20 teams and 20 rounds

[Perth Red]

Never said it couldn't be feasible long term but it's certainly not something we should aspire to any time in the immediate future.

There is no suggestion anyone is aspiring to it in the short term. if we are lucky we may get two teams in 5 years time, god only knows how long it would be after that before another two teams came in, probably a decade or two at least.

 

[Timmah]

Thats a bit black and white. Could you make up 4 teams from the Australian and NZ second tier, SL, French league, Union and PNG? Maybe, wouldn't be world beaters but may be competitive. Reality is there are more professional and semi professional RL players around the world today than there was back in 1995 when we last brought 4 clubs in.

Its a bit of a horse and cart argument anyway, we wont produce more talent until we need to produce more talent and we wont need more talent until we expand. If it really was major concern for the NRL they should have got on the front foot with it 5 years ago and had Richardsons blueprint in place by now for much stronger national and second tier programs. Our SG ball program still limps along with very little funding and on the goodwill of the bloke who owns Cash Converters. If they had a vision for a Perth team by 2023 then they should have been doing a heck of alot more with our elite pathways. We have still managed to produce a couple of decent NRL players with the meager resources we've had but lets get serious if playing talent depth is really a barrier to expansion.

In the closing rounds of 1995, winning scores of 40+ or 50+ became far too regular and showed that lack of depth across the league.

As for Perth coming into the comp, I certainly hope it happens at some point soon, but not at the expense of the premiership being competitive.

 

[Timmah]

There is no suggestion anyone is aspiring to it in the short term. if we are lucky we may get two teams in 5 years time, god only knows how long it would be after that before another two teams came in, probably a decade or two at least.

The OP certainly gave that impression

 

[Perth Red]

In the closing rounds of 1995, winning scores of 40+ or 50+ became far too regular and showed that lack of depth across the league.

As for Perth coming into the comp, I certainly hope it happens at some point soon, but not at the expense of the premiership being competitive.

Interestingly in their first year one expansion club finished bottom, one in bottom qtr and two finished mid table with Auckland only missing out on the playoffs due to a replacement error costing them 2 competition points. There was a big points difference gap between top and bottom clubs but SL got in the way of actually seeing if some of that settled down over the next few seasons.

re expansion impacting on competitiveness the NRL could go some way to reducing the chances of that by
A) investing heavily in elite pathways over next 5 years (though reality is the only the best will make it to the 16 NRL squads so plenty of talent left by the wayside or hopping over to Union still)
B) Having some sort of cap concession for new clubs to sign players from outside current NRL squads
C) Staggering the introduction of the two teams with one team entering 2021 and one in 2023

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Even if we increase playing numbers and depth, expansion will always see a slight dilution for a little period of time. It is not a reason not to expand.

 

[Last Week]

Even when the Titans came in there was a noticeable drop in quality. And that was just one team.

The drop in quality is inevitable, so I wouldn't like to think that THAT is the main reason for not expanding. It's not as if that even best players in the NSWRL or QRL (who aren't apart of an NRL club) are up to standard. The only way that they get there is by being apart of an NRL team.

 

[Last Week]

Anyway, onto the fun stuff.

If there were 20 teams, I'd like to see every team play each other once. I'd like to see 4 groups of 5 teams. A team then plays the teams in their own group a second time.As follows;

Nth Queensland
Melbourne
Adelaide
Canterbury
South Sydney

Brisbane
NZ2
Canberra
Penrith
Wests Tigers

Brisbane 2
NZ1
Newcastle
Manly
Parramatta

Gold Coast
Perth
St George/Illawarra
Cronulla
Sydney

Everyone travels an approximate even amount.

 

[flippikat]

Anyway, onto the fun stuff.

If there were 20 teams, I'd like to see every team play each other once. I'd like to see 4 groups of 5 teams. A team then plays the teams in their own group a second time.As follows;

Nth Queensland
Melbourne
Adelaide
Canterbury
South Sydney

Brisbane
NZ2
Canberra
Penrith
Wests Tigers

Brisbane 2
NZ1
Newcastle
Manly
Parramatta

Gold Coast
Perth
St George/Illawarra
Cronulla
Sydney

Everyone travels an approximate even amount.

