Greenberg wants 2nd Melb team

[The Great Dane]

Still havent undestood! Others do!? The main reason why the BEARS and other clubs were compromised was as a result of a News Ltd funded breakaway split in the code. This is the core of the games issues. You have not acknowledged this therefore we dissagree. It's a fundamental difference in where the issues confronting the code have come from. Once again you are wasting time!

Obviously SL didn't help the Bears situation, it only helped a few clubs situations if we are being honest, but to blame SL for what happened to the Bears is a massive stretch, and a massive case of revisionist history, and that's coming from a Bears fan...

The Bears were looking at relocating for quite a while before SL was even a twinkle in John Ribots' eye, as early as the late 80s there were rumours around the Bears support base that it was being looked into.
Whether or not SL went ahead the Bears almost certainly would have attempted to relocate to the CC on the promise from the NSWRL that they'd be exempt from rationalisation if they did, whether or not SL went ahead they would have bankrupted themselves building a stadium on the CC, whether or not SL went ahead rain would have delayed construction of said stadium, etc, etc, long story short everything that happened to the Bears would have happened whether or not SL happened or News got involved in the sport.

If you asked me I'd say that the Bears didn't really have a choice, they were on the chopping block and were almost certainly going to be rationalised if they stayed in Sydney, so they did the right thing by trying to relocate, where they went wrong was that they tried to relocate to a place without a suitable stadium for them to move into and tried to build one there that they couldn't really afford, that's where they went wrong, that was their downfall, nothing to do with anyone but themselves.
They wanted to stay as close to NS as possible, that's why they chose the CC (they said as much themselves at the time), but it wasn't rational for them to do so, had they relocated to (e.g.) Brisbane or wherever, where there was already a stadium ready for them to move into and they wouldn't have had to invest exorbitant amounts of money into the place to prepare it for their arrival then they'd probably still be around today.

Btw. Their are many inconsistencies in your justification and deflecting of News Ltd's role in the fiasco that occured so I'll leave it at that. You are wasting my time and energy with your poor assesment of what has happened to rugby league. We differ!

What inconsistencies?
And I'm not justifying or deflecting anything that News has done, I'm just not going to turn them into more of a bogyman then they really where either, and you are attributing to them a lot of things that they were only tangentially involved with or had nothing to do with...

It seems to me that you want to blame News and SL for all the sports problems, and ignore any responsibility that others have had in it's mistakes from over the years in doing so, and don't get me wrong, sure there is a lot to blame News for, but you also want to blame them for things that they had no hand in what so ever, and revising history to suit an agenda doesn't help anybody, it just muddies the water and makes it more likely that the mistakes of the past will be repeated.

 

[The Great Dane]

Theirs a few! Do you belueve that Sydney, Illawarra and the Central Coast should have no more than nine top flight clubs and even less clubs? If so you are one of those "dudes"! If not we are fine!

It depends what you mean by "no more then nine top flight clubs and even less clubs" in Sydney, the Illawarra, and the CC... If anything I want more clubs in those places, as many as the market decides that it can support.

Ideally I'd want the NRL to be restructured into an open ended pyramid system that isn't top heavy so that it can support as many clubs as the market can handle and can adjust to market pressures as quickly as rationally possible.
So no I don't necessarily want more than nine top flights clubs in Sydney, the CC, and the Illawarra, in particular, though if the market could support it I wouldn't be against it either.

I'm going to massively simplify it for the sake of brevity but if you're interested in more detail feel free to ask, but if I had my way the NSWcup, Qldcup, and NRL would be completely restructured into three national competitions NRL, tier 2, and tier 3, the lowest tier, tier 3, would be open ended with a base set of criteria (stadium size, x mount of start up funds, etc) so that any club from literally anywhere could join so long as they met those criteria, tier 2 would be the second tier competition that the strongest tier 3 clubs feed into once they meet a minimum set of criteria and the NRL/ARLC decide to expand tier 2, and the NRL would be the top tier that tier 2 feeds into once the ARLC and NRL choose to expand it.

