Channel 9 wants to kill of a sydney club

[adamkungl]

like appealing to all classes rather than just the dero class

Roosters already exist

 

[Reflector]

Bears got cut .. their major sponsor Citibank signed with swans and paid $500k+ a year for 17 years..

Hello?? What's that tell u

Citibank stopped sponsorship of Norths after 1997. In '98 they had no major sponsor then BBX worked a deal with them in '99.

 

[johnny plath]

I suppose it was a mistake but an excusable one given they have probably between them been in all the GFs over the last 10 years.

you mean like the golden era of the 80s when canterbury, parra, and manly played in every grand final except 1. Or how about that Golden era when the dragons won 11 in a row in the 50s/60s. I'm not really sure what your point is. It sucks for teams that aren't the domineers, but seriously competitions need the super teams to showcase the game, otherwise its just a bunch of similar mundane plodders driving the game into mediocrity. Everyone seems to be able to regirgitate what it is that Melbourne and Roosters do that makes them a level above, so how about instead of whinging, clubs strive for the same excellence instead of looking for excuses to cry and whinge.

 

[TheRam]

I'm a PE teacher. The AFL are all over schools & grassroots across NSW & ACT offering free gear (gold to a public school), lesson plans & AFL coaching clinics/programs/visits (makes it easier & more attractive to do more AFL in your PE program) etc. Never seen a brass razoo or so much as a school liaison officer or anything from an NRL team.

The AFL have an actual plan to grow their game & gets kids into it. The NRL don't give a crap if it's not on TV or in the courts apparently.

One thing I just don't get. If both sports are basically paid roughly the same amount of revenue from their respective media companies and the other bits and pieces that total said revenue, then how come the AFL has all these hundreds of millions more then the NRL to plough into NSW, QLD juniors and their expansion teams? I mean the amount of money they are spending every freakin year over and above the NRL in all their takeover endeavours is astronomical.

How the hell can they do it and also have all these assets while the NRL has zero to its name and can't fund junior development at any meaningful level in any State to actually grow the sport, but just enough for a slow death while the AFL ultimately take over?

How is this fight so lopsided?

 

[TheRam]

Anyone find it strange that there has been deathly silence from Greenberg and Beattie on this? Wouldn’t you think they would have made a statement by now?

I'm telling you they're the ones who got their surrogate to run this crap up the flag poll to get a gauge of the public reaction. Don't forget that Greenberg earlier in the year said he was looking at all possibilities for expansion and would most probably make a decision by early next year. I guarantee this is his way to feel the backlash without the ARLC/him getting any backlash.

Like I said, typical gutless polly stuff. This is why nothing will ever get better while we have useless self interest people like him at the helm.

 

[T-Boon]

you mean like the golden era of the 80s when canterbury, parra, and manly played in every grand final except 1. Or how about that Golden era when the dragons won 11 in a row in the 50s/60s. I'm not really sure what your point is.

My point is, it is boring. The fact it isn't the first time it has happened doesn't change that fact. Actually didn't they bring the salary cap in and make other radical changes because of these earlier examples you raise?
It is also worse that it is boring now than it was then because people didn't have choices then and they didn't get distracted as quickly. Also you can throw in that the leading teams now also play an excruciatingly boring style. At least Parra in the 80s played adventurous exciting football.
All this leads to talk of big changes.

 

[abc]

One thing I just don't get. If both sports are basically paid roughly the same amount of revenue from their respective media companies and the other bits and pieces that total said revenue, then how come the AFL has all these hundreds of millions more then the NRL to plough into NSW, QLD juniors and their expansion teams? I mean the amount of money they are spending every freakin year over and above the NRL in all their takeover endeavours is astronomical.

How the hell can they do it and also have all these assets while the NRL has zero to its name and can't fund junior development at any meaningful level in any State to actually grow the sport, but just enough for a slow death while the AFL ultimately take over?

How is this fight so lopsided?

