Expansion voting.

[flippikat]

If the AFL sink $100 million into propping up GWS in the name of expanding their base then they're hardly likely to walk away from that investment after 10 years to save small niche clubs that are dying a natural death in Melbourne.

The more likely result is the Fitzroy/Bears strategy. Keep propping up the expansion team until one of the niche clubs go under and then merge the two as a way to boost the expansion club's playing list and Melbourne following.

Be in no doubt, the AFL will still be solidly funding a second Sydney team in 10 years from now with zero sign of that support being withdrawn. The team may not still be called the GWS Giants or play in black and orange but it'll at least be the direct decendant of that club.

A second AFL team in Sydney is a long term reality we're going to have to get used to dealing with. Planning on the basis that it's a short term annoyance that'll be gone in five or ten years is dangerously self delusional.

Leigh.

You might be onto something - maybe that's why the AFL chose Giants over Wolves for GWS?

A generic American name is easier to replace with the identity of a struggling Melbourne club!

I doubt that this approach would work in the NRL though, as the expansion teams seem to be heading towards well-established identities (Bears, Reds, Jets..) that would be hard to displace.

Will be interesting to see what name & colours the Central Queensland bid go for, though.

 

[Quidgybo]

You might be onto something - maybe that's why the AFL chose Giants over Wolves for GWS?

A generic American name is easier to replace with the identity of a struggling Melbourne club!

I have no doubt the GWS and Gold Coast identities are immediately disposable in the event of a traditional identify going under in Melbourne. In fact I assumed that was precisely the thinking behind not initially selecting a mascot for the Gold Coast Football Club. I think the original plan was just to call it Gold Coast FC and wait a couple of years until the Kangaroos finally went under in Melbourne. Then "merge" the defunct Melbourne club with the expansion team and have the Gold Coast Kangaroos playing in blue, white and a dash of one extra arbitrary colour out of Robina.


I think that's still the general plan for both GC and GWS. Merge them with defunct Melbourne clubs at the first opportunity as a way to effectively achieve the relocations the AFL always wanted to do anyway. When the first Melbourne club goes down use the opportunity to strengthen one of the two expansion clubs and bring in Tasmania to maintain the nine game competition (and to shut the whinging islanders up). When the second Melbourne club goes under, strengthen the second of those frontier expansion sides and bring in a third WA team to maintain the comp.

Regardless of the exact details of how it plays out, I have no doubt the AFL will have fewer clubs in Melbourne long before they abandon the second Sydney team and the Gold Coast.

Leigh.

 

[bobmar28]

Has the NRL been running for 100years? Has Gallop been CEO for 100years? No they haven't. The NRL have pushed the button on memberships since 98 but it's really only kicked on since Gallops been CEO. So unfortunately you miss the mark yet again. Every other bid sees the importance of memberships. So do the NRL. What makes Jets so special? Memberships before bid submission dictates how well a bid is accepted in the community and how well it's been marketed. You gain nothing and lose more waiting until after bids are submitted by initiating the local public.

The Roosters have. How many members do they have after 100 years in first grade?

 

[bobmar28]

Exactly. So the standards of what a team can bring into the comp have already been set by the mere existence of these 3 clubs.

Therefore dribbling on and on about TV revenue is irrelevant. Because neither of these 3 clubs would add much except the odd finals game and the odd (nothing else on TV except a Sharks/Sea Eagles game but hey it's still rugby league so let's watch it anyways).

THEREFORE, criticism over what the CCBEARS would bring is irrelevant. We'll bring people, butts on seats, sponsors, TV revenue regardless, state of the art RL facilities and plans that show club self sustainability is easy and that all clubs SHOULD stop asking for handouts and rely on TV revenue alone.

At the end of the day all this TV revenue gets pumped predominately back into struggling clubs (who are struggling through their own mismanagement). The CCBEARS don't need to save any other clubs, hell no one wanted to save us. The CCBEARS are more concerned about the area they represent rather then how much extra $$ can we make to help out Sydney teams that never helped us.

BUT whats ironic is clubs are looking at WAReds & Ipswich as money sources via TV revenue. When most of that money will be pumped back into those bids to ensure their short term survival. Yet the CCBEARS, who will make the same $$revenue as the JETS regardless, due to their business plan all that TV revenue doesn't need to be pumped back into the CCBEARS to prop us up. Instead it can and will be pumped back into the weak Sydney clubs.

As it's been stated, the CCBEARS will help out other Sydney clubs more so then any other bid. However in saying that, the CCBEARS can stand on their own feet without the need for handouts. No one loses, regardless of the lack of foresight by some individuals.

A 4th QLD team will provide plenty in the way of TV dollars but it's not just about TV revenue. It's about moving on from a Sydney suburban competition to a truly national one. Adding another team to the Sydney region does the opposite.

