17th TEAM

[titoelcolombiano]

You don't need an emotional attachment to want something to be true, and the reason that I say that you want it to be true more so then it is actually true is because you seem to be wistfully asserting that it's the case without any real tangible reason to actually believe that any of it is actually the case.

I actually don't care either way as long as Brisbane gets a second team. But it will be Redcliffe - I'll let you know when they are in the comp.

 

[Perth Red]

that's interesting, I hadn't heard this before, is it actually a road block for the pirates or is it a good thing to be backed by the governing state organisation?

It depends, the Reds were formed with a part ownership model between the WARL and investors. Back then though the WARL were an independent organisation where as NRLWA is a subsidiary of the NRL and effectively owned by them. On paper it wouldn't be a bad thing for the NRL to part own the club for the first few years before off loading them to an investor to ensure safety and good governance and avoid a Titans style fiasco. The other NRL clubs didnt kick up a fuss when the NRL owned Titans and Knights so they may accept this scenario as long as they know it is time limited.

 

[The Great Dane]

I actually don't care either way as long as Brisbane gets a second team. But it will be Redcliffe - I'll let you know when they are in the comp.

People said the same thing about the Southern Expansion in the A-league.

They were the best of a bad lot of Sydney bids that started bidding before the A-league started the bidding process, so everybody just assumed that they were a shoe in. Then the A-league called for bids and all the bids that hadn't gone public came out of the woodwork, and then suddenly, almost overnight, four or five bids popped up that crapped all over the Southern Expansion bid and they went from being a shoe in to also-rans.

If the NRL is sensible and goes about things the right way, which I admit is a big if knowing the NRL, then a similar thing will happen when they call for bids, and a ton of bids with strong business plans will quickly form and/or go public, and there's a good chance that the best bids will come out of that group.

So declaring that Redcliffe will definitely get a spot from this far out is madness, it's literally coming to a conclusion with half the facts.

Also if it turns out that Redcliffe truly is the best Brisbane bid when all is said and done, then maybe the NRL should put Brisbane on the back burner for a little while, because as it stands Redcliffe definitely isn't what the NRL needs in a second Brisbane club, and the NRL can't afford to stuff up expansion to Brisbane again. So yeah it might be best to leave Brisbane to simmer for a little longer and focus on other areas until a better option makes it's self available in Brisbane, unless of course the NRL wants to go down the route of manufacturing a Brisbane club.

 

[The Great Dane]

It depends, the Reds were formed with a part ownership model between the WARL and investors. Back then though the WARL were an independent organisation where as NRLWA is a subsidiary of the NRL and effectively owned by them. On paper it wouldn't be a bad thing for the NRL to part own the club for the first few years before off loading them to an investor to ensure safety and good governance and avoid a Titans style fiasco. The other NRL clubs didnt kick up a fuss when the NRL owned Titans and Knights so they may accept this scenario as long as they know it is time limited.

I'm pretty sure that the whole conflict of interest thing will amount to nothing as well, it's probably something that one of the other bids (or a Journo trying to shit stir for clicks) just threw out there in an attempt to cause trouble. I still think it's worth mentioning though.

But if it was going to turn into something then I'd be worried about another bid making a big deal about it and lawyering up after they had lost to the Pirates bid. I doubt that the current NRL clubs could care less.

 

[mongoose]

People said the same thing about the Southern Expansion in the A-league.

They were the best of a bad lot of Sydney bids that started bidding before the A-league started the bidding process, so everybody just assumed that they were a shoe in. Then the A-league called for bids and all the bids that hadn't gone public came out of the woodwork, and then suddenly, almost overnight, four or five bids popped up that crapped all over the Southern Expansion bid and they went from being a shoe in to also-rans.

If the NRL is sensible and goes about things the right way, which I admit is a big if knowing the NRL, then a similar thing will happen when they call for bids, and a ton of bids with strong business plans will quickly form and/or go public, and there's a good chance that the best bids will come out of that group.

So declaring that Redcliffe will definitely get a spot from this far out is madness, it's literally coming to a conclusion with half the facts.

Also if it turns out that Redcliffe truly is the best Brisbane bid when all is said and done, then maybe the NRL should put Brisbane on the back burner for a little while, because as it stands Redcliffe definitely isn't what the NRL needs in a second Brisbane club, and the NRL can't afford to stuff up expansion to Brisbane again. So yeah it might be best to leave Brisbane to simmer for a little longer and focus on other areas until a better option makes it's self available in Brisbane, unless of course the NRL wants to go down the route of manufacturing a Brisbane club.

