NRL Expansion. Ideas and opinions.

[Stallion]

To be fair Auckland, Perth, South Queensland, and Illawarra were all f**ked, they were all basically flat broke and without massive investment (that honestly the NRL couldn't afford at the time and News wasn't willing to part with) they all would have folded anyway.

NZ got lucky cause after Auckland folded Eric Watson came in with bags of money and successfully negotiated with the NRL to start a new club in NZ, but with the exception of South Queensland (though there are other reasons why they were screwed) the chances of that happening for any of the other clubs, let alone of all of them, is slim to none.

So yeah realistically the NRL got very, very lucky with the Warriors, and Perth, South Queensland, and Illawarra were done and dusted...

More to the fiasco than that! South Qld were ostracized by the Broncos News Ltd connections. If News ltd were genuinely proactive and well meaning they would have backed the clubs you speak of with an assurity that they enjoy a strong media coverage relationship onto the distant future. The potential was there however the decision makers were not making/intending to create/make decisions for the advancement/growth of the code and longterm business growth.

 

[The Great Dane]

An incorrect "peace" agreement targeting 14 clubs was the major failing. Had the league held strong at 20 teams the rugby league landscape today would have been so much better. The code fights on!

Oh great you're back.....

Realistically 12-16 clubs was necessary, money constraints and broadcaster demands made that necessary, the real issues were that they didn't have a long term plan for where they wanted the comp to be in the future and because of that got rid of the wrong clubs, they had no plan to funnel the cut clubs into other competitions where possible, and allowed interest groups to bully them into decisions that weren't in the competitions or the sports best interest.

People aren't going to like me saying this, but realistically apart from the clubs that folded due to financial reasons all the clubs that were cut should have come from Sydney and in hindsight we shouldn't have bothered with the mergers!
Maybe a few could have been saved through relocation, so e.g. the Steelers fall over but Saints relocate to Wollongong or whatever, but those cases would have been few and far between...

 

[Stallion]

Oh great you're back.....

Realistically 12-16 clubs was necessary, money constraints and broadcaster demands made that necessary, the real issues were that they didn't have a long term plan for where they wanted the comp to be in the future and because of that got rid of the wrong clubs, they had no plan to funnel the cut clubs into other competitions where possible, and allowed interest groups to bully them into decisions that weren't in the competitions or the sports best interest.

People aren't going to like me saying this, but realistically apart from the clubs that folded due to financial reasons all the clubs that were cut should have come from Sydney and in hindsight we shouldn't have bothered with the mergers!
Maybe a few could have been saved through relocation, so e.g. the Steelers fall over but Saints relocate to Wollongong or whatever, but those cases would have been few and far between...

Yes I'm back. And what you have just suggested (culling established and universally recognised clubs) would have been absolute disaster! Don't think you appreciate the recognition and respect factor associated with the Sydney rugby league clubs? It's massive and generationally important. Your assumption that the multi billion dollar News ltd company could not finance assist 20 teams is not right. Decision makers within that media organisation were not there to see rugby league growth and prosperity.

 

[The Great Dane]

More to the fiasco than that! South Qld were ostracized by the Broncos News Ltd connections.

I alluded to that.

If News ltd were genuinely proactive and well meaning they would have backed the clubs you speak of with an assurity that they enjoy a strong media coverage relationship onto the distant future. The potential was there however the decision makers were not making/intending to create/make decisions for the advancement/growth of the code and longterm business growth.

News are a business, they weren't going to sink huge amounts of money into those clubs unless they thought they could make money from it, and realistically they never would have made their money back from that sort of investment, let alone a profit.

Besides do you really want News to be in a position of owning half the comp and controlling that much power over the sport, I know I wouldn't if I could avoid it, and I mean a big part of the reason that the "war" (BTW I detest calling it a war) was fought in the first place.

 

[The Great Dane]

Yes I'm back. And what you have just suggested (culling establishment and universally recognised clubs would have been absolute disaster! Don't think you appreciate the recognition and respect factor associated with the Sydney rugby league clubs? It's massive and generationally important.

Yeah, yeah we've heard it all before.

Honestly I can't be bothered explaining to you why you are full of shit again, cause I know you won't even read it let alone understand it.

Your assumption that the multi billion dollar News ltd company could not finance assist 20 teams is not right. Decision makers within that media organisation were not there to see rugby league growth and prosperity.

I never said they couldn't finance it, I said they wouldn't...

 

[Stallion]

I alluded to that.



News are a business, they weren't going to sink huge amounts of money into those clubs unless they thought they could make money from it, and realistically they never would have made their money back from that sort of investment, let alone a profit.

Besides do you really want News to be in a position of owning half the comp and controlling that much power over the sport, I know I wouldn't if I could avoid it, and I mean a big part of the reason that the "war" (BTW I detest calling it a war) was fought in the first place.

If it meant genuine growth of the code and its non implosion I would be ok with it. I certainly would not ask for the destruction of its core foundations which is the Sydney based clubs that are much loved and reveared throughout Australia.

 

[Stallion]

Yeah, yeah we've heard it all before.

Honestly I can't be bothered explaining to you why you are full of shit again, cause I know you won't even read it let alone understand it.



I never said they couldn't finance it, I said they wouldn't...

Yes. "wouldn't " being the key word! Their intentions were reckless and not genuinely proactive for the code. I suggest that they would rather take the financial hit to see rugby league constrained and split rather than see it grow in so many other ways.

 

[The Great Dane]

If it meant genuine growth of the code and its non implosion I would be ok with it. I certainly would not ask for the destruction of its core foundations which is the Sydney based clubs that are much loved and reveared throughout Australia.

