Gold Coast Bears/Nth Sydney/Gosford

[Stallion]

The fact you need to cherrypick an event game from 4 years ago rather than produce a recent average shows that these big sydney crowds are not normal.

But, putting that aside, where was this game played? Redfern, Brooky or Leichhardt? Did the fans flock to the culture and history? Of course not, this was played at ANZ and the game was 40k fans larger for it.

So you ignore the fact that these people do attend rugby league in such numbers and then propose the implosion of the code in Sydney? I picked a good example amongst plenty of good examples. The crowds and support is there. These people don't all just pass away suddenly! It's incompetent rugbyleague administrators that do not market and ticket price the game correctly. Your implosion philosophy is laughable yet you persist in your flawed stance which would ultimately weaken the code all over the massive city of Sydney both geographically (travel wise) & population wise? Astoundingly dumb from Mr Implosion!

 

[Perth Red]

So you ignore the fact that these people do attend rugby league in such numbers and then propose the implosion of the code in Sydney? I picked a good example amongst plenty of good examples. The crowds and support is there. These people don't all just pass away suddenly! It's incompetent rugbyleague administrators that do not market and ticket price the game correctly. Your implosion philosophy is laughable yet you persist in your flawed stance which would ultimately weaken the code all over the massive city of Sydney both geographically (travel wise) & population wise? Astoundingly dumb from Mr Implosion!

If the NRL can not go beyond 16 clubs would you rather see
A) no new growth in the NRL and stick with what we have for the foreseeable future
B) Relegate, relocate or merge a Sydney club or two to allow us to capitalise on the value and growth in other markets that expansion will bring

Come on, A or B ?

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I'd be happy for RL to do a revamp for a national footprint but absolutely no existing club gets in.

 

[Stallion]

If the NRL can not go beyond 16 clubs would you rather see
A) no new growth in the NRL and stick with what we have for the foreseeable future
B) Relegate, relocate or merge a Sydney club or two to allow us to capitalise on the value and growth in other markets that expansion will bring

Come on, A or B ?

A . Maintain the credibility and familiarity of the competition and then expand with additional clubs elsewhere when ready. Otherwise you will lose the core attraction of the existing and very popular NRL which is its established and well lnown clubs. You lose familiarity you lose respect/credibility and support. Simple as that. Imploding the game would be disastrous just like ee are witnessing with the loss of North Sydney and mixed identity of other merged clubs. It doesn't work to toy with familiarity and fans that can easily go to another code if push comes to shove. And this has happened to many fans that have been let down by losing their clubs identity and top flight presence. But I know you don't get this!

 

[Perth Red]

Dodge ball.

Nrl has given every indication it is unwilling to go beyond 16 clubs anytime soon, or even not so soon given it’s been 8 years in discussion so far. So you be happy to see Brisbane under represented and no presence to grow the game and take the fight to afl in places like Adelaide and Perth so we can keep an overstaurated city like Sydney and the game in its current state of staganation, in fact not even stagnation given drop in attendances and tv audiences.

And you call me game damaging in my opinion!

 

[Stallion]

Dodge ball.

Nrl has given every indication it is unwilling to go beyond 16 clubs anytime soon, or even not so soon given it’s been 8 years in discussion so far. So you be happy to see Brisbane under represented and no presence to grow the game and take the fight to afl in places like Adelaide and Perth so we can keep an overstaurated city like Sydney and the game in its current state of staganation, in fact not even stagnation given drop in attendances and tv audiences.

And you call me game damaging in my opinion!

You still dont get it! You are looking to destroy what makes the NRL. The Sydney clubs are fundamental for the credibility and fanbases of millions of fans. You tamper with that existing market advantage and you create immense loss of faith in the NRL. The only way to grow is to increase in number. Looks like these administrators have incompetently used funds so the game must wait for genuine additional expansion clubs and not implode upon itself. You don't throw the baby out with the bath water PR. Established clubs are already a significant historical, generational , recognisable and marketing plus. You tamper with that you see a further weakening of the code not just in Sydney but also outside of Sydney.

 

[siv]

If the NRL can not go beyond 16 clubs would you rather see
A) no new growth in the NRL and stick with what we have for the foreseeable future
B) Relegate, relocate or merge a Sydney club or two to allow us to capitalise on the value and growth in other markets that expansion will bring

Come on, A or B ?

