Expansion and Conferences

[CC_Roosters]

I think the best way forward for expanding the competition nationally in australia and across the Tasman is to have 2 conferences, expanding to 10 teams in each in the short to medium term.

It means you can add teams to each conference and have a full H&A season within each with rotating interconference matches each season. I think it would be best to split up the sydney clubs to even up the travel and make sure state media isnt biased to one conference.

My ideal setup is:

National Conference

Canterbury Bulldogs
Parramatta
Penrith
Manly
Central Coast Bears
Newcastle
WA Reds
NQ Cowboys
Canberra
SE QLD 2- Ipswich-Logan Jets is my preference

Tasman Conference

South Sydney
Roosters
Dragons
Cronulla
Wests Tigers
Melbourne
Warriors
2nd Kiwi- South Island or Wellington
Brisbane Broncos
Gold Coast

National Conf covers 3 Australian capitals in Perth, Brisbane and Sydney. The Tasman Conf covers Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne and Auckland.

Would have:
-18 H&A games within the conference per team
-5 Home interconference games
-5 Away interconference games

So you play every club at least once and every club in your conference H&A. 28 games in total, but i am assuming first grade squads are expanded to 30 players to cope with the extra games.

National conference reasoning
-Have maintained rivalries between Parra, Penrith and Bulldogs
-Triangle of hate between Central Coast, Manly and Newcastle giving 6 healthy rivalries
-Perth and NQ offsets the lack of travel across the tasman
-Canberra are interchangeable between the conferences but stuck them in here.

Tasman Conference reasoning
-Two kiwi sides together, honestly not having 2 derby matches would defeat half the purpose of a 2nd side IMO
-Maintained foundation rivalries between Souths, Easts and Wests Tigers.
-Maintained Dragons and Sharks derby H&A, plus key derbies in Dragons v Souths/Easts.
-Broncos give strong Qld presence, plus 2 X SEQ derbies with Gold coast. I feel it is important to have a Brisbane metro presence in both conferences thus the Brisbane sides have been split up. But GC rivalry makes up for this and they will still play jets once a year making it even more special when it rolls around

Should Conulla prove unsustainable they will be punted to Adelaide and swap conferences with the Raiders.

Shred and Criticise please.

 

[docbrown]

Conferences and divisions are definitely required when the comp gets to 20 teams. It just keeps interest alive in those final rounds.

The make up of teams all depends on how expansion is rolled out.

I think no matter what all the traditional rivalries need to be played home and away each season. For most teams that's about 4 particular games (8 home and away).

 

[Beowulf]

Pretty good - I think we'll have something pretty close to this by 2020. Hopefully it all is to be made public when expansion is announced later this year. A 5-10 year masterplan to set up the games long term future.

 

[clarency]

Conferences do make the league a lot more interesting. The lack of a definitive last place keeps the fans hopes up (relatively), and the lack of inter-conference games increases the discussion and hype around finals time when they have to face off against each other.

 

[The Green Mushroom]

When I first read that I thought you wrote "in Australia and across to Tasmania" and was waiting for the punchline.

I have no real comments about the specific membership in your conferences, but agree that a conference system is probably going to be needed if the comp keeps expanding.

I'm not sold on the idea of a 28 game home & away season and think some way needs to be devised to balance interconference play so teams aren't burdened by travel nor having to face the same teams over and over or get all the good teams in the other conference while their rival for the conference minor premiership gets to play the wooden spoon contestants.

 

[Wilson1]

I like the conference system but no how you have divided the teams. You want to maximize local derbies so all of the Sydney teams should be in one conference and all the other teams in their own conference.

 

[BuffaloRules]

28 games is too many.

In a 20 team competition, you would need to have more than 2 conferences or divisions... perhaps 4 or 5.

If you had 5 divisions of 4 teams you would play the other 3 teams in your division twice, and the other 16 teams once, giving a total of 22 games...

You could have for instance the folllwing to maximise local derbies and rivalries...;

Syd West - Tigers, Panthers, Dogs, Eels
Syd South - Drags,Roosters, Souths, Sharks
Sydn North- Bears, Manly, Knights and Perth?
QLD - Cowboys, GC, 2 brisbane sides.
South- Melb, Warriors, Canberra, NZ 2

Perth is the hard one to fit in.


Obviously how the play offs would be structured would require some thought...

 

[Noa]

I like the conference system but no how you have divided the teams. You want to maximize local derbies so all of the Sydney teams should be in one conference and all the other teams in their own conference.

No they shouldnt becasue there has to be some equity with kms travelled amongst all teams.

And sometimes less is more.

