Just thinking about the independent commission, and where expansion sits in the games future.
I always felt the worst thing about the super league debacle was it derailed league at such a high point and at a time when we were equal if not ahead of the afl and had made such a postive move to expand to NQ, NZ, Perth and a second brisbane team. Only 2 of those sides still exists.
So where and when should we expand to, or should we go the other way, or a combo of both.
Existing sides:
1. Melbourne must be retained and the league needs to support it. If the NRL does not have a presence in the countries 2nd largest city we may as well pack up and go home. It took afl 20 years to get a decent foothold and neither of the swans of lions have gained the complete hearts and minds of their cities, but have built a strong fan base and helped junior development to a point where a lot more kids now play in qld and nsw. The storm over time will do the same for us, just as the river starts as a trickle. The afl experience tells us we must persist.
2. The 9 sydney teams. Well I am against culling teams, it causes more problems than it solves. I am in favour of continuing to offer incentives for teams to merge or relocate. I think the tigers and dragons have worked to a large degree. If they are all viable, there is no problem with the sydney teams.
3. Knights, Raiders both stay as a presence in some very large regional cnetres.
4. NZ, NQ, Brisbane and GC, its easy they all need to stay.
So really I don't see a great need to cull teams, but present options that allows a possible reduction in sydney teams but only if in big trouble.
Expansion.
I'll do this in order.
1. Perth, for mine the great loss of SL war. Perth has a large british and south african base and already have a solid junior system for a non league state. This is the place, we should go there and support it big time.
2. 2nd Brisbane team. I think the 2nd great loss was the crushers. They were a breath of fresh air for the many people who did not like the broncos. People were very excited. But SL started and they were painted as NSW puppets. It seems strange that in a rugby league mad state we will soon have as many afl sides in s/e qld as league sides. Nearly 3 million people in that corner and only 2 teams, surely having a game every week at suncorp would be great. Surely bring more income to the game.
3. Adelaide, look we just need to look at a more national presence. We need to go into areas that have a prospect of growth of gaining new fans, new juniors. Adelaide is a must long term.
4. A 2nd NZ side, either wellington or a south island side. The south island side probably has more prospect for creating new fans and players, as the south island is still extremely union orientated compared to the north.
5. CC Bears. Nostalgia mean I like the idea, an existing stadium and brand is good. But to expand would mean to grow the game, I am sorry to CC fans but I don't see much chance for great growth in that area in terms of extra juniors and/or fans for the game. I am happy to have the CC bears but not before the above 4 options.
6. Central qld, look for mine no way. It would be based out of mackay and rocky and would eat into the NQ fan base. Its just not a big enough area and is already a league strong hold. I particularly think the Mackay end could eat into the cowboys market, a market which is not that big to start with. Could you really build 2 20000 - 25000 stadiums in those cities for 6 games each a year. Or would you just put it in one city that is not big enough to deal with that sort of team. I just don't think it would work, but prove me wrong CQ.
Any sort of timeline, well before the new TV deal for 2 new teams, so thats by 2012 would be the plan. Then settle on that for at least 3 years before looking at anyone else.
But I do know we can't compete as a national sport unless we grow and part of growth is expansion. But we must expand to the area that makes the most sense, not who gets the most media coverage.
I always felt the worst thing about the super league debacle was it derailed league at such a high point and at a time when we were equal if not ahead of the afl and had made such a postive move to expand to NQ, NZ, Perth and a second brisbane team. Only 2 of those sides still exists.
So where and when should we expand to, or should we go the other way, or a combo of both.
Existing sides:
1. Melbourne must be retained and the league needs to support it. If the NRL does not have a presence in the countries 2nd largest city we may as well pack up and go home. It took afl 20 years to get a decent foothold and neither of the swans of lions have gained the complete hearts and minds of their cities, but have built a strong fan base and helped junior development to a point where a lot more kids now play in qld and nsw. The storm over time will do the same for us, just as the river starts as a trickle. The afl experience tells us we must persist.
2. The 9 sydney teams. Well I am against culling teams, it causes more problems than it solves. I am in favour of continuing to offer incentives for teams to merge or relocate. I think the tigers and dragons have worked to a large degree. If they are all viable, there is no problem with the sydney teams.
3. Knights, Raiders both stay as a presence in some very large regional cnetres.
4. NZ, NQ, Brisbane and GC, its easy they all need to stay.
So really I don't see a great need to cull teams, but present options that allows a possible reduction in sydney teams but only if in big trouble.
Expansion.
I'll do this in order.
1. Perth, for mine the great loss of SL war. Perth has a large british and south african base and already have a solid junior system for a non league state. This is the place, we should go there and support it big time.
2. 2nd Brisbane team. I think the 2nd great loss was the crushers. They were a breath of fresh air for the many people who did not like the broncos. People were very excited. But SL started and they were painted as NSW puppets. It seems strange that in a rugby league mad state we will soon have as many afl sides in s/e qld as league sides. Nearly 3 million people in that corner and only 2 teams, surely having a game every week at suncorp would be great. Surely bring more income to the game.
3. Adelaide, look we just need to look at a more national presence. We need to go into areas that have a prospect of growth of gaining new fans, new juniors. Adelaide is a must long term.
4. A 2nd NZ side, either wellington or a south island side. The south island side probably has more prospect for creating new fans and players, as the south island is still extremely union orientated compared to the north.
5. CC Bears. Nostalgia mean I like the idea, an existing stadium and brand is good. But to expand would mean to grow the game, I am sorry to CC fans but I don't see much chance for great growth in that area in terms of extra juniors and/or fans for the game. I am happy to have the CC bears but not before the above 4 options.
6. Central qld, look for mine no way. It would be based out of mackay and rocky and would eat into the NQ fan base. Its just not a big enough area and is already a league strong hold. I particularly think the Mackay end could eat into the cowboys market, a market which is not that big to start with. Could you really build 2 20000 - 25000 stadiums in those cities for 6 games each a year. Or would you just put it in one city that is not big enough to deal with that sort of team. I just don't think it would work, but prove me wrong CQ.
Any sort of timeline, well before the new TV deal for 2 new teams, so thats by 2012 would be the plan. Then settle on that for at least 3 years before looking at anyone else.
But I do know we can't compete as a national sport unless we grow and part of growth is expansion. But we must expand to the area that makes the most sense, not who gets the most media coverage.
