Expansion of the A-League to a 12-team competition remains the ultimate goal of the Football Federation of Australia but that will largely hinge on the off-field success of the new season and the crucial support from broadcast partners.

Season 10 of the A-League could prove to be the most critical yet as its ability to maintain the viewer, spectator and membership growth of recent years will prove influential for the future in the toughest sporting market.

The head of the A-League, Damien De Bohun, says the groundwork for expansion will begin early this season when the FFA opens talks with broadcast partners over funding of a 12-team competition involving six televised games a week.
"We're expecting continued growth, we're pushing forward into the mainstream, which is very important": Damien de Bohun.

"We're expecting continued growth, we're pushing forward into the mainstream, which is very important": Damien de Bohun. Photo: James Boddington

While there will be no new team entering the league until the expiration of the TV-deal following the 2016-17 season, official talks will begin before the end of the year with broadcast partners Fox Sports and SBS, as well as other interested parties.

The FFA has a strong desire to expand the competition, though their ability to do so strongly relies on broadcast partners to fund a competition that could last 33 rounds with six games a week. As such, the importance of further improving TV ratings, attendances and memberships within the league will become the governing body's priority this season.

"This is a critical year," De Bohun said at Fox Sports A-League launch. "We're expecting continued growth, we're pushing forward into the mainstream, which is very important."

On the eve of a season many hope signals the arrival of the A-League into adulthood, the FFA insist the game has not completed its formative years as the task of building the its framework continues to be the main focus of the FFA.

Improving audiences, memberships, attendances and sponsorships remain the key targets for the FFA in a season that could prove to be one of the most definitive. Increasing those four key areas could serve as the platform for expansion and a 12-team competition that could coincide with the arrival of the next TV-deal at the earliest point in time.

"We've got a very clear commitment until 2017 with our current broadcast rights," De Bohun said. "It is really important to have that stability and the continuity but at the same time, in the coming months we will have discussions about future broadcasts. Fox Sports have been incredible partners of the Hyundai A-League and obviously SBS 1 broadcasting this year, too. As we'll sit down with broadcasters like them and potentially others, we'll start to assess whether an additional two teams and one more game per week will be valuable in a commercial sense and if it is, we'll look at it seriously."

Already the A-League is expecting a landmark season in terms of interest as memberships are on target to increase by up to 15 per cent across the competition, matching the FFA's expectations of more than 2 million supporters through the turnstiles. A move of the A-League from SBS 2 to SBS 1 for live Friday night games will likely provide some improvement in free-to-air audience figures.

Already there are positive signs for the game in what is poised to be a pivotal year in the plan to expand. The momentum of fan interest has never been higher after the bounce-on effect of last year's World Cup, maintained by the FFA Cup, Asian Champions League and now to the A-League. If it can be sustained and attract more than the rusted-on viewers, it may open the door for two new teams.

"There's no doubt as the league continues to grow, it's something we need to contemplate," De Bohun said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/aleague-expansion-depends-on-success-of-new-season-20141003-10q01m.html#ixzz3F59SbUoU

Wollongong, Canberra. Done.

Prepare for Brisbane Team 2 & Regional Victoria/3rd Melbourne for 13/14, then hit Tasmania and a second Adelaide team for 15 & 16, Penrith & Campbelltown for 17 & 18. Let Gold Coast, North Queensland, a 2nd NZ and a 4th Victorian side fight out the rest of the spots.

the only possible options they could be considering:
- Wollongong Wolves
- Canberra United
- South Sydney (Sydney Athletic etc...)
- Brisbane/Ipswich (Brisbane Strikers/ Ipswich Rovers)
- South-eastern Melbourne (Dandenong ......, Frankston......., Melbourne......)
- Auckland City

not ready yet:
- hobart
- south-west sydney
- geelong
- townsville
- gold coast
- cairns

the only possible options they could be considering:
- Wollongong Wolves
- Canberra United
- South Sydney (Sydney Athletic etc...)
- Brisbane/Ipswich (Brisbane Strikers/ Ipswich Rovers)
- South-eastern Melbourne (Dandenong ......, Frankston......., Melbourne......)
- Auckland City

not ready yet:
- hobart
- south-west sydney
- geelong
- townsville
- gold coast
- cairns

Oh boy! This thread again!!

