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!

Peter V'landys - New NRL/ARLC Chairman

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
2,770
Foxtel said they will not renegotiate the deal.

Why would they renegotiate a deal that's great for them?

Foxtel will renegotiate if theres enough content or theres an offer that makes them reconsider.

The ARLC only cares about keeping the status quo in Sydney. It's not doing what's best for rugby league.

That is highly arguable.

random stuff I never talked about and have no idea what you are responding to.


So you reckon Sydney should have nine clubs that generate bugger all revenue but think Adelaide shouldn't have a team?

Yes those tv rights and commercial deals that the NRL has have nothing to do with the Sydney clubs or the countries largest metropolitan region.

And I said it was arguable that Adelaide is required - I dont think it is - support for league is minimal, the number of people who play is tiny, and focus would be better spent on a second team in Queensland.

I mean I live in Adelaide, wtf would I know.

What's your opinion on a third Brisbane team to cover the south side?

I think yoy shoyuld get the Dolphins bedded down first.

Perth should have had a team 25 years ago.

Probably. Brisbane should have had a second team decades ago. We should be looking at Adelaide/NZ2/PNG and even Melb2 by now.

There's nothing wrong with being an AFL fan. There are people in this thread who have an irrational hatred of AFL and think anyone who doesn't share the same sentiment is a traitor worthy of excommunication. Their blinkered thinking does more harm than good because kids these days don't share their extreme position.

Sometimes it can go too far in the other direction.

There's a few people on here who just want to fling shit for fun. That's not what the forum is supposed to be about.

Of course it is. Forums arent lecture theatres or held to the proper rules of debating. If you arent here for fun, wtf are you here for.
 
Messages
12,780
Foxtel will renegotiate if theres enough content or theres an offer that makes them reconsider.

Foxtel will only renegotiate if it's in their best interests. They're not going to agree to fund an 18th team for a substantial amount to make our current deal closer to our main competitor.

That is highly arguable.

How so?

For years we had Grant and Greenberg refuse to expand because clubs (IE. Sydney teams) were not profitable.

ARL didn't hesitate to kill off the Crushers and Chargers, despite the latter being profitable.

The annual grant is continuously going up while Sydney teams struggle to make enough money to be profitable.

Brisbane has been kept a one team city for all but three years since 1988. You admitted to this later on in your response.

GF always held in Sydney. Greenberg and V'landys played the Queensland gov to get more money out of the NSW gov.

ARLC is thinking about creating a Sydney conference so that its teams travel even less than they do now.

V'landys wants to bring back the Bears.

V'landys wants to kill the Queensland Cup so he can bring back three grades of football to benefit the Sydney teams.

A few years ago the Townsville Stingers won the national championship, yet instead of letting them represent Australia at the Commonwealth Games RL 9s tournament, they sent the shit Sydney team who they beat. Nothing Sydney-centric about that, hey?

Yes those tv rights and commercial deals that the NRL has have nothing to do with the Sydney clubs or the countries largest metropolitan region.

Can you prove the TV deals would be lower if we had six or seven Sydney teams with one in Perth and one in Adelaide?

If Sydney is so important then how come its nine clubs cannot generate a deal that's equal to or better than the AFL's deal?

You don't think the Melbourne Storm, Brisbane Broncos and North Queensland Cowboys play a significant role in generating money from broadcast deals?

And I said it was arguable that Adelaide is required - I dont think it is - support for league is minimal, the number of people who play is tiny, and focus would be better spent on a second team in Queensland.

I mean I live in Adelaide, wtf would I know.

Same held true for Aussie rules in Brisbane back in the 80s. Adelaide Rams generated better attendances than many Sydney clubs in 1997.

Recent NRL games in Adelaide have drawn decent attendances.

I think yoy shoyuld get the Dolphins bedded down first.

I agree. A third team is about 10 to 15 years away from being a realistic option.

Probably. Brisbane should have had a second team decades ago. We should be looking at Adelaide/NZ2/PNG and even Melb2 by now.

Brisbane should have had a second team in 1988.

PNG is a third world country rife with violence and poverty.

Melbourne 2 would be nice, but it would cannibalise the Storm in an already over saturated sports market. It would be a repeat of the Melbourne Victory and Melbourne Hearts/City disaster.
 

