Almost certainly they don't realise it, but the AFL might just need Tasmania far more than Tasmania needs the AFL.
Much of the debate about whether Tasmania should finally be given a team in the national competition has centred around whether the state could afford to finance it.
Well here's a radical idea: it shouldn't have to.
How much do the taxpayers of Western Sydney or Gold Coast pay to finance their AFL teams?
Do Victorian taxpayers pay a subsidy - let's call it a Sherrin tax - to finance their 10 clubs?
Of course not, so why should Tasmanians?
Any future Tasmanian AFL club should be financed not by Tasmanian taxpayers but by the AFL, like it does in Western Sydney and on the Gold Coast.
Tasmanian taxpayer money would surely be better spent on hospitals, schools, police officers and expensive office makeovers for every newly-elected politician.
OK maybe I'm getting flippant. Perhaps the hospitals could wait a bit longer.
The AFL have long used the line that the Hawthorn and North Melbourne deals could preempt a Tasmanian team in the competition.
This is both convenient and ... how can I put this delicately ... rubbish.
All the while one of Australia's richest sporting codes has an intravenous drip to an annual $8 million funding stream, it would be financially catastrophic to consider shutting it off in favour of an alternative that might just involve money flowing the other way.
But only once Tasmania severs the link might the AFL realise how much it needs its island state.
The AFL should welcome Tasmanian involvement, not consistently reject it.
Outside Victoria, Tasmania would have to be Australia's most loyal footy state. And yet rugby league hotbeds like Queensland and NSW are better catered for simply because they tick the population box.
This most inflated of political footballs was given a fresh pump up by the long-awaited publication of a Tasmanian taskforce's report which suggested that the government should "reconsider or at least revalue" the AFL club deals, which are both up for renegotiation in 2021.
Debating the chestnut in The Examiner last week, Launceston Chamber of Commerce chief executive Neil Grose posed several questions, the most pertinent of which was: "Do the AFL want us in the league?"
About 125 years of history would suggest a resounding answer to that one.
In addition to observations about the viability of the Hawks and Kangaroos deals, the report made several key recommendations.
Delighted to report that Shaw Things ($29.95, Forty South) is now available at 56 outlets around Tasmania and selling well.— Rob Shaw (@TheShawThing) January 24, 2020
Thanks for all the support.
Can also post copies if required.
Check out the Facebook page for more info:https://t.co/IZ31h1HEbopic.twitter.com/pqSO8yBkRW
It makes perfect sense to base the team in the state capital but increase the capacity of UTAS Stadium to accommodate higher-drawing teams due to the venue's more central location plus the limitations on a similar expansion at Bellerive Oval.
However, the suggestion of a possible third major venue costing $300 million at Macquarie Point appears somewhat ludicrous. In the words of Luke McGregor's character in Utopia when asked what he would say to someone considering building an entirely new sport stadium in Tasmania: "Don't".
Last week, representatives of Tasmania's Liberal Government met with AFL hierarchy, presumably to explain where Tasmania is but, while there, to discuss the report's findings.
Minister Sarah Courtney described the dialogue as "productive" and "continuing", adding: "We're very hopeful on the back of those conversations that we'll be able to find a pathway towards our own AFL team."
Wary of being caught dwelling on the ball, Labor hit back with a swift counter-attack. Led by Rebecca White in a fetching Tassie-guernsey-over-blouse combo, the engine room was provided by O'Byrne siblings Michelle and David - respectively the Gary and Nathan Ablett of the party's midfield.
Labor's gameplan was to stick with Hawthorn but use North Melbourne's Hobart games as leverage to secure a Tasmanian AFL team.
Among the many comments beneath the story on The Examiner's Facebook page was one which correctly pointed out that having just Hawthorn playing in Launceston was the exact Tasmanian AFL landscape which existed before the Lara Giddings-led Labor Government - featuring all three aforementioned members - controversially brought North Melbourne to Hobart financed by tax-payers via the government business enterprise TT-Line.
Politicians seem to think voters' memories are as short as a St Kilda premiership window.
Further comments worthy of sharing on the post included an emoji of moaning muppets Statler and Waldorf with heads in hands, the suggestion that "Christmas Island would be a better fit for North Melbourne" and the cutting political analysis: "I'm so glad I slave away at work for my taxes to go towards paying for blow ins to kick a ball around."
Generally on this subject, the voice of reason tends to be Tourism Industry Council Tasmania chief executive Luke Martin.
He felt the Hawthorn deal was "critically important" for the Northern economy and needed to be "locked in indefinitely", adding: "I think any suggestion that we remove the Hawks from Launceston would be frankly economically stupid and politically nuts."
Rarely one to sit on the fence our Luke.
Economically speaking, Martin is probably on the money.
But maybe it would take cutting off the AFL's most convenient revenue stream for it to finally acknowledge its most dependable supporter base.
Subscriptions are available here.
Sign up to our Sport email here.