Another NRL backflip

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

In fairness to Perth Red the 2014 review was put up in 2012 when the Sydney clubs were pressing the ARLC pre David Smith to delay expansion.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...for-new-nrl-club/story-e6frg6n6-1226508501243

When David Gallop was CEO expansion was earmarked to start in 2013 and the ARLC then spoke of 2015 before the decided end of 2014 review. Grant clearly said that they would act quickly. You would expect that given this was put on the table back in 08 or 09 by the NRL that they would have a 90% idea on what they wanted so I think the bid teams could have fairly expected the review to complete by the end of 14 and a decision moving forward.

If there is going to be expansion that wont be till 2018 so they can have something to bargain with for more TV money so that the NRL can fill its obvious plan to be one of Australia's biggest employers!

You cant blame the ARLC for that. Expansion may have been on the table since '08 and teams may have been looking to enter the comp in 2013, but this was all said and done by the bids, NOT the ARLC.

Hell, the ARLC wasnt even established until 2012 and even then they were focused on stabalising their organisation and replacing people they deemed wrong for the new regime. That on top of the fact that Gallop did nothing on expansion in the lead up to the ARLC, obviously thinking it was something to discuss AFTER the new board took office.

For once it would e nice to see the NRL not shoot from the hip on expansion. Since '82, how many of our new teams have dropped out thanks to poor planning?!?! Why rush again when their is absolutely nothing to be gained...

 

[gyallop]

I wasnt blaming the ARLC simply saying that Grant created an expectation of a decision now of whether the game would expand and if so a time frame. What they aren't saying is that having driven Jim Doyle to resign who had spent his time working on game development no one else could oversee the review so it had to wait for Richardson.

 

[magpie4ever]

No way. Having the NRL and ESL seasons aligned is the only way International team could have any kind of meaningful existence.

Why make English RL compete with Soccer AND force them to stall their comp mid season to send rep players here when they can leave it as is and create a single, simple template for all the major Leagues (eg: Club 9s - February, Regular season - march to septenber, internationals - october/november).

Than you never get the classic tours of the Kangaroos to Pommyland or the Lions tours to here after their seasons end (there is no mid-season stoppage), as it was for 80 plus years. Now you end up with tinpot tournaments like the 4 nations with the Australia "C" team playing.

It is not soccer that English league is worried about completing with, its union.

 

[magpie4ever]

I wasnt blaming the ARLC simply saying that Grant created an expectation of a decision now of whether the game would expand and if so a time frame. What they aren't saying is that having driven Jim Doyle to resign who had spent his time working on game development no one else could oversee the review so it had to wait for Richardson.

When did Doyle resign?

 

[taipan]

Was it? there was no reason, if they had done what they had said and conducted the review at the end of the 2014 season, not after as some are quoting, that the teams couldn't have kicked off in 2017 giving hype and something to sell for the 2018 deal. Still what's another year of ínaction and stagnation when you've been strung along for 8 years already?

For me this isn't even about if Perth will get a team, its a lack of a strategic vision for growing RL outside of its heartlands. Where's the affiliated states funding and growth plan? Where's the guaranteed NRL games for new markets? Where's the international game we were promised by Grant? I agree they need to get NRL expansion well planned and right and no problem not rushing it but the ARLC has had the money and decision making for two years now and still nothing has happened to grow the game in new areas.

For a start the review was expected to continue til mid this year.The fact Richardson who was picked for the job does not start til March,three months is hardly a decent time scale.It was never going to be compeleted in a couple of months.

Lack of strategic vision,because of a delay?:roll:

Did you bother to check,Smith's intial comment?.This was to get all NRL clubs up to financial speed.It's all very well getting into expansion for expansion's sake,when a few clubs need to be professionalised .

You do understand the code has a packed schedule ,where players are complaining.The International game???,well the World club comp is a starting point,getting PNG into the Qld cup and soon Fiji into the NSW cup(with an Academy opening there).

Reduce the number of NRL rounds and you will be able to get more Internationals.

 

[taipan]

Easy to say sat in your well funded state with ten clubs to chose who to watch every weekend. I love this game, can see the massive potential it has, including in perth, and can see the inaction whilst other codes continue to grow and pump money into grass roots and prof clubs. If that makes me a whinger so be it, I love RL and will whinge until the day I give up that love, which hopefully will be never.