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
2,770
Foxtel will only renegotiate if it's in their best interests. They're not going to agree to fund an 18th team for a substantial amount to make our current deal closer to our main competitor.

I didnt say they will. I said if the content additions justified it, they would come back to the table. Adding another team would do that


Its a perspective thing. For instance, you are highly biased.

For years we had Grant and Greenberg refuse to expand because clubs (IE. Sydney teams) were not profitable.

times change. the clubs are now profitable...and hey look - your expanding.

ARL didn't hesitate to kill off the Crushers and Chargers, despite the latter being profitable.

This isnt the 90s anymore.

The annual grant is continuously going up while Sydney teams struggle to make enough money to be profitable.

They make enough now. The grant is part of their license agreement. The money the league makes is literally made off the back of the clubs.

Brisbane has been kept a one team city for all but three years since 1988. You admitted to this later on in your response.

I never had to admit it, it was obvious.

Can you prove the TV deals would be lower if we had six or seven Sydney teams with one in Perth and one in Adelaide?

Did i say they would be?

If Sydney is so important then how come its nine clubs cannot generate a deal that's equal to or better than the AFL's deal?

Theres a variety of reasons that the NRL may never reach that - not least is the duration and advertising opportunites it presents.

You don't think the Melbourne Storm, Brisbane Broncos and North Queensland Cowboys play a significant role in generating money from broadcast deals?

yawn. did i say they didnt? And while Broncos do generate significant ratings, they still average much less than any prime time FTA Sydney tv rating.

Same held true for Aussie rules in Brisbane back in the 80s. Adelaide Rams generated better attendances than many Sydney clubs in 1997.

We arent in the 90s anymore.

Recent NRL games in Adelaide have drawn decent attendances.

Its one thing to FIFO once or twice a year, its another to generate constant crowds.
 
Messages
12,780
I didnt say they will. I said if the content additions justified it, they would come back to the table. Adding another team would do that

😂

Unless V'landys is stupid enough to give Foxtel an extension until 2032 then there's zero chance of Foxtel giving us the sort of money needed to satisfy the greedy clubs.

The clubs won't stand for anything but a significant increase.

Its a perspective thing. For instance, you are highly biased.

I back up my statements on this subject. You do not provide anything more than your opinion.

I'll cite Neil Cadigan's magnificent publication 20 Years In The Saddle North Queensland Cowboys 1995-2014 as evidence to support my claims.

I went to the trouble of posting key snippets from the book here.

times change. the clubs are now profitable...and hey look - your expanding.

😂

Take away the annual grant and most of them would be up shit creek without a paddle. The largest source of income for most of them is the annual grant and gaming machine revenue.

This isnt the 90s anymore.

Here's an article from the 2007-10 period that backs me up.

Sydney clubs killing the game?
By Brent Read from The Australian

Sydney clubs would prefer to blame the New South Wales Government, and its poker machine tax, for their plight. They would rather flog a horse that shows no signs of life than contemplate the more realistic alternative - relocate or merge, a concept that led to rancour during Super League and its aftermath.

Gallop isn't the only prominent NRL identity suggesting Sydney clubs are in danger. Gold Coast coach John Cartwright promoted the idea of a 12-team competition recently in a magazine column, claiming that Sydney should be divided into four zones.

In effect, Sydney clubs are holding back the game. They are holding earning capacity of players because they can't afford to pay more money, something that has resulted in superstars Mark Gasnier and Sonny Bill Williams looking overseas for opportunities.

They are holding back the game's exposure on a national level by refusing to contemplate relocation.

Behind the scenes, an undercurrent of support is growing for the game to revisit expansion at the expense of overcrowding in Sydney. Most won't say it publicly, but some chief executives privately believe the only way to grow the pie is to make the game truly national.

That means returning to Adelaide and Perth, two clubs sacrificed in the wake of the Super League peace deal. It means putting a plan in place and sticking to it. It means leaving financially stricken Sydney clubs with three choices: Merge, relocate or die.

"At the moment the game is under threat more in Sydney than anywhere else," Brisbane chief executive Bruno Cullen said of rugby league.

"That's one issue. The other threats that are coming to our game are the other truly national codes - the AFL and soccer, and to a lesser extent rugby union. They can get the big money for sponsorship and television revenue because they are national."