Actually if the original plan for SL is anything to go by News getting that sort of control would have resulted in the formation of 4 "super clubs" in Sydney with the with current Sydney clubs all owning a stake in one of them, then the current Sydney clubs would have been dropped down to a lower tier NSW competition (which in theory would have been televised as well), and been left to act as feeder clubs for their "super club".

So yeah you probably would have thought that it resulted in the "destruction of its core foundations which is the Sydney based clubs" anyway.

 

[The Great Dane]

Yes. "wouldn't " being the key word! Their intentions were reckless not genuinely proactive for the code. I suggest that they would rather take the financial hit to see rugby league constrained and split rather than see it grow in so many other ways.

Their intentions were clear as day, they thought they could make bank from the sport (which they could have if they got what they originally wanted).

No conspiracy theories necessary.

 

[Stallion]

Actually if the original plan for SL is anything to go by News getting that sort of control would have resulted in the formation of 4 "super clubs" in Sydney with the with current Sydney clubs all owning a stake in one of them, then the current Sydney clubs would have been dropped down to a lower tier NSW competition (which in theory would have been televised as well), and been left to act as feeder clubs for their "super club".

So yeah you probably would have thought that it resulted in the "destruction of its core foundations which is the Sydney based clubs" anyway.

Yes. Implosion is not a bearer for expansion. The game would have collapsed like a deck of cards! So maintaining of the core strength of the competition(universally popular and recognisable Sydney clubs) with additional expansion clubs would have been the best way to go.

 

[Stallion]

Their intentions were clear as day, they thought they could make bank from the sport (which they could have if they got what they originally wanted).

No conspiracy theories necessary.

By dismantling the core of the Sydney based competition would have meant the quick and sudden demise of the code!? So the intentions were spurious and reckless. Insincerity at its greatest level with the end aim of weakening a very popular code.

 

[Stallion]

Their intentions were clear as day, they thought they could make bank from the sport (which they could have if they got what they originally wanted).

No conspiracy theories necessary.

No conspiracy theory here. It's a reality theory!

 

[Peet]

LOL, somebody needs to read up on the history of the Rams!

They averaged 15,330 a game in 97, in 97 Balmain averaged 10,355 and Wests averaged 8,602, so no matter which half of the merger you supported back then the Rams were a bigger draw. Naturally their average attendance dropped in 98 down to 7,682, but basically every team at the times crowds dropped, especially the clubs like Adelaide who were tipped in the media to lose their license, add to that that their team was absolute dog shit as well and are you really surprised (BTW they still averaged more than the Magpies at 7,301, though Balmain where one of the few clubs to see a tiny increase to 10,576).

When they were wrapped up Adelaide had money in the bank and the foundations of a club that could have potentially grown into a strong club over time especially if they were nurtured.

So no they weren't a failure they were murdered!
First they were kneecapped by News who pulled their funding and reinvested it into Brisbane and Melbourne (as they did with all the SL clubs bar the Broncos and the Storm), then the killing blow was delivered by the NRL who decided to sacrifice them to save "loyal" clubs, despite the fact they had a better business plan and were in a better position then most of if not all of those loyal clubs, and cause there was no established fan-base to protest when it happen they were allowed to just slip away...

But if they came back in, where would they play? Adelaide Oval is far too big & Hindmarsh, a soccer ground, is too short.

 

[Perth Red]

But if they came back in, where would they play? Adelaide Oval is far too big & Hindmarsh, a soccer ground, is too short.

Would need to be part of the criteria for admission that SA Govt wou”d need to redevelop Hindmarsh to be more suitable. State govt’s are looking for the sports tourist $ and if they th8nk this will boost tourism numbers they’ll get behind it like WA Govt has done.

 

[The Great Dane]

But if they came back in, where would they play? Adelaide Oval is far too big & Hindmarsh, a soccer ground, is too short.

Honestly I don't know, probably better to ask people from Adelaide what would be best.

Would need to be part of the criteria for admission that SA Govt wou”d need to redevelop Hindmarsh to be more suitable. State govt’s are looking for the sports tourist $ and if they th8nk this will boost tourism numbers they’ll get behind it like WA Govt has done.

Hindmarsh is privately owned now, which in a just world it'd be wrong for taxpayers dollars to go to redeveloping a privately owned stadium...

 

[T-Boon]

I'd be ok with the regional teams getting consideration regarding costs of travel but not Brisbane and Melbourne. They can suffer.

 

[Travitoh]

But if they came back in, where would they play? Adelaide Oval is far too big & Hindmarsh, a soccer ground, is too short.

We would most likely get a new rectangular stadium. Adelaide United have been pushing for one for a few years now but their biggest problem has been that it would be left empty in the winter. Our own NRL club would fix that. Adelaide Oval only got redeveloped like it did because the two AFL clubs agreed to move from Football Park.

 

[Perth Red]

Yes I'm back. And what you have just suggested (culling established and universally recognised clubs) would have been absolute disaster! Don't think you appreciate the recognition and respect factor associated with the Sydney rugby league clubs? It's massive and generationally important. Your assumption that the multi billion dollar News ltd company could not finance assist 20 teams is not right. Decision makers within that media organisation were not there to see rugby league growth and prosperity.

And here we go again. When is school back?

 

[Perth Red]

Honestly I don't know, probably better to ask people from Adelaide what would be best.



Hindmarsh is privately owned now, which in a just world it'd be wrong for taxpayers dollars to go to redeveloping a privately owned stadium...

Nib stadium is owned by local government. WA Govt bought the license to operate it for 25 years so it could then spend $125mill developing it. No reason SA couldn’t be the same.

 

[Stallion]

And here we go again. When is school back?

Too much common sense for you? That's fine although dissappointing. I'm well aware of the ignorance within the website. Some are with it and cognisant of what's going on . And some are not. That's the way it is.