Following the Devils: Chasing the 20th Team
FOOTY ANALYSIS
As sure as night follows day, a 20th AFL team will follow the entry of its 19th.
With Tasmania all but locked in now to a 2028 start, attention will soon turn to the when, where and why on the competition’s next frontier.
A few locations have come up, gotten some press, but none raised so far have desperately stood out as home run options, markets overdue or beyond compelling.
So, let’s break down the candidates in play, the aspects that work for and against them, and come away with a recommendation, if you like, on where the AFL should expand to next.
First and foremost, let’s address if there’s an alternative play here, do we need a 20th team at all, does it need to come via expansion? In short, yes.
To stay at 19 teams is never ideal, whilst not fatal and moreover it will be in play for a few seasons anyway before a 20th team comes along, an odd number of teams is all downside.
A bye every week, a 19th team doesn’t really add value to the pot until its followed by a 20th, its extra cost with little return, the unevenness on other logistics too, it’s just not preferred.
As for whether we can achieve welcoming in the Devils yet also get an even number of teams without expansion – not really. You’d need to look at mergers or contraction, so turning two teams into one to get back to 18 teams or losing one altogether. Once you get to 19, you want to get to 18 or 20, and there’s no obvious, smooth, or probably fair path back to 18 unless something drastic happens. Undesirable.
So, we’re staring down a 20th team, a new team, another Gold Coast, GWS, Tasmania. Let’s sort this out.
The list, in no order, seems to start and begin with:
· A team in the NT, based out of Darwin,
· A team in Canberra, kicking the Giants out,
· A third team in Adelaide,
· A third team in Perth, or
· A second team in Brisbane
Let’s rule out from the get-go any idea of a team in Newcastle, northern Queensland, the Sunshine Coast, New Zealand, etc.
The marker of this 20th team needs to be one that can work, sure, with some initial teething pains, but it can’t be a long-term strategic play, it can’t be a drain on the system.
So, let’s go through them, firstly the most popular one, or one that gets the most mentions so far: the Northern Territory.
In short this is the one that’s the most likeable, but in reality, the most unlikely.
That may sound blunt to some, but we’re not talking about notional, make pretend here, this is committing millions of dollars and years, decades to create a standalone club in the country’s biggest sporting competition.
There’s great romanticism to the idea of a club based up there, it would be well supported, well received, and be a lovely addition to the national competition in all those feel good aspects. But commercially, just no, not even close.
The short way of looking at it is via Tasmania’s struggles, and then to put those same headwinds through the lens of the Darwin and/or NT market.
Darwin is much smaller than Hobart, and the NT has half the population of Tasmania. Think about the economics here, the maths. It won’t stack up. Trying to find the funds to get the thing going, and to maintain it, let alone the logistics of a new stadium; Tassie showed us where the tipping point is in getting things built. If Hobart ‘only just’ achieved what the league considered bare minimum to enter the competition, what hope does Darwin have? Let alone how you incorporate Alice Springs into the picture, too.
The Tasmanian economy isn’t near any of its peers on the mainland, but it’s a fair ways better than the NT’s. And you’ll hear there’s big money up north, the gateway to Asia, all that, but how is that going to bankroll and justify a successful AFL club that doesn’t just survive but strives to compete with West Coast, Collingwood and Adelaide?
Yes, there’s a Taskforce, it’s got Nathan Buckley, a proud Territorian, it’s got Andrew Demetriou, ex-AFL CEO, its sponsored by the NT Government. Great. Doesn’t magically change the numbers. And numbers and balance sheets and money will be what separates these candidates from “yep, it’s a goer” from “no, it’s a pipe dream”.
Sadly, despite how good it might seem or look to those without any skin in the game, it’s far from a wise decision.
And I acknowledge, finally, there’s a role footy can play in improving the social and inclusivity opportunities clearly present and pertinent up there. And in some ways those ambitions connecting the two have a lot going for them, in this lens. But it’s the wrong solution to a problem we all concede needs proper attention.
Don’t spend a billion dollars on a stadium for a city with half the population of Geelong, but, if you have a billion dollars free, absoutely let’s spend it up there but in other, more productive ways, yes?
Ok, we’ve put a line through that bid. Who else?
Rapid fire on the honourable mentions? A third team in Adelaide? Nice idea, I mean for a brief moment let’s say we give Norwood a license, that would be worth watching. The Redlegs vs. Port Adelaide in the big league would be box office.
But overall, pragmatically, Adelaide’s population next decade isn’t expected to grow that much, so it’ll still hover around 1.5m people. Basic maths says, and I don’t want to make this too arithmetic-centric, that a third team could work but wouldn’t flourish, unless Adelaide got bigger, and until then ‘not yet’ is the short way of saying it.
