Divided rugby league fell 25 years ago – but united has it conquered? by Steve Mascord.

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

People want the game to grow .
Then there’s total nutters like you who have these bizarre unrealistic fantasies …SINGAPORE
Cull Syd teams
Cull Syd teams.

we can grow …..
the 18th team when added will show that.
& it won’t be Singapore …

I never said the 18th team will be from Singapore. Nor did I say it should be from Singapore. I challenge you to find any post alluding to anything of the sort. You won't find it because I never said it.

I've said ad nauseum that if our game wants to generate more revenue then it will need to invest in new markets.

The biggest untapped markets near us are Adelaide, Perth and Singapore. There's no reason our game cannot carve out a niche in all three of those markets.
It's not something that will happen overnight, but with the right preparation and investment it can be achieved within 20 or 30 years.

The problem is our game doesn't have any ambition to have a team in Adelaide and has shunned Perth's bids for over a decade because it's run by morons who think everything should be based around Sydney.

Look at the three people who liked your post. One of them thinks the 18th team should be from Gosford. Another one wants it to be a PNG team that is based out of Cairns. The third one has a vendetta against me because I point out the inadequacies of his club. It proves my point about our game being run and supported by insular morons.

The Bradley Report from the early 1990s identified that Sydney can only support five teams.

 

[MugaB]

I never said the 18th team will be from Singapore. Nor did I say it should be from Singapore. I challenge you to find any post alluding to anything of the sort. You won't find it because I never said it.

I've said ad nauseum that if our game wants to generate more revenue then it will need to invest in new markets.

The biggest untapped markets near us are Adelaide, Perth and Singapore. There's no reason our game cannot carve out a niche in all three of those markets.
It's not something that will happen overnight, but with the right preparation and investment it can be achieved within 20 or 30 years.

The problem is our game doesn't have any ambition to have a team in Adelaide and has shunned Perth's bids for over a decade because it's run by morons who think everything should be based around Sydney.

Look at the three people who liked your post. One of them thinks the 18th team should be from Gosford. Another one wants it to be a PNG team that is based out of Cairns. The third one has a vendetta against me because I point out the inadequacies of his club. It proves my point about our game being run and supported by insular morons.

The Bradley Report from the early 1990s identified that Sydney can only support five teams.

It also pointed out, no team in Logan

 

[Reflector]

I never said the 18th team will be from Singapore. Nor did I say it should be from Singapore. I challenge you to find any post alluding to anything of the sort. You won't find it because I never said it.

I've said ad nauseum that if our game wants to generate more revenue then it will need to invest in new markets.

The biggest untapped markets near us are Adelaide, Perth and Singapore. There's no reason our game cannot carve out a niche in all three of those markets.
It's not something that will happen overnight, but with the right preparation and investment it can be achieved within 20 or 30 years.

The problem is our game doesn't have any ambition to have a team in Adelaide and has shunned Perth's bids for over a decade because it's run by morons who think everything should be based around Sydney.

Look at the three people who liked your post. One of them thinks the 18th team should be from Gosford. Another one wants it to be a PNG team that is based out of Cairns. The third one has a vendetta against me because I point out the inadequacies of his club. It proves my point about our game being run and supported by insular morons.

The Bradley Report from the early 1990s identified that Sydney can only support five teams.

For the sake of anybody who hasn't visited the expansion threads, I want to clarify that

a) I don't think expansion should stop at 18 teams, and the NRL could afford to expand to 20 teams once more in the mid-term future.

b) I agree Perth should have a team again at some point- whether it's a new entity or the Bears playing all home games in W.A bar 2 per season at NSO

c) I maintain Wests Tigers are wasted in their current form and would be better utilised with the JV splitting, Wests focusing on S-W Sydney full-time as the Western Sydney Magpies, while what's left of Balmain relocate the brand north, pair up with Easts and enter the comp as the Brisbane Tigers, all home games at Suncorp bar 2 per season at Leichardt

I am certainly not of the view that the Bears/ Central Coast is the only bid worth considering in the games' future and have a more progressive view on expansion than many (i.e, I maintain we can keep the traditional clubs AND expand to new areas that are feasible as opposed to culling or relocating a whole lot of existing sides for the sake of a 'magic' number of teams.)

