SANFL's 10th Team

[marbles]

make the crows and power play reserves in the vfl

create a south australian premier league where the bottom 2 sides go down to the amateur league div 1, the amateur league 2 grand finalists come up into the sanfl

every club in adelaide therefore has the opportunity to play in the sanfl

in the first year bring only 1 team up to the sanfl to make it 10 teams (St.Peters?)

[beenreal]

make the crows and power play reserves in the vfl

create a south australian premier league where the bottom 2 sides go down to the amateur league div 1, the amateur league 2 grand finalists come up into the sanfl

every club in adelaide therefore has the opportunity to play in the sanfl

in the first year bring only 1 team up to the sanfl to make it 10 teams (St.Peters?)

So for starters, you're expecting the PAFC to fund AFL League, AFL Reserves, plus SANFL League, Reserves, U18s and U16s squads

[Wedgie]

If the AFL is willing to float a second team in Sydney then there will be no way that South Australia will be reduced to one team.

Yeah really really good point. Having 2 teams in a city of 4.6 million really means that a city with 1.2 million should have the same. Nice logic.
The AFL wont give a flying rats about having a 2nd side based here if they keep losing money and getting noone along where they'll throw money at a 2nd Sydney franchise for ever and day simply because of the potential outreach of the league.

[Champ]

If the AFL is willing to float a second team in Sydney then there will be no way that South Australia will be reduced to one team.

Yeah really really good point. Having 2 teams in a city of 4.6 million really means that a city with 1.2 million should have the same. Nice logic.
The AFL wont give a flying rats about having a 2nd side based here if they keep losing money and getting noone along where they'll throw money at a 2nd Sydney franchise for ever and day simply because of the potential outreach of the league.

1. Have a look at the average attendance at GWS games.
2. Sydney, the city of reportedly 4.2 million have a severly transient population which at any one time houses a large number of non-Austalian skilled workers/working holiday makers. This same city is home to a little thing called the NRL which in turn has an international audience. Using simpler terms to explain my apparent lack of logic there are more footballers (AFL) followers per capita in SA than in Sydney. I specifically state Sydney as there is one league (AFL) currently played outside of the metropolitan area, Black Diamond which in fact was established I'm led to believe on the back of Victorian workers who migrated to the area some time ago (Newcastle).
3. The AFL has openly planned, marketed and projected that it will have two AFL teams operating in each major city.

If this logic isn't enough then let's put it down to a matter of simple opinion based on my shallow yet naive following of AFL media, you idiot.

[Champ]

If the AFL is willing to float a second team in Sydney then there will be no way that South Australia will be reduced to one team.

Yeah really really good point. Having 2 teams in a city of 4.6 million really means that a city with 1.2 million should have the same. Nice logic.
The AFL wont give a flying rats about having a 2nd side based here if they keep losing money and getting noone along where they'll throw money at a 2nd Sydney franchise for ever and day simply because of the potential outreach of the league.

1. Have a look at the average attendance at GWS games.
2. Sydney, the city of reportedly 4.2 million have a severly transient population which at any one time houses a large number of non-Austalian skilled workers/working holiday makers. This same city is home to a little thing called the NRL which in turn has an international audience. Using simpler terms to explain my apparent lack of logic there are more footballers (AFL) followers per capita in SA than in Sydney. I specifically state Sydney as there is one league (AFL) currently played outside of the metropolitan area, Black Diamond which in fact was established I'm led to believe on the back of Victorian workers who migrated to the area some time ago (Newcastle).
3. The AFL has openly planned, marketed and projected that it will have two AFL teams operating in each major city.

If this logic isn't enough then let's put it down to a matter of simple opinion based on my shallow yet naive following of AFL media, you idiot.

This being said the AFL is winning the race here (Sydney) with Swans average attendance and membership being healthy; this also has something to do with their current success as Sydney people are simply spoilt for choice. Example, Sydney FC's crowd figures in the season following their championship win in the A-League - in which they went from highest attendnace rates to lowest in 12 months which coincided with them going from top to near bottom.
Getting off track now, apologies. Just trying to pry some logic out of myself on a Friday afternoon.