What exactly does NZ provide but more travel cost. Fucking amazing you people.

Wollongong and South West Sydney in 2017

Springfield (Brisbane 2), Canberra, 3rd Melbourne (Casey?) Adelaide 2 2021

Wollongong, Canberra. Done.

Prepare for Brisbane Team 2 & Regional Victoria/3rd Melbourne for 2013/14, then hit Tasmania and a second Adelaide team for 15 & 16, Penrith & Campbelltown for 17 & 18. Let Gold Coast, North Queensland, a 2nd NZ and a 4th Victorian side fight out the rest of the spots.

I think Mack meant seasons? Unless we're living in the past :)

While there will be no new team entering the league until the expiration of the TV-deal following the 2016-17 season, official talks will begin before the end of the year with broadcast partners Fox Sports and SBS, as well as other interested parties.

Oh boy! This thread again!!

What exactly does NZ provide but more travel cost. Fucking amazing you people.

People making lists again... We can't select where the teams come from, we have to go where the money is.

FFA should provide a clear list of requirements to prospective bidders, then look at the bids to see which are the most viable... And if that ends up being a South Sydney side and a Wollongong side, so be it - we shouldn't cry about NSW bias...

http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/330522179764/Gallop-answers-the-questions?__federated=1

You should watch this. Straight from the horses mouth.

Everybody on here says Wollongong is not part of Sydney. Thus not "millions"

Northern Spirit when it entered the NSL had good crowds.So why wouldn't a new Northern Spirit be successful?

I think that is true to some extent - but Gallop also talks about long term vision. Simply put the increase in population in the next 20 years will see an extra 5-6 million people in the coastal area between Brisbane and Melbourne. I see Gallop trying to follow the expanding area.

And while Wollongong is not Sydney it is very accessible to a large portion of the Sydney millions, especially the football loving millions, rather than the rugby union north shore and rugby league northern beaches that the Mariners are close to.

South West Sydney is close to WSW but is also a projected major growth area especially when you consider Badgerys Creek development. The Liverpool - Campbelltown - Badgerys Creek triangle in particular is a large area with a good population that will only become more dense.

I would have picked Springfield( Ipswich - Logan - Toowoomba) as the 2nd of the 2017 teams but I think they need a different stadium that Suncorp to differentiate themselves. A new stadium at Springfield is mooted by 2020 as is the Civic stadium in Canberra, The other big area of growth is expected to be Perth so the possibility of a Perth 2 is also there.

My prediction:
Third Sydney team.
Second Brisbane team.
Both representing a particular geographical area.

The positive side to Wollongong team is the the away support. You know WSW will travel down there well we take 10 000 to Newcastle you could easily take that to wollongong as well as Sydney FC and mariners arn't to far away, as well as their good number's that turned up to that friendly all stars game and the FFA Cup game. I think Wollongong is now the perfect next expansion area. As for the 2nd team who knows?

People making lists again... We can't select where the teams come from, we have to go where the money is.

FFA should provide a clear list of requirements to prospective bidders, then look at the bids to see which are the most viable... And if that ends up being a South Sydney side and a Wollongong side, so be it - we shouldn't cry about NSW bias...

If you consider the influence of Foxtel and then replace 'the fish' from meaning attendances to potential Foxtel subscriptions.... Then I think we are looking at two areas only Auckland and Queensland

Gallop says fish where the fish are (I.e. Big cities). De Bohun says he wants derbies in every city. AFC says no Wellington.

My conclusion:
Wellington out
Adelaide City in
Springfield (2nd Brisbane) in
2nd Perth in

12 team league with every team having a derby rival. Possible of having a derby every week.

Watching the 2013-14 A-league grand final this morning and the talk of attendances, ratings, corporate sponsorship sounds to me they will be two teams from major capital cities.

Just remember the lowest attended A-league grand final was between two regional teams.

I would say it could be a 3rd Sydney team and a 2nd Brisbane team.

With the endless issues surrounding the central coast and Newcastle this might be a factor in hindering Canberra and wollongongs entry as they would deem it high risk.

