Expansion Team Names

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Seems like you don't understand, that mentions that they would need that to be AHEAD of Brisbane 2, I don't a single person on here thinks Brisbane 2 shouldn't be the next team

I took it to mean that there will be just one team added, and then we will go a few years with just 17 teams.

There would be a reason the $200 million figure was brought up. We just calculated that $208,238,000 was spent on the Storm between 1998 and now. Most of it came from News Ltd. ARLC doesn't have News Ltd in the picture to fund a Perth venture, so it needs some one with deep pockets to do it for them.

When you take it into context with PVL's stance and the comments made by media analyst Colin Smith, it would appear as if Perth isn't on the radar at ARLC. If it was then PVL and Colin Smith would be talking it up, not down. I don't recall Gallop, Smith or Greenberg every being in favour of Perth.

I cannot see Perth being the 18th team, either. Whoever gets the 18th licence will probably depend on how Brisbane 2 fares. If it goes really well or better than expected then they might decide Brisbane 3. Or they could go New Zealand 2. Or they could have a change of heart and go Perth. Who knows.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

​

Hang on a minute, that's not him saying that it'd cost $200mil to set up a Perth club with some knowledge behind it, that's an offhanded comment said flippantly.

It's also been said before the NRL had really started their review into expansion, and before the findings have been presented, we also don't know who this guy is or what his agenda is.

I mean that could just be V'Landys being his insular self, or it could be a quote from a patriotic Queenslander who won't even discuss any bids other than Brisbane bids, and for all we know he might be in a minority on the commission and that the as a whole the ARLC actually supports a Perth club.

See this is why you need to provide the quote you are referring to.

Why else would he say the bid needs $200 million in capital from a rich investor if it has nothing to do with how much the club will need to survive?

We know the Storm have been provided $208,238,000 since 1998 if you include salary cap grant and funding from the NRL to their football department, plus the extra money given to them by News Ltd and the ARLC. When you put it in that context, it makes sense for him to say the club would need an investor to put $200 million into it. The game tried to expand there in 1995 and failed. News Ltd bailed the club out at the start of 1996 because it was broke, in exchange for them signing with Super League. The next year they wound the club up because it was haemorhaging so much money. Then they set up the Storm. That would suggest to me that Melbourne, as difficult as it was to establish, wasn't as hard as Perth will be for the NRL.

How many people from the ARLC have come out and said they're in favour of expanding into Perth?

Gallop talked up Ipswich/Logan and "fishing where the fishes are", or something to that effect.

I don't recall Dave Smith saying anything.

PVL ruled out expansion into Perth and Adelaide.

Greenberg also said there would be no expansion into Perth.

The only person who spoke positively about it was Peter Beattie, and he cannot be trusted given his record as Queensland Premier.

 

[TheEroticGamer]

For all we know the 200 million talk isn’t a reflection of Perth’s financial fragility but instead just how profitable a second Brisbane/Ipswich team would be. Crowd numbers, tv ratings especially for derbies, lack of dependency on the NRL for financial security.

Perth won’t be anywhere near as hard to get done as Melbourne. AFL has 9 teams in the MCG/Marvel precinct. Every day a Storm home game is played they effectively have to go up against an AFL game in the same precinct as they more or less have four Melbourne home games Thursday through Sunday. It’s really hard to convince people to try out something new when just a short walk away you can stick with what you’re familiar with. No one’s trying out mango chicken when you are constantly in stock of butter chicken(it’s more like rugby league is the butter chicken to the afl’s mango chicken but you get the point).

In Perth, it’s just two teams. That’s it. That’s a 1/4 shot your home game will be on the same day as one of the AFL home games and 1/2 it will even share a day with either of the teams’ matches. It is going to be so much easier to convince people to check out the sport when their current favourite sport isn’t going on next door, and it’s gonna be even easier to get news coverage when you’re one of three winter teams playing on a separate day rather than being in a state with ten teams that play about 2 games a day which just swallows up all of the coverage.

 

[Dingo_dan]

The support for Perth just ain't there.

