Another NRL backflip

[CowboyFuriousFury]

As long as it's not *your* team right? Why not Souths to Perth instead of the Roosters?? Seriously, give me 3 good, solid reasons based on fact as to why you would move the Rosters over Souths?

Roosters fans didn't show up after winning a premiership and there hard to find in general despite being a foundation club in rugby league 'heartland'. All that success and a non-existent fan-base only keep alive due to rich connections.

Last year, the Roosters had embarrassing crowds left and right in particular the Gold Coast game. The loss of the Roosters in NSW would be minimal compared to Souths which would leave a dent in NSWRL.

 

[Rodney]

No clubs are moving.

As long as the clubs are viable in the long term there's really no reason to move, and the prime candidates for relocation are pretty stable.
Cronulla and Manly represent the smallest populations in Sydney but they don't look like going under anytime soon.

If a club is afloat and has a sustainable fan base it would be actively detrimental to cut them of and air lift their team out.

Wests is in financial strife but it represents a massive area which is going to have a massive population boom in the next couple of decades.
The South West is going to grow by ~250k people in the next 2 decades and the NRL needs to really double down on the region.

There's still room within the current NRL structure for expansions,
I reckon we can get to 20 teams before we have to ask some serious questions about how the competition is formatted.
But while we can painlessly tack on 2 more teams why not?

 

[Perth Red]

Well this certainly makes things interesting. Maybe we will see more than two clubs introduced.

How many teams should we have in the comp?

We’ve got to expand. I’m not so concerned about the number of teams, it’s the number of fixtures. The bigger the expansion the better it is for the TV networks. I think Western Australia deserves a side, we need another team in South-East Queensland and New Zealand is crying out for another team. The opportunities there in the next media deal are huge. I think we can make some good decisions fairly quickly.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...211006949?nk=11dfb895eb6d8d04a297e315f37a2efa

 

[andrew057]

That's a great interview. Happy with everything he said.

 

[taipan]

Well this certainly makes things interesting. Maybe we will see more than two clubs introduced.

How many teams should we have in the comp?

We?ve got to expand. I?m not so concerned about the number of teams, it?s the number of fixtures. The bigger the expansion the better it is for the TV networks. I think Western Australia deserves a side, we need another team in South-East Queensland and New Zealand is crying out for another team. The opportunities there in the next media deal are huge. I think we can make some good decisions fairly quickly.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...211006949?nk=11dfb895eb6d8d04a297e315f37a2efa

It makes your previous whining about Perth/expansion not happening a little premature.
The NRL would not have countenanced continual NRL games in Perth IMO,if they had zero intention of considering that city in expansion plans.

First time in ages that red face journo Rothdick has given a decent interview ,and the responses by Richo were enlightening.
Give Rothdick another slab of beer in appreciation,should cover his breakfast.

 

[BuffaloRules]

Looks like our mate Perth Red is doing some back flips of his own...

There is no chance in my opinion that they will expand by more than 2 clubs in any one TV contract period though...

So if they wanted to bring in SEQ3, NZ2 and Perth than an existing team would be getting chopped...

 

[Flapper]

I think they'd ideally want 4 new teams, but they wouldn't want to make it 20 teams. They'd rely on relocation/folding to create two new spots, but if that doesn't happen they'll reluctantly go to 20.

 

[Perth Red]

Sounds like Richo has his eye on less rounds but more games per round to keep,the tv $'s flowing.

Until Dave Smith comes out and announces when we'll be kicking off I will continue my scepticsm, Too many false dawns in NRL expansion to think otherwise over the last ten years. Most positive comments for a long time though.

 

[bobmar28]

No clubs are moving.

As long as the clubs are viable in the long term there's really no reason to move, and the prime candidates for relocation are pretty stable.
Cronulla and Manly represent the smallest populations in Sydney but they don't look like going under anytime soon.

If a club is afloat and has a sustainable fan base it would be actively detrimental to cut them of and air lift their team out.

