the players that AFL Canberra fields. Gold Coast hasnt played finals in the 13 or so years they have existed. Tasmania hasnt started yet and their under 15s beat ACT by 100 points last year. North Melbourne has gone 12 - 1 - 78 since 2020. Where is Canberra's Academy catchment going to be? You could take everything outside Sydney, draw a line to the western border of NSW and to the Murray and they are still smaller than GWS who are smaller than the Swans, who are smaller than the catchment for all the southern states teams inc Tasmania. Just had a look at Ballarat. AFL Canberra has u13, 14 and 15 competitons. They field a total of 21 sides. Ballarat have 2 year age groups. Their under 13 and under 15 age groups field 40 teams. They are close to Melbourne, they have a majority AFL supporting population and have 36 players from Ballarat on AFL lists. Canberra has 5 or 6. It isnt big enough to have a small percentage of supporters that make it viable like Gold Coast or GWS and the football landscape is too diverse in Canberra, unlike Tasmania. The 20th team is a very long way off. North are probably closer to folding or relocating than a 20th team is to being started.

[@chadchadderton]

Canberra is the best option for expansion or relocation... if you wan't people to suggest they stop talking about it then explain why the AFL shouldn't expand past 18 teams instead of rambling about Canberra not being viable when it's objectively the best location for expansion.

[@johnhynes7784]

@@chadchadderton I listed them above. Not wasting time on an illiterate anonymous nuffy.

[@huwgrossmith9555]

Joon da l up

[@brettbrett9973]

Too many teams now. Most will not a flag in a generation. Greed and makes it weak competition. Google those facts.

[@debuthunter5389]

Most other big codes have like 30+ teams in their competition, or they have 20 but with a relegation system, which actually means like 40+ teams. It is damn hard to win a premiership/cup/championship. That is how life is in most places.

[@chadchadderton]

@@debuthunter5389 What big code in Australia has 30+ teams in their competition? What big code in Australia has 40+ teams in their competition AND a relegation system?

[@debuthunter5389]

@@chadchadderton - was referring to the part of not winning a flag in a generation. Doesn't matter where you are for that. It's normal.

[@chadchadderton]

@@debuthunter5389 Why didn't you answer my question? Why are you avoiding it?

[@debuthunter5389]

@@chadchadderton - none of them do. What's your point?

[@Phillips-25]

First

[@BurningMad]

Freo aren't able to attract a key forward? Are you forgetting Luke Jackson and Jesse Hogan? Yes Hogan didn't work out for them but he was a marquee trade in. Freo can attract players just fine, this shouldn't be cited as a barrier to a third team in Perth. I also disagree with the idea that population isn't that important, the number of people in an area who are interested in the game is the most important thing because it represents the potential fanbase and ability to generate revenue, which is what the AFL is really interested in most.

[@boundaryrider]

Luke Jackson is a Ruckman and both him and Hogan are home grown products. I said in the video they can attract home grown talent but if WA was to get another team u need more than WA talent. That’s what I’m saying about Fremantle. Name one key FWD they have recruited in 10 (even 15 years) outside of WA. They don’t even attract that many players other than home grown talent. My point is if Fremantle can’t attract outside talent now, how would they b able to if a 3rd WA team was brought into the comp with likely high signing bonus incentives.

[@boundaryrider]

And on the population front, u even say that it the interest of the game I mean with the population argument u would have to give the NZ. Hell go even further and say the USA. They have a huge population but u have to look at want for football. That’s why I said that WA can b a viable option because there is only 13% of supporters that are AFL members in WA. so there is a big untapped market. But on the likes of the ACT yes they have a big population in that area but a 5th of the Giants member based is from the ACT. Much less of a market at this point.

[@BurningMad]

@@boundaryrider Luke Jackson is a ruck/forward. And I disagree that they need more than WA talents given how much talent WA produces and how fast their population is growing. Fremantle has been poor for much of the past 10 years, and bad non-Vic teams always find it hard to recruit players from other states, especially key forwards who are hard to develop. You're asking for a lot there. When Freo were good, they attracted players like Chris Tarrant.

[@BurningMad]

@@boundaryrider well of course interest is important, but we're talking about Australia where there is plenty of interest, not some foreign country. That's why WA3 and Canberra are much better propositions than anywhere up north, there are just many more people even accounting for two existing teams. All the interest in the world can't make up for the fact Darwin and Cairns both have less than 200 000 people.