They barely bring anything to TV ratings.
Crowds for NRL games have been a case or diminishing returns for years. Yea they sold out origin, but thats origin. You'd get 50k to origin in Darwin. You get 90k to origin in Melbourne, but the storm (who have been dominate for almost 2 decades) average in the teens.
Comparisons with the storm are fair. Storm have found a good niche for themselves, but that's in a city at least double the size of Perth. Thats after 20 years of success, numerous GFs and 4 GF wins (even though 2 were later stripped, the euphoria created In the moment for all of these created momentum for the franchise). Even their scandal come at the right time to solidify the fan base. The storm have had a charmed run but even then they've only found a niche in the Melbourne market.
Perth are not going to have the success Storm had. I think people don't quite understand the power West Coast and the Dockers have on the public in Perth. The afl fanaticism in Perth makes melbournites look like bandwagoning fan boys of afl. Afl is a religion in Perth and West Coast and the Dockers are twin Jesus's. A Perth team will struggle to get any attention.
The mindset when letting an expansion team in should be 'will they survive if they turn out like the Titans'. That has to be the criteria. And if the perth franchise performs like the titans have their is now way it survives. What's worse, if we let a perth team in now when the support just ain't there and it fails for a second time, then there will never be a Perth team ever again. That would put a full stop into perth forever. When we go to Perth, it has to he done right and permanently.

 

[mongoose]

$106,738,000 as in $106 million?

That means the Storm have gotten $208,238,000.

No wonder they've dominated the competition!

What makes the Storm's spending all the more contemptible is News Ltd used the money it received from fans of other clubs who subscribed to Foxtel and invested it in the Storm so they could develop a massive advantage over every other team, which helped them dominate the competition from the mid 2000s until now. It's enough to make fans from teams who struggle to not want to invest in the game.

But other clubs would have been getting Leagues clubs grants in that time, did the Storm get any money from a Leagues club since 1998? The question is have the Storm really been more expensive to run than any other team? It's probably put them in better stead that most other clubs if they have been.

 

[greenBV4]

But other clubs would have been getting Leagues clubs grants in that time, did the Storm get any money from a Leagues club since 1998? The question is have the Storm really been more expensive to run than any other team? It's probably put them in better stead that most other clubs if they have been.

Exactly, I've asked this before with no response

They probably have spent a bit more than other clubs but not to the tune donky would have everyone believe when you factor in how much they need propping up by their leagues clubs, and it has worked out for them in the long run - theres a difference purposefully over spending and "bleeding"

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

The support for Perth just ain't there.

They barely bring anything to TV ratings.
Crowds for NRL games have been a case or diminishing returns for years. Yea they sold out origin, but thats origin. You'd get 50k to origin in Darwin. You get 90k to origin in Melbourne, but the storm (who have been dominate for almost 2 decades) average in the teens.
Comparisons with the storm are fair. Storm have found a good niche for themselves, but that's in a city at least double the size of Perth. Thats after 20 years of success, numerous GFs and 4 GF wins (even though 2 were later stripped, the euphoria created In the moment for all of these created momentum for the franchise). Even their scandal come at the right time to solidify the fan base. The storm have had a charmed run but even then they've only found a niche in the Melbourne market.
Perth are not going to have the success Storm had. I think people don't quite understand the power West Coast and the Dockers have on the public in Perth. The afl fanaticism in Perth makes melbournites look like bandwagoning fan boys of afl. Afl is a religion in Perth and West Coast and the Dockers are twin Jesus's. A Perth team will struggle to get any attention.
The mindset when letting an expansion team in should be 'will they survive if they turn out like the Titans'. That has to be the criteria. And if the perth franchise performs like the titans have their is now way it survives. What's worse, if we let a perth team in now when the support just ain't there and it fails for a second time, then there will never be a Perth team ever again. That would put a full stop into perth forever. When we go to Perth, it has to he done right and permanently.

This sums up my views on Perth. I feel for Perth because it ticks some of the boxes, but when I hear Western Australians talk so passionately about fumbleball, Eagles and Dockers it makes me realise just how hard it will be for us, especially as AwFuL will do everything they can to turn public sentiment against us and the media will be there enabling them. We will be labelled that evil northern game trying to take down their beloved fumbleball, Eagles and Dockers.

Theatrically it should be easier to get it done in Perth than it was in Melbourne. It might turn out to be more doable than I think. I still cannot shake this fear that failing a second time would be the best ammunition AwFuL could use in their campaign against us. They would never let us forget it and it would be a public relations disaster. My hope is the game puts $10 million aside for development of the game in WA at grassroots level, fund a team in the Queensland Cup and let it grow organically so that the ARLC will have no choice but to add an NRL team there because the numbers support it.

My other fear is what the other clubs will want. I just cannot see them agreeing to another expensive expansion project. They want the game’s revenue to themselves, not shared with a new team that will take years to establish itself in enemy territory. Brisbane 2 has the advantage of adding money to the pie, which the rest of the league will accept.

