Gold Coast Bears/Nth Sydney/Gosford

[titoelcolombiano]

If you're going to go with a non city name people need to identity with it.

Are there any Queenslanders that can comment if people think of themselves as 'south Queenslanders'

Queensland yes, but is and should only be used by the State of Origin team.

South Queensland not so much - it is a terrible name. The Crushers were called the South-East QLD Crushers which was worse. Brisbane is fine as a name for the second team here. It is more the ownership model that counts. It needs to be a real member owned club - it would be very popular here if that were the case. I like another posters suggestion of reviving the old Brisbane Combined team that used to be a representative team of the BRL that would play NSWRL teams. It will be the perfect offset for the corporate Broncos.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Queensland yes, but is and should only be used by the State of Origin team.

South Queensland not so much - it is a terrible name. The Crushers were called the South-East QLD Crushers which was worse. Brisbane is fine as a name for the second team here. It is more the ownership model that counts. It needs to be a real member owned club - it would be very popular here if that were the case. I like another posters suggestion of reviving the old Brisbane Combined team that used to be a representative team of the BRL that would play NSWRL teams. It will be the perfect offset for the corporate Broncos.

Yeah I like a member owned club idea. Would really set them apart from the Broncos.

Fwiw - the crushers were just 'South Queensland' not SEQ.

 

[adamkungl]

Nobody would be against it.

But why should NSRL or the North Sydney Leagues Club which already supports a much larger junior operation then ESDRL be the ones to fund RL in adelaide and not the more wealthier ESDRL who already has pocketed lots of adelaide cash from taking a game there?

Would that be because clubs like Easts and Manly dont have to give a shit about RL anywhere or everywhere whilst all the other clubs fly the flag?

Oh, and in all the years Bears were trying to plant themselves on the Central Coast did they ever actually invest in Central Coast RL? Because Roosters currently are.

 

[papabear]

Oh, and in all the years Bears were trying to plant themselves on the Central Coast did they ever actually invest in Central Coast RL? Because Roosters currently are.

Yes the Roosters have invest so much more on the Central Coast then the bears did

just like they invested so much more into their own region then the bears did.

I will give you that easts built first grade sides better then the bears and a lot of other sides, but when it comes to fostering rugby league, easts can go jump in a river before that club has a platform to preach to other clubs about what to do.

You have been around rugby league long enough to know this.

 

[adamkungl]

Yes the Roosters have invest so much more on the Central Coast then the bears did

just like they invested so much more into their own region then the bears did.

I will give you that easts built first grade sides better then the bears and a lot of other sides, but when it comes to fostering rugby league, easts can go jump in a river before that club has a platform to preach to other clubs about what to do.

You have been around rugby league long enough to know this.

Rambling nonsense as usual. You know I'm not a representative or in any way a platform for the Easts club right? And you still didn't answer the question.

It's very simple. Try to keep up. Bears need an avenue into first grade. Available avenues are rapidly drying up. Adelaide is potentially the last option, even though it's pretty far out/pie in the sky stuff. This has nothing to do with Roosters (or Manly). In fact, if either club did what I'm suggesting in Adelaide or moved there even part-time it would get rid of the only expansion option which the Bears could potentially latch onto so I'm not sure how this would be preferable.

Take the chip off your shoulder.

 

[taipan]

Reda the Brisbane Bombers want to lodge a bid $10m, and they have the financial resources to do so..They would retain the club on the G.C.
They also stated the Titans would not be rebranded.
Velly interesting captain.

 

[siv]

Oh, and in all the years Bears were trying to plant themselves on the Central Coast did they ever actually invest in Central Coast RL? Because Roosters currently are.

Bears funded and built Gosford Stadium

 

[herbert henry1908]

Bears funded and built Gosford Stadium

Didn't the NSW government fund most of it? I remember the battle for money at the time. (They certainly campaigned for it to be built)

 

[adamkungl]

Sooo have the generous and mighty Bears actually put anything into Central Coast junior Rugby League in all their years of campaigning to plonk their team there?

