I am very much a fan of p/r being introduced. However knowing FFA in the likely event we don't see it within the near future, I think one thing they could do to slightly pacify the rabid mob we have become is expand by 4 teams rather than 2.

- 14 teams = 26 rounds. Yes we drop a round but we also move to a proper home and away round robin. Teams are already potentially meeting 6 times (3 A League, 1 FFA Cup, 1 Finals, 1 AFC Champions League) in the current format, taking away one of the A League meetings might ease the repetitive nature of the fixture list and give the games more meaning. FFA might see it in a different light, i.e. Melbourne derby only twice a season, loss of ratings from third game BUT new teams could add more derbies to make up that gap, plus non marquee fixtures like WEL v NEW will get a slight boost because when they don't have to play each other twice in a month you won't have that feeling of "Again, already?!" and actually be more keen to watch. (NB. I would watch that fixture regardless but there does seem to be a mentality that a game not containing a "big city" team doesn't reel in the viewers the same way a SYD/WSW/MCI/MVI fixture does.)

-14 teams gives the challenge of packing 7 games into a weekend, but the 26 game season still means they can start and finish the season around the same point, hey we might even be able to observe an international break with all the free time!

-14 teams is starting to be a decent amount of teams, we could conceivably sit on that amount of teams as our top tier for a few years without complaint (although you'd hope they'd be making plans for a second tier in the meantime)

-2/4 teams away from there to be the perfect sized comp. (I think 18 teams/34 game season is ideal but 16/30 games would be good for Australia once you factor in International Breaks as alluded to by MarkfromCroydon at the top of this page)

-The obvious advantages of expanding, new away trips, new stadiums, more players/coaches/fans/rivalries.

-More development opportunities for players. I think we have enough decent players now that 4 extra teams wouldn't significantly bring down the quality of the league. I think some of the squad depth might drop a bit but according to people like Decentric, the youngsters coming through are good enough to fill those spots.

I think they should jump to 14 teams, but if they are scared it's too big a jump and if they are worried about expansion and only want to go to 12 teams, they could ‘bite the bullet’ and put one team in Perth and one in Adelaide.
Now I don’t like this, but from a commercial point of view they could then:
Split the league into 2 conferences of 6 teams each. (W.A, S.A, Vic), (Qld, NSW, NZ)
Then play each team in your conference 3 times (15 matches) and each team in the other conference 2 times (H,A for 12 matches). Result is same amount of rounds (27) as present but an extra match of content each round.
Immediate positives:
- Derbies for Perth/Adelaide,
- Perth, Adelaide and Melbourne teams would get 15 Games in their home city (11-14 designated as home ground games)
- Should be less travel for all teams in both conferences.
 
Then if you still want a top 6, you could have top 3 in each conference qualify, 3v2 elimination, winner plays 1 in semi, winners of semis into grand final at team with best regular season record.

It’s not ideal, but it’s probably the best way to build up new teams in Perth and Adelaide, and should give all teams less costs.

4 teams is at least a 40% increase in costs for the FFA. I have my doubts they would want to do it unless the tv said so. 

Posted this earlier in the membership thread but if you look at the membership numbers per club, the top 4 are the Melbourne and Sydney clubs. If the next team comes from the suburbs of Melbourne or Sydney it can't be a bad thing.

Shire has approx 25% of Sydney memberships..... yet it is there most important area and they set up their youth academy nowhere near it. :blink:

More than 40%, because the PFA negotiated that the increased revenue would have a 30% split go into players wages, it would be closer to a 50% increase probably for 4 new teams. So this new tv deal needs to be around the 80M mark for it to be feasible at least and that won't leave much in the kitty.

Expansion is a no brainier as we don't have enough pro or high end semipro environments.

Focusing on Expansion ahead of National Second Division presents it's own problems. Two key ones are having 20 to 80 odd Australian players ready (depending on number of expansion teams) and competitive for the A-League.
Second concern is wether outside of Melbourne and Sydney is the city can support either a second team or new team straight off the bat.

A 2nd Division should also be seen as the arbiter of these issues, producing talent and developing clubs.

@arthur

If it were up to me....

I would increase the visa player number to 6 for a few years.

To potential free up 5 Australian players for 2 expansion teams. Along with their 6 visa spots that is 11 players. So yeah, around 25 players needed (instead of 35).

Feels like a sticky situation for the FFA to be in right now even if expansion is on the agenda.

Moving to 12 teams has been tried before and it sucked big time (You can make the case for the fact that all 4 brands were terrible for various reasons in hindsight which is valid as City and Wanderers seem to have steadied the ship a little).  33 rounds feels like such a long season for so few teams, but a 22 round season is ridiculously small.  If the FFA wanted to make it work it could see the conference system introduced like what was suggested above which wouldn't be great but would be the lesser of the other evil being burnt out after 33 rounds of football.  

