18th club, whose next?

[Perth Red]

Ok let’s compare the dolphins or easts tigers to other top tier sports

pick an Aussie sport which has expanded and added teams like those

The worlds bigger than just australia lol
but ok let’s play local, dockers, 41k attendances, 56kmembers $66.2mill turn over. note despite the bigger size of afl, it hasn’t been stupid enough to waste another license adding a third team into perth.

and again you miss my point. It’s not will brisbane3 be bigger than any other expansion option, it’s what does the nrl want to be in the future.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

AFL Red and Gould are both flogs.

 

[Wb1234]

The worlds bigger than just australia lol
but ok let’s play local, dockers, swans, lions, port Adelaide. all big city teams not over saturating the market,

and again you miss my point. It’s not will brisbane3 be bigger than any other expansion option, it’s what does the nrl want to be in the future.

So you were wrong about the nrl being focused on small clubs

thanks buddy

 

[Pneuma]

AFL Red and Gould are both flogs.

That sums up the discussion neatly.

 

[Perth Red]

So you were wrong about the nrl being focused on small clubs

thanks buddy

Nope, keep adding mouths to the bowl and the share each gets makes them thinner.

 

[Wb1234]

Nope, keep adding mouths to the bowl and the share each gets makes them thinner.

That’s Perth

and Melbourne

Brisbane clubs and other heartland clubs feed them

 

[Pneuma]

Nope, keep adding mouths to the bowl and the share each gets makes them thinner.

AFL red at his best. Caught pant’s down and reverts to bullshit.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Phil Gould's blunt answer on his podcast when asked if it should be Perth, PNG or a second NZ team next in the NRL:

"Brisbane"

When quizzed on the options presented in the original question he made these comments:

NZ - "eventually, but not yet. They aren't ready for one yet"

Perth - "perhaps, they'd be the third option for me"

PNG - "under serious consideration because the Governments are involved"

Google Podcasts is no longer available

podcasts.google.com

What he said makes sense.

Brisbane is the only location that is guaranteed to generate strong revenue from football operations; increase the value of the broadcast deal; increase the size of the talent pool, and; inflate the NRL attendance beyond 20k (one of Dave Smith's goals).

What we've got on here is a bunch of "progressives" who want us to quash meritocracy and push diversity for selfish reasons.

Affirmative action never works out well. Especially when it relies on socialism to survive. It causes mediocrity by punishing the strong and promoting the weak.

Brisbane has earnt the right to have three teams by virtue of having a massive rugby league community that wants more content in a city that is light years ahead of Perth, New Zealand and PNG in terms of global relevance.

I'd have NZ2 and Perth in the NRL as the 19th and 20th teams, but only if they could meet the criteria needed for entry. In Perth's case it would require a written contract from the WA Gov guaranteeing an upgrade to Perth Oval; a high performance training facility; better funding for local clubs, and; funding for RL programs across secondary schools.

NZ2 needs to settle on a fixed location before it can be taken seriously. No city is able to resent a compelling case for why it should be the base for the next team. Wellington is doomed by the restriction on night games it can host. The South Island is doomed by its sparse population and lack of commercial opportunities. Auckland isn't ready for a second team.


I'd go with Brisbane Tigers for.the 18th licence then wait 10 or so years until Perth and NZ2 are ready before including them.

This PNG bid is just plain dumb and will backfire on the ARLC if it is stupid enough to take Albo's $200m. We've got the PNG Gov crying out for Australia to step in and quell the tribal violence that is marring the country. Albo won't do anything on this issue -- the previous video I posted explained why -- but he willing to give them $200m over 10 years for a team that will do nothing for the average Papuan.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

you’ve made an awful lot of assumptions and guesses in there. And Perth isn’t melbourne, rugby league has always been much stronger here than in Victoria. We just had 45k turn out for nrl Ffs!