 

[bobmar28]

You agreed with one post, where he was defending his club.

Hardly a way to push for another teams inclusion to the RL based on merit.

I don't get why you are so anti CC, did mum run away with a fella up there ?

Coming from a unbiased perspective (I have no attachment to any of the bids). My priority is what is best for the game (covering all aspects).

Based on merit covering all aspects CC s in the best position of all prospective bids, even a moron should be able to see this.

How is adding a 10th team to the Sydney region good for the game?

The time has come to expand the game outside NSW.

 

[Talons]

AFL are quickly running out of expansion options.

After GWS and Gold Coast, where else could they expand?

All they have left are low-population areas that follow their game (Eg Tasmania, rural Victoria, Northern Territory) or places that need a lot of work getting the following they need to sustain a team (hello GWS & Gold Coast Suns)

Their game means sweet FA to people in New Zealand - that's a market of 4 million and growing.

Rugby League's strength is that there are MANY long-term expansion options, from frontiers with decent populations like Perth and Adelaide right through to places with an established RL history such as SE Queensland and PNG..

There's also a third category. places with a stronger Rugby Union culture than Rugby League. RL has always had a lower profile in NZ, but the Warriors have lifted it, and a second team will do even more, given the local derby it creates. The two biggest candidates would have to be Wellington and Christchurch.. And if you really want to create a rivalry, Auckland v Christchurch is as big as it gets in NZ sport.

Here in New Zealand, the real competition to the NRL is Super Rugby.. And look at the geographical spread of that! AFL will never match that, but Rugby League might (In NZ and Australia anyway.. South Africa would need work, but not TOTALLY impossible)

Here is a poster who has come onto this thread without bias, but out of sheer logic (not manipulation) has encapsulated what the supporters of a QLD bid are all about...

 

[bobmar28]

He agrees to anything that is pro ipswich. If you put together every post that he was quoted or referred to with remarks along the line of "great post" and the like, you will see contradictions. He doesn't have an argument or an opinion as to why Ipswich deserves a team more, he'd rather just argue with anybody and everybody else's arguments despite those arguments having contradictions when put together.



For the fifth time:

The AFL's GWS team is targeting North Sydney hills district right up to the Central Coast for juniors as there is not enough juniors in Western Sydney let alone The greater western Sydney to support a team.

When are people going to learn that the GWS team is not locations in the area determined only by the AFL as "Greater Western Sydney".

9 Sydney teams can't counter the AFL invasion?

 

[Red&BlackBear]

The Roosters have. How many members do they have after 100 years in first grade?

Originally Posted by Red&BlackBear
Has the NRL been running for 100years? Has Gallop been CEO for 100years? [\b]No they haven't. The NRL have pushed the button on memberships since 98 but it's really only kicked on since Gallops been CEO. So unfortunately you miss the mark yet again. Every other bid sees the importance of memberships. So do the NRL. What makes Jets so special? Memberships before bid submission dictates how well a bid is accepted in the community and how well it's been marketed. You gain nothing and lose more waiting until after bids are submitted by initiating the local public.

 

[_Johnsy]

How is adding a 10th team to the Sydney region good for the game?

The time has come to expand the game outside NSW.

It's now the Sydney region, the area keeps expanding. Next it will be NSW.

Because I don't think the other 2 bids will be ready for inclusion in 2013. IMO the order for readiness is CC, WA, CQ and then Ipswich.

Yes it is and it is a shame they do not appear ready IMO.

 

[Talons]

9 Sydney teams can't counter the AFL invasion?

If you believe some on here 9 is will never be enough but I'm comfortable and relaxed in the fact that the independent commission will have a little more foresight. They've already tipped their hand at the Byron Bay conference and stated in the media that clubs would prefer expansion to be less N.S.W centric.

 

[bobmar28]

Based on what, your blind faith of anything QLD. Have you actually sat down and thought about what is needed to even begin to submit a successful NRL bid ?Itake because a few league loving people from anywhere in QLD say "yeah we want to have a team in the NRL" that's good enough for you?

I don't see any benefits from not gaining pubic input/support/prospective financial members of the NRL club. Community support is essential ( remember the Titans bid was community driven, & the NRL acknowledged this was a major factor in the Titans gaining admission).

It really makes sense to keep everything under wraps. Especially considering the decision will be made much earlier than the start date of March 2013 a total of 26 months away.

FMD, really ?:crazy::crazy::crazy:

And your statement that Ipswich is not a valid option at this point is based on???

 

[flippikat]

Here is a poster who has come onto this thread without bias, but out of sheer logic (not manipulation) has encapsulated what the supporters of a QLD bid are all about...

Well if all bids were equally ready, I'd support another Brisbane team over Central Coast - if 2013 really is the year of the next expansion.

