"It’s very realistic to say that we’ll have a second team in Brisbane in 2023": V'landys

[flippikat]

The problem is that they need a 17th AND an 18th team to get a decent boost to TV money - there's your extra game each weekend.

In addition to that, a team in a timezone that's not eastern Australia opens more scheduling options.. and a LATER timeslot is preferable to an earlier one...

Gee, I wonder what 18th team that could point to...?

 

[Jim Rockford]

I'm really starting to think this guy is a Perth Red alt.

 

[Santino Patane]

I'm really starting to think this guy is a Perth Red alt.

Mate, give it up. You’re making a fool of yourself. Grow up and contribute outside of just hanging shit on someone, or just f**k off. You’re only entertaining yourself and there’s another term for that- wanking. And what’s the noun for that???

 

[Jim Rockford]

Wow, he's giving all his alts a workout today.

 

[The Great Dane]

Mate, give it up. You’re making a fool of yourself. Grow up and contribute outside of just hanging shit on someone, or just f**k off. You’re only entertaining yourself and there’s another term for that- wanking. And what’s the noun for that???

Thanks for that constable Patane.

 

[The Great Dane]

The NRL’s plans to launch a second Brisbane team in 2023 are hanging in the balance after ARLC chairman Peter V’landys revealed the Covid crisis could force expansion to be delayed.
V’landys is forging ahead with investigating the merits of a 17th club based in south east Queensland entering the NRL from 2023 when the game’s new free-to-air broadcast deal commences.

Meetings between the NRL and three bid teams – the Firehawks, Dolphins and Jets – were due to be held in Brisbane on Monday this week, but were cancelled due to government Covid restrictions.
The extreme measures will impact the NRL’s revenue streams and profitability for 2021 while also diverting attention from expansion.

The NRL was planning to make a decision on expansion for 2023 by the end of July, however it now appears inevitable the deadline will be pushed back.
At least one of the expansion bid teams believes 2024 is a more realistic date for a new team to launch due to the NRL’s more pressing priorities and the lingering uncertainty of Covid.

The NRL is nearing the pointy end of negotiations with Channel 9 over a new broadcast deal from 2023, with the result of that to decide whether expansion is financially viable.

V’landys said the cancellation of this week’s meetings would not have a huge impact and he had not given up hope of a 2023 launch date.

“I’m not worried about the delays – a couple of weeks in the scheme of things is neither here nor there,” he said.

“It gives us a chance to read the documents substantially more because there are mountains of documents.
“We will hold a special meeting of the board after the interviews. There won’t be much time lost.

“My theory is nothing is impossible. You’ve got to have a ‘can-do’ attitude. If it means 2024 then it’s 2024. If it’s 2023 it’s 2023.

“We’re not giving up on 2023 just yet but if the financial position worsens then we will have no option.

“The whole idea of having another team is to improve the revenues of the game. If it was going to be a burden you wouldn’t do it.

“It’s the overall economy you’d be worried about. There are certain conditions in the economy and our financial position we have to take into account.”
V’landys said expansion ultimately relied on what broadcasters were willing to pay.

“If we proceed or don’t proceed all depends on broadcast revenue,” he said.

“You can always put it back and start the new broadcast revenue from the next year but that’s not ideal.
“Our financial position at the moment is reasonably good considering the circumstances. A lot will depend on the next month or two. If things don’t go very well with Covid then naturally we will have to re-look at it.

“We will never put financial pressure on the game, never ever. We will always make the decisions for the best overall benefit of the game.

“If the next two or three months causes us to haemorrhage in finances then we will naturally have to look at it. I absolutely agree with that. I can’t see that happening, but if it did that’s being responsible.

“The broadcasters have got to provide the additional revenue or else it doesn’t proceed.

“We’ve been negotiating on that for quite a while. We will know that in the next couple of weeks. It will all come together and we can make an informed decision.

“As I’ve said from day one, the business case has to stack up and it’s got to be for the benefit of the game as a whole. If it’s not for the benefit of the game as a whole we’re not going to proceed.”
If a 17th club is given the green-light from 2023, they face a race to set up their operations and begin recruiting available players from November this year.

South Sydney CEO Blake Solly and Broncos chairman Karl Morris this week called for a decision on expansion to be delayed a year due to the uncertainty engulfing the game.

V’landys said the current clubs would be consulted before a decision was made.

“Expansion has been on the table for many years and this is the first time we’ve gone to this length to decide once and for all,” he said.

“We have got the courage to look at it, analyse it and if it’s beneficial to the game as a whole we will present that case to the club CEOs and chairs.

