Look, I don't deathride this bid out of hate for the Bears. I am very worried that Rugby League is heading up the creek without a paddle in this country. A few mates of mine who grew up RL fans all play AFL and follow both codes now.
We must make our game more national, and we must increase revenue, open new markets and get a better spread of sides. I think the Bears as a "northern" St George model is excellent and actually much better than a few current sides.
Unfortunately, it isn't really within the NRL's powers to boot those sides. It would be extremely difficult to do (Wests 1983, Souths 2002). We thus must do whats in the best interests of the competition as a whole, and then try to fix Sydney with incentives to the weaker clubs.
I don't hate the Bears, I just think Bears fans put their cause ahead of the best interests of Rugby League, when there are some big external things that we have to deal with.
Thing is you have to look a bit longer term than just the next tv deal when deciding where to put a team.
CC is rugby league heartland. It's a place that deserves a team at some point in the future. It has the population, interest, and while it's close to an area overrepresented in terms of the amount of teams it's still
NOT Sydney and never will be. If that was all the bid had going for it you might say SEQ would be better off getting the nod, but the other aspect is continuing value of the Bears brand. The Bears were a much loved foundation club that is etched into the minds of many followers of RL all over the country. Even disregarding how badly they were treated at the turn of the century, that's a brand name with value, and is not something that should just be tossed aside like some people (yourself included) seem to think should happen.
If SEQ don't get another team in the coming years the effect on the region will be minimal, and possibly even positive. The Broncos will hum along but the Titans will get some much needed breathing room. No one will miss the bombers, and the window for expansion (or relocation) will still be well and truly open. We will probably get a slightly worse deal from TV revenue, and that's something to consider. But if the sport is relying on the marginal extra tv money that a 3rd SEQ team would bring to stop it going tits up we're in deep deep shit anyway.
If CC don't get a team in the coming years the Bears will probably start to fade into obscurity. They will go the way of the Bluebags and be that team from the last century that didn't make it through the rationalisation of the game. In other words, a brand with value to the game would be lost forever. Even you must admit that is worth considering. If hypothetically Manly or the Sharks looked to relocate there in the future, that would leave fewer existing brands to be utilised for future expansion into other areas (Wellington, CQLD, Adelaide etc). Long term that would be a loss of value for the NRL.
If they gave the nod to CCB and WAR and switch to an 18 team comp they could still build in to the TV deal the possibility of increased revenue from an extra SEQ game should an existing Sydney team relocate north. Put a $25m incentive (a fraction of the increase in tv revenue) for any existing Sydney team to relocate and merge with a Brisbane QLD cup team and play out of Suncorp. Then you get a SEQ team with history in Sydney and Brisbane, the Bears back and a more even spread of clubs across the eastern seaboard. Is it the perfect model for a second Brisbane team? Maybe not, but how is just dumping the "Bombers" on Brisbane any better?
