Foxsports talks expansion

[gallagher]

If you accept that there are too many teams in Sydney, then we need to piss off one of the fans bases at some point. Relocation at least allows fans to follow from afar...

At least in dividing Magpies and Balmain, the ARLC can justify relocating the club "WT is dead, but fear not, we're bringing back two dead teams. But we can only do so in these new locations". We drop a Sydney team and get 2 expansion location with already well known brands.

As for your point of WT fans that neve followed Balmain,
- their "Tigers" will still exist in Perth
- the name would probably "West Coast" ()
- They arent losing an iconic jersey as theirs changes every 3 years. Whereas a Balmain reincarnation would have the classic jersey.

All of the current Tigers fans would be as happy as fans of relocated teams could possibly be....



This is a ridiculous thing to say...

The Tigers are potentially on the brink of death (the ARLC could push them if they wanted to). They are in turmoil, the BEST time for dramatic change. You cant exclude a team from potential relocation BECAUSe they are struggling.

You dont wait for a club to be healthy and stable to pull the rug out from under them...

How are wests tigers potentially on the brink of death? Do you know the difference between wests tigers and balmain tigers?

 

[alien]

f**k off you would.

That shitty old banner of yours would be out in a flash.

you asked if i would still support souths if a miracle happened and the magpies came back into the nrl. my answer was yes and i meant it. i didn't say that i wouldn't support the magpies too. i've been reading some social media and have seen quite a few people from the balmange side of the joint venture say they won't support wests tigers anymore if balmange are no longer a part of it after march 2016. i messaged some of them privately and asked them if they liked my idea and most of them liked it.

 

[alien]

How are wests tigers potentially on the brink of death? Do you know the difference between wests tigers and balmain tigers?

this is a good point. a lot of people think or act like it is the same club

 

[adamkungl]

no ron massey cup is 3rd grade. sydney shield is 4th grade.

nrl (1st grade)
nsw cup (2nd grade/reserve grade)
ron massey cup (3rd grade)
sydney shield (4th grade)

western suburbs have teams in both ron massey cup and the sydney shield. they also have teams in the harold matts (under 16s) and sg ball (under 18s). in the future they might be back in the nsw cup and under 20s (if under 20s stop being a glorified national comp)

NRL U20s is higher grade competition than the Magpies 4th grade plods. Sorry bro

 

[Perth Red]

Re relocation of a club to Perth, Short term it wouldnt work but long term would eventually be accepted. reason i say this is due to the current hardcore RL fanbase already being NRL fans of some team or other.

I think it woul be dfficult for a lifelong Souths or Bulldogs fan to suddenly start supporting a WC Sharks, Tigers or Panthers. Eventually the kids wouldnt care but that is a 20 year wait! Better to start fresh with a brand WA can call its own.

Also the continual media beat up on the club looking to move back to Sydney would be sht. You know how sydney media loves to heap sht on the game, this would be an ongoing story of rumours of wanting to return which would erode fan and corprotae support.

re detah riding clubs, like many many others I think Sydney is over saturated whilst more lucrative markets are left with nothing. When youve got sub 7000 crowds turning out to games in our supposed heartland and clubs constantly going cap in hand for bail outs from the NRL, unable to secure major sponsors etc etc then it is clear there is signifcant issues that need addressing. Then you add in the NRL telling us we cant expand due to weak existing clubs then yep we need some hard decisons to be made over the next decade.

 

[The Charlatan]

you asked if i would still support souths if a miracle happened and the magpies came back into the nrl. my answer was yes and i meant it. i didn't say that i wouldn't support the magpies too. i've been reading some social media and have seen quite a few people from the balmange side of the joint venture say they won't support wests tigers anymore if balmange are no longer a part of it after march 2016. i messaged some of them privately and asked them if they liked my idea and most of them liked it.

If Balmain have nothing to do with it, it wouldn't change anything for me. Why? Because unlike pedantic merkins like you who want things a certain way I'm an unconditional supporter.

 

[The Charlatan]

How are wests tigers potentially on the brink of death? Do you know the difference between wests tigers and balmain tigers?

I don't know how people keep getting that mixed up. Ashfield are flush, and they'd be able to run the club just fine on their own.

 

[docbrown]

If you accept that there are too many teams in Sydney, then we need to piss off one of the fans bases at some point.

It would be smarter if they weren't fans of one of the bigger Sydney clubs that you already pissed off. That's mainly what I'm saying.

Relocation at least allows fans to follow from afar...

It also reduces personal investment/existing interest.

At least in dividing Magpies and Balmain, the ARLC can justify relocating the club

Like I said most of the younger fan base really don't give a shit about those brands. All they know is 'Wests Tigers' period. You tell some 17 year old kid "We're killing your club to bring back the Magpies" their response will be "Who the f**k are the Magpies? Don't kill my club you f**king merkin!"

- their "Tigers" will still exist in Perth
- the name would probably "West Coast" ()
- They arent losing an iconic jersey as theirs changes every 3 years. Whereas a Balmain reincarnation would have the classic jersey.

All of the current Tigers fans would be as happy as fans of relocated teams could possibly be....

