Central Coast Bears - Stand Aside

[dgsfan]

How many AFL teams in non heartlands after expansion? 4
How many NRL teams in non heartlands after expansion? 1 (2 if you count NZ)

NATIONAL Rugby League my ass if they admit the Bears.

Thankfully I don't think they will. Things are souring with the bid lately.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

How many AFL teams in non heartlands after expansion? 4
How many NRL teams in non heartlands after expansion? 1 (2 if you count NZ)

NATIONAL Rugby League my ass if they admit the Bears.

Thankfully I don't think they will. Things are souring with the bid lately.

So Ipswich isnt heartland right?

 

[dgsfan]

Was merely pointing out that the AFL has the right idea RE expansion. If the NRL admits the bears its just the NSWRL with a few other teams.

 

[BunniesMan]

How many AFL teams in non heartlands after expansion? 4
How many NRL teams in non heartlands after expansion? 1 (2 if you count NZ)

NATIONAL Rugby League my ass if they admit the Bears.

Thankfully I don't think they will. Things are souring with the bid lately.

Do you have any reason to think that? You know just because you don't like the bid doesn't mean "things are souring".

 

[BDGS]

Was merely pointing out that the AFL has the right idea RE expansion. If the NRL admits the bears its just the NSWRL with a few other teams.

yep putting teams in areas that cry out in pain when they receive them over areas that cried out for a team is definitely the right way to go about it.

Even the AFL have conceeded the GWS team won't work due to lack of support and juniors, thats why they are based in a 'central west' area. Player living on the coast, last name appealing to Americans. I mean damn i wished the NRL expanded like this :sarcasm:

 

[dgsfan]

Hey, they have the number 1 sports deal in the country.

 

[BDGS]

yeah they got lucky getting a good TV deal on packers death bed. Doesn't mean they expand well, even their own supporters are dirty of GWS expansion team.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

How many AFL teams in non heartlands after expansion? 4
How many NRL teams in non heartlands after expansion? 1 (2 if you count NZ)

NATIONAL Rugby League my ass if they admit the Bears.

Thankfully I don't think they will. Things are souring with the bid lately.

Was merely pointing out that the AFL has the right idea RE expansion. If the NRL admits the bears its just the NSWRL with a few other teams.

No, your post doesn't make sense. According to your count, RL after expansion will only have 1 expansion team, Melbourne. You seem to have forgotten Perth.

So, if the Bears got in (a heartland team) that would be at the expense of Ipswich (ALSO A HEARTLAND TEAM)

Admitting the Bears or the Jets will result in the same amount of heartland and non heartland teams. Your just making up an argument to put down the CCBears bid.

And I dont see how the AFL have expanded so much better then us. They cover a wider timezone and will have 2 teams minimum in 5 states in 2 years.

RL currently has teams in 4 states and 1 in another country, but only 2 timezones are covered. Once Perth comes in, we will have more exposure to more metropolitan areas and cover more timezones then the AFL with outposts in 5 states plus NZ.

The only thing the AFL are doing better then us is saving money and pushing Auskick. Their idea of expansion is dangerous and could cost them dearly.

 

[BDGS]

No, your post doesn't make sense. According to your count, RL after expansion will only have 1 expansion team, Melbourne. You seem to have forgotten Perth.

So, if the Bears got in (a heartland team) that would be at the expense of Ipswich (ALSO A HEARTLAND TEAM)

Admitting the Bears or the Jets will result in the same amount of heartland and non heartland teams. Your just making up an argument to put down the CCBears bid.

And I dont see how the AFL have expanded so much better then us. They cover a wider timezone and will have 2 teams minimum in 5 states in 2 years.

RL currently has teams in 4 states and 1 in another country, but only 2 timezones are covered. Once Perth comes in, we will have more exposure to more metropolitan areas and cover more timezones then the AFL with outposts in 5 states plus NZ.

The only thing the AFL are doing better then us is saving money and pushing Auskick. Their idea of expansion is dangerous and could cost them dearly.

You aren't really a Eels supporter are you?

I agree 100% on just about every post and I'm a bulldogs supporter, something is definitely wrong here.

 

[Timmah]

The AFL has the right idea with expansions... is that why they've still got 10 of their 18 teams in Victoria, all within 1.5 hours of the Melbourne city centre?