Point 1.I am an Internationalist and expansionist,and that means getting a Perth team into the NRL.Ram that up your warm beer sucking throat as a starter.
Point 2.Your naïve attitude to long established clubs and wanting some to relocate ,or merge,after the SL debacle,shows you haven't learnt a thing.
Point 3.I have no problem with having a passion for the game,and wanting a team .I have a problem with people who are quite happy for other people to lose a club so he can have a team.I have followed a club being at deaths door on a few occasions,so don't talk to me about passion.

Let me spell it out.In 2014 we still had the ASADA dramas going on.The Sharks were every which way but losoe,Newcastle were in disarray with twinkle toes Tinkler stuffing things up,the Titans losing crowds ,West Tigers in no mans land with a board at issues with each other.
The Sharks have now settled into being a strong financial club .The Tigers have a new professional board,the Titans have rid themselves of a few of the old school ,and the Knights have Quayle on board and the opportunity to sell the club down the line.

Now me lad all these take preference over someone sitting in front of an Apple Mac sniffing the Fremantle Doctor and throwing darts at areas for expansion.

The new TV deal I repeat comes in 2018,expansion was really never going to be any earlier.Why? Because when Gallop left after years of umming,the code had no money.Only in 2013/4 it has built up a nest.this money is not to be wasted.Hence the very reason for making expansion to be 100% secure,and not another GWS/Brisbane Bears/Titans debacle.

 

[The Great Dane]

Yeah I don't see the big deal.

They said that they'd start the review at the end of the 2014 season, unfortunately they weren't prepared for that seemingly because Richardson wasn't prepared to leave his job at the Rabbits until he had put everything in order over there, and that took longer then expected due to their success last year, so they delayed the start of the review a few months until the guy that would be heading the review for all intents and purposes started working at the NRL, which seems more then reasonable to me.

The review was always going to take roughly a year, so the public was never going to get any answers before the end of the 2015 season and this delay hasn't changed that.

So it's not like they've put off expansion for another year as some people are claiming, it's just taken longer to get the review started then expected due to things largely outside of their control.

 

[Tigers1986]

How South-East Queensland can be a 'near-certainty' when Perth and Wellington have more going for them is a cause for concern. The Crushers failed for a reason and the Titans aren't doing much better.

The player talent pool is there, the demand is there, we just need to make sure it doesn't flop and become a disaster by going to big without financial security.

 

[alien]

there are plenty of places that should have an nrl team but don't because if they all did there would be too many teams, and that is because sydney has too many teams. 9 teams in sydney (or any city) is too many for a national comp. i don't want to see any of the current sydney clubs die, but relocation isn't death for a club because they still would keep their history/records, club colours, jersey, mascot.

i would like to see:
3 sydney clubs relocate - roosters to perth, sharks to adelaide, bulldogs to brisbane
a come back of the bears, but as a central coast club.
new clubs from wellington, christchurch, and port moresby

that would be a 20 team comp

 

[Flapper]

One just needs to look at the 'heartland' clubs constantly asking to be bailed out all the time with handouts. The fact, after decades the 'heartland' clubs can't get there stuff together is disturbing they had more than enough time to get it together.

The self-interest and insular mindset kicks into the NRL once more with the delay of expanison. A true 'heartland' wouldn't have the financial/crowd problems the current clubs have. This is the NRL not the NSWRL.

Please plenty of AFL clubs in Melbourne have financial problems and lower than average crowds. Or are you saying that Melbourne isn't a true AFL heartland?

 

[Masoe_eats_babies]

NRL expansion is more elusive than Dre's Detox :lol::lol:

 

[gyallop]

When did Doyle resign?

Just looked he quit in June effective end of season and his replacement wasnt a RL person so his game development roles would have passed back to Greenberg who no doubt decided he had too much on his plate so once more the NRL staff grows.
Greenberg and Richardson two big egos who have said in the past they aspire to run the game , might be interesting days ahead!! I hope Dave Smith has a rear vision mirror!

 

[duylm]

Please plenty of AFL clubs in Melbourne have financial problems and lower than average crowds. Or are you saying that Melbourne isn't a true AFL heartland?

When you put all clubs on a metric against each other, by definition 8 of our NRL teams will performed below average whether that be crowds or financial. Everyone compares themselves to the Broncos (and rightly so to try and aspire to) but whenever it is claimed we need to get existing clubs up to scratch I feel like we are waiting for the mathematics to change so that we can have 16 teams performing above average. Our biggest basket case clubs are still much stronger that 80-90% of A-League clubs.

