Wedgie wrote:Its all about money guys. AC relied on sponsors for money previously but now thanks to their setup at Oakden theyre raking it in.
Would be better off than most of the A League sides.
Never say never!

Can understand where you are coming from but if i was in charge of handing out an A-league licenses, the most important thing is maintaining the quality and integrity of the product as well as obviously making the most money possible from the license venture. Look at my other post outlining where i think the league will expand. North Queensland, Goldcoast, Second/western sydney side, second melbourne side. It may be in condraciction of what i said earlier but the maximum number of sides a league in this country could sustain would be 14. Two more teams on top of the suggestion already posted by me is still a stretch.
You need to consider the quality of the product and not spreading the talent to thin. Let's face it, a-league standard is not great. Thoroughly enjoyable but not great. More teams could be sustained with an influx on international (mainly asian) players/talent but currently the mone is not there for that either. Remembering also that the foundations of the new league was that it designed to unite cities behind teams and do away with the clubs heavily associated with ethnic ties in an attempt to alieviate hooligansim/race issues etc. Handing out new a-league liscense must also stay true to that theme.
I see Adelaide cities bid falling down on two fronts. Firstly, an adelaide city club would potentially be heavily ethnically dominated by italian culture, as it was in the old NSL. Not being prejudiced or racist there at all but that was the sort of thing the a-league was trying to avoid. Secondly lets look at where the league as a whole is going to get the best bang for buck in maximum 14 team competition. Before even going into it in detail, i can safley say that it wouldnt be in adelaide with a second team.
Far ahead of us are a second melbourne side, western sydney, wollongong (who were unlucky to have there license bid reject of northern queensland. After those three (which takes the competion to thirteen, the competition for a 14th license would viably come from canberra, tasmania, or a second adelaide side. From a business prespective would you rather spilt the adelaide market and loyalties or pursue a city (hobart or canberra) who, at the moment have no sporting side in any of the major football codes. Without a stadium expansion or relocation to a new city based stadium, i cant see united attendances getting any higher than there current, respectable (but third lowest in the league) average. Splitting a small adelaide market is very dangerous.
A canberra side could be supported by an AIS youth side in the youth new league and a tasmanian side would only be competing with the devils cricket side for crowd and supporter numbers over the summer months.
Sorry city.....not on the cards, but hey, feel free to make me eat my words