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

[El Diablo]

f**k the Bears

CC would be dumbest idea ever. that's not expanding

 

[Goddo]

Yep, no expansion is better than bad expansion.

 

[Bro Bear]

I suppose QLD is expanding!!!???

 

[Beowulf]

I suppose QLD is expanding!!!???

Yep, have to laugh every time I hear QLD is expansion but CC is not!

 

[AlwaysGreen]

I'll bet the NRL/IC know exactly which 2 areas they want for expansion. They'll take this to the broadcasters and say these two areas will have teams for the 2nd year of the contract.

Those areas WILL be Perth and Brisbane.

qft.

Which is why expansion has been put off, to ensure that the Perth and the best Brisbane bid are watertight. Its obvious that teams in Brisbane and Perth will help substantially with revenue and so in the long term assist existing clubs.

Sadly the Central Coast bid will not. I'll be called a hater but that's the truth, the CC bid may help the local economy but will do little to the broader wealth of the NRL. The decision will be one made for economic reasons, not nostalgic ones.

 

[Beowulf]

f**k the Bears

CC would be dumbest idea ever. that's not expanding[/QUOTE

Ignoring your foul language how can it be a dumb idea to:
- reward a heartland rugby league area
- reward one of the fastest growing population centres in NSW
- provide a team to over 1 million people that currently have no easy access to an NRL ground
- reward a proactive franchise that has driven the expansion debate, identified the importance of club memberships long before the NRL, has 100% finance, 7000 members and over 100 years experince running a top flight RL team
- heal an open wound in the game
- create 2 enormous derbies v Newcastle and Manly
- EXPAND the game by re-engaging with those lost to the game (estimated by D Gallop as over 40,000) who have little interest in RL UNLESS THEY HAVE A TEAM CALLED THE BEARS TO SUPPORT.

If St George Illawarra is a 'dumb' idea, then yes, Central Coast Bears is a dumb idea.

The game wants strong products, not weak ones. In NSW that means we need a strong Newcastle, Parra, Bulldogs, Rabbitohs, Dragons, Bears. Survival of the fittest will dictate who survives from the rest in Sydney....those that can't hack it will relocate or perish.

 

[nko11]

- heal an open wound in the game

The game wants strong products, not weak ones. In NSW that means we need a strong Newcastle, Parra, Bulldogs, Rabbitohs, Dragons, Bears. Survival of the fittest will dictate who survives from the rest in Sydney....those that can't hack it will relocate or perish.

So we should re-admit the Bears to heal an open wound, but then create another through alienation of a supporter group. I know you love the Bears, but the current teams should be the NRL's No.1 concern.

If St George Illawarra is a 'dumb' idea, then yes, Central Coast Bears is a dumb idea.

Would you clarify this point please...

- create 2 enormous derbies v Newcastle and Manly

IDK about this point... These clashes can get 20K Max. Whereas your competing bid (Brisbane bids)-(I think it's fair to compare) Will get 20K+ Dragons, Bulldogs 30K+ Titans, Cowboys and 50K+ Broncos...

 

[lturner]

The game wants strong products, not weak ones. In NSW that means we need a strong Newcastle, Parra, Bulldogs, Rabbitohs, Dragons, Bears. Survival of the fittest will dictate who survives from the rest in Sydney....those that can't hack it will relocate or perish.

The Central Coast Bears don't even exist as a real footy club. You blokes should get yourselves organised and actually join a league so your supporters have more to do than hang around internet forums living out fantasies, regaling the natives with tall tales about the second most popular team on TV (during the 90s).

I suggest making a bid to joining the second best league in the country, the Queensland Cup.

 

[duylm]

Exactly, clubs need to be told how things are going to be not the one's dictating. Otherwise it will always be about self interest, which is what I thought the IC was going to get away from.

So true. The day the 'independant' commission is influenced by self interested clubs is the day we should trash the whole concept entirely. They are supposed to make decisions for the greater good of the game. Just look at that fat load Shane Richardson. If it had been up to him we would have flushed all tv earnings and potential earnings from Monday night football straight down the toilet, just because he can't get his club to get HALF their members to turn up to home games at the best of times let alone MNF.

 

[Der Kaiser]

The talent is there and some. And no reason why Clubs couldnt look to bring in talent from Europe, PNG, Tonga, Samoa, Fiji and if need raid Union short term.
I would like the NRL and Gallop to grow some balls and be attacking in expansion instead of just standing still. The game and clubs are run often by people who are in the comfort zone and are too lazy to change or do much. The IC is a waste of time and any foll could see that it would take this long to sort out because people only care about themselves and not the game. This is why RL has never really expanded as people often live in a goldfish bowl and want to be the big fish. They are frightened that they have to change and be nobodies for the game to properly grow.