Maybe all NSW based clubs should just revert back a NSWRL based FG comp and invite Norths and Newtown back

And let NRL go on its merry way and have GFs at Suncorp with all the expansion clubs it wants

But 70% of the TV revenue would need to come with the NSWRL clubs

You could then play a Super Bowl on 2nd weekend in October

 

[Perth Red]

You still dont get it! You are looking to destroy what makes the NRL. The Sydney clubs are fundamental for the credibility and fanbases of millions of fans. You tamper with that existing market advantage and you create immense loss of faith in the NRL. The only way to grow is to increase in number. Looks like these administrators have incompetently used funds so the game must wait for genuine additional expansion clubs and not implode upon itself. You don't throw the baby out with the bath water PR. Established clubs are already a significant historical, generational , recognisable and marketing plus. You tamper with that you see a further weakening of the code not just in Sydney but also outside of Sydney.

SOME Sydney clubs are, not all. Little argument that losing NS has been more than offset by the success of the growth of the game in Melbourne. Losing two Sydney clubs to bring in Brisbane 2 and Perth, Adelaide or nz2 would likely equal much greater long term games that cover the losses of ONLY having 7 clubs in Sydney!

Invest in an nrl championship second tier comp and there is no reason the likes of of, Balmain, west’s, manly and Cronulla couldn’t be succesful at that level creating space for real growth that will make nrl the number one winter footy code in the country.

 

[Stallion]

Maybe all NSW based clubs should just revert back a NSWRL based FG comp and invite Norths and Newtown back

And let NRL go on its merry way and have GFs at Suncorp with all the expansion clubs it wants

But 70% of the TV revenue would need to come with the NSWRL clubs

You could then play a Super Bowl on 2nd weekend in October

A two conferences set up is a good idea into the future. And yes due to the tyrrany of distance in Australia something like that makes sense. Additional clubs would be a target mindset for the outside of NSW clubs competition. It would be good if this was a strategy with development and set up of expansion clubs/franchises being invited and accepted over a progressive timefrane. It would absolutely mean and create an increase in aspiring junior numbers everywhere ! Bids of various franchises from designated expansion areas could be involved and the most worthy bid accepted within a mapped out timescale with final number to be reached when all outside of NSW areas/cities have at least two club/franchises. Its a longterm strategy and at least its progressive and expansionary with the codes genuine growth in place.

 

[Stallion]

SOME Sydney clubs are, not all. Little argument that losing NS has been more than offset by the success of the growth of the game in Melbourne. Losing two Sydney clubs to bring in Brisbane 2 and Perth, Adelaide or nz2 would likely equal much greater long term games that cover the losses of ONLY having 7 clubs in Sydney!

Invest in an nrl championship second tier comp and there is no reason the likes of of, Balmain, west’s, manly and Cronulla couldn’t be succesful at that level creating space for real growth that will make nrl the number one winter footy code in the country.

Lol! Are you serious?.You actually think Melbourne was the in for North Sydney being exiled? Are you aware that their were 22 top flight clubs in Australia in 1997? The Storm was created out of the carve up of the Mariners, Adelaide Rams and Perth Reds. Melbourne Storm WAS THE ONLY POSITIVE FROM THE SUPERLEAGUE WAR!
In Australia we don't do level 2 crap mate! It's first grade or your club is nothing! That's the way it is. Your relentless and ignorant attack on the Sydney clubs is astounding. And all the Sydney clubs including North Sydney should be respected and maintained/supported in the top flight. You still dont get it! The implosion theme is stuck in that head of yours and it cant see the massive damage it would do to the competition. Once again YOU STILL DON'T GET IT!

 

[flippikat]

I honestly think the AFL had an advantage to begin with because in the 1970s (pre-expansion of the VFL), it had two large cities in Perth and Adelaide that already had AFL as their prime winter sport. Even though their focus was their own local leagues, the groundwork was there for a national league to be sorted pretty quickly - with HUGE markets represented.

By contrast, rugby league only had one huge population centre in its heartland outside of Sydney (Brisbane), and a lot of middle-sized regional towns, like Woolongong & Newcastle. Expanding to those regional centres was easier than trying to win-over AFL heartland, but the markets are smaller than those big AFL cities.

That's how AFL have managed to keep most of their Melbourne clubs - the closest they have to the Knights or Raiders or Cowboys is Geelong. Every other interstate team is in a huge capital city market (2 teams in Greater Perth, Sydney & Adelaide), with the Gold Coast/Tweed aread (Suns) not far behind the capitals in terms of population.

I'm not saying we should axe the Knights, Cowboys and Raiders.. but if we accept keeping them as part of the competition AND expect to keep all the current Sydney clubs, we're gonna need at least 20 teams to make a truly national competition, more if we want the kind of returns that cross-town derbies in big cities generate - which is something AFL, Big Bash cricket and A-League know all about.

