Merging Sydney Teams

[docbrown]

Gallop's recent comments of relocating Sydney clubs would definitely appear to indicate that is off the agenda.

When you look at the areas we need to/could service -
* Perth/Western Australia
* Western Brisbane/
* Central Coast/North Sydney
* New Zealand II
* Adelaide/South Australia

* New Zealand III
* Sunshine Coast
* Central Queensland
* Papua New Guinea
* Melbourne II

Now some of these may never happen. But honestly the top 5 should be the biggest priorities. However I won't discount the longer term benefits of the other five.

However with a combined population with New Zealand of over 35,000,000 in the future I would not want to see any more than 22-24 teams.

To prepare for the first 5 I suggest we need to start looking at reducing the current comp to 15 teams through merger. I would rather the teams stay entirely in Sydney rather than be shifted to a new city entirely. All one team cities must remain as is - Storm, Raiders, Dragons, Knights, Titans, Broncos, Cowboys, Warriors. Also the Wests Tigers are already merged.

Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs
Parramatta Eels
South Sydney Rabbitohs
Manly Warringah Sea Eagles
Sydney City Roosters
Penrith Panthers
Cronulla Sharks

Of those I suggest that the top 3 are strong enough to remain stand alone.

I think it is unwise to merge traditional rivals or those with two strong mascots or two strong local identifiers. I also suggest that the weakness of one club should be address by the strength of the other and vice versa.

 

[docbrown]

That said I think the teams can survive without merger but I think some will continue to rely on handouts whereas if they merged and had a large financial incentive then they could become bigger than the sum of their parts.

 

[adamkungl]

You've lost the plot if you think fking Adelaide is worth more than any of the Sydney clubs.

Also, who's relying on handouts? The Titans?

 

[Aaron_sfas]

how do the dragons fall into the one team city category?? they show what seems almost like contempt towards the illawarra at times

 

[joshie]

Gallop's recent comments of relocating Sydney clubs would definitely appear to indicate that is off the agenda.

When you look at the areas we need to/could service -
* Perth/Western Australia
* Western Brisbane/
* Central Coast/North Sydney
* New Zealand II
* Adelaide/South Australia

* New Zealand III
* Sunshine Coast
* Central Queensland
* Papua New Guinea
* Melbourne II

These two clubs need to be higher on the list IMHO. I Think that the next moves should go Brisbane Bombers and Perth followed by the Bears and NZ II.

With this next TV deal, how much coverage that is given to the oppressed states (Vic, Tas, WA, SA, NT) will be key in weather or not Melbourne II and Adelaide/SA is possible. If a regular amount of fair coverage at a high standard going head to head with AFL is accesisable, then we will see how genuine that expansion is.

In our climate right now you can't look very far past the eastern sea board for growth simply because 9 are farkwitts. But down the road, it is possible, considering we have a better product which includes International Competitions.

 

[Dragon_Taylor6]

how do the dragons fall into the one team city category?? they show what seems almost like contempt towards the illawarra at times

What a load of rubbish.

 

[adamkungl]

Let's be honest...this thread is nothing more than a more elaborate way to suggest a Roosters Sharks merger again. For someone normally sensible, docbrown is off his head with this one.

 

[docbrown]

Let's be honest...this thread is nothing more than a more elaborate way to suggest a Roosters Sharks merger again. For someone normally sensible, docbrown is off his head with this one.

No not at all, I didn't even mention it. Obviously that would be my choice but like I said merger doesn't even have to happen at all, it just means we may very will go into a competition with more than 20 teams.

Just given Gallop's comments on keeping all Sydney bases covered it just seemed like a good discussion topic - the conflict between keeping Sydney covered vs expansion in those 10 areas.

 

[docbrown]

how do the dragons fall into the one team city category?? they show what seems almost like contempt towards the illawarra at times

They have already merged so that would also eliminate them from contention,.

 

[docbrown]

These two clubs need to be higher on the list IMHO. I Think that the next moves should go Brisbane Bombers and Perth followed by the Bears and NZ II.

While I don't necessarily agree that the Bombers are the next fit (to me the best Brisbane scenario is the one East Cost Tiger has remarked on elsewhere) those 4 areas are all logical and would bring the competition to 20 teams.

Any other areas would then mean we would have to surpass that. The question is: do we look at mergers to minimise it?

 

[adamkungl]

I think we'll hit 20 teams within a decade with the first 4 you mention (Perth CC Brisbane2 NZ2).