Moving to 14 teams will allow a traditional round robin style league albeit with one less round but will have scope to move to 30 with the introduction of 2 extra teams if they want to go down that route or stick with 14 teams and introduce the second tier.  This supported by the FFA Cup, a Pre-Season Tournament perhaps and the youth teams playing in the NPL give a pretty decent base for the future to build on.

The issue lies in the amount of money the FFA will need to cough up to help fund these projects.  We don't have many billionaire sugar daddies left in Australia and the last 2 left their clubs in ruins, so the FFA need to decide do they inject a smaller amount with the risk of burn out and lower attendances due to the extended season or put a high amount of cash in to fund 4 new teams?  Perhaps even the question will be - where do the TV broadcasters want these teams?  Can they pay up to help fund them?

We can all think of any variety of 4 new teams to join the league in the next few years.  Off the top of my head we have Wollongong, Shire, SW Sydney, South Melbourne, Geelong, 2nd Adelaide, 2nd Perth, 2nd Brisbane who may all be able to compete for a license.  I'm wondering now if the new TV deal comes out, will it have an extended A-League included along with the announcement?

I look at it this way - the FFA should be doing everything within their powers to expand the league and make as many professional teams as possible. 

It is probably unpopular but they should at least expand by 1 team. It does give a bye and no extra match per weekend but makes 3 extra rounds. Because there is a finals series I dont think it would be much of a big deal. 1 team in Sydney or Melbourne woud present 6 extra derby games for the broadcasters and public. 

I would of course prefer 2 teams. 

@Richie scott21

My view is to establish a Second Division first.

Expansion teams to come from the second division pool.
More and better player development for expansion teams.
Allow longer term planning for franchises to establish their markets before going to HAL wether as an expansion team or Prom/Rel

Over a period of time the HAL should be 16 teams and the Second Division should be 16 teams

32 Teams nationally provides for the type of Geographic footprint that will engage the whole country in football like no other sport can.
Our goal should be to be the number 2 sport in every state, it could just about make us the number 1 sport in the nation.

If the FFA is really that shit scared of failure they should just expand to Sydney & Melbourne again.

Either Sutherland or Macarthur & Geelong or South Melbourne will start with at a minimum ok crowd figures.
Then there comes the derbies, each side would individually receive a large boost from his two other city siblings which also creates the greater want of memberships in their smaller stadiums (look at what it did for WSW).
Then there’s the boost the other way around, these sides travel to the other city rivals and the crowds for these games are again larger than average with solid travelling support.

So if say these sides had 10 home games against regular HAL opposition with avg crowds of 8,000 = total of 80,000. It doesn’t view too badly because all of their stadiums are almost half full (except Geelong).
Then they host x3 min derbies & get crowds of 18,000 bringing the aggregate to 134,000 which rises the avg to over 10,000.

This is basically the worst possible outcome/most conservative scenario you could get with having another Syd/Melb side coming in. If they can actually represent a particular area & capture their particular market we can easily go higher for their own home games alone let alone when they travel to the other sides in the City.

I would prefer that also but it is not the way the FFA want it to go. 

Same rules as A-League clubs imo, 5 visa players. 

It seems the same message over and over on here making it appear that the FFA don't want to expand the comp. The reality is that we don't operate in an ideal world which makes so many of these plans people very hard to execute .

What are we currently seeing playing out?

- More stakeholders expect more cash coming their way
- More stakeholders expect to be added to the competition in whatever form (ie. A-League expansion, 2nd national tier, W-League expansion) wanting in on any cash
- Powerplays going on from all levels and corners of the game

Is that conducive to a successful outcome?

Only if stakeholders realise that there is only so much to go around and can work with and not against any initiatives that are undertaken.

Not everything will go the way people want them too, but let's hope the FFA does come up with a defined plan that people can aim towards with some hope of making progress.

David Gallop has pretty much been banging on about the woken giant and tv deal from his first day on the job.

Frank even said there should be 12 teams by 2017. (After he had said there would be pro rel around the same time).

They can't even announce where they want new teams and take applications.

They have no concrete plans and change all the time. Only thing that is clear is that they will not release a plan and that they will want license fees... Although they will probably try to setup and sell franchises themselves to try and get as much money as they can.

Herein lies a big problem. The FFA has not even considered 12 teams for the current rights negotiations. They have put their hopes on doubling the value of the rights, with an 18% decline in ratings, and major international tournaments no longer included in the bundle. Then in the event they achieve this doubling by dumb luck, they are then locked in to the rights period lest they want to divide the revenues of 10 clubs amongst 12 half way through the contract (the media partner will be under no obligation to renegotiate the value). We could perhaps understand the FFA not being ready to expand, but to not even have it as an option is just stupid.

Get ready for another 4 (or 5?) years of this format, having what we want explained to use and "distance derbies" waved in front of us plebs to keep us happy. When people vote with their feet - again - they will cobble together a press conference and use the word "stakeholders" 15 times and all will be good again.

