So you want Brisbane to be limited to just 2 clubs so that Sydney can have 9, despite Sydney having 2 people for every person from Brisbane?
The maths doesn't add up.
Having 4.5 times as many clubs in Sydney than Brisbane, despite there being just 2 people in Sydney for evey person in Brisbane, is just plain dumb. It would make far more sense to have 3 in Brisbane and 6 or 7 in Sydney. That way both areas are saturated with RL and will have plenty of local derbies to generate interest. It's about what's best for RL as a whole, not what's best for a few thousand RL fans in Sydney.
Presuming once again.I have not stated or laid down any specific numbers of Brisbane clubs.But I will state this .In a population of 2.5m ,and only one club Broncos, they can't pack out their stadium, and get memberships little more than double these nasty Sydney clubs.You'd think with one team,theyget 40k plus week in week outline heartland city, playing not weekly but fortnightly.
The NRL is going to expand into Brisbane and wants an 18th team down the line.Stated today.
There is no reason they could not make it 3, but I suggest the new franchise/s there better get decent crowds and anything less than 20k minimum,would not be a good look in a city of 2.5m.
And the GC can't get more than half in their new stadium, with a population of 600K.And I like the GC setup.
From where I sit you are right the Broncos need to get off their a*se in a city they dominate and pack their stadiums, because ATM
the numbers do not stack up.Newcastle could teach Broncos a thing about tribalism and crowds per population base..
Further the NRL has stated having a 2nd Brisbane side is worth $50m,beauty.
With 6-7 clubs in Sydney, you will end up with an even smaller junior league, crowds will not have improved dramatically, and I dare say TV ratings in Sydney may well be affected.Oh and there may well end up a 3rd AFL club in the South.
So reducing the opportunity for local players to play for their current clubs in Sydney ,is a good thing?Rememebr teh NRLd onto have a draft.
We live in country of 25m people,not 330m like the States ,where clubs and teams move to various cities,Crowds are not effected ,juniors tend to play soccer like here.
So when a city here loses a club it hits ,when a club moves in the States,it still packs out stadiums.
When other clubs get off their backsides and build assets and own grounds in the NRL,they can dictate if they wish, where clubs should go.
ATM all clubs now and in the future wherever they exist, rely on the NRL $13m teat they are given.
You make claims and assumptions ,yet haven't provided factual supporting evidence the effects of relocating a club
from Sydney to another location ,when a club is viable.Anyone can sit back with the 9 club 6 club pins on maps ,
that doesn't pay the bills or assure crowds and members, nor provide certainty on Tv ratings, nor additional monetary outlays for a new club.And you do this whilst ignoring the Bears and the joint ventures moving 6 games here,6 games there's not ideal for their fans.Stand alone club have at least home certainty.
Yet the governing body who runs the show,has people at the coal face ,via junior comps, businesses in various states
who have shown interest, know the impact of joint ventures and flick a club ,provides the revenue at least has more than an idea, what is likely to provide the money they want, the support they want and the TV ratings they want.That's why they are not keen on relocation, because they have a better idea than you or me, as to the effect on fans, keeping an eye on competitors after the sponsorship dollar and expansive views.they understand Sydney tribalism.They have their faults, but they sure as hell have a decent idea of the Sydney market particularly post SL.
I have a choice between the NRL's experience and knowledge, as opposed to your views from outside Sydney.It's not hard to figure which is the most reliable source.