I'm not necessarily taking the piss, it's a fair question that I legitimately dont know the answer to

 

[magpie_man]

Proposal: Bears to Adelaide

Why?
It's harder and harder to see the Central Coast coming into the comp unless as a relocation of an existing Sydney team.
Rumour has it the Titans bid has fallen through.
There's nowhere else to go for the Bears - Brisbane and WARL would both be very reluctant to take on a Sydney brand in their already strong expansion bids. They have little to gain from a partnership.

But Adelaide?
I believe it is a given that one day, be it in 10 or 30 years, the NRL must expand to Adelaide.
There is no existing expansion bid in Adelaide, and the SARL is barely functional.
South Australian Rugby League requires football expertise, drive to succeed, and funds - all of which the Bears have.
The Bears need a new home to call their own should they ever return to the top flight, and Adelaide is the last viable option in Australia.

How?
Start a club in the local comp and raise the standard and stability. Push the NRL to sort out the funding and governance issues in the SARL.
Short term, step up to junior reps and RM Cup with the growing SARL feeding players.
Medium term, step up to NSW Cup.
Long term, bid for Adelaide Bears to enter the NRL.

I genuinely think that this is the last remaining option for the poor old Bears.
They're not going to get-up on the Gold Coast, the NRL aren't going to add another team just up the road from Sydney and Perth already have a strong bid/identify that they're pushing.
If expansion does happen (which I think is absolutely essential) I'd put good money on it being:
Brisbane II
Perth
New Zealand II
Adelaide

New Zealand already has a reasonably strong Rugby League identity, so transplanting a hibernating Sydney club over there just isn't going to work.
Adelaide seemingly is the last roll of the dice.

 

[herbert henry1908]

I genuinely think that this is the last remaining option for the poor old Bears.
They're not going to get-up on the Gold Coast, the NRL aren't going to add another team just up the road from Sydney and Perth already have a strong bid/identify that they're pushing.
If expansion does happen (which I think is absolutely essential) I'd put good money on it being:
Brisbane II
Perth
New Zealand II
Adelaide

New Zealand already has a reasonably strong Rugby League identity, so transplanting a hibernating Sydney club over there just isn't going to work.
Adelaide seemingly is the last roll of the dice.

If Adelaide is there last chance I'd say they're dead & buried.

Don't think we'll see a 19th & 20th team added for a longtime, maybe late 2030's.

NRL are cautious about the 17th & 18th team, others seem ridiculously distant.

 

[Stormwarrior82]

If Adelaide is there last chance I'd say they're dead & buried.

Don't think we'll see a 19th & 20th team added for a longtime, maybe late 2030's.

NRL are cautious about the 17th & 18th team, others seem ridiculously distant.

Don't necessarily agree with that. Brisbane 2 and Perth for me are the next teams but png and nz 2 also have strong cases for short term inclusion. Can't see why 4 teams couldn't be introduced in a expanded nrl 20 team comp in 2023.

I've said before that the bears should aim for Adelaide and even another Sydney team aim for Darwin.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Don't necessarily agree with that. Brisbane 2 and Perth for me are the next teams but png and nz 2 also have strong cases for short term inclusion. Can't see why 4 teams couldn't be introduced in a expanded nrl 20 team comp in 2023.

I was considering the cautious approach the NRL take to expansion. I can't see them going from their current stance to 4 teams at once.

But I would say I think 4 teams at once is a massive mistake. Spreading the player talent that thin will really hurt the quality of footy.

When the game expanded by 4 teams in 1995 we got two very poor teams and two decent teams. In 1995 there were 4 teams that won less games than the knights did this year.

New NRL rules call for 30 top level squad members, that's 120 new players we need to find overnight. Too much.

 

[adamkungl]

Perth and Brisbane for 2023
2 more some time in the 2030s

 

[Stormwarrior82]

I was considering the cautious approach the NRL take to expansion. I can't see them going from their current stance to 4 teams at once.

But I would say I think 4 teams at once is a massive mistake. Spreading the player talent that thin will really hurt the quality of footy.

When the game expanded by 4 teams in 1995 we got two very poor teams and two decent teams. In 1995 there were 4 teams that won less games than the knights did this year.

New NRL rules call for 30 top level squad members, that's 120 new players we need to find overnight. Too much.