“That’s part of the process. We’re not going to make the decision without going to them, even though we don’t have to.

“We have to show that it’s to the full benefit of the game. If we can’t convince ourselves that step won’t need to proceed.”

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

Considering the absolute state that the game is in delaying expansion is probably a good thing.

Hopefully it'd give them time to come to their senses and realise that 17 teams is a stupid idea as well.

 

[flippikat]

Considering the absolute state that the game is in delaying expansion is probably a good thing.

Hopefully it'd give them time to come to their senses and realise that 17 teams is a stupid idea as well.

Good point.

If a 1 year delay gives the NRL time to make a quality, well-considered (don't laugh), strategic (look.. I said don't laugh) plan for teams 17 and 18 that maximises revenue and makes solid strides towards a truly national profile, then.. well.. (ok, you can have a chuckle if you want..) it might be a silver lining to this Covid cloud.

A rushed and/or rashly chosen and/or poorly executed 17th team could well be worse than no expansion at all.. especially if there's no road-map to an 18th team.

 

[The Great Dane]

Good point.

If a 1 year delay gives the NRL time to make a quality, well-considered (don't laugh), strategic (look.. I said don't laugh) plan for teams 17 and 18 that maximises revenue and makes solid strides towards a truly national profile, then.. well.. (ok, you can have a chuckle if you want..) it might be a silver lining to this Covid cloud.

A rushed and/or rashly chosen and/or poorly executed 17th team could well be worse than no expansion at all.. especially if there's no road-map to an 18th team.

I was more thinking that a year might give them time to realise that the 6 again rule is a cancer, that the whole philosophy taken to referring has been f**ked for a decade, that the salary cap obviously needs to be reworked, that junior development and grassroots funding is a joke, etc, etc, and that they could start making changes to those things before trying to sell the game to a new market.

In other words, maybe we shouldn't be too quick to present RL at it's worst to a new market.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Man somebody has their head firmly stuck in the sand...

Firstly, it's very hard to simply wave them away as 'fads' when there's been consistent growth over years.

Asserting that they'll never get the opportunity to see their teams play, A. isn't necessarily true anymore (all of the big leagues have seen the value in taking games abroad, and EPL teams and the NFL have already played exhibitions in Australia, the NBA helped facilitate Team USA coming to Australia, and other competitions will follow suit given time) and B. it is totally redundant in the modern world where they can watch every game live or on demand, interact directly with the club and on occasion players, buy their products, watch their media, etc, etc, without ever having to leave the comfort of their home.

The world, and how people interact with pro-sports in it, has changed, and those changes are facilitating massive movement in the sports market all over the world, and frankly, to deny that is to deny reality.

I mean f**k, how do we even define participation anymore!

I think it's safe to say that kids that pick up FIFA, Madden, NBA 2k, etc, are significantly more likely to develop an interest in said sport, and technically they are participating in the sport in some way, even if it's not in the traditional sense. Now I'm not quite sure what to make of that yet, as research needs to be done in that area, but I'm sure you can see what I'm getting at.

Every kid who plays soccer, basketball and gridiron games on the computer is investing their time and money into those sports, which takes their focus off AwFuL and NRL. The last thing our game can afford is to have a generation of kids not engaged. It's not enough to have kids saying they support an NRL club that they never watch or buy merchandise from. We need those kids watching avidly each week as they'll become paying spectators when they reach adulthood.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

The NRL’s plans to launch a second Brisbane team in 2023 are hanging in the balance after ARLC chairman Peter V’landys revealed the Covid crisis could force expansion to be delayed.
V’landys is forging ahead with investigating the merits of a 17th club based in south east Queensland entering the NRL from 2023 when the game’s new free-to-air broadcast deal commences.

Meetings between the NRL and three bid teams – the Firehawks, Dolphins and Jets – were due to be held in Brisbane on Monday this week, but were cancelled due to government Covid restrictions.
The extreme measures will impact the NRL’s revenue streams and profitability for 2021 while also diverting attention from expansion.

The NRL was planning to make a decision on expansion for 2023 by the end of July, however it now appears inevitable the deadline will be pushed back.
At least one of the expansion bid teams believes 2024 is a more realistic date for a new team to launch due to the NRL’s more pressing priorities and the lingering uncertainty of Covid.

The NRL is nearing the pointy end of negotiations with Channel 9 over a new broadcast deal from 2023, with the result of that to decide whether expansion is financially viable.

V’landys said the cancellation of this week’s meetings would not have a huge impact and he had not given up hope of a 2023 launch date.

