The Bears

[Dark Corner]

The annual grant is 130% of the salary cap. About $3m to $4m of the grant goes directly to the football department of each club. Some Sydney clubs would struggle to compete if they had to produce that $3m to $4m on their own. Many of them struggle to make ends meet with the $3m to $4m they're getting from ARLC.

It's unfair for Sydney teams to receive this money when most of them add nothing to the broadcast rights revenue, which is evident by the most watched teams being Broncos, Storm and Cowboys with the lowest-drawing clubs being from Sydney. It would make good business sense to kill the least popular Sydney brand and replace it with a 3rd Brisbane team, a 2nd NZ team, a Perth team and possibly an Adelaide team to form a strong 20 team competition that has 8 in Sydney, 3 in Brisbane, 1 in Adelaide, 1 in Melbourne, 1 in Perth, 2 in NZ with 4 teams in regional QLD/NSW and ACT. That's a good spread that provides pathways for kids all over the country and lucrative local derbies for the broadcasters in Sydney, Brisbane and NZ. If NZ 2 is successful then another Sydney team could relocate to NZ or be killed off so that we can have more local derbies in NZ and help RL compete with RU for talent and media coverage in the Shaky Isles.

Seven to eight teams in Sydney is more than enough and more than Sydney RL fans deserve. Any Sydneysider who whinges about that is just a petulant sook with an entitlement complex.

I think 6 is the perfect number but if you had to get rid of 2/3 Sydney clubs or relocate who would they be ?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I think 6 is the perfect number but if you had to get rid of 2/3 Sydney clubs or relocate who would they be ?

Ideally, I would make the following relocations.

Sharks - - - > Adelaide
Bulldogs - - - > Christchurch
Sea Eagles - - - > Gosford

Introduce Pirates as 18th team.

 

[siv]

The annual grant is 130% of the salary cap. About $3m to $4m of the grant goes directly to the football department of each club. Some Sydney clubs would struggle to compete if they had to produce that $3m to $4m on their own. Many of them struggle to make ends meet with the $3m to $4m they're getting from ARLC.

It's unfair for Sydney teams to receive this money when most of them add nothing to the broadcast rights revenue, which is evident by the most watched teams being Broncos, Storm and Cowboys with the lowest-drawing clubs being from Sydney. It would make good business sense to kill the least popular Sydney brand and replace it with a 3rd Brisbane team, a 2nd NZ team, a Perth team and possibly an Adelaide team to form a strong 20 team competition that has 8 in Sydney, 3 in Brisbane, 1 in Adelaide, 1 in Melbourne, 1 in Perth, 2 in NZ with 4 teams in regional QLD/NSW and ACT. That's a good spread that provides pathways for kids all over the country and lucrative local derbies for the broadcasters in Sydney, Brisbane and NZ. If NZ 2 is successful then another Sydney team could relocate to NZ or be killed off so that we can have more local derbies in NZ and help RL compete with RU for talent and media coverage in the Shaky Isles.

Seven to eight teams in Sydney is more than enough and more than Sydney RL fans deserve. Any Sydneysider who whinges about that is just a petulant sook with an entitlement complex.

Sydney clubs dont add to broadcast revenue

Youve lost the plot

 

[Colk]

Sydney clubs dont add to broadcast revenue

Youve lost the plot

Some of them do, some of them don’t

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Sydney clubs dont add to broadcast revenue

Youve lost the plot

The 4 or 5 big Sydney clubs add to broadcast revenue. The small ones don't offer anything.

 

[siv]

The 4 or 5 big Sydney clubs add to broadcast revenue. The small ones don't offer anything.

Can you provide evidence?

Your argument doesnt stack up

Because we could revert to a Sydney only comp and broadcasting rights wouldn't change much

Brisbane, NZ and regionals would still want to watch. As they did prior to 1995 which resulted in the Pay-TV War

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Can you provide evidence?

Your argument doesnt stack up

Because we could revert to a Sydney only comp and broadcasting rights wouldn't change much

Brisbane, NZ and regionals would still want to watch. As they did prior to 1995 which resulted in the Pay-TV War

This is bullshit.

