NRL: Lets talk about relocating teams, says QRL boss.

[Teddyboy]

All except
Souths
Bulldogs
Eels
Knights
Dragons
Roosters

They can stay in nrl, rest can play in the nswrl championship with the bears and jets

Roosters can go full time to Central Coast, St.George to Illawarra and Souths back to the SFS or expand the 5000 seater at Redfern...no brainer.

 

[j5o6hn]

I would relocate the Eastern Suburbs to South Australia Adelaide is a nice place I hear then let them work to set up there own juniors ect & have to actually look after their Junior clubs instead of buying other peoples

 

[DlEHARD]

Relocating Sydney teams to QLD would be an insult and a disaster.

 

[The Great Dane]

Relocating Sydney teams to QLD would be an insult and a disaster.

I don't think that anybody was suggesting that any teams should be relocated to Queensland...

 

[The Great Dane]

Personally I think that relocation is a bad idea, but if you were going to do it the best way to do it would be to do it in a way that would have the least impact possible on the clubs, so a small restructure of Sydney to start, then if necessary big relocation to other cities.

For example instead of relocating Cronulla as is often suggested, force the Dragons to move full-time to the Gong (maybe minus a couple of big games like the ANZAC day game that they can keep in Sydney), then force the Sharks to broaden their focus to all of the surrounding regions of Sydney (including all the traditional Dragons areas in Sydney) instead of just the Shire, and make them represent the fact that they aren't just the Cronulla Sharks anymore with a minor re-brand so that their brand encompasses that whole region as well. Then if all goes well in a couple generations you'd have a 'South Sydney' team and a South Coast team where you used to have two teams fighting over what is effectively the same patch of turf.

Take Manly, they're stuffed at the moment, but relocating the only club north of the Bridge to the other side of the country would be a dumb idea, so instead of doing that the NRL should buy the club back from the Penn family, then restructure it into the 'North Sydney' club and re-brand to represent that fact, piss the Bears off when they try to intervene and meddle, then once the club is stable and relatively established sell it on to the highest bidder with the understanding that the club must focus on all of NS. Then in a couple generations instead of having a tiny club on the Norther Beaches ignoring the rest of North Sydney you'd have the making of a relatively big club that represents the whole region.

If the NRL was really going to push relocation then stuff like that is where they should start. There're other areas where the solutions aren't so simple like 'East Sydney' (one of either Souths or the Rooster probably have to pack up and leave), and figuring out who stays, who goes, where and how they stay, where they go, in Western Sydney will be a nightmare for all involved, and that is where you're big relocations would come from, but even then there're probably a few solutions (like Tigers to Campbelltown/South West Sydney full time) that could be explored.

 

[Perth Red]

The gong isnt big enough to support an nrl team, nor is Gosford. There simply is t the population or corporate support in these smaller cities.

 

[The Great Dane]

The gong isnt big enough to support an nrl team, nor is Gosford. There simply is t the population or corporate support in these smaller cities.

True, but if the Sydney market wasn't a completely over crowded mess then the NRL could afford to allow smaller markets like the South Coast or Central Coast to lean on it to help support their teams without the added pressure further f**king an already completely f**ked situation, and if in this scenario excess clubs from Western Sydney and Eastern Sydney are being shipped off to other markets then suddenly the NRL would have the privilege to allow a club or two to lean in on the Sydney market without the added pressure causing to many headaches.

 

[Diesel]

Take Manly, they're stuffed at the moment, but relocating the only club north of the Bridge to the other side of the country would be a dumb idea, so instead of doing that the NRL should buy the club back from the Penn family, then restructure it into the 'North Sydney' club and re-brand to represent that fact, piss the Bears off when they try to intervene and meddle, then once the club is stable and relatively established sell it on to the highest bidder with the understanding that the club must focus on all of NS. Then in a couple generations instead of having a tiny club on the Norther Beaches ignoring the rest of North Sydney you'd have the making of a relatively big club that represents the whole

North/ern (Shore) Sydney Sea Eagles is a must for the north of the bridge.

As part of the rebrand, They’d need a major presence on the North Shore since they’d be most likely playing at the SFS. Can’t see NS getting a 20k stadium anytime soon.

 

[Diesel]

I read on Twitter last week and can’t find it that Beattie is struggling with expansion, it wasn’t as easy as he thought it’d be (powerbroker etc) and the only way we’d see an e pandion footprint was if a relocated. He made the comment the only team likely at this stage would be Manly & made a comment about Perth Sea Eagles

 

[Marlins]

I read on Twitter last week and can’t find it that Beattie is struggling with expansion, it wasn’t as easy as he thought it’d be (powerbroker etc) and the only way we’d see an e pandion footprint was if a relocated. He made the comment the only team likely at this stage would be Manly & made a comment about Perth Sea Eagles

I know it won’t happen, But if it somehow did. Could Perth and the sea eagles make a fair go of it?

 

[juro]

I read on Twitter last week and can’t find it that Beattie is struggling with expansion, it wasn’t as easy as he thought it’d be (powerbroker etc) and the only way we’d see an e pandion footprint was if a relocated. He made the comment the only team likely at this stage would be Manly & made a comment about Perth Sea Eagles

Hard to argue with this...

 

[Quicksilver]

I say kill off all Sydney teams.

Just have Perth v Canberra every week in a SOO style contest.

 

[Quicksilver]

Sydney 4,526,479 / 9 teams = 502,942. people per team.

Canberra 424,666 /1 team = 424,666.

2015 population figures.

https://blog.id.com.au/2016/populat...top-50-largest-cities-and-towns-in-australia/

Sydney also growing faster than Canberra.

