|
Both teams will be a success |
2
|
  
6
% |
|
Just Gold Coast |
1
|
3
% |
|
Just Sydney |
1
|
3
% |
|
Put a team in Tasmania |
22
|
70
% |
|
Put a team in Northern Territory |
0
|
0
% |
|
Put a team in Canberra |
1
|
3
% |
|
Put a team in New Zealand |
2
|
6
% |
|
Put a third team in South Australia |
0
|
0
% |
|
Put a third team in Western Australia |
2
|
6
% |
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/30/2005
Posts: 888
Location: '09 Eagles. On the rise!!!
|
themasta wrote:
That's a horrible idea. The coloured quota for the South African cricket team has been a major blight on that team. Race should play no part in choosing a player for a team. If a team came from NT I woulnd't be surprised if it had a few more indigenous players than other teams, but no way can it be a "no one but aboriginals" team.
Agree 100%.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/30/2008
Posts: 805
Location: Melb
|
ossie wrote:Hmmm sounds quite similar to the Fitzroy-Bears "merge"  nothing like it mate, the Brisbane/Fitzroy merge was offical and all the formalities were done, for example change of name, agreed new homebase ect.... whereas Melbourne just pick-up some "extra" players, they didnt change names to the University Demons or Melbourne Students, the only change that happened to Melb (that im aware of) is they just had a few extra names on there playing list
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/26/2008
Posts: 330
Location: North of the Yarra
|
I'd like to see a team in Tassie and a team in West Sydney. I'd also like to see clubs like: Melbourne, North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs moved on. They don't have big enough supporter bases to be viable in the AFL. In fact the AFL should pay off all their debts as a going away present and ship them off to the VFL. That way their die hard fans will still get to see them play and the stronger clubs won't continue to be comprised by having to prop them up.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/30/2008
Posts: 805
Location: Melb
|
Personally, I would rather see a Tassie, NT and possibly a Camberra team, just ot make the game more nation, before making another Syd team
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/29/2008
Posts: 114
Location: Melbourne
|
Drop Bear wrote:I'd like to see a team in Tassie and a team in West Sydney. I'd also like to see clubs like: Melbourne, North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs moved on. They don't have big enough supporter bases to be viable in the AFL. In fact the AFL should pay off all their debts as a going away present and ship them off to the VFL. That way their die hard fans will still get to see them play and the stronger clubs won't continue to be comprised by having to prop them up. I think North Melbourne are going in the rite direction so they should stay, but i think the AFL should consider mergin the Dogs and Dees and have Melbourne Bulldogs. Then use the free 18th licence for a Tasmaina Team.
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/10/2008
Posts: 15
Location: Hobart
|
Why all this talk of mergers between failing clubs? As the first post in this forum said, AFL has only lost 3 clubs compared to NRL's 17. Let's keep this track record, and just add, instead of taking teams.
Gold Coast, I don't mind - doubt they'll have much success, but alright, nonetheless.
West Sydney, no, as any minor few interested in AFL football in NSW already follow a team.
Why Tasmania? No other team is named after a state. Let's have two teams - Hobart and Launceston. Then Northern Tasmanians are kept happy, and the Southern Tasmanians (in the capital) can not have to travek so far to watch AFL football. If we were going to have a Tasmania team, they should play 6-7 games at North Hobart Oval and/or Bellerive Oval, and the remainder at Aurora Stadium.
In the future, in addition to the 16 teams, we could have:
Gold Coast
West Sydney
Hobart
Launceston
Darwin
Canberra
Norwood
East Perth
North Adelaide
West Perth
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/10/2008
Posts: 1,052
Location: Carlton
|
hcd wrote:Why all this talk of mergers between failing clubs? As the first post in this forum said, AFL has only lost 3 clubs compared to NRL's 17. Let's keep this track record, and just add, instead of taking teams.
Gold Coast, I don't mind - doubt they'll have much success, but alright, nonetheless.
West Sydney, no, as any minor few interested in AFL football in NSW already follow a team.
Why Tasmania? No other team is named after a state. Let's have two teams - Hobart and Launceston. Then Northern Tasmanians are kept happy, and the Southern Tasmanians (in the capital) can not have to travek so far to watch AFL football. If we were going to have a Tasmania team, they should play 6-7 games at North Hobart Oval and/or Bellerive Oval, and the remainder at Aurora Stadium.
In the future, in addition to the 16 teams, we could have:
Gold Coast
West Sydney
Hobart
Launceston
Darwin
Canberra
Norwood
East Perth
North Adelaide
West Perth
WA already has 2 cr@p teams why would you want 2 more? Where are you going to play all of the games?
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 1,524
Location: Chance was there and not taken so now get over it
|
hcd wrote:Why all this talk of mergers between failing clubs? As the first post in this forum said, AFL has only lost 3 clubs compared to NRL's 17. Let's keep this track record, and just add, instead of taking teams.
Gold Coast, I don't mind - doubt they'll have much success, but alright, nonetheless.
West Sydney, no, as any minor few interested in AFL football in NSW already follow a team.
Why Tasmania? No other team is named after a state. Let's have two teams - Hobart and Launceston. Then Northern Tasmanians are kept happy, and the Southern Tasmanians (in the capital) can not have to travek so far to watch AFL football. If we were going to have a Tasmania team, they should play 6-7 games at North Hobart Oval and/or Bellerive Oval, and the remainder at Aurora Stadium.
In the future, in addition to the 16 teams, we could have:
Gold Coast
West Sydney
Hobart
Launceston
Darwin
Canberra
Norwood
East Perth
North Adelaide
West Perth
A 26 team competition? North Melbourne, Melbourne, Bulldogs all struggle to make money right now as it is. In fact since 1980 every Victorian club with the exception of Essendon have been on the brink. Brining in more teams will spread the available money thus making it even harder for clubs to survive. The cost of running a club will not go down they will only rise. People are already saying that another two teams will reduce the skill levels I don't think it will to a noticeable degree however ten more teams could do it noticeably.
|
|
|
Guest |
