NRL two conferences

[Russell Crowe's Band]

What about 3 Conferences of 6 instead?

Conference 1
Brisbane
Brisbane 2
Gold Coast
North Queensland
Auckland
NZ 2

Conference 2

Newcastle
Manly
Sydney City
South Sydney
St George
Cronulla

Conference 3

Penrith
Parramatta
Canterbury
Wests
Melbourne
Canberra


Play everyone in your conference twice (10 games) and everyone else once (12 games). 22 rounds each.

Top 2 from each conference go in to a top 8 finals series with the last 2 spots determined on overall league ranking or a wildcard play off.

Thoughts?

18 into 3 is better than 18 into 2

 

[Valheru]

In regards to travel, this proposal really only negatively effects the Raiders and Newcastle. The other non-Sydney teams have to fly to any given away game anyways with the exception of Broncos V Titans. That's not to say that is a reasonable that those 2 clubs are put out.

Having said that this is a poor idea, there is nothing wrong with the current system where clubs get 3-4 requests in the fixture that the NRL grants. This ensures that Sydney v non Sydney rivalries as they organically grow are played twice a year e.g. Storm/Roosters

Limiting the amount of GF combinations is a terrible idea.

 

[nick87]

Love it. Make it happen
though i think Perth should be one of the expansion teams over another NZ team myself

Also i think it works better 18 into 3 conferences, rather than 2.

 

[Vee]

So it would be exactly the same as now???

No, it would be 4 teams from each conference, not necessarily the case atm.

 

[SouthsCountry]

I LOVE THIS CONFERENCE IDEA....
Sydney Crowds will finally hopefully grow!

 

[Foreign Legion]

Oh FFS no.
Nowhere near enough teams for conferences even adding two new teams by 2026 , plus you wouldn't necessarily have the the Two best teams playing for the Premiership.

Bring in the UK clubs!

 

[LineBall]

Using my "glass half full" thinking, one positive could be that increase in Sydney derbies should increase crowds, which in turn would strengthen the NRL's case for government investment in suburban grounds.

If they make the finals series the top four from each conference, and seed them 1-8 on their points for the regular season, this would mean we still have the chance for two Sydney teams to meet in the GF.

Would the Sydney teams have to always travel away to play those teams not in their conference? You would think that would be the fairer option, seeing as the other conference already has the higher travel demands.

 

[Dark Corner]

To be honest, the conference system does not even work that well in the USA as it is often a very unfair situation. Last season in the NFL, Im pretty sure that a team with a losing record made the playoffs. Quite a few clubs with winning records missed the cut purely due to the conference they were in.

USA copit because they don't know any other way.....but the culture of our game would (and should) absolutely reject the idea. For our faults, at least our competition at least is fair in that the best eight teams always make the playoffs.....unlike in a conference system.

NFL is different Tom Brady is the league and anyone under is life

 

[Last Week]

This is dumb.

 

[Dark Corner]

Bring in the UK clubs!

SUPER LEAGUE.... Cumbria, Calder and Hartlepool.

 

[Knight76]

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.

 

[Coparugby]

In regards to travel, this proposal really only negatively effects the Raiders and Newcastle. The other non-Sydney teams have to fly to any given away game anyways with the exception of Broncos V Titans. That's not to say that is a reasonable that those 2 clubs are put out.

Having said that this is a poor idea, there is nothing wrong with the current system where clubs get 3-4 requests in the fixture that the NRL grants. This ensures that Sydney v non Sydney rivalries as they organically grow are played twice a year e.g. Storm/Roosters

Limiting the amount of GF combinations is a terrible idea.

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.

 

[Zadar]

In regards to travel, this proposal really only negatively effects the Raiders and Newcastle.[/B] The other non-Sydney teams have to fly to any given away game anyways with the exception of Broncos V Titans. That's not to say that is a reasonable that those 2 clubs are put out.

Having said that this is a poor idea, there is nothing wrong with the current system where clubs get 3-4 requests in the fixture that the NRL grants. This ensures that Sydney v non Sydney rivalries as they organically grow are played twice a year e.g. Storm/Roosters

Limiting the amount of GF combinations is a terrible idea.

But the big beneficiaries of it is the Sydney based teams that do not have to travel at all.

 

[betcats]

Im sure there are a lot of negatives to this proposal but are we really worrying about travel costs? This isnt park footy, if we are as big and professional as we'd all like to believe than travel costs are not an issue.

 

[Valheru]

But the big beneficiaries of it is the Sydney based teams that do not have to travel at all.

Let's analyse this claim

Under the proposed structure the roosters for example would play the other 8 Sydney teams twice, all in Sydney and then 9 games against non Sydney sides. Let's assume one of those would be Magic round in Brisbane and then they split the other 8 home and away so a total of 20 games in Sydney and 5 out of Sydney. Let's assume to NZ once, QLD twice (one for magic round), VIC and one of ACT/Newcastle.

This year under the current 24 game system system they have 17 games in Sydney, 4 in QLD (1 for Magic Round),1 in VIC and 2 in ACT/Newcastle so it's really not that much difference. That also doesn't take in to account the likelihood of moving home games interstate in a non COVID world. Take Penrith as another example who actually do play 20 games in Sydney (well not quite as a couple of those are in country locations but that is the choice of those Sydney teams moving home games)

As I said, I don't support the system due to the reasons already outlined but the travel thing will be no different for most clubs.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Channel 9 conference:
Brisbane
Melbourne
Parramatta
Souths
Roosters
North Queensland
Penrith
St George Illawarra
Newcastle

Povo Conference
I.e. The rest.

Top 8 teams of the Channel 9 conference play in the finals with the Roosters and Storm crowned champions every 2 out of 3 years.

 

[Diesel]

I can’t see it being a top 8, the NRL will want to generate more cash so we’ll end up with a top 10, perhaps two x five team finals format?

Wests Tigers will own 6th

 

[Perth Red]

Timing of “leaks” like this are always interesting. he’s a more Machiavellian idea, Vlandys wants Brisbane2 in, he knows that there is resistance from existing clubs, especially Sydney ones (hence why they are spending their hard earned commissioning their own impact report). What better way to sell the idea of expansion to these Sydney clubs than by suggesting that it can lead to a reversion back to the good old days of a sydney comp? Throw in nz2 as the “possible” 18th club which is far less threatening to them than the possibility of bringing Perth in and it becoming another melbourne success, thus diminishing them even further, and voila. Sydney clubs get dragged over the line to support Brisbane2 and the conference thing and nz2 can sit around for a few years until people forget about it.

 

[Perth Red]

Im sure there are a lot of negatives to this proposal but are we really worrying about travel costs? This isnt park footy, if we are as big and professional as we'd all like to believe than travel costs are not an issue.

The NRl covers all travel and accommodation costs for the clubs so that wouldn't be an issue in regards to the non sydney conf. The point Knight76 makes about player recruitment would be a very real one.

 

[Knight76]

My main issue, is that teams from the same conference are not ever going to be able to meet in the grand final.

Id support conferences that the top 4 from each form the top 8 and any team can make the gf.

I still dont support a conference based on sydney vs the rest.