18th club, whose next?

[Wb1234]

This is the question. Very few locations that stand out as a must here

Brisbane 3
nz2 and 3
Png with govt backing

very strongly stand out

 

[Gobsmacked]

This is the one of the dumbest arguments you've presented in your case against Brisbane 3.

Why would the Broncos need to draw 50k to every match at Lang Park when the average for the 15 non-Brisbane clubs is 18,301, with that figure inflated by Magic Round?

The Broncos averaged 36k at Lang Park last year. That's twice the average of the non-Brisbane clubs.

Dolphins averaged 32k at Lang Park.

Meanwhile, we've got the Storm averaging just 17k at MRS with a team that's been camped inside the top four over the bulk of their existence. You're happy with the Storm having such a low supporter base in a city of 5m and use it to argue for teams in Adelaide and Perth, which are both smaller than Brisbane.

There's no logic behind your posts. You just want a team in Perth "because" it's where you live.

Here's the logic behind his posts.

If he lived in Newtown.. the entire forum would be spamed with pro Newtown propaganda.
All roads would lead to Newtown
He'd use the AFL... that's right, the AFL as an example.. Richmond bla bla bla

You know that to be 100% accurate.

Painful as it is with Perth but thankfully it's not Newtown, North Sydney or the f**king Solomon Islands!

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I’m not delusional as I’m not claiming anything! No one knows what the wa govt is offering,hence why I said a decision on perth inclusion will largely hinge on what the wa govt is offering! If it’s too good for the nrl to ignore them perth will be either club 18 or 19. If it isnt then who knows what the nrl will decide.

Vlandys seemed impressed after his first conversation with the WA premier and did a 180 on his view of perth inclusion so it must have been something good!

You claimed Perth will be awarded the 18th or 19th licence.

Now you're claiming you never "claimed" anything?

Go f**k yourself.

Your claim is based on the supposition that the WA Gov is offering a great deal for the NRL, yet you don't even know what the WA Gov is offering.

WA Gov said they will not be running a Perth-based NRL team, FWIW.

V'landys was being tactful. His previous comment stirred up the Western Australian media, politicians and Cumins. He wanted to avoid any more controversy. He hasn't exactly spoken about Perth since he was put on the spot.

 

[mongoose]

This is the question. Very few locations that stand out as a must here

its not that none of the locations stand out, it's that they all present some significant challenges.

PNG has obvious logistical and financial issues, which some people here are hilariously pretending don't exist.

Perth and NZ2 are the best options to me but just don't know what kind of support they will get in terms of fans, sponsors, TV money and government... People can't even agree on exactly where NZ2 will be located. Perth will need some support from the NRL to begin with and that is no guarantee they will offer any.

Brisbane 3 - I have no issue with a 3rd Brisbane team one day but the current QLD clubs will fight tooth and nail against it happening. Its too soon after the Dolphins.

 

[Wb1234]

Perth and NZ2 are the next 2 teams.
Nobody knows who's next.
But I'd bet my left nut it's those 2

Well at least you will still have the right one

 

[Iamback]

its not that none of the locations stand out, it's that they all present some significant challenges.

PNG has obvious logistical and financial issues, which some people here are hilariously pretending don't exist.

Perth and NZ2 are the best options to me but just don't know what kind of support they will get in terms of fans, sponsors, TV money and government... People can't even agree on exactly where NZ2 will be located. Perth will need some support from the NRL to begin with and that is no guarantee they will offer any.

Brisbane 3 - I have no issue with a 3rd Brisbane team one day but the current QLD clubs will fight tooth and nail against it happening. Its too soon after the Dolphins.

Which is why there is no front runner or anything that stands out

PNG has been done. So I will skip that

Say Perth gets a higher salary cap for example, there is no way to bring that back. So I have no problem with all bids being treated the same as far as that is concerned.

NZ to be a chance needs a council or someone putting a case forward, then can start from there.

