NRL Expansion Priorities

[Albert Rosenfeld]

Need to move to 18 and then 20 NRL clubs ASAP. The four clubs below are urgently needed.


1. Perth
2. Brisbane II
3. Wellington
4. PNG


After that the national profile of the NRL will be completed with the licensing of Adelaide.
The international profile will be competed with the licensing of Christchurch.
Then two more Queensland teams would give the NRL more Queensland representation and balance.
With 24 clubs the expansion of the NRL should be complete. However it should then be more appropriately renamed the South Pacific Rugby League (SPRL).


5. Adelaide
6, Christchurch
7. Central Queensland
8. South Queensland IV OR Far North Queensland (Cairns)


There is really no justification for a Central Coast team. First it would overlap with Newcastle and Manly. Second there are already too many NSW teams for a competition which has national and international aspirations. An Illawarra-South Coast team (with St George back as a stand alone club) makes more sense than a Central Coast team.

 

[ash the bash]

As much as I would love to see the Bears back I just can't see that happening in the short run. The struggles the Mariners are having to an extent would also make the NRL nervous about basing a team on the coast. The only way for it to be a success would have to involve north Sydney which is what the bid is doing. IMO the Nrl will look for bigger fish, WCP and Brisbane 2 would have to be next two cabs off the rank. In regards to Brisbane 2 I really hope the Brothers bid can get there act together, playing 8-9 games at Suncorp and the other home games in places like Cairns, Mackay even NT where Brothers clubs are based. I would prefer a team from CQ than the Bombers who sound as if they are being run by a "Searle" take 2

 

[Gas Panic!]

I can't believe the number of people who justify rapid expansion on the basis of the fact it's called the 'National Rugby League' therefore we need representation from every major centre nationally. Doesn't work like that.

Using that logic, if we took the above idea of naming it the South Pacific Rugby League, we'd have to expand to 48 teams simply so that we could 'truly' represent the region we claim to be.

 

[Gas Panic!]

Furthermore, the existing clubs are struggling to stay afloat as it is.

 

[Albert Rosenfeld]

Furthermore, the existing clubs are struggling to stay afloat as it is.

The emphasis on building club memberships is the way in which clubs will soon be able to stay afloat without the infusion of extra TV money. At that point expansion (with an increased value TV contract), can go ahead.

 

[Captain Apollo]

The emphasis on building club memberships is the way in which clubs will soon be able to stay afloat without the infusion of extra TV money. At that point expansion (with an increased value TV contract), can go ahead.

Really, and where is the "increased value TV contract" going to come from? Of our 3 free to air TV networks, two of them are treading water at best and are not in great financial health (namely Nine and Ten). The Seven network would not be able to service the NRL with showing all AFL games already.

As to PNG, they are decades away from joining the NRL. Principal reason is infrastructure, or lack thereof. Port Moresby does not have the best ammenities as it is now for accomodation, let alone a decent stadium. I don't doubt peoiple would turn up tpo watch games as I know how fanatically they follow rugby league there, but it takes more than just people in this day and age.

Any expansion needs to be slow and considered. You want new sides to be competitive from day 1, not just making up the numbers ala GWS in the AFL. All rapid increases in clubs will do is drain talent from exisiting clubs and spread the talent more thinly across the league. Lopsided games will not see an increase in TV valuation.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Lol at suggesting the NRL will go for NZ2 or PNG before they lock up Adelaide

 

[docbrown]

Regarding the Central Coast people need to understand the area already has a population bigger than what Newcastle, Canberra & Illawarra had when the Knights, Raiders and Steelers were admitted. Imagine if people were complaining about expansion to those areas because there were too many NSW teams.

In 25 years time we're likely looking at a population around 550,000 on the Central Coast that will be unrepresented. The Knights (my side) will have 1,000,000 in the Hunter (plus 600,000 up to the border to worry about and Manly will be focused on the North Sydney. Setting the Bears upon on the Coast, bringing nationwide Bears fans out of the woodwork and giving the Sea Eagles their former North Sydney terrirory is the best solution.