A second team in Brisbane? Not as silly as it sounds. Ex-Gold Coast Suns Chair Tony Cohrane put that on the agenda on SEN this week, and he made a compelling case. Brisbane gets a new 65,000 stadium soon that will need more events beyond hosting Lions home games, Brisbane as a city will be closer to 3m people next decade, would be a big enough market, and with a savvy strategy, a rival to the Lions, by then, you can see it. But not yet.
I think a second team in Brisbane given its more closely aligned to Sydney and Melbourne, than Perth and Adelaide, is a good shout. But is it the next cab off the rank? No. Let’s be honest, Brisbane feels like a grouse market now, because the Lions are going for a three peat and the upcoming Olympics are gifting the code the best new stadium in the country.
But apply a less rosy lens, let’s project to 2040, Olympics far in the rear vision mirror, the Lions could be mid-table, the second team’s struggling; its not too long ago that in the wrong conditions we all got existential about Queensland footy. I think its turned a corner, participation is way up, all the metrics have green arrows. But a second team in Brisbane is ‘too soon’.
Which brings me to my two prevailing, preferred choices: Canberra or a third team in Perth.
Canberra is a compelling market, the ACT’s population will be similar to Tasmania’s come next decade, but Canberra is twice the size of Hobart now and is growing at a faster rate.
It’s also, technically, part of that ‘northern states’ strategy, and whilst not really north, or a state, Canberra is the mainland’s seventh biggest city, behind only the five major capitals and the Gold Coast.
It supports professional sport as is, both the Brumbies and Raiders are well established, and is part of the merry go round that hosts international cricket.
It’s got an existing connection to the AFL by hosting three GWS games each year, which are all well supported, sellouts mainly, and Manuka Oval presents as a terrific home stadium that unlike Hobart would only require significant redevelopment instead of a complete, expensive redo.
Yes, the Giants have ties there, and in this case, they’d need to decouple, which is probably a blessing in disguise. Arguably Canberra has been a stronger win for the Giants than in Western Sydney, looking at engagement and crowd numbers. To force the Giants to invest all of their energy back with their core base, instead of spending time a couple hours down the road every now and then in the nation’s capital might strategically be helpful.
Canberra works; you’d have confidence that turning Giants members attending three times a year into going 11 times a year for their own team. It feels more likely than unlikely to succeed. The ACT Government are keen too:
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…
Canberra’s partnership with the Giants is a strength, not a roadblock. It demonstrates that there is already a large and growing AFL fan base in Canberra and a track record of hosting high‑quality fixtures.
[ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr, August 2025]
As for a third team in Perth, the foundations are there. Perth is bigger than Adelaide, and richer, so where a third team for the city of churches feels a stretch, out west it feels conducive.
The Eagles are a powerhouse, have a stronghold, Freo came in eight years after but now are also rock solid, with that slight skew or angle on that what, coastal, south of the river, alternative to what was previously a one-team town.
With Optus Stadium always a great option for more games, the role the Perth market plays for TV and broadcasters and fixturing, that only helps the cause.
How you do it, do you position them as a northern suburbs team, based out of Joondalup but playing in town, or do you hybrid something out of Bunbury, south of the metro area, some games there, some games in the city; that’s in the detail and for another time.
But as a market, could the Eagles and Dockers play with a third little brother, I mean shit, if you’re putting your marketing and graphic design hat on, call them Perth, use WA gold as your primary colour, appeal to the masses. If you vulnerable at all to be stolen away from supporting the Eagles, and/or never really found the alternative of a purple team called ‘Dockers’ appealing, let me come at you with some nostalgic, state-wide pride. Call them the Perth Quokkas or Cockies or something and you know what, probably works, right? Exactly.
So, Canberra or Perth, those two are Bonecrusher and Our Waverley Star for me, this far out, with a process not even started, or publicly still anyway.
Canberra’s a good-sized city and a rugby league market with clear potential. It has an AFL background and existing connection, and wouldn’t need much to get a new team running successfully.
Perth, city is on a heater, its big enough for a third team, and if you get that angle or marketing right, how to appeal to those who might jump ship from the Eagles or Dockers, there’s great potential there.
If I had to choose? I’d go Canberra, its more strategic a choice, it’s a simpler leap, a few quid upgrading Manuka, turn three-game Giants members into 20th team season ticket holders, away you go. The safe play is Perth, but safe doesn’t mean its best.
Timeline? Current broadcast deal, which a couple years in looks like overs (the league has done super well to get what it got) expires the end of the 2031 season. So any new agreement kicks in 2032, and in negotiations for that in the leadup will centre on “how can this be better than the last”, which in these economic times, but also the landscape of TV and how profitable that is, will be tricky.
So, four seasons after Tassie, in line for the new TV deal, as a point of difference to help find new value, keep the broadcast money up, that makes too much sense to me.
2032. Canberra or the Quokkas. Stay tuned.