Geographically, which teams in the NRL don't make sense?

[Goddo]

North Shore people (who'd rather watch the Waratahs or the Swans anyway before pootling home in their volvos for a cup of tea, a panadol and a good lie down).

:lol:

I think cutting ANY team from the NRL would be a mistake which would do nothing but piss people off and drive people away from the game (as happened with Bears fans). Some teams may be bigger and better than others, but they all have their niche and their history, particularly the older Sydney clubs. Yes, in a perfect world you could reimagine Sydney into four quadrants, but it just ain't gonna happen. None of the remaining Sydney clubs are suitable for merger for reasons of rivalry and culture, and it's these passionate inter-club rivalries and histories which fuel the NRL in Sydney.

Some Sydney teams are bigger and better than others, but not all will survive into the future. I guess thats why threads like this pop up - people can see that the current set up is unstable, and speculate how it might change.

The clubs with weak support in niche markets are the ones that will continue to struggle along, unless they find ways to grow their market share. That is the challenge.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

It's in a black hole between three clubs -- the Bulldogs seems to end at the Georges River in the Bankstown area, Fairfield to the north is the limit of Eels territory, but neither is it close enough to Campbelltown to call the Tigers home.

Traditional boundaries seem to shift over time though with populations, so it's probably fallen into the Dogs area as it shares the most demographically with the rest of the bulldogs heartland, being in the SW Sydney Middle-Eastern belt. (I realise not all Dogs fans are from that community, but the Bulldogs are definitely their club of choice).

 

[SpaceMonkey]

The way I see it a club's location has an influence on four main factors.

1: crowds. the home ground needs to be somewhere a reasonable number of the clubs fans will realistically travel to.
2: ability to attract sponsors/corporate support.
3: junior development. Areas such as the Eastern Suburbs and Northern beaches don't produce as many juniors as places like SW Sydney or Auckland due to different population demographics.
4: ability to attract players- a club can attract signings more easily if it's located somewhere that footballers want to live.

Some of these factors can compensate for weaknesses in other areas- for example Manly and Easts may struggle to produce juniors, but have an advantage in the lifestyle they can attract players with.

 

[BunniesMan]

:lol:

Some Sydney teams are bigger and better than others, but not all will survive into the future. I guess thats why threads like this pop up - people can see that the current set up is unstable, and speculate how it might change.

The clubs with weak support in niche markets are the ones that will continue to struggle along, unless they find ways to grow their market share. That is the challenge.

Most of this post is BS. The Sydney clubs are fine. If Cronulla could survive this decade they'll never die, likewise with the other smaller Sydney teams. We're about to hit a tv rights deal that could double what we're currently getting. The club grant will for the first time be bigger than the salary cap.

If no club died this decade, it's not going to die in the forseeable future.

 

[beave]

If the Cowboys get their new stadium, their existence is secure. The proposed location is close to the train station and Townville CBD.

The proposed area for the Cowboys new stadium being close to a train station isn't really the reason why most people are fans of it's location, it's more so the fact that it's in town and close to the entertainment precinct so that if you want to bung one on after a game it's a 5 min walk to the nightclub strip and there's going to be a shit tin of parking in the new carparks around the stadium. The new stadium also has the league club right next door to it, the stadium and leaguesy at the moment are about a 25 min drive apart and the club has lost a lot of $$$$ because it lacks a leagues club within close vicinity of the game. The Brothers Leagues club next door to the stadium has made a motza over the years thanks to the Cowboys games, it's about time we took advantage of this and had our own nearby our ground. A train station nearby this stadium doesn't really have that much advantage up here, we don't have light rail around the city, and I honestly don't think many people will take a train here for a game, most people stay overnight at family or friends houses.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Most of this post is BS. The Sydney clubs are fine. If Cronulla could survive this decade they'll never die, likewise with the other smaller Sydney teams. We're about to hit a tv rights deal that could double what we're currently getting. The club grant will for the first time be bigger than the salary cap.

If no club died this decade, it's not going to die in the forseeable future.

You're making a bit of sense for once sister. The Only issue is that in the future the divide between the rich and poor will get bigger. Sydney can manage their current amount of teams IF those clubs realize that the days of pokie machines are over and that professionalism isn't about who spends the most money but who spends their money the wisest.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Most of this post is BS. The Sydney clubs are fine. If Cronulla could survive this decade they'll never die, likewise with the other smaller Sydney teams. We're about to hit a tv rights deal that could double what we're currently getting. The club grant will for the first time be bigger than the salary cap.

If no club died this decade, it's not going to die in the forseeable future.

This would indicate to me that the cap should be raised. I wouldn't want to sacrifice elite players from the game to keep mediocre clubs afloat.

 

[devoid]

The NRL needs to retain one primary strength - that is the fans of the existing clubs. I feel for the Magpie and Steelers fans. If my club was forced to merge and lost our identity, I wouldn't be very happy.

In saying that, ideally the way forward as I see it, is expansion. I think Perth needs to come back asap, along with a club from Adelaide, Queensland, and another NZ side.