“I’m not worried about the delays – a couple of weeks in the scheme of things is neither here nor there,” he said.

“It gives us a chance to read the documents substantially more because there are mountains of documents.
“We will hold a special meeting of the board after the interviews. There won’t be much time lost.

“My theory is nothing is impossible. You’ve got to have a ‘can-do’ attitude. If it means 2024 then it’s 2024. If it’s 2023 it’s 2023.

“We’re not giving up on 2023 just yet but if the financial position worsens then we will have no option.

“The whole idea of having another team is to improve the revenues of the game. If it was going to be a burden you wouldn’t do it.

“It’s the overall economy you’d be worried about. There are certain conditions in the economy and our financial position we have to take into account.”
V’landys said expansion ultimately relied on what broadcasters were willing to pay.

“If we proceed or don’t proceed all depends on broadcast revenue,” he said.

“You can always put it back and start the new broadcast revenue from the next year but that’s not ideal.
“Our financial position at the moment is reasonably good considering the circumstances. A lot will depend on the next month or two. If things don’t go very well with Covid then naturally we will have to re-look at it.

“We will never put financial pressure on the game, never ever. We will always make the decisions for the best overall benefit of the game.

“If the next two or three months causes us to haemorrhage in finances then we will naturally have to look at it. I absolutely agree with that. I can’t see that happening, but if it did that’s being responsible.

“The broadcasters have got to provide the additional revenue or else it doesn’t proceed.

“We’ve been negotiating on that for quite a while. We will know that in the next couple of weeks. It will all come together and we can make an informed decision.

“As I’ve said from day one, the business case has to stack up and it’s got to be for the benefit of the game as a whole. If it’s not for the benefit of the game as a whole we’re not going to proceed.”
If a 17th club is given the green-light from 2023, they face a race to set up their operations and begin recruiting available players from November this year.

South Sydney CEO Blake Solly and Broncos chairman Karl Morris this week called for a decision on expansion to be delayed a year due to the uncertainty engulfing the game.

V’landys said the current clubs would be consulted before a decision was made.

“Expansion has been on the table for many years and this is the first time we’ve gone to this length to decide once and for all,” he said.

“We have got the courage to look at it, analyse it and if it’s beneficial to the game as a whole we will present that case to the club CEOs and chairs.

“That’s part of the process. We’re not going to make the decision without going to them, even though we don’t have to.

“We have to show that it’s to the full benefit of the game. If we can’t convince ourselves that step won’t need to proceed.”

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

So expansion is only on the table to prop up ailing clubs who want the money, but not the competition that a new club will provide?

Is it in the game's best interest to have no representation in SA/WA and under-representation in SEQ and NZ just so Sydney can remain over saturated with 9 clubs it cannot support without NRL funding?

The double standards are going to drive kids outside of Sydney to fumbleball, soccer and any other sport that doesn't cater to one f**king city.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

The problem is that they need a 17th AND an 18th team to get a decent boost to TV money - there's your extra game each weekend.

In addition to that, a team in a timezone that's not eastern Australia opens more scheduling options.. and a LATER timeslot is preferable to an earlier one...

Gee, I wonder what 18th team that could point to...?

I reckon the NRL will go with Bris 2 and NZ 2 because it'll make the broadcast rights more valuable in the short-term, which is all they care about. A 2nd NZ team allows a game to be played in NZ in a prime time viewing slot each week. That's got to be good for the NZ broadcast rights. Adding Bris 2 and Perth does nothing for the NZ broadcast rights as it'll just lead to more games being broadcast into NZ at 9.30pm or later.

We need an administration that adds Bris 2, NZ 2 plus Perth and Adelaide.

What time would a game in Perth be played so that it's screened at a viewable hour in eastern Australia and New Zealand?

12pm Sunday at Perth Oval would work as it allows the game to be broadcast on Foxtel into the eastern states at 2pm and 4pm in NZ, and avoids clashes with the Dockers and Eagles. It's unfair on Perth, but that's the reality as the NRL is a Sydney-centric competition that is focussed on AEST and to a lesser degree, NZST.

 

[flippikat]

So expansion is only on the table to prop up ailing clubs who want the money, but not the competition that a new club will provide?

Is it in the game's best interest to have no representation in SA/WA and under-representation in SEQ and NZ just so Sydney can remain over saturated with 9 clubs it cannot support without NRL funding?

The double standards are going to drive kids outside of Sydney to fumbleball, soccer and any other sport that doesn't cater to one f**king city.