This doesn't take into account that the Dragons are only half a Sydney team.

4,526,479 / 8.5 teams = 532,527.

Bit of food for thought.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

I read on Twitter last week and can’t find it that Beattie is struggling with expansion, it wasn’t as easy as he thought it’d be (powerbroker etc) and the only way we’d see an e pandion footprint was if a relocated. He made the comment the only team likely at this stage would be Manly & made a comment about Perth Sea Eagles

I dont know how much faith i put in "twitter" as a source...

However, (if its true) its nice to know the ARLC is ACTIVELY pursuing it and not just waiting for an opportunity. Even if they have chosen the difficult path, at least they know which way they want to go.

The one thing that surprises me is that the Sydney power brokers are acting as a barrier to this. It is understandable that the clubs dont want to move themselves, but it seems like self interest would see the club bosses trying to move each other and opening up Sydney markets for themselves.

 

[Perth Red]

Sydney 4,526,479 / 9 teams = 502,942. people per team.

Canberra 424,666 /1 team = 424,666.

2015 population figures.

https://blog.id.com.au/2016/populat...top-50-largest-cities-and-towns-in-australia/

Sydney also growing faster than Canberra.

This doesn't take into account that the Dragons are only half a Sydney team.

4,526,479 / 8.5 teams = 532,527.

Bit of food for thought.

A very simplistic way of looking at sports club potential population reach. Reality is Manly, Cronulla etc dont have a realistic reach of 550k people. Also Sydney has numerous other sports teams to split the sporting interest and appears to have a general sports apathy in the community there compared to other Australian cities.

 

[Perth Red]

I dont know how much faith i put in "twitter" as a source...

However, (if its true) its nice to know the ARLC is ACTIVELY pursuing it and not just waiting for an opportunity. Even if they have chosen the difficult path, at least they know which way they want to go.

The one thing that surprises me is that the Sydney power brokers are acting as a barrier to this. It is understandable that the clubs dont want to move themselves, but it seems like self interest would see the club bosses trying to move each other and opening up Sydney markets for themselves.

lol ARLC are not actively pursuing anything. They are waiting to see if Manly, or someone else falls over. Thats not an expansion strategy, its merely waiting for an opportunity. Beattie is surprised how difficult expansion is? Please do me a favour. He's a typical pollie, elected on a mandate that he'll never fulfill.

 

[Quicksilver]

A very simplistic way of looking at sports club potential population reach. Reality is Manly, Cronulla etc dont have a realistic reach of 550k people. Also Sydney has numerous other sports teams to split the sporting interest and appears to have a general sports apathy in the community there compared to other Australian cities.

Good point.

Canberra also have a Rugby team and half an AFL team. So I guess a truer number would be

424,666/ 2.5= 169,866.

They're a good chance of getting an A League team too.

426,666/ 3.5= 121,905.

 

[The Great Dane]

Sydney 4,526,479 / 9 teams = 502,942. people per team.

Canberra 424,666 /1 team = 424,666.

2015 population figures.

https://blog.id.com.au/2016/populat...top-50-largest-cities-and-towns-in-australia/

Sydney also growing faster than Canberra.

This doesn't take into account that the Dragons are only half a Sydney team.

4,526,479 / 8.5 teams = 532,527.

Bit of food for thought.

Sydney 4,526,479 / 9 teams = 502,942. people per team.

Canberra 424,666 /1 team = 424,666.

2015 population figures.

https://blog.id.com.au/2016/populat...top-50-largest-cities-and-towns-in-australia/

Sydney also growing faster than Canberra.

This doesn't take into account that the Dragons are only half a Sydney team.

4,526,479 / 8.5 teams = 532,527.

Bit of food for thought.

Population doesn't = fan-base, and besides that Sydney's problem isn't a problem with population its a problem with market saturation and resources.

 

[Perth Red]

Good point.

Canberra also have a Rugby team and half an AFL team. So I guess a truer number would be

424,666/ 2.5= 169,866.

They're a good chance of getting an A League team too.

426,666/ 3.5= 121,905.

Well if we want to be simplistic Sydney has 17 professional sports clubs

Sports clubs = (AFL,NRL,Supersomethings,Aleague,netball,baskeball)

The capital city sports saturation table
Brisbane 3million/5 = 600k
Perth 2mill/5 = 400k
Melbourne 5mill/13 = 385k
Adelaide 1.3mill/4=325k
Sydney 5.1mill/17 =300k
Canberra 440k/2.5= 176k

Clearly Sydney has far too many sports clubs and is rumored to be getting two more (Union and soccer)

 

[taipan]

Well if we want to be simplistic Sydney has 17 professional sports clubs

Sports clubs = (AFL,NRL,Supersomethings,Aleague,netball,baskeball)

The capital city sports saturation table
Brisbane 3million/5 = 600k
Perth 2mill/5 = 400k
Melbourne 5mill/13 = 385k
Adelaide 1.3mill/4=325k
Sydney 5.1mill/17 =300k
Canberra 440k/2.5= 176k

Clearly Sydney has far too many sports clubs and is rumored to be getting two more (Union and soccer)

Throw in another out of left field.
Commercial backing has to be taken into account ,where Sydney is the biggest in the country ,in terms of major International companies.Melbourne ditto.Both populations continue to grow, not remain stagnant,
Plus regional support for Sydney clubs within NSW is far greater than Perth.And Perth is also likely to get a 3rd AFL team.
Tasmania population over 500,000 has no AFL/NRL orA league team.So it doesn't as stated before relate to population base.
It boils down to public interest/demand,financial backing, juniors,facilities and transport and growth potential.