 

[MugaB]

For the sake of anybody who hasn't visited the expansion threads, I want to clarify that

a) I don't think expansion should stop at 18 teams, and the NRL could afford to expand to 20 teams once more in the mid-term future.

b) I agree Perth should have a team again at some point- whether it's a new entity or the Bears playing all home games in W.A bar 2 per season at NSO

c) I maintain Wests Tigers are wasted in their current form and would be better utilised with the JV splitting, Wests focusing on S-W Sydney full-time as the Western Sydney Magpies, while what's left of Balmain relocate the brand north, pair up with Easts and enter the comp as the Brisbane Tigers, all home games at Suncorp bar 2 per season at Leichardt

I am certainly not of the view that the Bears/ Central Coast is the only bid worth considering in the games' future and have a more progressive view on expansion than many (i.e, I maintain we can keep the traditional clubs AND expand to new areas that are feasible as opposed to culling or relocating a whole lot of existing sides for the sake of a 'magic' number of teams.)

Grotd the dumbshit, thinks that there is only a limited amount of licences, as if they made of fkn platinum, .... but they cost nothing and the ARLC can hand them out as if they were lollies if they wanted to... there is no magic number, but the competition can be a better game if it stayed around 20, maybe 22...
The areas that need a team, are first and foremost Perth, Nz2, then either Qld5, Adelaide, Vic2, PNG down the track

 

[Perth Red]

History would suggest the NRL is super reluctant to expand. since nrl settled on its 15 teams in 2002 we’ve only seen 2 teams added in 21 years. Hopefully we’ll see team 18 added by 2028 (26 years for 3 clubs). Teams 19 and 20 will likey not be seen for another 10-20 years at earliest after that, if at all imo. putting clubs on $17million grants isnt going to speed up the addition of new clubs either!

 

[MugaB]

History would suggest the NRL is super reluctant to expand. since nrl settled on its 15 teams in 2002 we’ve only seen 2 teams added in 21 years. Hopefully we’ll see team 18 added by 2028 (26 years for 3 clubs). Teams 19 and 20 will likey not be seen for another 10-20 years at earliest after that, if at all imo. putting clubs on $17million grants isnt going to speed up the addition of new clubs either!

I think it will all depend on where the next area is and how well its received, plus the broadcast deal, if it makes a significant rise, and all goes well, should see 19 & 20 come in sooner than that

 

[siv]

I never said the 18th team will be from Singapore. Nor did I say it should be from Singapore. I challenge you to find any post alluding to anything of the sort. You won't find it because I never said it.

I've said ad nauseum that if our game wants to generate more revenue then it will need to invest in new markets.

The biggest untapped markets near us are Adelaide, Perth and Singapore. There's no reason our game cannot carve out a niche in all three of those markets.
It's not something that will happen overnight, but with the right preparation and investment it can be achieved within 20 or 30 years.

The problem is our game doesn't have any ambition to have a team in Adelaide and has shunned Perth's bids for over a decade because it's run by morons who think everything should be based around Sydney.

Look at the three people who liked your post. One of them thinks the 18th team should be from Gosford. Another one wants it to be a PNG team that is based out of Cairns. The third one has a vendetta against me because I point out the inadequacies of his club. It proves my point about our game being run and supported by insular morons.

The Bradley Report from the early 1990s identified that Sydney can only support five teams.

Bradley report is 30-40 years out of date and failed to take into account the values of tradition, brand to the RL product and the changes in telecommunications

So its time to stop quoting a report that no one has a PDF of

 

[mongoose]

For the sake of anybody who hasn't visited the expansion threads, I want to clarify that

a) I don't think expansion should stop at 18 teams, and the NRL could afford to expand to 20 teams once more in the mid-term future.

b) I agree Perth should have a team again at some point- whether it's a new entity or the Bears playing all home games in W.A bar 2 per season at NSO

c) I maintain Wests Tigers are wasted in their current form and would be better utilised with the JV splitting, Wests focusing on S-W Sydney full-time as the Western Sydney Magpies, while what's left of Balmain relocate the brand north, pair up with Easts and enter the comp as the Brisbane Tigers, all home games at Suncorp bar 2 per season at Leichardt

I am certainly not of the view that the Bears/ Central Coast is the only bid worth considering in the games' future and have a more progressive view on expansion than many (i.e, I maintain we can keep the traditional clubs AND expand to new areas that are feasible as opposed to culling or relocating a whole lot of existing sides for the sake of a 'magic' number of teams.)

I don't like calling for teams to be culled but there are definitely too many teams in Sydney IF you want to be optimising the amount of support and money that comes into the game. Sydney might be increasing in population (all state capitals are) but the demographics have changed a lot over the last 25 years - there is not the level of support for the game there was 30 years ago, especially amongst people under 30. A place like Perth might be an AFL city but there is still potentially a much bigger market there for an RL team than there is in Sydney for some of its current teams. I do understand that teams like Manly, Wests and Cronulla have fans all over the country from decades of exposure on TV which can't be discarded so easily....

