Future NRL Stadiums

[Brutus]

Do you think that sydney soccer teams are getting up in arms about this stadium thing? lol. Or Rugby Union? Why league? You're hampered with erroneous thinking.

It may have something to do with the fact there are 9 Sydney NRL teams. How many Soccer or union teams will it affect Mr Van Halen??

 

[Von Neumann]

It may have something to do with the fact there are 9 Sydney NRL teams. How many Soccer or union teams will it affect Mr Van Halen??

Thanks for bringing that up. I had not forgotten that. Its just the realities of the nrl clubs that there are so many. Its hampering not in their numbers as such, but how they approach growth - it would make any business timid to feel as though they come to alike another club, given their fragile bottom line. But they must make that jump, somehow, at some time.

^ That is not a failing of the concept or the world, that is a failing of the club who allowed its image/differentiation to be whittled down to a nub so that it was not effective. They need to take ownership of that. Didn't see Souths get wollowed in pride to a detrimental point once they came back. They sucked it up when Rusty got in there and starting kicking goals.

.

^ Identity is a fan concern mainly - it does not apply at club level so much in how we are talking about it here: as I explained earlier, much of a teams identity is in who plays for it, who they represent (doesn't have to be tied to a location)
.
.
.

So it becomes a question of transitions. And thats the period the NRL is in, game-wide.
.

Its not that there's a conspiracy theory or some kind of big-wall limitation hitting NRL teams (wherever they are), the scheme of things is to elevate them all up the water spout, and the surviving or thriving or dying will come in the mushroom cloud at the top. < Why? Because the NRL has to keep moving, mate!

Do NRL fans see it as a problem there's so many NRL teams in sydney? And if so, or if not even, how do they all exist in the modern realities. Does the comp want to be one where it needs to fund the bottom two teams in the city like the AFL has done for years. Nothing is saying the nrl will eventually have to do that anyway though; what sort of landscape should the comp strive for though.

__

This post here is not about the clubs though - this is about the fans. Their faith, and their commitment levels. And people who may want to come on board.




The failing does not come in making this jump now hinged upon these set of parameters. The failing will only come in the next landscape - and hinge on those sets of parameters (the time of reckoning is down the line), if they were to fail.

I find it striking that not a single club has been willing to come out and say they would move if such a stadium became available. They need to be seen to be getting on with it.

.

^ And by getting on with it - thats why I have stated that this new stadia (should it come to pass) is a great opportunity to the clubs and indeed all rectangle sports in the city.

Yet here we stand - with people (hard core supporters, at that, probably) getting heads in the sand and being heavily resistant.


The point of me bringing that up in the first place when I said that was to highlight the change in attitudes. Does it matter if there are 2 soccer clubs and 1 union team, but 9 nrl teams? I dont think it does that much in terms of growing. Maybe in terms of surviving, but that does not factor now.

No deal has been done of the stadium with the govt, and no deal has been done with the clubs and stadium. Whats to say it won't be a gradual process, much like with ANZ stadium.

But the proof is in the pouding - they will have to.

In direct response to your post - I'd say, why do their numbers have to be an excuse for them? What will happen if they don't step up?

Ive found recently when it comes to stadia that the largest joke has been the tigers committing to liechardt oval They just commited with no public plans on what they are doing next. Is it a communication problem or is it a vision problem? They have websites with news, ect, but just where do they outline the club's journey. It should be in big bold letters at the tops of their page "We want to be excellent; we will be doing this, this and this. " They should be writing on their page "we will be seeking a new stadium"

( I see that as a missed marketing opportunity. "Last year we'll be at leichardt oval." They should leverage it)

Is it any wonder there is confusion and uncertainty around these NRL clubs - they don't even seem to know where they are going themselves, and they don't even seem to want to tell their fans even if they DID know!

But beware the day when one of them comes out and says (perhaps a bit like the liechardt oval thing) that it makes more sense to stay at their dilapidated ground because the sums dont add up or something. For that would be the first club to knock on the head. Because having 9 teams gives you an abundance of choice. Whats 1 team really among 9. In the new landscape losing an elite presence from an area does not have to spell its death knell....as the norths situation presents when study is done, and Juniors are evenly distributed in terms of funding location and geographical support (benefits realised over time).

