Melbourne should go. They bring nothing to the game (apart from a few replacable sponsors). They have won a premiership, made the finals every year they have been in the comp and no one in Melbourne could care less.
On to another point. The Sydney Swans. People say they were given time to get a supporter base etc. but that is not true. If you can be bothered to do some research and draw conclusions to that research you will find that in 1994 the Sydney Swans had a crowd average of 9, 184. Just one year later (and we all know what story broke in 1995) there crowd averages increased to 15,949.
In 1996 that crowd average grew by nine thousand people and in 1997 when the Rugby League was spilt in two it grew to 36 thousand.
Ever since then the highest crowd average has been 30 thousand and that was in 2003 and 2004.
It wasn't about building up supporters, it was the terrible doings of the split in the game. Poor old Melbourne just doesn't do nothing for the game and is only there because News ltd wants them there and Super League's greatest sponsors Telstra are supporting the News Ltd vision.
Just to add to the post. There is no question that I support the storm in terms of being a competitive outfit. However, it should be noted that they have entered a market which is tough and a market in which was not brought up on Rugby League.
The best ways to enter markets like this one is to play representatives matches there that involve AUSTRALIA. Why do you think union is semi-popular down there. They don't play Super 12 game featuring NSW v QLD, they play the national team because it gives the people a feeling that they are apart of that team because its an AUSTRALIAN team.
http://stats.rleague.com/afl/crowds/summary.html