If you were CEO how would you handle expansion

[BuderusIsaBeast]

I think Christchurch would be a better choice then Wellington. More people, South Island and they have seemed to react better to league then Wellington imo

 

[Diesel]

NZ Warriors should play a quarter of their homes games in Christchurch and a quarter of their home games in Wellington.

In other words 1/2 their games outside Auckland? Because they don't travel enough as it is.
How often does Souths leave NSW each year? 3-4 tops?

 

[Diesel]

I think Christchurch would be a better choice then Wellington. More people, South Island and they have seemed to react better to league then Wellington imo

Welly has a higher population than Christchurch.

As much as I'd love a Wellington team, Christchurch would be a better option and has a purpose made rectangular stadium which Wellington doesn't

 

[jim_57]

NZ Warriors should play a quarter of their homes games in Christchurch and a quarter of their home games in Wellington.

No. Auckland is a big enough place to have its own team, they could become one of the biggest teams in the NRL if they coukd string some success together.

A local derby would help I think, NZ2 is a must with Perth and Brisbane 2.

 

[T-Boon]

where do people think the money for expansion is going to be after all the clubs have spent 20mill on centres of excellence. Thats what we need. More funky weights rooms, white boards and labs and such.

 

[alien]

In other words 1/2 their games outside Auckland? Because they don't travel enough as it is.
How often does Souths leave NSW each year? 3-4 tops?

Yeah because they are supposed to represent New Zealand, not just Auckland.

 

[Pommy]

Yeah because they are supposed to represent New Zealand, not just Auckland.

Says who? They weren't forced to change their name I don't believe so I don't think there was a mandate for them to cover NZ. They just felt it was a better money spinner.

 

[Diesel]

Yeah because they are supposed to represent New Zealand, not just Auckland.

The Auckland Warriors went bust and was relaunched as the NZ Warriors. Different entity. It was at this time black was introduced to the jersey.

 

[Stormwarrior82]

I still feel that the Nrl needs to hold off on expansion until the titans and Newcastle are sold. The next to teams need to be Brisbane 2 and Perth. Then a nz team and a Adelaide off the back of a Perth/Adelaide rivalry.

What is good now is that expansion hopefuls can now workout the costings for there teams. Clubs get 130% for salary cap, a football department spending cap of sorts. If the wa pirates can promise the spending or get guaranteed money for a future club once the tits and newy sell. Why the hell wouldn't the nrl expand. Their case would be to good to knock back. The Nrl would need at least their digital channel up and running by then and/or money from other broadcasters that makeup the 130% cost.

I feel 2021or 2022 will be the expansion years.

 

[alien]

The Auckland Warriors went bust and was relaunched as the NZ Warriors. Different entity. It was at this time black was introduced to the jersey.

I know what happened but as far as the club's records go, it's the same club. I believe they should represent the whole of NZ. 6 home games in Auckland, 3 home games in Wellington, 3 home games in Christchurch.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I believe, like Brisbane as well, Auckland needs a 'local' derby.

A 2nd Brisbane and NZ team would be great. As well as Perth.

And Wellington in a predominantly yellow and black accents combo would be great - no real clashes. The blacker one for occasional away.

 

[Perth Red]

Only problem with Wellington is the Union team are struggling big time and crowds are poor so what chance a RL team? Is it big enough and wealthy enough with corporates to be sustainable?

 

[Perth Red]

I feel 2021or 2022 will be the expansion years.

ah I remember when we were confidently posting how we felt 2012/13 would be the year for expansion. Another decade sails past.

 

[Stormwarrior82]

ah I remember when we were confidently posting how we felt 2012/13 would be the year for expansion. Another decade sails past.

becareful using the term "we".
When gallop was running the show, yes there was the chance of expansion but he had no research or system in place to properly usher in new teams and would of always ended badly. The change of bosses from Smith to Greenberg wouldn't of helped because Greenberg was Always going to look after the clubs first. But in saying that, since smith taking over, they always wanted the clubs to stand on there own 2 feet. That is what's prolonged the whole thing. The clubs and nrl not being able to hold back there spending.

Having 2 new teams making $10+ mill losses is never good policy... ask the afl.

How I see it is that the afl hasn't done due diligence when they introduced gws and suns. Yes they have made some inroads but also the afl have spent $200/$300/$400 mil plus over 10 years where the nrl hasn't had to. Once these nrl expansion clubs start they will be profitable from the get go. That's not a bad thing.

 

[T-Boon]

The change of bosses from Smith to Greenberg wouldn't of helped because Greenberg was Always going to look after the clubs first.

The main reason the clubs and News got rid of Smith and installed Greenberg was because he was starting to talk about expansion. This is why it is not going to happen, CEO's will not even have the courage to bring it up. Or else next man in.

 

[Diesel]

I know what happened but as far as the club's records go, it's the same club. I believe they should represent the whole of NZ. 6 home games in Auckland, 3 home games in Wellington, 3 home games in Christchurch.

Doesn't work like that, you alienate your own support base. Perhaps the Warriors could play 2 games outside of Auckland (they already play 1) and say Souths, could play the other 4 around NZ. Problem solved.