They will pick the 2 that have the balance between low risk high reward right.

This is an endless argument and a thread that I change my opinion on daily.

Just hope the two they pick ultimately are the best bid regardless where they come from .

The big question is are we ready for a 33 game regular season and would they scrap finals if this is the length of the season.

Forget a second Adelaide team any time soon, unless a major economic upturn happens in this state their won't be any money for one unless it's owned by a mega sugar daddy happy to blow millions every year.
Adelaide City as one old city fan said recently have "50 fans and 2 bob in the bank", they aint gonna be a viable option for the aleague.

Adelaide's population is poor, stagnant and unlikely to change anytime soon.

What I found interesting is Gallops 4 year cycles.
This must mean 4 year tv deal. Which means next expansion 21/22.

14 teams gives 26 rounds.

12 teams 33?

That's 198 round games with 12 teams
And
182 with 14 teams

[youtube]l1dnqKGuezo[/youtube]

I meant next next expansion.

We might be looking at 25/26. The likes of Wollongong and Canberra can wait. Other markets need to be established sooner rather than later. Even if it means sfc and Brisbabe lose fans in the short term.

What I found interesting is Gallops 4 year cycles.
This must mean 4 year tv deal. Which means next expansion 21/22.

14 teams gives 26 rounds.

12 teams 33?

That's 198 round games with 12 teams
And
182 with 14 teams

Sorry, yea i got ya. That clip was more for laughs, it has to happen eventually, has to be 2 Brisbane teams imo, whoops sorry, got mixed up. A 2nd Brisbane team will not work at all, plain and simple at the moment, QLD got fucked over, the trial state! It will be a while for a 2nd Brisbane team, Sydney will be fine. I blame beer :D



Edited by MrBrisbane: 4/10/2014 07:52:26 PM

4 year tv deal expires in 2018... So why assume that the next expansion can't be until 2022?

They've already proved that a new team can be up and running within a few months, the ideal would be for them to have a year - even with that long lead in we've still got another 3 years before we need to make a decision.

What I found interesting is Gallops 4 year cycles.
This must mean 4 year tv deal. Which means next expansion 21/22.

14 teams gives 26 rounds.

12 teams 33?

That's 198 round games with 12 teams
And
182 with 14 teams

I meant next next expansion , as I wrote

The thing with a 14 team comp is that 26 rounds isn't good enough IMO.

Heads up - not to spoil the fun, but Frank Lowy has mentioned a few times how the ideal number for the A-League is '12-14 teams, max'. IIRC This may also be a recommendation from the Crawford Report, at the least.

And that's not just some random number Lowy and the Report have just plucked out of the sky - it's based on the number of potentially appropriate markets and with Australia's quite centralised population and few large centres outside the capitals, it makes alot of logical sense and naturally works out that way with some of our discussions surrounding the 'remaining options'. Get this straight - in some ways the best or bonanza has already happened, or is happening, with West Sydney and the re-booted Melbourne x2. The boom that A-League expansion brings has arguably peaked and we won't see any better from any potential expansion markets, than what we're seeing at those clubs, especially Wanderers. Heck, there are few better than Wanderers as is, just Victory - they're the new boys, but they're setting many trends in the league already - helping to take it to a new level.

We have to adjust our sights down and recognise that if whoever we bring it, be it Canberra, South Coast (Wollongong), Nth Qld Fury mk II, Tassie, Ipswich, Geelong... they will be clubs more the scale of the Mariners and their numbers would realistically track similarly, if a little larger, at the best (Jets level? That would be fantastic, though achievable, for such markets, IMHO). Though with the likes of Canberra and South Coast, at the least - and too perhaps Tassie, Ipswich and Fury - they would bring that element of 'national coverage' and representation. Nationally recognised centres, with the geography and scope/diversity in the league broadened - as it certainly was when Fury and GCU were briefly in the league - The humidity of tropical Townsville certainly an interesting away trip, for the teams, travelling fans and even those watching on TV. And especially regarding the nation's capital, they could draw alot more backing that the holiday/retirement locale of Central Coast?

