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

[Jamberoo]

I remember when people used to say almost exactly the same things about Melbourne.

Good job people didn't listen to that nonsense back then otherwise you wouldn't have a team...

Melbourne was never a small nor slow growing city. And it is not nearly as AFL obsessed as Adelaide.
But if ‘they’ used to say that Melbourne would produce small ratings and no RL players. Then yes, they were right. Melbourne has always had a population comparable with Sydney and has always been three times the size of Adelaide.
Which makes Adelaide a bad idea.
Perth is different, and a maybe for an NRL team because:-
- it has double Adelaide’s population
- more diverse sporting tastes
- far less AFL obsessed.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Melbourne was never a small nor slow growing city. And it is not nearly as AFL obsessed as Adelaide.
But if ‘they’ used to say that Melbourne would produce small ratings and no RL players. Then yes, they were right. Melbourne has always had a population comparable with Sydney and has always been three times the size of Adelaide.
Which makes Adelaide a bad idea.
Perth is different, and a maybe for an NRL team because:-
- it has double Adelaide’s population
- more diverse sporting tastes
- far less AFL obsessed.

Is Adelaide really more of a fumbleball city than Melbourne?

Who would win in an origin fumbleball game between SA and Vic? Would it even be competitive?

I'd imagine they're both similar, with the exception of Adelaide having only 2 teams whereas Melbourne has 9. Melbourne also has 1 RL club, 1 RU club, 3 soccer clubs, 2 cricket clubs and 2 basketball clubs. Adelaide has one basketball club, 1 soccer club and 1 cricket club. There's room for 1 RL club in Adelaide.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Is Adelaide really more of a fumbleball city than Melbourne?

Who would win in an origin fumbleball game between SA and Vic? Would it even be competitive?

I'd imagine they're both similar, with the exception of Adelaide having only 2 teams whereas Melbourne has 9. Melbourne also has 1 RL club, 1 RU club, 3 soccer clubs, 2 cricket clubs and 2 basketball clubs. Adelaide has one basketball club, 1 soccer club and 1 cricket club. There's room for 1 RL club in Adelaide.

They have an 10 team local rules comp also which has a rich history. The pre covid GF drew 40,000.

Adelaide is just as obsessed with Aussie Rules as Melbourne, possibly even more so.

 

[Jamberoo]

Is Adelaide really more of a fumbleball city than Melbourne?

Who would win in an origin fumbleball game between SA and Vic? Would it even be competitive?

I'd imagine they're both similar, with the exception of Adelaide having only 2 teams whereas Melbourne has 9. Melbourne also has 1 RL club, 1 RU club, 3 soccer clubs, 2 cricket clubs and 2 basketball clubs. Adelaide has one basketball club, 1 soccer club and 1 cricket club. There's room for 1 RL club in Adelaide.

Yes, if Melbourne is 95% AFL, then Adelaide is 99%.
SA has a 36% win/loss ratio in AFL origin games even though Vic has four times SA’s population. Per capita, it is the AFL capital.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

They have an 10 team local rules comp also which has a rich history. The pre covid GF drew 40,000.

Adelaide is just as obsessed with Aussie Rules as Melbourne, possibly even more so.

That's scary.

 

[The Great Dane]

Melbourne was never a small nor slow growing city. And it is not nearly as AFL obsessed as Adelaide.
But if ‘they’ used to say that Melbourne would produce small ratings and no RL players. Then yes, they were right. Melbourne has always had a population comparable with Sydney and has always been three times the size of Adelaide.
Which makes Adelaide a bad idea.
Perth is different, and a maybe for an NRL team because:-
- it has double Adelaide’s population
- more diverse sporting tastes
- far less AFL obsessed.

Blah, blah, blah, people have said this same shit in dozens of sports about dozens of things, and it’s always proven wrong given time and resources.

‘Baseball will always be “America’s favourite pastime”’, ‘hockey doesn’t work in the desert’, ‘soccer will never build a sustainable pro comp in the US’, ‘Aussie rules will never crack “the northern states”’, ‘MMA will never compete with boxing’, ‘the Storm won’t survive in Melbourne’, etc, etc, etc, all of it BS.