^Regarding norths situation. People move in and out of territories all the time. In future terms I am mostly refering to, but it still has present day implications.



This is why I said what I did - because as a fan thats the kind of certainty they need [in sydney]. To commit to ever increasing levels of support. WHY? Yes, why! That is the question. Why does it matter for sydney teams and their fans.

Its an added situation to deal with these numerous teams, but it should not be an excuse.

__

It may be best not to ask me though, its probably best to ask Shane Richardson and Dave Smith. After all the stick those two have taken, the public (section of) and the papers will be forced to admit one day something entirely different to the negativity. A recent sydney morning herald report highlighted as such in regards to the report Richardson is compiling, though the smh has never been negative toward league that made its narrative false.

__

So, i say to you, maybe dont question at an angle what I wrote, but see the wider picture, and that these stadia are crucial to the future of the sport. Perhaps the answer you will accept, which is not false by any means, is that we have to concern ourselves with this, and they do not. Where do you want to be in 10 years. I think for a long time the wrong questions have been asked. (But I mean your question was very good, Brutus)

 

[carcharias]

Give us another 60 page essay smurf guts.

Haha
Who actually reads all that shit?

Too much !

Just a couple of lines is all that is needed.

 

[insert.pause]

Thanks for bringing that up. I had not forgotten that. Its just the realities of the nrl clubs that there are so many. Its hampering not in their numbers as such, but how they approach growth - it would make any business timid to feel as though they come to alike another club, given their fragile bottom line. But they must make that jump, somehow, at some time.

^ That is not a failing of the concept or the world, that is a failing of the club who allowed its image/differentiation to be whittled down to a nub so that it was not effective. They need to take ownership of that. Didn't see Souths get wollowed in pride to a detrimental point once they came back. They sucked it up when Rusty got in there and starting kicking goals.

.

^ Identity is a fan concern mainly - it does not apply at club level so much in how we are talking about it here: as I explained earlier, much of a teams identity is in who plays for it, who they represent (doesn't have to be tied to a location)
.
.
.

So it becomes a question of transitions. And thats the period the NRL is in, game-wide.
.

Its not that there's a conspiracy theory or some kind of big-wall limitation hitting NRL teams (wherever they are), the scheme of things is to elevate them all up the water spout, and the surviving or thriving or dying will come in the mushroom cloud at the top. < Why? Because the NRL has to keep moving, mate!

Do NRL fans see it as a problem there's so many NRL teams in sydney? And if so, or if not even, how do they all exist in the modern realities. Does the comp want to be one where it needs to fund the bottom two teams in the city like the AFL has done for years. Nothing is saying the nrl will eventually have to do that anyway though; what sort of landscape should the comp strive for though.

__

This post here is not about the clubs though - this is about the fans. Their faith, and their commitment levels. And people who may want to come on board.




The failing does not come in making this jump now hinged upon these set of parameters. The failing will only come in the next landscape - and hinge on those sets of parameters (the time of reckoning is down the line), if they were to fail.

I find it striking that not a single club has been willing to come out and say they would move if such a stadium became available. They need to be seen to be getting on with it.

.

^ And by getting on with it - thats why I have stated that this new stadia (should it come to pass) is a great opportunity to the clubs and indeed all rectangle sports in the city.

Yet here we stand - with people (hard core supporters, at that, probably) getting heads in the sand and being heavily resistant.


The point of me bringing that up in the first place when I said that was to highlight the change in attitudes. Does it matter if there are 2 soccer clubs and 1 union team, but 9 nrl teams? I dont think it does that much in terms of growing. Maybe in terms of surviving, but that does not factor now.

No deal has been done of the stadium with the govt, and no deal has been done with the clubs and stadium. Whats to say it won't be a gradual process, much like with ANZ stadium.

But the proof is in the pouding - they will have to.

In direct response to your post - I'd say, why do their numbers have to be an excuse for them? What will happen if they don't step up?