It wouldn't be a P&R system (at least in the short to mid term, in the long term who knows, the system could support it if it was ever rational to run P&R in this country and the NRL wanted to go down that route), and there wouldn't be instantaneous upward movement between the tiers (in other words a team in tier 3 that meets the criteria for tier 2 wouldn't instantly move up to tier 2 just cause they meet the minimum standards of tier 2), but there would be instantaneous downward movement, so if for example the Titans were to go bankrupt again and no longer met the minimum standards of the NRL they'd instantly be moved down to NRL 2 where they could be more competitive and wouldn't face as many market pressures to rebuild themselves, and would be replaced with the strongest tier 2 club that meets the standards of the NRL, but there'd be nothing stopping the Titans from eventually rejoining the NRL in the future, so that way you'd see constant merit based movement between the tiers as the clubs and competitions adjust to the market pressures of the time.

So if my 'plan' was to be implemented you'd end up with three tiers, the lowest tier (tier 3) would get as big as necessary to accommodate as many clubs that want to join it that meet the minimum criteria, tier 2 would be the middle tier that would be significantly smaller then tier 3 and would be of a much higher standard than tier 3, and then the NRL it's self that would probably be capped out at around the top 20 clubs, over time the most elite of the clubs and players would be funneled upwards into the NRL.

Because of the spread of power and the way that the NRL is run an idea like this will never happen, the top NRL clubs would never let it happen cause it'd mean that they wouldn't be guaranteed a spot in the NRL and huge grants like they are guaranteed now, and they'd be forced to fend for themselves and justify their own existence, but if I was running things that is very roughly the way that things would be structured and run.
So who knows, maybe we'd have more Sydney, Illawarra, and CC clubs in the NRL under that structure, but I doubt it, however we'd definitely have more in the whole pyramid.

However in the NRL as it is structured now, no Sydney, Illawarra, and the CC can't support as many clubs as they have in the NRL...

 

[Stallion]

Obviously SL didn't help the Bears situation, it only helped a few clubs situations if we are being honest, but to blame SL for what happened to the Bears is a massive stretch, and a massive case of revisionist history, and that's coming from a Bears fan...

The Bears were looking at relocating for quite a while before SL was even a twinkle in John Ribots' eye, as early as the late 80s there were rumours around the Bears support base that it was being looked into.
Whether or not SL went ahead the Bears almost certainly would have attempted to relocate to the CC on the promise from the NSWRL that they'd be exempt from rationalisation if they did, whether or not SL went ahead they would have bankrupted themselves building a stadium on the CC, whether or not SL went ahead rain would have delayed construction of said stadium, etc, etc, long story short everything that happened to the Bears would have happened whether or not SL happened or News got involved in the sport.

If you asked me I'd say that the Bears didn't really have a choice, they were on the chopping block and were almost certainly going to be rationalised if they stayed in Sydney, so they did the right thing by trying to relocate, where they went wrong was that they tried to relocate to a place without a suitable stadium for them to move into and tried to build one there that they couldn't really afford, that's where they went wrong, that was their downfall, nothing to do with anyone but themselves.
They wanted to stay as close to NS as possible, that's why they chose the CC (they said as much themselves at the time), but it wasn't rational for them to do so, had they relocated to (e.g.) Brisbane or wherever, where there was already a stadium ready for them to move into and they wouldn't have had to invest exorbitant amounts of money into the place to prepare it for their arrival then they'd probably still be around today.



What inconsistencies?
And I'm not justifying or deflecting anything that News has done, I'm just not going to turn them into more of a bogyman then they really where either, and you are attributing to them a lot of things that they were only tangentially involved with or had nothing to do with...

It seems to me that you want to blame News and SL for all the sports problems, and ignore any responsibility that others have had in it's mistakes from over the years in doing so, and don't get me wrong, sure there is a lot to blame News for, but you also want to blame them for things that they had no hand in what so ever, and revising history to suit an agenda doesn't help anybody, it just muddies the water and makes it more likely that the mistakes of the past will be repeated.

