The Future of Rugby League

[docbrown]

Rugby League is on the brink of a new era now in... 1993...

Just further proof that we've been having conversations like these for some time now...

Part I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_zw4Tvuoho

Part II

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HgG4SubTh0&feature=related

I for one can't wait until the new Perth & South Queensland teams come in 1995...

 

[alien]

they shouldnt have been kicked out in the first place

 

[bobmar28]

I agree with Sterlo. Amalgamation is the way to go.

 

[docbrown]

What's interesting is that because of Super League we're in a similar position as we were in 1993:

* There were a bunch of competing bids back in 1993 right across the region - today we have WA, QLD, NSW, NZ & PNG all with serious bids - so even stronger interest. Also the impact on lower grades & the potential dilution of talent.

* The debate about what to do with struggling Sydney clubs - you can't prop them all up - they have to stand on their own merit - amalgamation is a real option or relocation - since 93 five teams have risen above the others and built sustainable clubs - Eels, Rabbitohs, Bulldogs, Tigers (merger) & Dragons (merger) - while four other clubs continue to have issues with growing widespread support at a similar level

* Do you amalgamate teams that are historic rivals? Norths-Manly failed because of that and trying to cover too much area. In that video Souths-Easts is mooted - that would likewise be a disaster. The better model is to find 2 clubs who aren't rivals, one that has a strong location branding (Easts/Sydney City) & the other with a strong mascot branding (Sharks) and with weaknesses than can be addressed by the other's strength (Junior/family support combined with Corporate support) to create a team that's popular Sydney-wide & increases its national profile

* If you relocate a team, will those original Sydney fans go to away games in Sydney? In AFL there are centralised grounds, in the NRL there are suburban grounds. Somewhat tellingly we have had no relocations. Central Coast Bears would be the first but is still in close proximity to its original supporter base.

* The salary cap/draft system combination and oversight into over expenditure & free agency. How to give greater salary cap oversight, how to retain players, how to minimise the "mercenary" feel, the issues surrounding a draft & its impact on a game that emphasises local pathways

 

[Quidgybo]

If you relocate a team, will those original Sydney fans go to away games in Sydney? In AFL there are centralised grounds, in the NRL there are suburban grounds.

To really capitlise on the local fanbase the league would have to be more proactive than just expecting them to turn up at rival suburban grounds. It would need a formal Sydney season ticket with matches marketed as blockbusters at a common central ground. The home team would get 90% of the income from the away team's Sydney tickets with the away team getting the remaining 10% as a commission for bringing their fans as a block. The league would also need to guarantee express public transport for such matches.

If say the Sharks moved then they could have a package of five away games (Roosters, Tigers, Rabbitohs, Dragons, Sea Eagles) and one home game (Bulldogs) all at the SFS that the Sydney fanbase could coaless around. Home teams get a gate boost from a large guaranteed block of away fans and blockbuster status supported by NRL marketing. The fans of the relocated team get a "home" ground in Sydney, their own seat surrounded by their own supporters and a guaranteed six games each year.

Leigh

 

[docbrown]

To really capitlise on the local fanbase the league would have to be more proactive than just expecting them to turn up at rival suburban grounds. It would need a formal Sydney season ticket

That is a smart and logical step.

If say the Sharks moved then they could have a package of five away games (Roosters, Tigers, Rabbitohs, Dragons, Sea Eagles) and one home game (Bulldogs) all at the SFS that the Sydney fanbase could coaless around.

I guess the questions are:

* Will the other teams want to move one of their home games to the SFS?
* Is it possible to coordinate that and get agreement with five teams on a long term basis?
* Will those teams think that they could get larger crowds/more money at that ground rather than at home?
* Will Sharks fans actually view the SFS as their home ground when that's never been the case?
* Will they want to travel there?
* If the SFS doesn't work out, will they want to go to 6 or 7 different Sydney grounds?

In the AFL if a team that usually plays at the MCG or Docklands were to move interestate, it would still have a large number of games played there.

 

[Loudstrat]

Stop looking at Sydney as a single entity and start accepting that it is a number of regions as well. There is no way you would expect outer clubs to dump local games and play out of a far away "central" stadium. Sydney's transport network simply is not built that way.

It works in Melbourne for precisely the resons it doesnt work in Sydney. Firstly, none of Melbourne's clubs are outer urban anyway. Second, Melbourne's transport hub and CBD are central. Sydney has in Manly, Penrith, Parramatta, Cronulla and half the Tigers merger, and half the Dragons merger - as outer urban. Why should fans give up local grounds and crowds to far flung stadia?

 

[Loudstrat]

I agree with Sterlo. Amalgamation is the way to go.

You agree with Sterlo 20 years ago :lol:

 

[bobmar28]

You agree with Sterlo 20 years ago :lol:

I've seen no evidence he has changed his mind.

 

[siv]

That is a smart and logical step.



I guess the questions are:

* Will the other teams want to move one of their home games to the SFS?
* Is it possible to coordinate that and get agreement with five teams on a long term basis?
* Will those teams think that they could get larger crowds/more money at that ground rather than at home?
* Will Sharks fans actually view the SFS as their home ground when that's never been the case?
* Will they want to travel there?
* If the SFS doesn't work out, will they want to go to 6 or 7 different Sydney grounds?

In the AFL if a team that usually plays at the MCG or Docklands were to move interestate, it would still have a large number of games played there.