 

[BuffaloRules]

No they shouldnt becasue there has to be some equity with kms travelled amongst all teams.

And sometimes less is more.

You have to ensure that the biggest rivalry games occur every year, even if that means you play your neighbour down the road home and away.

Melbourne's biggest home game every year is against the Warriors.

You need them to play that game every year, even though its a three hour flight for the Warriors

 

[Noa]

You have to ensure that the biggest rivalry games occur every year, even if that means you play your neighbour down the road home and away.

Melbourne's biggest home game every year is against the Warriors.

You need them to play that game every year, even though its a three hour flight for the Warriors

Well obviously you want 1 game every year vs your biggest rival, doesnt have to be 2 is all Im saying.

I mean after 10 years of playing 2 games v your divisional rivals you develop a pretty healthy rivalry there

 

[BuffaloRules]

Well obviously you want 1 game every year vs your biggest rival, doesnt have to be 2 is all Im saying.

I mean after 10 years of playing 2 games v your divisional rivals you develop a pretty healthy rivalry there

It needs to be 2 so you are guaranteed of playing your biggest rival at home every year.

 

[Noa]

It needs to be 2 so you are guaranteed of playing your biggest rival at home every year.

I agree with the premise of every division having 1 set of rivals e.g. warrior's, storm, souths, tigers. However I don't think you can set up divisions based on this alone such as souths, dragons, roosters, tigers and maintain equality across the comp

 

[Perth Red]

I can see Perth v Melbourne becoming a big rivalary in years to come. History in AFL, fact Melbourne got most of Western Reds resources when we were culled, long history in the affiliated states comp, battle of the two expansion cities etc. The NRL and two clubs should be building it from day one. When we sign Slater, Smith and Bellamy for our first season it will only get bigger!

Do agree you need to structure the conferences with rivals as much as possible but do need to split the NSW cup teams up to give some equity to FTA covg and travel.

 

[docbrown]

I can see Perth v Melbourne becoming a big rivalary in years to come. History in AFL, fact Melbourne got most of Western Reds resources when we were culled, long history in the affiliated states comp, battle of the two expansion cities etc. The NRL and two clubs should be building it from day one. When we sign Slater, Smith and Bellamy for our first season it will only get bigger!

Do agree you need to structure the conferences with rivals as much as possible but do need to split the NSW cup teams up to give some equity to FTA covg and travel.

It all depends on how many Sydney teams are in the comp.

An East Sydney & West Sydney division makes sense.

Also I'd suggest that divisions should potentially cross over conferences... :shock:

 

[gonzo89]

Although it sounds heretical what about using the Super League split as the start point for any conferences? It would split Qld, and Brisbane, and also split Sydney. There can be some playing around with new teams and merged teams but it shouldnt be too hard as a basis. If you needed to split conferneces further you could split them North/ South.

 

[docbrown]

Although it sounds heretical what about using the Super League split as the start point for any conferences? It would split Qld, and Brisbane, and also split Sydney. There can be some playing around with new teams and merged teams but it shouldnt be too hard as a basis. If you needed to split conferneces further you could split them North/ South.

Well it's a shame that a media company the size of News didn't just pour in a stack load of money to establish a 20 team competition post-Super League with 2 10 team conferences ala the AFL/NFL merger. Teams could've swapped conferences etc but at least expansion areas like Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Central Coast, Gold Coast and South Queensland could have been propped up eventually so that after 5-10 years the comp became self sustaining again and we'd be 5-10 years ahead of where we are now.

But the past is prologue and we need to rebuild once more and make rugby league into what is has always been destined to be.

 

[CC_Roosters]

Well it's a shame that a media company the size of News didn't just pour in a stack load of money to establish a 20 team competition post-Super League with 2 10 team conferences ala the AFL/NFL merger. Teams could've swapped conferences etc but at least expansion areas like Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Central Coast, Gold Coast and South Queensland could have been propped up eventually so that after 5-10 years the comp became self sustaining again and we'd be 5-10 years ahead of where we are now.

But the past is prologue and we need to rebuild once more and make rugby league into what is has always been destined to be.

Still bewilders me as a recent arrival to the sport that teams where just culled across the nation. Surely they could have let an enlarged comp have a go and allow the teams to thrive or die off naturally of their own accord?

Did have another think about the conferences format and the one glaring weakness in the american system is that teams in the same conference with huge rivalries, think Red sox and yankees can never play in a world series. So it would be a shame in the NRL if the likes of Souths and the Roosters could never play in a GF for being in the same conference.

Not sure how the finals could be jigged to fix that, maybe a cross over in the final round of the playoffs, to allow any opponents to still match up.

-week 3;