They are more of a "bogey man" than you think! NEWS LTD funded the split that weakened the code. Its undeniable. Along with a combination of poor administrators the mess was planted!

 

[Stallion]

It depends what you mean by "no more then nine top flight clubs and even less clubs" in Sydney, the Illawarra, and the CC... If anything I want more clubs in those places, as many as the market decides that it can support.

Ideally I'd want the NRL to be restructured into an open ended pyramid system that isn't top heavy so that it can support as many clubs as the market can handle and can adjust to market pressures as quickly as rationally possible.
So no I don't necessarily want more than nine top flights clubs in Sydney, the CC, and the Illawarra, in particular, though if the market could support it I wouldn't be against it either.

I'm going to massively simplify it for the sake of brevity but if you're interested in more detail feel free to ask, but if I had my way the NSWcup, Qldcup, and NRL would be completely restructured into three national competitions NRL, tier 2, and tier 3, the lowest tier, tier 3, would be open ended with a base set of criteria (stadium size, x mount of start up funds, etc) so that any club from literally anywhere could join so long as they met those criteria, tier 2 would be the second tier competition that the strongest tier 3 clubs feed into once they meet a minimum set of criteria and the NRL/ARLC decide to expand tier 2, and the NRL would be the top tier that tier 2 feeds into once the ARLC and NRL choose to expand it.

It wouldn't be a P&R system (at least in the short to mid term, in the long term who knows, the system could support it if it was ever rational to run P&R in this country and the NRL wanted to go down that route), and there wouldn't be instantaneous upward movement between the tiers (in other words a team in tier 3 that meets the criteria for tier 2 wouldn't instantly move up to tier 2 just cause they meet the minimum standards of tier 2), but there would be instantaneous downward movement, so if for example the Titans were to go bankrupt again and no longer met the minimum standards of the NRL they'd instantly be moved down to NRL 2 where they could be more competitive and wouldn't face as many market pressures to rebuild themselves, and would be replaced with the strongest tier 2 club that meets the standards of the NRL, but there'd be nothing stopping the Titans from eventually rejoining the NRL in the future, so that way you'd see constant merit based movement between the tiers as the clubs and competitions adjust to the market pressures of the time.

So if my 'plan' was to be implemented you'd end up with three tiers, the lowest tier (tier 3) would get as big as necessary to accommodate as many clubs that want to join it that meet the minimum criteria, tier 2 would be the middle tier that would be significantly smaller then tier 3 and would be of a much higher standard than tier 3, and then the NRL it's self that would probably be capped out at around the top 20 clubs, over time the most elite of the clubs and players would be funneled upwards into the NRL.

Because of the spread of power and the way that the NRL is run an idea like this will never happen, the top NRL clubs would never let it happen cause it'd mean that they wouldn't be guaranteed a spot in the NRL and huge grants like they are guaranteed now, and they'd be forced to fend for themselves and justify their own existence, but if I was running things that is very roughly the way that things would be structured and run.
So who knows, maybe we'd have more Sydney, Illawarra, and CC clubs in the NRL under that structure, but I doubt it, however we'd definitely have more in the whole pyramid.

However in the NRL as it is structured now, no Sydney, Illawarra, and the CC can't support as many clubs as they have in the NRL...

That's were we absolutely differ. Im figuring the population of the three regions can easily support ten top flight clubs. You dont! I do. Mathematically and culturally its a common sense fit for an established top flight competituon going forward.

 

[LeagueXIII]

The Bears only moved to Gosford because the local council were always difficult for them to deal with, their ground was heritage listed and with modern sport going the way it was they needed corporate boxes etc. That's why they were moving.

Had SL not happened Arthurson would never have axed the Bears he has said this many times as they are an essential part of the game.