Lol at suggesting the NRL will go for NZ2 or PNG before they lock up Adelaide

PNG is a long way off but if Melbourne's still got issue and Perth wouldn't even be less than 10 years old, Adelaide is marginal at best. Unlike Perth & Melbourne it's a city with little growth. We could have a small club in Adelaide but it would likely generate less revenue and less interest than a strong Central Coast Bears or New Zealand 2 club for quite some time.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Regarding the Central Coast people need to understand the area already has a population bigger than what Newcastle, Canberra & Illawarra had when the Knights, Raiders and Steelers were admitted. Imagine if people were complaining about expansion to those areas because there were too many NSW teams.

In 25 years time we're likely looking at a population around 550,000 on the Central Coast that will be unrepresented. The Knights (my side) will have 1,000,000 in the Hunter (plus 600,000 up to the border to worry about and Manly will be focused on the North Sydney. Setting the Bears upon on the Coast, bringing nationwide Bears fans out of the woodwork and giving the Sea Eagles their former North Sydney terrirory is the best solution.



PNG is a long way off but if Melbourne's still got issue and Perth wouldn't even be less than 10 years old, Adelaide is marginal at best. Unlike Perth & Melbourne it's a city with little growth. We could have a small club in Adelaide but it would likely generate less revenue and less interest than a strong Central Coast Bears or New Zealand 2 club for quite some time.

Growth means nothing when you're comparing a state capital of a million plus people to regional cities/towns less than one-third that size.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Regarding the Central Coast people need to understand the area already has a population bigger than what Newcastle, Canberra & Illawarra had when the Knights, Raiders and Steelers were admitted. Imagine if people were complaining about expansion to those areas because there were too many NSW teams.

In 25 years time we're likely looking at a population around 550,000 on the Central Coast that will be unrepresented. The Knights (my side) will have 1,000,000 in the Hunter (plus 600,000 up to the border to worry about and Manly will be focused on the North Sydney. Setting the Bears upon on the Coast, bringing nationwide Bears fans out of the woodwork and giving the Sea Eagles their former North Sydney terrirory is the best solution.



PNG is a long way off but if Melbourne's still got issue and Perth wouldn't even be less than 10 years old, Adelaide is marginal at best. Unlike Perth & Melbourne it's a city with little growth. We could have a small club in Adelaide but it would likely generate less revenue and less interest than a strong Central Coast Bears or New Zealand 2 club for quite some time.

Its not to say that the Central Coast shouldnt have a team, just that they are behind a lot of other areas for need of a team.
You say that there will be half a million people, but if a CC team came in at the expense of Perth/Brisbane/Wellington, then there is another million unrepresented.

The difference is that the Central Coast is so close to so many teams that they are hardly unrepresented. Im not saying this makes up for a team, but you cant compare it to Perth, Brisbane, Canberra or Townsville, because these places would be both without a team and without options to travel to.

The difference with the Bears and the 3 clubs you mentioned is that Canberra, Ilawarra and Newcastle were all introduced during the NSWRL days. If you wanted to compare these situations, its like if Nowra got a team instead of Newcastle.

The overall point is that there is nothing to say the Central Coast shouldnt have a team, but once all the other locations ahead of them are filled, is there still the demand to justify a CC team.

 

[Perth Red]

Not that there needs to be any more justification for a Perth team as top priority but:

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...ralias-best-city/story-fnhocxo3-1226783153597

CC makes no sense, why would you have three teams within 90mins of each other? Part of current clubs strife is due to over saturation.

Perth, brisbane2 2017 then Wellington and Adelaide 2023 ish should be the long term plan IMO.

 

[TitanBronco]

The NRL need to put an expansion plan together. Areas need to be prioritised.