In simple terms the revenue numbers aren't that close overall so the NRL have less.
In 2018, the NRL revenue was just on 500M (vs. AFL 668M) where 37% was non-broadcast
In 2018, Broncos was top club with 52M (vs. AFL 40M-86M where Broncos would rank 16th)

Ultimately is is a numbers game as to why NRL has less to invest.

 

[Diesel]

One thing I just don't get. If both sports are basically paid roughly the same amount of revenue from their respective media companies and the other bits and pieces that total said revenue, then how come the AFL has all these hundreds of millions more then the NRL to plough into NSW, QLD juniors and their expansion teams? I mean the amount of money they are spending every freakin year over and above the NRL in all their takeover endeavours is astronomical.

How the hell can they do it and also have all these assets while the NRL has zero to its name and can't fund junior development at any meaningful level in any State to actually grow the sport, but just enough for a slow death while the AFL ultimately take over?

How is this fight so lopsided?

Heard many times today the AFL made $50m this past year, which is very impressive but I haven’t heard if that figure is gross or nett. Anyone know?

 

[Travitoh]

My point is, it is boring. The fact it isn't the first time it has happened doesn't change that fact. Actually didn't they bring the salary cap in and make other radical changes because of these earlier examples you raise?
It is also worse that it is boring now than it was then because people didn't have choices then and they didn't get distracted as quickly. Also you can throw in that the leading teams now also play an excruciatingly boring style. At least Parra in the 80s played adventurous exciting football.
All this leads to talk of big changes.

The past decade has delivered 7 different premiership sides and 11 of 16 clubs featuring in the GF.
Of the 5 remaining clubs, 3 won a premiership in the decade before that.

 

[T-Boon]

The past decade has delivered 7 different premiership sides and 11 of 16 clubs featuring in the GF.
Of the 5 remaining clubs, 3 won a premiership in the decade before that.

Some clubs catch lightning in a bottle and stick their head up for a season maybe 2 and hope to win. It is bound to happen since there is a top 4 so 2 outsiders get a decent crack each year. But that hasn't seemed realistic this year. The Roosters and Melbourne have been at least top 4 for a decade (I think the Roosters dropped out for a year so then went and bought every ones favourite players). People are totally bored and also suspicious with the competition. There has been a lot of salary cap cheating and people are pretty convinced that it is happening now.
The other thing is there is just boredom about the existing clubs. There hasn't been anything new for what 12 years.
Same structured style of play by each club.
With fox people get to watch sports from over seas so there is more choice now.
All I am doing here is explaining why people are bored and want to talk about new teams coming in to freshen things up.

 

[TheRam]

In simple terms the revenue numbers aren't that close overall so the NRL have less.
In 2018, the NRL revenue was just on 500M (vs. AFL 668M) where 37% was non-broadcast
In 2018, Broncos was top club with 52M (vs. AFL 40M-86M where Broncos would rank 16th)

Ultimately is is a numbers game as to why NRL has less to invest.

View attachment 32718

That is all fine, but aren't you referring to the AFL's clubs profitability here? They don't fund the expansion teams or the Junior investments in the non AFL States do they? They would be looking into funding and supporting their own back yards, right?

 

[siv]

While we’re on idiotic ideas

Just get rid of 8 Sydney teams
Put 4 in Brisbane
2 in Melbourne
2 in Tasmania

Then add another extra 4 to the South Pacific countries.

Well it's one option for all NSW based teams to leave the NRL and just play in a 12 team NSWRL competition

Then you can add Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane West, Brisbane North, Wellington and Fiji to the NRL

 

[Travitoh]

Some clubs catch lightning in a bottle and stick their head up for a season maybe 2 and hope to win. It is bound to happen since there is a top 4 so 2 outsiders get a decent crack each year. But that hasn't seemed realistic this year. The Roosters and Melbourne have been at least top 4 for a decade (I think the Roosters dropped out for a year so then went and bought every ones favourite players). People are totally bored and also suspicious with the competition. There has been a lot of salary cap cheating and people are pretty convinced that it is happening now.
The other thing is there is just boredom about the existing clubs. There hasn't been anything new for what 12 years.
Same structured style of play by each club.
With fox people get to watch sports from over seas so there is more choice now.
All I am doing here is explaining why people are bored and want to talk about new teams coming in to freshen things up.