 

[siv]

Becareful Great Dane

News Ltd induced SL war inflated player salaries way too quickly

While the weather impacted the Bears ability to play a game at Graham Park in 1999

It was not the reason for the adminstrator to be called in

They got called in by the "axing" of the club in a SL war peace deal, and the axing was only required because News Ltd started the SL War over Pay-TV rights

So was it News Ltds fault or was it the Federal Goverment

As the Federal Government stopped Packer-Murdoch-Telstra in forming Foxtel back in 1993

I stand by the fact that RL war just a pawn in a bigger Pay-TV chess game

 

[Stallion]

Becareful Great Dane

News Ltd induced SL war inflated player salaries way too quickly

While the weather impacted the Bears ability to play a game at Graham Park in 1999

It was not the reason for the adminstrator to be called in

They got called in by the "axing" of the club in a SL war peace deal, and the axing was only required because News Ltd started the SL War over Pay-TV rights

So was it News Ltds fault or was it the Federal Goverment

As the Federal Government stopped Packer-Murdoch-Telstra in forming Foxtel back in 1993

I stand by the fact that RL war just a pawn in a bigger Pay-TV chess game

And the powers that be happened to pick on rugby league!

 

[Perth Red]

Nothing just "happens", it was ripe for the picking and News Ltd being the parasites they are simply moved in to a space created by poor administration

 

[Stallion]

Nothing just "happens", it was ripe for the picking and News Ltd being the parasites they are simply moved in to a space created by poor administration

Think an enemy from within plus the financier in News ltd did the damage! Well orchestrated I believe.

 

[The Great Dane]

That's were we absolutely differ. Im figuring the population of the three regions can easily support ten top flight clubs. You dont! I do. Mathematically and culturally its a common sense fit for an established top flight competituon going forward.

Well you either didn't read or didn't understand the post that you are quoting...

 

[The Great Dane]

Becareful Great Dane

Of what?

News Ltd induced SL war inflated player salaries way too quickly

The majority of the ARL players contracts and "loyalty bonuses" were centrally funded, so most of that increase in salaries was payed for out of the ARL's and Packers' pocket (James Packer literally organised for players salaries to be topped up with packer family money) and not the clubs themselves.

Sure the sudden increase would have impacted the Bears, and all the other clubs, but not as much as you'd think.

While the weather impacted the Bears ability to play a game at Graham Park in 1999

It was not the reason for the adminstrator to be called in

They got called in by the "axing" of the club in a SL war peace deal, and the axing was only required because News Ltd started the SL War over Pay-TV rights

Sure, but why were they axed as part of the "peace deal"? Cause they were broke. Why were they broke? Cause they had put basically every cent they had to their name into a stadium in Gosford that they couldn't really afford in the first place, and during the most tumultuous time in the history of the sport.

They probably would have chucked every cent to their name at the stadium whether or not SL had happened, the ARL were already planning further rationalisation for Sydney, everybody knew it, and they weren't hiding the fact that it was coming, and the Bears were already looking at relocation as early as the late 80s to avoid that rationalisation that was coming, well before SL was even a thought bubble in the halls of the Brisbane Broncos.
So to dodge that rationalisation the Bears probably would have come to the same conclusion that they did during the SL war, that they need to relocate to be certain of their survival, and they probably would have decided that they wanted to move to a place as close to NS as possible and probably still would have come up with the CC as that place, at which point they still would have heavily invested in the stadium on the CC that they couldn't really afford to convince the government to build a stadium there, and they still would have bankrupted themselves doing so.

The only major differences would be that they probably wouldn't have been as rushed to get the stadium built, which would probably have made it more feasible, and the promise from the ARL that they wouldn't be rationalised if they relocated probably would have been more reliable then it was during the war.

So yeah it's reasonable to suggest that whether or not SL happened the Bears would still be in a similar situation to the one that they are in now, and it's definitely reasonable to say that News were not directly responsible for the Bears downfall and it wasn't their intended outcome to destroy the Bears (or any club if you look into it for that matter) nor did they directly attempt to 'assassinate' them, the Bears were just caught in the crossfire so to speak, and really that is the only point I've been trying to make.