It's like saying move South Sydney to Hobart. They can still wear the same colours and call themselves South Coast Rabbitohs. All the current Rabbitohs fans would be happy.

Not that I'm suggesting that because it's as ridiculous as the West Coast Tigers.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Re relocation of a club to Perth, Short term it wouldnt work but long term would eventually be accepted. reason i say this is due to the current hardcore RL fanbase already being NRL fans of some team or other.

I think it woul be dfficult for a lifelong Souths or Bulldogs fan to suddenly start supporting a WC Sharks, Tigers or Panthers. Eventually the kids wouldnt care but that is a 20 year wait! Better to start fresh with a brand WA can call its own.

I imagine the people that are already NRL fans would just be happy to get a local team...

A brand new team would have the same problems in people already having different loyalties, so its not going to change whether its a new brand or an old one.

Also the continual media beat up on the club looking to move back to Sydney would be sht. You know how sydney media loves to heap sht on the game, this would be an ongoing story of rumours of wanting to return which would erode fan and corprotae support.

This kind of talk will happen, again, regardless of the the brand...

As soon as you have a bad year, there will be talk of folding them o moving them on (look at the GC). As long as the power to relocate the team out of Perth isnt left with old Balmain figures, youll be fine.

re detah riding clubs, like many many others I think Sydney is over saturated whilst more lucrative markets are left with nothing. When youve got sub 7000 crowds turning out to games in our supposed heartland and clubs constantly going cap in hand for bail outs from the NRL, unable to secure major sponsors etc etc then it is clear there is signifcant issues that need addressing. Then you add in the NRL telling us we cant expand due to weak existing clubs then yep we need some hard decisons to be made over the next decade.

This is why i think relocation is the way forward...

Sydney has too many team, but cutting one/some would be tragic. Relocating the brand for the fans to follow from afar at least provides the ARLC with some legitiant arguements to quell any media uproar. "The team was dying, it was the only way to save them. We are determined to preserve the games history. rah rah rha..."

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

How are wests tigers potentially on the brink of death? Do you know the difference between wests tigers and balmain tigers?

POTENTIALLY, as in the ARLC has the power to push them and they could do nothing about it...

The ARLC already has a majority on the board, and thats without taking full control of the the Balmain side. If the ARLC chose to drop a Sydney team, the Tigers are already in position to go.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

It would be smarter if they weren't fans of one of the bigger Sydney clubs that you already pissed off. That's mainly what I'm saying.

I cant think of a team better positioned to be moved on...

It also reduces personal investment/existing interest.

Its hopeful thinking to imagine they would jump to a different team near my.

At least relocation keeps them in the game, and their kids can be targeted by they NRL marketing team.

Like I said most of the younger fan base really don't give a shit about those brands. All they know is 'Wests Tigers' period. You tell some 17 year old kid "We're killing your club to bring back the Magpies" their response will be "Who the f**k are the Magpies? Don't kill my club you f**king merkin!"

I imagine they would be more inclined to follow the Tigers team in Perth. (And dont try to pretend the WTigers is THAT different to the Balmain brand)

The Magpies > Adeladie is more about providing that location with SOME kind of brand depth; i really dont want to see another Titans-style gimmick.

It's like saying move South Sydney to Hobart. They can still wear the same colours and call themselves South Coast Rabbitohs. All the current Rabbitohs fans would be happy.

Not that I'm suggesting that because it's as ridiculous as the West Coast Tigers.

Not "happy", but as happy as can be expected under the circumstances. Again, killing a Syndey team will always piss SOMEONE off. This is just about mitigation.

 

[alien]

NRL U20s is higher grade competition than the Magpies 4th grade plods. Sorry bro

under 20s isn't senior rugby league, so it isn't any grade. it's just a glorified national under 20s comp at the moment, but soon it will just be a nswrl under 20s comp and qld will have their own under 20s comp

 

[Perth Red]

I think we've got to the point after being led up the garden path for 8 years that we would accept anything! 2 games a year would be nice but the NRL cant even manage that.

 

[alien]

Re relocation of a club to Perth, Short term it wouldnt work but long term would eventually be accepted. reason i say this is due to the current hardcore RL fanbase already being NRL fans of some team or other.

I think it woul be dfficult for a lifelong Souths or Bulldogs fan to suddenly start supporting a WC Sharks, Tigers or Panthers. Eventually the kids wouldnt care but that is a 20 year wait! Better to start fresh with a brand WA can call its own.

Also the continual media beat up on the club looking to move back to Sydney would be sht. You know how sydney media loves to heap sht on the game, this would be an ongoing story of rumours of wanting to return which would erode fan and corprotae support.

re detah riding clubs, like many many others I think Sydney is over saturated whilst more lucrative markets are left with nothing. When youve got sub 7000 crowds turning out to games in our supposed heartland and clubs constantly going cap in hand for bail outs from the NRL, unable to secure major sponsors etc etc then it is clear there is signifcant issues that need addressing. Then you add in the NRL telling us we cant expand due to weak existing clubs then yep we need some hard decisons to be made over the next decade.

ok thanks for the reply PR. i agree that there are probably too many teams in sydney, but i don't want to see teams fold because you lose fans, and joint ventures are messy, so i thought relocations might be a better idea. if we keep the same amount of sydney teams then it means expansion to all the area the nrl should be in will take a lot longer because there are only a certain number of quality players to go around.