Heartland teams are, and can be a great strength. A proven supporter area with plenty of active support (CC Bears) and a measured risk area (WA Reds) are ideal. And they both have the infrastructure... something Ipswich and Bundy/Rocky (CQ) lack.

 

[bobmar28]

Keep up the good work CC Bears. Surely the NRL can see that we will bring more exposure to the game than some of the other bids. How many members do the other bids have, how much sponorship do the other bids have, how many juniors do the other area's have?????

SA for a team - now that would be waste of time, at least for the next 20 years.

Has to be the CC Bears and WA Reds for 2013.

The other two QLD bids in 2018 - their stadiums may be built by then. However, it would be great if the NRL turns around and states we will be admitting the CC Bears and WA Reds into the NRL in 2013 and the NRL in 2018 wil be having a two ten team conferences in the NRL with the admittance of the CQLD and the other SEQLD team.

Are you sure you want to ask that question?

 

[bobmar28]

So Ipswich isnt heartland right?

QLD is heartland and has 4.5 million people. You have to ask yourself, why do they have only 3 teams to NSW 10. And believe it or not some people want to make that 11.

The NRL should be expanding not contracting.

 

[Mike_Jets]

It will come down to money, first up I dont know anyone connected with any bid but I did hear a rumor that QR are willing to bankroll a CQ bid - so it may even be a world cup and Qatar situation with a shock twist after all this:shock:
Maybe only two teams in 2013 is not enough?
league of 22 teams in 2015 could give 21 games 10 home 10 away and 1 at a festival weekend at "neutral' ground

 

[BunniesMan]

QLD is heartland and has 4.5 million people. You have to ask yourself, why do they have only 3 teams to NSW 10. And believe it or not some people want to make that 11.

The NRL should be expanding not contracting.

And you don't know what contraction means.

 

[Timmah]

QLD is heartland and has 4.5 million people. You have to ask yourself, why do they have only 3 teams to NSW 10. And believe it or not some people want to make that 11.

The NRL should be expanding not contracting.

I would define expansion as venturing into areas that would bring positives to the game. The Bears bid certainly achieves that. How it can possibly be termed as contracting is beyond me... a league-strong area gaining a team can only be good for the game and it's people.

As for the "QLD is heartland" argument - no, Sydney is RL heartland. More people attend games in Sydney annually, more people watch games in Sydney annually. Queensland is actually in decline - both the Titans (expensive) and Cowboys (sh*thouse) are haemorraging crowd numbers. Brisbane remains strong - because they're in the city and prices at Suncorp aren't as expensive.

 

[Goddo]

The AFL has the right idea with expansions... is that why they've still got 10 of their 18 teams in Victoria, all within 1.5 hours of the Melbourne city centre?

Heartland teams are, and can be a great strength. A proven supporter area with plenty of active support (CC Bears) and a measured risk area (WA Reds) are ideal. And they both have the infrastructure... something Ipswich and Bundy/Rocky (CQ) lack.

Currently, but if either of those bids got the nod they would quickly have a lot of infrastructure spending- they would follow a similar path to the Titans.

I'm just saying the infrastructure arguement is a bit redundant. Yes, the Bears already have it, but it will only take an NRL licence to see development of new facilities for the two qld bids.

 

[PaulyTom]

Perth and a Christchurch team would be the ultimate expansion of taking the game out of traditional areas.

I would love to see 2 NZ teams but don't think it will happen for another 10 years.

 

[dgsfan]

Hmm 2 NZ teams to 3 QLD? Does that seem fair given they have similar populations and QLD is RL mad?

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Perth and a Christchurch team would be the ultimate expansion of taking the game out of traditional areas.

I would love to see 2 NZ teams but don't think it will happen for another 10 years.

Id say the next 3 teams to be admitted are definatly going to be the CCBears, Perth and Ipswich. Battle for 4th IMO will be Queenslands 5th vs Christchurch. IMO Christchurch with the CCBears, Ipswich and Perth would do the NRL for about 20 years.

 

[BDGS]

Currently, but if either of those bids got the nod they would quickly have a lot of infrastructure spending- they would follow a similar path to the Titans.

I'm just saying the infrastructure arguement is a bit redundant. Yes, the Bears already have it, but it will only take an NRL licence to see development of new facilities for the two qld bids.

Only a licence? Geez mate. A licence is huge.