NRL two conferences

[SouthsCountry]

I say give this conference system 3 years, if it doesn't work go back to an 18 team single league just as the AFL do right now.

 

[big hit!]

V'Landys is an ideas man. Sometimes he has shit ideas

 

[Dogs Of War]

I see how 3 conferences will work. Cause that's really what we have now. Just not the visibility of how the conferences are made up.

Other than bragging rights for winning each conference, and I'm not sure how much weight will be put on that given how little weighting we give the JJ Giltan shield winner each year.

And I'd rather avoid this Sydney teams conference vs the rest conference. That's just asking for a breakaway comp where 3-4 Sydney teams are invited to come over so they can reduce teams because there aren't enough quality players which no matter how many teams you have, there will be some teams who are just can't get their shit together.

 

[hrundi99]

it seems a positive for the Raiders. 3 to 4 hours on a bus to Sydney isn’t as good as a 1 to 2 hour plane journey.

Flying will mean the Raiders players are more fresh for a match than if they caught the bus to Sydney again.

Having an elite athlete cramped up in a bus for up to 4 hours before a match isn’t ideal.

You know that you have to get to the airport early to check-in then wait for baggage after etc, right?

3 to 4 hours on a bus is similar to a 1-2 hour flight.

 

[gUt]

Conferences could be changed every year/every couple of years either randomly or by design. This would help ensure no GF combinations are impossible over time.

 

[Captain Apollo]

I love how the "problems" are "Sydney teams won't have to travel" and "we won't see intra conference finals/grand finals".

Firstly under the current system we have some Sydney teams who barely travel outside of Sydney in any given season. As to the finals, that is ot set in stone and there are alternate suggestions already in the NRL proposal.

Further the "one conference is stronger than the other so one group will get an easy run" well gee dang, that already happens with some clubs draws currently.

Finally if anyone things a solution is going to be "every club should play all others twice in a year" that just isn't going to happen in a 16 or 18 team competition. It just is not practical at all.

 

[big hit!]

First of all, I don't support the idea, mainly because I know it will look like shit and implemented badly by an Australian.

But seriously, do you folks believe that the League will be split right through finals? C'mon, This is just some nein/smh reporters take on how USA style groupings work. They have a history of AFL & NFL in Football. AL & NL in Baseball. College Athletic conferences where top universities don't even play all each all season.

And they have loads more teams!

Going back to my opening paragraph - you have an Aussie who looks at what is done overseas, and immediately coins a similar system here as 'conferences'. In reality, it's merely a grouping or pooling.

 

[myrrh ken]

so basically Storm vs some Sydney team gf for the next 20 years

 

[The Plodder]

I like the idea of a 16 conference competition, with 1 team per conference. Each team plays against another conference either once or twice during the season, with 2 byes during the season, for a 26 round regular season.

The top 8 conferences at the end of the regular season then split into 2 division for the "Finals" - the top 4 conferences in one group (eg. ranks 1-4), and the bottom 4 conferences (eg. ranks 5-8) in another. Within each interconference finals group, the top ranked conference plays the bottom ranked conference (eg. 1 v 4, and 5 v 8) and the remaining two conference teams per conference group play each other in the initial "Quarter-Finals".

After the 1st round of "Finals", the bottom two ranked teams are knocked out, and the top two ranked winning teams proceed straight to the Conference "Semi-Finals".

We then have 2 x H2H games between the remaining 4 conference teams, in what should be dubbed the "Semi-Semi-Finals". The winner of each respective game meets one of the two winners who moved on from the "Quarter-Finals" in the "Semi-Final".

The winner of each "Semi-Final" game will then meet each other in the final final, dubbed the "Grand Final". The winner of the "Grand Final" is announced as champion, and gets 15 consecutive weeks on the Friday night slot on Channel 9 the following year.

Thoughts?

 

[gUt]

I like the idea of a 16 conference competition, with 1 team per conference. Each team plays against another conference either once or twice during the season, with 2 byes during the season, for a 26 round regular season.

The top 8 conferences at the end of the regular season then split into 2 division for the "Finals" - the top 4 conferences in one group (eg. ranks 1-4), and the bottom 4 conferences (eg. ranks 5-8) in another. Within each interconference finals group, the top ranked conference plays the bottom ranked conference (eg. 1 v 4, and 5 v 8) and the remaining two conference teams per conference group play each other in the initial "Quarter-Finals".

After the 1st round of "Finals", the bottom two ranked teams are knocked out, and the top two ranked winning teams proceed straight to the Conference "Semi-Finals".

We then have 2 x H2H games between the remaining 4 conference teams, in what should be dubbed the "Semi-Semi-Finals". The winner of each respective game meets one of the two winners who moved on from the "Quarter-Finals" in the "Semi-Final".

The winner of each "Semi-Final" game will then meet each other in the final final, dubbed the "Grand Final". The winner of the "Grand Final" is announced as champion, and gets 15 consecutive weeks on the Friday night slot on Channel 9 the following year.

Thoughts?

I would prefer 1 team in 16 conferences.

 

[marshall stalin]

Yipee been advocating for this for yonks when a 17th and 18th team were admitted - It's a winner for sure - more revenue and interest - conference naming right sponsors for instance.

