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!

Todd Greenberg has pretty much said one Sydney team will be relocated.

Irish-bulldog

Juniors
Messages
785
Well on channel 9 last night Todd Greenberg’s comments lead towards the NRL are serious about moving 1 Sydney team. Well if it was to happen, which one would move and why ?, not because you just hate a team, what are some clubs really lacking in.
 

VictoryFC

Bench
Messages
3,786
Id say Manly, but Brookvale is getting a facelift so who knows.

Relocation would be a mistake. Theyll come to same conclusion as auskickers. There isnt enough broad support to kill one of the clubs as they all have their positives, Sydney RL would be poorer for losing a club, so theyll eventually do what auskick did and decide to expand to 18.

Sydney clubs happy, new cities happy, and broadcasters with an extra game in two key markets happy. Win win
 
Messages
4,040
If you go the geographical argument, roosters or Souths. Both lay claim to the east/south east corridor, but are pretty well boxed in outside of that

As i said the other week, the Souths ceo confirmed a few years ago that 80% of their members don’t even live in the south of Sydney any more

On that basis, it’s goodbye Souths

If they moved the dogs I’d understand as well. Don’t have a huge geographical space to lay claim to and don’t really have a sustainable/quality home ground option
 

Last Week

Bench
Messages
3,642
If you go the geographical argument, roosters or Souths. Both lay claim to the east/south east corridor, but are pretty well boxed in outside of that

As i said the other week, the Souths ceo confirmed a few years ago that 80% of their members don’t even live in the south of Sydney any more

On that basis, it’s goodbye Souths

If they moved the dogs I’d understand as well. Don’t have a huge geographical space to lay claim to and don’t really have a sustainable/quality home ground option

1ICuL_tsI7A9D7h9PvS3X1nBtHQJmlxiWu1spJ529KsmxovLEXlqOJP6A87rI079-kpRQ5EzGcHbQ7TiiTMIxQvmMzhK17zPAHAaBDs=w500-h207-nc
 

Dawesy76

Juniors
Messages
254
We can all speculate as much as we want. We can all give our ifs and buts, but in the end we all knows the Sharks are in the gun.
 

Lemon Squash

First Grade
Messages
7,982
If you go the geographical argument, roosters or Souths. Both lay claim to the east/south east corridor, but are pretty well boxed in outside of that

As i said the other week, the Souths ceo confirmed a few years ago that 80% of their members don’t even live in the south of Sydney any more

On that basis, it’s goodbye Souths

If they moved the dogs I’d understand as well. Don’t have a huge geographical space to lay claim to and don’t really have a sustainable/quality home ground option

No doubt if you were starting a new NRL from scratch tomorrow the Roosters/Souths area would be occupied by one club.

Next to no chance they would ever relocate either of the two current clubs even though it makes the most sense.
 

Knight76

Juniors
Messages
2,043
No he didn't.

He ran through a list of options and that was one of them. Not sure how he basically said anything.
 

Latest posts

Top