HAWTHORN president Jeff Kennett has weighed into the debate about the struggles of Victorian clubs, questioning whether the game's heartland is capable of sustaining 10 clubs over the next five years.

Kennett said he was among those who had long argued that 10 clubs was too many for the Victorian population to sustain, tying the financial health of Victorian clubs to its lack of premiership success.

And, in another response to the AFL's admission that the superiority of interstate clubs was not cyclical, Geelong chief executive Brian Cook suggested that "throwing money" at Victorian clubs won't redress the on-field imbalance that exists between them and their interstate rivals.

"We have been arguing for years that 10 clubs are too many for the Victorian population to support," Kennett said yesterday.

Kennett said "a lot of people" had argued that 10 clubs was was too many for one state. "It's a very obvious point. How can a population of 4-5 million support 10 clubs at the level of costs and professionalism that exists today?"

He said three or four clubs wouldn't survive without the AFL's additional financial support, explaining that "scarcity of product" was a major advantage for interstate clubs. This included "scarcity of seats" at their grounds, which created reserved-seat revenue, especially in Perth.

"I think the reality is I don't know how 10 clubs are going to gain the different sponsorships, and community support, over the next five years to keep them all viable. Now I might be entirely wrong. When you consider we have a competition of 16 clubs — two in the west, two in Adelaide, one in Sydney, one in Queensland, and the balance 10 in one state — then quite clearly there's an issue of supply and demand."

Kennett said the interstate teams' money was translating into finals success. "They have huge amounts of money, which they spend in providing the players with all the best coaching advice, medical advice support you can possibly imagine."

He said while there were four Victorian clubs in the eight today, "the real crunch is … particularly in finals, whether the Victorian clubs have the wherewithal to support their players etcetera in the same way that Sydney or a West Coast or a Fremantle, certainly Adelaide, Brisbane, and I suspect the answer to that is no.

"The clubs that are not strong, unfortunately, are probably going to get weaker without some special support. Now that's a very difficult issue, because how do you provide that support — I mean, Hawthorn were almost, they almost lost their identity, in 1996, with the merger. Victorian clubs cannot expect to survive long-term if they don't think differently to what they did in the past."

Kennett said Hawthorn had established a second base in Tasmania, not simply for money, but to give it "a point of difference" and advantage over other Victorian clubs. "If you can't see that you have a viable financial football future in 15-20 years, then you've got to argue why do you want to die by a thousand cuts? That's why Hawthorn has made some very decisive decisions, not popular with everyone."

Cook said throwing money at Victorian clubs wasn't necessarily the solution to the on-field gap. He said clubs had to innovate to be successful and survive.

"You've got to really be careful about the assumption that throwing dollars at problems is going to solve the problem," Cook said.

"It's not that simple. The resources and extra resources is not simply about throwing money at problems, because there is people involved, and you need to identify and develop good people, ensure you have the best processes in place."