Every club should play 1 home game away from home.

 

[Perth Red]

Doesn't work like that, you alienate your own support base. Perhaps the Warriors could play 2 games outside of Auckland (they already play 1) and say Souths, could play the other 4 around NZ. Problem solved.

Every club should play 1 home game away from home.

Ideally you'd see warriors play ten games in Auckland and two in Wellington, then find two or three clubs willing to take their warriors games to the likes of Dunedin, Christchurch and hameliton. It looks decades before nz will ever get another team so let's give warriors 15 or 16 games across nz to grow their brand, they could and should be the leading members club in the nrl if supported by the nrl properly.

 

[alien]

Doesn't work like that, you alienate your own support base. Perhaps the Warriors could play 2 games outside of Auckland (they already play 1) and say Souths, could play the other 4 around NZ. Problem solved.

Every club should play 1 home game away from home.

LOL!

Souths already play 2 home games outside of Sydney (Perth and Cairns).

 

[Gizza]

This is my vision for the future, don't know how long it'll take for the NRL to expand, doesn't seem on the cards in the near future but maybe in 10 years or so this is what I think will happen. It's pretty similar to a lot of suggestions already on here but I go into a bit of detail.

Firstly, the Dragons being moved permanently to Illawarra and the Tigers to Campbelltown is something that needs to happen for the expansion of the game in those areas.

The 4 teams I'd like to see added into the NRL are:
Perth
Ipswich
Central Coast
2nd NZ Team

Perth is almost definitely the place where the NRL is looking to expand to next, with State of Origin headed there, a pretty big market and an essential to truly make this a national game.

Undoubtedly there will be the need for a 4th QLD team, and I believe that bringing up the Ipswich Jets from the Q Cup is the best way to do this. A rapidly growing area with a greatest appetite for Rugby League, and a great club to build upon.

Central Coast has the facilities and has been waiting long enough for a team, and deserves one. I see no reason that an NRL club wouldn't be able to be moderately successful if run properly.

As for the 2nd NZ team, it has to be done at some stage, although I'm unfamiliar with the state of RL in NZ and the possible cities for expansion so I'll leave it as the 2nd NZ team.

This leaves us with 20 Teams. I'm pretty happy with the current length of the NRL season, however I believe State of Origin should be on standalone weekends with other International (e.g Pacific Islands) fixtures to be played on those weekends, possibly in a competition format. That takes 3 rounds away from us, plus one more as the finals system that I'll talk about later goes for an extra week.

Thus, we are left with 22 regular season rounds. This means that everyone plays each other once, and 3 of the teams twice (Home and Away). I don't see a need for bye rounds in this format, with State of Origin on standalone weekends.

I think the best way to tackle which teams play each other twice is to split them into geographical divisions. 4 Teams in QLD play each other twice, as well as the 4 Teams from WA, VIC and NZ combined.

As for NSW, having 4 Teams per division makes acomodating rivalries difficult due to the way the geographical division works. Therefore, they are in groups of 3 based on location, then play one of the other NSW teams that they have a rivalry with. I see it working like this

Northern Division
Newcastle
Central Coast
Manly

Central Division
Sydney
South Sydney
Canterbury-Bankstown

Western Division
Parramatta
Penrith
Wests

Southern Division
Cronulla
Illawarra
Canberra

As for the interdivision rivalry matches, although rivalries will change I see them looking like this:

Sydney Roosters v Illawarra Dragons (ANZAC derby)
Manly Sea Eagles v Parramatta Eels
Cronulla Sharks v Central Coast Bears (New Rivalry)
Newcastle Knights v Canberra Raiders (Both non-Sydney)
Penrith Panthers v Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs
South Sydney Rabbitohs v Wests Tigers

Obviously these are subject to change dependent on what rivalries are formed and what would be the most profitable for the clubs.

As for the finals, the Top 10 go through and they are played over 5 weeks. I don't think anyone can complain about another week of finals footy.

In the first week there are two elimination finals: 7 v 10 and 8 v 9
As well as two other matches:
3 v 6 and 4 v 5
The 1st and 2nd Teams get the week off.

Week 2 involves the winners of the elimination finals playing the losers of the two other matches from Week 1, in another elimination final.
The winners of the other matches play teams 1 and 2 for a week off.

From Week 3 it narrows down to two matches, the EF winners play the losers of the other matches in Knockout fixtures.

Week 4 is the Preliminary finals, where the winners from Week 3 play the winners from Week 2 that had Week 3 off.

Then of course, is the Grand Final.

I hope you enjoyed reading my detailed plan and look forward to hearing some feedback about it. Obviously it's all hypothetical and could only happen if the Legaue went perfectly with no Teams dropping out of the comp, and the game staying healthy in the junior and local sectors, where we need better development programs.

 

[Perth Red]

Central coast and Illawarra are not big enough or have enough corporates to sustain a club now we are moving to clubs needing revenues in the $20-25mill revenue range. Take a look at Newcastle and that is a much bigger population with a much better stadium.