So was it News Ltds fault or was it the Federal Goverment

As the Federal Government stopped Packer-Murdoch-Telstra in forming Foxtel back in 1993

I stand by the fact that RL war just a pawn in a bigger Pay-TV chess game

I thought that all went without saying, just as the ARL selling the pay TV rights to Packer for some tiny amount along with the FTA rights went without saying.

News weren't on some crusade to destroy the sport like Stallion suggests, they were just out to make a buck out of the sport, hell had the ARL worked with them like the ARU, NZRU, SARU, AFL, EPL, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, all did at the time instead of fighting them to the end over even the most petty shit and the fear that they'd lose complete control over the game, then maybe RL would be in a better position then it started out in before News looked to get involved like all those other sports and leagues aforementioned are, who knows honestly...

 

[Stallion]

Of what?



The majority of the ARL players contracts and "loyalty bonuses" were centrally funded, so most of that increase in salaries was payed for out of the ARL's and Packers' pocket (James Packer literally organised for players salaries to be topped up with packer family money) and not the clubs themselves.

Sure the sudden increase would have impacted the Bears, and all the other clubs, but not as much as you'd think.



Sure, but why were they axed as part of the "peace deal"? Cause they were broke. Why were they broke? Cause they had put basically every cent they had to their name into a stadium in Gosford that they couldn't really afford in the first place, and during the most tumultuous time in the history of the sport.

They probably would have chucked every cent to their name at the stadium whether or not SL had happened, the ARL were already planning further rationalisation for Sydney, everybody knew it, and they weren't hiding the fact that it was coming, and the Bears were already looking at relocation as early as the late 80s to avoid that rationalisation that was coming, well before SL was even a thought bubble in the halls of the Brisbane Broncos.
So to dodge that rationalisation the Bears probably would have come to the same conclusion that they did during the SL war, that they need to relocate to be certain of their survival, and they probably would have decided that they wanted to move to a place as close to NS as possible and probably still would have come up with the CC as that place, at which point they still would have heavily invested in the stadium on the CC that they couldn't really afford to convince the government to build a stadium there, and they still would have bankrupted themselves doing so.

The only major differences would be that they probably wouldn't have been as rushed to get the stadium built, which would probably have made it more feasible, and the promise from the ARL that they wouldn't be rationalised if they relocated probably would have been more reliable then it was during the war.

So yeah it's reasonable to suggest that whether or not SL happened the Bears would still be in a similar situation to the one that they are in now, and it's definitely reasonable to say that News were not directly responsible for the Bears downfall and it wasn't their intended outcome to destroy the Bears (or any club if you look into it for that matter) nor did they directly attempt to 'assassinate' them, the Bears were just caught in the crossfire so to speak, and really that is the only point I've been trying to make.



I thought that all went without saying, just as the ARL selling the pay TV rights to Packer for some tiny amount along with the FTA rights went without saying.

News weren't on some crusade to destroy the sport like Stallion suggests, they were just out to make a buck out of the sport, hell had the ARL worked with them like the ARU, NZRU, SARU, AFL, EPL, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, all did at the time instead of fighting them to the end over even the most petty shit and the fear that they'd lose complete control over the game, then maybe RL would be in a better position then it started out in before News looked to get involved like all those other sports and leagues aforementioned are, who knows honestly...

No one is saying that News ltd isnt out to make a buck! They definitely do not care if rugby league grows or developes into more than just an Aussie dominated game. We differ fellas and I'm fine with the stance Ive taken . And many support this idea/stance as well. But you can single me out. I'm fine for a scrap!

 

[Stallion]

Well you either didn't read or didn't understand the post that you are quoting...

? I understood it. You don't subscribe to more than nine top flight teams out of the three regions being discussed. Its as simple as that . No placating side talk of divisions. We are discussing the top flight which the Aussie sports psyche only take note of. Thats it! No compromises. It's far too damaging for the code. The decline of the code in North Sydney is fact and it will be replicated again if dilution occurs. Another team is mathematically and culturally wise. Let alone a solid business savvy approach which engenders more local rivalries. Like it or not these top flight rivalries are popular. I emphasise TOP FLIGHT. NOT SECOND GRADE STATUS! In OZ that's the way we roll!

