Ive Got it.....16 teams.

[simostorm]

Nrl or is it Erl....Eastern rugby league.
1.Melbourne Storm
2.Brisbane Broncos
3.Nth Qld Cowboys
4.NZ Warriors
5.St Ge/Illa Dragons
6.Wests Tigers
7.Souths Rabbits....possible move to Central Coast
8.Newcaslte Knights
9.Penrith Panthers
10.Canberra Raiders
11.Cro Sharks-possible Move to Perth Sharks
12.Parra possible move to-Adelaide Eels
13.Cant Bulldogs
14.Sydney Roosters
15.Manly Seaseagles.
16.New Team-Gold Coast or Wellinton not CC
Hows that, Its about time we become a National League and not a
Eastern League, it would mean moving two teams

 

[CycloneSteve]

Will never ever happen. There will never be any teams again in Perth or Adelaide. It was tried and failed. Plus you will never get any of those teams to move anyway.

 

[DIEHARD]

1 - Brisbane Broncos
2 - North Queensland Cowboys
3 - Gold Coast Dolphins
4 - Brisbane United (Whatever)
5 - Newcastle Knights
6 - Canberra Raiders
7 - New Zealand Warriors
8 - Southern Orcas
9 - Melbourne Storm
10 - St George Illawarra Dragons
11 - South Sydney Rabbitohs
12 - Canterbury Bulldogs
13 - Easts Roosters
14 - Wests Tigers
15 - Penrith Panthers
16 - Parramatta Eels
17 - Manly Sea Eagles
18 - Cronulla Sharks
19 - Central Coast Bears
20 - Perth Reds

Ultimately. Gold Coast first then Southern Orca...

 

[Follow Me Up To Carlton]

Umm who wants a national League anyway? It would be boring

ERL sounds fine to me. :thumn

 

[Front-Rower]

1 - Brisbane Broncos
2 - North Queensland Cowboys
3 - Gold Coast Dolphins
4 - Brisbane United (Whatever)
5 - Newcastle Knights
6 - Canberra Raiders
7 - New Zealand Warriors
8 - Southern Orcas
9 - Melbourne Storm
10 - St George Illawarra Dragons
11 - South Sydney Rabbitohs
12 - Canterbury Bulldogs
13 - Easts Roosters
14 - Wests Tigers
15 - Penrith Panthers
16 - Parramatta Eels
17 - Manly Sea Eagles
18 - Cronulla Sharks
19 - Central Coast Bears
20 - Perth Reds

Ultimately. Gold Coast first then Southern Orca...

20 Teams again You do that and the game will definately become a laughing stock. The game can not sustain 20 teams its been proven before and if implemented again would go broke. Lets face it I agree at least one team should be admitted to the competition or one team has to go but another 5 to come in thats silly.

Just because the controlling body is the National Rugby League doesn't mean its a NATIONAL game.

 

[Weasels Ripped My Flesh]

I think that Perth would be able to sustain a team - when the reds were around, Perth was a rugby league city on the rise - they had a great local competition, plenty of juniors, etc. Then the friggin' SuperLeague came around and messed all that up

 

[bartman]

It will be 10 years or more before we see attempts to try an NRL team in Adelaide or Perth again. The game is still recovering from the split and is not yet as healthy as when it decided to go to 20 teams last time.

And I think there will be a few clubs that don't survive the next ten years... so that might fit nicely.

Let's just get News Ltd to approve a sixteenth team first and see how it pans out from there?

 

[Vicious]

1 - Brisbane Broncos
2 - North Queensland Cowboys
3 - Gold Coast Dolphins
4 - Brisbane United (Whatever)
5 - Newcastle Knights
6 - Canberra Raiders
7 - New Zealand Warriors
8 - Southern Orcas
9 - Melbourne Storm
10 - St George Illawarra Dragons
11 - South Sydney Rabbitohs
12 - Canterbury Bulldogs
13 - Easts Roosters
14 - Wests Tigers
15 - Penrith Panthers
16 - Parramatta Eels
17 - Manly Sea Eagles
18 - Cronulla Sharks
19 - Central Coast Bears
20 - Perth Reds

Ultimately. Gold Coast first then Southern Orca...

20 Teams again You do that and the game will definately become a laughing stock. The game can not sustain 20 teams its been proven before and if implemented again would go broke. Lets face it I agree at least one team should be admitted to the competition or one team has to go but another 5 to come in thats silly.

