You don't get it from removing teams...
Really!
Because all the financially realistic ways of easing pressure on the Sydney market that doesn't take one hundred years (that we don't have) to implement that I've ever herd of include removing teams from the market.
In the simplest terms I can think of at the moment, the only way you can reduce over saturation is to remove the excess supply of product that your not selling, which in the NRL's case means removing the excess teams.
Don't you remember what happened in the late 90's?
Yeah I remember, two groups with wildly different agendas rushing to shrink the amount of professional RL clubs down from 20 (or however many it was at the time of the "peace treaty) down to 14 clubs within 2 years.
They did none of the proper research required for such an under taking, they picked teams that would survive and those that wouldn't almost completely on how much money they had in the bank at the time, they gave preference to some teams over other for arbitrary reasons and they didn't even bother to think what the future implications would be of their decisions after the year 1999!
So basically they did something that would have taken decades to do properly in two years and made an endless amount of mistakes because of it!
I also remember that
every club from Sydney except the Bears ended up surviving in some form, even though even back then Sydney was over saturated!
O woe be upon the poor Sydney RL fans who lost almost nothing!
You some how believe that removing Sydney teams is going to result in more people in Sydney following the game? :crazy:
NO, I don't believe that at all.
I know that by removing Sydney clubs you're going to lose support at least in the short term in Sydney, but there simply isn't enough money to go around to support 9 clubs in Sydney.
So because of this lack of money we have teams that cannot support themselves and are unlikely to be able to make enough money to support themselves in the near future, that are holding a position in the national competition while other clubs across the world that might have something more to add to the competition are held out of the comp by said under preforming clubs.
So what needs to happen is these clubs need to be removed from the market!
By doing this we free up money (whether it be from corporate, sponsorship or even fans) in Sydney which then can be picked up as new sources of income for the teams that remain in Sydney and used to cement their position and at the same time create room in the competition to introduce new clubs in untapped markets that will have the opportunity to both spread the sport and introduce new sources of income into the competition.
So what I'm suggesting is that we trade 9 weaker clubs (some of which are sustainable and of which aren't) in Sydney for 4-5 stronger clubs in Sydney all of which are sustainable and 4-5 clubs in new markets spreading the reach and popularity of the game while getting help to become sustainable in their new homes long term.
If we're going to pay to keep them running we may as well be doing it somewhere where we get the most out of the clubs, and in a place where they aren't a direct competitor to other clubs around them.
And like I keep saying... why doesn't the AFL cut Melbourne teams?
They have rationalised Melbourne before and they have been persistently trying to get more clubs from Melbourne to move abroad.
Just like us eventually they'll be forced to take more drastic measures to rationalise Melbourne.
Why do they put in millions to prop them up at the expense of the rest of the competition?
Because even they don't have the money to simply kick out all the teams they want moved out of Melbourne and support a bunch of new clubs all over the country at the same time, while still playing the amount of games ever week that they are contractually obliged play to because of their broadcasting rights agreement.
They also don't have the luxury of a large amount of groups bidding to enter their competition or very many markets left that could independently support a new club from day dot, like the NRL has.
Lots of should have, would have, could have here...
All I know is that the State Government gave them a $170 Million to build a new stadium and it appears they somehow stuffed it up...
Even so, they play in a brand new stadium in the best weather in the comp during winter, but even with these leg ups they cant seem to attract any support there..
I don't disagree, and don't get me wrong I'm not defending the mistakes that the Titans and NRL have made.
However I do think that if handled correctly the Titans not only wouldn't be called the Titans but could have been much more successful then they have been by now.
I also don't think that they are a lost cause yet, it'd be expensive and it'd take time but they could be saved.
What is clear is that at the moment they contribute the least of any club... Even your Raiders contribute more to the game...
Apart from low crowd and membership numbers (which are explainable and fixable given time) what do we fail to contribute to the NRL?
We pay our own way, we develop more then our fair share of juniors (though admittedly that may be changing, but no one but the NRL would be to blame for that), we're the only club South of Sydney before you get to the Victorian border and (even though I hate this sort of argument it is legitimate in this instance) the only thing that keeps RL running in the ACT and Southern NSW, if there was no Raiders group there wouldn't be enough money to support most of the juniors competitions in the area and RL would be a lot smaller in the area then it is and likely almost nonexistent in the ACT it's self.
Trust men when I say that I know better then most that the Raiders are by no means perfect, but they do a lot more then they ever get credit for and certainly more then enough to justify their license for the moment, if we were incapable of supporting ourselves (and hence also incapable of paying for all the stuff we do with juniors as well, which I might add isn't required of us) then I might agree with you.
I don't see how they can turn it around...
A rebrand would be putting lipstick on a pig...
By it's self it would be yes, but with a complete restructure of the operations of the business, a new business plan, a new board with a heavy influence from the NRL and a large and extensive marketing campaign you'd be getting somewhere
Move them to Brisbane in my opinion, but I'm sure that the QLD state Govt have them locked into playing at Robina on the back of building them a new stadium....
The QLD state Govt probably does have them locked into Robina, but ignoring that wouldn't necessarily be against the idea of the Titans moving to Brisbane (though they'd still need a rebrand), but I don't think that things are quite that bad yet.
Unfortunately things appear to be moving very slowly....
That's not necessarily a bad thing.