Rugby league, on the other hand, is preoccupied with the survival of Sydney clubs when the answer lies elsewhere. With the NRL locked into long-term television contracts with the Nine Network and Fox Sports, there will be no sudden influx of money. That means, unlike the AFL, the NRL can't afford to prop up ailing clubs. Against that backdrop, frustration grows outside Sydney, a mood which led to the Super League revolution in 1995, which in turn led to a split competition in 1997.

"When you strategise you have to know where you're at to know where you're going," Melbourne Storm chief executive Brian Waldron said.

"What I do know is there is a team called the Sydney Roosters that from my understanding has less players participating in rugby league at junior and senior level than we do in Melbourne.

"There are two teams in (southern Sydney) and surrounding areas (Cronulla and St George Illawarra) that arguably are sharing a low potential supporter base. That's just my perception.

"The reality is you have to get some research to determine where you're going. There will be some research that will tell you there's some markets that you can generate enormous revenue in outside of Sydney, or it may just be rationalisation."

As for the future of Sydney clubs, Mayer said: "The danger is the costs involved with running a footy club are growing - and revenues aren't.

"Clubs have to find new ways to make money. If you're competing with seven other clubs in Sydney, that's a big ask.

The NRL is conscious of the benefits of expansion, and $8 million remains on the table for a club which packs up and moves.

"We will be in new places in the short- to medium-term but it's not the time to be putting more pressure on our existing clubs by adding teams.", [said David Gallop.]

As such, clubs need to move of their own volition, something Cullen says would benefit the game immeasurably by producing greater sponsorship revenue, which in turn would be drip fed back to the clubs.

"All this talk about rationalisation is not about getting more money in the pool, it's about survival," Cullen said.

Waldron is even more emphatic.

"I have been on record since the day I walked into this business, when I heard David Hill (former head of sport at Channel Nine and now a heavy-hitter with Fox Sports in the US) at my first ever chief executives conference say we had the best television product in the world in sport," Waldron said.

"I have said right from the start the only reason we don't generate more money than our competitors is because we're not truly a national game.

"Rationalise the Sydney clubs and make it a national game. Make it a national game and you'll stop having to worry. We're not talking about now, we're talking about a generational approach.

One thing has become patently clear this week: Something needs to change.

"What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result," Waldron said. "Many would argue we are insane at the moment in our game."

They make enough now. The grant is part of their license agreement. The money the league makes is literally made off the back of the clubs.

Delusional.

The Sydney clubs are given the money they need to survive by the ARLC. The Sydney clubs make f**k all money. They generate TV ratings of 3k to 8k in Adelaide, Melbourne and Perth. The crowds they pull in Sydney are tiny more often than not. Sponsors don't want to throw much at them because their brands have little value.

Theres a variety of reasons that the NRL may never reach that - not least is the duration and advertising opportunites it presents.

There would be more sponsorship opportunities for our game if we had a truly national competition.

yawn. did i say they didnt? And while Broncos do generate significant ratings, they still average much less than any prime time FTA Sydney tv rating.

Who is the most watched team on TV?

Broncos. By some distance, too.

We arent in the 90s anymore.

Read the article above. These problems were around in 2010. The only thing that's changed is the ARLC now gives the clubs a fortune to stay on their feet.

Its one thing to FIFO once or twice a year, its another to generate constant crowds.
Adelaide Rams and Western Reds generated very strong crowds in their first seasons.
 
Last edited:

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
2,770
😂

Unless V'landys is stupid enough to give Foxtel an extension until 2032 then there's zero chance of Foxtel giving us the sort of money needed to satisfy the greedy clubs.

The clubs won't stand for anything but a significant increase.

You really dont have any idea whats on offer. No one does at this point.

I back up my statements on this subject. You do not provide anything more than your opinion.

So do you. So do we all

I'll cite Neil Cadigan's magnificent publication 20 Years In The Saddle North Queensland Cowboys 1995-2014 as evidence to support my claims.

I went to the trouble of posting key snippets from the book here.

And almost none of it is relevant to the current discussion. Other than your anti Sydney crusade. Which I disagree with,

😂

Take away the annual grant and most of them would be up shit creek without a paddle. The largest source of income for most of them is the annual grant and gaming machine revenue.