 

[Albert Rosenfeld]

We need Perth and Brisbane II to make 18 clubs. Then Wellington and PNG HUnters to make an even 20 clubs. Then a few years later we add Adelaide and Christchurch, to go to 22 clubs. Finally we add Fiji and a fifth Queensland team ( I am not sure which part of Queensland) to make the perfect 24.

Thus the NRL would become the South Pacific Rugby League (SPRL) instead of NRL, which is already misleading.

The 24 team SPRL would comprise:

North Queensland Cowboys
Brisbane Broncos
Brisbane Bombers
Gold Coast Titans
South Queensland Crushers/Central Queensland Barbas

Sydney Roosters
South Sydney Rabbitohs
St George-Illawarra Dragons
Cronulla Sutherland Sharks
Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs
Wests Tigers
Parramatta Eels
Penrith Panthers
Manly-Warringah

Newcastle Knights

Canberra Raiders

Melbourne Storm

Adelaide Rams

Perth Pioneers

Auckland Warriors
Wellington Orcas
Christchurch Thunder

PNG Hunters

Fiji Bati

Total TV and digital rights deal: $3 billion

 

[Miller was a legend]

Wow $3 million. Good times indeed

 

[Miller was a legend]

Oh that's better $3 billion.

 

[alien]

We need Perth and Brisbane II to make 18 clubs. Then Wellington and PNG HUnters to make an even 20 clubs. Then a few years later we add Adelaide and Christchurch, to go to 22 clubs. Finally we add Fiji and a fifth Queensland team ( I am not sure which part of Queensland) to make the perfect 24.

Thus the NRL would become the South Pacific Rugby League (SPRL) instead of NRL, which is already misleading.

The 24 team SPRL would comprise:

North Queensland Cowboys
Brisbane Broncos
Brisbane Bombers
Gold Coast Titans
South Queensland Crushers/Central Queensland Barbas

Sydney Roosters
South Sydney Rabbitohs
St George-Illawarra Dragons
Cronulla Sutherland Sharks
Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs
Wests Tigers
Parramatta Eels
Penrith Panthers
Manly-Warringah

Newcastle Knights

Canberra Raiders

Melbourne Storm

Adelaide Rams

Perth Pioneers

Auckland Warriors
Wellington Orcas
Christchurch Thunder

PNG Hunters

Fiji Bati

Total TV and digital rights deal: $3 billion

not enough quality players for 24 teams, not for at least a few decades, and i don't think we need to have nrl teams in all those places you have mentioned. some of those locations would get an nrl team quicker if there were a couple/few relocations from sydney

 

[RoosTah]

We need Perth and Brisbane II to make 18 clubs. Then Wellington and PNG HUnters to make an even 20 clubs. Then a few years later we add Adelaide and Christchurch, to go to 22 clubs. Finally we add Fiji and a fifth Queensland team ( I am not sure which part of Queensland) to make the perfect 24.

Thus the NRL would become the South Pacific Rugby League (SPRL) instead of NRL, which is already misleading.

Total TV and digital rights deal: $3 billion

It's an ambitious idea, but by the time there's the critical mass to achieve that I'd guess the TV rights would be worth $10 billion... in other words probably 15-20 years away at least.

In my view the expansion priorities in descending order are:

1. Perth - West Coast Pirates (critical market that has shown potential; we need presence there)
2. Brisbane - Bombers (value in terms of ratings, derbies etc can't be denied)
3. NZ 2 (Christchurch)
4. NZ 3 (wellington)

In my view the expansion into NZ is probably still a bit too soon, but it's critical for 2 reasons that are both tied up with increasing the value of the game:

1. To further capitalise on their strong domestic development and give NZ more complete presence. NZ already supplies more players to the NRL than Queensland; but the lack of local pathways means Union will always get first pick. This would help arrest that and also help develop some great local derbies

2.The international game. Giving NZ a robust 3 team presence will ensure more NZ talent flows to League, which will in tern strengthen the Kiwis and make the rivalry with the Kangaroos increasingly meaningful.

Heck, the Kiwis have won just as many trophies in the past 10 years as the Kangaroos, so they are competitive, but if they started to truly dominate, then an international series against them could start to generate Origin like hype and interest. Given Origin's value to the TV deal, that alone should be incentive enough.

I see this as probably a 10 year proposition, but one that definitely needs to happen.

As for PNG and Fiji - great potential in terms of talent, but PNG remains too unstable and Fiji isn't profitable enough a market.

 

[gallagher]

POTENTIALLY, as in the ARLC has the power to push them and they could do nothing about it...

The ARLC already has a majority on the board, and thats without taking full control of the the Balmain side. If the ARLC chose to drop a Sydney team, the Tigers are already in position to go.

Well the NRL just handed the tigers a new license , along with 3 other teams, to 2027 i think it is. So they have have less potential than 12 other teams of extinction.
You really have no idea about the tigers situation.