And some people claim clubs are not profitable because they rely on the grant to put them into the black. But the grant is made up of licensing and broadcast revenue which wouldn't exist without all the individual clubs. Why can't that be considered a legitimate source of income?!? :crazy:

 

[Perth Red]

Melbourne is equally over saturated and the AFL knows it. Lucky for them they have compliant clubs that continue to bail out the situation. If the Eagles, Carlton etc refused to pay the ticket tax and demanded and equal grant payment the amount of clubs in Melbourne (or the strong AFL national expansion program) would look very different. Could you imagine South Sydney fans paying an extra $2 a game just so the Sharks or St's could be kept afloat?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...782524366?nk=7a3bb240ad0fbfaa1b5487bca10aeadd

 

[Perth Red]

And some people claim clubs are not profitable because they rely on the grant to put them into the black. But the grant is made up of licensing and broadcast revenue which wouldn't exist without all the individual clubs. Why can't that be considered a legitimate source of income?!? :crazy:

I don't think many think that the grant is the issue. The issue is the remaining $10million clubs need to generate. Many clubs have been able to rely on a few million from the pokie dens to keep them afloat but those coffers are drying up in a lot of cases. Some have got lucky finding a sugar daddy or selling off the family jewels to keep them going. Broncos are not the bar tbh, Bulldogs and souths are imo. Broncos have lots of luxury such as stadium and one big city appeal. Maybe Warriors, Melbourne and eventually perth should be aiming for Broncos size but the Sydney clubs and Newcastle would do well to be the size of bulldogs and souths who are operating in the same confines as themselves.

Decent crowds, break even without cutting necessary costs and decent brand marketing is really all anyone is asking of clubs. Shouldn't be beyond the realms of a $billion sport.

 

[taipan]

Melbourne is equally over saturated and the AFL knows it. Lucky for them they have compliant clubs that continue to bail out the situation. If the Eagles, Carlton etc refused to pay the ticket tax and demanded and equal grant payment the amount of clubs in Melbourne (or the strong AFL national expansion program) would look very different. Could you imagine South Sydney fans paying an extra $2 a game just so the Sharks or St's could be kept afloat?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...782524366?nk=7a3bb240ad0fbfaa1b5487bca10aeadd

The Sharks don't need money from other clubs to keep afloat.A $300 million development and the least reliance on poker machines says so.As did Bruno Cullen when he examined the Shark's finances and plans.

Last year if ASADA hadn't intervened they would have broken even.That means without a major front jumper sponsor and coming motherless last.

And their cash flow/profitability will improve further when the residential development has resdients and the retail has customers.

 

[pHyR3]

The Sharks don't need money from other clubs to keep afloat.A $300 million development and the least reliance on poker machines says so.As did Bruno Cullen when he examined the Shark's finances and plans.

Last year if ASADA hadn't intervened they would have broken even.That means without a major front jumper sponsor and coming motherless last.

And their cash flow/profitability will improve further when the residential development has resdients and the retail has customers.

sharks are set. roosters, tigers, dragons and knights look fine as well. great work by the NRL to help that along within 1 or 2 years.

no one in sydney is being relocated in the near future

 

[bobmar28]

there are plenty of places that should have an nrl team but don't because if they all did there would be too many teams, and that is because sydney has too many teams. 9 teams in sydney (or any city) is too many for a national comp. i don't want to see any of the current sydney clubs die, but relocation isn't death for a club because they still would keep their history/records, club colours, jersey, mascot.

i would like to see:
3 sydney clubs relocate - roosters to perth, sharks to adelaide, bulldogs to brisbane
a come back of the bears, but as a central coast club.
new clubs from wellington, christchurch, and port moresby

that would be a 20 team comp

Sydney should have no more than 5 teams.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Im starting to think the Tigers will be the first team out of Sydney (assuming relocation happens at all)....

 

[Feej]

i would like to see:
3 sydney clubs relocate - roosters to perth, sharks to adelaide, bulldogs to brisbane

As long as it's not *your* team right? Why not Souths to Perth instead of the Roosters?? Seriously, give me 3 good, solid reasons based on fact as to why you would move the Rosters over Souths?