Just because the controlling body is the National Rugby League doesn't mean its a NATIONAL game.

Why can`t the game sustain 20 teams????

 

[Front-Rower]

Vicious looked what happened to your team the Magpies.

Not even the most popular sport in this country AFL has a 20 team competition. Soccer the most played footy code in the country doesn't have a 20 team competition. What chance has Rugby League got? NONE.

Its struggles with a current 15 team competition. Look at the Gap with talent between the top 4 teams in the competition and the the rest.

Ofcourse things like the Cowboys run are going to happen its the law of averages that suggest things like this will happen. Also Vicious I assume you follow the Wests Tigers? They finished 9th on the ladder yet a team only 8 places higher then them on the table beat them 78-0 over two games.

 

[KFC]

I don't buy the "There's not enough talent to go around..." theory.

There's plenty of talent in the lower grades just itching for the opportunity to play 1st grade.

And no matter how many teams aree in the comp half of them are going to be in the lower sid eof the ladder.

 

[t-ba]

Err No...20 teams was given no chance by SL. It wasn't the flaws in that system (Mostly revolving around the number of Sydney Teams), it was Murdoch, Ribot and Moore who spelled the doom of that. In the long term a 20 team competition is sustainable. It will take some pain and some further Rationalisation in Sydney, but in the end it's quite possible with a well established business plan

A few points:
1) Operating costs are substantially lower in RL than they are AR.
2) The Sydney Clubs are nowhere near as f*cked financially as their AFL Melbourned counterparts.
3) Soccer might be the most played, but it certainly isn't the most watched. That honour is a dogfight between AR and RL.

 

[t-ba]

Vicious looked what happened to your team the Magpies.

Not even the most popular sport in this country AFL has a 20 team competition. Soccer the most played footy code in the country doesn't have a 20 team competition. What chance has Rugby League got? NONE.

Its struggles with a current 15 team competition. Look at the Gap with talent between the top 4 teams in the competition and the the rest.

Ofcourse things like the Cowboys run are going to happen its the law of averages that suggest things like this will happen. Also Vicious I assume you follow the Wests Tigers? They finished 9th on the ladder yet a team only 8 places higher then them on the table beat them 78-0 over two games.

So? The 13th placed beat 5 top 8 outfits...That's simply a consequence of the large offside. If the old 5m was in place, thrashings like that probably wouldn't have happened. It's good that sides get punished like that, because this season most of them lifted after a couple of spankings and added to the general unpredictability and evenness of the comp.

 

[Front-Rower]

1) Operating costs are substantially lower in RL than they are AR.

Because in RL you don't have travel to Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane and Sydney every second week. Most rubgy league teams travel by BUS.

3) Soccer might be the most played, but it certainly isn't the most watched. That honour is a dogfight between AR and RL.

Because the NATIONAL soccer leage was poorly managed. With teams being thrown into every city and the only ones to succeed where the Perth Glory because they had the guts to PROMOTE their own team. Not like Melbourne Storm.

Going back on the not enough talent issue how demoralising would it be for a team of up and comers to play for say Perth or Adelaide to get belted every week by teams such as the roosters or bulldogs.

Thats why 14 or 16 teams is PLENTY to have an elite competition with players who are really of 1st Grade standard.

Super League had the right idea when you really think about it, but the thing that was bad about their SUPER Idea was the fact they threw tonnes of money around and tried to kill off the tradition in the game.

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

We can keep the current 15 teams. Over time relocations we see it become a true national comp.

 

[t-ba]

Because in RL you don't have travel to Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane and Sydney every second week. Most rubgy league teams travel by BUS.

Most Certainly not. Ground Rental is the big issue, that's why Whitten Oval is getting an upgrade, so the Dogs can play in a smaller venue. Melbourne Clubs only travel by air 4-5 times a year at most, about as many times as a financially troubled Manly had to (Brisbane, Townsville, Melbourne, Auckland)

Because the NATIONAL soccer leage was poorly managed. With teams being thrown into every city and the only ones to succeed where the Perth Glory because they had the guts to PROMOTE their own team. Not like Melbourne Storm.