You obviously weren’t around in the early 90’s when The game was strong in perth? It will never be #1 in perth but can still be strong. Saying I don’t understand the game here when you are so blatant.y ignorant of rugby league In The west is laughable.

as for brisbane, no one’s arguing a third team wouldn’t be a decent sized club but there is a law of diminishing returns as is seen in Sydney The more clubs you squeeze into a city. And it comes down to does nrl need new markets or just keep consolidating existing ones.

but at the end of the day it really is a philosophical position, do you believe rugby league should be trying to grow into new markets and spread the game or do you believe it should stick to where it is historically strong and not be worrying about growth into new areas. You and I clearly differ in what we believe is best for the game long term, and that’s ok.

for me I’d like to see the nrl grow a pair and bring in:
West Coat Pirates
Oceana Orcas (out of wellington and playing 6 games in png if govt will fund it)
Adelaide bears

That sets up the nrl for new market growth for the next 30 years.

If it was up to me then the next three teams would be Brisbane Tigers, Perth and NZ2.

I'd love to have a natural footprint sometime in the future, but we're decades away from it being viable.

I don't doubt Perth is the most advanced non-RL market in Australia. The game is growing at the grassroots level. Thw problem is Brisbane 3 is much more advanced and better equipped to provide the resources needed to make the game stronger.

I don't buy the argument about diminishing returns. Brisbane 3 will always be better supported, richer and more valuable to the broadcasters than Perth and NZ2. The game is professional and needs money to grow. It's also under attack in its heartland from a richer competitor that is investing heavily in SEQ and greater Sydney. We'd be stupid to sit back and let them make further inroads. You've said it before, the ARLC doesn't have the resources to prop up expensive expansion projects because it doesn't generate as much revenue from its broadcasters and game day. Brisbane 3 will provide more capital from sponsorship and corporate hospitality than Perth and NZ2. The extra money generated from broadcast deals and sponsorship can be used to develop the game.

 

[blue bags]

The worlds bigger than just australia lol
but ok let’s play local, dockers, 41k attendances, 56kmembers $66.2mill turn over. note despite the bigger size of afl, it hasn’t been stupid enough to waste another license adding a third team into perth.

and again you miss my point. It’s not will brisbane3 be bigger than any other expansion option, it’s what does the nrl want to be in the future.

AFL are looking at a 3rd Perth team

 

[flippikat]

What he said makes sense.

Brisbane is the only location that is guaranteed to generate strong revenue from football operations; increase the value of the broadcast deal; increase the size of the talent pool, and; inflate the NRL attendance beyond 20k (one of Dave Smith's goals).

What we've got on here is a bunch of "progressives" who want us to quash meritocracy and push diversity for selfish reasons.

Affirmative action never works out well. Especially when it relies on socialism to survive. It causes mediocrity by punishing the strong and promoting the weak.

Brisbane has earnt the right to have three teams by virtue of having a massive rugby league community that wants more content in a city that is light years ahead of Perth, New Zealand and PNG in terms of global relevance.

I'd have NZ2 and Perth in the NRL as the 19th and 20th teams, but only if they could meet the criteria needed for entry. In Perth's case it would require a written contract from the WA Gov guaranteeing an upgrade to Perth Oval; a high performance training facility; better funding for local clubs, and; funding for RL programs across secondary schools.

NZ2 needs to settle on a fixed location before it can be taken seriously. No city is able to resent a compelling case for why it should be the base for the next team. Wellington is doomed by the restriction on night games it can host. The South Island is doomed by its sparse population and lack of commercial opportunities. Auckland isn't ready for a second team.


I'd go with Brisbane Tigers for.the 18th licence then wait 10 or so years until Perth and NZ2 are ready before including them.

This PNG bid is just plain dumb and will backfire on the ARLC if it is stupid enough to take Albo's $200m. We've got the PNG Gov crying out for Australia to step in and quell the tribal violence that is marring the country. Albo won't do anything on this issue -- the previous video I posted explained why -- but he willing to give them $200m over 10 years for a team that will do nothing for the average Papuan.

"10 or so years" before NZ 2 & Perth?

That's crazy.

Look, we need an 18th team ASAP to get us to 9 games per week & no bye - and with the number of possibilities we have, 20 teams seems completely attainable.

