Chicken_Hunter said:Front-Rower said:Expansion. Why are soo many of you upset and abusing the NRL that they didn't expand. Rugby League doesn't have the right ingredients to support another team. At the present time there are probably two teams too many in the competition.
What ingredients do you need?
The gold coast bid has more potential than any sydney team.. They have backing from numerous businesses, thousands of juniors.. And its the fastest growing area in australia..
Who cares about how poor or crap other clubs are, the gold coast would have been a team that could support itself and that is all that should matter..
I dont understand why poor clubs influenced this decision when they have nothing at all to do with the gold coast and how they would have made their money..
50% goes directly to News Limited's Super League $220 million debt
Lantana said:Everybody needs to calm down.
Don't forget the NRL never once requested submissions from any of the potential franchisees. It was Singo that came on with his typical bullyboy business tactics. Well if Singo is so in favour of expanding the comp how come he wont allow any other commercial radio stations the rights to broadcast games? Because he knows without Rugby League his precious 2gb would rate f**k all.
What does this mean in the long run?
Both of these areas will still recieve NRL support in the forms of games and development. (Surely 16,000 at Roosters V Cowboys shows the area is a Rugby League stronghold without it's own team. The same can be said for the Gold Coast with 18,000 at trial games)
Currently clubs are losing a combined total of 25 million a year and the NRL pays them a total of 30 million (2.5 each). With the pokie tax coming in there is a further shortfall in the grant from the leagues club. When you consider the NRL: makes about 70 million a year and 50% goes directly to News Limited's Super League $220 million debt that leaves around $35 million for the ARL to;
* Fund the ARL Foundation
* Provide NSWRL grants - and affiliated Statewide Cup competitions
* Provide QRL grants - and Affiliated Statewide Cup competitions
* Provide CRL grants
* Fund the ASSRL competitions
* All ARL tours
* Employ all staff including development officers
* Plough millions back into grassroots Rugby League
* Marketing costs
This definately not the time to consider expansion.
f**k, we have knobheads on here every week complaining about the NRL not advertising enough!
The AFL never considered expansion until they had
* a vibrant competition that was averaging over 30,000 to club games (NRL doesn't average hald that)
* until they had a strategic plan for teams to be located in area where AFL had been promoted and developed for many years (Perth, Adelaide)
* Developed a clear pathways program for young talent to be developed nationally and syphoned into the AFL through a fair and equitable player draft.
* Had negotiated a pay TV deal that is TWICE the NRL's deal ($100 million a year)
* Had negotiated a Free to air broadcasating right that was going to provide a vehicle to drive the games promotion into the area they want to develop next as an AFL area (Sydney, Brisbane) - You can see 5 free to air games a week on CH10 + CH9 and can hear games broadcasted on several radiostations with the Swans live on MMM.
Rugby League has plenty of hurdles to get over with new TV rights (Pay and free) to negotiate being the catalyst ot the games direction over the next 10 years.
Don't panic, it would be easy for a weak and irresponsible executive to play the good guy and let these teams in and be a champion for a week. But the future of our game isn't about fly by night decisions. The next franchise admitted can not go down the path of the Reds, Rams, Mariners or Crushers, it is to hurtful to our game.
Yes Singo has guarenteed the Bears for 5 years, then what. Singo isn't a dill and if that franchise isn't making money (I'm pretty sure it will) than what is stopping him moving on?
We need to understand the long term viability of our sport whilst taking in some key performance influncers prior to any decision.
The no is for now until we get a better understanding of where we are so the NRL and News can draw a blueprint of where the game is heading over the next decade. The decision will be a little easier because of the outstanding presentation prepared by the GC,CC and Wellington.
My bet is each area will have a team by 2010.
Rugby League has plenty of hurdles to get over with new TV rights (Pay and free) to negotiate being the catalyst ot the games direction over the next 10 years.
FileMan said:You leaguies should try and persuade former AFL CEO Wayne Jackson to take over from Gallop. Maybe that would bring league up to it's feet. :lol:
Hoggy said:We get Orford!
Still no guarantee we stay either. :roll:
hybrid_tiger said:I agree with Gallop.
What this game needs is stability. Every year something changes - we have gone through turmoil over the past decade or so and the competition is finally starting to settle down.
I'm not against expansion - but just not at the current point in time.
It should be part of the entry criteria for all new teams that they must turn a profit or add value to the NRL within a stipulated period (five years is reasonable) otherwise they lose or could be threatened with the loss of their licence.
This way at least, if the NRL get it wrong, it wont hang over their heads for ever! Then we can try and try again until we do get it right.