Perth Glory draw a smaller crowd than Melbourne, Travel More, have no TV money and are still a success. their turnover would be lucky to be on a par with Melbournes WITHOUT the NRL club grant or Unky Rupey's money. Certainly runs counter to the 'travel' argument you've presented. Unless of course they are winning NSL's driving across the Nullabor (And in the Football Kingz case...across, perhaps even under the ditch!) in a coach every second weekend :lol: . Just goes to show who succesful fiscally tightfisted management can be and should be an argument FOR a Perth Team (The Glory draw about 8000 after half a decade of...Glory! The Reds Drew about 7000 during seasons of woe and failure)

Going back on the not enough talent issue how demoralising would it be for a team of up and comers to play for say Perth or Adelaide to get belted every week by teams such as the roosters or bulldogs.

Thats why 14 or 16 teams is PLENTY to have an elite competition with players who are really of 1st Grade standard.

Super League had the right idea when you really think about it, but the thing that was bad about their SUPER Idea was the fact they threw tonnes of money around and tried to kill off the tradition in the game.

Why? Is there a natural limit on the number of first graders a system can produce? 20 teams, if the NRL so desired is quite sustainable. RL isn't as demographically handicapped as the AFL, as evidenced by the large numbers of Islanders playing the sport.

The Brisbane and Sydney AFL clubs weren't composed of local kids either. Still aren't for the most part.

Super League didn't have the Right idea. At the core of its ideal was the assassination of tradition.

 

[dimitri]

super league killed rl in perth and adelaide before it ever got started

we should go back there soon and put in much more effort

 

[nqboy]

Wests Tigers are a natural fit for Perth as are the Sharks for Adelaide.

 

[Front-Rower]

Because in RL you don't have travel to Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane and Sydney every second week. Most rubgy league teams travel by BUS.

Most Certainly not. Ground Rental is the big issue, that's why Whitten Oval is getting an upgrade, so the Dogs can play in a smaller venue. Melbourne Clubs only travel by air 4-5 times a year at most, about as many times as a financially troubled Manly had to (Brisbane, Townsville, Melbourne, Auckland)

Because the NATIONAL soccer leage was poorly managed. With teams being thrown into every city and the only ones to succeed where the Perth Glory because they had the guts to PROMOTE their own team. Not like Melbourne Storm.

Perth Glory draw a smaller crowd than Melbourne, Travel More, have no TV money and are still a success. their turnover would be lucky to be on a par with Melbournes WITHOUT the NRL club grant or Unky Rupey's money. Certainly runs counter to the 'travel' argument you've presented. Unless of course they are winning NSL's driving across the Nullabor (And in the Football Kingz case...across, perhaps even under the ditch!) in a coach every second weekend :lol: . Just goes to show who succesful fiscally tightfisted management can be and should be an argument FOR a Perth Team (The Glory draw about 8000 after half a decade of...Glory! The Reds Drew about 7000 during seasons of woe and failure)

Going back on the not enough talent issue how demoralising would it be for a team of up and comers to play for say Perth or Adelaide to get belted every week by teams such as the roosters or bulldogs.

Thats why 14 or 16 teams is PLENTY to have an elite competition with players who are really of 1st Grade standard.

Super League had the right idea when you really think about it, but the thing that was bad about their SUPER Idea was the fact they threw tonnes of money around and tried to kill off the tradition in the game.

Why? Is there a natural limit on the number of first graders a system can produce? 20 teams, if the NRL so desired is quite sustainable. RL isn't as demographically handicapped as the AFL, as evidenced by the large numbers of Islanders playing the sport.

The Brisbane and Sydney AFL clubs weren't composed of local kids either. Still aren't for the most part.

Super League didn't have the Right idea. At the core of its ideal was the assassination of tradition.

If you would of read what I said I said the problem with Super League was that they tried to bury the tradition in the game.

You look at the competition this year, how many quality first graders are there running around at for instance Parramatta, Souths, Cronulla, Wests lucky too be about 3 or 4 in each team.

You want to make the competition a 20 team national game, go ahead throw the money around, build the competition to a truly national comp. But when it all back fires and there is no more rugby league don't start crying and remember even the Swans don't get that much support here in Sydney when they have an OK year.

While I think of it to. I suppose you have never been to Perth. Every second TV add has Perth Glory players in it. Thats where their TV money comes from. I don't see to many Manly players on TV adds.

 

[BringBackBalmain!]

disgraceful that nobody has included balmian in thier 16 teams.

i think that if melbourne get a super 14 side then the storm will have to relocate.

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

We need teams in Perth and Adelaide soon otherwise we'll never get a piece of that market which will be a huge marketing and image advantage to the AFL in the long run.