Ah there lies the rub. You cant take it away. The clubs are entitled to it under their license agreements. And they are entitled to not sign those agreements if there isnt enough.


lol brian waldron

Delusional.



The Sydney clubs are given the money they need to survive by the ARLC. The Sydney clubs make f**k all money. They generate TV ratings of 3k to 8k in Adelaide, Melbourne and Perth. The crowds they pull in Sydney are tiny more often than not. Sponsors don't want to throw much at them because their brands have little value.

The ARLC doesnt get money without the clubs - wherever they may be - and that largest market BY FAR - is in Sydney.

There would be more sponsorship opportunities for our game if we had a truly national competition.

Sure. Never said otherwise.

Who is the most watched team on TV?

Broncos. By some distance, too.

So? That'll happen with a highly favourable broadcast arrangement too.

Read the article above.

Did. Still not relevant.

These problems were around in 2010. The only thing that's changed is the ARLC now gives the clubs a fortune to stay on their feet.

The ARLC derives considerable benefits from their presence.

Adelaide Rams and Western Reds generated very strong crowds in their first seasons.

good for them. I dont believe they will draw anything like that now.

You keep at it chief. Ill step away now.
 
Messages
12,780
You really dont have any idea whats on offer. No one does at this point.

A ninth game. That's all the ARLC has to offer. The most we could hope for is an extra $50m pa. That would drive the the deal up to $450 pa.

And almost none of it is relevant to the current discussion. Other than your anti Sydney crusade. Which I disagree with,

It proves the NSWRL and ARL were biased in favour of the Sydney clubs. I said the game is and always has been Sydney-centric. You disagreed.

Ah there lies the rub. You cant take it away. The clubs are entitled to it under their license agreements. And they are entitled to not sign those agreements if there isnt enough.

And it's killing the game at all levels beneath the NRL.

The ARLC doesnt get money without the clubs - wherever they may be - and that largest market BY FAR - is in Sydney.

Rugby league is more popular in Brisbane than Sydney.

NRL clubs would have no players without junior RL. V'landys is trying to kill the Queensland Cup. Good luck recruiting players under his proposal if it's given the go ahead.

The ARLC derives considerable benefits from their presence.

Para vs Pen GF was the lowest drawing in history.

good for them. I dont believe they will draw anything like that now.
I don't care what you believe.
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
22,997
Look it`s not only the QRL. I heard an interview with Mike Eden ex-Manly, Roosters player a few years ago. He runs a successful Law practice in Albury these days and still maintains a strong interest in League. He said a NSW Cup team based out of that city would do wonders against the encroachment being threatened by the bucket loads of money being thrown at the area by fumbleball. He seemed to think that it could be financially viable and would be very popular.
When I heard him speak, very eloquent and measured, it gave the impression that the idea was a no-brainer.
He posts some good stuff on Twitter

recently got a group of manly old boys together to have lunch with arko after his recent difficulties
 

mongoose

Coach
Messages
11,354
There's too many clubs in Sydney, But the BRL should expand to create more clubs in Brisbane.
yeah i don't get his beef with the QLD cup. It's not really that important where Brisbane teams are located... Norths, Souths and Easts are where they are because they are 100 year old clubs- when places like Logan and Moreton Bay were completely rural. Pathways have been poor in Brisbane because we have 4 or 5 teams all feeding the Broncos.
 

Storm80

Juniors
Messages
212
It’s such a bizarre a statement. Who do they think people on the Southside have been supporting for 30 years? If anything Brisbane Broncos aren’t a north or south side team. They’re a national brand with fans in pretty much every state.
Not a bizarre statement at all. Of course the city as a whole overwhelmingly support the broncos. Despite a few years of the crushers, they’ve been a one team city for 34 years. That’s kinda my point actually, that everyone in Brisbane goes for the broncos and the NRL have failed to split the population and create a real rivalry with the 2nd team.

The dolphins represent an area (Moreton Bay) of about 460k people.

City of Brisbane 1.2m (this figure includes inner west and inner south suburbs)
Ipswich city 233k
Logan city 350k

So the river actually splits the population roughly in two. About 1.1m north of the river and 1.1m south of it.