 

[siv]

Of what?



The majority of the ARL players contracts and "loyalty bonuses" were centrally funded, so most of that increase in salaries was payed for out of the ARL's and Packers' pocket (James Packer literally organised for players salaries to be topped up with packer family money) and not the clubs themselves.

Sure the sudden increase would have impacted the Bears, and all the other clubs, but not as much as you'd think.



Sure, but why were they axed as part of the "peace deal"? Cause they were broke. Why were they broke? Cause they had put basically every cent they had to their name into a stadium in Gosford that they couldn't really afford in the first place, and during the most tumultuous time in the history of the sport.

They probably would have chucked every cent to their name at the stadium whether or not SL had happened, the ARL were already planning further rationalisation for Sydney, everybody knew it, and they weren't hiding the fact that it was coming, and the Bears were already looking at relocation as early as the late 80s to avoid that rationalisation that was coming, well before SL was even a thought bubble in the halls of the Brisbane Broncos.
So to dodge that rationalisation the Bears probably would have come to the same conclusion that they did during the SL war, that they need to relocate to be certain of their survival, and they probably would have decided that they wanted to move to a place as close to NS as possible and probably still would have come up with the CC as that place, at which point they still would have heavily invested in the stadium on the CC that they couldn't really afford to convince the government to build a stadium there, and they still would have bankrupted themselves doing so.

The only major differences would be that they probably wouldn't have been as rushed to get the stadium built, which would probably have made it more feasible, and the promise from the ARL that they wouldn't be rationalised if they relocated probably would have been more reliable then it was during the war.

So yeah it's reasonable to suggest that whether or not SL happened the Bears would still be in a similar situation to the one that they are in now, and it's definitely reasonable to say that News were not directly responsible for the Bears downfall and it wasn't their intended outcome to destroy the Bears (or any club if you look into it for that matter) nor did they directly attempt to 'assassinate' them, the Bears were just caught in the crossfire so to speak, and really that is the only point I've been trying to make.



I thought that all went without saying, just as the ARL selling the pay TV rights to Packer for some tiny amount along with the FTA rights went without saying.

News weren't on some crusade to destroy the sport like Stallion suggests, they were just out to make a buck out of the sport, hell had the ARL worked with them like the ARU, NZRU, SARU, AFL, EPL, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, all did at the time instead of fighting them to the end over even the most petty shit and the fear that they'd lose complete control over the game, then maybe RL would be in a better position then it started out in before News looked to get involved like all those other sports and leagues aforementioned are, who knows honestly...

Your a broken record

Bears werent broke - they just couldnt service their loan after being cut due to SL war

Simple

Anyway - why cant Canberra run their own lical RG and U20s team

They should be flush with left over News Ltd money

 

[titoelcolombiano]

PR . The administrator was incompetent! He was a News Ltd stooge! The Bears were shafted!

Bears are dead and deserve to be. They were debt riddled and homeless at the time of their demise and have let North Sydney go backwards since whilst they go chasing re-entry to the NRL on the Central Coast, Gold Coast and Perth.

It's time to focus on fixing North Sydney by focusing on their local community from the NSW Cup.

 

[Perth Red]

Bears werent broke - they just couldnt service their loan

????

 

[Stallion]

Bears are dead and deserve to be. They were debt riddled and homeless at the time of their demise and have let North Sydney go backwards since whilst they go chasing re-entry to the NRL on the Central Coast, Gold Coast and Perth.

It's time to focus on fixing North Sydney by focusing on their local community from the NSW Cup.