I am glad you brought up a club’s viability should it fail on the field. Only one team can be declared premiers at the end of the season. Only 4 can finish in the top 4. There are 16 clubs. That means failure is part and parcel of running a club. The Storm model is unsustainable as it requires everyone else is held back. This isn’t good for the game in Queensland and NSW. I cannot see how the NRL could repeat this in Perth or Adelaide. It’s no wonder fairweather fans in Queensland have adopted the Storm as their team. They know it is rigged to have the Harlem Globetrotters aka Melbourne win and have decided to save themselves the pain of backing the teams that are put there to lose.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

But other clubs would have been getting Leagues clubs grants in that time, did the Storm get any money from a Leagues club since 1998? The question is have the Storm really been more expensive to run than any other team? It's probably put them in better stead that most other clubs if they have been.

The difference there is those clubs funded themselves through a venture that they had to run successfully or face financial ruin. The Storm were funded by the company that had a 50% stake in the ARL and, used profits generated by all clubs to give this one specific club a massive advantage over the rest. I wish my club could overspend, at the expense of the profits generated by our competitors, to gain an unfair advantage that has us in the top 4 every year.

 

[T-Boon]

What about the Gamers as a team name?

Brisbane Gamers.

I really like this. Its my new favourite.

 

[mongoose]

The difference there is those clubs funded themselves through a venture that they had to run successfully or face financial ruin. The Storm were funded by the company that had a 50% stake in the ARL and, used profits generated by all clubs to give this one specific club a massive advantage over the rest. I wish my club could overspend, at the expense of the profits generated by our competitors, to gain an unfair advantage that has us in the top 4 every year.

The Storm was an investment which is now paying off and all those other clubs are benefiting from. The NRL doesn't get the billion dollar TV deals without Melbourne and the investment the NRL has put into the Storm over the last 20 years. You can twist it anyway you like but no Melbourne presence, no massive TV deals.

 

[Perth Red]

didn't News sell the club in 2013? when did the ARLC bail them out?

This is the same News ltd who undersold the games TV rights to themselves up until 2012.



$200,000,000 up front? over 10 years? seems you are just throwing random amounts out there. How do you know how many businessmen are in WA or SA who could to invest in an NRL team?

Who is going to fund all these Brisbane NRL teams btw, pokie clubs? why bother...

$200mill? Haha what a load of BS! Maybe over 100 years.
$2-3mill a year tops Id say, if any is needed. Pirates are quite capable of getting a 15k plus crowd avg, $5-6mill sponsorship and corporate sales ( we already have the main sponsor tied up), our merch sales will be through the roof, $13mill NRL grant. There's the $26mill a year you need to run an NRL club.

AFL are not stupid, they have a variable grant scheme because they know not all things are created equal. This communist approach by the NRL to club payments is holding the game back.

 

[The Great Dane]

also worth noting, do you want to know how much EVERY club has received from the NRL in the form of the grant since 1998? 106.738 Million, and it is safe to assume that most, if not all, clubs have been spending more than just the NRL grant each year

If you add in leagues clubs grants and investment from owners (i.e. the equivalent of what the Storm got from News) on top of the NRL grants then the majority of NRL club would have had a similar amount invested into them as the Storm over the past 20 years, some of them probably even had more.

There's also a massive assumption being made that just because that money was invested into the clubs that it all went into supporting a club that couldn't support it's self, which isn't necessarily true at all. For example money that was invested into building centres of excellence wasn't a necessity it was a luxury.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Canterbury (Christchurch) Bulldogs
Adelaide Sea Eagles
West Coast (Perth) Tigers
Gold Coast Bears (North Sydney, Burleigh merger)
Brisbane United (old BRL Logo - owned by the QRL or a consortium of interested QRL clubs) - the Broncos killed off the old BRL, this would be a hell of a rivalry

 

[The Great Dane]

Why else would he say the bid needs $200 million in capital from a rich investor if it has nothing to do with how much the club will need to survive?

Firstly he never said that the bid needs $200mil from an investor to underwrite it, he said that Brisbane is ahead of Perth unless there's $200mil in it. Those are two vastly different things

There are at least half a dozen things he might have meant by that, for example he might have meant that he'd only let Perth go in front of Brisbane if they offered a $200mil licensing fee, maybe he meant that the club needed to grantee a $200mil dollar investment into grassroots and juniors over x-amount of time, maybe he was roughly referring to the amount of money Twiggy has or is investing into RU in WA, etc, etc.

But given the context of the quote I think that chances are that it was a poorly thought out comment made flippantly with a hyperbolic number that he had pulled out of his arse, and that not only was it never meant to be taken literally, but all he meant by it was that unless something unexpected happens Brisbane is next in line.

