Building the next NZ team

[SpaceMonkey]

Sweet, I don't know what services are found in the ungodly Tasman region.

The Tasman’s alright. They consider themselves closer to the civilised people of the capital than the godless Cantabarbarians

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Millionaire players wont want to live in a little town of 50k people lol.
It'll be hard enough getting them to choose Christchurch over Auckland I suspect.

I suspect if you based them in Queenstown that wouldn’t be a problem

 

[MugaB]

What about a Southern team that is framed a little differently.

5 games - Wellington
5 games - Christchurch
1 game - Dunedin
1 game - Nelson

HOWEVER... my little controversial part.

Base the training base in Nelson.

A smaller region is likely cheaper for relocation. You could attract investment from the entire south and incentivise investment from the Nelson region as well. It may also help to ensure neither Christchurch or Wellington see the team as 'that other cities side, not really ours'. It could become a truly regional Southern side 'against' that team above the Bombays.

This would require 'buy in' from the local competitions / RL powers to atleast publically align with the NRL side. Like the Victorian Rugby League (Victorian Storm Premiership) This may mean playing an NRL side branded competition, every junior side bearing the logo in some way.

Additionally, I would ensure there was clear development of a pathway from each of these locations directly into "Southern..."

Christchurch // Wellington // Nelson and Dunedin would be favoured as locations for a national feeder system / competition into Southern (with other Northern sides feeding into the Warriors)

Out of the 4 locations you mentioned, Christchurch is moreso in the centre of all of them anyways plus it has the new indoor stadium coming, better off basing it there for 9 home matches then have a few remaining token games and trials in Wellington, Nelson and Dunedin

 

[Matua]

The Tasman’s alright. They consider themselves closer to the civilised people of the capital than the godless Cantabarbarians

I don't know, they jumped on the Crusaders train pretty quickly when they started winning (I remember in 1996 they wanted to join the Canes, 1998 they were all diehard Crusaders).

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Out of the 4 locations you mentioned, Christchurch is moreso in the centre of all of them anyways plus it has the new indoor stadium coming, better off basing it there for 9 home matches then have a few remaining token games and trials in Wellington, Nelson and Dunedin

Being in n the geographical centre doesn’t make much difference, they’re all too far apart to get much out of town support from each other. The stadium and the population are the key factors

 

[MugaB]

Being in n the geographical centre doesn’t make much difference, they’re all too far apart to get much out of town support. The stadium and the population are the key factors

Correct, Christchurch out of those 4 mentioned is the better option

 

[jim_57]

Out of the 4 locations you mentioned, Christchurch is moreso in the centre of all of them anyways plus it has the new indoor stadium coming, better off basing it there for 9 home matches then have a few remaining token games and trials in Wellington, Nelson and Dunedin

Sydney clubs have taken home games to NZ plenty of times over the years as well so that is an option to get more game in NZ without the Warriors & NZ2 spreading themselves too thin. None this year unfortunately.

 

[Perth Red]

Sydney clubs have taken home games to NZ plenty of times over the years as well so that is an option to get more game in NZ without the Warriors & NZ2 spreading themselves too thin. None this year unfortunately.

If each Sydney team took a home game to NZ to play the warriors or Christchurch we could have 8 or 9 extra games in NZ in cities without a club. But someone needs to pay for it. You'd then be filling basically every Friday 6pm slot with a NZ game.

 

[jim_57]

If each Sydney team took a home game to NZ to play the warriors or Christchurch we could have 8 or 9 extra games in NZ in cities without a club. But someone needs to pay for it. You'd then be filling basically every Friday 6pm slot with a NZ game.

In an ideal world that 6pm Friday would basically be the ‘NZ game’ time slot, with a game in NZ for most of them. With 2 NZ teams that becomes a lot easier, but they shouldn’t be forced to have all their games at that time, I’m sure like all clubs they’d want some afternoon games.

Add in a few side deals with Australian clubs to play in Napier, Wellington, Hamilton etc ideally.

 

[Matiunz]

What about a Southern team that is framed a little differently.

5 games - Wellington
5 games - Christchurch
1 game - Dunedin
1 game - Nelson

HOWEVER... my little controversial part.

Base the training base in Nelson.

A smaller region is likely cheaper for relocation. You could attract investment from the entire south and incentivise investment from the Nelson region as well. It may also help to ensure neither Christchurch or Wellington see the team as 'that other cities side, not really ours'. It could become a truly regional Southern side 'against' that team above the Bombays.

This would require 'buy in' from the local competitions / RL powers to atleast publically align with the NRL side. Like the Victorian Rugby League (Victorian Storm Premiership) This may mean playing an NRL side branded competition, every junior side bearing the logo in some way.

Additionally, I would ensure there was clear development of a pathway from each of these locations directly into "Southern..."

