You've raised good points about saturation. Only thing I'll add to it is if two teams in Brisbane is "saturation", then wouldn't nine teams in Sydney be overkill?
How do we justify limiting Brisbane to just two while keeping nine in Sydney, when RL is arguably more popular in Brisbane?
We're going to have to bite the bullet at some stage and rationalise in Sydney to grow the game elsewhere. The new team has added an extra $20m a year to game, to offset the extra $15m needed to fund them. DailyMail says Foxtel threw in $20m instead of $15m due to the marketability of a second Brisbane team.
"An extra $15 million will be needed per year to fund another team, with Foxtel to offset that money by promising $20 million as a part of its broadcast deal, given the marketability of a second Brisbane team."
The NRL is set to announce its 17th franchise after the game reported a massive $50million surplus - with new broadcast deals set to catapult the game to new heights.
www.dailymail.co.uk
If that's true, then I'd like to know what a third team in Brisbane is worth. I imagine it's a question that only time can answer and, will depend on how well The Dolphins perform on and off the field.
Maybe two teams in Brisbane is enough. But if it is, then we have no option but to kill off a few Sydney clubs so we can create room for Adelaide, Perth, NZ 2 and hopefully NZ 3. The message I'm getting from some of the Sydney posters on here is keep Brisbane to just two teams so we can add Adelaide, Perth, NZ 2 and
retain all nine clubs, even though there's no demand for them. As a Queenslander that offends me and makes me want to quit watching the game I've loved since I was a kid.
Why should I fork out $25 a month for a Kayo to watch nine Sydney clubs that don't mean shit to me with just four from Queensland that I do want to see, but not at such a high cost?
I cannot speak for other Queenslanders, but as some one who grew up watching more Queensland Cup as a kid than ARL in 1996, I have a heavy bias towards the old BRL clubs. I didn't have Optus Vision in 1996 and Ch9 only had one game on delay each Friday night with an hour highlights package each Sunday night. Some times we would get a Saturday game involving the Chargers or the Broncos on a Sunday at 4pm. Other than that, the only live and uninterrupted coverage we got was of the Queensland Cup at 2pm each Saturday. I grew up watching that game religiously as the coverage was better than that of the ARL. I got to learn about all these great clubs that none of you lot down south ever saw. I didn't care that they didn't have any big name players. The football was great and the clubs had character. The commentary of David Wright, Warren Boland and Gerry Collins left an impression on my mind and I'll always remember it as the pinnacle of rugby league.
I couldn't give a shit if all nine Sydney clubs were killed off. I never rated them and I do not have an emotional connection to any of them. I've seen them play out front of empty stadiums since I was a kid and thought to myself, "why are these wankers in the big league when no one in their own city could be bothered to watch them play"? I didn't really watch much of them. I spent more time listening to the radio to hear updates on the Cowboys, even though the Sydney-based commentators clearly hated my club. This only fueled my hatred for Sydney even more.
That's my two cents as a Brisbane-bred RL fan. I don't expect people down south to understand or agree with my view, I'm just telling you how I see it and how I feel. I get that you lot down south have a different view that I'll never stand and I've come to accept it, but it's also the reason why I don't know if I can keep loving the game the way I did if it continues with its "Sydney first and f**k everyone else" attitude. I would be surprised if I was the only person who felt this way.
