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 Expansion. Ideas and opinions.

Who would you admit as the next team into the NRL?

  • Perth

    Votes: 75 57.7%
  • PNG

    Votes: 8 6.2%
  • Wellington/2nd NZ team

    Votes: 5 3.8%
  • Adelaide

    Votes: 6 4.6%
  • Darwin

    Votes: 1 0.8%
  • Fiji

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Central Coast

    Votes: 10 7.7%
  • Central Queensland/4th Queensland team

    Votes: 12 9.2%
  • Samoa

    Votes: 1 0.8%
  • Other (please specify)/No Expansion

    Votes: 12 9.2%

  • Total voters
    130
Messages
21,880
I think in the next 20 years if the NRL are smart we should have more than enough talent to have 20 teams, maybe 22. Hopefully we choose brands that will have their own place in the game. The Titans have never really forged their own identity. They're just there. Haven't really made a dent competitive-wise, no big rivalries, no controversies, struggle off the field etc. This compared to Melbourne who had to struggle for relevance in AFL-mad Victoria, were immediately successful, changed the game with their shitty wrestling tactics, cheated, then came back and won as well as having several of the best players of the era in their side.

Next 5 years:
West Coast Pirates (or Perth Pirates or whatever)
Brisbane Brothers (with some games in country QLD)

10-15 years:
West Brisbane Jets
South Pacific (Wellington-Christchurch-Dunedin-Fiji-Samoa)

15-20 years:
Central Coast Bears
Northern Hunters (Cairns-PNG)

Perth would have the benefit of a one-team state as well as the history of the Reds.

The extra Brisbane teams would have the history of teams in the QLD Cup and throughout the state in the case of Brothers. They aren't just brands that spring up out of nowhere like the Titans or Brisbane Bombers.

South Pacific would benefit from a team representing the rest of NZ, with the Warriors being almost exclusively Auckland. One game a year in Fiji & Samoa would give us greater representation in the islands and reward them for the great players and moments they've provided us with. They'd also have the obvious rivalry with the Warriors.

Central Coast has the bears behind them - the long struggle to get back in. A lot of fans would hate them as well judging by how many 'there's too many Sydney teams' arguments come up when their name is brought up. They'd have immediate conflict with Manly and Newcastle.

The Hunters would have 2 QLD Cup teams backing them as well as 2 reserve sides in the Pride and PNG Hunters. Players live and train in Cairns, play half their games in PNG.


Other possible options - Adelaide, 2nd Melbourne side, the Bears taking over Gold Coast or Perth etc. shouldn't be considered for a long time. Adelaide has nothing behind it, they shouldn't be considered over teams like Central Coast or PNG even if it is safer or 'geographical spread' to quote Greenberg. No need for Melbourne 2 ever really. Bears on the Gold Coast or West Coast instead of Central Coast won't have any support apart from the one game a year they want to play at North Sydney.


Only way the central coast is happening is an existing Sydney team moving there.

In 15-20 years their major bargaining chip, the stadium, will be 40 years old.
 

Springs09

Juniors
Messages
1,903
Only way the central coast is happening is an existing Sydney team moving there.

In 15-20 years their major bargaining chip, the stadium, will be 40 years old.

Yeah that's if there is only 18 spots up for grabs. If we ever have 22 sides I can't see an argument against it, we'd have 5 or 6 teams in QLD and 2 in NZ.

And I am yet to see what is so bad about old stadiums. Don't know why SFS needs an upgrade. ANZ needs one because it's not rectangular. Gosford is great for footy and if it is still in good condition in 15 years, why is age a negative against it? Most of the grounds I went to in England were decades old if not 100+.
 
Messages
21,880
Yeah that's if there is only 18 spots up for grabs. If we ever have 22 sides I can't see an argument against it, we'd have 5 or 6 teams in QLD and 2 in NZ.

Assuming the current 16 stay, I’d have these teams before the central coast.

Perth
Brisbane 2
Queensland 5
NZ 2
PNG
Adelaide

Adelaide will be tougher than some of the other markets, but we’ve seen some pretty decent crowds down there of recent. We also have the state of origin going there in 2020. Single city of 1.5 million plus is a better option than the central coast.

Honestly though I think 22 teams is really stretching it, there’ll be a significant amount of meaningless games being played at that point.

If the population does grow as is being predicted, perhaps promotion & relegation might be an option in the future? Best way to avoid too many meaningless games.