Ive found recently when it comes to stadia that the largest joke has been the tigers committing to liechardt oval They just commited with no public plans on what they are doing next. Is it a communication problem or is it a vision problem? They have websites with news, ect, but just where do they outline the club's journey. It should be in big bold letters at the tops of their page "We want to be excellent; we will be doing this, this and this. " They should be writing on their page "we will be seeking a new stadium"

( I see that as a missed marketing opportunity. "Last year we'll be at leichardt oval." They should leverage it)

Is it any wonder there is confusion and uncertainty around these NRL clubs - they don't even seem to know where they are going themselves, and they don't even seem to want to tell their fans even if they DID know!

But beware the day when one of them comes out and says (perhaps a bit like the liechardt oval thing) that it makes more sense to stay at their dilapidated ground because the sums dont add up or something. For that would be the first club to knock on the head. Because having 9 teams gives you an abundance of choice. Whats 1 team really among 9. In the new landscape losing an elite presence from an area does not have to spell its death knell....as the norths situation presents when study is done, and Juniors are evenly distributed in terms of funding location and geographical support (benefits realised over time).

^Regarding norths situation. People move in and out of territories all the time. In future terms I am mostly refering to, but it still has present day implications.



This is why I said what I did - because as a fan thats the kind of certainty they need [in sydney]. To commit to ever increasing levels of support. WHY? Yes, why! That is the question. Why does it matter for sydney teams and their fans.

Its an added situation to deal with these numerous teams, but it should not be an excuse.

__

It may be best not to ask me though, its probably best to ask Shane Richardson and Dave Smith. After all the stick those two have taken, the public (section of) and the papers will be forced to admit one day something entirely different to the negativity. A recent sydney morning herald report highlighted as such in regards to the report Richardson is compiling, though the smh has never been negative toward league that made its narrative false.

__

So, i say to you, maybe dont question at an angle what I wrote, but see the wider picture, and that these stadia are crucial to the future of the sport. Perhaps the answer you will accept, which is not false by any means, is that we have to concern ourselves with this, and they do not. Where do you want to be in 10 years. I think for a long time the wrong questions have been asked. (But I mean your question was very good, Brutus)

You don't use Twitter do you?

 

[Desert Qlder]

It may have something to do with the fact there are 9 Sydney NRL teams. How many Soccer or union teams will it affect Mr Van Halen??

*smacks Brutus across the head*

 

[pHyR3]

jesus christ, i feel like im verbose sometimes but learn to be concise

no one wants to read a paper when they come on here

 

[Von Neumann]

jesus christ, i feel like im verbose sometimes but learn to be concise

no one wants to read a paper when they come on here

Hey, that is distilled down. I could have done explanations in the margins then explanations about the explanations.

I'd be more inclined to say the length was a measure about how wrong many of us have viewed this issue in the past. Myself included.

The fear campaigns need to cease. The only way to combat fear and superstition is through knowledge. But haha its not like I don't agree with you!

 

[alien]

Build a 40k roofed stadium to replace sfs

that's around 5,000 seats less than the current sfs and they can already put a roof over that stadium (which i think is a good idea)

 

[alien]

Von Neumann = oikee

???

:-k

 

[alien]

I agree with anz but it probably doesn't need changing. Its not as bad I reckon as some make out. It will still be a useful stadium.

i liked anz stadium's plans of having the seats behind the posts on both ends close to the field and getting a retractable roof

 

[Von Neumann]

Von Neumann = oikee

???

:-k

I appreciate some mystery surrounds me. But I'd much prefer the focus to be on rugby league. And to be judged by my ideas.

The anz proposal looked good, sure, to a degree.. Because the stand rake is just wrong for a true football ground as an ideal. In any case the opportunity cost of that is too severe for the whole of Sydney given the limited budget and remember its government funds.

This does not rule out other funding methods. The proposal for an upgrade to anz would be irresistible then, even if its potentially financially catastrophic once parra and sfs come online. Or if...