However I have a feeling that the Bears are more ready than ANYTHING PUBLICISED that Queensland bids have - and for that reason I think the Bears and Reds are the best choice for 2013.

Now, the Queensland bids may have more "in place" than they're letting-on - there may well be confidential agreements, and reports "for NRL eyes only" etc.. but I can only go on what is in the public domain.

As I indicated earlier, I believe the speculation is actually hurting the game and we need a decision on this round of expansion VERY SOON.

Not just that, we also need direction for future phases of expansion (and contraction in Sydney, which I believe still has a club or 2 to go..)

In my ideal scenario I'd have one more merger in Sydney (in the same year as Brisbane 2 is admitted), or a team relocating to Brisbane - so within a short space of time we'd have Central Coast, Perth AND Brisbane2.

Then the next round of expansion we can start looking at some even more exciting options - REALLY expanding the game (Sunshine Coast, Adelaide, NZ 2, PNG, Central Qld) and further for phases after that (NZ 3rd club, Melbourne 2nd club, Geelong or Tasmania?)

 

[bobmar28]

I agree, but lets kill them off quicker.

With Bears they will last 5 years, without Bears they will last a 10-15 years.

So, 9 Sydney teams is not enough. You want to add a 10th.

 

[bobmar28]

I think you underestimate the AFL's committment and financial ability to keep them going. They see this as a long term investment to get a bigger viewership in Sydney and eventually alot more $'s and media profile from it. If the AFL was the NRL I'd agree, but they've got atrack record of being willing to spend to make things happen.

They will need deep pockets.

 

[backdoor]

And your statement that Ipswich is not a valid option at this point is based on???

The mob behind the Ipswich bid struggle to run a Q Cup outfit.

 

[bobmar28]

It's now the Sydney region, the area keeps expanding. Next it will be NSW.

Because I don't think the other 2 bids will be ready for inclusion in 2013. IMO the order for readiness is CC, WA, CQ and then Ipswich.

Yes it is and it is a shame they do not appear ready IMO.

It's a term I have been using for 2 or 3 years. Go back and look at my posts

 

[bobmar28]

The mob behind the Ipswich bid struggle to run a Q Cup outfit.

So in other words, a stab in the dark.

 

[BDGS]

9 Sydney teams can't counter the AFL invasion?

Nope, one team can counter, what you have just labelled as "The AFL invasion". The problem is we need to put a team where they are actually invading and not where they name suggest they represent cause god knows that is a lie.

So, 9 Sydney teams is not enough. You want to add a 10th.

Nope, i want to add a second regional NSW team and a third overall.

 

[Pj,Rj,Hj]

AFL are quickly running out of expansion options.

After GWS and Gold Coast, where else could they expand?

All they have left are low-population areas that follow their game (Eg Tasmania, rural Victoria, Northern Territory) or places that need a lot of work getting the following they need to sustain a team (hello GWS & Gold Coast Suns)

Their game means sweet FA to people in New Zealand - that's a market of 4 million and growing.

Rugby League's strength is that there are MANY long-term expansion options, from frontiers with decent populations like Perth and Adelaide right through to places with an established RL history such as SE Queensland and PNG..

There's also a third category. places with a stronger Rugby Union culture than Rugby League. RL has always had a lower profile in NZ, but the Warriors have lifted it, and a second team will do even more, given the local derby it creates. The two biggest candidates would have to be Wellington and Christchurch.. And if you really want to create a rivalry, Auckland v Christchurch is as big as it gets in NZ sport.

Here in New Zealand, the real competition to the NRL is Super Rugby.. And look at the geographical spread of that! AFL will never match that, but Rugby League might (In NZ and Australia anyway.. South Africa would need work, but not TOTALLY impossible)

I see this point raised occasionally here.

Firstly the AFL has no intention on infinite expansion. 18 is good, as is 16. It's all about the market size for maximum revenue potential but that is pretty obvious.

Secondly expansion potential isn't going to remain the same for the NRL either. Think about how difficult it will be for the likes of Canberra and Townsville when NRL club operational cost reach today's AFL levels. All those potential locations like the Sunshine coast, Wellington may not be able to support a club in the future. It's the very reason why Tasmania don't have an AFL club even with a start up fan base of a few hundred thousand. In the AFL, clubs with a fan base around 300 000 and lower have a very hard time. According to Roy Morgan research, over half the NRL clubs are under that bracket. When NRL clubs look to start turning over $40 million, thats going to be a real struggle in the small markets.

As for Super Rugby, the AFL is hardly concerned. No S15 Franchise is worth more than an AFL club, nor a fair share of NRL clubs. In the S15 case the Geographic spread and cultural divide is more a handicap than a benefit.

 

[BDGS]

Why are we talking about AFL expansion in the NRL expansion thread?