[Wedgie]

1. Have a look at the average attendance at GWS games.

Neither I, or the AFL give a rats clacker about GWS's attendance in its first season.
It's all about exposure and keeping TV channels happy.
GWS got more than some Rugby League clubs yet Rugby League is still a massive ratings bonanza.
Sydney crowds have always been pathetic bandwagonners to all their teams in all their sports, that's just the way they are.
Unlike Port supporters at least they have the excuse they have other things to do.
BUT the companies with the money are based in Sydney as are the largest share of the viewing public.
Saying there has to be 2 sides in Adelaide because there are 2 sides in Sydney is laughable.
There has to be 2 sides in Adelaide IF they can be profitable and have good attendances, if they can't, then one goes.

[Champ]

1. Have a look at the average attendance at GWS games.

Neither I, or the AFL give a rats clacker about GWS's attendance in its first season.
It's all about exposure and keeping TV channels happy.
GWS got more than some Rugby League clubs yet Rugby League is still a massive ratings bonanza.
Sydney crowds have always been pathetic bandwagonners to all their teams in all their sports, that's just the way they are.
Unlike Port supporters at least they have the excuse they have other things to do.
BUT the companies with the money are based in Sydney as are the largest share of the viewing public.
Saying there has to be 2 sides in Adelaide because there are 2 sides in Sydney is laughable.
There has to be 2 sides in Adelaide IF they can be profitable and have good attendances, if they can't, then one goes.

Wow, the AFL don't give a rats about the attendance of the team they bankrolled... And they did it for tv rights...
Your next point contradicted your first.... You said they did it for tv rights yet games are not shown live in Sydney where there is apparently the largest viewing public according to you....
Yes I am correct in that the direct aim of the afl is to have two sides in every major city so what the hell is your problem. With this! I couldn't give a shit if port go and Norwood go in or there is one team or five teams or whatever, this thread is about solving the SANFL dilemma and reserves dilemma.

[Wedgie]

Wow, the AFL don't give a rats about the attendance of the team they bankrolled... And they did it for tv rights..

Correct and end of story.
Sorry about being the bearer of things you don't want to hear, I'm sure in an ideal world the AFL and SANFL would love to continue to give charity to a basket case but it's not going to happen, enjoy your losses while you can as that's all you're going to have to look back on in 10 years time.

[Psyber]

Wow, the AFL don't give a rats about the attendance of the team they bankrolled... And they did it for tv rights...
Your next point contradicted your first.... You said they did it for tv rights yet games are not shown live in Sydney where there is apparently the largest viewing public according to you....
Yes I am correct in that the direct aim of the afl is to have two sides in every major city so what the hell is your problem. With this! I couldn't give a shit if port go and Norwood go in or there is one team or five teams or whatever, this thread is about solving the SANFL dilemma and reserves dilemma.

The main point about TV rights is selling Foxtel subscriptions or T-boxes, not free to air - that's where the money is.
If the Telstra/Foxtel axis could arrange for there to be no free to air programming they would, and they'd pay more to the AFL for it.

[wild dog]

Sydney crowds have always been pathetic bandwagonners to all their teams in all their sports, that's just the way they are.
Unlike Port supporters at least they have the excuse they have other things to do.

Spoken just like a Syndeysider.

Yes I am correct in that the direct aim of the afl is to have two sides in every major city so what the hell is your problem. With this! I couldn't give a shit if port go and Norwood go in or there is one team or five teams or whatever, this thread is about solving the SANFL dilemma and reserves dilemma.

The AFL have said the establishment of GWS and Gold Coast are 20 year propositions - paraphrashing Demetriou. Your clutching at straws to compare the business case of GWS and Gold Coast with Port.
Personally I dont care if Port Power merge with Adelaide, if we want to see a thriving SANFL which would allow it to expand to 10 teams, it would appear the only sensible option is to reduce to 1 AFL team. Someone mentioned the relegation model to allow amateur teams to go up to the SANFL, but if the top tier (AFL) does not do the same thing it will bring the SANFL down.

Five years ago we would all have laughed at this and some are still saying its pie in the sky, but Port Power on its own does not seem capable of making enough money in the good times to cover itself in the bad times. Fair enough this is the first full cycle for Port, but the trajectory from here in terms of money making and team success would be extremely hard to achieve. Why though have they failed so miserably in keeping themselves viable, when Fremantle have managed to be a losing team since inception but stay financially successful, attract the crowds, keep sponsorship and make money? Either its that couple of hundred thousand more in Perths population (plus WA's stunning fincancial performance,) or Port have managed to alienate themselves so successfully from the SA population.

