What I mean by it is that if there are too many clubs or too many clubs cannibalising each other's revenue in one city or some clubs that just do not have the ability to devlop a sustainable revenue or that new clubs may have a better chance than existing ones at thriving then the competition may need to have a different look going forward. In SL for example they took the bold decision to drop from 14 to 12 teams as they recognised they did not have enough funding to support 14 sustainable teams. Bit different here were you have lots of central revenue but seemingly most clubs unable to generate enough outside the central grant to thrive. If it is true one club lost $4million last year then that should be enough to make you think some just aren't going to survive as the game continues to grow.
The NRL needs to up the grant to around $8-10million over next 3-4 years and cap non player football salaries, if clubs still can't get by then take some tough decisions if need be. Grants gone up,significantly in last 3 years including one off payments yet some clubs are still making significant losses, somethings got to give.
Lets say we drop the two weakest teams in Sydney, bring in a Brisbane side and, I don't know, lets say somewhere random that neither of us would ever try and suggest, I know, Perth. Lets say we bring in another Brisbane team and a Perth team. Your logic is that the remaining Sydney clubs would be better off for it. But why? What do you base that on?
Do you really think that crowds are going to rise significantly, sponsorship to be worth more because there's less Sydney teams to choose from (less cannibalization as you put it), that sponsors are going to want to throw more money at clubs at the chance of being exposed to a new Perth audience or a Brisbane audience twice, to make up for a supposed $40million deficit?
And what on earth makes you think that new clubs could have a better chance at thriving? The Titans and Storm haven't. Hell, even the Warriors, who have an entire country to draw revenue from, struggled.
We can look at your precious AFL. The Giants and Suns are only alive because of the grants they receive from the AFL and then more. The Swans and Lions are still sucking off the field and require help from the AFL.
You have nothing to back up your claim that the game would be better off with less Sydney teams and with new teams in other areas.
Short to medium term investment into our current clubs to get them self sustainable not only is better for the current fans, but also ensures a stable base for new clubs to come into, who will no doubt need assistance to the tune of millions. Be patient and quit with the agenda. You just look stupid.
