New Nrl- where would the teams be

[alien]

1. Sydney City (Covering Easts/Souths)
2. Western Sydney
3. North Sydney/Northern Beaches
4. Cronulla/St George
5. Wollongong
6. Newcastle/Central Coast
7. Canberra
8. Melbourne
9. Perth
10. Adelaide
11. Brisbane
12. Central QLD
13. North QLD
14. NZ South Island
15. NZ North Island
16. Gold Coast
17. Melbourne/Geelong team (for the rivalry)
18. Hobart or Darwin

no way would they have 3 eastern sydney teams and only 1 western sydney team

 

[Misanthrope]

Whoops. Didn't notice that.

Replace Gold Coast with a second Western Sydney team.

Graveyard for sports anyway.

 

[TheFrog]

Adelaide cannot support an NRL team. Not enough supporters of the game. Hobart and Darwin cannot even support an AFL team, what hope would the NRL have? And finally, Wollongong failed before, why would it succeed now?

It seems to say the least odd to suggest Hobart, Adelaide and Darwin (and a second Melbourne team for goodness sake) but not a second Brisbane team.

 

[BuffaloRules]

if a couple of clubs relocate from syd, i think it would be clubs who aren't that strong financially

All clubs will be strong financially under the new TV deal.

 

[Pommy]

if a couple of clubs relocate from syd, i think it would be clubs who aren't that strong financially

f**k my life, two weeks ago you said Bulldogs should go and that you woudnt move teams just because they weren't financially successful.

Originally posted by Alien

i can understand that point of view too. i just think there should be certain areas in sydney that should be have it's own nrl club. for example, if all the western sydney clubs were poor and all the eastern sydney clubs were rich, and some sydney teams had to relocate so there could be expansion, i wouldn't move all the western sydney clubs just because they weren't as rich or successful, because there are areas in western sydney that should have it's own nrl club

 

[BuffaloRules]

f**k my life, two weeks ago you said Bulldogs should go and that you woudnt move teams just because they weren't financially successful.

He is all over the shop mate...

I think it happens because his doctor varies his meds and it wrecks his short term memory...

 

[alien]

f**k my life, two weeks ago you said Bulldogs should go and that you woudnt move teams just because they weren't financially successful.

there's a difference between what i would do and what i think the nrl would do

 

[Misanthrope]

Adelaide cannot support an NRL team. Not enough supporters of the game. Hobart and Darwin cannot even support an AFL team, what hope would the NRL have? And finally, Wollongong failed before, why would it succeed now?

It seems to say the least odd to suggest Hobart, Adelaide and Darwin (and a second Melbourne team for goodness sake) but not a second Brisbane team.

If the NRL never existed and was starting today as is posited in the original post, I'm just looking at what would be the best model as far as creating a national profile.

You could easily sub out Wollongong (merging them with Cronulla) and introduce a second Brisbane team to go alongside North and Central.

As for Hobart, they've shown they can get behind a T20 team, so there's definitely room for other sports there if marketed correctly. Darwin is a fast growing city, so getting on on the ground floor would be better than arriving late to the party.

Adelaide is a tough one. It's an AFL stronghold, but so is/was Melbourne, and it's taken time to carve out a following there. Adelaide is a smaller city, so you could easily replace the team proposed yhere with one in PNG or the Pacific. Hell, a third NZ team in Wellington (to go alongside Auckland and Christchurch) would work in place of that.

 

[juro]

1. East Sydney
2. North Sydney
3. NW Sydney
4. SW Sydney
5. South Sydney
6. Newcastle
7. Canberra
8. Wollongong
9. East Brisbane
10. West Brisbane
11. North Brisbane
12. Gold Coast
13. South NZ
14. North NZ
15. North Qld
16. Central Qld
17. Perth
18. Adelaide
19. Melbourne
20. Melbourne 2

 

[BuffaloRules]

1. East Sydney
2. North Sydney
3. NW Sydney
4. SW Sydney
5. South Sydney
6. Newcastle
7. Canberra
8. Wollongong
9. East Brisbane
10. West Brisbane
11. North Brisbane
12. Gold Coast
13. South NZ
14. North NZ
15. North Qld
16. Central Qld
17. Perth
18. Adelaide
19. Melbourne
20. Melbourne 2

I like it but to make the new franchises even more anonymous get rid of the geographical reference to North, West etc, and just have the teams referred to by number - eg Sydney 1, Sydney 2 etc...

Imagine the excitement when Sydney 4 plays Brisbane 2 in the final...

 

[Misanthrope]

I'm an ardent Sydney 3 supporter. f**k you!

 

[alien]

16 teams:

north queensland
brisbane 1
brisbane 2
gold coast
newcastle
central coast/manly warringah/north sydney
central sydney
cronulla sutherland/illawarra/south coast
parramatta
penrith
liverpool/macarthur
canberra
melbourne
adelaide
perth
new zealand warriors (home games in auckland/wellington/christchurch)

 

[parrawentyfan]

1. Adelaide
2. Perth
3. Melbourne 1 (city based)
4. Victoria (representative of wider Melb and regions but still based in the city)
5. Canberra
6. Brisbane Northside
7. Brisbane Southside
8. North Sydney (based at Chatswood)
9. East Sydney (based at SFS)
10. Parramatta (based at Parramatta)
11. Western Sydney (based at Liverpool)
12. Illawarra
13. Newcastle
14. Central Coast
15. North Qld (Townsville)
16. Far North Qld (Cairns)
17. Gold Coast
18. Tasmania (no other winter team to get behind) would need a whole new strategy to make it work.