Are people bored of NFL because New England are around the mark every year for the past 15?
Or NBA and at least one of Steph Curry/LeBron James/Kahwi Leonard featuring in every finals series?
Or Man City/Chelsea winning EPL every season?

You've exaggerated the 'dominance' of Melbourne and Sydney when they've played off once for the Premiership, last season.

 

[ACTPanthers]

Some clubs catch lightning in a bottle and stick their head up for a season maybe 2 and hope to win. It is bound to happen since there is a top 4 so 2 outsiders get a decent crack each year. But that hasn't seemed realistic this year. The Roosters and Melbourne have been at least top 4 for a decade (I think the Roosters dropped out for a year so then went and bought every ones favourite players). People are totally bored and also suspicious with the competition. There has been a lot of salary cap cheating and people are pretty convinced that it is happening now.
The other thing is there is just boredom about the existing clubs. There hasn't been anything new for what 12 years.
Same structured style of play by each club.
With fox people get to watch sports from over seas so there is more choice now.
All I am doing here is explaining why people are bored and want to talk about new teams coming in to freshen things up.

No, what you're doing is playing the same old song on the broken record you seem to love so much... The only thing boring in rugby league, is your constant overstating how boring YOU think it is (I emphasise the YOU because your imagined conversations with people about how boring RL is never actually happened)

 

[Twizzle]

Cutting teams will cut fans, there is enough evidence of that in this thread.

Expansion is the future but are the current NRL administration smart enough to do this successfully ?

Not for mine.

 

[ACTPanthers]

There's no way I'd follow another team in the NRL if the Panthers were cut (or relocated for that matter). I watch a lot of NFL and NBA so would just be more active in those rather than follow another NRL team (I consider relocating a team to be essentially creating a new team, and I couldn't follow another team other than the Penrith Panthers)

 

[mongoose]

In simple terms the revenue numbers aren't that close overall so the NRL have less.
In 2018, the NRL revenue was just on 500M (vs. AFL 668M) where 37% was non-broadcast
In 2018, Broncos was top club with 52M (vs. AFL 40M-86M where Broncos would rank 16th)

Ultimately is is a numbers game as to why NRL has less to invest.

View attachment 32718

We're supposed to beleive the Lions make more revenue than the Broncos who have bigger crowds, more members and sell more merchandise?
Looks like more fudged figures from AFL land.
There was a report a few years ago that had the Penrith Panthers as the most valuable sporting brand in the country but thats only because they have 6 or 7 Leagues clubs with over 150,000 members in total. Not hard the twist numbers to make something look bigger than it is.

 

[Diesel]

There's no way I'd follow another team in the NRL if the Panthers were cut (or relocated for that matter). I watch a lot of NFL and NBA so would just be more active in those rather than follow another NRL team (I consider relocating a team to be essentially creating a new team, and I couldn't follow another team other than the Penrith Panthers)

If they changed to the West Sydney Panthers and played somewhere in western Sydney that wasn’t Penrith for 1/2 their games, would they still have your support?

 

[Perth Red]

Beattie made a comment via Twitter on Sunday night saying nothing had been decided. Haven’t heard anything from Todd

Thanks hadnt seen that but in regards to saying nothing and hoping it goes away that is a very naive strategy. If there is no intention or even consideration why not have the CEO come out with a strong statement the day the story broke and snuff the fire before it starts raging?

 

[grouch]

Well worth a read

https://pythagonrl.com/2019/09/04/on-expansion-and-its-relationship-with-sydney