I came across this via somebody sharing one of these clips on the forum. I thought it may be worth sharing the full play-list as many of you guys may find these discussions interesting. The chat with Steven Horvat about Geelong was particularly interesting. Was good to hear from Ivan Slavich to give us an update/reminder about Canberra and what their previous bid achieved. Also good to hear from Rabieh Krayem and how Fury mk III are going. Wollongong always a very strong option and I hope they're amongst the first priorities:

The Daily Football Show - 'A-League NEXT' playlist:
https://audioboom.com/playlists/1317797-a-league-next-the-case-for-expansion

Individual cases, with additional info, in-order of airing:

Daily Football Show,  April 6, 2016, 'A-League NEXT – Wollongong – the case for expansion'
Daily Football Show, April 13, 2016, 'A-League NEXT – Canberra – the case for expansion'
Daily Football Show, April 20, 2016, 'A-League NEXT – Gold Coast – the case for expansion' (re-expansion)
Daily Football Show, April 27, 2016, 'A-League NEXT – Far North Queensland – the case for expansion' (re-expansion)
Daily Football Show, May 4, 2016, 'A-League NEXT – Ipswich – the case for expansion'

Domenic Favata, May 5, 2016: Ranking the Daily Football Show ‘A-League NEXT’ candidates for expansion so far:
http://outside90.com/ranking-the-candidates-for-a-league-expansion-so-far/

Daily Football Show, May 11, 2016, A-League NEXT - Southern Melbourne
Daily Football Show, May 18, 2016, 'A-League NEXT – Geelong – the case for expansion'
Daily Football Show, May 25, 2016, 'A-League NEXT – Southern Sydney – the case for expansion' (Featuring FFT AU's Andy Jackson)
Daily Football Show, June 1, 2016, 'A-League NEXT – Tasmania – the case for expansion'

Daily Football Show, 2016: 'A-League NEXT - Auckland'
Daily Football Show, 2016: 'A-League NEXT - Singapore'

I couldn't sleep last night, and imagined a world where every A-League club had a "local derby"

Glory + 2nd Perth team
Adelaide United + 2nd Perth team
Melbourne Victory + Melbourne City
Hobart + Launceston
Sydney FC + WSW
Newcastle + CCM
Wellington + Auckland
Canberra + Queanbeyan/Southern ACT
Brisbane + Gold Coast
And if you wanted 20 and #metrics, third Melbourne and Sydney team

Never gonna happen, but was fun to fall asleep to.

Not sure about the Tassie one and ACT wouldnt happen.  You could suggest Cairns vs Townsville

Canberra is smaller than Newcastle, no way you would have 2 teams there.

I think 14 is the magic number to begin with and then introduce a 2nd division. The 4 teams need to come from Sydney and Melbourne and perhaps a 2nd Brisbane. Sydney's geography allows for easily 2 teams to be introduced (or 1 and Wollongong but I would rather the Gong come into a 2nd Div). The smart option would be Sutherland and basically invite the Lyall Gorman and the Sharks to be the franchise owners, with this try and get the Sutherland and St George Associations on board. The Sharks own their stadium and thereby they do not need big crowds initially to be sustainable, in addition, the backroom admin staff are all in place for the most part and the sharks Woolaware development means they have cash source behind them.

The other Sydney are is Liverpool/Campbelltown/Macarthur. This is the fastest growing population base in Australia, there will be 1 million more people living out there by 2036 apparently. You have Campbelltown stadium or possibly bring Sydney United in utilizing Edensor Park which on my stream of the NPL final looked a fantastic facility which would incur low rental costs.

Sth Melbourne having Lakeside and structural backing surely can be an option and the 4th option is either a Victorian NPL club (Knights/Bentleigh etc) which have their own facility or Brisbane Strikers using Perry Park or apparently Lions FC in the Brisbane League have the financial backing of a club and are planning a boutique stadium in the western corridor (Cockerill's artlcle)

The 2 Division would then be a way or introducing the regional areas and probably 2nd Adelaide and Perth. (Wollongong, Canberra, Geelong, Gold Coast, Cairns, Townsville, Perth 2, Adelaide 2, Tassie, Sunny Coast and optionally addition Syd and Melb NPL clubs like Blacktown, Penrith, Manly, Hume, Bentleigh, Dandenong)

Danel Garb just tweeted:

David Gallop at A League launch: "10 teams is not enough. Expansion will come sooner rather than later as will promotion and relegation."

https://twitter.com/DanielGarb/status/783098112885657600

DG said:

Yeah Canberra would never happen as a two team city (other than maybe one in div. 1 and 2) and tassie would probably work best with one side sharing two cities.
In real analysis (my previous thing was dream analysis) 14 is the magic number, but if there was to be a full on p+r structure, there's need to be some sort of geographically based promotion structure to some extent. Otherwise, there's the possibility of one or 2 states dominating the A-League

:-)

This is the best option.

Selfishly because its campbelltown stadium is walking distance from my place. Stadium is the perfect size. Hill for the kids and everything.

All talk. Take some action. 

I have a dream...