Even if you relocate you would keep your "heritage games"

For teh Sharks I would play 6 to 9 at Adelaide or Perth and 2 to 3 at Shark park

 

[CC_Roosters]

Even if you relocate you would keep your "heritage games"

For teh Sharks I would play 6 to 9 at Adelaide or Perth and 2 to 3 at Shark park

I disagree with this. If i lived in those cities in this situation my first reaction would be thats a half assed relocation. All or nothing IMO

Given the sharks own their ground, any relocation would surely mean they sell the stadium given it would be a bit pointless without a tennant.

Unless a sydney club falls over of its own accord i would not be forcing any relocation or mergers. would cause too much trouble with the whole sports fanbase IMO. We have a growing metro area saturated, including in key growth regions like Penrith and the south west so lets keep it that way.

I can see a situation in the short term where Manly play part of their season on the Sunshine coast if the ground the where upgraded to NRL standard. Exactly like Hawthorn and north melbourne in the afl, service another market on a part time basis while securing their long term future. everyone wins.

 

[Loudstrat]

I doubt there will be any upgrade until a team wants to play there, and it wont be for a few games per year. Besides, manly wont be the one moving. If anyone it will be Cronulla. I dont see any other club considering it.

 

[Loudstrat]

I've seen no evidence he has changed his mind.

You see no evidence of anything. You would trip over evidence and not recognise it. You cant even see 1 million unrepresented people in northern Sydney / Central Coast!

 

[Scott Gourley's Lovechild]

The idea of moving a club to an expansion area isn't about the immediate effect. It is about the next generation. I dislike the AFL as much as the next bloke (my CUB rep is an ex-Swan + Geelong player, though his boss is an ex-Dragon which makes everything better to me since a NSWRL player is higher on the food chain than a VFL player), but the idea isn't to plant a side into an area and hope everyone loves them immediately. The idea is to have people grow up with the team in the area, and associate the team with the area, no matter their prior history.

 

[Ausguy]

i wonder who will replace the sharks in relocation threads when our future is secured by june this year....

 

[qldseaeagle96]

I can see a situation in the short term where Manly play part of their season on the Sunshine coast if the ground the where upgraded to NRL standard. Exactly like Hawthorn and north melbourne in the afl, service another market on a part time basis while securing their long term future. everyone wins.

How much smack has been pumped into your veins? Mate I have lived on the Sunny Coast since 1999 and we get ZERO infrastructure up here. We don't have an arts centre, public transport network or adequate health care facilities.

Google Stockland stadium at Kawana Waters and see for yourself how far away this is from NRL standard. Holds about 1500 punters.

Your local park with swings and a slippery dip is probably better equipped to handle an NRL match than this excuse for a "stadium".

Plus throw in the fact that we are a liberal voting area means we will never see any cash from eithe ALP or LNP. = Disgrace.

 

[Quidgybo]

Given the sharks own their ground, any relocation would surely mean they sell the stadium given it would be a bit pointless without a tennant.

Keep in mind that the valuable bit is the NRL license, not necessarily the football club itself. "Relocating" could mean a new consortium coming in and buying the NRL license and optionally buying the name and colours of an existing club, and then using those assets to allow their newly formed club to enter the League. Relocating an existing organisation (espacially one in bad shape) lock stock and barrel may be more expensive than forming a new club from scratch in the target market and just buying the license. In the case of the Sharks that could leave the existing football club remaining in the Shire with the cash in hand from the sale of the NRL license and still holding a quite valuable asset in the form of Shark Park.

Leigh.

 

[Quidgybo]

Google Stockland stadium at Kawana Waters and see for yourself how far away this is from NRL standard. Holds about 1500 punters.

Your local park with swings and a slippery dip is probably better equipped to handle an NRL match than this excuse for a "stadium".

Plus throw in the fact that we are a liberal voting area means we will never see any cash from eithe ALP or LNP. = Disgrace.

This is where the Commission as governing body of one of the major professional leagues in Australia would have quiet a lot leverage (certainly more than any individual bid vying for entry). If the Commission went to the Queensland Government and said we'll guarantee you another tam in the NRL if you build a stadium here then I have no doubt the Government would jump at it. State Governments see NRL and AFL franchises as very valuable commodities given their stimulating effects on the local economy of a host region. They'll fall over themselves to build a stadium if they have a guarantee of getting an extra team based in their State.

Leigh.

 

[Loudstrat]

Bullsh*t. First of all a Government has to have that money avalable. There is no guarantee that they do, especially in a state still recovering from major natural disasters from 12 months ago. Secondly, the QLD Govt would be well aware of the situation, and with 3 sloppy bid attempts now a year or so old it has ample opportunity to make a push for one. Thirdly, the rates the Titans are charged for Skilled Park are crippling - what bid would want to be shackled to a deal that potentially kills their club? Finally - been there, done that.

 

[Loudstrat]

Keep in mind that the valuable bit is the NRL license, not necessarily the football club itself. "Relocating" could mean a new consortium coming in and buying the NRL license and optionally buying the name and colours of an existing club, and then using those assets to allow their newly formed club to enter the League. Relocating an existing organisation (espacially one in bad shape) lock stock and barrel may be more expensive than forming a new club from scratch in the target market and just buying the license. In the case of the Sharks that could leave the existing football club remaining in the Shire with the cash in hand from the sale of the NRL license and still holding a quite valuable asset in the form of Shark Park.

Leigh.

Great. The Sharks have an asset that will never be used. Just like their trophy cabinet.

And some useless new area gets a team that LOOKS like the Sharks in an area with a few thousand people more than the shire - except they are old farts from Victoria who dont follow League, dont have a leagues club to support them and dont have a ground.

You are a genius. ](*,)