Central Coast Bears - Stand Aside

[BunniesMan]

People saying there should be two new teams make me laugh.

Where in the hell will you get players from for two new teams?

Do we really want to dilute the standard of an NRL match even further?

Well 1 new team doesn't add any more matches per week. And that's the most important thing, an extra game adds a lot to the price we get at the tv rights negotiations.

As for the players, how many players do we lose every year to other codes and other countries? Two new teams means we can keep a lot more of them.

 

[Dragon Slayer]

Well 1 new team doesn't add any more matches per week. And that's the most important thing, an extra game adds a lot to the price we get at the tv rights negotiations.

As for the players, how many players do we lose every year to other codes and other countries? Two new teams means we can keep a lot more of them.

Yes I agree some players wouldn't go overseas if there were more teams here.

But there definately isn't 50 Aussie First graders overseas.

How many Aussie players overseas would you bring back to Australia to swap with a current player in your team now?

 

[innsaneink]

Well 1 new team doesn't add any more matches per week. And that's the most important thing, an extra game adds a lot to the price we get at the tv rights negotiations.

As for the players, how many players do we lose every year to other codes and other countries? Two new teams means we can keep a lot more of them.

Nowhere near as many as two new teams comprising two full squads would need, the majority - not all - of those going os are finishing up
The talent pools way down as it is

 

[jasonstevenswedgie]

People saying there should be two new teams make me laugh.

Where in the hell will you get players from for two new teams?

Do we really want to dilute the standard of an NRL match even further?

from the 100 plus playes running around os

 

[Perth Red]

Yes I agree some players wouldn't go overseas if there were more teams here.

But there definately isn't 50 Aussie First graders overseas.

How many Aussie players overseas would you bring back to Australia to swap with a current player in your team now?

yes there are, in another thread on this topic I easily came up with two squads of 22 made up from players out of the NRL that would both comfortably make the 8.

Add in PNG, English SL players and home grwon players from the two teams new areas and it shouldn't be a drama.

 

[lturner]

And that's the most important thing, an extra game adds a lot to the price we get at the tv rights negotiations.

Not necessarily. Who is going to pay more for that one extra game? Channel 9? They will still probably take their 3 games as usual.

So the only reason they have for paying more is if the new teams somehow give them access to higher rating games. But adding new teams possibly dilutes the quality by spreading the best players around. Channel 9 have previously stated that only another Brisbane or South-East Queensland club will make any difference to the value of the competition to them. This is because the Brisbane TV audience always wants to see a Brisbane side, which is obviously why the Broncos are always on Friday Night Football. But when the Broncos are playing badly, the ratings in Brisbane drop off. If there was another Brisbane club, there would be a good chance of one of the clubs being in form at any one time. This is not a problem in Sydney, because there are 3 or 4 teams that always rate strongly (parra, saints, canterbury, maybe wests) so there always some of these teams in good form.

So the extra game will probably end up on pay TV. How much more will Fox pay for one extra game per week? Having 2 new teams will cost the NRL about $7m per year in club grants, so Fox will need to pay at least this much extra each year otherwise the new clubs will actually drain money, not add to it. Fox currently pay $42m per year for 5 games per week, which is $8.4m for each weekly game. So continuing this example, if Fox paid an extra $8.4m per year for this extra game it would net the NRL around $1.4m extra per year after the paying the grants to the new clubs. But would Fox pay this same amount for a 6th game? There has to be some diminishing returns here surely.

I am not saying that the NRL won't get more money in the next deal - they will for sure. But the extra money will be due to the existing 16 clubs, and the fact that the NRL got stitched up on the last deal. People like to think it's as simple as saying 1 extra game equals more money, but it's not. It totally depends on whether there's a new Brisbane team (which might increase the free-to-air value) and then how much Pay TV will pay for the extra game.

 

[Dragon Slayer]

Not necessarily. Who is going to pay more for that one extra game? Channel 9? They will still probably take their 3 games as usual.

So the only reason they have for paying more is if the new teams somehow give them access to higher rating games. But adding new teams possibly dilutes the quality by spreading the best players around. Channel 9 have previously stated that only another Brisbane or South-East Queensland will make any difference to the value of the competition to them. This is because the Brisbane TV audience always wants to see a Brisbane side, which is obviously why the Broncos are always on Friday Night Football. But when the Broncos are playing badly, the ratings in Brisbane drop off. If there was another Brisbane club, there would be a good chance of one of the clubs being in form at any one time. This is not a problem in Sydney, because there are 3 or 4 teams that always rate strongly (parra, saints, canterbury, maybe wests) so there always some of these teams in good form.

So the extra game will probably end up on pay TV. How much more will Fox pay for one extra game per week? Having 2 new teams will cost the NRL about $7m per year in club grants, so Fox will need to pay at least this much extra each year otherwise the new clubs will actually drain money, not add to it. Fox currently pay $42m per year for 5 games per week, which is $8.4m for each weekly game. So continuing this example, if Fox paid an extra $8.4m per year for this extra game it would net the NRL around $1.5m extra per year after the paying the grants to the new clubs. But would Fox pay this same amount for a 6th game? There has to be some diminishing returns here surely.