[Navy2005]

make the crows and power play reserves in the vfl

create a south australian premier league where the bottom 2 sides go down to the amateur league div 1, the amateur league 2 grand finalists come up into the sanfl

every club in adelaide therefore has the opportunity to play in the sanfl

in the first year bring only 1 team up to the sanfl to make it 10 teams (St.Peters?)

I think you might be unto something there. Although it would be difficult for a Div 1 side to step up to SANFL standard initially. They would also almost certainly struggle financially with funding. Zoning and underage programs would also cause a problem. But if they adopted the promotion relegation method these issues could be rectified with time. Maybe one solution could be that the team promoted inherits the zone of the relegated club.

[TimmiesChin]

Pissing the AFL back across the border is the best option.

I think a mentality like this says a lot about whats wrong with the sanfl.

Take afl away and its associated revenue away and the sanfl is screwed. Minimal sponsorship, no tv revenue.... it doesnt get close to generating the revenue it needs to stay afloat.... it relies on afl generated income.

Afl as a whole is profitable.... even if some clubs are not.

[whufc]

Pissing the AFL back across the border is the best option.

I think a mentality like this says a lot about whats wrong with the sanfl.

Take afl away and its associated revenue away and the sanfl is screwed. Minimal sponsorship, no tv revenue.... it doesnt get close to generating the revenue it needs to stay afloat.... it relies on afl generated income.

Afl as a whole is profitable.... even if some clubs are not.

Yeah true, but if there was no AFL the SANFL would become more profitable, never gonna happen but at the moment the Power is costing the SANFL millions.

[TimmiesChin]

Pissing the AFL back across the border is the best option.

I think a mentality like this says a lot about whats wrong with the sanfl.

Take afl away and its associated revenue away and the sanfl is screwed. Minimal sponsorship, no tv revenue.... it doesnt get close to generating the revenue it needs to stay afloat.... it relies on afl generated income.

Afl as a whole is profitable.... even if some clubs are not.

Yeah true, but if there was no AFL the SANFL would become more profitable, never gonna happen but at the moment the Power is costing the SANFL millions.

Elements of truth in what you say but afl wont die now.... so sanfl will always be a lesser rung. Take afl players and revenue out and salary cap drops... country leagues poach players etc.

Also while port is costing lots now, revenue from home games that goes straight to sanfl such as catering parking and corporate/sponsorship is recouping a lot of it... if not all.

[Psyber]

I still don't think there is the interest or the money in SANFL to support more than 8 teams, or that there ever was...

[therisingblues]

Pissing the AFL back across the border is the best option.

I think a mentality like this says a lot about whats wrong with the sanfl.

Take afl away and its associated revenue away and the sanfl is screwed. Minimal sponsorship, no tv revenue.... it doesnt get close to generating the revenue it needs to stay afloat.... it relies on afl generated income.

Afl as a whole is profitable.... even if some clubs are not.

It's called "parochialism", and it's the reason the SANFL has thrived for so long.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Pissing the AFL back across the border is the best option.

I think a mentality like this says a lot about whats wrong with the sanfl.

Take afl away and its associated revenue away and the sanfl is screwed. Minimal sponsorship, no tv revenue.... it doesnt get close to generating the revenue it needs to stay afloat.... it relies on afl generated income.

Afl as a whole is profitable.... even if some clubs are not.

It's called "parochialism", and it's the reason the SANFL has thrived for so long.

Also the reason Adelaide is a backwater.

[StrayDog]

Also the reason Adelaide is a backwater.

Enduring wisdom from the top end. Go back to sleep.

[therisingblues]

Pissing the AFL back across the border is the best option.

I think a mentality like this says a lot about whats wrong with the sanfl.

Take afl away and its associated revenue away and the sanfl is screwed. Minimal sponsorship, no tv revenue.... it doesnt get close to generating the revenue it needs to stay afloat.... it relies on afl generated income.

Afl as a whole is profitable.... even if some clubs are not.

It's called "parochialism", and it's the reason the SANFL has thrived for so long.

Also the reason Adelaide is a backwater.

Debatable.
So far as the SANFL is concerned, the mentality of South Australians saw them endorse the no frills local product of football much more than in WA. Our league has exceeded expectations of popularity well into the AFL age of footy.
I'd love for the AFL to fall flat on it's ass and cease to exist.
But that's just a dream.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Also the reason Adelaide is a backwater.

Enduring wisdom from the top end. Go back to sleep.

Get back to the pound.