Looks pretty good to me. 20 teams, Brisbane derby, NZ derby, Perth & Adelaide have teams (so all mainland capitals covered-off). What's not to like?

Yeah, there is still the huge saturation of Sydney.. and I'm not sure if it's sustainable against so many 1-city teams.. maybe the NRL would have to link any bailout to relocation *if* that happens.

 

[Last Week]

Anyway, onto the fun stuff.

If there were 20 teams, I'd like to see every team play each other once. I'd like to see 4 groups of 5 teams. A team then plays the teams in their own group a second time.As follows;

Nth Queensland
Melbourne
Adelaide
Canterbury
South Sydney

Brisbane
NZ2
Canberra
Penrith
Wests Tigers

Brisbane 2
NZ1
Newcastle
Manly
Parramatta

Gold Coast
Perth
St George/Illawarra
Cronulla
Sydney

Everyone travels an approximate even amount.

Further to this, with a 20 team comp, you'd have to have a 10 team finals system in order for more of the games to remain relevant at the end of the season.

Id propose that the top two of each group qualify and then the next best two out of all of that.

The format would be the same one used in 1998 which was also 10 teams. It's basically the old top 5 system, but doubled.

 

[flippikat]

Further to this, with a 20 team comp, you'd have to have a 10 team finals system in order for more of the games to remain relevant at the end of the season.

Id propose that the top two of each group qualify and then the next best two out of all of that.

The format would be the same one used in 1998 which was also 10 teams. It's basically the old top 5 system, but doubled.

Absolutely.

As well as that, there's scope for minor trophies - maybe a trophy & prize for being "best of your group" and a (New Zealand rugby) Ranfurly Shield-style 'challenge' trophy.

The way that works, is that what-ever club holds the shield has to "defend" it in every home game. The 'Challenger' team wins the shield if they beat the holder at their home ground (a draw means the holder keeps the shield - you have to beat them at their fortress to take the shield away).. if the challenger wins, they become the new holder of the shield & have to defend it in THEIR next home game. Maybe a prize for the holder of such a shield at the end of the regular season? (Note, in New Zealand NPC Rugby, the shield is "locked away for the summer" with the holding team after the end of regular season, and not put on the line in any playoff games)

That way, if the club running 18th place on the ladder has an away game up against the "shield holder" (whether that team is 1st, or 7th or 20th..), they have some kind of trophy to play for.. something to lift for.

 

[MugaB]

Anyway, onto the fun stuff.

If there were 20 teams, I'd like to see every team play each other once. Then again within their own division. I'd like to see 4 groups of 5 teams. A team then plays the teams in their own group a second time.As follows;

Nth Queensland
Melbourne
Adelaide
Canterbury
South Sydney

Brisbane
NZ2
Canberra
Penrith
Wests Tigers

Brisbane 2
NZ1
Newcastle
Manly
Parramatta

Gold Coast
Perth
St George/Illawarra
Cronulla
Sydney

Everyone travels an approximate even amount.

I like the idea just not the team allocation, for me it would have to be split up into Divisions/Conferences that are North South East and West
With each divisions top 2 teams in the 8 finals time

So a North division would be

Brisbane Broncos.
Nth Qld Cowboys.
Gold Coast Titans.
Sth Qld. (New team)
Newcastle Knights.

East division.

Auckland Warriors.
Central Coast (new team)
Manly Sea Eagles
Eastern Suburbs Roosters
NZ South Island (new team)

South Division.

South Sydney Rabbitohs
Cronulla Sharks
St.George Dragons
Canberra Raiders
Melbourne Storm

Western division.