But they're all 'relatively small fry' and the big, long awaited, hump were Sydney and Melbourne x2 and they've happened. It was a great shame that GCU and especially Fury, folded. Fury could've still kept on with slightly different context/fortune. But we're back to that kind of square one again - not unlike where we were when the league initially expanded with the QLD teams. Hopefully a QLD team comprises one of two new teams and either Ipswich or Nth QLD Fury - New and Improved - would be good IMHO - accompanied by Canberra or perhaps South Coast. Max the league at 14, if we must, with South Coast and whichever most workable/best backing, between bids from Tassie, Geelong and a re-booted Gold Coast.

Edited by GloryPerth: 5/10/2014 12:05:23 AM

No , either 12 (which isn't great) or 16.
As Pat wrote maybe they should try bringing in 4 teams at the same time.
This is very difficult.

To put it simpler, don't see the comp being beyond 14 teams. Lowy said 12-14 and 'I think' that's because Crawford did. The markets, the array of 'appropriate markets' left, re-inforces this number. It's good there may be 1-2 pretenders who may miss out, as atleast that adds competition to the bidding. It's a shame if a Tassie or the like never make the A-League, but there could be a national second tier down the road, we never know - if again, there are the markets for it (as too funding and subsidisation). So it still doesn't necessarily have to be an either/or - then again, all these regions have gone with-out a top tier Australian team soo long, some have NEVER had one - not even NSL? - so in a way you can't miss what you've never had and if they've never had it, then perhaps, like the difficult N/S Market of Tassie, they sadly never will? Canberra have had the market to warrant a try before, in the short-lived Canberra Cosmos, Wollongong had the Wolves.. Though Townsville never had an NSL team, they had the Fury A-League team a while... NSL never attempted the Gold Coast, but A-League did - perhaps in-hindsight they had a reason? Anyway, that's part of the story, narrative and context of each of these regions, their bids and even their potential capability and success. But FTR Cosmos doesn't reflect the potential Canberra reality, just as, in a way, Parramatta 'Eel' Power didn't reflect West Sydney's. Perhaps GCU's doesn't reflect GC's either? I guess we, including the FFA, can't really know, till we get down to the business of bidding and the due diligence and under-takings involved, to weed out the PR and optimism from the practical realities and true potential.

Edited by GloryPerth: 5/10/2014 01:00:47 AM

Heads up - not to spoil the fun, but Frank Lowy has mentioned a few times how the ideal number for the A-League is '12-14 teams, max'. IIRC This may also be a recommendation from the Crawford Report, at the least.

If you consider the influence of Foxtel and then replace 'the fish' from meaning attendances to potential Foxtel subscriptions.... Then I think we are looking at two areas only Auckland and Queensland

There was nothing in the Crawford Report about the number of teams in the national league. The NSL Report recommended starting with 10 teams with the freedom to expand should suitable options appear.

As for Lowy saying the ideal is 12-14 max - Frank has also said (on expanding to 10 teams, that 12 would follow, and after that the sky is the limit... He also said, "Promotion and relegation is the lifeblood of the game, so we can't ignore it and we won't ignore it... By the time the (2018) World Cup comes there will be promotion and relegation, we will probably have a lot more teams and ... I believe we are going to move forward in big steps, as we are now."

He's a businessman and a politician - he'll say whatever he thinks works best for the audience he's addressing.

Edited by Benjamin: 5/10/2014 04:27:07 AM

People who want Auckland are really desperate to see us kicked back to the OFC. you're dumb as dog shit JoFFA. How you ever became mod will forever be a mystery.

Can't wait for an Auckland team to come back to the a-league. An NZ derby would be great for the a-league, when it happens we should rename ourselves to the ANZ-league so the New Zealand teams feel more wanted.

Poor. Make it less obvious next time. ;)

Soccer Tasmania will meet a group of Hobart businessmen today in the hope of establishing a Tasmanian team in the National Soccer League.

Hobart-based property developer Sean Bissett is behind the push, which would involve around 28 full-time positions, including 18 players.

Soccer Tasmania's chief executive David Smith says the meeting will look at whether the proposal is viable, as well as any support his group can offer.

"To put a team in the Australian premier league, really your start-up capital is about $5 million," he said.