I would have a top 5 in each conference and the 2 conference winners playing off superbowl style or as a compromise and top 4 conference cross over final series - 1 vs 2's - winner through to week 3 and losers player the winners of 3 vs 4's - losers of 3 v 4's eliminated - possibly wild card finalist the best 9 and 10th team from either group.

Also an all stars game -conference vs conference - best vs the best - specially made kits ( jumpers/shorts/socks etc) changed very year or so.

People need to think outside the square/box - hopefully this will mean a true home and away season-home game every second week - not this 2 or 3 game at home in a row and or 2 or 3 games away in a row - return to 3 grades on the one day too for a full day/night of footy .

It's a winner in my view

 

[marshall stalin]

I like the idea of a 16 conference competition, with 1 team per conference. Each team plays against another conference either once or twice during the season, with 2 byes during the season, for a 26 round regular season.

The top 8 conferences at the end of the regular season then split into 2 division for the "Finals" - the top 4 conferences in one group (eg. ranks 1-4), and the bottom 4 conferences (eg. ranks 5-8) in another. Within each interconference finals group, the top ranked conference plays the bottom ranked conference (eg. 1 v 4, and 5 v 8) and the remaining two conference teams per conference group play each other in the initial "Quarter-Finals".

After the 1st round of "Finals", the bottom two ranked teams are knocked out, and the top two ranked winning teams proceed straight to the Conference "Semi-Finals".

We then have 2 x H2H games between the remaining 4 conference teams, in what should be dubbed the "Semi-Semi-Finals". The winner of each respective game meets one of the two winners who moved on from the "Quarter-Finals" in the "Semi-Final".

The winner of each "Semi-Final" game will then meet each other in the final final, dubbed the "Grand Final". The winner of the "Grand Final" is announced as champion, and gets 15 consecutive weeks on the Friday night slot on Channel 9 the following year.

Thoughts?

your saying you want 16 conferences with 1 team per conference - mmm so every team with be a conference champion/winner in that case if still 16 teams -

 

[seanoff]

This is a poor idea. There will be many years where one conference is stronger than the other and the gf ends up a game between 1 v 7. It’s masked by shit teams playing other shit teams.

NCAA basketball this year. The big10 was considered the shit. Pretty much all gone straight up because they only played each other and it was masking the fact they were all garbage.

But under this system a possible garbage team gets to a gf.

the expansion conference this year has one decent team and a bunch of strugglers. The other is a possible top 4 and possibly 6 of the top 8. Stupid system.

 

[Perth Red]

So what are the advantages?
1. Sydney teams get to play each other more often and travel less
2. ??????????????? .................

 

[AlwaysGreen]

So what are the advantages?
1. Sydney teams get to play each other more often and travel less
2. ??????????????? .................

2. No Perth team

 

[Last Week]

This proposal is going to weaken one conference, and strengthen the Sydney one.

Imagine the attraction of playing for a sydney conference team, travel cut down dramatically. Where with the other conference travel would be every week pretty much.

That is going to increase the player market power for the sydney conference further strengthening that conference.

Imagine being a player that can be based in sydney, settle your family and most weekends play local and be back with the fam again. Huge.

Yeah, but counter offer to that, cost of living in Sydney is much higher than anywhere else in the country. So yeah, travel more, but you'll have more money in your pocket.

 

[Coparugby]

You know that you have to get to the airport early to check-in then wait for baggage after etc, right?

3 to 4 hours on a bus is similar to a 1-2 hour flight.

It’s the sitting in one spot on a seat for many hours that ruins the preparation. The shorter plane journeys are much better for preparation.

 

[Last Week]

There's really no point to conferences in the NRL except for the purpose of maximising revenue in the draw. Which we already do.

The only other reasons to have conferences/divisions is to build rivalries and give more teams a shot at making the finals.

And with 50% of the teams making the finals, and a highly manipulated draw already, there's no point. I'd love conferences with a guaranteed team or two making the finals (NFL style) but there's no point.

The only point where we would need a conference/division system is when the length of the season would blow out. We would need to have more than 26 teams at the current season length.

 

[big hit!]

TBH, a grouping idea can be implemented right now in order to build rivalries.

Have 4 groups of 4 teams:
- Teams in the same group play each other twice every season - 6 matches
- Group play another group twice on a season rotating basis so every team plays each other twice in a season every 3 years - 8 matches
- Play teams in the 2 remaining groups once - 8 matches
- Keep single ladder and finals the same.

Provides only 22 games per season. Personally I think this is enough as the last few rounds can drag on, however the broadcasters would pay less.

For anyone who's read this far, these would be my groups:

Brisbane - Gold Coast - Melbourne - North Qld
Manly - Newcastle - South Sydney - Sydney
Canberra - Parramatta - Penrith - Wests Tigers
Canterbury - Cronulla - New Zealand - St George Illawarra

As you can see, 3 Sydney metro clubs, and one regional or out of state club in each group.

At least it delivers transparency regarding the schedule.

 

[mave]

In keeping with recent rule changes, we should start this ridiculous conference system mid-season.