Just on that fact alone, when you have the first team on the CBD side of the river in red hill, why would you put the 2nd team in a region further north where there is only 460k people vs 1.1m people in the south and west.

With a team either side of the river you could build a proper north vs south rivalry, maximise tv rights and dominate the AFL in the area they are trying to exploit. It’s a no brainer.

And just to clarify, it’s not really about whether people in Brisbane or Ipswich will continue to support the broncos or not. It’s about retaining the market and making sure the youth don’t see AFL as a viable option to play.

Compare it to AFL in Sydney. One team city with the swans. They have captured a market for themselves in the inner west, north and east of the bridge. Probably 2m to 2.5m people to market at and get to games.

But prior to 2012 everyone in nsw with a the most casual interest in AFL was basically a swans fans. Where they put gws? Cronulla? In Manly? Chatswood? Gosford?

No, they’ve put it at Homebush with a presence at Blacktown and in Canberra. They split the city in two allowing them to market themselves to the 2.2m people in western Sydney.

AFL made a choice to go after where the population growth is in Sydney. And baring in mind, GWS is attempting to win new people to the game - Brisbane is a captured NRL market already.

NRL in Brisbane chose to have two teams located north of the river and gift the broncos (News Ltd) an area of 1.7m people vs the dolphins region of 460k.

It’s akin to the second A League Sydney club being put in Campbelltown and told they will be know as “the Magpies” but Sydney FC continues to represent every region of Sydney except the Campbeltown area.

The broncos will always have over three times the supporter base of the dolphins. That doesn’t create an even rivalry and won’t boost tv audience as much as a team like the Brisbane Firehawks which would have been able to market themselves as the south of the river team to 1.1m people.

If the NRL were smart they’d have negotiated with QLD government to sure up a new 20-30k stadium and training facilities in the south. They could have linked in with the Olympic bid and shared hockey or soccer or rugby 7s.

The difference between AFL and NRL expansion decisions and strategy is just staggering. NRL is the most popular sport in Brisbane. They really should have 3 teams by now, with Redcliffe probably being the third one and linking up with Sunshine Coast region. The market should be saturated, but not over saturated like Sydney, and they should be shoring up key regions from AFL.

AFL in Sydney is less popular than AFL in SE Queensland. AFL is going up against 9 NRL teams, with GWS going up against Penrith, Parramatta, Wests and Canterbury. So GWS has 4 direct competitors.

Brisbane Lions direct competitors in the south are the broncos. That’s it. The dolphins are so far north they aren’t a factor.

It’s hilarious in Sydney it’s all “tribalism and local rivalries is what makes the game, more local teams, an over saturated market is what we need in Sydney and our strong teams in the west will stop GWS from being successful”.

When Sydney people speak of Brisbane it’s the opposite “well they all go for the broncos anyway so why saturate the market, they might struggle for sponsorship, or it might not make money, you don’t wanna step on what the broncos have built and we don’t really need to create direct competitors for the AFL cause the broncos will sort it out for us”.

All the arguments about leagues built on local rivalry is just thrown out the window when it comes to Brisbane. And that’s cause ultimately, the “tribalism” schtick that Sydney people use to defend an over saturated market is a load of horse shit.

The Lions will continue to infiltrate the south and west of Brisbane with its new training facilities and brand spanking new billion dollar stadium at the Gabba in 2032. While the NRL will get to 2040 twiddling its thumbs and scratching their head wondering how the AFL pulled the rug from under them yet again. You can see it a mile off.

But we’ll all know the reasons NRL be scratching their heads in 2040 because they’ll look back at decisions made from 2020 onwards and as always only have themselves to blame.
 

Storm80

Juniors
Messages
212
If clubs and players weren’t so greedy the arlc would be making so much money it could be investing in things which set the game up for life
and despite both getting more than they deserve they still aren’t happy and are angling for more

they aren’t the sole stake holders of the game

the governing body should be allowed to build for the future
Bwhahaha what is this rugby Union type crap…

The game was founded cause union players wanted to be paid. The game has always been defined by players deservedly getting financial reward.

Players are not being greedy. They took a massive pay cut during COVID - one which the NRL tried to stooge them out of their proper repayments.

