NRL two conferences

[MugaB]

Yes i reckoned this, from about 6 months ago, saying a north/south border split of sydney breaking up each conference

North
Cowboys, Broncos, Bris2, Titans, Knights, SeaEagles, Panthers, Eels, Tigers

South
Rabbitohs, Roosters, Sharks, Bulldogs, Dragons, Warriors, NZ2, Raiders, Storm

This would be the only way to be fair to travelling interstate teams and split the comp for increased rivalries in both QLD and NSW

 

[siv]

I find it strange that we get so much flack on the split pools ststem

Today we already have the following teams

Brisbane, Gold Coast, Cowboys, Melbourne, Warriors basically are playing each other twice and have bases in Queensland

Brisbane 2 would naturally go into this group

While Newcastle plays Warriors, Canberra, Brisbane, Gold Coast twice

Canberra plays Newcastle, Warriors, Gold Coast, Melbourne twice and have their 90s rivalry with Brisbane

It's the conference finals system is where the problem is. It's designed to try and always have a Suncorp preliminary final

 

[siv]

I find it strange that we get so much flack on the split pools ststem

Today we already have the following teams

Brisbane, Gold Coast, Cowboys, Melbourne, Warriors basically are playing each other twice and have bases in Queensland

Brisbane 2 would naturally go into this group

While Newcastle plays Warriors, Canberra, Brisbane, Gold Coast twice

Canberra plays Newcastle, Warriors, Gold Coast, Melbourne twice and have their 90s rivalry with Brisbane

It's the conference finals system is where the problem is. It's designed to try and always have a Suncorp preliminary final

 

[betcats]

The only thing I really dont like is the top four from each conference playing off in the finals. Just make it a genuine top 8 and we are laughing. I would make the sydney conference travel to play the non sydney teams(most of the time at least) although then you don't get to see out of town teams play in sydney many times.

The two clubs that are really not getting much out of this are Canberra and Newcastle, maybe the warriors as well. The QLD clubs would do well from it, another brissy team and each team is playing 6 QLD derbys a year(home and away)

 

[Danish]

The only thing I really dont like is the top four from each conference playing off in the finals. Just make it a genuine top 8 and we are laughing. I would make the sydney conference travel to play the non sydney teams(most of the time at least) although then you don't get to see out of town teams play in sydney many times.

The two clubs that are really not getting much out of this are Canberra and Newcastle, maybe the warriors as well. The QLD clubs would do well from it, another brissy team and each team is playing 6 QLD derbys a year(home and away)

i reckon top 3 from each conference with 2 wild card spots for the next 2 highest ranked teams based on a combined ladder. That would hopefully keep more teams interested for the entire season.

Id also want the 8 finals teams ranked by a combined ladder when planning the finals series to cover for the situation where the best 2 teams come from the same conference.

 

[AnonymousLurker]

The only thing I really dont like is the top four from each conference playing off in the finals. Just make it a genuine top 8 and we are laughing. I would make the sydney conference travel to play the non sydney teams(most of the time at least) although then you don't get to see out of town teams play in sydney many times.

The two clubs that are really not getting much out of this are Canberra and Newcastle, maybe the warriors as well. The QLD clubs would do well from it, another brissy team and each team is playing 6 QLD derbys a year(home and away)

And how would that he different to know for the qld teams they already play home and away .

The problem is the game is sooking because the broncos are a basket case and Nines FTA Ratings are taking a hit

 

[firechild]

not harder for one conference clubs but certainly becomes much easier for the other which will be an unfair advantage in player recruitment and fatigue factor as season wears on to playoffs. Take this season most Sydney clubs have 5 out of nsw games, In a Sydney conference they wouldn’t leave the city. That’s a massive advantage,

But the proposal is that each conference will play every team in their conference twice and the other conference once. They would still leave Sydney for half of the out of conference games. So, about 5 times per year, exactly as it is now.