Neither does it exclude future funding, but not in the present seems. As such its game over for the body that runs it, thus heralding in a stadiums NSW body

 

[alien]

I appreciate some mystery surrounds me. But I'd much prefer the focus to be on rugby league. And to be judged by my ideas.

my apologies ;-)

 

[Von Neumann]

my apologies ;-)

Don't worry no offence taken

So is the anz proposal something you'd go for? Looks kinda cool I think. Pity they never thought of long term post Olympics use. In fact a DT or Richard Hinds article, could be mistaken but I think. it was Hinds, recently gave a great explanation about that.

The only problem I have with it, is I posted a signal iduna park pic of virtually in the same spot with vastly superior views. That stadium was built in the 70s. It looks like, and remember photos expand the focal length/ appeture of our eyes see, making things appear further away, to be 30 meters closer at least with a better height/angle of view. The resolution our eyes could make out at the other end of the field is far superior. Both are not photos sure, but the dimensions apply

Objects in the mirror are closer than they seem is a common sticker on cars. I can categorically state I want anz to not be torn down and continued to be used with what we understand. We need both imho

 

[Timbo]

Whichever is the large stadium moving forward, it definitely needs those drop-down screens (seen in the above image) to make the stadium more intimate for club games. They're becoming a standard feature for stadiums in the states that host lower drawing events.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.afr.com/brand/rear-window/more-high-comedy-in-sydneys-stadium-wars-20150506-ggvmpa

More high comedy in Sydney's stadium wars

I tell you what: this brouhaha over funding for Sydney's sports facilities has more angles than a tool shop!

Former NSW Liberal leader John Brogden will shortly hand down his report to sports minister Stuart Ayres on the matter, although cabinet has already read most of it in The Daily Telegraph.

On Monday, the Sydney tabloid's John Lehmann revealed a confidential plan to spend $800 million on a new 65,000-seat stadium (with underground parking) at Moore Park; demolish nearby Allianz Stadium and spend $100 million building a smaller venue on the site; demolish and build a new Parramatta Stadium for $400 million; and to spend zilch on ANZ Stadium in Homebush, other than to pay the operator $135 million to hand it back to the government.

Well first, at $800 million, Darryl Kerrigan would say, they've got to be dreaming. The new Perth Stadium doesn't even open until 2018 and is already costing $1.2 billion, even without a car park beneath. And if you can't cobble together a greenfield project for under 10 figures, good luck flattening Parramatta and bringing it back to life for less than half that much dosh.

Second, who in Sydney is going to cop this? Can you imagine the apoplexy at The Sydney Morning Herald, where "urban development" means a cycleway here or there and the odd pop-up shops selling second-hand sandals, when they realise yet another slab of parkland is being bulldozed for rugby league hooligans from whoop whoop who've never filled Allianz which was custom built for them in the first place? And the Elizabeth Farrelly columns in memory of the tranquil, bucolic Kippax fields, once framed by Moreton Bay Figs and swarming with doped-out housos and their pitbulls, now ruined by an invasion of roided-up yobbos in their Canterbury get-up.

And what about the Telegraph, the newspaper synonymous with "a fair go" for Western Sydney? It'll be DEFCON 1 in editor Paul Whittaker's office, surely, if $900 million is spent east of Central Station – even if it is such a nice stroll from Holt Street. They'll be organising a rally down Mt Druitt's main drag. Whittaker will give a rousing speech (by phone).

Remember, Sydney will never be Melbourne. Melbourne's sporting precinct, like its CBD, is in the centre of greater Melbourne. Moore Park, like Sydney's CBD, borders the east of greater Sydney. It's not like for like. And unlike Melbourne, Sydney is genuinely a four-code town.

So why knock down Allianz and build a larger version next door? Because the hot dogs are below par? That's like buying a new car because the ashtray's full in the old one. Earth to Brogden: change the caterers and get Scotty Cam on the case – whack a roof on her and she'll be a beauty.

As we said, Allianz is never full. The average crowd for NRL matches there in the past five years is just 16,000. The Roosters struggle to pull in 12,000 and that's only after Nick Politis has done them all a solid price on a demo Ford Falcon.