Brisbane IMO needs a smaller neutral ground then you can look for another side, Redcliffe being the next biggest ground is crazy

 

[Perth Red]

You're completely blind to anything that points away from a Perth team.
Completely blind.
It will be an interesting world for you once Perth gets a team..
Holy shit! Opportunity everywhere!

Not at all, I’ve been saying for years brisbane 2 is a no brainer, perth, nz2 and adeliade bears should be planned for. I’m an expansionist, I want to see our game grow in new markets, not remain tethered to pokie clubs in two states.

 

[Perth Red]

This is the one of the dumbest arguments you've presented in your case against Brisbane 3.

Why would the Broncos need to draw 50k to every match at Lang Park when the average for the 15 non-Brisbane clubs is 18,301, with that figure inflated by Magic Round?

The Broncos averaged 36k at Lang Park last year. That's twice the average of the non-Brisbane clubs.

Dolphins averaged 32k at Lang Park.

Meanwhile, we've got the Storm averaging just 17k at MRS with a team that's been camped inside the top four over the bulk of their existence. You're happy with the Storm having such a low supporter base in a city of 5m and use it to argue for teams in Adelaide and Perth, which are both smaller than Brisbane.

There's no logic behind your posts. You just want a team in Perth "because" it's where you live.




The Broncos vs Dolphins game and crowds for Broncos vs Cowboys at Lang Park provide a compelling argument for a third Brisbane team. @Perth Red is too stupid to realise that the only way the NRL will develop bigger crowds from an 18th team is via a third Brisbane team playing out of Lang Park.



Are you talking about Dolphin Oval or Lang Park?

A Perth-based club is the very definition of "unneeded".

Irrelevant what everyone else is getting. It’s very clear that two clubs is enough for brisbane demand for the next few years, if not forever. When dolphins and broncos are getting close to filling Suncorp then it would be clear there is demand starting to outstrip supply. there is no reason what so ever RL fans in Logan or ipswich can’t be supporting any of the three nrl seq clubs that are there now

 

[Perth Red]

You claimed Perth will be awarded the 18th or 19th licence.

Now you're claiming you never "claimed" anything?

Go f**k yourself.

Your claim is based on the supposition that the WA Gov is offering a great deal for the NRL, yet you don't even know what the WA Gov is offering.

WA Gov said they will not be running a Perth-based NRL team, FWIW.

V'landys was being tactful. His previous comment stirred up the Western Australian media, politicians and Cumins. He wanted to avoid any more controversy. He hasn't exactly spoken about Perth since he was put on the spot.

Ffs you muppet read my post. I said depending on what the wa govt is offering perth will be club 18 or 19. Irrestible offer they’ll be in, if it’s not then who knows.

 

[Gobsmacked]

Not at all, I’ve been saying for years brisbane 2 is a no brainer, perth, nz2 and adeliade bears should be planned for. I’m an expansionist, I want to see our game grow in new markets, not remain tethered to pokie clubs in two states.

Well, we certainly align on those 3 places the game needs to expand to.
Although it isn't a popular opinion, I'd prefer a very strong 18 apposed to 20 which require 2 Sydney clubs to move to Perth and Adelaide.
There's too many Sydney clubs.
Sharks to WA and Tigers to SA would be ideal.. a lot of people will complain! The example of this working is the Brisbane Bears but why stop there? NFL franchisees move all the time, recently the Raiders ( Oakland LA ) moved out to Vegas .. now they have their own city!!!

 

[Perth Red]

Well, we certainly align on those 3 places the game needs to expand to.
Although it isn't a popular opinion, I'd prefer a very strong 18 apposed to 20 which require 2 Sydney clubs to move to Perth and Adelaide.
There's too many Sydney clubs.
Sharks to WA and Tigers to SA would be ideal.. a lot of people will complain! The example of this working is the Brisbane Bears but why stop there? NFL franchisees move all the time, recently the Raiders ( Oakland LA ) moved out to Vegas .. now they have their own city!!!