Twenty teams play each other once only - meaning, unlike the current system, there is no bias in draw (eg. one club plays the Storm twice, whereas some other clubs only play the Storm once). Rep games play on stand alone weekends. Still play a top 8 finals system. Less games for tiring players - hopefully reduces injuries. I hate the off season, but I won't begrudge NRL players a chance to recuperate.

And before anyone says it, I realise there is a problem with depth currently. But this idea is a 'vision.' Toyota cup could go a way to helping bridge the gap - perhaps by the 2018 TV deal, this could be workable.

 

[eozsmiles]

Sydney Roosters and Souths are really on each others door step nowadays. The only reason they both exist seperately is Politis and Crowe. So much has changed in these two areas since 1908. Back then the whole place was full of working class footy families. Not too many families living in those parts anymore. 99% of the fans of these clubs have never lived in those areas. Go for a walk through Surry Hills or through Redfern and you are far more likely to get an opinion on an indoor water feature or a new bodega styled sushi bar than you will on the Dally M medal.

Not sure if that is geographic or demographic but one thing is certain. If the NRL started today and you said you wanted a team based at Randwick and a team based at Redfern you'd get laughed out of the room.

 

[Eels Dude]

Well I think being close actually makes sense because it means less travelling times, stretching it further to the outers of Perth etc...just takes up more time in terms of the travelling done for teams for 1 game before coming back.

In terms of the Sydney clubs I find Parra and Penrith are a bit too close and probably Wests as well.

Have you actually been to Western Sydney? Parramatta to Penrith is roughly 35kms. It's about the same distance from Parramatta to Cronulla but you wouldn't call that close at all. Campbelltown is even further still. I think you underestimate how large an area western Sydney encompasses.

 

[docbrown]

Sydney Roosters and Souths are really on each others door step nowadays. The only reason they both exist seperately is Politis and Crowe. So much has changed in these two areas since 1908. Back then the whole place was full of working class footy families. Not too many families living in those parts anymore. 99% of the fans of these clubs have never lived in those areas. Go for a walk through Surry Hills or through Redfern and you are far more likely to get an opinion on an indoor water feature or a new bodega styled sushi bar than you will on the Dally M medal.

Not sure if that is geographic or demographic but one thing is certain. If the NRL started today and you said you wanted a team based at Randwick and a team based at Redfern you'd get laughed out of the room.

The Rabbitohs & Sydney/Easts though have managed to spread their support base West.

In my opinion the Rabbitohs have the larger city wide support base but if Easts were to merge with the Sharks they'd rival Tigers, Dragons & Bulldogs in terms of support.

 

[juro]

Sorry amigo but this would not work. Manly supporters are mainly from the Northern Beaches and not the North Shore - despite being next to one another these two areas are quite distinct and different, with the national park acting as the natural border. I reckon the crowds would be smaller than they get now - you'd lose some of the softer Northern Beaches folk who don't wanna battle the traffic to Chatswood, without making up for this loss with new North Shore people (who'd rather watch the Waratahs or the Swans anyway before pootling home in their volvos for a cup of tea, a panadol and a good lie down).

I think cutting ANY team from the NRL would be a mistake which would do nothing but piss people off and drive people away from the game (as happened with Bears fans). Some teams may be bigger and better than others, but they all have their niche and their history, particularly the older Sydney clubs. Yes, in a perfect world you could reimagine Sydney into four quadrants, but it just ain't gonna happen. None of the remaining Sydney clubs are suitable for merger for reasons of rivalry and culture, and it's these passionate inter-club rivalries and histories which fuel the NRL in Sydney.

Carn the mighty Sea Eagles!!

Almost every supporter is opposed to change regarding their team. Old Balmain fans probably still long for 12 rounds at Leichardt. Old Bulldogs fans may want to still be at Belmore. But clubs need to think long term and sometimes need to make tough decisions. A move may cause short term pain but may ensure the long term viability of a club. North Sydney haven't existed in the top grade for over a decade. In another 10 years, there will be a generation of people on the north shore who have never seen the Bears live.

And the argument about the north shore being union and AFL heartland may have something to do with the area being neglected for so long.

 

[oval]

Almost every supporter is opposed to change regarding their team. Old Balmain fans probably still long for 12 rounds at Leichardt. Old Bulldogs fans may want to still be at Belmore. But clubs need to think long term and sometimes need to make tough decisions. A move may cause short term pain but may ensure the long term viability of a club. North Sydney haven't existed in the top grade for over a decade. In another 10 years, there will be a generation of people on the north shore who have never seen the Bears live.

And the argument about the north shore being union and AFL heartland may have something to do with the area being neglected for so long.

I agree the area has been neglected. I'd love to see the Bears brought back, playing some games at North Sydney and some up at Gosford... But that's another thread.

 

[super_coach]

Iam a old balmain man and I was for the merger from day one and Iam still sold on it. We went from two teams that had one foot in the poor house to a very strong club on and off the field. My team now is the WestsTigers and I dont think the magpies got shafted in the merger.
I think their are a few other teams that could really benefit from making some hard calls, club land is dead and sponsorship is getting harder to come by

 

[RedVee]

Which is the point I was kind of making. Having lived in the area for most of my life, there was really no rhyme or reason as to why people supported the club they do.