And I am yet to see what is so bad about old stadiums. Don't know why SFS needs an upgrade. ANZ needs one because it's not rectangular. Gosford is great for footy and if it is still in good condition in 15 years, why is age a negative against it? Most of the grounds I went to in England were decades old if not 100+.

I think there’s several reasons. Modern buildings often aren’t built to the same standards as older ones were, the modern consumer also wants more for their dollar. Modern stadiums are competing against the TV broadcasts for consumers, if they don’t provide something special, they’re going to struggle.

Central coast is going to look pretty old hat when you see the new parramatta stadium, signtlines will blow it out of the water.

Re the SFS. On the surface it may seem fine, but there’s more to it.

It has significant issues with

- Corporate facilities (in the wrong position)
- female toilets & change rooms
- undercover seating
 
Last edited:

Springs09

Juniors
Messages
1,903
Assuming the current 16 stay, I’d have these teams before the central coast.

Perth
Brisbane 2
Queensland 5
NZ 2
PNG
Adelaide

Adelaide will be tougher than some of the other markets, but we’ve seen some pretty decent crowds down there of recent. We also have the state of origin going there in 2020. Single city of 1.5 million plus is a better option than the central coast.

Honestly though I think 22 teams is really stretching it, there’ll be a significant amount of meaningless games being played at that point.

If the population does grow as is being predicted, perhaps promotion & relegation might be an option in the future? Best way to avoid too many meaningless games.



I think there’s several reasons. Modern buildings often aren’t built to the same standards as older ones were, the modern consumer also wants more for their dollar. Modern stadiums are competing against the TV broadcasts for consumers, if they don’t provide something special, they’re going to struggle.

Central coast is going to look pretty old hat when you see the new parramatta stadium, signtlines will blow it out of the water.

Re the SFS. On the surface it may seem fine, but there’s more to it.

It has significant issues with

- Corporate facilities (in the wrong position)
- female toilets & change rooms
- undercover seating


There has barely been a whisper out of Adelaide. If they actually had good support behind a bid like Perth, then sure. But as of now, when it comes to what will bring the greatest benefit to the code in terms of support and juniors, Central Coast is ahead. Any team in Adelaide would be a plastic thing thrown together. I don't see why we should ignore an area that has a well-supported bid and is a great junior nursery for a city that hasn't shown any interest beyond attending a couple of one-off games, just for the sake of a dot on the map. The other bids all have significant reason why they should be considered over Central Coast, Adelaide does not.

The stadium might look old compared to the one new stadium we have in Sydney, but it looks better than damn near every other stadium that Sydney teams play out of - Brookvale, Cronulla, Penrith, Leichhardt, Campbelltown, ANZ. There's no reason why if these grounds are still being used in 15 years that Central Coast couldn't be used as a full-time home ground for a team. There's also no reason why it couldn't be upgraded.

Those are issues but I don't see why it needs a total rebuild. Those issues could be fixed without one.
 
Messages
21,880
There has barely been a whisper out of Adelaide. If they actually had good support behind a bid like Perth, then sure. But as of now, when it comes to what will bring the greatest benefit to the code in terms of support and juniors, Central Coast is ahead. Any team in Adelaide would be a plastic thing thrown together. I don't see why we should ignore an area that has a well-supported bid and is a great junior nursery for a city that hasn't shown any interest beyond attending a couple of one-off games, just for the sake of a dot on the map. The other bids all have significant reason why they should be considered over Central Coast, Adelaide does not.

We’re talking 20 years time though, that’s enough to build up some systems behind the team.

Juniors on the central coast can be managed without an NRL team anyway, they are in many locations. Roosters are doing some work up that way right now.


The stadium might look old compared to the one new stadium we have in Sydney, but it looks better than damn near every other stadium that Sydney teams play out of - Brookvale, Cronulla, Penrith, Leichhardt, Campbelltown, ANZ. There's no reason why if these grounds are still being used in 15 years that Central Coast couldn't be used as a full-time home ground for a team. There's also no reason why it couldn't be upgraded.

I’m just saying that the stadium becomes less appealing as time goes on. It was a huge selling point for a team 15 years ago, much better than most Sydney stadiums, and it still failed to pull a full time team.

Big issue with the central coast is the lack of corporate support.