Wests is in financial strife but it represents a massive area which is going to have a massive population boom in the next couple of decades.
The South West is going to grow by ~250k people in the next 2 decades and the NRL needs to really double down on the region.

There's still room within the current NRL structure for expansions,
I reckon we can get to 20 teams before we have to ask some serious questions about how the competition is formatted.
But while we can painlessly tack on 2 more teams why not?

The southwest is having a massive population boom right now.

 

[Raiderdave]

One just needs to look at the 'heartland' clubs constantly asking to be bailed out all the time with handouts. The fact, after decades the 'heartland' clubs can't get there stuff together is disturbing they had more than enough time to get it together.

The self-interest and insular mindset kicks into the NRL once more with the delay of expanison. A true 'heartland' wouldn't have the financial/crowd problems the current clubs have. This is the NRL not the NSWRL.

heartland clubs can't get their stuff together

gee:sarcasm:
maybe if QLD clubs didn't start a war up & put the game back 20 years they'd be fine by now

it was Qlders who nearly ended our game
no one should pay attention to anything any of this lot say about RL

they have NFI

 

[Loose Cannon]

I'd be happy with 20 teams over 19 rounds, stand alone SOO weekends (which TV don't want, tell them bad luck if NRL are serious about being in control now), 4 weeks of semis and Auckland Nines as a nice entree. 26 weeks plus the nines carnival in total.

If they want more go to 22 rounds by dividing into five conferences for the opening three and season ending three weeks.

- Sydney East: Roosters, Eagles, Rabbits, Sharks.
- Sydney West: Eels, Bulldogs, Tigers, Panthers.
- Country: Knights, Dragons (Illawarra), Raiders, Bears (Gosford).
- Queensland: Broncos, Titans, Cowboys, Qld4
- Expansion: Warriors, Storm, Pirates, NZ2.

Have an internal conference championship within the main premiership where 5 divisional prizes are awarded based on results of intra-conference games. It is likely that although at the tail end of the season when clubs have no chance of progressing to the semis, because only 6 games would be relevant in this sub-competition, they may still qualify as division champions, thus creating an interest secondary to the main comp. Therein lies the importance of scheduling these games in the final weeks.

 

[not graham olling]

Sydney should have no more than 5 teams.

dont know what the optimum number is for Sydney but Brisbane certainly could another one and Perth would be fines as would another Kiwi team.

 

[Diesel]

It can still be a 20 team competition with 22-24 rounds and every team only plays once. Not every club has to play every round if they decide they want SoO over 5 weeks instead of 3. Currently during Origin period teams get byes.

The Super Rugby competition is suspended for the international window that just kills the momentum you have.

What the NRL could do is just say no club games on the weekend of Origin and during the Origin period of (say) 5 weeks, clubs play split-rounds of say 2 games and we have 4-5 games a week over this period where Origin players are able to rest and back up to play these 2 games.

 

[alien]

alien:
"there are plenty of places that should have an nrl team but don't because if they all did there would be too many teams, and that is because sydney has too many teams. 9 teams in sydney (or any city) is too many for a national comp. i don't want to see any of the current sydney clubs die, but relocation isn't death for a club because they still would keep their history/records, club colours, jersey, mascot.

i would like to see:
3 sydney clubs relocate - roosters to perth, sharks to adelaide, bulldogs to brisbane
a come back of the bears, but as a central coast club.
new clubs from wellington, christchurch, and port moresby

that would be a 20 team comp"

Sydney should have no more than 5 teams.

manly could eventually sod off to the sunshine coast or central qld (rocky)

 

[alien]

As long as it's not *your* team right? Why not Souths to Perth instead of the Roosters?? Seriously, give me 3 good, solid reasons based on fact as to why you would move the Rosters over Souths?

i'll give you 4

1. souths have more members
2. souths have a higher average home ground attendance
3. souths have a larger junior district
4. souths have 8 more premierships than roosters

 

[alien]

Wests is in financial strife

definitely not. it's their sponge of a wife named Balmange that's broke!