If this new venue goes ahead, the NRL will need to play three games there every weekend to pay the lease – meaning Easts, Souths, Wests, St George and Canterbury will all be in the frame to relocate from the Homebush fan base. Then there'll be Waratahs, Wallabies Tests and the Swans and Australian and NSW cricket next door at the SCG. In other words, three to four events within a square mile every weekend of the year. Look at Anzac Parade and Moore Park Road and now imagine downtown Jakarta on the last Friday of Ramadan. Carnage.

We can't wait to see the horror on the faces of the educated and urbane (just ask them) residents of Centennial Park, Paddington and Woollahra (including Whittaker) when The Footy Show fanatics clog their roads and steal their God-given on-street parking. David Leckie is going to need a helipad on the roof of his joint just to get from Lang Road to Bistro Moncur for a caprese salad.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.news.com.au/national/the-greens-fail-to-turn-over-a-new-leaf/story-e6frfkp9-1227339224591

WEST MUST WIN BATTLE

PLANS for the future of Sydney’s sporting stadiums have led to a classic Sydney battle. The wealthy east is now pitted against a resurgent West.

At issue is if the east should *receive $800 million for the construction of a new stadium at Moore Park as opposed to upgrading Sydney’s Olympic heartland, the West’s ANZ Stadium.

The outcome of this conflict will determine much of Sydney’s sporting future. It will shape viewing habits, the growth of sporting codes and a substantial amount of the state budget.

For all of these reasons, it is clear an upgraded ANZ Stadium should be the priority. Not only is it an *established venue with direct heavy rail access, but it also has the seating capacity required for events on a global scale.

This is not to say that the concept of a new stadium, or of an *upgraded Allianz Stadium, should be dismissed. It is just that the arguments in favour of an enhanced ANZ Stadium appear so much stronger.

A substantial reinvestment in ANZ Stadium, bringing the site up to the very latest international standards, would see the entire Olympic precinct be reborn. It should lead to private investment in the areas surrounding the stadium, making the site more attractive on several levels. Contrast that with plans to build a new 65,000-seat stadium in Moore Park, opposed on solid grounds by both the Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs and South Sydney Rabbitohs, whose core supporters would be required to trek across the city.

At a time when NRL attendance is low, every possible step ought to be taken to put teams and matches close to the NRL supporter base. A new stadium in the east would represent the opposite approach.

Discussion over both sites, plus a proposed new 35,000-seat stadium at Parramatta, now risk being *derailed by competing forces.

It may be a positive step for the government to appoint an independent authority to assess the different competing policies. At the very least, this would put in place a dedicated forum for analysis of this *crucial Sydney-building exercise.

 

[Brutus]

So Souths and the Bulldogs are both vehemently opposed to the Moore Park Stadium plans.

Good one Souths.

 

[big hit!]

When you think of AFL for example - do you think of North Melbourne?

we should, they have the metropolitan in their name. :sarcasm:

But then you must ask yourself, with other clubs being city wide clubs in future (retaining much of their identity) where to for small clubs like manly and cronulla? They are struggling as is. Thats why I asked the other guy if he thinks about the little, tiny, North Melbourne in the AFL when he thinks of AFL?

Every sport bar AFL (who's Melbourne clubs are inner city ones anyway) has city names for teams. Except the NRL clubs.

and except many football clubs in europe. just take a look at football clubs in london. when there are several clubs in a metropolitan, referencing them all as the metropolitan name dilutes the identity and makes them generic.

And one of their inner city clubs already calls itself sydney, the roosters. New York Giants/Jets.

greater new york has 2 NFL clubs, not 9! :crazy:

Start calling themselves Sydney Roosters, Sydney sharks, South sydney, West(s) Sydney, and be done with it. Penrith would remain, Manly would remain as its an identifiable spicky little peninsular.

sydney bulldogs, sydney tigers, sydney blah. it's been done and it branded these clubs as plain vanilla.

They need Icons for stadia, and they need big, city wide teams

not when there are 9 clubs within a metropolitan in the same League. they will cannibalise each other and only 3 or 4 of the strong will survive. we'll end up with a 10 team league.

What he was talking about is the fact that IF cronulla fans won't travel 25 mins, then whats the point.< - As an example.

