A-league Expansion - Derbies
Canada now has three teams in the MLS and, although there is a difference in population and money, would it be a realistic option for NZ to go this route?
It is their competition, why should NZ get another team before another Australian team? Auckland have proved they can't support an A-League team, as well as supporting the Breakers and the Warriors, Blues and whatever other teams are up there. No one has enough money in this country or enough passion to take the losses. And there is simply not enough support in Auckland or Christchurch to warrant people going to 13 games a season. The A-League has enough problems as it is, do I need to mention Gold Coast United and Newcastle?
Would I like to see another team, sure but as JD said won't be happening in the next 5-10 years, if at all.
I can't see Asia wanting to absorb Oceania.
Id even go so far as saying if some millionaire decided tonight that he wants to prop up an Auckland franchise for the next 5 years, FFA would take that on and it would be a done deal by the end of next week. Theyre desperate to not spend/lose money on the A-League.
I think you'd find that even if we did merge, the Island nations would only ever play each other anyway. FIFA dont pull friendlies out of a hat. And if they couldnt afford to travel then they wouldnt. Whats the worst that could happen? Not play in the Asia Cup? Theyre not doing that now so they wouldnt be any worse off. They'd still have things like the Pacific Games and the Oceania nations cup would probably still exist in some capacity. Thats pretty much it as it is currently, again they wouldnt be any worse off.
Yeah, the Ricki Herbert dual role was the only entanglement I could think of.
Quite right that you wouldn't want any conflict of interest, although it's never stopped the FFA running a club when they need to.
It would be easy enough to fix. Organise a simple home and away system with a direct knock out to weed out the likes of Samoa, Tonga etc... then bring the winners of those games in with Round 2 of Asia, and go from there. Very likely that the rest would get knocked out straight away and it would only cost them one away match somewhere in Asia. The harsh reality of it all is that at some stage they will need to expect to pay for travel, or why else contend for the WC?
Nothing until 2015. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/soccer/freeze-on-a-league-expansion-to-get-soccer-in-order/story-e6frfg8x-1226325366966
With the Phoenix coming to town to play Perth on February 2, the question about expansion in New Zealand has resurfaced, but the problems experienced by the Football Kingz and New Zealand Knights, the ashes from which the Phoenix arose, are still raw in the minds of locals.
And veteran Auckland journalist Terry Maddaford says those same obstacles stand in the way on any New Zealand expansion enterprise, even with other codes showing the right strategy can pay off.
http://www.footballaustralia.com.au/news-display/Auckland-expansion-remains-distant-hope/58935
I'm actually sick of this story, not your fault RR. Do they not understand that the FFA are not expanding at least til 2015? so it's a moot discussion. I'm not sure what crowd is going to show up at Eden park. But it won't be close to 20k
When pigs fly and elephants shit gold.
I'm actually sick of this story, not your fault RR. Do they not understand that the FFA are not expanding at least til 2015? so it's a moot discussion. I'm not sure what crowd is going to show up at Eden park. But it won't be close to 20k
Not sure 2015 is achievable, but I would hope we see a serious bid by 2020. Any bid needs to evolve more naturally than someone like Owen Glenn just throwing a pile of cash at it. Auckland should want a team, rather than just trying to build it and hope they will come.
2015 is only 2 years away, now is probably a good time to hold these discussions.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/7971084/A-League-expansion-ruled-out
This article says at least 4 years. Even if Auckland do want one, do the Aleague want another NZ team over an Australian one?
Why would FIFA provide an exemption for another NZ team? I thought the main premise of an NZ team was because we did not have pro football. Now we have it, what impetus is there to approve a 2nd team? From an FFA stand point, they wont get any more in TV rights, costs will got up for travel... For the FFA, there is no incentive to do this.
Why would FIFA provide an exemption for another NZ team? I thought the main premise of an NZ team was because we did not have pro football. Now we have it, what impetus is there to approve a 2nd team? From an FFA stand point, they wont get any more in TV rights, costs will got up for travel... For the FFA, there is no incentive to do this.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/7971084/A-League-expansion-ruled-out
This article says at least 4 years. Even if Auckland do want one, do the Aleague want another NZ team over an Australian one?
Canberra, Wollongong, Tasmania, Gold Coast, North Queensland, Geelong, 2nd Brisbane Team, 2nd Adelaide Team
Compared to those options, Auckland is very tempting because of its size. I think Canberra & Wollongong are viable options for #11 and #12. There is no reason why Auckland couldn't aim for the 13th spot, hardest part is finding a solid 14th bid to keep the league even.
Why would FIFA provide an exemption for another NZ team? I thought the main premise of an NZ team was because we did not have pro football. Now we have it, what impetus is there to approve a 2nd team? From an FFA stand point, they wont get any more in TV rights, costs will got up for travel... For the FFA, there is no incentive to do this.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/7971084/A-League-expansion-ruled-out
This article says at least 4 years. Even if Auckland do want one, do the Aleague want another NZ team over an Australian one?