AFL and it’s players seem to get their CBAs deals done without any of this type of clusterf**k we are experiencing, while the code continues to grow its presence.

So if AFL can do it professionally, with our leaks to media every 5 seconds - why can’t NRL? I think you’ll find the answer is one of competence and genuine respect for its stakeholders.

If only NRL negotiated an extra $500m in tv rights from 2025-27 they’d have so much more money to fund the future of the game.
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,545
Donkey is comparing apples with oranges - the article is from Newslimited who are rather biased one has to say against Clubs that stuck with the ARL and particular ARL Identities/Supporters from that period still to this day. i.e Phil Gould cops it from Newslimited.

Donkey has a bias against Sydney himself and finds articles that support his views but forgets that these are only opinion pieces and not factual accounts that can be relied on.

The Salary cap during that period

2007 - 3.9 million
2008- 4 million
2009 - 4.1 million
2010 - 4.1 million

2022 - 10 million - Club Grants - 13.9 million

It needs to sink in that there is no way the NRL will be reducing the number of Teams in Sydney by either merging or relocating them.

The AFL wouldn't consider such a move either for any of their 9 Melbourne based AFL teams.

 
Messages
12,780
It’s such a bizarre a statement. Who do they think people on the Southside have been supporting for 30 years? If anything Brisbane Broncos aren’t a north or south side team. They’re a national brand with fans in pretty much every state.
What's biazare is the mental gymnastics Sydney RL fans use to argue Brisbane is an all-city team while claiming the Roosters cannot represent anything but a small pocket in the eastern suburbs.

Roosters could represent a large proportion of Sydney if they were marketed right and weren't competing with so many clubs.

Having said all of this, the Broncos do have a large following in Logan, Ipswich and the bay side suburbs of Brisbane.
 
Messages
12,780
yeah i don't get his beef with the QLD cup. It's not really that important where Brisbane teams are located... Norths, Souths and Easts are where they are because they are 100 year old clubs- when places like Logan and Moreton Bay were completely rural. Pathways have been poor in Brisbane because we have 4 or 5 teams all feeding the Broncos.
The Brisbane landscape has changed significantly over the last 110 years. BRL is no longer the highest standard of RL in Brisbane and Broncos have made the inner city BRL clubs redundant.

Don't take my word for it. Go to Davies Park to watch a Souths Magpies game. It'll be played in front of a dozen people on a ground that has dilapidated wooden bench chairs that have been rotting for 50 years. There's a rusty old turnstile sitting on its own that hasn't been used in at least 40 years. The club would have died 20 years ago without assistance from the Raiders. When the NSWRL killed dual registration and forced the Raiders out of the Queensland Cup it almost sent the Magpies bust.

Norths Devils have bugger all fans.

They're hogging two licences that could serve communities without an NRL team.
 
Last edited:

Canard

Immortal
Messages
34,559
1. The Brisbane landscape has changed significantly over the last 110 years. BRL is no longer the highest standard of RL in Brisbane and Broncos have made the inner city BRL clubs redundant.

Don't take my word for it. Go to Davies Park to watch a Souths Magpies game. It'll be played in front of a dozen people on a ground that has dilapidated wooden bench chairs that have been rotting for 50 years. There's a rusty old turnstile sitting on its own that hasn't been used in at least 40 years. The club would have died 20 years ago without assistance from the Raiders. When the NSWRL killed registration and forced the Raiders out of the Queensland Cup it almost sent the Magpies bust.

Norths Devils have bugger all fans.

They're hogging two licences that could serve communities without an NRL team. aTEAM.

Do BRL teams have "licences"?

The state of the game that you are describing is the reality of modern lower tier sports, in 2022.

People just have to many other entertainment options available to them to generate interest at any level below elite, and it wouldn't matter if the team was located in Milton or Mt Gravatt.
 
Messages
12,780
Donkey is comparing apples with oranges - the article is from Newslimited who are rather biased one has to say against Clubs that stuck with the ARL and particular ARL Identities/Supporters from that period still to this day. i.e Phil Gould cops it from Newslimited.
So you're arguing it's all an evil conspiracy by News Ltd to doom innocent Sydney clubs?

🤣

If that was the case then News Ltd could have used the 50% stake they had in the game back then to kick these clubs out.