The reality is that if you have a good product people will buy it no matter where they are from or what the history is, and one cursory look at the Rams early success proves that can also be the case for RL in SA if we ever take the time to nurture it.

 

[The Great Dane]

They have an 10 team local rules comp also which has a rich history. The pre covid GF drew 40,000.

Adelaide is just as obsessed with Aussie Rules as Melbourne, possibly even more so.

Yes, if Melbourne is 95% AFL, then Adelaide is 99%.
SA has a 36% win/loss ratio in AFL origin games even though Vic has four times SA’s population. Per capita, it is the AFL capital.

None of that is surprising given that Aussie rules has never had a serious competitor in the SA market.

It’s easy to dominate the winter sports market when you’ve effectively had a monopoly on it for 150 years.

 

[Jamberoo]

Blah, blah, blah, people have said this same shit in dozens of sports about dozens of things, and it’s always proven wrong given time and resources.

‘Baseball will always be “America’s favourite pastime”’, ‘hockey doesn’t work in the desert’, ‘soccer will never build a sustainable pro comp in the US’, ‘Aussie rules will never crack “the northern states”’, ‘MMA will never compete with boxing’, ‘the Storm won’t survive in Melbourne’, etc, etc, etc, all of it BS.

The reality is that if you have a good product people will buy it no matter where they are from or what the history is, and one cursory look at the Rams early success proves that can also be the case for RL in SA if we ever take the time to nurture it.

So everything is proven wrong? Where do you draw the line then? Should Hobart have a team? Geelong?

NRL does not have the resources for an Adelaide team. It would be a massive financial drain, as it was for News Ltd in 97/98. Adelaide does not have the QLD/NSW/NZ ex-pats like Melbourne. These people make up the core of Storm's supporter base.
There is no push from anyone in SA to have a team. There are 17 teams (not clubs) in SA. That is 220 people actually playing RL (not tag). It is virtually non-existent.
Perhaps priority should go to cities/bids that have the infrastructure and financial backing to run an NRL club.
Yes - Brisbane 2
Maybe - Brisbane 3, NZ 2, Perth
No - Adelaide and anywhere else.

 

[Perth Red]

So everything is proven wrong? Where do you draw the line then? Should Hobart have a team? Geelong?

NRL does not have the resources for an Adelaide team. It would be a massive financial drain, as it was for News Ltd in 97/98. Adelaide does not have the QLD/NSW/NZ ex-pats like Melbourne. These people make up the core of Storm's supporter base.
There is no push from anyone in SA to have a team. There are 17 teams (not clubs) in SA. That is 220 people actually playing RL (not tag). It is virtually non-existent.
Perhaps priority should go to cities/bids that have the infrastructure and financial backing to run an NRL club.
Yes - Brisbane 2
Maybe - Brisbane 3, NZ 2, Perth
No - Adelaide and anywhere else.

That's largely because the game has been totally neglected there. Adelaide is currently where Perth was in 1998-2005. Our player numbers were down below 750, clubs were closing down and the game was on its arse. Eventually through investment by NRL and third parties, appointment of a very capable WARL CEO, bringing NRL regular games to Perth and talk of expansion the game got itself back on its feet to the point where it is now a viable expansion option. Id be surprised if the NRL spends more than $250k a year on the game in Adelaide, but they are happy to take the South Australians millions for taking a SOO game there! If AFL can get a foothold in Western Sydney I'm pretty damned sure NRL could in SA for a lot less investment!

 

[The Great Dane]

So everything is proven wrong? Where do you draw the line then? Should Hobart have a team? Geelong?

Could Hobart and Geelong support NRL teams; no probably not, but that's because of economic realities not some BS fantasy that people from Hobart and Geelong are indoctrinated to be Aussie Rules fans and couldn't possibly take an interest in RL.

In other words it's a red herring that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

NRL does not have the resources for an Adelaide team. It would be a massive financial drain, as it was for News Ltd in 97/98. Adelaide does not have the QLD/NSW/NZ ex-pats like Melbourne. These people make up the core of Storm's supporter base.
There is no push from anyone in SA to have a team. There are 17 teams (not clubs) in SA. That is 220 people actually playing RL (not tag). It is virtually non-existent.
Perhaps priority should go to cities/bids that have the infrastructure and financial backing to run an NRL club.
Yes - Brisbane 2
Maybe - Brisbane 3, NZ 2, Perth
No - Adelaide and anywhere else.