Those are issues but I don't see why it needs a total rebuild. Those issues could be fixed without one.

The biggest issues with Allianz stadium is the rebuild to 45k seats & $730m being spent on it.

All it needs is another version of the new parramatta stadium, which actually wouldn’t be much more expensive than major remodeling work.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,982
Adelaide is an interesting one. You could take a top down approach and put a nrl team in then use that to build the grass roots and interest in a Melbourne storm way but, like a gws, it would take significant nrl investment. Or you could work on raising profile of game, investing in grass roots development, more showcase games and aim for a viable club their in 20 years. Given the nrl is not an aggressive expansion organisation by any stretch of the imagination I doubt they will do option 1 and have my doubts they even have enough strategy in them for growth to tackle the second approach.

I dont think people realise WA has had a reasonable RL grass roots foundation since the mid 50’s and has consistently won the affiliated states championships for years. It is ahead at grass roots level of every other non heartland state. It also has a good stadium, millionaire backers and a fanbase h guy for top level action. Compared to pretty much every other expansion option it is a long way ahead IF the nrl really wants to develop a national competition,
 
Messages
17,542
Adelaide is an interesting one. You could take a top down approach and put a nrl team in then use that to build the grass roots and interest in a Melbourne storm way but, like a gws, it would take significant nrl investment. Or you could work on raising profile of game, investing in grass roots development, more showcase games and aim for a viable club their in 20 years. Given the nrl is not an aggressive expansion organisation by any stretch of the imagination I doubt they will do option 1 and have my doubts they even have enough strategy in them for growth to tackle the second approach.

I dont think people realise WA has had a reasonable RL grass roots foundation since the mid 50’s and has consistently won the affiliated states championships for years. It is ahead at grass roots level of every other non heartland state. It also has a good stadium, millionaire backers and a fanbase h guy for top level action. Compared to pretty much every other expansion option it is a long way ahead IF the nrl really wants to develop a national competition,
And hopefully they wait until you are gone before making the move into Perth
 

mistertaylor

Juniors
Messages
415
Modern buildings often aren’t built to the same standards as older ones were, the modern consumer also wants more for their dollar. Modern stadiums are competing against the TV broadcasts for consumers

If the NRL want more people to attend games in person, the answer is simple. Lower ticket prices, especially in GA sections.
 

King hit

Coach
Messages
14,092
Perth is so far ahead of Adelaide expansion it isn't funny. Perth has junior players, some sort of League history and some interest. In South Australia Rugby League is foreign. I've never meet anybody from there who knew the Adelaide Rams existed or knew there were 2 different codes of Rugby.
 
Messages
21,880
If the NRL want more people to attend games in person, the answer is simple. Lower ticket prices, especially in GA sections.

That’s definitely a big part of it.

But people aren’t going to sit in the rain no matter how cheap it is. Just one example of why our stadiums need to modernise.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,977
If the NRL want more people to attend games in person, the answer is simple. Lower ticket prices, especially in GA sections.

Yeah as Perth Red said the last while has me thinking it is not that simple. I think you would need to drop prices significantly plus advertise the hell out of that fact before people (at least people in Sydney) are even aware of it.
 

mistertaylor

Juniors
Messages
415
Herbert - adverse weather conditions will always have an impact on crowd attendances. Modernising a stadium by putting a roof on it, or having top notch wifi, won't do much to improve attendances either.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,982
Herbert - adverse weather conditions will always have an impact on crowd attendances. Modernising a stadium by putting a roof on it, or having top notch wifi, won't do much to improve attendances either.

Putting a roof on it will dramatically reduce the impact of poor weather!
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,982
With modern society being as soft as it is it won’t hurt to have a full roof. And generally the game is a better spectacle in the dry.
 

Springs09

Juniors
Messages
1,903
I'm pretty sure it's the journey to the ground, not the ground itself, that turns away spectators during poor weather. Yes they are soft but if it was just about sitting in the rain then we'd see a lot more in the upper stands.

Better spectacle shouldn't come into it. Taking wind and rain and heat out of the picture takes out so many variables teams have to adapt to. Good defence and handling in the wet can be just as good a spectacle as a dry weather game.
 

mistertaylor

Juniors
Messages
415
Not feasible to out a roof on every ground.

Unless all the Sydney teams are happy to play out of a single roofed venue, eg a redevelooed ANZ Stadium?
 

Latest posts

Top