 

[nick87]

i reckon top 3 from each conference with 2 wild card spots for the next 2 highest ranked teams based on a combined ladder. That would hopefully keep more teams interested for the entire season.

Id also want the 8 finals teams ranked by a combined ladder when planning the finals series to cover for the situation where the best 2 teams come from the same conference.

100% agree with this, if they go down the path of 2 conferences...
top 3 from each, and then the next best two as wildcards

If you're not one of the best 3 teams in a 9 team conference, you got no right to bitch about missing the play offs

I personally favour splitting it into 3 conference

C1: Nth Qld, Brisbane 1, Brisbane 2, Titans, Perth and NZ
C2: Penrith, Parra, Roosters, Bulldogs, Souths, Manly
C3: Raiders, Knights, Storm, Dragons, Sharks and Tigers

You play everyone in your conference twice (home and away), you play the other 12 once... that's 22 games, which shortens the season for player welfare concerns but by adding the two teams, you're going to land around the same number of games that we have now (from memory, it was actually slight more)
With a top 2 from each going through and 2 wild cards

But honestly im just really pleased the game is thinking this way... i really believe this sort of set up is the way to go long term... you put something like that in place today, and in 20 years time you watch how much hatred and rivalry develops between those conferences... because inevitably they're going to have to play so many high stakes games against each other... and win/lose/draw, when you're constantly pitted against the same teams in high stakes games the fans and clubs will develop those rivalries

and rivalries help drive crowds, they help create marquee "showcase" match ups that drive TV ratings, revenue and coverage

Shit, put something like this in, figure an NRL draft and watch the revenue for the game soar.

 

[Pete Cash]

People are seeing the obvious benefits for Sydney sides but the outside sydney conference has such staggering advantages for the storm (and Brisbane if they can get their act together) that its silly.

The outside of Sydney conference is made up of a ton of small market sides. These teams can be good to great (raiders in the 90s, Knights in the early 00s, Cowboys in the 10s) but its often built on the form of talented juniors and generational players coming through. This can be hard to replicate (see how mediocre the Raiders have been since the NRL era began)

If the non sydney conference just had these two gigantic clubs and a bunch of small market sides this is going to ultimately make it easier for those two gigantic clubs.

If we look at the results since 2011 this would be where the Storm finished if we remove the non sydney sides from the ladder

1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, and 1st. They are currently 1st out of the non sydney clubs right now.

It would also be a softer comp for them. The average amount of non Sydney sides in the top 8 during that period is a little over 3. There has only been more non Sydney sides in the top 8 twice in that period (2011 and 2016)

If the finals were just non-sydney club v non sydney club and it had been like this since 2011 I feel like the storm would have won more premierships

 

[big hit!]

All this shit about top 3 from a conference or conference winners going through as higher ranked is bullshit for the NRL, and serves to show how much folks don't understand about the divisional/conference system used in the USA - isn't this where we're getting all our ideas?

Every team will play the other 15 (or 17 teams) at least once in the NRL. Currently, a team will play 9 out of 15 teams twice! The schedule differentiation between all teams is small.

In contrast, each team in the NFL will play only 14 of 32 teams each season. Each team is placed within a division of 4 teams. These 4 teams have a unique schedule each season:
- they play each other twice -home and away (6 matches - division)
- they play all teams in another division from the same conference once on a 3 year rotating basis (4 matches - intraconference)
- they play 1 team from each of the remaining divisions from the same conference once based on prior-yr standings (2 matches - intraconference)
- they play all teams from a division in the other conference once on a 4 year rotating basis (4 matches - interconference)

and new to 2021

- they play 1 team from a division in the other conference once based on prior-yr standings. That other conference division will be the division played wholly 2 years prior (1 match - interconference)

So, each team plays:
3 (out of 3) divisional conference teams twice
6 (out of a further 12) other own conference teams once
5 (out of 16) teams from the other conference once

Even if you wanted to compare it to the NBA where each team plays each other at least once in an 82-game season, they still play their divisional rivals and conference opponents substantially more than any non-conference opponents.

