What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

NRL and its clubs are expected to palm-off expansion until 2014 or 2015

Of the three favourites which two teams make the most sense?

  • Brisbane II

    Votes: 137 67.8%
  • Central Coast

    Votes: 55 27.2%
  • Western Australia

    Votes: 182 90.1%

  • Total voters
    202

ona2001

Juniors
Messages
29
As I live in the area and am involved with a junior club i nthe area I can tell you exactly whats happened. Almost all over 30 who remember the Bears wouldn't follow another team - they have become casual RL watchers at best of State of origin, finals etc, but have switched most focus to Swans and Waratahs. Bring the Bears back, this changes overnight.

This is translating to their kids - with no local NRL team representing the district, and no parents passionate about the game, there is no connection and less and less kids follow league also. Of those who do, allegiances are split on the lower north shore between mainly Souths, Roosters, Parramatta, St George, Tigers, Manly. In pretty close to that order, too, but NRL jerseys are rarely sighted these days around here. It all depends on which team is having a run of success - so last few years, more St George and Manly than would otherwise be the case. When their eras end, their support will fall.

There is a cultural divide and an access issue to Brookvale that precludes support for the Sea Eagles...they will never be the 'natural' team to follow, just one of a selection of peripheral options. Parents will be more inclined to take kids to a venue they can easily access and watch in comfort - currently none. A lot of the cultural divide is due to the Sea Eagles seige mentality "you hate us and we hate you'. So if you don't live on the peninsula, it means Manly hates you, so hardly an endearing enticement for undecided fans (or sponsors)!

David Gallop is fully aware of the lack of traction Manly have on the north shore and northern beaches - he has said as much himself with comments about the attraction of a team with a home ground that can be easily accessed via the north shore-Gosford rail link, and the attraction in reconnecting with all Bears fans lost to the game (over 40K in his words).

Brookvale is poorly located to cater for anywhere except the peninsula - surely no one can deny that, and because of this, they will always struggle financially and be unable to service there own area adequately, let alone northern Sydney and the Central Coast. I see Manly junior numbers are falling also, despite successful times. Every dollar (and more than they have) goes into the NRL squad, not grassroots or junior/other rep teams.

If you only had 1 team to fill northern Sydney and Central Coast, you'd locate it at Hornsby (or maybe Chatswood or Gosford). The last place you'd locate it is halfway up the peninsula which no one can access through sufficient capacity public transport except if you live on Pittwater Rd or access via ferry/bus from Circular Quay or express bus from the CBD.

Since we're stuck with Brookvale for one team, another team is needed to cover outside the peninsula, IF IT CAN PROVE IT WILL HELP, NOT HINDER. That's the challenge for the Bears bid team. Once you understand the mass transport system requirements and networks, its pretty straightforward!

You've summarised Manly's limited potential for growth outside the northern beaches assuming that is where they remain based well, but the Bears bid is making a major mistake in my opinion assuming a Central Coast based team will receive the support they think it will from Sydney's North Shore, or vice versa. The two regions are a significant distance apart geographically, socially and culturally and strategies in junior development, memberships, community engagement and sponsorships will require significantly different approaches in each area. My personal hunch is that a North Shore based team with a presence on the Central Coast could be viable, but not vice versa. The CC offers the best opportunities for community engagement and (current) junior development but just doesn't offer the same weight in future TV rights potential or local sponsorship dollars that a Sydney based club would.

While I think existing Sydney teams playing at Bluetongue fortnightly and at a family friendly time is the best way to serve the CC, the Bears can have a major presence in this area and gain from it but their base needs to remain further south, playing in all likelihood at the SFS, if they're to have the best chance of success.
 

Rockin Ronny

Juniors
Messages
1,769
It's remarkable how News Limited drivel is taken up as fact in teh expansion debate. News Limited dont want new clubs because it will cost them more - the value of the TV rights will go up.
So - in the last 11 years, a range of bullshit arguments have been made by ant-CC Bears people:
  • Too many teams
  • Not enough NRL standard players
  • Regional nSW
  • Not regional - really Sydney
  • Too close to Sydney
  • Too far away from Sydney
  • Doesn't add to TV rights
  • Adds to TV rights - but wrong area
  • Not expansion, consolidation needed
  • Expansion but we need consolidation.
Instead of parroting the crap from News Limited morons pushing their own agenda, let's have some facts. To start, Goddo, define what adds to TV rights value - you make big sweeping News Limited-style motherhood statements, but you never justify them.

PS: Macca from canberra - stay out of this. Go flip some burgers.
 

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
It's remarkable how News Limited drivel is taken up as fact in teh expansion debate. News Limited dont want new clubs because it will cost them more - the value of the TV rights will go up.

So - in the last 11 years, a range of bullshit arguments have been made by ant-CC Bears people:
  • Too many teams
  • Not enough NRL standard players
  • Regional nSW
  • Not regional - really Sydney
  • Too close to Sydney
  • Too far away from Sydney
  • Doesn't add to TV rights
  • Adds to TV rights - but wrong area
  • Not expansion, consolidation needed
  • Expansion but we need consolidation.
Instead of parroting the crap from News Limited morons pushing their own agenda, let's have some facts. To start, Goddo, define what adds to TV rights value - you make big sweeping News Limited-style motherhood statements, but you never justify them.

PS: Macca from canberra - stay out of this. Go flip some burgers.

& of course .. you aren't parrotting cr@p ... & know everything

when you come up with an actual fact
let us know

that is all ;-)
 

Rockin Ronny

Juniors
Messages
1,769
& of course .. you aren't parrotting cr@p ... & know everything

when you come up with an actual fact
let us know

that is all ;-)

They are facts, moron, it's what been said.
So, then - you answer the question - define precisely what adds value to TV rights in respect of expansion.