I would also like to change the whole format of the NRL. Have a 2 Conferences of 10 with Perth, Norths Sydney/Gosford, Wellington and Brisbane 2 coming in. The top 5 in each conference playing off and the winners meeting in the grand Final and the same with the bottom 5 with the winners of each playoff playing in a Minor Final. A big change but then it would be a far better system than what we currently have. The draw most seasons is a joke. Teams would at worst have 9 Regular home games and then playoff games split between the two competing clubs. More doesnt alwways mean better. People will watch Quality and want the stars to play. With teams missing 5 or 6 players due to SoO they dont feel its worth paying good money to watch reserve teams. Also clubs need to push themselves and not just think of "We need 13 home games to make ends meet". If they pushed themselves to get more fans in to games and to offer themselves as pro active rather than just be always moaning. Too many clubs are just treading water instead of making a real effort and improving the way they are.

The NRL should be pushing Clubs to be better run and getting more members in. frankly RL needs to be better run at all levels. Clubs getting less than 10,000 to games is not good enough. We can laugh at sports like AFL but they have fans who are commited and turn up to watch games. RL fans especially in Sydney are often too lazy to make the effort even to turn up at home games. Souths a few years ago had 10s of thousands on the street-but where are these people now? Clubs need to realize that they have to be pro active in bringing fans in, Sponsors in and not just relying on a big TV Contract.

 

[bobmar28]

I suppose QLD is expanding!!!???

Yes, they are league heartland and yet have only 3 teams to NSW's 10.

 

[Beowulf]

So we should re-admit the Bears to heal an open wound, but then create another through alienation of a supporter group. I know you love the Bears, but the current teams should be the NRL's No.1 concern.
Would you clarify this point please...
IDK about this point... These clashes can get 20K Max. Whereas your competing bid (Brisbane bids)-(I think it's fair to compare) Will get 20K+ Dragons, Bulldogs 30K+ Titans, Cowboys and 50K+ Broncos...

I'm not saying any team should go - I want all teams to survive, but demographic changes over time will necessarily see some teams in the future fold or relocate, a la Newtown, Glebe, Annandale etc......

Rather than lose one, whether it be in 5 or 30 years, wouldn't it be better to see a brand retained, like the Swans in AFL?

The IC's concern will be the betterment of the game, NOT solely a fiefdom to protect existing clubs, otherwise its not an IC. Yes, everything will be done within reason to exist existing clubs, but not to the detriment of the long term future.

Re crowd figures to clashes, don't forget full houses at Newcastle will get around 30K, Brookie, Bluetongue and NS Oval yes just over 20K, though Bluetongue will be extended for another 4K. The cost of staging at these venues is far less than Suncorp, hence more profitable unless you get 40K+ at Suncorp. Its not even about crowds, its about national interest - Bears v Manly will draw more general interest across Australasia than a Bris v Bris clash that would interest QLDers only.

 

[POPEYE]

The CC would have made sense if the Sharks had of relocated there when they had the chance. Now having either club is nonsensical with Manly where it is.

The fact is that the Roosters and Sharks must relocate even though it would not cause a ripple if Souths did. The Roosters would have the most to gain as their

following is second only to Souths Australia wide even if all they need is a phone box to house their game day supporters. The only team that would be taking a

slight risk in relocating would be the Sharks but the risk is greater where they are.

 

[Beowulf]

The Central Coast Bears don't even exist as a real footy club. You blokes should get yourselves organised and actually join a league so your supporters have more to do than hang around internet forums living out fantasies, regaling the natives with tall tales about the second most popular team on TV (during the 90s).

I suggest making a bid to joining the second best league in the country, the Queensland Cup.

I've a lot more to do - I volunteer at merchandise stands giving up time away from my family, manage a junior RL team and have put off going back to work for 6 months, extending parental leave, to help the cause. Many have done similar or more. What sacrifices have you made for your fav bid team? ZERO.

I think the Bears have enough experience under their belt with 103 years as the NS Bears in initially the premier state based and ultimately national comp. How much national club running experience has your fav bid team got? ZERO.

So how about you stop living your online fantasy and get out in the community and do some real work to make our game better, like the Bears are doing?

Thanks for helping to highlight just two of our strengths, passion and experience.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

. Its not even about crowds, its about national interest - Bears v Manly will draw more general interest across Australasia than a Bris v Bris clash that would interest QLDers only.

You're kidding, right? A manly v bears clash will only have interest for norths fans continuing to hold a grudge, historically no one else really cares about this match.

Brisbane V Brisbane has the potential to be the biggest derby in the NRL. The Broncos are hated by a lot of people in 'Australasia', for that reason alone thousands would tune in and turn up to watch the new boys give it to them.

 

[Goddo]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-gallop-confirms/story-e6frg7mf-1226078131081

No expansion in 2013, Gallop confirms
Brent Read
June 20, 2011

THE seven consortia bidding for entry to the NRL in 2013 were delivered a death blow yesterday when chief executive David Gallop expressed his personal view that the game's existing clubs should enjoy the fruits of the game's next broadcasting deal before new teams entered.

The final decision on expansion will fall to the independent commission, which is expected to take control of the game within weeks, but the inaugural eight commissioners are expected to take guidance from Gallop and the NRL clubs.

That advice is likely to mean no expansion in 2013, testing the resolve of the seven parties bidding to enter the premiership. Central Coast, Perth, Wellington, Central Queensland, Papua New Guinea and two bidders from southeast Queensland are jostling for the likely two places on offer.