"These guys aren't just running around for the sake of it, they're very keen and obviously to make that sort of decision you need to investigate a lot of it.

"One of the major things, I would imagine, is whether it's viable or not for a Tasmanian team to be in the national league."

Actually a old article from 2004, shortly before the death of the NSL, Tasmania was looking to field a team

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2004-02-06/tasmania-seeks-nsl-team/131314



I would still like to see Tassie get a team.

I can see players and marquees putting up their hands to go live in Launceston.

The reason sfc got ADP is the city.
The reason they got Janko is the city.
The reason Lampard even considered Melbourne was the city.

SFC "the biggest club" wouldn't miss the fans who started to support a shire based team.
A shire team, likewise a Sws team have a far greater pulling power from potential players, marquees and managers.
Again, much greater than Wollongong and Canbera and especially Tasmania.

Are you suggesting Fowler went too the Fury in order to find Nemo?

Local media (Val Migliaccio from The Advertiser) has been pushing Adelaide City as a potential entrant.

Just plain stupid.

Val's an idiot, but a proud idiot. He'll never admit he is wrong. AC don't have the money, the backing or the even the growth potential to be a viable A-League team. The Adelaide business community couldn't support another A-League team. Not enough sponsors to go around.2nd Brisbane would have more chance, based out of Ipswich/Sunshine Coast perhaps?
The Gong and Canberra have to be the best chances for adding teams that wouldn't be a drain on the comp.

Edited by vanbasten88: 5/10/2014 10:26:25 PM

A team from Melbourne and a team from Sydney because it makes financial sense for sponsors and stakeholders.

makes most sense, unless they are looking to move into new markets. The FFA and Foxtel would probably argue there are still new untapped markets in both cities....and they're not exactly wrong...

They won't argue , they will agree.

Sydney is a given.

Melbourne's only obstacle would be where?
Would it be South Melbourne
Or
People keep saying SE. Dandenong/Frankston. Would they and could they play at Lakeside?
What would you call them?
(I mean, can you call them Dand or Frank etc or does it have to SE Melbourne ?)

I believe South's 40 year lease gives them control over all domestic football at the venue, so it would be near impossible for a franchise unconnected to SMFC to play out of Lakeside. Whilst Lakeside has good road and tram connections to the South-East suburbs and makes sense as a venue for a side representing that area, I suspect the ease of public transport into the CBD would most likely lead to AAMI Park being the venue of choice, perhaps with City switching to Etihad if they get their shit-right on the pitch and start pulling decent crowds.

Another idea, is to open up second side in Brisbane - representing the state of Queensland rather than the city itself or a suburb. There was talk that some fans were lost to Roar when they switched from Queensland to Brisbane (admittedly price changes and some poor communications with supporters didn't help either). Call them Queensland Rovers, and have them play games in Brisbane, Townsville, on the Gold Coast to engage the whole state. Also adds the derby which is both city rivals and city vs state rivals into the fixture list.

makes most sense, unless they are looking to move into new markets. The FFA and Foxtel would probably argue there are still new untapped markets in both cities....and they're not exactly wrong...

There was a vital clue in Gallop's speech alluding to where the next A-League clubs might come from.
"Not everyone has the same market and when it comes to expansion I have already said that you need to fish where the fish are and go where the biggest opportunities exist," he said.
"And the biggest opportunities are where millions of people live not hundreds of thousands."
http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/blog/2014/09/24/key-successful-league-expansion

I guess if done right the markets where the fish are smaller in number should still be able to provide a[size=9] financially viable second tier comp and average in the 5 - 8 k range...[/size]

You mean Souths wouldn't allow it.

Is it enough to call a team "South Eastern Melbourne" and expect fans to come?
How would they differ from Victory or City? Is the geographical bond enough?
How do they unite the region?
I don't know much about the area.

I don't know if SMFC would accept it or not, but it would appear unlikely - I doubt any business would willingly play a part in a rival business moving in on their turf... Especially when South are so keen to get into the A-League themselves.