The absolute maximum given this country's size should be 24 - I would suggest Adelaide, PNG would be next, with another QLD team and another NZ team coming afterwards. Melbourne 2 seems ridiculously unlikely, ever.

 

[CQ Italia]

When you look at the areas we need to/could service -
* Perth/Western Australia
* Western Brisbane/
* Central Coast/North Sydney
* New Zealand II
* Adelaide/South Australia

* New Zealand III
* Sunshine Coast
* Central Queensland
* Papua New Guinea
* Melbourne II

-----
5 of those don't even have a bid. Central Queensland may surprise a few than.

 

[docbrown]

I think we'll hit 20 teams within a decade with the first 4 you mention (Perth CC Brisbane2 NZ2).

The absolute maximum given this country's size should be 24 - I would suggest Adelaide, PNG would be next, with another QLD team and another NZ team coming afterwards. Melbourne 2 seems ridiculously unlikely, ever.

What's really interesting is that Melbourne will have a population of 7,000,000 by 2050.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Perth and Brisbane 2 in 2014/15

NZ 2, PNG in 2020

If mergers or relocations occur then so be it. CC can have a team then, whether it be the Bears or a relocated Sydney side. Otherwise those other franchises are more important.

 

[joshie]

While I don't necessarily agree that the Bombers are the next fit (to me the best Brisbane scenario is the one East Cost Tiger has remarked on elsewhere) those 4 areas are all logical and would bring the competition to 20 teams.

Any other areas would then mean we would have to surpass that. The question is: do we look at mergers to minimise it?

The Bombers have everything in the process and a lot of Brisbane-ites dont support the broncos because of things that happened in the past! SO thee Bombers would gain those fans and then there would be a true cross town derby for QLD. This would mean SEQ and the Gold Coast belongs to the Titans, The Broncos have the logan-central brisbane area and then the Bombers would represent the north. Then eventually the CQ bid would represent CQ obviously and the Cowboys far north.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Perth and Brisbane 2 in 2014/15

NZ 2, PNG in 2020

If mergers or relocations occur then so be it. CC can have a team then, whether it be the Bears or a relocated Sydney side. Otherwise those other franchises are more important.

Why are they more important? I thought consumer demand was the most important overall aspect of expanding to anywhere. Consumer demand is what dictate's ratings, subscriptions, attendances, memberships, sales etc. Consumer demand is what in the end makes or breaks a deal. Without consumer demand, the code or any business organization for that matter has nothing. It's first priority is cash influxes from such demands. You can't base important decisions on potential alone, you need guarantee's to some extent.

And from where I'm standing the Central Coast Bears have the most consumer demand at the moment and a'las a population to justify any actions being taken on expansion.

Brisbane still hasn't justified itself for getting another team. If you truly live here you would bloody well see it with your own eyes on any day of the week.

 

[docbrown]

The Bombers have everything in the process and a lot of Brisbane-ites dont support the broncos because of things that happened in the past! SO thee Bombers would gain those fans and then there would be a true cross town derby for QLD. This would mean SEQ and the Gold Coast belongs to the Titans, The Broncos have the logan-central brisbane area and then the Bombers would represent the north. Then eventually the CQ bid would represent CQ obviously and the Cowboys far north.

Are the Broncos actually logan based or is that just a hopefully wish that they move to suit the Bombers?

 

[joshie]

Are the Broncos actually logan based or is that just a hopefully wish that they move to suit the Bombers?

They represent that area in many ways and I do believe that they had or have a feeder club in Logan.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Why are they more important? I thought consumer demand was the most overall important aspect of expanding to anywhere. Consumer demand is what dictate's ratings, subscriptions, attendances, memberships, sales etc. Consumer demand is what in the end makes or breaks a deal. Without consumer demand, the code or any business organization for that natter has nothing. It's first priority is cash influxes from such demands. You can't base important decisions on potential alone, you need guarantee's to some extent.

And from where I'm standing the Central Coast Bears have the most consumer demand at the moment and a'las a population to justify any actions being taken on expansion.

Brisbane still hasn't justified itself for getting another team. If you truly live here you would bloody well see it with your own eyes on any day of the week.

Because it's not that big a market and it's already dominated by RL anyway. It doesn't make the game more national, it does nothing for international RL and it does nothing for the player pool. The CC people may be able to show THEY want a team more than the others. But that doesn't mean they should get one.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Because it's not that big a market and it's already dominated by RL anyway. It doesn't make the game more national, it does nothing for international RL and it does nothing for the player pool. The CC people may be able to show THEY want a team more than the others. But that doesn't mean they should get one.

1.1+ million and growing isn't a big market?