NOTE: Can you please stop saying "That is all" - it's lame and makes you look even more of a dildo.
 

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
They are facts, moron, it's what been said.
So, then - you answer the question - define precisely what adds value to TV rights in respect of expansion.

NOTE: Can you please stop saying "That is all" - it's lame and makes you look even more of a dildo.

so anything you read or hear ... in essence " whats been said " that is positive about the CC bears
is fact

& anything written or said that's negative about the bears
is

parroting the crap from News Limited morons pushing their own agenda

hmmmm

best we not take any notice of you , as those rose coloured glasses are super glued to your head

that is all ;-)
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
67,109
They are facts, moron, it's what been said.
So, then - you answer the question - define precisely what adds value to TV rights in respect of expansion.

NOTE: Can you please stop saying "That is all" - it's lame and makes you look even more of a dildo.

Not wanting to step into your personal argument but I would suggest:

New audience
Increasing audience
New time slot potential

as the key factors in terms of TV value.

The argument against the bears is that they don't tick any of those boxes as people who will watch RL on the CC/NS are already watching it where as Brisbane has been shown that when a Q'land team is involved more people watch the game and Perth adds the new audience/new time slot advantage.

I am saddened that we still have TV deciding the strategic vision of our game rather than the NRL laying out the future and then telling the TV companies what it is and what it will cost them. Do you really think the $1bill+ deal for AFL had anything to do with adding another NSW & Q'land team to their comp? Nope, in the short term those teams add nothing for TV companies beyond another game each round. However the AFL knows that 2 teams in NSW and 2 in Q'land along with their traditional states spread ties up the country for them from a national point of view and will pay dividends in 20+ years time.
 

bobmar28

Bench
Messages
4,304
They are facts, moron, it's what been said.
So, then - you answer the question - define precisely what adds value to TV rights in respect of expansion.

NOTE: Can you please stop saying "That is all" - it's lame and makes you look even more of a dildo.

Why don't we (IC) ask the networks?
 

Beowulf

Juniors
Messages
720
Not wanting to step into your personal argument but I would suggest:

New audience
Increasing audience
New time slot potential

as the key factors in terms of TV value.

The argument against the bears is that they don't tick any of those boxes as people who will watch RL on the CC/NS are already watching it where as Brisbane has been shown that when a Q'land team is involved more people watch the game and Perth adds the new audience/new time slot advantage.

Great to hear thats the argument against the Bears, because its one that can be easily proved/disproved......if the Bears can prove people aren't watching RL on the CC or north shore as much as they used to (or compared with areas with a RL team), and hence have potential for more viewers in a sponsor rich environment, they instantly lock up one expansion slot because of all the other advantages the Bears bring to the table - increased Sydney crowds, heritage brand, merchandise, demographic, support from QLD etc...
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
67,109
Great to hear thats the argument against the Bears, because its one that can be easily proved/disproved......if the Bears can prove people aren't watching RL on the CC or north shore as much as they used to (or compared with areas with a RL team), and hence have potential for more viewers in a sponsor rich environment, they instantly lock up one expansion slot because of all the other advantages the Bears bring to the table - increased Sydney crowds, heritage brand, merchandise, demographic, support from QLD etc...

It isn't actually that easy to answer from what I can see. How do you work it out? I guess you could look at viewing figures for say Cronulla, Penrith etc and Gosford/NS and see if they are similair ,but I don't think the metro stats actually break down like that so you probably can;t.

Then you have to guess at the potential audience of Perth, maybe 100-150k per game (guesstimates at best as potential is only useful if realised) and how many extra Q'landers tune in when a Brisbane teram is playing compared to 2 NSW teams (easier to do as those stats exist). Then you alos need to factor in advertising appeal, ie is it more appealing for an advertiser knowing their product will be seen in Gosford or Perth/Brisbane etc etc.

I would suggest it is actually quite hard to do with any accuracy so it will ultimately come down to what the TV execs want as much as anything.
 

bobmar28

Bench
Messages
4,304
It isn't actually that easy to answer from what I can see. How do you work it out? I guess you could look at viewing figures for say Cronulla, Penrith etc and Gosford/NS and see if they are similair ,but I don't think the metro stats actually break down like that so you probably can;t.

Then you have to guess at the potential audience of Perth, maybe 100-150k per game (guesstimates at best as potential is only useful if realised) and how many extra Q'landers tune in when a Brisbane teram is playing compared to 2 NSW teams (easier to do as those stats exist). Then you alos need to factor in advertising appeal, ie is it more appealing for an advertiser knowing their product will be seen in Gosford or Perth/Brisbane etc etc.

I would suggest it is actually quite hard to do with any accuracy so it will ultimately come down to what the TV execs want as much as anything.

I think I know what they want. Perth and SEQ.
 

Goddo

Bench
Messages
4,257
I think I know what they want. Perth and SEQ.
Well, Gyngel has said outright he wants another South East Queensland team if 9 are expected to pay more for Free to air rights. Perth has the obvious attractions of timezone for pay TV.

Its Perth and Brisbane's (which bid though?) to lose.
 

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,955
Gyngell can get f**ked tbh...about time we dictated terms to the networks, not the other way around.
 
Messages
4,765
Well, Gyngel has said outright he wants another South East Queensland team if 9 are expected to pay more for Free to air rights. Perth has the obvious attractions of timezone for pay TV.

And Channel 10/ONE want the CCBears should they get the rights.
 

Latest posts

Top