Without Lakeside as an option I would suggest that having the training base in the south-east suburbs (as suggested by imonfourfourtwo, this could be St Kilda's current training faciltities), and putting an emphasis on local engagement and marketing, with the team's only central Melbourne activities being on game-day. If the team is clearly 'FROM' the area, then there's more reason to believe that the local supporters will feel a stronger attachment than for a team that represents all-over-everywhere.

I suspect the plan to engage locals, particularly school children, and identify as the team of the 'southern region', would be SMFC's aim if they are able to get an expansion license. Unfortunately, it's difficult to do this prior to getting a license because of both the cost factor and the lack of interest in anyone following a non-A-League side.



Do you mean playing out of Suncorp? Otherwise it's QE2. Or Ballymore, or even the Gabba. I think it's important to be at a different 'home' venue if possible - even if the venue isn't perfect for football.

You would only be able to play 1 game in GC and Townsville max per year if they played at Suncorp. Fans in Brisbane would prefer to see Roar if you can only see eg 7 home games live. The one element Heart proved in Melbourne was that some people will go and see another team simply because it's another team. They WANT to support someone other than the team they've been given. So the Roar lose a few, or never got them in the first place, and the new boys pick them up... Along with all the country boys who never felt able to get behind a Brisbane rather than Queensland side. Don't see why playing 3 games in Townsville, 3 on the Gold Coast, 2 in Cairns, 7 in Brisbane would be a huge issue. Shorter season tickets, lower prices, etc.

Then comes the next issue, do you dump games vs Ccm, Phoenix and glory to the countryside every year or do you give them mv, sfc etc? Prioritising of 'big' games for one venue over another shouldn't be a huge issue either, because every game in Townsville, Cairns, Gold Coast, etc., would be something of an event due to the lack of said fixtures. Logic would obviously push toward having the derby games in Brisbane to maximize on 'visiting' Roar fans.

This also kills off potential GC or Fury bids down the line. Or they would eventually change to Brisbane Rovers.
Im not in love with the idea but if it means another team in Qld I think it's good. The key would be focusing on Ipswich, Logan and Sunshine Coast. GC and the rest would follow naturally. It could potentially assist with GC and Fury options in the future - if this franchise took off there would be the possibility to slowly switch more fixtures to the city that is providing the greatest backing. An 'organic' move away from city. If Gold Coast goosed it and Townsville/Cairns had the numbers, switch to North Queensland Rovers.

A 12 team comp is 33 games (probably), thats either 16 or 17 home games. I would recommend playing out of QE2 (eventually hoping for the government to alter the arena)
1 x GC
1 x Townsville
1 x Sunshine Coast
1 x Ipswich (but they don't have a-league standard)

Fans should be encouraged to travel to home games instead of away games.

Its not hard to imagine
"The People's team" bla bla bla

Similar with maroon shorts. With the letters QR over a Queensland map etc ( not to be confused with Queensland Rail) . They'd probably f$ck it up though, and have an all maroon kit and call it Qld United

In this situation I would like to see certain criteria met by locations to host games eg. Local publicity, tv and radio. Local advertising and backing from the councils. Beer tents, food trucks, mingle etc. Saturday games, to make the "regional" games an event people look forward to every year. This is so other centres have opportunities to host matches also if they have the facilities and can generate a good public.

I guess if done right the markets where the fish are smaller in number should still be able to provide a financially viable second tier comp and average in the 5 - 8 k range...

Crowds aren't the issue when setting up the new franchises - commercial backing is. The problem with the smaller areas is that they don't have as much business to back the local team. Business tends to gather in the big cities, and that's why the new franchises are more likely to come from them.

Another, perhaps less palatable idea:

Collingwood - didn't work in the 90s, but that was a rebadged Heidelberg rather than a new club, and in another age in terms of football in this country. As much as I hate Collingwood and anything else in black-and-white stripes - with their admin and training facilities, physical training and medical staff, and more importantly their database of one-eyed Pie supporters, they would be a side with good potential. Plus, always good to have a pantomime villain that everyone can hate.

-PB

I guess if done right the markets where the fish are smaller in number should still be able to provide a financially viable second tier comp and average in the 5 - 8 k range...

Have companies even been approached regarding major sponsorship. Especially if they are expanding their market and tourist industry with the help of national exposure. I thought this was one of the cheapest games to run.