It's in a black hole between three clubs -- the Bulldogs seems to end at the Georges River in the Bankstown area, Fairfield to the north is the limit of Eels territory, but neither is it close enough to Campbelltown to call the Tigers home.

It's not really a black hole. It is more a Black'n'white hole.

The junior clubs there are West Magpies juniors, I know through years of driving my son up from C'town to play games. It is however, which I think is what you are meaning, the outer limit of the West Magpies area.
The other side of the bridge towards Moorebank, Milperra etc is Canterbury Bankstown territory, and as you say just north is Parramatta territory.

 

[flippikat]

Iam a old balmain man and I was for the merger from day one and Iam still sold on it. We went from two teams that had one foot in the poor house to a very strong club on and off the field. My team now is the WestsTigers and I dont think the magpies got shafted in the merger.
I think their are a few other teams that could really benefit from making some hard calls, club land is dead and sponsorship is getting harder to come by

From an outsider's perspective (Wellington New Zealand), that joint venture looked like a match made in heaven - two proud foundation clubs who didn't had an especially powerful rivalry joining forces for the common good.

I was pleased as punch to see the Wests Tigers win a premiership, and hoped that it may have been the spur for a couple of other Sydney clubs to make the same call.

It's a shame that hasn't happened thus far.

 

[Lambretta]

Agree on the Sharks.

Dogs have a decent catchment, they've still got the bulk of SW Sydney.

Inner Sydney has one too many teams with the Tigers, Roosters and Bunnies sharing a fairly small geographical area, though the Tigers have their addition junior base in the outer SW.

Manly have the problem of changing demographics with the Northern Beaches becoming a very expensive place to live, they will struggle to maintain good junior number as the number of young families in the region drops off. This will partly be offset by the fact that Manly is a pretty desirable place for young players to come and live, so they need to foster links with junior clubs outside Sydney.

The North Shore is still unrepresented. The return of the Bears would fix this.

North Qld are fine, they have a loyal following, though their catchment is very spread out. Your point about being strategically weak with rivalries and attracting away fans is pretty meaningless as it could equally be applied to the Warriors, Canberra, Melbourne and to a lesser extent Newcastle.

If there's one thing we could learn from the AFL is that geographical boundaries are fairly meaningless- I've recently moved to Melbourne and was very surprised by the fact that about half of all the AFL sides "represent" inner melbourne suburbs, but they all get better crowds than even the most popular Sydney NRL teams.

The Tigers actually share more area in common with the Bulldogs in their Ashfield region than with Souths or the Roosters. Also with Campbelltown being their main haunt these days you can pretty much move them out of the inner suburbs. They're more a Western and Souths Western team these days.

The Roosters recognised that they need to appeal to a larger audience and call themselves Sydney and with alliances with Newtown are hoping to move to the Inner West.

Souths have known for years that like AFL clubs they represent an area far bigger than their original geographic region, especially since the gentrification of suburbs such as Kensington and Kingsford etc as their original fans have largely moved West anyway. Playing at Homebush is recognition of this.

Yes there are probably too many teams in Sydney from a national POV, but all clubs will stay put as long as they're financially viable.

I hate to be one to say re-locate etc, but the only one in dire danger of going anywhere is the Sharks and that wont help a 2nd Brisbane team or the Central Coast.

 

[axl rose]

Iam a old balmain man and I was for the merger from day one and Iam still sold on it. We went from two teams that had one foot in the poor house to a very strong club on and off the field.

Was a bit of a disaster really for the first 4 years, very close to going under. I was for the merger as i couldn't see any other options for Balmain. They looked closely at the move to the central coast in the early 90s but for whatever reasons decided against it.

 

[juro]

Iam a old balmain man and I was for the merger from day one and Iam still sold on it. We went from two teams that had one foot in the poor house to a very strong club on and off the field. My team now is the WestsTigers and I dont think the magpies got shafted in the merger.
I think their are a few other teams that could really benefit from making some hard calls, club land is dead and sponsorship is getting harder to come by

I agree that the Wests Tigers are stronger than Wests or Balmain ever could have hoped to be on their own. A tough call was made by both clubs for the benefit of themselves and the NRL. Further tough calls have been made in taking a large slice of their games to either Homebush or the SFS to improve the financial strength of the club.

As an old Balmain man, how many games would you like to see played at Leichardt?

 

[bobmar28]

It's an ugly topic, but when you look at geographies and demographics, a number of NRL teams are poorly placed. These include:

Sharks - with the dragons entrenched in southern sydney and their partnership with Illawarra, it makes little sense to have a team in between

Dogs - again, with the dragons nearby, borders with the rabbits and within shooting distance of parramatta catchments, probably an example of poor placement

Rabbits/roosters/tigers - depending on where you agree they are based, they are very close too each other

Cowboys - not a large population and are strategically weak when it comes to rivalries and attracting away fans to games

I'm not suggesting that these clubs should be booted, but it's interesting when you consider some of the larger Australian geographies that are not covered (second Brisbane team and perth) by the NRL at the moment

Cheers,
Moffo

Tigers are based in Campbelltown ... 50km from Bunnies/Roosters.