 

[Stallion]

I honestly think the AFL had an advantage to begin with because in the 1970s (pre-expansion of the VFL), it had two large cities in Perth and Adelaide that already had AFL as their prime winter sport. Even though their focus was their own local leagues, the groundwork was there for a national league to be sorted pretty quickly - with HUGE markets represented.

By contrast, rugby league only had one huge population centre in its heartland outside of Sydney (Brisbane), and a lot of middle-sized regional towns, like Woolongong & Newcastle. Expanding to those regional centres was easier than trying to win-over AFL heartland, but the markets are smaller than those big AFL cities.

That's how AFL have managed to keep most of their Melbourne clubs - the closest they have to the Knights or Raiders or Cowboys is Geelong. Every other interstate team is in a huge capital city market (2 teams in Greater Perth, Sydney & Adelaide), with the Gold Coast/Tweed aread (Suns) not far behind the capitals in terms of population.

I'm not saying we should axe the Knights, Cowboys and Raiders.. but if we accept keeping them as part of the competition AND expect to keep all the current Sydney clubs, we're gonna need at least 20 teams to make a truly national competition, more if we want the kind of returns that cross-town derbies in big cities generate - which is something AFL, Big Bash cricket and A-League know all about.

Completely agree. The whole reduction of clubs has been a mistake! For rugby league the more the merrier. Even if conferences are adopted. It's the way forward for this great and underachieving code. No implosion required just genuine additional expansion clubs! Its a very easy and watchable game to embrace. Just needs to get out there.

 

[flippikat]

Completely agree. The whole reduction of clubs has been a mistake! For rugby league the more the merrier. Even if conferences are adopted. It's the way forward for this great and underachieving code. No implosion required just genuine additional expansion clubs! Its a very easy and watchable game to embrace. Just needs to get out there.

I never argued for 22 or 24 teams, I just stated that due to the NRL including regional centres and smaller cities it's painted itself into a corner.

In fact, I think having 20+ teams will spread our player depth way too thinly.

No way will the NRL axe the likes of Newcastle for bigger population centres like Perth and Adelaide, so UNLESS it rationalises Sydney we're facing a big number of clubs to get a nationwide spread of teams. Especially if it wants to unlock the value of derbies.

 

[The Great Dane]

Lol! Are you serious?.You actually think Melbourne was the in for North Sydney being exiled? Are you aware that their were 22 top flight clubs in Australia in 1997? The Storm was created out of the carve up of the Mariners, Adelaide Rams and Perth Reds. Melbourne Storm WAS THE ONLY POSITIVE FROM THE SUPERLEAGUE WAR!

That's simply factually incorrect.

A Melbourne club was planned to be part of the SL in 98, it was going to be the SL first expansion, they were going to be called the Melbourne Mavericks (obviously the name was changed to the Storm), Glenn Lazarus was their first big signing, they were also signing coaching staff, players (most of whom didn't end up getting a run cause better players became available after the Reds and Mariners kicked the bucket), etc, when suddenly the war ended and a whole bunch of players were made available by the Mariners and Reds going tits up.

Here's the last surviving image of their logo (that I know of)-

The Melbourne Storm were not an amalgamation of what was left of the Mariners, Reds, and Rams, they were in existence before the 3 folded they just hadn't played a game yet, and they played their first season alongside the Rams who were still around in 98.

In Australia we don't do level 2 crap mate! It's first grade or your club is nothing! That's the way it is. Your relentless and ignorant attack on the Sydney clubs is astounding. And all the Sydney clubs including North Sydney should be respected and maintained/supported in the top flight. You still dont get it! The implosion theme is stuck in that head of yours and it cant see the massive damage it would do to the competition. Once again YOU STILL DON'T GET IT!

How do you know!?

A multi tier system has never seriously been attempted in this country, so how could you possibly know that it wouldn't work!?

 

[Stallion]

I never argued for 22 or 24 teams, I just stated that due to the NRL including regional centres and smaller cities it's painted itself into a corner.

In fact, I think having 20+ teams will spread our player depth way too thinly.

No way will the NRL axe the likes of Newcastle for bigger population centres like Perth and Adelaide, so UNLESS it rationalises Sydney we're facing a big number of clubs to get a nationwide spread of teams. Especially if it wants to unlock the value of derbies.

As an ex player, i dissagree with the lack of depth comment. Being personally involved as a trialist the amount of hidden talent is immense. The inadequate player depth line is a flawed excuse to.not have additional teams.

 

[flippikat]

As an ex player, i dissagree with the lack of depth comment. Being personally involved as a trialist the amount of hidden talent is immense. The inadequate player depth line is a flawed excuse to.not have additional teams.

I'm not convinced with that argument.

Look at the last time we had 20 teams (1995, 1996 and 1998) there was a handful of teams that were way off the pace. When the number of teams was pruned 1998-2000, the teams near the bottom of the ladder did better.