Firstly Perth and either a second Brisbane team or Central Qld. Brisbane will most likely get the

From their the next step along with Central Qld is Wellington on the proviso they take 2 home games a year each to Christchurch and Dunedin. From there a team could be set up in Adelaide which may require the relocation of a Sydney team.

Sadly with the Sydney market so saturated there would be no room for another side on the Central Coast. Manly and other teams may need to take games there or another relocation may be in order.

 

[bobmar28]

Need to move to 18 and then 20 NRL clubs ASAP. The four clubs below are urgently needed.


1. Perth
2. Brisbane II
3. Wellington
4. PNG


After that the national profile of the NRL will be completed with the licensing of Adelaide.
The international profile will be competed with the licensing of Christchurch.
Then two more Queensland teams would give the NRL more Queensland representation and balance.
With 24 clubs the expansion of the NRL should be complete. However it should then be more appropriately renamed the South Pacific Rugby League (SPRL).


5. Adelaide
6, Christchurch
7. Central Queensland
8. South Queensland IV OR Far North Queensland (Cairns)


There is really no justification for a Central Coast team. First it would overlap with Newcastle and Manly. Second there are already too many NSW teams for a competition which has national and international aspirations. An Illawarra-South Coast team (with St George back as a stand alone club) makes more sense than a Central Coast team.

St George? Steelers back as a stand alone team. St George can merge and stay in Sydney.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Its not to say that the Central Coast shouldnt have a team, just that they are behind a lot of other areas for need of a team.
You say that there will be half a million people, but if a CC team came in at the expense of Perth/Brisbane/Wellington, then there is another million unrepresented.

The difference is that the Central Coast is so close to so many teams that they are hardly unrepresented. Im not saying this makes up for a team, but you cant compare it to Perth, Brisbane, Canberra or Townsville, because these places would be both without a team and without options to travel to.

The difference with the Bears and the 3 clubs you mentioned is that Canberra, Ilawarra and Newcastle were all introduced during the NSWRL days. If you wanted to compare these situations, its like if Nowra got a team instead of Newcastle.

The overall point is that there is nothing to say the Central Coast shouldnt have a team, but once all the other locations ahead of them are filled, is there still the demand to justify a CC team.

That is also where places like Perth have an edge over the Central Coast, namely they are not near any other team and being in a different time zone, give the NRL an extra TV time slot to sell to the TV networks, being as they are 3 hours behind the east coast. The Central Coasyt does not give that benefit. That is why places like Perth will be looked on more favourably.

 

[juro]

First expansion - Perth and Brisbane 2
Second expansion - NZ2 and another QLD team

Considering how long it is taking to get to the first expansion, seems pretty pointless to worry too much about the details of where a second expansion is going to go, though...

 

[docbrown]

Growth means nothing when you're comparing a state capital of a million plus people to regional cities/towns less than one-third that size.

It's not just a question of pure population. Adelaide is a state capital with stagnant growth where we'll be a minor sport even after the creation of a local club, a club which in all effect is likely to be less supported and make less money than Central Coast Bears or a second New Zealand side and which is also likely to lose money for quite some time whilst those two other key markets are neglected for who knows how long (decades potentially...).

Its not to say that the Central Coast shouldnt have a team, just that they are behind a lot of other areas for need of a team.

To be fair the Central Coast first applied for a team to the NSWRL in 1978 before Illawarra, Canberra and Newcastle.

You say that there will be half a million people, but if a CC team came in at the expense of Perth/Brisbane/Wellington, then there is another million unrepresented.

I'm not actually saying at the expense of those cities. For mine Perth is the number one priority.

Brisbane is the second priority but none of the current Brisbane bids are the complete package and if we put in a second-rate second Brisbane side we will pay for it for next 20 years. But if a group like the Brothers get their act together then they're likely to leap frog the Bears.