Canberra, Wollongong, Tasmania, Gold Coast, North Queensland, Geelong, 2nd Brisbane Team, 2nd Adelaide Team
Compared to those options, Auckland is very tempting because of its size. I think Canberra & Wollongong are viable options for #11 and #12. There is no reason why Auckland couldn't aim for the 13th spot, hardest part is finding a solid 14th bid to keep the league even.
Why would FIFA provide an exemption for another NZ team? I thought the main premise of an NZ team was because we did not have pro football. Now we have it, what impetus is there to approve a 2nd team? From an FFA stand point, they wont get any more in TV rights, costs will got up for travel... For the FFA, there is no incentive to do this.
Agree with Jeff. More pros for NZ than for Australia. Who in Australia is going to watch an NZ derby?
If Auckland had built that stadium on the waterfront, it might be a different story. But can they turn out for 14 home games a year at North Harbour or Mt smart?
Tasmania is challenged by having the two real population bases split in Hobart and Launceston. Neither of them huge.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/7971084/A-League-expansion-ruled-out
This article says at least 4 years. Even if Auckland do want one, do the Aleague want another NZ team over an Australian one?
Canberra, Wollongong, Tasmania, Gold Coast, North Queensland, Geelong, 2nd Brisbane Team, 2nd Adelaide Team
Compared to those options, Auckland is very tempting because of its size. I think Canberra & Wollongong are viable options for #11 and #12. There is no reason why Auckland couldn't aim for the 13th spot, hardest part is finding a solid 14th bid to keep the league even.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/7971084/A-League-expansion-ruled-out
This article says at least 4 years. Even if Auckland do want one, do the Aleague want another NZ team over an Australian one?
Canberra, Wollongong, Tasmania, Gold Coast, North Queensland, Geelong, 2nd Brisbane Team, 2nd Adelaide Team
Compared to those options, Auckland is very tempting because of its size. I think Canberra & Wollongong are viable options for #11 and #12. There is no reason why Auckland couldn't aim for the 13th spot, hardest part is finding a solid 14th bid to keep the league even.
Aucklanders are very much apathetic when it comes to supporting anything
think queensland could definitely provide at least another team. Canberra is the obvious one.
Agree auckland has to want a team before they try and get one. I assume they would use north harbour ?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/7971084/A-League-expansion-ruled-out
This article says at least 4 years. Even if Auckland do want one, do the Aleague want another NZ team over an Australian one?
Canberra, Wollongong, Tasmania, Gold Coast, North Queensland, Geelong, 2nd Brisbane Team, 2nd Adelaide Team
Compared to those options, Auckland is very tempting because of its size. I think Canberra & Wollongong are viable options for #11 and #12. There is no reason why Auckland couldn't aim for the 13th spot, hardest part is finding a solid 14th bid to keep the league even.
Aucklanders are very much apathetic when it comes to supporting anything
i agree that 2nd Brisbane & Adelaide team is unlikely, they can't get big crowds for the teams they have already. The most viable looking places to have teams for me are Wollongong, Canberra and Auckland.
Auckland is just too big not to return at some point, but I don't think they should be the next cab off the rank. As I said earlier, I think 2020 would be a realistic target to aim for.
The difference is that a 6k crowd is a poor crowd in Wellington whereas it was a decent crowd for the Kingz and a dream for the Knights, in a market 3 or 4 times the size.
That's a hard business case to make stack-up.
At Mt Smart with Rufer playing the Kingz had a few crowds of 10,000 plus. But they couldn't sustain them.
The difference is that a 6k crowd is a poor crowd in Wellington whereas it was a decent crowd for the Kingz and a dream for the Knights, in a market 3 or 4 times the size.
That's a hard business case to make stack-up.
The difference is that a 6k crowd is a poor crowd in Wellington whereas it was a decent crowd for the Kingz and a dream for the Knights, in a market 3 or 4 times the size.
That's a hard business case to make stack-up.
The difference is that a 6k crowd is a poor crowd in Wellington whereas it was a decent crowd for the Kingz and a dream for the Knights, in a market 3 or 4 times the size.
That's a hard business case to make stack-up.
[I hope they don't come back here for that very reason.
[/quote]
So if an oligarch like, say, Owen Glen, or that warehouse geezer, offerred to bankroll an Auckland A-League team, you'd be against the attempt Jeff?
Jerzy: Thats not what I am saying. Its not about the money. Its about the pitiful crowd numbers. As News just highlighted, a bad crowd is Wellington is a great crowd for a former Auckland franchise. Granted the Auckland franchise did not perform but if they were to do so, would the crowds be any better? Even then, to consistently hit that crowd number, that Auckland franchise would have to consistently perform. Across 2 teams and 12 odd season, the Phoenix have done it for 3 of those years.... I'm quite content for there to be 1 team in NZ and if that means its in Wellington and not Auckland, so be it.
Ryan: Canberra or Tasmania. I think you need to make it a geographical spread. Granted they are not the best locations but going back into Adelaide and Brisbane and revisiting GC and NQ would not be smart I think. Again, I also do not think there is an incentive for the FFA to put another team in NZ and would FIFA and AFC approve it?