Beyond Tasmania, the race for the AFL’s 20th team is heating up

As the battle for the 2025 AFL premiership heats up on field, the off-field part of the game is also getting more interesting. 

The increasingly likely confirmation of the entry of the Tasmanian Devils to the AFL in 2028 has caused an increase in speculation and statements about a prospective 20th AFL team.

Last Tuesday, ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr told local paper the Canberra Times that “if the AFL decides to expand to 20 teams, Canberra’s proven support for the game, including growing membership, sell-out crowds and infrastructure commitments, will speak for itself”.

In a potentially connected move, AFL head honcho Andrew Dillon made a relatively low-profile trip to the nation’s capital to watch the Giants play North Melbourne on Sunday afternoon.

The change of positioning in the ACT towards a potential new AFL side follows similar moves across the country.

Two weeks ago it was reported that the West Australian Football Commission (owners of West Coast and Fremantle) had softened their stance about the introduction of a third team from Western Australia.

Meanwhile, the bid for a team from the Northern Territory continues to grab attention nationally.

So, who will win the licence for the AFL’s 20th team, and why do we need one anyway?

The contenders

Some footy fans might be wondering why there’s such a rush to expanding to 20 teams so quickly.

Like most things, the answer lies in the little details and logistics.

“Nineteen [teams] is an awkward number for a competition. So it’s going to get to 20 pretty quickly, I’d reckon, after Tassie come in,” North Melbourne coach Alastair Clarkson said.

An odd number of teams like 19 creates a number of fixturing difficulties around constant byes and neutral rounds like Gather Round. It would require a season of either 22 or 24 games, which may cause further scheduling issues for the AFLW.

Given the apparent need, it’s no surprise that cities, territories and states are starting to jostle for position in the battle for inclusion.

“It’ll be paper, scissors, rock which state gets it,” Clarkson said.

Each potential bid has immediate strengths and weaknesses. All three have strong intangible claims to getting a team as well that go beyond the strict numbers.

Perth

With a growing population, new state-of-the-art stadium and strong economic outlook, Western Australia and Perth have a strong case on paper for being frontrunners for a third team out west. Introducing a third team in WA would reduce the travel burdens on West Coast and Fremantle, and help serve a footy-mad populace.

West Coast and Fremantle are both in the top six clubs when looking at off-field financial health. Wooden spooners West Coast have the fifth highest home attendances of any club this year.

A new team in Perth wouldn’t grow the game to a new location. This may be mitigated by playing some games in regional areas such as Bunbury. Further concerns exist around whether the members on the West Coast waiting list would shift to a new side, and if there are enough fans who aren’t dedicated to either the Dockers or Eagles to make a side viable.

It’s worth noting that the case for a third Perth side appears stronger at face value than a similarly constructed third Adelaide team, despite the historical strength of South Australian football.

Northern Territory

It could be argued that no place loves footy as much as the Territory. On per capita terms, no state or territory plays footy as much as the NT. Plenty of footy stars, from the Riolis to Michael Long and Andrew McLeod, hail from the territory.

“Territorians love their AFL and there’s no doubt that having a long-term plan to get a team in the AFL is the best way to ensure success.” then-NT chief minister Eva Lawler said last year.

There’s also a strong case — as made by the most-recent NT Strategic Business Case for an AFL team — that an AFL team may have a broader societal impact in the territory.

Even a marginal improvement in livability may have significant impacts on improving outcomes for Territorians.

Of the candidates, the NT has the smallest population base and the hardest strict business case to make. The NT case included several scenarios, including a split team with north Queensland or a relocated side.

The case estimated that there would be a shortfall of about $13 million a year for an NT team that would need to be made up by government or altruistic sponsors.

Canberra

In many ways, Canberra represents a “Goldilocks” option.

It has a bigger regional population than Tasmania, and has been angling for an expansion side since 1981. The region also has a strong playing history with stars such as Alex Jesaulenko and James Hird hailing from the area.

“I feel like this is a great football town — AFL town. If it makes financial sense … then I think they’d get great support down here from a membership [and] sponsorship perspective.” GWS coach Adam Kingsley said last week.

The underlying finances of Canberra are also strong, with a high level of disposable income. Crowds in Canberra have been stronger than in Darwin or Hobart consistently since 2017, with numerous games declared sellouts.

Working against Canberra is the presence of teams in other major sporting codes, with the Raiders and Brumbies already present on the national stage. In addition, it may be hard to entice potential fans out in winter, with attendances at sporting events dropping in the bitterly cold winter months.

To further grow the game, avoid the worst of winter and help the bottom line, a Canberra team might also play games in Albury or the broader Riverina region.

The cost

It’s not cheap to run a footy team, let alone stand one up from scratch.

Analysis supplied to prospective expansion parties suggests a club run like the modest operations of North Melbourne, GWS or the Gold Coast would need about $52 million per year.

The AFL hands out cash to clubs in two different tranches — a baseline payment currently around $14 million and variable funding going to clubs with greater need due to historically smaller fan bases and revenue streams. That additional portion can vary from the $0 handed out to Collingwood and West Coast right up to nearly $15 million to GWS and Gold Coast.

However, that generosity will not readily be shared by those current clubs. These clubs, after all, will get the final say on expansion.

The AFL has informed interested parties such as the NT that it expects future expansion teams to be able to operate on the average amount of distribution given to other clubs. To satisfy this desire, the Tasmanian government agreed to further supplement the Devils with up to $12 million per year.

That funding appears to be the difference between the Devils being viable without extra AFL support or not.

This affects potential bids significantly, particularly the NT. It may also have real impacts on a new Perth or Canberra side. Any new team doesn’t just need to grow the base of the league, but also leave the financial state in a better place.

Beyond the yearly funding required for a team, there’s also the need for a place to play.

That element is the only remaining road block to Tasmania’s entry, with the proposed Macquarie Point stadium still stuck in the Project of State Significance process.

With a hung parliament, there’s no guarantee that the Hobart stadium will sail through smoothly — let alone any clarity on the final price for the stadium if approved.

For two of these three expansion options, a new stadium might also be a sticking point.

One of the biggest advantages of a potential Perth bid is Perth Stadium. The government has regularly bought major events to fill the new stadium, from State of Origin NRL to Coldplay. An extra AFL team would likely help fill the often vacant stands in winter.

The other two bids would either require significant upgrades or a new stadium.

Canberra has recently put an expansion of Manuka Oval out for tender to increase the capacity to almost 20,000. Meanwhile, the business case for the NT team outlines the clear need for a new stadium for entry of a standalone side. That stadium was earmarked as costing $700 million, without a clear source of agreed funding.

Given the number of variables at play, it might be anyone’s guess who is the favourite for the new AFL side. Last year Dillon was coy.

“We have got interest from the NT, there’s interest in north Queensland.

“People have been talking about a third team out of WA, [or] Canberra, so it’s great that there is interest. Long may that debate continue.”

Given recent movements, the race is well underway.