So long as 2 of those 3 teams are Perth & NZ 2, then yeah let's have Brisbane 3.. hell, I'd even accept them as the 18th team (though I think the Dolphins/Broncos/Titans need to bed-in their SEQ rivalry first) IF we have a plan for Perth & NZ 2 being added soon after.

I strongly believe Perth should be 18th team, then NZ 2 and one other (Brisbane, Adelaide, PNG, where-ever) added at the same time just a few years after that - certainly not ten+ years after the 18th team though!

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

In your opinion. I’ve said the nrl doesn’t need brisbane3. That’s my opinion based on a belief that the nrl will be better served growing into new markets not consolidating already reached ones.

Where's the money going to come from to support expansion into Adelaide and Perth?

Ironically, there's more financial support from the PNG and Aus Gov for a team in Port Moresby than the SA and WA Gov have shown for teams in Adelaide and Perth.

The broadcasters couldn't be f**ked into paying a cent for teams from Adelaide and Perth. Head of Strategy for WWOS, Fordham, said Ch9 wants more content in SEQ featuring Queensland teams. The only way we get that is by adding Brisbane 3.

Broadcast rights is by far the strongest revenue stream for the ARLC. Brisbane 3 will generate more revenue from this source than Adelaide and Perth. It'll also generate more revenue from sponsorship, corporate hospitality, ticketing, merchandise and membership (than Adelaide and Perth).

We also don't know what will happen with the Storm when Bellamy is finally carted off to the loony bin or old fella's farm. They could become cellar dwellers and lose the bandwagon supporters who've inflated their attendances at MRS to 16k. They'll definitely lose the bandwagon support they have in SEQ and draw lower ratings on TV. If this were to happen after admitting a team from Perth then the ARLC would have an albatross around its neck, much like AwFuL does with the Suns and Giants.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Relative to other top tier sports where nrl clubs are minnows in comparison. The more clubs you add to brisbane the smaller each club gets,

Broncos increased their membership and attendances after the addition of the Dolphins.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

"10 or so years" before NZ 2 & Perth?

That's crazy.

Look, we need an 18th team ASAP to get us to 9 games per week & no bye - and with the number of possibilities we have, 20 teams seems completely attainable.

So long as 2 of those 3 teams are Perth & NZ 2, then yeah let's have Brisbane 3.. hell, I'd even accept them as the 18th team (though I think the Dolphins/Broncos/Titans need to bed-in their SEQ rivalry first) IF we have a plan for Perth & NZ 2 being added soon after.

I strongly believe Perth should be 18th team, then NZ 2 and one other (Brisbane, Adelaide, PNG, where-ever) added at the same time just a few years after that - certainly not ten+ years after the 18th team though!

The problem with adding Perth within the next few years is it will seriously dilute the talent pool. Most of the game's players are from Queensland, NSW and NZ. Perth would struggle in the player market because juniors want to remain close to home. Any junior that was successful at Perth would be poached by a successful club on the east coast that can provide them with a premiership. It would also weaken the Storm because they would be recruiting from the same competitons in Queensland, NSW and NZ.

Let Dolphins and Brisbane Tigers strengthen the talent pool in SEQ for a decade.

Let NZ grow its economy and cities to a level that can support NZ2.

Let the WA Gov build the infrastructure needed for a Perth-based team to compete in the player market for players and fans. The enormous size of the Eagles and Dockers is a serious impediment to a Perth-based NRL club.

 

[Perth Red]

If it was up to me then the next three teams would be Brisbane Tigers, Perth and NZ2.

I'd love to have a natural footprint sometime in the future, but we're decades away from it being viable.

I don't doubt Perth is the most advanced non-RL market in Australia. The game is growing at the grassroots level. Thw problem is Brisbane 3 is much more advanced and better equipped to provide the resources needed to make the game stronger.

I don't buy the argument about diminishing returns. Brisbane 3 will always be better supported, richer and more valuable to the broadcasters than Perth and NZ2. The game is professional and needs money to grow. It's also under attack in its heartland from a richer competitor that is investing heavily in SEQ and greater Sydney. We'd be stupid to sit back and let them make further inroads. You've said it before, the ARLC doesn't have the resources to prop up expensive expansion projects because it doesn't generate as much revenue from its broadcasters and game day. Brisbane 3 will provide more capital from sponsorship and corporate hospitality than Perth and NZ2. The extra money generated from broadcast deals and sponsorship can be used to develop the game.