Wests Tigers
Parramatta Eels
Canterbury Bulldogs
Penrith Panthers
Perth (new team)


Every team plays each other once overall, then each other within each division, thus making 23 rounds (19 vs everyone, plus 4 per division)
The ladder consists of each division and the best 2 teams in each travel into finals

This gives more fierce rivalaries, and also gives teams a chance to make finals, also with 4 ladders keeping it interesting, thus also pushing the best out of all teams as they may not make the finals even if they played well that season and the 2 teams above them slide in ahead of them

 

[titoelcolombiano]

I like the idea just not the team allocation, for me it would have to be split up into Divisions/Conferences that are North South East and West
With each divisions top 2 teams in the 8 finals time

So a North division would be

Brisbane Broncos.
Nth Qld Cowboys.
Gold Coast Titans.
Sth Qld. (New team)
Newcastle Knights.

East division.

Auckland Warriors.
Central Coast (new team)
Manly Sea Eagles
Eastern Suburbs Roosters
NZ South Island (new team)

South Division.

South Sydney Rabbitohs
Cronulla Sharks
St.George Dragons
Canberra Raiders
Melbourne Storm

Western division.

Wests Tigers
Parramatta Eels
Canterbury Bulldogs
Penrith Panthers
Perth (new team)


Every team plays each other once overall, then each other within each division, thus making 23 rounds (19 vs everyone, plus 4 per division)
The ladder consists of each division and the best 2 teams in each travel into finals

Not bad - I've had a go at splitting the comp into divisions / conferences too and find it difficult to keep key rivalries together i.e. it could be argued that the following clubs are a key part of each others' fixture but won't all fit into a single conference of four or five (key rivalries or big drawing games in brackets):

Broncos (Storm, Warriors, NZ2 (assumably), Titans, Cowboys)
Storm (Warriors, NZ 2 (assumably), Broncos
Warriors (NZ2, Storm, Broncos)
NZ 2 (Warriors)
Titans (Broncos, Cowboys, Warriors, NZ 2 (assumably)
Cowboys (Broncos, Storm)
Brisbane 2 (Broncos, Cowboys, Titans, Storm, Warriors, NZ 2 (assumably)

 

[MugaB]

Not bad - I've had a go at splitting the comp into divisions / conferences too and find it difficult to keep key rivalries together i.e. it could be argued that the following clubs are a key part of each others' fixture but won't all fit into a single conference of four or five (key rivalries or big drawing games in brackets):

Broncos (Storm, Warriors, NZ2 (assumably), Titans, Cowboys)
Storm (Warriors, NZ 2 (assumably), Broncos
Warriors (NZ2, Storm, Broncos)
NZ 2 (Warriors)
Titans (Broncos, Cowboys, Warriors, NZ 2 (assumably)
Cowboys (Broncos, Storm)
Brisbane 2 (Broncos, Cowboys, Titans, Storm, Warriors, NZ 2 (assumably)

Its all about keeping a section of teams versus each other, regardless if they are traditional rivals or not, they will all play against each other anyway, a good example is the northern division i made up has all qld teams and newcastle, that group is interesting and local qld derbies are great

Thing is the NRL might add more qld teams (redcliffe and west brissy) so then Newcastle could move to the eastern division, and another team can shift to another division etc

Its a compass effect dividing sydney and added the furthest teams into it also
Making perth and anything western sydney,
Auckland and the eastern coast nsw
Melbourne and southern nsw
You might have a favorite team in each division you want to see lead that ladder

You couldn't do this currently with 16 teams, 20 - 24 teams is better, coz then all you as a fan are interested in is the local ladder to see your local team win, not the whole league, might even push you to see more games if you know theres your divisions rival game on, as they matter moreso to you and your team than other wins against the rest of the league

 

[widddds]

Speaking of groups/conferences, how about this idea?

For the argument's sake there needs to be 20 NRL teams so for example Wellington, Perth, Brisbane 2 and Central Coast are added to the comp.

Then all the teams are divided up geographically into 5 groups: East, North, South, West and Distant.
East: Central Coast, Sea Eagles, Rabbitohs, Roosters
North: Broncos, Titans, Knights, Brisbane 2
South: Raiders, Sharks, Storm, Dragons
West: Bulldogs, Eels, Panthers, Tigers
Distant: Warriors, Cowboys, Wellington, Perth

Then 1 team from each group is used to form conferences. This ensures that teams in the same geographic area don't play each other twice which allows for increased travel equity. For example:
C1: Cowboys, Central Coast, Broncos, Raiders, Tigers
C2: Warriors, Roosters, Brisbane 2, Dragons, Eels
C3: Perth, Rabbitohs, Titans, Sharks, Panthers
C4: Wellington, Sea Eagles, Knights, Storm, Bulldogs
Notice that each conference has only 3 NSW teams (I know Canberra isn't technically NSW but I'm counting it).