So what is the point? Im damn sure that Arsenal fans WILL travel to the north of england to watch their side play.

They are dedicated. Cronulla is not. In fact, if they were able to purchase more away tickets they would.

because 25mins isn't what it takes a manly or cronulla fan to travel from their regions to centralised areas in sydney. spit bridge, pittwater and military rd is a merkin. king georges rd and homebush bay drive is a merkin. weekends are worse than peak hour and bad decisions in infrastructure planning over decades has meant that the majority of citizens in this metropolitan depend on the car because little has been spent on public transport. it's absurd that we haven't got a hurstville to strathfield rail line, a northern beaches line and many other holes in the rail system.

even folks who live in the inner west areas north of parramatta rd such as haberfield and five dock need to get into their car to get any where without waiting a ridiculous amount of time for a road transport service. and then on weekends, that bus will be stuck in traffic anyway.

and building a 65k capacity venue in moore park will be another bad decision. it rarely fills up to its 40k capacity now. the area struggled with an event when 10k attend. so what will the proposal achieve?

arsenal playing an away game in the north of england is one thing. moving games to the north of england does not make them a north london club anymore, just as centralising NRL club home games will mean clubs will lose the association with their areas of the metropolitan.

Do you think that sydney soccer teams are getting up in arms about this stadium thing? lol. Or Rugby Union? Why league? You're hampered with erroneous thinking.

2 teams in one league, 1 team in the other, and the proposed plan will upgrade their existing venues.

 

[Von Neumann]

http://www.afr.com/brand/rear-window/more-high-comedy-in-sydneys-stadium-wars-20150506-ggvmpa

Comedy? He writes a good comedy himself. So much hyperbole. So many non sequitur's. Nothing follows - a fallacy set up in the top half leads into a strawman argument at the bottom. Who's he kidding - but it definitely made for great reading.

Just supposing he is right: To be frank, I myself was talking cheap stadia until everyone was ahhhing about mega stadia in america. I was talking about (previously, not so much here) upgrading the SFS, gradual new stands at parra and elsewhere.

But in reality that misses the point. I dont believe ANZ should get a dime. Its not a stadium worthy of an upgrade. If anything, supposing his article is correct (and I dont believe it is), they should knock down ANZ and build that anew. What he fails to realize is that that is against the whole point of the endeavor. The costs would be worse.

You can't have ANZ upgraded and a new SFS, or ANZ upgraded and piecemeal upgrades to the multitude of grounds around the place. It won't work.

He has blasted the east part of the city - which no, is not perfect - but neither is the west - and his main agenda seems to be a class warfare battle of the west v the east. Thats his device of persuasion.


****
That, to my mind, is intellectually dishonest
*****

This is not an east v west issue, or an issue about the amount of people who will be in the district. As a city, the city should be glad that more people are using the area for what its designed for. This realization is not new to the residents of the area. They were aware of this when they moved there.

One of the issues he raised, which was done to support the condemnation of the exercise, was hotdogs. Its not a mere literary device. Thats the best he can come up with? He is seriously clutching at straws.

How does he know how many people will go to the district. The SFS has a fairly average reputation within the league community. Its issues of congestion and transport are being tackled with the light rail (that he failed to mention).

Now, NO - i do not get why it needs an underground carpark -- and I dont know why they need the arena. Im keen to hear just why -- but this should not cloud the central issue - stadia.

 

[Von Neumann]

we should, they have the metropolitan in their name. :sarcasm:


and except many football clubs in europe. just take a look at football clubs in london. when there are several clubs in a metropolitan, referencing them all as the metropolitan name dilutes the identity and makes them generic.


greater new york has 2 NFL clubs, not 9! :crazy:


sydney bulldogs, sydney tigers, sydney blah. it's been done and it branded these clubs as plain vanilla.


not when there are 9 clubs within a metropolitan in the same League. they will cannibalise each other and only 3 or 4 of the strong will survive. we'll end up with a 10 team league.