 

[Wb1234]

I don't like calling for teams to be culled but there are definitely too many teams in Sydney IF you want to be optimising the amount of support and money that comes into the game. Sydney might be increasing in population (all state capitals are) but the demographics have changed a lot over the last 25 years - there is not the level of support for the game there was 30 years ago, especially amongst people under 30. A place like Perth might be an AFL city but there is still potentially a much bigger market there for an RL team than there is in Sydney for some of its current teams. I do understand that teams like Manly, Wests and Cronulla have fans all over the country from decades of exposure on TV which can't be discarded so easily....

Nah the teams in Sydney are in the wrong spot

you could literally add north Sydney bears as a jv with central coast and they would be stronger than many regional clubs (and current Sydney teams) from day one

the current teams in the nrl weren’t all decided by merit more so politics

as a Canberra fan do you ever wonder maybe a small regional market like Canberra might not be worth so much hence why afl avoids it

 

[Desert Qlder]

SINGAPORE!!!

 

[mongoose]

Nah the teams in Sydney are in the wrong spot

you could literally add north Sydney bears as a jv with central coast and they would be stronger than many regional clubs (and current Sydney teams) from day one

the current teams in the nrl weren’t all decided by merit more so politics

as a Canberra fan do you ever wonder maybe a small regional market like Canberra might not be worth so much hence why afl avoids it

Yes I know Canberra is a small market team and doesn't add a huge amount of value to the broadcast deal. I think we are a strategically important team though for regional NSW and the Riverina area, which is where the AFL is encroaching into.

 

[flippikat]

For the sake of anybody who hasn't visited the expansion threads, I want to clarify that

a) I don't think expansion should stop at 18 teams, and the NRL could afford to expand to 20 teams once more in the mid-term future.

b) I agree Perth should have a team again at some point- whether it's a new entity or the Bears playing all home games in W.A bar 2 per season at NSO

c) I maintain Wests Tigers are wasted in their current form and would be better utilised with the JV splitting, Wests focusing on S-W Sydney full-time as the Western Sydney Magpies, while what's left of Balmain relocate the brand north, pair up with Easts and enter the comp as the Brisbane Tigers, all home games at Suncorp bar 2 per season at Leichardt

With Wests splitting & Tigers hooking up with Brisbane Easts, that brings is to 18 teams - but you still have Perth, Adelaide & NZ 2 jostling for the 2 spots that'd bring us to 20 teams.

If 20 teams is what we're aiming for, AND we want Perth, Adelaide, NZ 2 and Brisbane 3 (Either South of the river or Western corridor), then ONE Sydney club needs to either relocate or be demoted.

Otherwise we'd need to either forgo one of those 4 expansion options or go past 20 teams.

 

[Wb1234]

Yes I know Canberra is a small market team and doesn't add a huge amount of value to the broadcast deal. I think we are a strategically important team though for regional NSW and the Riverina area, which is where the AFL is encroaching into.

Every club has its own benefits

but non Sydney clubs need the strength of the game in Sydney to survive

it was damaged hugely by super league

any one that thinks there should be less teams in Sydney now has rocks in their head … even the sharks as much as I don’t rate them

dragons to Wollongong full time (2 games at sfs) and tigers to Campbelltown (2 games at lo) and it’s fine

one day central coast bears if they miss out on Perth

 

[Wb1234]

With Wests splitting & Tigers hooking up with Brisbane Easts, that brings is to 18 teams - but you still have Perth, Adelaide & NZ 2 jostling for the 2 spots that'd bring us to 20 teams.

If 20 teams is what we're aiming for, AND we want Perth, Adelaide, NZ 2 and Brisbane 3 (Either South of the river or Western corridor), then ONE Sydney club needs to either relocate or be demoted.

Otherwise we'd need to either forgo one of those 4 expansion options or go past 20 teams.

As an ex Balmain fan I’d love to see that

 

[flippikat]

As an ex Balmain fan I’d love to see that

If the Tigers split, and Balmain becomes part of a joint venture with Brisbane Easts, then we'd have 18 teams - which includes the Dolphins, Brisbane Tigers, and a Campbelltown-Based Magpies.

That leaves 2 spots for Perth, Adelaide & NZ 2 to fill (if we're serious about a 20 team limit and having those three covered-off) - so 1 relocation or demotion would STILL be needed to accomplish that.

 

[Captain Apollo]

If the Tigers split, and Balmain becomes part of a joint venture with Brisbane Easts, then we'd have 18 teams - which includes the Dolphins, Brisbane Tigers, and a Campbelltown-Based Magpies.

