Jonty
Juniors
- Messages
- 1,256
Would you count Wollongong, cronulla, manly and Penrith as being more populated than Christchurch?
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!
Would you count Wollongong, cronulla, manly and Penrith as being more populated than Christchurch?
Exactly.
A Christchurch based NRL would most likely take both the name and represent the South Island 1.3 million people.
450 k is perfectly fine for an nrl club
Who’s to say only the people in Christchurch would only watch their games?
So for the cowboys your including all of north qld
Are you really going to compare the titans to a lone South Island team?
Keep shifting the goal posts buddy
Yes, absolutely when it’s a kiwi team against Aussie.
So it's saying NZ could have 3 teams ?Apologies if this has been done before but I am bored and thought to have a play around with Chatgpt on the topic of 20th team and it suggested NZ. I raised a few questions around players, value etc and It isn't perfect and some of the numbers I think would be off but interesting non the less. Here is what it spat out
"Adding a second New Zealand NRL team is more than just a feel-good move — it has potential financial upside if handled strategically, but it also comes with real risks around player depth and market saturation. Let’s break both parts of your question down:
Financial Benefit of a Second NZ Team
TV Rights & Revenue Growth
- Foxtel/Kayo & Nine (Australia): Another NZ team gives minimal uplift in Aussie broadcast rights. Their value is in time slots and competitive games.
- Sky Sport (NZ): Where the big growth potential lies.
- NZ currently pays ~$20M AUD/year for the Warriors. A second team could add $10M–$15M+ per year depending on viewership and derby interest.
- If Sky gets a Friday night Warriors vs Orcas rivalry, they'd push harder in negotiations.
- Derby games are TV gold:
- Think: Warriors vs Kea becomes the NZ version of Broncos–Cowboys or Roosters–Rabbitohs.
- 3–4 games/year between NZ teams could spike NZ ratings significantly.
Ballpark TV Rights Impact:
- NZ TV deal uplift: +$10–15M AUD/year
- Potential new commercial partners (Air NZ, NZ brands): +$2–5M/year
- Increased digital/streaming appeal for NZ fans = long-tail value
Where Would the Players Come From?
Short Answer: It’s a real concern — but not unmanageable.
NZ Domestic Talent Pool
- NZ produces around 100+ NRL-level juniors per year, but many are poached early by Aussie clubs.
- A second NZ team would give those players a reason to stay — especially if placed in the South Island.
- Strong base in:
- Auckland (already overloaded with Warriors academy talent)
- Waikato/Bay of Plenty
- Christchurch and Canterbury region
- NZ rugby has more depth than it needs — and a growing number of players are crossing codes.
- A second NRL team could:
- Offer alternative career paths to fringe Super Rugby players
- Snap up young dual-code juniors before they’re lost to rugby
- NZ’s massive Pacific Islander population is a natural fit.
- Recruit directly from:
- Tonga, Samoa, Fiji
- Auckland/Porirua/Christchurch school systems
- Every expansion team taps into:
- NSW Cup/Q-Cup surplus
- Former NRL players overseas
- Junior reps blocked by stacked NRL rosters (e.g., Panthers, Roosters)
Key Risk: Dilution of Talent
- With 20 teams, there’s concern about spreading the current talent pool too thin.
- But the NRL’s investment in Pathways + NZ developmentcan offset this:
- Double down on junior elite programs in Christchurch, Hamilton, Wellington
- Incentivise Kiwi kids to stay in NZ
Final Verdict
Financial upside: Solid — potentially +$15–20M/year to the NRL with a second NZ team
Player pool: Tight, but viable if paired with a strong development plan
To make it work:
- The NRL must centralise NZ player development
- Ensure the second team is well-funded and well-coached
- Position the NZ derby as a marquee event — not just another fixture
Then I asked it which is a stronger business case Wellington or Christchurch?
1. COMMERCIAL STRENGTH
Wellington (Capital City)
Pros:
- Bigger population: ~220,000 city / ~500,000 region (vs ~400,000 in Christchurch)
- Government HQ: Proximity to political power = easier federal support (especially with PNG/NZ aid links)
- Corporate base: More head offices, especially public sector, insurance, energy companies
- Sky Stadium: 34,000 seats, already hosts NRL & Warriors games
Cons:
- Stadium is soulless and often empty
- Weaker local identity — doesn’t “own” league or union
- Not as tribal as Christchurch
Christchurch (South Island)
Pros:
- Strong local identity and loyalty – the South Island backs its own hard
- Revitalised city post-quake with a point to prove
- Te Kaha Stadium (opening ~2026): brand new 30,000-seat venue = excellent fan experience
- Less “competition” for attention than in Wellington
Cons:
- Smaller corporate base
- Smaller airport/media reach (though not by much)
- Union-dominated, but in decline
Winner: Wellington — for raw commercial potential, especially with government and big corporate partners.
But it's close — Christchurch has a stickier fan base and a shinier new stadium coming.
2. ON-FIELD / FOOTY POTENTIAL
Junior Pathways
- Auckland dominates junior league in NZ, but both Wellington and Christchurch are under-tapped.
- Christchurch has a more developed rugby league history, especially through the old Canterbury Bulls and South Island tournaments.
- More Māori and Pasifika league heritage in Christchurch than Wellington.
Talent Pool Depth
- Christchurch regularly produces NRL players (e.g. Manu, Tevaga, Brimson's family is from there)
- Better link to rural league communities (e.g. West Coast, Timaru, Invercargill)
- Wellington's elite athletes tend to go into rugby union, sevens, or drift to Auckland early
3. X-FACTOR / “Sticky Brand” Potential
Christchurch:
- “South Island vs North Island” could become a tribal rallying point
- More underdog vibe = more loyalty
- New stadium could drive huge FOMO and fan attendance
Wellington:
- Harder to define identity — it's everyone’s second team
- Risk of being a “Warriors Lite”
FINAL VERDICT
Category Winner Population / TV Market Wellington Commercial Sponsorship Wellington Player Pathways Christchurch Fan Culture Christchurch Long-term Identity Christchurch
Best Choice: Christchurch — if the NRL wants a sticky, competitive, and sustainable second NZ club with tribal support and real pathways.
Wellington might offer better short-term commercial polish, but Christchurch gives you a team with soul — closer to what the Dolphins have done."
Quality trolling
Why not?
didnt channel 9 say something similar before Perth was announced?