Christchurch // Wellington // Nelson and Dunedin would be favoured as locations for a national feeder system / competition into Southern (with other Northern sides feeding into the Warriors)

Way too much distance in between each of those places for any form of unity. Nelson whilst nice enough is Tiny and adding extra travel to a team that would already be one of the most travelled sides is a burden they don’t need. The distance between Wellington and Dunedin is comparable to Melbourne to Wollongong

 

[docbrown]

Out of the 4 locations you mentioned, Christchurch is moreso in the centre of all of them anyways plus it has the new indoor stadium coming, better off basing it there for 9 home matches then have a few remaining token games and trials in Wellington, Nelson and Dunedin

The thing is if you get a couple of Sydney teams to give up home games and play them in New Zealand, you could end up with that kind of scenario. 8-9 matches in Christchurch, 5-6 matches in Wellington per season - with NZ2 as either the home or away team for those games. So you end up with 13-15 NZ2 games and 12 Warriors games in NZ each year - enough to fill most 6pm Friday slots (not saying you'd have them play every Friday though).

And before the whingers cry 'what about Wests Tigers'. It's not a a forced merger. They're a new club and a new identity. A person in Wellington supporting them is no different than a person in Wellington supporting the Warriors right now. You're simply giving them an option to go see live NRL when that option doesn't exist now. And along with the Warriors, NZ2 are the club that most NZ-based fans of Sydney teams will want to see their club play anyway. No different to when those Sydney clubs play the Warriors in cities outside of Auckland already.

 

[Matiunz]

The thing is if you get a couple of Sydney teams to give up home games and play them in New Zealand, you could end up with that kind of scenario. 8-9 matches in Christchurch, 5-6 matches in Wellington per season - with NZ2 as either the home or away team for those games. So you end up with 13-15 NZ2 games and 12 Warriors games in NZ each year - enough to fill most 6pm Friday slots (not saying you'd have them play every Friday though).

And before the whingers cry 'what about Wests Tigers'. It's not a a forced merger. They're a new club and a new identity. A person in Wellington supporting them is no different than a person in Wellington supporting the Warriors right now. You're simply giving them an option to go see live NRL when that option doesn't exist now. And along with the Warriors, NZ2 are the club that most NZ-based fans of Sydney teams will want to see their club play anyway. No different to when those Sydney clubs play the Warriors in cities outside of Auckland already.

The question is why would Sydney teams give up a home game to the opposition? Also would other clubs stand for another club having more significantly more home games? Most clubs were asked to take a game to NZ post covid and only the Tigers were willing- can’t see that changing

 

[Canard]

The question is why would Sydney teams give up a home game to the opposition? Also would other clubs stand for another club having more significantly more home games? Most clubs were asked to take a game to NZ post covid and only the Tigers were willing- can’t see that changing

No club takes any game anywhere, without a financial incentive.

 

[bazza]

What are the transport links from Nelson to those places and Australia like though? I don’t imagine they’re great so it would probably be more expensive to operate out of there.

Nelson is the only place I have been to in NZ and can confirm that can only get a flight from Sydney to Auckland, Wellington and Christchuch (and maybe Queenstown). Then you have to pay the same price again for the short flight to Nelson on a small plane.

It isn't like Wellington or Christchurch are going to be expensive locations to have a team compared to Sydney. I would base a team in one of those cities and play a maximum 4 home games at other locations

 

[jim_57]

The question is why would Sydney teams give up a home game to the opposition? Also would other clubs stand for another club having more significantly more home games? Most clubs were asked to take a game to NZ post covid and only the Tigers were willing- can’t see that changing

Same reason they’ve done it in the past or do so now at other places. They get paid.

I assume the Warriors get paid when they take games to Christchurch, Wellington, Napier etc. as well.

 

[Perth Red]

Same reason they’ve done it in the past or do so now at other places. They get paid.

I assume the Warriors get paid when they take games to Christchurch, Wellington, Napier etc. as well.

yep $300-500k is the normal price for an NRl game by all accounts.

 

[Thatwasnthighref]

yep $300-500k is the normal price for an NRl game by all accounts.

And that's on top of the gate?

Wonder how that compares to what they earn from a full Mt Smart

 

[Perth Red]

And that's on top of the gate?

Wonder how that compares to what they earn from a full Mt Smart

yes the club get to keep the gate and corporate sales as well.

 

[docbrown]

The question is why would Sydney teams give up a home game to the opposition? Also would other clubs stand for another club having more significantly more home games? Most clubs were asked to take a game to NZ post covid and only the Tigers were willing- can’t see that changing

Money.

Also Sydney teams are already playing 14-18 games in Sydney most years which is pretty much the same thing.

For instance, if the Roosters gave up a couple of home games and you schedule teams like Rabbitohs, Tigers and Dragons at the SFS, they'd still end up with 12-14 games at the SFS and 2 games elsewhere for extra $$$. That's 2 of the games that could be in NZ and it's a net benefit to everyone involved.

 

[The Great Dane]

The clubs would already be doing it if there was genuine money to be made in taking games to NZ regularly, and it's definitely a loss leader if the NRL needs to step in to truly make it worth their while.

You also have to take into account what it costs clubs to take home games on the road, and as a general rule it isn't worth it to them in the long run unless they genuinely can't support themselves, at which point they've got bigger problems to deal with anyway. As a general rule, and certainly in this case, taking games on the road is also a lazy band-aid solution to bigger problems.

The reality is that you need to find a way to make it viable locally if you want more RL content in NZ, and especially if you want that content to be more widespread across the country. The best way to go about achieving that is highly debatable, and there probably isn't a single correct answer, but expecting one or two local NRL sides to provide market coverage across all of NZ is just unrealistic.