Lol. The Northern peninsula can be a rugby league strong hold if the Bears are given top-flight status and are based on the Central Coast. The twofold effect of gaining two rugby league areas with the Central Coast and the once rugby league popular North Sydney area would be a boon for the code. With Manly Warringah as part of the mix it creates a number of local derbies and increases the codes cultural and local relevance. Id suggest the three regions with over 6milion in population and growing will well and truelly be satisfied by ten top flight NRL clubs. But the people whom are not so good at maths and cultural relevance cant work this out. In total I believe it would be prudent for the NRL to add four more over a ten year period. These clubs coming from Brisbane (a priority!), Central Coast/North Sydney (reclamation and gain ), West Coast Pirates in Perth and another area of choice from either Melbourne, Adelaide or NZ. That would be the strategy for genuine expansion without imploding the code in its heartland areas again. This to be staged and structured in a progressive way with two clubs added each five years coinciding with tv deals etc.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Lol. The Northern peninsula can be a rugby league strong hold if the Bears are given top-flight status and are based on the Central Coast. The twofold effect of gaining two rugby league areas with the Central Coast and the once rugby league popular North Sydney area would be a boon for the code. With Manly Warringah as part of the mix it creates a number of local derbies and increases the codes cultural and local relevance. Id suggest the three regions with over 6milion in population and growing will well and truelly be satisfied by ten top flight NRL clubs. But the people whom are not so good at maths and cultural relevance cant work this out. In total I believe it would be prudent for the NRL to add four more over a ten year period. These clubs coming from Brisbane (a priority!), Central Coast/North Sydney (reclamation and gain ), West Coast Pirates in Perth and another area of choice from either Melbourne, Adelaide or NZ. That would be the strategy for genuine expansion without imploding the code in its heartland areas again. This to be staged and structured in a progressive way with two clubs added each five years coinciding with tv deals etc.

I respect what you are saying but I think the last thing the NRL needs is another NSW team, especially when we don't have a Brisbane derby, a New Zealand derby or a team in Perth or Adelaide. These markets, some in the short term and others in the long term will all grow the game commercially, in membership numbers, attendances and eyes on TV sets. Yes, they are new brands but so were the Broncos and Storm once but now you couldn't have a credible NRL comp without them.

 

[Stallion]

I respect what you are saying but I think the last thing the NRL needs is another NSW team, especially when we don't have a Brisbane derby, a New Zealand derby or a team in Perth or Adelaide. These markets, some in the short term and others in the long term will all grow the game commercially, in membership numbers, attendances and eyes on TV sets. Yes, they are new brands but so were the Broncos and Storm once but now you couldn't have a credible NRL comp without them.

I agree with most of what you are stating. Just think Australias highest populated area and the foundation of this competition deserves that one more club for consolidation on the NSW coast. 6 million people and growing in three regions can easily accomodate an already culturally accepted code like rugby league. These are big population areas with geographic barriers involved. It will be successfull for the code along with the other areas of Brisbane, WA ,NZ & Adelaide in the picture as time goes. Some of the areas like Adelaide and NZ may need significant more lead up time. Central Coast Bears could start easily in five years time with notice. Two ready made areas are beckoning for more top flight rugby league and would give instant added value with increased junior interest as a result. In time the others will be great as well.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

I agree with most of what you are stating. Just think Australias highest populated area and the foundation of this competition deserves that one more club for consolidation on the NSW coast. 6 million people and growing in three regions can easily accomodate annalready culturally accepted code like rugby league. These are big population areas with geographic barriers involved. It will be successfull for the code along with the other areas of Brisbane, WA ,NZ & Adelaide in the picture as time goes. Some of the areas like Adelaide and NZ may need significant more lead up time. Central Coast Bears could start easily in five time with notice. Two ready made areas are beckoning for more too flight rugby league and would give added value with increased junior interest as a result. In time the others will be great as well.

I agree with consolidating the NSW coast. I would do it by moving the Roosters to CC and the Dragons to Wollongong. Both teams will still play plenty of matches in Sydney as away teams (with a Sydney based membership options) and both could be allowed one heratige home game in Sydney plus the Anzac match at Allianz. This would ensure that the iconic Dragons and Roosters brands remain in the NRL, still play plenty of matches in Sydney for their Sydney based fans, will reduce the amount of clubs that actually operate in the city to give the Dogs, Souths and Parra room to become super clubs of Australian Sport but won't do damage to the league by kicking a Sydney team out of the comp.