A club would only move if they had financial need, and the nrl has made sure no one will ever have that financial need.nfl is privately owned pure business. Owners dont care about the fanbase or tradition, just in how much money it’s making.

 

[Bukowski]

Well, we certainly align on those 3 places the game needs to expand to.
Although it isn't a popular opinion, I'd prefer a very strong 18 apposed to 20 which require 2 Sydney clubs to move to Perth and Adelaide.
There's too many Sydney clubs.
Sharks to WA and Tigers to SA would be ideal.. a lot of people will complain! The example of this working is the Brisbane Bears but why stop there? NFL franchisees move all the time, recently the Raiders ( Oakland LA ) moved out to Vegas .. now they have their own city!!!

Is that with a change in ownership? NFL?

 

[Iamback]

Is that with a change in ownership? NFL?

Not always but it is due to a city offering stuff. Usually free land to build a Stadium on. Or money towards it

 

[Gobsmacked]

A club would only move if they had financial need, and the nrl has made sure no one will ever have that financial need.nfl is privately owned pure business. Owners dont care about the fanbase or tradition, just in how much money it’s making.

Yeah you're right and before sl I believe it was sink or swim approach. Now however, it's only possible with a big cash incentive like 50 million up front and 10 million a year for 10 years, something like that- not that I think it would ever happen.

 

[Gobsmacked]

Is that with a change in ownership? NFL?

I think so. Let's say Perth miss out on 18 and the Force fold. Forester does a deal with the government where he chips in 10% of a new stadium, then buys the Sharks licence for 100 million- WA Sharks.

 

[Perth Red]

I think so. Let's say Perth miss out on 18 and the Force fold. Forester does a deal with the government where he chips in 10% of a new stadium, then buys the Sharks licence for 100 million- WA Sharks.

Why would the force fold? Only way force no longer exists is if twiggy walks away or they got cut again.

Problem is sharks would need to be willing to sell it, and there is no reason they would.

 

[Gobsmacked]

Why would the force fold? Only way force no longer exists is if twiggy walks away or they got cut again.

Problem is sharks would need to be willing to sell it, and there is no reason they would.

Why would the force fold? Super Rugby could fold ! Maybe....
The furtherest, most costly club who produce the least players that has the shortest and least successful history that has already folded once With terrible attendance and facilities in a comp that's rapidly losing traction because there's too many Australian clubs..
Currently simply the play thing of an ageing billionaire...
Yes they could fold.
Why would the Sharks sell? Everything is for sale, it just comes down to price..the very reason you become a billionaire.
Just spitballin

 

[Perth Red]

Why would the force fold? Super Rugby could fold ! Maybe....
The furtherest, most costly club who produce the least players that has the shortest and least successful history that has already folded once With terrible attendance and facilities in a comp that's rapidly losing traction because there's too many Australian clubs..
Currently simply the play thing of an ageing billionaire...
Yes they could fold.
Why would the Sharks sell? Everything is for sale, it just comes down to price..the very reason you become a billionaire.
Just spitballin

If we are waiting for all those ifs to get a perth club in then its gonna be a very long time lol

 

[Gobsmacked]

If we are waiting for all those ifs to get a perth club in then its gonna be a very long time lol

Not really, it's going to have taken 1 year for the NRL to decide on a location and another year to weigh up the bids and 2 years to set up and build a roster..so 4 years for a team from scratch. Relocation would have half that time. It could all play out over the course of a year and the move in under 2. A Relocation to Perth could be done before we went to 18..
Not saying it will but all certainly within the realm of possibility.

 

[Iamback]

Not really, it's going to have taken 1 year for the NRL to decide on a location and another year to weigh up the bids and 2 years to set up and build a roster..so 4 years for a team from scratch. Relocation would have half that time. It could all play out over the course of a year and the move in under 2. A Relocation to Perth could be done before we went to 18..
Not saying it will but all certainly within the realm of possibility.

Problem is for PR every club is sound especially his beloved Sharks