The 30 member squad changes nothing but puts another 5 players that are already contracted to the club into the main squad. Nothing else changes apart from the fact it eases the 2nd tier cap a little. The players that miss out on the 17/18 will go back to the feeder team.

Yes I agree with you mostly on that and I feel it could be a mistake for 4 teams but png would bring there own players kumuls/hunters and the nz 2 could be a lot of union/league nz players.

Png hunters play an aggressive/strong/exciting type of football, Ipswich from a couple yrs back played a different/attacking type of football. Introducing 4 teams gives the Nrl a massive shake up that could help spawn a new era of football that is exciting/ different and national.

 

[herbert henry1908]

The 30 member squad changes nothing but puts another 5 players that are already contracted to the club into the main squad. Nothing else changes apart from the fact it eases the 2nd tier cap a little. The players that miss out on the 17/18 will go back to the feeder team.

Yes I agree with you mostly on that and I feel it could be a mistake for 4 teams but png would bring there own players kumuls/hunters and the nz 2 could be a lot of union/league nz players.

Png hunters play an aggressive/strong/exciting type of football, Ipswich from a couple yrs back played a different/attacking type of football. Introducing 4 teams gives the Nrl a massive shake up that could help spawn a new era of football that is exciting/ different and national.

Most teams uses between 23-30 players in first grade during a season. With 4 teams we'd be seeing some pretty average players in FG.

PNG might bring players but not first grade standard, not yet anyway. But there are other issues with PNG that won't see it happen anytime soon.

Agree on NZ though, think we could tap into RU player resources there.

My preference in the short term would be to see a Sydney team relocate to Perth & then we could have new teams in the 3 most important under represented markets. WA/Brisbane/NZ. Probably a pipe dream though.

 

[adamkungl]

Most teams uses between 23-30 players in first grade during a season. With 4 teams we'd be seeing some pretty average players in FG.

PNG might bring players but not first grade standard, not yet anyway. But there are other issues with PNG that won't see it happen anytime soon.

Agree on NZ though, think we could tap into RU player resources there.

My preference in the short term would be to see a Sydney team relocate to Perth & then we could have new teams in the 3 most important under represented markets. WA/Brisbane/NZ. Probably a pipe dream though.

My version of the "grand vision"

Current 16 teams***
*Dragons based in Wollongong (8 games)
** Sea Eagles based in Gosford (8 games)
*** Wests based in Campbeltown (8 games)
WC Pirates
Brisbane City Somethings
Adelaide Bears
NZ Southern Orcas (split Wellington Dunedin Christchurch)

PNG, Fiji, Samoa and Tonga all playing Cup level football.

 

[herbert henry1908]

My version of the "grand vision"

Current 16 teams***
*Dragons based in Wollongong (8 games)
** Sea Eagles based in Gosford (8 games)
*** Wests based in Campbeltown (8 games)
WC Pirates
Brisbane City Somethings
Adelaide Bears
NZ Southern Orcas (split Wellington Dunedin Christchurch)

PNG, Fiji, Samoa and Tonga all playing Cup level football.

Looks pretty good.

You're right that we definitely need to see teams utilising Gosford, Wollongong & Campbelltown more. That in itself would better define the Sydney/NSW market.

My only concern about 20 teams one day in the amount of dead games towards the end of the season. Dare I mention promotion/relegation?

 

[adamkungl]

Looks pretty good.

You're right that we definitely need to see teams utilising Gosford, Wollongong & Campbelltown more. That in itself would better define the Sydney/NSW market.

My only concern about 20 teams one day in the amount of dead games towards the end of the season. Dare I mention promotion/relegation?

Don't you dare.

Meh, every other sport manages to deal with so called "dead games" I mean EPL has 20 in a first past the post.. It's one of those issues that isn't really an issue imo

 

[herbert henry1908]

Don't you dare.

Meh, every other sport manages to deal with so called "dead games" I mean EPL has 20 in a first past the post.. It's one of those issues that isn't really an issue imo

Yeah fair point about the EPL. Only usually 4 teams at most in the mix for the title, and another 4-5 in the mix for relegation.

But all that is suplimented by other Cup competitions.