That leaves 2 spots for Perth, Adelaide & NZ 2 to fill (if we're serious about a 20 team limit and having those three covered-off) - so 1 relocation or demotion would STILL be needed to accomplish that.

Otside of the name "Tigers" what would Balmain actually bring to the table for any Qld based side? All the money resides in the wests side of the joint venture, as do many of th eir biggestr junior league catchment (i.e. Campelltown area).

 

[MugaB]

If the Tigers split, and Balmain becomes part of a joint venture with Brisbane Easts, then we'd have 18 teams - which includes the Dolphins, Brisbane Tigers, and a Campbelltown-Based Magpies.

That leaves 2 spots for Perth, Adelaide & NZ 2 to fill (if we're serious about a 20 team limit and having those three covered-off) - so 1 relocation or demotion would STILL be needed to accomplish that.

That will never happen... the tigers splitting up is fanciful... and will only ever be a kick in the teeth to any current wests tigers fan, not to mention a relocation of sorts for the whole club that is based in the WESTERN SUBURBS of sydney aka Ashfield/Concord... they'll never move to campbelltown fulltime, unless the stadium became some new bankwest of sorts, and the area doesn't draw the amount of crowds that playing at LO or Parra does... as for Qld5, if Easts are to join as no.19 they've said they'd be changing the tigers brand to firehawks... might even change again before then... besides if NRL expansion was fair dinkum, we don't go back there yet.. we persue NZ and Perth again... then look at other areas to push past 20, there is NO magic number, and licenses are not finite.. there seems to be this perception that they are, and that there must be a limit, if that were true, we would have never past 14 in 2000s... there is absolutely no appetite to cull BRANDS from the competition, that was evident the moment the titans got bought by the NRL or Newcastle or recently the sharks getting a helping hand... every Brand has a unique offering to the competition whether it be junior participation (panthers sharks, tigers), strategic foothold (gold coast, manly, canberra, auckland) or just adds value to the broadcasters in Brisbane...
Certain teams are viewed as not essential because of their standing on the ladder, or geographical borders.. but having the brands successful is far greater than where they are placed, Sydney has a unique structure to its geography, and is ever growing, which makes the current teams and their rivalries or derbies more valued than an interstate team vs Sydney based side on veiwership, i think we are at a good number with the current 9, and losing one wouldnt help market the other 8 any better.. the population will grow in nsw and if the teams spread out they could account for it.. dragons in Wollongong FT is a great idea.. which leaves Cronulla in the south, which they basically thriving off anyways... my issue isnt the Manlys or the Cronullas, its the rabbits and roosters being this inner city set up, they for mine are the best suited to drift from the area they are in, souths are already drifting west, roosters should drift north... tigers or dogs should also drift south west, just as dragons have moved even more south... if the bears were ever to come back having them instead of roosters and manly could work... but again the NRL doesnt want to lose their brands for some dots on the map approach.. they could still come in the form of Adelaide, Perth or NZ same goes for East tigers

 

[flippikat]

Otside of the name "Tigers" what would Balmain actually bring to the table for any Qld based side? All the money resides in the wests side of the joint venture, as do many of th eir biggestr junior league catchment (i.e. Campelltown area).

To be honest, I think the original proponents of the idea probably just saw synergies (as far as branding goes - Easts Brisbane wouldn't need to rebrand to something like the failed Firehawks bid), and ran with it as an idea.

I think it's pretty damn unlikely that the Wests Tigers JV will split, so in actuality we're just looking at 3 spots for 4 decent expansion locations.

 

[flippikat]

.. then look at other areas to push past 20, there is NO magic number, and licenses are not finite.. there seems to be this perception that they are, and that there must be a limit, if that were true, we would have never past 14 in 2000s...

So, 22 teams then?

Current 17 plus...

West Coast Pirates
Adelaide Rams
NZ 2
Brisbane 3
<where ever they fit> Bears

??

 

[MugaB]

So, 22 teams then?

Current 17 plus...

West Coast Pirates
Adelaide Rams
NZ 2
Brisbane 3
<where ever they fit> Bears

??

West Coast BEARS
Adelaide Rams
NZ 2

...Then maybe if they want to go past 20
PNG
QLD5
VIC2
In 1997 there was 22 RL clubs, (in 2 comps)

In 1998 there was 20 teams, albiet they planned to cull them down even moreso, but it still existed...with the money at play now they can all be sustainable, back then its wasn't set up to do so, the game is going forward and on the up, getting rid of brands would be the last thing they would do