I'm not sure if I would compare any of our bids to the A League. The A League were desperate to shake up a very stale competition. The A League also wanted money from selling licenses. One of those new Sydney or Melbourne teams will be dead in a few years, if not both of them. You can bet your house on it.

 

[Stallion]

It's great that you think that the idea is valid (by almost every metric it's not, but that's beside the point), but we know that you think the idea is valid, you tell us ad-nuseam, and you don't need to tell us again, and though the idea may be valid in your opinion, it doesn't actually exist as an entity that is bidding for a license anymore. So holding the idea up as a realistic possibility is not only a pointless waste of time, but doing it all the time is extremely annoying.

Lets see if I can build some sort of analogy for you-

I think that the NRL bankrolling a team in Hawaii is a very valid idea, but no team in Hawaii exists for them to bankroll, and as far as we know there's no bid from Hawaii, so though it may be a very valid idea I don't bring it up as an actual possibility all the time because currently it's not an actual possibility and I personally don't have the power to make it one.

Now imagine how annoying it would be if I went around into every thread and just popped in to say 'this is all good, but what about Hawaii!? Hawaii is a much better idea' and derailed every thread with talk about the hypothetical idea of a team in Hawaii, when you (and others) were trying to talk about other things?.

You'd find that pretty annoying wouldn't you?

If you really want to talk about the Bears all the time then resurrect one of the old Bears threads from when they were an actual bid, or better yet start a new one discussing the Bears plans to try and partner with one of Perth bids, because last I heard that was what they were up to (well apart from trying to cannibalise any Sydney club that's in financial trouble)

Once again a failed analogy. Hawaii is not North Sydney Bears. It does not have an existing and widespread supporter base. Your twisting of reality shows your consistent ignorance to the damage being done to existing supporter bases (not only Bears but Manly Warringah -in the northern Sydney scenario ) BUT YOU CONTINUE ON WITH THE IGNORANCE!

 

[mongoose]

Also if it turns out that Redcliffe truly is the best Brisbane bid when all is said and done, then maybe the NRL should put Brisbane on the back burner for a little while, because as it stands Redcliffe definitely isn't what the NRL needs in a second Brisbane club, and the NRL can't afford to stuff up expansion to Brisbane again. So yeah it might be best to leave Brisbane to simmer for a little longer and focus on other areas until a better option makes it's self available in Brisbane, unless of course the NRL wants to go down the route of manufacturing a Brisbane club.

I do kind of agree with this statement though. Redcliffe has too many question marks. Redcliffe is a very isolated part of Brisbane, similar to Manly in Sydney. The club already has connections with the Broncos. The Broncos need a ruthless competitor not a small nice suburban club that wont step on their toes.

 

[MugaB]

Interview with Todd on perth and origin

https://www.6pr.com.au/podcast/wheres-our-nrl-team/

Not much but spin, and no real bid talks but interesting nonetheless

 

[titoelcolombiano]

People said the same thing about the Southern Expansion in the A-league.

They were the best of a bad lot of Sydney bids that started bidding before the A-league started the bidding process, so everybody just assumed that they were a shoe in. Then the A-league called for bids and all the bids that hadn't gone public came out of the woodwork, and then suddenly, almost overnight, four or five bids popped up that crapped all over the Southern Expansion bid and they went from being a shoe in to also-rans.

If the NRL is sensible and goes about things the right way, which I admit is a big if knowing the NRL, then a similar thing will happen when they call for bids, and a ton of bids with strong business plans will quickly form and/or go public, and there's a good chance that the best bids will come out of that group.

So declaring that Redcliffe will definitely get a spot from this far out is madness, it's literally coming to a conclusion with half the facts.

Also if it turns out that Redcliffe truly is the best Brisbane bid when all is said and done, then maybe the NRL should put Brisbane on the back burner for a little while, because as it stands Redcliffe definitely isn't what the NRL needs in a second Brisbane club, and the NRL can't afford to stuff up expansion to Brisbane again. So yeah it might be best to leave Brisbane to simmer for a little longer and focus on other areas until a better option makes it's self available in Brisbane, unless of course the NRL wants to go down the route of manufacturing a Brisbane club.

I'm not sure why you keep replying to this. Let's leave it at that and I'll let you know when Redcliffe enter the NRL.