Some Sydney clubs were piling up debt back in those days. Cronulla was steeped in debt until a few seasons ago.

Donkey has a bias against Sydney himself and finds articles that support his views but forgets that these are only opinion pieces and not factual accounts that can be relied on.

There are incontrovertible facts in these articles that you're unwilling to accept. Here's just a few facts presented in the aforementioned article:

1. Salary cap was low because Sydney clubs weren't generating enough revenue to pay players anything higher than $4.1m.
2. The gaming machine revenue tax introduced by the NSW gov at the time crippled Sydney clubs because they relied heavily on people playing the pokies. They didn't draw enough capital from sponsorship, gate receipts, merchandise and corporate hospitality to be viable.

The only real difference between now and 2010 is each club is given a $14m grant by the ARLC to cover what they're unable to generate. Take away the grant and these clubs will be back in dire straights.

The Salary cap during that period

2007 - 3.9 million
2008- 4 million
2009 - 4.1 million
2010 - 4.1 million

2022 - 10 million - Club Grants - 13.9 million

That's because John Grant introduced an annual grant of 130% to cover the salary cap and costs of running a football team.

🙄

The Sydney clubs are still in a very vulnerable position should Foxtel fall over or decide they don't want to fund us much anymore. God help us if AwFuL makes any further inroads into Sydney and Brisbane, as Murdoch told the media that fumbleball is his preferred game and will use his publications to help it grow in the northern states.

What do you think News Ltd will do if fumbleball becomes popular enough in Brisbane and Sydney for Foxtel to generate enough subscriptions in those markets without rugby league?

It needs to sink in that there is no way the NRL will be reducing the number of Teams in Sydney by either merging or relocating them.

No one said the ARLC is going to cull Sydney teams. It doesn't mean that they shouldn't cull a few for the good of the game.

Every year we say no to expanding into new markets because we are preoccupied with propping up unviable Sydney clubs and it is slowly turning us into a niche sport.

Not having teams in Adelaide and Perth is limiting the game's exposure in those markets and holding back our ability to generate revenue from advertising. This ain't an opinion. It's a fact propped up by us ignoring 40% of the metro markets that major companies operate in.

The AFL wouldn't consider such a move either for any of their 9 Melbourne based AFL teams.

They have in the past.
 
Messages
12,780
Do BRL teams have "licences"?

The state of the game that you are describing is the reality of modern lower tier sports, in 2022.

People just have to many other entertainment options available to them to generate interest at any level below elite, and it wouldn't matter if the team was located in Milton or Mt Gravatt.
Each club has a mandate they have to follow or risk being kicked out. Mackay Cutters were threatened with expulsion from the Queensland Cup for not wanting to play in PNG.
 

mongoose

Coach
Messages
11,354
The Brisbane landscape has changed significantly over the last 110 years. BRL is no longer the highest standard of RL in Brisbane and Broncos have made the inner city BRL clubs redundant.

Don't take my word for it. Go to Davies Park to watch a Souths Magpies game. It'll be played in front of a dozen people on a ground that has dilapidated wooden bench chairs that have been rotting for 50 years. There's a rusty old turnstile sitting on its own that hasn't been used in at least 40 years. The club would have died 20 years ago without assistance from the Raiders. When the NSWRL killed registration and forced the Raiders out of the Queensland Cup it almost sent the Magpies bust.

Norths Devils have bugger all fans.

They're hogging two licences that could serve communities without an NRL team.
Sadly I think the QLD cup is mainly a feeder comp that relies on Leagues Club funding.... I doubt the magpies would get much more of a following playing in Logan and if they did they would have most likely moved there permanently by now.

If the council did up Davies Park and improved the game day experience (food trucks, craft beer etc) I think they would get some really good turnouts actually. It would pull the hipster crowd a bit like the Newtown Jets.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
34,559
Each club has a mandate they have to follow or risk being kicked out. Mackay Cutters were threatened with expulsion from the Queensland Cup for not wanting to play in PNG.

It's a given that clubs have to follow certain protocols etc.

But you seem to be intimating that there is a finite number of licence holders and that this is preventing any new clubs from joining.

Given the amount of clubs that have come and gone in the BRL and QCup over the last 20 or so years, I don't think any such limitation exists at this level.
 

Latest posts

Top