If the Queensland clubs, Melbourne, Canberra and New Zealand formed their own competition then their fans will follow them and have no reason to watch the Sydney league. It's delusional to think they're going to give up watching their teams to support a Sydney competition.

Super League was more popular than the ARL.

There's a reason Ch9 want the Broncos to play on Thurs/Fri.

 

[Colk]

Can you provide evidence?

Your argument doesnt stack up

Because we could revert to a Sydney only comp and broadcasting rights wouldn't change much

Brisbane, NZ and regionals would still want to watch. As they did prior to 1995 which resulted in the Pay-TV War

Can you provide evidence? Because evidence is running against you.

There is no way that if you got rid of Brisbane, Melbourne, North Queensland (for Australian audiences) and the Warriors (for NZ audiences) that you would get the same amount of people watching the sport - you only have to look at supporter numbers

You would also definitely have a severely reduced TV deal

 

[Colk]

This is bullshit.

If the Queensland clubs, Melbourne, Canberra and New Zealand formed their own competition then their fans will follow them and have no reason to watch the Sydney league. It's delusional to think they're going to give up watching their teams to support a Sydney competition.

Super League was more popular than the ARL.

There's a reason Ch9 want the Broncos to play on Thurs/Fri.

I can’t believe that there are people on here claiming that the lowest ranking Sydney clubs are somehow more important to the competition and TV (let’s face it as that’s where most of the money is coming from) than the Brisbane Broncos, Melbourne Storm, North Qld Cowboys, NZ Warriors etc

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I can’t believe that there are people on here claiming that the lowest ranking Sydney clubs are somehow more important to the competition and TV (let’s face it as that’s where most of the money is coming from) than the Brisbane Broncos, Melbourne Storm, North Qld Cowboys, NZ Warriors etc

In 2020, the 1st, 4th and 6th most watched clubs across FTA and Pay TV were Broncos, Storm and Cowboys. Broncos finished 16th, Cowboys 14th and Melbourne 2nd on the premiership ladder. Penrith won the minor premiership and broke all sorts of records, yet they were only the 7th most watched team.

On Foxtel, Melbourne, Brisbane and North Queensland were the 1st, 3rd and 5th most watched clubs. Four of the six least watched clubs were from Sydney.

I think that's all the evidence we need that some Sydney clubs aren't very valuable to the broadcasters and the loss of non-Sydney clubs would be disastrous for the NRL and its broadcast partners.

The Season that Was...2020 - NRL TV Ratings *updated 20/11* - Sports Industry AU

The 2020 NRL season totaled 70.2 million viewers across the Nine Network and Foxleague, up 0.35% on the first 20

www.footyindustry.com

 

[siv]

This is bullshit.

If the Queensland clubs, Melbourne, Canberra and New Zealand formed their own competition then their fans will follow them and have no reason to watch the Sydney league. It's delusional to think they're going to give up watching their teams to support a Sydney competition.

Super League was more popular than the ARL.

There's a reason Ch9 want the Broncos to play on Thurs/Fri.

Now your talking

Exact argument for the regional conference and the Sydney conference

Time has proven the Ribot vision was flawed

Some people are stuck in 1995 Apr 1

 

[Santino Patane]

Now your talking

Exact argument for the regional conference and the Sydney conference

Time has proven the Ribot vision was flawed

Some people are stuck in 1995 Apr 1

If others are stuck in 1995, I’d say you’re stuck somewhere between 1967 and 1981……

 

[Colk]

Now your talking

Exact argument for the regional conference and the Sydney conference

Time has proven the Ribot vision was flawed

Some people are stuck in 1995 Apr 1

Nobody is saying that Sydney clubs are worthless. All we are saying is you can’t judge all Sydney clubs as the same; same as you can’t judge all clubs outside of Sydney as the same.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Nobody is saying that Sydney clubs are worthless. All we are saying is you can’t judge all Sydney clubs as the same; same as you can’t judge all clubs outside of Sydney as the same.