 

[mongoose]

I'm not sure why you keep replying to this. Let's leave it at that and I'll let you know when Redcliffe enter the NRL.

Do you know something?
Im in two minds about the Dolphins, guess it depends on what their plan is...

 

[Travitoh]

Once again a failed analogy. Hawaii is not North Sydney Bears. It does not have an existing and widespread supporter base. Your twisting of reality shows your consistent ignorance to the damage being done to existing supporter bases (not only Bears but Manly Warringah -in the northern Sydney scenario ) BUT YOU CONTINUE ON WITH THE IGNORANCE!

Bring back the Rams!

 

[The Great Dane]

I'm not sure if I would compare any of our bids to the A League. The A League were desperate to shake up a very stale competition. The A League also wanted money from selling licenses. One of those new Sydney or Melbourne teams will be dead in a few years, if not both of them. You can bet your house on it.

I'm not comparing anything to the A-league.

I'm saying that there are undoubtedly more people/groups that are preparing bids that won't go public until the NRL announces the bidding process, and that to assert that X bid is a certainty so early on is foolish.

I only bring up the A-league as an example of bids waiting in the wings being better than the ones that are public.

 

[The Great Dane]

I'm not sure why you keep replying to this. Let's leave it at that and I'll let you know when Redcliffe enter the NRL.

I keep replying because you keep saying stupid stuff like the bold...

 

[Walter sobchak]

Interview with Todd on perth and origin

https://www.6pr.com.au/podcast/wheres-our-nrl-team/

Not much but spin, and no real bid talks but interesting nonetheless

If I was a fan of NRL expansion into Perth(which I am) I’d be very disappointed with what I heard and more specifically what I didn’t hear in that interview with Todd Greenberg. Every time the issue was brought up Greenberg brought it back to just talking more NRL and origin games to Perth as a way of increasing RL’s footprint in Australia instead of awarding a NRL franchise to the Perth pirates.

 

[The Great Dane]

Once again a failed analogy. Hawaii is not North Sydney Bears. It does not have an existing and widespread supporter base. Your twisting of reality shows your consistent ignorance to the damage being done to existing supporter bases (not only Bears but Manly Warringah -in the northern Sydney scenario ) BUT YOU CONTINUE ON WITH THE IGNORANCE!

I've genuinely met 6 year old kids with better comprehension skills then you, and you're supposed to be a teacher...

 

[The Great Dane]

If I was a fan of NRL expansion into Perth(which I am) I’d be very disappointed with what I heard and more specifically what I didn’t hear in that interview with Todd Greenberg. Every time the issue was brought up Greenberg brought it back to just talking more NRL and origin games to Perth as a way of increasing RL’s footprint in Australia instead of awarding a NRL franchise to the Perth pirates.

To be fair he's probably not in the position to do anything else right now.

It's not like he can say that Perth is definitely getting a team and/or give a timeline or anything, not until the NRL has actually decided whether or not it's actually going to expand, what the plan is, when it's going to expand, etc.

Even then saying that Perth is a certainty would probably be a bad idea for multiple reasons.

 

[Perth Red]

If I was a fan of NRL expansion into Perth(which I am) I’d be very disappointed with what I heard and more specifically what I didn’t hear in that interview with Todd Greenberg. Every time the issue was brought up Greenberg brought it back to just talking more NRL and origin games to Perth as a way of increasing RL’s footprint in Australia instead of awarding a NRL franchise to the Perth pirates.

They’ve been saying the Same thing since 2013, it’s like a stuck record! We’ve gone from three nrl games a year to none. Nrl has no idea,

 

[Stallion]

I've genuinely met 6 year old kids with better comprehension skills then you, and you're supposed to be a teacher...

No you haven't! You are a delusional fool hiding a flawed thought process on what is good for this code. I call it reckless.

 

[flippikat]

They’ve been saying the Same thing since 2013, it’s like a stuck record! We’ve gone from three nrl games a year to none. Nrl has no idea,

Precisely. There needs to be a managed plan for new markets (basically Perth, NZ2 & Adelaide) of investing in juniors & local league, coupled with regular games there each season, increasing in the run-up to having their own NRL club - starting with a regular season game each season, rising to 2, then 3 or 4 per year, then they have a team of their own.

It's a commonsense transition, easily replicated for each new market as it comes into consideration.

 

[Belmore Dude]

Perth Pigs is a suitable name