Truth be told who cares who is team 17 and who is team 18, because it's isn't, or shouldn't be, an either or, and both of them should be coming in at the same time or in quick succession to add content, and value to broadcasters, by adding a 9th game each week.

 

[Perth Red]

If you add in leagues clubs grants and investment from owners (i.e. the equivalent of what the Storm got from News) on top of the NRL grants then the majority of NRL club would have had a similar amount invested into them as the Storm over the past 20 years, some of them probably even had more.

There's also a massive assumption being made that just because that money was invested into the clubs that it all went into supporting a club that couldn't support it's self, which isn't necessarily true at all. For example money that was invested into building centres of excellence wasn't a necessity it was a luxury.

A lot of them had a heck load more! Aside for the base grant everyone gets, the NRL tipped in an extra $26.5mill to the Storm over 6 years as part of the deal for News ltd to withdraw from ownership of the Storm (something the NRL was agitating for as it doesnt want more than one club owned by the same people for obvious reasons). What is interesting in this is why News Ltd were so adamant that the Storm survive and thrive Maybe as they know the value to their media in having a successful Melbourne NRL club?

To give you a sense of how much LC's are bailing out the FC operations of heartland clubs in comparison:
Parra Eels NRL club
2016 $12mill loss
2017 $10.1mill loss
2018 $4mill loss
2019 $5.9mill loss
That's $32mill in losses in 4 years!!

Who is this numpty that donkey breath claims said that Perth needs $200mill?

 

[The Great Dane]

Who is this numpty that donkey breath claims said that Perth needs $200mill?

Some anonymous commissioner that was quoted in a Roy Masters column last year. There's a good chance that it's just V'Landys, it sounds like something he'd say.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Canterbury (Christchurch) Bulldogs
Adelaide Sea Eagles
West Coast (Perth) Tigers
Gold Coast Bears (North Sydney, Burleigh merger)
Brisbane United (old BRL Logo - owned by the QRL or a consortium of interested QRL clubs) - the Broncos killed off the old BRL, this would be a hell of a rivalry

TBoon suggested the Tigers change their name to Western Tigers and play 4 to 6 games a year in Perth. I reckon that would be a good way to introduce pro RL to Perth to see if a permanent team there could be viable. It would have the security of a Leagues Club, financiers and junior leagues in Sydney to prop it up, plus the benefits of a new supporter base in Perth and its growing junior base.

The NRL could do something similar with Canterbury as soon as next year if it really wanted to. With two of Sydney's three stadiums out of commission, the NRL could have the Bulldogs become a 50% Sydney club, 50% Christchurch club. Split games between the two cities 50-50. Bulldogs get the bonus of having first dibs to juniors from South Island and get to create a new supporter base. South Island gets 6 games a year. Maybe even add black and red to the jersey. Who knows, it might even help the club attract a sponsor.

I agree about a BRL club being the best choice for Brissie 2. I know it would never happen, but it would be good if the QRL and the remaining Q-Cup teams from Brisbane teamed up to become the Brisbane Diehards. The fact Fortitude Valley never got to play in the Queensland Cup as a standalone club, and only had one season as a merged entity with Brothers, means anyone under 30 wouldn't have any bias against them. Fortitude Valley were the most successful and famous club in Queensland, with a history dating back to 1908. The fact they came back from the death to field teams in the BRL a few years ago and won it symbolises their "diehard" spirit and would be an appropriate moniker for a team representing the downtrodden competition that produced State of Origin. Those early 1980s Queensland teams were made up of players from the BRL with one or two Queenslanders who played in the NSWRFL and they dominated NSW for years. They did it without poker machines in a much smaller city that had less capital. It was truly a David vs Goliath story and something all Queensland RL fans should be proud of and celebrate.

 

[Travitoh]

Trying to think outside the box...

Adelaide Kaurna?

Black with red and yellow trim for the colours.
A native animal for the mascot.

I feel it'd represent the native people without being insensitive. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.

 

[The Great Dane]

Trying to think outside the box...

Adelaide Kaurna?

Black with red and yellow trim for the colours.
A native animal for the mascot.

I feel it'd represent the native people without being insensitive. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.

Ethnic clubs are never a good idea.

The best way to represent everyone is to not explicitly represent anyone.

 

[T-Boon]

Ethnic clubs are never a good idea.

The best way to represent everyone is to not explicitly represent anyone.

Notre Dame is arguably the most supported college football team in America because they are the Catholics. Almost everyone "hates" them except the many millions who love them.
Maybe for NRL, who has luke warm supporters, some teams link to something would create more passion.