Outside AFL & NRL, there's no other sports league in the world that has such a concentration of teams in one city.

AFL have been able to mitigate that to a degree by their "focus on the big fish" strategy of going for state capitals, then derby-ising those cities.

The NRL has painted itself into a corner due to the plethora of Sydney clubs and a decent number of mid-size town/regional clubs.

I don't think enough people realise that some of the issues that spurred the creation of Superleague are still issues now.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Outside AFL & NRL, there's no other sports league in the world that has such a concentration of teams in one city.

AFL have been able to mitigate that to a degree by their "focus on the big fish" strategy of going for state capitals, then derby-ising those cities.

The NRL has painted itself into a corner due to the plethora of Sydney clubs and a decent number of mid-size town/regional clubs.

I don't think enough people realise that some of the issues that spurred the creation of Superleague are still issues now.

Many of the issues still exist and are growing stronger due to the self-interest of the clubs, especially the ones from Sydney. Things like the ARLC using the Queensland Gov to get more money from the NSW Gov to keep the GF in Sydney for another 20 plus years is the sort of thing that creates division and opens the door for AwFuL to eat into Queensland territory.

I'm glad Paul Kent brought up the Southern Sydney issue. Having two teams in Southern Sydney is insane. Both clubs have struggled for decades and have no possibility of competing with the big guns because they're cannibalising a small market. The ostrich response that Sydney fans put up whenever this subject is mentioned is the reason the game is f**ked irreparably, as actioned needed to take place 30 years ago, but won't happen until the game is either on its deathbed or never at all. By that time our competitors will be so far ahead of us that we'll be behind RL in England or worse, at France's level.

 

[MugaB]

Mate, give it up. You’re making a fool of yourself. Grow up and contribute outside of just hanging shit on someone, or just f**k off. You’re only entertaining yourself and there’s another term for that- wanking. And what’s the noun for that???

I actually like much of what jim says, and basically he points out most of what I'm thinking everytime i read most of PRs posts, seems that jims entertaining more folk than you think

 

[mongoose]

I actually like much of what jim says, and basically he points out most of what I'm thinking everytime i read most of PRs posts, seems that jims entertaining more folk than you think

So it's your Alt-account lol

 

[Pippen94]

Outside AFL & NRL, there's no other sports league in the world that has such a concentration of teams in one city.

AFL have been able to mitigate that to a degree by their "focus on the big fish" strategy of going for state capitals, then derby-ising those cities.

The NRL has painted itself into a corner due to the plethora of Sydney clubs and a decent number of mid-size town/regional clubs.

I don't think enough people realise that some of the issues that spurred the creation of Superleague are still issues now.

That's not true. Go look at soccer around the world

 

[flippikat]

That's not true. Go look at soccer around the world

The most stacked-in-one-city soccer league I could find was the English premier league - 6 out of 20 teams from London (just under a third). If you can find more slanted examples, I'd love to hear about them.. but a scroll through the top tiers of big soccer powers shows a decent geographical spread every time.

By the way, If we had a similar proportion of Sydney clubs as there are London clubs in the Premier League, we'd have FIVE.

Five Sydney clubs, plus Raiders, Knights, Broncos, Warriors, Cowboys, Storm & Titans is 12 teams.

Add Brisbane 2, Perth, Adelaide, NZ2 (through expansion and/or relocation) and you have 16 teams, with a geographical spread that's fit for some time to come.

Food for thought.

 

[MugaB]

So it's your Alt-account lol

No way a souths supporter i would never be, i have all my teeff

 

[Pippen94]

The most stacked-in-one-city soccer league I could find was the English premier league - 6 out of 20 teams from London (just under a third). If you can find more slanted examples, I'd love to hear about them.. but a scroll through the top tiers of big soccer powers shows a decent geographical spread every time.

By the way, If we had a similar proportion of Sydney clubs as there are London clubs in the Premier League, we'd have FIVE.

Five Sydney clubs, plus Raiders, Knights, Broncos, Warriors, Cowboys, Storm & Titans is 12 teams.

Add Brisbane 2, Perth, Adelaide, NZ2 (through expansion and/or relocation) and you have 16 teams, with a geographical spread that's fit for some time to come.

Food for thought.

Premier League isn't fixed plus there's more than that many pro teams in London

Football in London - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Here's Argentina league;

2021 Argentine Primera División - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

J league in Japan

2021 J1 League - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Jim Rockford]

No way a souths supporter i would never be, i have all my teeff

Just like I can't be a Penrith supporter as I'm not a dole-bludging Houso.