So, each team verses the other teams in their conference twice and each team from the other conferences once. Adding up to 23 games. Plus there could be an extra round added so teams can verse a rival from another conference a second time, such as Dragons v Rabbitohs or Panthers v Eels. Thus adding up to 24 rounds.

I think this method greatly reduces the unfairness of travel. While it can still be unfair for teams like Perth and New Zealand I don't think there is any other way to make it more fair.

 

[Perth Red]

Two conferences to maximise rivallaries and spread travel equally

Pacific conference

Auckland
Nz2
Brisbane
Cowboys
Titans
Brisbane2
Parramatta
Tigers
Penrith
Bulldogs

National conference
Perth
Adelaide
Melbourne
Canberra
Newcastle
Manly
Souths
St’s
Roosters
Cronulla

Playneach side in your conference home and away plus 5 clubs from the other conference, alternating clubs each year, for a 23 round season,

Top 10 play off. Top 4 each conference auto go into playoffs, other two places wild card spots for clubs with next best records.

 

[mongoose]

Looks pretty good to me. 20 teams, Brisbane derby, NZ derby, Perth & Adelaide have teams (so all mainland capitals covered-off). What's not to like?

Yeah, there is still the huge saturation of Sydney.. and I'm not sure if it's sustainable against so many 1-city teams.. maybe the NRL would have to link any bailout to relocation *if* that happens.

i'm not sure about the 20 teams comp but ideally the NRL has a national second division which a couple of sydney teams drop back to. You would have the bears, the jets, qld cup, nsw cup teams, png, fiji, and teams from the other states, including hopefully a team from Tassie. Only issue is travel costs...

 

[titoelcolombiano]

i'm not sure about the 20 teams comp but ideally the NRL has a national second division which a couple of sydney teams drop back to. You would have the bears, the jets, qld cup, nsw cup teams, png, fiji, and teams from the other states, including hopefully a team from Tassie. Only issue is travel costs...

I really like this idea. The Intrust Super Cup (QLD / NSW Cup combined) can focus on suburban grounds and traditional RL clubs playing matches at family friendly times and leave the big stadia and national expansion to the NRL. This will ensure all league fans are catered for.

No NRL affiliated clubs allowed and all expansion hopefulls to start in this league.

 

[T-Boon]

I really like this idea. The Intrust Super Cup (QLD / NSW Cup combined) can focus on suburban grounds and traditional RL clubs playing matches at family friendly times and leave the big stadia and national expansion to the NRL. This will ensure all league fans are catered for.

No NRL affiliated clubs allowed and all expansion hopefulls to start in this league.

Thats the key. If the NSW/QLD cup is totally independent of the NRL clubs it could start to draw small crowds and they could establish their own identity and styles of play which would be great for the game.

Basically nobody is interested in NRL reserve grade.

 

[Perth Red]

Thats the key. If the NSW/QLD cup is totally independent of the NRL clubs it could start to draw small crowds and they could establish their own identity and styles of play which would be great for the game.

Basically nobody is interested in NRL reserve grade.

So what nrl clubs do for reserve grade? If they had to run a 16 team reserve grade a) they would whinge they couldn’t afford it and b) it would suck the best second tier players to it leaving your new second tier in fact a third grade.

 

[T-Boon]

So what nrl clubs do for reserve grade? If they had to run a 16 team reserve grade a) they would whinge they couldn’t afford it and b) it would suck the best second tier players to it leaving your new second tier in fact a third grade.

I'd go something like the NFL where if you go pro and cant make the NRL you don't play. Maybe NRL clubs could farm players out to a NZ first grade for some match fitness or something. They should have a top 25 and that is it.

We really need to isolate the influence that NRL clubs have over RL to just the first grade. They are disastrous.