NZ to have its own comp but still a joint organisation with the NRL

 

[TheFrog]

1. Adelaide
2. Perth
3. Melbourne 1 (city based)
4. Victoria (representative of wider Melb and regions but still based in the city)
5. Canberra
6. Brisbane Northside
7. Brisbane Southside
8. North Sydney (based at Chatswood)
9. East Sydney (based at SFS)
10. Parramatta (based at Parramatta)
11. Western Sydney (based at Liverpool)
12. Illawarra
13. Newcastle
14. Central Coast
15. North Qld (Townsville)
16. Far North Qld (Cairns)
17. Gold Coast
18. Tasmania (no other winter team to get behind) would need a whole new strategy to make it work.

NZ to have its own comp but still a joint organisation with the NRL

Adelaide and TASMANIA can support an NRL franchise (and Melbourne/Victoria two) but Penrith/Canterbury-Bankstown/St George cannot.

Yeah right.

 

[Pommy]

Adelaide and TASMANIA can support an NRL franchise (and Melbourne/Victoria two) but Penrith/Canterbury-Bankstown/St George cannot.

Yeah right.

I was more surprised at Cairns getting a team. No way the Warriors would get ditched I'm sure having both nations in the sports is a big advantage when sponsors are looking to get involved. Removing NZ looses about 1/6th of your potential audience reach.

 

[parrawentyfan]

Ha. A bit of controversy. Let me explain. There is no way in hell i would present that idea but it is an 'ideal world' type of view i guess setting aside history around sydney teams.

In terms of a few things:
- Cairns and Townsville have similar populations and are far enough apart to have minimal impact on each other. Cairns has a lot of potential to be a gateway to Asia, plus will play an important role in the Government's Northern Australia strategy. Rivalries are the big thing in Australian sport lately (look at BBL or A-League).

- I don't think there is any question that Adelaide could support a team with proper support and development opportunities.

- Tasmania is a really out there option. But both Hobart and Launceston have been desparate for a national team for ages. You would need to lay 10-20 years worth of groundwork at least though getting RL's profile up.

- Sydney. I think RL really stuffed up the mergers. I've seen other posts that listed 3 Syd teams and i listed 4 so that's reasonably fair. I do think those regions can sustain a team but in the scheme of a national comp they don't add much. Sydney teams are poorly located and don't utilise business districts and transport hubs. Why have a team at Cronulla or Kogarah when there are city wide transport links a few kms away at Hurstville or Bankstown. Same deal with Manly and Chatswood. That said, I think while the current teams are poorly located, all are sustainable.

- NZ is an absolute asset. I would like to build on it by building having a professional league under the NRL banner rather than just one pro team. That comes back to conferences but that's for another day.

 

[alien]

16 teams:

north queensland
brisbane 1
brisbane 2
gold coast
newcastle
central coast/manly warringah/north sydney
central sydney
cronulla sutherland/illawarra/south coast
parramatta
penrith
liverpool/macarthur
canberra
melbourne
adelaide
perth
new zealand warriors (home games in auckland/wellington/christchurch)

this would only be if the nrl started from scratch, and it's probably a good thing they don't do that, because too much history and tradition would be poured down the drain. the only way to accomplish it without starting from scratch would be to relocate clubs from sydney and merge a couple who probably have every right and ability to stand alone in sydney, so i don't think it would ever happen now. for example: roosters would have to relocate to perth, bulldogs would have to relocate to adelaide, st george illawarra would have to merge with cronulla, bears would come back into the comp as the second brisbane club. actually i think new zealand should have 3 clubs because so many juniors are coming from there. so 18 teams, but keeping the top 8 finals:

north queensland - north queensland cowboys
brisbane 1 - brisbane broncos
brisbane 2 - south queensland bears
gold coast - gold coast titans
newcastle - newcastle knights
central coast/manly warringah/north sydney - "northern eagles" or "manly-central coast eagles"
central sydney - south sydney rabbitohs
cronulla sutherland/illawarra/south coast - st george illawarra sharks
parramatta - parramatta eels
penrith - penrith panthers
liverpool/macarthur - wests
canberra - canberra raiders
melbourne - melbourne storm
adelaide - adelaide bulldogs
perth - perth roosters
auckland - auckland warriors
wellington - wellington ???
christchurch - christchurch ???

 

[Perth Red]

Qland 5
Broncos
Ipswich Jets
GC Titans
NQ Cowboys
CQ Roosters

NSW 7
Newcastle Knights
Northern sea eagles (manly and CC)
South Sydney
Canterbury Bulldogs
Western Sydney Eels
Canterbury Bulldogs
Southern Dragons

NZ 2
Northern Warriors
Southern Orcas

National 4
Melbourne Storm
Adelaide Panthers
West Coast Tigers
Canberra Raiders

18 team comp

 

[alien]

Qland 5
Broncos
Ipswich Jets
GC Titans
NQ Cowboys
CQ Roosters

NSW 7
Newcastle Knights
Northern sea eagles (manly and CC)
South Sydney
Canterbury Bulldogs
Western Sydney Eels
Canterbury Bulldogs
Southern Dragons

NZ 2
Northern Warriors
Southern Orcas

National 4
Melbourne Storm
Adelaide Panthers
West Coast Tigers
Canberra Raiders

18 team comp

you have counted the bulldogs twice. is one of them meant to be cronulla?

if balmain are no longer a part of the joint venture, and wests take over, i don't think they'd relocate, and if they did i doubt they would keep the tiger

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

Would you relocate with them?