The favourites are Perth, because of the advantageous time slot it provides for television, and one of the southeast Queensland bidders. However, the landscape could change if expansion is taken off the agenda for 2013.

The negative for bidding parties is that 2013 may be too soon, but the positive news is that they will know their fate when the new television deal is completed, either at the end of this year or early next year. Gallop confirmed expansion would need to form part of those negotiations.

Furthermore, he suggested, there would be at least two new sides in the competition by 2015.

"We certainly need to make some decisions around expansion," Gallop told ABC Grandstand.

"Personally, I would have thought we would get to 18 teams by 2015. It might come earlier, but we should be giving our existing clubs a couple of years of new television money to get themselves stable before we introduce new teams into the competition.

"I am just expressing that as a personal view that we will get there by 2015, perhaps before.

"That's what we should be doing some assumptions on, and make sure our existing 16 clubs share in the benefits of the new television deal for a couple of years."

The NRL and its clubs will finalise their stance at a meeting on July 21. The NRL has been working on a series of proposals to take to that meeting and The Weekend Australian revealed they would be formed on the basis of no expansion in 2013. The outcome of the meeting will then form the basis for recommendations by the NRL to the incoming commissioners.

The eight commissioners have been identified, although the Australian Rugby League and other stakeholders remain at loggerheads on the fate of western Sydney lawyer Jim Marsden.

The ARL wants Marsden on the commission rather than former Ansett and North Queensland director Mark Williamson.

Gallop said expansion teams would need up to two years to prepare for entry to the NRL, also indicating that expansion is no chance in 2013. "I think it's a minimum of 18 months to two years to really be ready to participate in the competition in a meaningful way," he said.

"By meaningful, I mean that they have community engagement and they have a playing roster that is competitive. I think we need to be planning it around the broadcasting negotiations -- that there will be a ninth game during the life of the contract."

The NRL and its clubs will also hammer out recommendations for the 2013 schedule and beyond at the July 21 meeting, with the possibility State of Origin could move to Monday nights.

Stand-alone Origin matches are unlikely to win support, although the Rugby League Professionals Association is likely to call for them.

 

[Sgt. Kabukiman]

You're kidding, right? A manly v bears clash will only have interest for norths fans continuing to hold a grudge, historically no one else really cares about this match.

Brisbane V Brisbane has the potential to be the biggest derby in the NRL. The Broncos are hated by a lot of people in 'Australasia', for that reason alone thousands would tune in and turn up to watch the new boys give it to them.

How many people will turn up to watch Souths vs Brisbane II at ANZ? Roosters vs Brisbane II at the SFS? Parra vs Brisbane II at Parramatta? If the Titans and Cowboys are any example, next to no-one. I suspect there might be just a few more people going along to watch Souths, the Roosters, Parra and the rest of the NSW teams play the Bears ;-)

 

[AlwaysGreen]

How many people will turn up to watch Souths vs Brisbane II at ANZ?

Seeing the POTL could only muster 8000 against the titans i'd say 7000 for the first couple of years with increases after this.

Roosters vs Brisbane II at the SFS? Parra vs Brisbane II at Parramatta? If the Titans and Cowboys are any example, next to no-one. I suspect there might be just a few more people going along to watch Souths, the Roosters, Parra and the rest of the NSW teams play the Bears ;-)

Until the novelty wears off and people realise that bringing back the bears was a mistake. The bears have been gone for 9 years, by the time 2015 comes along it will be 13. Anyone from age 18 down won't know or care about the bears history.(Except of cource the 1.1 million CC people who are just crazy about the bears :sarcasm. The bears needed to come back in 2007-8 to maintain relevance. Now they are just part of history whose memory survives only through the efforts of a passionate few. In that sense the bears and their supporters can be likened to Penny Farthing enthusiasts or Civil War recreationists. Harsh but true.

 

[Sgt. Kabukiman]

Until the novelty wears off and people realise that bringing back the bears was a mistake. The bears have been gone for 9 years, by the time 2015 comes along it will be 13. Anyone from age 18 down won't know or care about the bears history.(Except of cource the 1.1 million CC people who are just crazy about the bears :sarcasm. The bears needed to come back in 2007-8 to maintain relevance. Now they are just part of history whose memory survives only through the efforts of a passionate few. In that sense the bears and their supporters can be likened to Penny Farthing enthusiasts or Civil War recreationists. Harsh but true.

Yeah, let's just forget about the thousands of new Bears fans who will be created by the re-introduction of the team, and pretend that there aren't bucketloads of Bears fans who still love their team and are counting down the days until they come back. I guess if the Raiders folded tomorrow you'd jump straight onto another team and never look back :roll:

A major strength of the Bears bid is that they will get the support of one of the strongest and fastest-growing rugby league regions in the world, while also bringing together fans of a 103-year-old team that has a rich history. Brisbane II can only hope to mop up the dregs of rugby league fans that the Broncos and Titans have left behind, while leading to record-breaking low crowds for their games in Sydney.

 

[bluesbreaker]

Bye Bye Billion