On top of their average grants it cost News and the NRL roughly $120mil spread over 15 years to get the Storm to where they are, and News paid the vast majority of that. In the grand scheme of things that is just a drop in the ocean, and even if we assume that it would cost significantly more than that to achieve similar results in Adelaide (which I highly doubt unless the team is perennial losers), the NRL could easily afford it.

The only reason that RL is so small in SA is because it's been left to fend for it's self it's whole existence. As I said before; it's not surprising that the AFL dominants SA when Aussie Rules has effectively had a monopoly on the winter sports market in SA for 150 years.

The Ram's attendance numbers in 1997 prove that if you break that monopoly people will take an interest, and before you say it, yes their numbers effectively halved in 98, but every team struggled in that time and any team's numbers would halve if it was made clear to them that the team wouldn't be around next season.

 

[mongoose]

Melbourne was never a small nor slow growing city. And it is not nearly as AFL obsessed as Adelaide.
But if ‘they’ used to say that Melbourne would produce small ratings and no RL players. Then yes, they were right. Melbourne has always had a population comparable with Sydney and has always been three times the size of Adelaide.
Which makes Adelaide a bad idea.
Perth is different, and a maybe for an NRL team because:-
- it has double Adelaide’s population
- more diverse sporting tastes
- far less AFL obsessed.

Maybe i'm wrong but Adelaide may not be as snobby towards Rugby league as Melbourne is. You may get a greater percentage of converts in Adelaide who support AFL and League. I think there a lot of people in Melbourne who will never follow League cause they see it as a Sydney game and vice versa, a lot of Sydney people will never follow AFL cause its a Melbourne game. Adelaide doesn't have those hang ups. Most people in Adelaide would probably be happy to have another national sports team to follow, not saying it wouldn't require a lot of time and effort.

 

[Jamberoo]

Well in the unlikely event that Adelaide ever get an NRL team, hope that you all are right and I am wrong.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Well in the unlikely event that Adelaide ever get an NRL team, hope that you all are right and I am wrong.

The only way I can see it happening any time soon is if a major businessman and SA Gov threw a shitload of money at a team that's on death door, on the provision they relocate permanently to Adelaide, but the odds of it happening are minuscule. There's a better chance of winning Powerball and Gold Lotto in the same week.

 

[Perth Red]

The only way I can see it happening any time soon is if a major businessman and SA Gov threw a shitload of money at a team that's on death door, on the provision they relocate permanently to Adelaide, but the odds of it happening are minuscule. There's a better chance of winning Powerball and Gold Lotto in the same week.

Thats the real problem, the NRL shouldn't be concerned about soon for Adelaide but they should have a growth strategy that makes it a possibility in the next ten years. Sadly its so concerned with small suburbs in Sydney and what Ch9 and Fox want now that it has no big picture vision or long term strategy for the game.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Thats the real problem, the NRL shouldn't be concerned about soon for Adelaide but they should have a growth strategy that makes it a possibility in the next ten years. Sadly its so concerned with small suburbs in Sydney and what Ch9 and Fox want now that it has no big picture vision or long term strategy for the game.

It's shit that a kid's ability to be an RL fan in this country is determined by where they're born and raised.

 

[MugaB]

Well in the unlikely event that Adelaide ever get an NRL team, hope that you all are right and I am wrong.

They already had one, in the first year of the NRL

 

[Perth Red]

They already had one, in the first year of the NRL

Rams are a foundation club lol

 

[MugaB]

Rams are a foundation club lol

Yes that is correct, although they aren't around at top light along with norths

 

[parrawentyfan]

The other thing Adelaide has going for it is that it has also been neglected by union. Melbourne and even Perth have been nurtured more.

So there is a chance to get people interested in any of the 'rugbies' because the other one isn't around.

 

[Perth Red]

The other thing Adelaide has going for it is that it has also been neglected by union. Melbourne and even Perth have been nurtured more.

So there is a chance to get people interested in any of the 'rugbies' because the other one isn't around.

don’t know about that, grassroots looks bigger than league in melbourne

https://sa.rugby/