Why did ch9 pay nothing for brisbane2 if more brisbane teams is so valuable to tv? Your theory isn’t backed by evidence on that one.

you don’t how wealthy the WA bid consortium are, or what the WA govt is putting in the table for a wa club so you can not possibly claim that perth will be a financial albatross for the nrl. That’s just an opinion with no foundation.

it doesn’t matter where the expansion club signs players from, it’s giving kids opportunity to play nrl. Eventually wa or nz2 will produce its own players and players for other clubs, just like one day dolphins will. We had 10k registered male players 25 years ago, we’ve done it before.

ah the old afl threat argument. Please.

 

[Perth Red]

AFL are looking at a 3rd Perth team

They really aren’t, not in the next two decades.

 

[Perth Red]

Broncos increased their membership and attendances after the addition of the Dolphins.

And they are genuine contenders lol. You think it would have increased this year if they were second bottom instead of second top?

 

[blue bags]

They really aren’t, not in the next two decades.

Yes AFL has mentioned Perth 3.
And Tasmania
Where else can AFL expand
Canberra AFLW team has been mentioned aswell
Brisbane 2nd team maybe

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Why did ch9 pay nothing for brisbane2 if more brisbane teams is so valuable to tv? Your theory isn’t backed by evidence on that one.

You know the amount of Broncos games on Ch9 has decreased since the Dolphins were added. It's why News Ltd paid more and Ch9 are paying the same. This information has been presented to you before.

you don’t how wealthy the WA bid consortium are, or what the WA govt is putting in the table for a wa club so you can not possibly claim that perth will be a financial albatross for the nrl. That’s just an opinion with no foundation.

It could become an albatross if the business community decides the investment is bad for business. Poor on field results will result in poor crowds and a low membership base.

Who will sponsor a club with few members and poor attendances?

A Perth-based NRL is not going to sit in the top 4 of the premiership ladder, year after year, like the Storm have for the bulk of their existence.

Fans will lose interest in a team that loses more games than it wins. Look at the Western Force to see the future of a Perth-based NRL team once they become strugglers on the field over a number of years.

Rugby union has a larger profile than rugby league in Perth.

Look at the Brisbane Lions to see my point about expansion teams from non-heartland cities. They struggle financially despite earning more than most NRL clubs. It's delusional to think Perth will be an exception to the trend.

it doesn’t matter where the expansion club signs players from, it’s giving kids opportunity to play nrl.

Not all clubs are equal. Elite players want to play for a team that can contend for the premiership. Distance from family is also a consideration. A Perth-based club will struggle to a greater extent in the player market than the Dolphins because they'll be an unknown commodity on the otherside of the country. You can bet your arse they will have to pay overs to entice established players away from the other 17 clubs.

Eventually wa or nz2 will produce its own players and players for other clubs, just like one day dolphins will. We had 10k registered male players 25 years ago, we’ve done it before.

Perth is never going to produce the same quantity or quality of players as the QRL, NSW and NZRL.

ah the old afl threat argument. Please.

It is a threat. Their participation numbers are increasing in SEQ and Sydney.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

TBf there’s been different people advocating for different expansion ideas for years now. Just in last 12 months we’ve had dolphins ceo and coach, Brohman, politis etc advocating for perth, Gould and politis advocating For brisbane3, johns and others advocating for png, different commissioners advocating for pretty much everyone! I wouldn’t hold any stock in any of them. End of day nrl and it’s tv partners will determine where’s next based on risk, funding and where they strategically want to take the game over the next two decades.

I suspect the decision around 18 or 20 clubs will also play a major part in who club 18 will be. hopefully when they’ve stopped fcking around on their Vegas junkets they can turn their attention to so called ‘turbo charging’ expansion decisions!

I don't necessarily agree with his comments, but thought it was interesting to post.

On the NRL and expansion, I think it's clear they've got some good strategies for the game. They just aren't releasing them publicly so that our rivals know exactly what we are doing.