So at this stage I'd say given that there is no solid plan for a second New Zealand side and that the Brisbane bids aren't up to scratch then Central Coast is the 2nd best bid but if Brisbane gets its act together then Bears would be number 3.

But that also means the Bears are also ahead of the imaginary Adelaide team, the Central Queensland bid which requires a larger population (and can likely be catered for by a Brisbane Brothers outfit in the interim) and the long term PNG project.

The difference is that the Central Coast is so close to so many teams that they are hardly unrepresented. Im not saying this makes up for a team, but you cant compare it to Perth, Brisbane, Canberra or Townsville, because these places would be both without a team and without options to travel to.

Yes but only a tiny percentage of Central Coast fans are actually making the trek to Newcastle and Sydney to attend games.

Imagine if we took all the Dragons games from Wollongong and said 'Hey, Sydney's just down the road, you don't need games in Wollongong'. I suspect our games' fans in Wollongong will go from being strong supporters to casual supporters.

What we've got on the Central Coast are fans who follow multiple clubs but who are less likely to commit to the game financially. Given that they are already rugby league fans (unlike Adelaide) giving them a local side is a major step in gaining that commitment.

The difference with the Bears and the 3 clubs you mentioned is that Canberra, Ilawarra and Newcastle were all introduced during the NSWRL days. If you wanted to compare these situations, its like if Nowra got a team instead of Newcastle.

And if they hadn't been introduced because people had said 'there's too many NSW teams' I wonder what price we'd be paying today for having blackholes in those markets.

If the Super League nonsense hadn't occurred chances are nobody would be whinging about the Central Coast Bears existing because nobody would be stupid enough to remove a heritage team from that important market.

And I assume you're just being sarcastic comparing Nowra to those much larger regional centres.

 

[Western_Eel]

You have to look at the future not just a ''whats best now'' approach

I think the new NRL will look at expansion a bit differently that the last NRL, IMO unless we are expanding to 20 or more team i dont see CC getting in they might have a good Bid but the NRL will look at growth first and thats Perth, Adelaide and Brisbane another NZ team would go alright too

 

[spoonman]

@ doc Brown.
I am curious what you have against the Brisbane Bombers?
The Brothers bid seem to have no public profile and seem to be years behind the bombers bid which IMO have a solid case to be one of the 2017/2018 expansion teams with Perth.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Need to move to 18 and then 20 NRL clubs ASAP. The four clubs below are urgently needed.


1. Perth
2. Brisbane II
3. Wellington
4. PNG


After that the national profile of the NRL will be completed with the licensing of Adelaide.
The international profile will be competed with the licensing of Christchurch.
Then two more Queensland teams would give the NRL more Queensland representation and balance.
With 24 clubs the expansion of the NRL should be complete. However it should then be more appropriately renamed the South Pacific Rugby League (SPRL).


5. Adelaide
6, Christchurch
7. Central Queensland
8. South Queensland IV OR Far North Queensland (Cairns)


There is really no justification for a Central Coast team. First it would overlap with Newcastle and Manly. Second there are already too many NSW teams for a competition which has national and international aspirations. An Illawarra-South Coast team (with St George back as a stand alone club) makes more sense than a Central Coast team.

No chance in hell comp is stretched way to thin as is, aside from 2-3 teams each year every other team is just making up numbers.

We don't want to end up like the AFL with half the matches being thrashing every week.

 

[reanimate]

No chance in hell comp is stretched way to thin as is, aside from 2-3 teams each year every other team is just making up numbers.

We don't want to end up like the AFL with half the matches being thrashing every week.

With the growth of our comp, we have the ability to draw our players from a far, far wider base than corruptionball. E.g. the clubs who begin to scout and recruit regularly from places like South Africa, more of the Pacific Islands, even maybe countries like Serbia even further down the track (there are some big men to be found there), will likely have such moves pay off in a huge way. We also have the ability to pillage Union here for any half-decent players they may have, same goes for Union in NZ.