What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

20 teams and 20 rounds

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,147
We need a shorter season as it gets boring after the 20th round.
20 games each team is more than enough. To offset the loss in rounds as far as TV revenue goes we should have 10 games per round so this means we need 20 teams. There are enough players.

Edit: I am not suggesting that the teams play each other once. I think we need 2 divisions of 10 teams with some non division games.
 
Last edited:

footy75

Bench
Messages
2,991
Always good to keep an open mind and put these things on the table.

But the last 6 rounds are exciting when teams are jostling for final positions.

What about if there are only 20 rounds...imagine the impact that has on teams hit hard by Origin.
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,276
It would have to be 19 rounds if everyone plays each other once. But you could have a magic weekend make up the 20th round. I could see us at 20 teams in the future, but it would be a couple of decades away. I'd add Perth, Brisbane 2, Adelaide and NZ 2.
 

yobbo84

First Grade
Messages
9,616
20 teams. 19 games each = 190 games (only 2 less than current).

Play 9 rounds.
Then 2 x split rounds for byes.
Then the last 9 rounds.
So 20 rounds in total, then finals.
GF in the last week of August.
Origin in September.
Tests in October.

Yeah before you all hound me I know there's a million-and-one reasons that wouldn't work but it's fun to dream.
 

JamesRustle

First Grade
Messages
6,477
I'm for it, so long as there are mandatory player trade windows every every 20 weekdays (4 weeks) that go for 20 hours after completion of rounds 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
there was! how have we gone backwards.... less teams in the comp, our national team doesnt even play anymore, no more 4 nations etc etc...

That's my point. The whole reduction in number of teams was flawed and unnecessary. It created doubts and division within the code and fans in general.
 

Timmah

LeagueUnlimited News Editor
Staff member
Messages
100,874
That's my point. The whole reduction in number of teams was flawed and unnecessary. It created doubts and division within the code and fans in general.
Maybe if you were blind.

The competition didn't (and arguably still doesn't) have the player depth to sustain the 20 teams. We ended 1998 and 1999 with certain teams on the back of 30+ floggings weekly, sometimes double that.

Any kind of expansion isn't really helpful unless there is adequate player depth to ensure we don't have teams fall into a perennial cycle. As successful as the AFL is, this has happened with their expansion to 18 teams and in the last five years a couple of clubs have been anchored to the bottom of the table. We shouldn't make the same mistakes for the sake of dots on a map.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,147
We ended 1998 and 1999 with certain teams on the back of 30+ floggings weekly, sometimes double that.

That is to do with spread of talent between teams, not the depth of talent.
We need to spread that talent out amongst the teams better and expansion should help with that with one team towns like Perth and Adelaide getting good TPA's to compete with Melbourne, Brisbane and Roosters.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
Maybe if you were blind.

The competition didn't (and arguably still doesn't) have the player depth to sustain the 20 teams. We ended 1998 and 1999 with certain teams on the back of 30+ floggings weekly, sometimes double that.

Any kind of expansion isn't really helpful unless there is adequate player depth to ensure we don't have teams fall into a perennial cycle. As successful as the AFL is, this has happened with their expansion to 18 teams and in the last five years a couple of clubs have been anchored to the bottom of the table. We shouldn't make the same mistakes for the sake of dots on a map.

The lack of player depth argument is a furfy! Not sure if you played rugby league or not Timmah? In my past I was a trialist for an NRL club and reached the last 30 prior to being cut from an original squad of 300.Some of the players that were cut before my departure were freaks! I have seen the talent behind the scenes in the reality of a trialist scenario. The talent pool is clearly there. In fact more teams add to junior interest and further incentive to play rugby league. Limiting rugby league opportunity is shear folly.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top