So can you numbskulls see the requirement for such a system and qualification in those League, and not here?

The only reason a grouping (stop calling it a conference - this is laughable) system is required in the NRL is to ensure the teams you want playing twice do, like they already manage to achieve anyway.

 

[Captain Apollo]

The NRL have said that none of this is "set in stone", and according to reports in today's Sydney Morning Herald are not being looked at until around 2025 (source: https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/ra...-under-conference-system-20210428-p57n3f.html).

 

[Pippen94]

i reckon top 3 from each conference with 2 wild card spots for the next 2 highest ranked teams based on a combined ladder. That would hopefully keep more teams interested for the entire season.

Id also want the 8 finals teams ranked by a combined ladder when planning the finals series to cover for the situation where the best 2 teams come from the same conference.

Defeats purpose of conferences

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Relocate 3 Sydney teams to Adelaide, Perth and NZ, then add 2 teams in Brisbane.

18 Teams

6 x Sydney
3 x Brisbane
2 x NZ
1x Melbourne
1 x Newcastle
1 x Canberra
1 x Adelaide
1 x Perth
1 x Townsville
1 x Gold Coast

2 Conferences

Adelaide, Perth and Melbourne join the other 6 Sydney teams in the Blue Conference.

All 5 Queensland teams, both NZ teams plus Newcastle and Canberra play in the Maroon Conference.

Players born in NZ and ACT get to play for Queensland. Players born in Adelaide, Melbourne and Perth get to play for NSW. That will give the Sydney-centric ARLC a motive to get the game thriving in "rusted-on AFL states"

 

[Frailty]

Yes, let's do a conference system for an 18 team competition. I mean it works in the US were the conference is geographically based to reduce travel or history based on two competitions, and where they have 30 teams or more.

There is literally no reason or benefit for this to be done in the NRL.

 

[Knight76]

So, they set up this Sydney vs the rest conference thing, what happens down the travk with further expansion?

There will be no more sydney teams, so how do the conferences stay balanced?

If a Sydney team relocates, they lose 1 team and the non sydney conference gains 1?

Its stupid.

 

[Valheru]

The problem with basing your model on the US one is that they are probably one of three countries int he world (the other 2 being China and India) that have many large population areas spread over a vast geographical space.

Australia just ins't like that with only 5 real significant population centres whereas America has like 50.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

So, they set up this Sydney vs the rest conference thing, what happens down the travk with further expansion?

There will be no more sydney teams, so how do the conferences stay balanced?

If a Sydney team relocates, they lose 1 team and the non sydney conference gains 1?

Its stupid.

you can move Newcastle and Canberra to the Sydney conference and expand it to NSW/ACT vs the rest.

 

[Steel Saints]

Why not have an annual tv event where the conferences are drawn. Have teams picked out of a bowl and that determines the two conferences.

PS: I prefer it the way it is.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

you can move Newcastle and Canberra to the Sydney conference and expand it to NSW/ACT vs the rest.

Or you can just relocate 3 struggling Sydney clubs that will never be anything but little fish in a big pond to large metro areas that don't have a team.

Canterbury Bulldogs to Christchurch. They get to keep their name as Canterbury Bulldogs.

Sharks to Perth. Southern Sydney (St George and Sutherland) have around 500k people, so 2 teams here is bad business and the reason both clubs are struggling off the field. Keep the Dragons and make them the Southern Sydney Dragons. Cronulla rebrand as West Coast Sharks.

Manly to Adelaide. New name can be Adelaide Sea Eagles. Roosters can absorb the North Shore, Northern Beaches and Central Coast.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Yeh your Knights have amazing rivalries with the teams in either of the groups you put them in

Realisticaly, the Knights just dont have many rivalries...

That is actually part of the strength of this system; it will CREATE rivalries. Jam the same 5 teams together every year and have them fight of 1 spot.

Even if the clubs dont have rivalries, they will develop very quickly!!