because 25mins isn't what it takes a manly or cronulla fan to travel from their regions to centralised areas in sydney. spit bridge, pittwater and military rd is a merkin. king georges rd and homebush bay drive is a merkin. weekends are worse than peak hour and bad decisions in infrastructure planning over decades has meant that the majority of citizens in this metropolitan depend on the car because little has been spent on public transport. it's absurd that we haven't got a hurstville to strathfield rail line, a northern beaches line and many other holes in the rail system.

even folks who live in the inner west areas north of parramatta rd such as haberfield and five dock need to get into their car to get any where without waiting a ridiculous amount of time for a road transport service. and then on weekends, that bus will be stuck in traffic anyway.

and building a 65k capacity venue in moore park will be another bad decision. it rarely fills up to its 40k capacity now. the area struggled with an event when 10k attend. so what will the proposal achieve?

arsenal playing an away game in the north of england is one thing. moving games to the north of england does not make them a north london club anymore, just as centralising NRL club home games will mean clubs will lose the association with their areas of the metropolitan.



2 teams in one league, 1 team in the other, and the proposed plan will upgrade their existing venues.

We have moved on from this, but you have largely misunderstood much of what I wrote. I like you, so I am going to spend 20 minutes (everyone else would be able to do it in 5) writing this out. I might not have been clear too.

I know ny has 2 nfl teams - wouldn't it be great if sydney had 2 rl teams?

Football clubs in england do not struggle for identity and the argument is a strawman one. Its not equal, its a separate issue equated to this one, and its not fitting to think of it in the same way. How many london clubs make it to the EPL at once? None of it is apples to apples. The ones who share similar backgrounds, ect, well, of course only one can go up usually, but this is not even the point. What about the two Hull's in RL in england? They both have an identity. Sure, one is not as big as the other, but that is a failing of the main comp, and they adhere to the promo/relo theme.

There are big clubs and small clubs - thats the point! Identity retained. That was the point about the 2 NY NFL teams. So where does it fit in?

Unfortunately for rugby league (but not in a negative sense really) there is no promotion and relegation. This is good and bad. But what it ultimately means is that instead of big/little clubs - they need to be more like the NFL. In the NFL they all have a value over 1 billion dollars. And they are all pretty close in value - and they are NOT afraid to move city's, locations, states even!. Thats one of the reasons why the NFL works so well in a competition with no promotion relegation - its live or die. However, in the EPL Man UTD have a revenue over 400 million per year, while others have revenues more like 50 million. Go figure. What happens to them? They go down and recover.

How do you suppose teams in the NRL recover? They can't. The league has to lump them around. So the ONLY, and i am dead serious about this, its the one thing you mainly misunderstood about my post.....the only thing they can do is to move as one. Thats right. Move as one. Or stay as close as possible. Its no good waiting for (like in the AFL, which the NFL has) revenue distribution - that helps you stay close, but its not the same as 'being' close organically. It only goes so far.


The problem then becomes - how do you share something (money) which you don't have? Trust me, in such leagues - its always a case of staying close. Be that it comes from sugar daddy's who may pull the pin at any time (and understand financial realities)....or be that it comes from some other form of funding - such as crowds....ect. They need to remain close.

So this is why the NRL needs to move as one, and why ground rationalisation (if possible) is the best thing they could do.

Im not thinking black and white, its multifaceted, but its probably more closer to reality if you use your minds eye to see it.

They won't lose association into the future. You're thinking with 1950's glasses. These days they are BRANDS, and they do not need to be tied to a geographical location as much as they need to be recognized. This would be less of a problem if sydney had only 2 clubs, but by having 9 it does not change the fact. They are all sydney - they are all worth supporting, whats the problem? Can't marketing get across a message?

Maybe those hard to reach clubs are not viable. Just look at manly, struggle street. Just look at cronulla - they have a place next door.

What we don't want is for such clubs to hold the sport back. They can be dragged into the future, and their fans can follow, or they can wither. That was my whole point about talking about Arsenal - yes it is one thing, mate---- the one thing that it is, is fan dedication. They see the team as worthy of following around.

Now you tell me, who the frigging hell will follow cronulla around?

Dont misconstrue my words, your counter arguments are absurd. Im sorry. But if there is anything else you would like me to clarify, of course I will.