I am not saying that the NRL won't get more money in the next deal - they will for sure. But the extra money will be due to the existing 16 clubs, and the fact that the NRL got stitched up on the last deal. People like to think it's as simple as saying 1 extra game equals more money, but it's not. It totally depends on whether there's a new Brisbane team (which might increase the free-to-air value) and then how much Pay TV will pay for the extra game.

Some interesting points.

And of course it all leads to the same verdict.

Another QLD team adds to the T.V deal and is the smarter way to go with expansion.

You don't add a game to the schedule but you add another bow to the QLD Friday night programme.

f**k the Bears!

 

[jasonstevenswedgie]

f**k the Bears!

not a truer word typed in these forums

 

[dgsfan]

Agreed. The NRL will make the wrong decision, as usual. We'll see the Bears averaging 16,000. Nothing will change. The TV deal won't be affected at all. Pointless.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

CENTRAL COAST BEARS PRESIDENTS CUP BOWLS TOURNAMENT



Winning team from Avoca with CCB's Michael Buettner


The membership drive stand signing up another member.​

 

[beave]

I must say I do like the jersey.

 

[BunniesMan]

Agreed. The NRL will make the wrong decision, as usual. We'll see the Bears averaging 16,000. Nothing will change. The TV deal won't be affected at all. Pointless.

16,000 would put them above a lot of current teams.

 

[dgsfan]

That's average, though. What's the point if the team won't affect the TV deal at all? To admit another club to have them perform adequately when they don't really add anything other than 16,000 fans who already follow RL is pointless. A SEQLD team's fans would all be current RL supporters but the team would add greatly to the TV deal. Having another QLD team on FTA would increase the ratings greatly. We've all seen Brisbane's TV ratings when a QLD team isn't plying, having one more QLD team in the comp reduces that occurrence. NSW has 10 teams. There is always going to be a NSW team on Friday night/Sunday. Like I said before, to have 3 NRL teams vs 2 AFL teams in a RL state is bad. It would be like having 7 AFL teams in NSW (75%). CC should hold off until a Sydney team folds. Personally I would rather them back as Nth Sydney and not this abortion.

 

[Dragon Slayer]

I'm very confident an IC would be more strategic with a choice of new entrant in the NRL than what Gallop and the rest of the current NRL board would be. A smart IC won't be bullied by an arrogant Bears bid that demands inclusion.

The IC will pick an expansion team not a consolidation team in N.S.W

 

[Red&BlackBear]

I'm also pretty much confident that if your team doesn't have your project built in time that you will go broke. Doesn't mean it will happen DSlayer. You're gonna be left with egg on your face and what makes it funnier is all the effort you spend in here bagging our bid. While in the mean time instead of worrying like some of you want us too, we just keep working hard and moving forward.

You can't dampen our spirits dslayer and considering you lack many smarts petey, I assure you mate our bid is yet to go into 4th gear. The majority want this to happen and our plan is on track, if anything our announcements have come earlier due to demand pressures.

 

[bobmar28]

CTown is actually 50k from the CBD.

As the crow flies.

 

[bobmar28]

People saying there should be two new teams make me laugh.

Where in the hell will you get players from for two new teams?

Do we really want to dilute the standard of an NRL match even further?

How is it possible that the AFL can do it but we can't?

 

[Brutus]

It's always what we friggin can't do with rugby league.

 

[bobmar28]

Not necessarily. Who is going to pay more for that one extra game? Channel 9? They will still probably take their 3 games as usual.

So the only reason they have for paying more is if the new teams somehow give them access to higher rating games. But adding new teams possibly dilutes the quality by spreading the best players around. Channel 9 have previously stated that only another Brisbane or South-East Queensland club will make any difference to the value of the competition to them. This is because the Brisbane TV audience always wants to see a Brisbane side, which is obviously why the Broncos are always on Friday Night Football. But when the Broncos are playing badly, the ratings in Brisbane drop off. If there was another Brisbane club, there would be a good chance of one of the clubs being in form at any one time. This is not a problem in Sydney, because there are 3 or 4 teams that always rate strongly (parra, saints, canterbury, maybe wests) so there always some of these teams in good form.

So the extra game will probably end up on pay TV. How much more will Fox pay for one extra game per week? Having 2 new teams will cost the NRL about $7m per year in club grants, so Fox will need to pay at least this much extra each year otherwise the new clubs will actually drain money, not add to it. Fox currently pay $42m per year for 5 games per week, which is $8.4m for each weekly game. So continuing this example, if Fox paid an extra $8.4m per year for this extra game it would net the NRL around $1.4m extra per year after the paying the grants to the new clubs. But would Fox pay this same amount for a 6th game? There has to be some diminishing returns here surely.

I am not saying that the NRL won't get more money in the next deal - they will for sure. But the extra money will be due to the existing 16 clubs, and the fact that the NRL got stitched up on the last deal. People like to think it's as simple as saying 1 extra game equals more money, but it's not. It totally depends on whether there's a new Brisbane team (which might increase the free-to-air value) and then how much Pay TV will pay for the extra game.

It has been stated that AFL is doing just that. Once again, how is it that the AFL can add an extra game to get a bigger TV deal but we can't?

 

[bobmar28]

It's always what we friggin can't do with rugby league.

For some people.