Is it time to merge some AFL teams?

[Fred]

Better still ... Have a top 6 and a best of three for grabs final.
Or reward the team that finishes top as the best team... Which it is anyway.

[TLPG]

That second part's a regression back to the Argus finals system. No one will support it.

The first part is only six finals (if I get what you're proposing), so they won't do that either.

[Beaussie]

I tend to agree there are too many teams in Melbourne. I'd encourage North Melbourne to move to Tassie full time. The AFL, well Vlad at least has talked of a 20 team comp in the future with Tassie and a North QLD or 3rd Perth team coming in. North QLD would be interesting.

[Cracker]

North Queensland would never work. Townsville is a rugby league town.

[geppo]

The financial state of some clubs will make this decision and it ill be to merge. Maybe the Saints could become demons and be tough enough to finally win something!!

[Xman]

The financial state of some clubs will make this decision and it ill be to merge. Maybe the Saints could become demons and be tough enough to finally win something!!

The Melbourne Saint/Demons?

[King-Eliagh]

Melbourne Saint demons is an awesome club name!

Still think Darwin is the natural choice, above north qld.

[cos789]

There is really only one problem facing the AFL and that is the inequality between some teams.
There are NOT too many teams in Melbourne. Even the lowest AFL club is greater than an nrl club.
Roughly speaking it takes a population catchment of 400k to support an AFL team.
With the introduction of Boutique stadium deals this figure is even less.
The other problem is onfield performance that goes together with financial inequality to a large degree.

Now you can fix the problem by way of two methods.
Fixing the inequality is a long, arduous route that will be fought all the way by the more powerful clubs.
The other is relocation so avoiding the neccessity for complete equalisation.
The AFL is telegraphing the direction it wants the clubs to go just like it telegraphed NM going to the GC.
There will be a team in Tasmania and quite possibly NZ.
The boutique stadium arrangement will make Tasmania financially viable and NZ will be supported like GWS
as a long term project. A third AFL team in WA does little for the AFL brand and if you are going to remove teams from Melbourne then even less so. I do think teams from Melbourne could be relocated and also the league could be expanded to 20 if neccessary. If the league is expanded that would probably be at the detriment of rl.
One thing is for sure - there will never be any mergers within Melbourne.

[King-Eliagh]

Well ur in the minority here cos so I'm afraid ur sounding a bit off chops.

There's too many teams in melbs for sure. Darwin and tassie should be next with two less melb teams to account for em.

Nz won't be happening this century and prob not next, if ever. A name change to the code might fix that.

[Cracker]

Darwin does not have the population base to support an AFL team.

[King-Eliagh]

Oh well guess we can't consider the code as national then.

Darwin is a growing city and would represent the whole nt. it really is time for them.

[TLPG]

Not only that, Cracker, it's a bad time of the year to be playing up north. There's a very good reason why the NTFL and the Tiwi Islands play their respective competitions in the wet season. A Darwin based AFL team would have to play ALL their home matches at night and the electricity costs would be horrendous to say the least. The NT government couldn't afford the bill for that.

[Swans4ever]

IMO Saints should have 4 games in NZ, North and Hawks continue with existing arrangement in Tassie, WB play 4 games in Canberra with GWS also 4 games. Melb 4 games in Darwin and Adelaide/Port one game each. The league needs to settle down for a time at least 5 years before they think of introducing new teams. Long term I think all Melb clubs are viable - better to bring in Tassie and either NZ, Canberra, New Castle or Cairns. Have two conferences of 10 teams with a home and away of 18 rounds (play everyone in your conference twice) top six of conference East play top six of conference West. (Bottom four play bottom four for number 1-5 draft picks). Top 8 then proceed to finals after cross conference rounds. This will provide incentives not to tank whilst also make finals. Total rounds for finals bound teams is 24. Which is only two more rounds per year. Bottom 8 teams is 22 rounds.

At the end of season in November every 4 years (non Olympic, FIFA WC and RU WC) have a state championship with two pools of 4 pool 1 VIC, SA, International players(born OS) and Indigenous team. Pool 2 WA, NSW/ACT, QLD/NT and Tassie. After 3 rounds (play everyone once) 1 pool 1 v 2 pool 2 and 1 pool 2 v 2 pool 1 play off to get in final.

But I don't think either will happen.

[geppo]

Maybe instead of creating a new team in Sydney they should have offered the move for a Melbourne club to do it and be financially better off. Same as Gold Coast, should have been a melbourne team (I think North were offered it but rejected the offer).

[Swans4ever]

Maybe instead of creating a new team in Sydney they should have offered the move for a Melbourne club to do it and be financially better off. Same as Gold Coast, should have been a melbourne team (I think North were offered it but rejected the offer).

North were offered Gold Coast and when they rejected it the AFL then decided to creat two sides GC and GWS.