SA Footy

...for those who want a 10th team in the SANFL. This won't happen of course, but this option from our competition point of view will not lower the standard of the competition by admitting another club to dilute either city or country zones; it's a proven team that can do well in this state; and is cashed up:

http://www.footygoss.com/index.php/main ... _the_wafl/

Of course, here is the dangers of admitting an extra team within our borders - Peel is just an AFL draft feeder.

http://www.footygoss.com/index.php/main ... shortfall/

I think Peel were silly in investing in shares but so be it, it's done and they're not the first entity to invest poorly.

Interesting article re Subi. Bring it on, cant wait to get to Leederville to see SFC v SFC.

I'd like to see 2 tams from teh Wafl and NT added making a 12 team comp - 22 rounds home and a way no byes. Perfect

doggies4eva wrote:I'd like to see 2 tams from teh Wafl and NT added making a 12 team comp - 22 rounds home and a way no byes. Perfect

Instead of 2 from WA, I'd rather a team from Tas. Then I could watch the Bays once a year.

Maybe the SANFL can do the same thing the VFL did. Expand nationally but as a 2nd tier comp.

I'd love to see a tenth team in the comp, but where from? I dont think Metro Adelaide could support another league side, the major country centres are allocated to metro teams as zones, which only really leaves the option of a team from out of SA. Darwin/NT is always where I thought #10 would come from, but I think Vlad the Impaler at Fort F**kup (AFLHQ) has put the kybosh on that by trying to get/forcing (we'll give you this blood money if....etc) the Darwin team to play in the AFLQ comp to strengthen the GC17 recruiting pool. Tassie would be an idea, but they shut the door on us and went with the VFL, and now they are bust and returning to a statewide comp. IMHO Tassie is more likely to get an A-League team than sustain a unified footy team in the VFL/SANFL going on recent experience.

Does anyone out there with a more intimate knowledge of the financials of SANFL footy and NTFL footy have a clue on the gain/costs to the SANFL for having Darwin or even any other club as team#10. Do we really need a tenth team, or is it just to get rid of the unclean look of a 9-team comp and the bye?

My gut feel is that a team from WA is a step too far, in both distance and cutting the fabric of the local game. Would/Do we really care? If anything I think a team of Territorians would add some spice to the comp, and having watched a few games up there in my time, their style of footy can be highly entertaining on its day.

Personal Post Only

A 10th team would see a cut in distribution money of approx $50,000 per club per year
Season would probably be shortened to 18 home and away games - again less revenue
No breaks in season for players that bye currently provides

If needing to get rid of bye rather see 8 teams playing 21 rounds of 7 away, 7 home and 7 neutral. Which would see an increase in distribution .

Col D

cd wrote:Personal Post Only

A 10th team would see a cut in distribution money of approx $50,000 per club per year
Season would probably be shortened to 18 home and away games - again less revenue
No breaks in season for players that bye currently provides

If needing to get rid of bye rather see 8 teams playing 21 rounds of 7 away, 7 home and 7 neutral. Which would see an increase in distribution .

Col D

Rules is rules D

last one on first one off CD, see ya Eagles....

cd wrote:A 10th team would see a cut in distribution money of approx $50,000 per club per year

Why?

Wouldn't a tenth team mean an extra game per weekend with the associated gate receipts, pie sales etc?

Ingall wrote:

cd wrote:A 10th team would see a cut in distribution money of approx $50,000 per club per year

Why?

Wouldn't a tenth team mean an extra game per weekend with the associated gate receipts, pie sales etc?

No as the number of games each team plays could go down to 18 instead of the 20 games (plus 3 byes) that we have now, which means 1 less home game each = less money. More teams = the AFL money is spead more evenly across the comp = less income for the clubs.

okay, I was assuming they'd keep a 23 round comp, with the draw evened out over a few years.

the problem with Peel thunder is that they are based so far away from Perth. there is no point changing what we currently have now with a 9 team comp, things have been working smoothly. the bye is good because it also means that you can go and support your local SAAFL side for at least 2-3 games of the year.

If Subi do play in the SANFL who is going to pay for the airfares and hotel costs and the like.

kookas wrote:the problem with Peel thunder is that they are based so far away from Perth.

Distance isn't even an issue. Mandurah is a pretty big area these days and people commute from there all the time.

Barto wrote:

kookas wrote:the problem with Peel thunder is that they are based so far away from Perth.

Distance isn't even an issue. Mandurah is a pretty big area these days and people commute from there all the time.

Also the New Southern Suburbs Railway (yes, state governments can actually build infrastrucure that isn't more roads!) gets you to and from Mandurah/Perth City in under 40 minutes for about $8 return. Distance is not the issue here. To be honest I'm not sure what is the issue with Peel FC, in theory they should be like the Central Districts of the WAFL...in reality they're more like the Panthers than the Dogs.

Mount Gambier region support a team? Then you could raid Western Victoria for players and enjoy sticking another one up the Vics, lol.

Personal post only

Ingall - my thoughts are based on currently we get approx $500,000 as our distribution from the SANFL each year - or if you like $4.5 million across the 9 clubs.

If goes to 10 then either the SANFL has to find an extra half a million to give out or the 4.5 is divided by 10 meaning we get $450,000 a drop of 50,000 and with less games and the way the 2 AFL teams have been going re crowds etc at AAMI dont think an increase very likely.

I reckon could cost each of the clubs more like $80,000+ in lost revenue.

Col D

Grimmett wrote:Mount Gambier region support a team? Then you could raid Western Victoria for players and enjoy sticking another one up the Vics, lol.

Leave Glenelg's zone alone, thankyou very much

HeartBeatsTrue wrote:Maybe the SANFL can do the same thing the VFL did. Expand nationally but as a 2nd tier comp.

sounds a bit like PhillH artical in the 2008 SANFL media guide an interesting read.

The only way it could be profitable is with AFL support. The AFL would not support an interstate based expansion club in the SANFL.