If our game wishes to remain a mainstream sport in Australia then it needs to expand into new markets. If it tries to survive on a Brisbane and Sydney footprint then it will lose relevance as the rusted-on fans die off and are replaced by a new generation that only cares about the glamour and prestige of easy to access global sporting brands.

Another issue is accessibility. The short-term windfall the ARLC gets from the Fox Sports deal is bad in the long run for our game as it makes it too expensive for many of our potential younger fans to access it. Not everyone can fork out $25 per month for a Kayo subscription with rent being $450+ week.

For $6 a month I can watch NBL, NBA, NFL and NHL on Fetch TV's Vibe Pack. That's what the NRL, AwFuL and cricket are up against over the next five years. Don't be surprised if more people consume American sports and European soccer competitions, as it's easier than ever to do so.

 

[flippikat]

Now your talking

Exact argument for the regional conference and the Sydney conference

Time has proven the Ribot vision was flawed

Some people are stuck in 1995 Apr 1

NO - the travel demands on teams would be even more inequitable than they currently are.

You'd have one conference where most of the teams are a bus-ride apart, and another where teams have to fly a lot.

I honestly can't believe that the same old rubbish "Sydney Conference and Interstate Conference" idea keeps rearing it's head, when it's clearly a model that delivers a huge advantage to Sydney clubs.

 

[flippikat]

Can you provide evidence?

Your argument doesnt stack up

Because we could revert to a Sydney only comp and broadcasting rights wouldn't change much

Brisbane, NZ and regionals would still want to watch. As they did prior to 1995 which resulted in the Pay-TV War

Warriors fan in Wellington here. I might still watch if we went back to just a Sydney comp.. but nowhere near as much, and the NRL can forget about me buying merchandise if that happened.

Taking away a team from my country would kinda turn me off the league, to be honest.. and be a signal that they really don't care for the game here - and that they just wanna go back to an insular "Sydney above all else" mindset.

Might even get me opening my wallet for Hurricanes tickets & merchandise...

 

[MugaB]

Warriors fan in Wellington here. I might still watch if we went back to just a Sydney comp.. but nowhere near as much, and the NRL can forget about me buying merchandise if that happened.

Taking away a team from my country would kinda turn me off the league, to be honest.. and be a signal that they really don't care for the game here - and that they just wanna go back to an insular "Sydney above all else" mindset.

Might even get me opening my wallet for Hurricanes tickets & merchandise...

NRL would be insane to split the comp via sydney vs regional, it solves nothing and promotes nothing, reverting the comp to a NSWRL vs the Rest is a failed mentality..
The only split that matters in regards to a conference model is to create a north/south border split directly thru the centre of Sydney, as anything north of that divide plays in the conference with the QLD clubs, Newcastle etc. And anything South of that up against NZs, Melbourne canberra etc.
Its the only fair way to justify a split, and keep everyone traveling everywhere regardless of their locality

 

[flippikat]

NRL would be insane to split the comp via sydney vs regional, it solves nothing and promotes nothing, reverting the comp to a NSWRL vs the Rest is a failed mentality..
The only split that matters in regards to a conference model is to create a north/south border split directly thru the centre of Sydney, as anything north of that divide plays in the conference with the QLD clubs, Newcastle etc. And anything South of that up against NZs, Melbourne canberra etc.
Its the only fair way to justify a split, and keep everyone traveling everywhere regardless of their locality

Yeah - if the competition had to be split into formal conferences, then North/South (or even east/west) makes the most sense, with Sydney evenly split in two between the conferences.

 

[Vee]

I'm a black fella ya f**kin merkin. And with a comment like that I'd rip ya fucin head apart if I ever met you.

Oh, I see, internet tough guy, huh?

 

[MugaB]

Yeah - if the competition had to be split into formal conferences, then North/South (or even east/west) makes the most sense, with Sydney evenly split in two between the conferences.

Only issue i see with east and west in a sydney split, is that there is a bulk of teams east, but a north/south split works currently