Fast-forward to now, last couple of seasons we've has a generally competitive league apart from Newcastle who have been way off the pace 2016-17, but before that just look at the 2015 table. 2015 was a very competitive season.

We MIGHT be able to manage 20 teams now (two phases of expansion, 2 teams per phase), with a lot of junior work & luring back players from the Superleague but that's about it. Brisbane 2, Perth, Adelaide & one more.

Ambitious stuff like getting derbies into Melbourne NEEDS Sydney to be rationalised.

 

[Foreign Legion]

That's simply factually incorrect.

A Melbourne club was planned to be part of the SL in 98, it was going to be the SL first expansion, they were going to be called the Melbourne Mavericks (obviously the name was changed to the Storm), Glenn Lazarus was their first big signing, they were also signing coaching staff, players (most of whom didn't end up getting a run cause better players became available after the Reds and Mariners kicked the bucket), etc, when suddenly the war ended and a whole bunch of players were made available by the Mariners and Reds going tits up.

Here's the last surviving image of their logo (that I know of)-

The Melbourne Storm were not an amalgamation of what was left of the Mariners, Reds, and Rams, they were in existence before the 3 folded they just hadn't played a game yet, and they played their first season alongside the Rams who were still around in 98.



How do you know!?

A multi tier system has never seriously been attempted in this country, so how could you possibly know that it wouldn't work!?

One team i always kinda liked and miss till this day are the Adelaide Rams..

 

[Stallion]

I'm not convinced with that argument.

Look at the last time we had 20 teams (1995, 1996 and 1998) there was a handful of teams that were way off the pace. When the number of teams was pruned 1998-2000, the teams near the bottom of the ladder did better.

Fast-forward to now, last couple of seasons we've has a generally competitive league apart from Newcastle who have been way off the pace 2016-17, but before that just look at the 2015 table. 2015 was a very competitive season.

We MIGHT be able to manage 20 teams now (two phases of expansion, 2 teams per phase), with a lot of junior work & luring back players from the Superleague but that's about it. Brisbane 2, Perth, Adelaide & one more.

Ambitious stuff like getting derbies into Melbourne NEEDS Sydney to be rationalised.

22 clubs in 1997?. Both comps enjoyed patronage despite tumultuous and divisive times. I trialled and my experience was that from 300 players on an open day in late January, it was wittled down to a squad of 17 . I got cut at the 30 mark. The players I seen cut before I was were football freaks. I beg to differ. I've experienced the trial period for the Roosters Presidents cup squad and it is still by far the hardest thing I have done in my life to date. Glad I did it and can extol the knowledge as a result.

 

[Stallion]

I'm not convinced with that argument.

Look at the last time we had 20 teams (1995, 1996 and 1998) there was a handful of teams that were way off the pace. When the number of teams was pruned 1998-2000, the teams near the bottom of the ladder did better.

Fast-forward to now, last couple of seasons we've has a generally competitive league apart from Newcastle who have been way off the pace 2016-17, but before that just look at the 2015 table. 2015 was a very competitive season.

We MIGHT be able to manage 20 teams now (two phases of expansion, 2 teams per phase), with a lot of junior work & luring back players from the Superleague but that's about it. Brisbane 2, Perth, Adelaide & one more.

Ambitious stuff like getting derbies into Melbourne NEEDS Sydney to be rationalised.

Agree with most but no rationalising of the pot of gold in Sydney. These clubs have immense historical, generational and Australia wide support. Established Sydney clubs are a crucial asset to the code going forward. They give the competition notoriety and credibility plus a massive established tv audience and fan base. More clubs yes! Just got to hook in and work at it like you stated.

 

[Perth Red]

Lol! Are you serious?.You actually think Melbourne was the in for North Sydney being exiled? Are you aware that their were 22 top flight clubs in Australia in 1997? The Storm was created out of the carve up of the Mariners, Adelaide Rams and Perth Reds. Melbourne Storm WAS THE ONLY POSITIVE FROM THE SUPERLEAGUE WAR!
In Australia we don't do level 2 crap mate! It's first grade or your club is nothing! That's the way it is. Your relentless and ignorant attack on the Sydney clubs is astounding. And all the Sydney clubs including North Sydney should be respected and maintained/supported in the top flight. You still dont get it! The implosion theme is stuck in that head of yours and it cant see the massive damage it would do to the competition. Once again YOU STILL DON'T GET IT!

There was only so many places, they could have kept ns and not had Melbourne, regardless it was more the point I was making that IF the nrl is to remain at 16 clubs then losing two Sydney clubs is likely more than offset by bringing in new bigger markets