NRL wants two conference comp

[T-Boon]

why as a successful businessman would I want to give my hard earned to a Sydney club to bring a few games to perth? That doesn’t get us any closer to a perth club.

What about if tourism WA became the major sponsor for the said Sydney team.

 

[T-Boon]

as a fan whose club has yo yo’d with promotion and relegation in SL I can tell you it is a disastrous model! Clubs coming up don’t have time to build a decent squad and are whipping boys likely to go straight back down in a worse financial state, and clubs going down have sponsors and fans abandon them and end up broke if they can’t get get back up within a year or two. It simply doesn’t work when the financial gap between divisions is huge, which it would be here.

I don't see Parra, Brisbane, Penrith, Dogs, Rabbits etc going broke like that. Maybe a couple lesser clubs will become constant second division teams. Also RL is considerably bigger here than in England.

 

[flippikat]

Norths, Newtown and NSW Country before Adelaide is f**king laughable, yet not a surprise at all.

Yep. As I said, it looks like a way to get an elite league, downsize Sydney, AND make it look like you're adding teams that appeal to both traditionalists and expansionists.

In the words of Morty (Rick & Morty), "Isn't this like Superleague, but with extra steps?"

 

[Travitoh]

What about if tourism WA became the major sponsor for the said Sydney team.

To achieve what? Meant nothing to Hawthorn when Tourism Tasmania sponsored them other than a way to make money from otherwise poor fixtures financially. It would achieve nothing for Perth's expansion hopes.

 

[T-Boon]

This idea of Sydney orientated supporters that selling a couple of games to unrepresented cities counts as expansion is absolute dribble.

is there any team that has ever taken more than one game a season to an expansion city?

 

[Travitoh]

I don't see Parra, Brisbane, Penrith, Dogs, Rabbits etc going broke like that. Maybe a couple lesser clubs will become constant second division teams. Also RL is considerably bigger here than in England.

Those clubs aren't the ones who'll be at risk of relegation, like Leeds, St Helens, Wigan etc in England.

The only difference between league in Australia and England is that in Australia it has a stronghold in the countries biggest city. Otherwise its geographical appeal remains.

 

[T-Boon]

To achieve what? Meant nothing to Hawthorn when Tourism Tasmania sponsored them other than a way to make money from otherwise poor fixtures financially. It would achieve nothing for Perth's expansion hopes.

Hawthorn are huge where they are and so were never going to relocate. If Perth went this route it could pick on a no hope sydney team with sub 10k attendences and no money and persuade them to keep upping the number of games.

 

[flippikat]

as a fan whose club has yo yo’d with promotion and relegation in SL I can tell you it is a disastrous model! Clubs coming up don’t have time to build a decent squad and are whipping boys likely to go straight back down in a worse financial state, and clubs going down have sponsors and fans abandon them and end up broke if they can’t get get back up within a year or two. It simply doesn’t work when the financial gap between divisions is huge, which it would be here.

It's an appalling proposal, for sure.. but it's got just enough there that might snare some fans.

"Oooh they're gonna bring back the Bears, AND Newtown, AND have a bush team.. and they may even get promoted!!".

Yeah, it's a bit like the poor guy who blows his pay every week on gambling, because "one day I'm gonna win big!"

 

[tri_colours]

promotion relegation is the way to go.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/s...e/news-story/7d7d0988915b0c29d71fd2fe6be1627b

Though No Jets, Bears!

 

[Travitoh]

is there any team that has ever taken more than one game a season to an expansion city?

If Easts played more than 1 of their dregs on the fixture list a season in Adelaide i would attend as many as i did last season. After the initial appearance of the game, it only appeals to those who are already supporters of the club visiting.

 

[T-Boon]

Those clubs aren't the ones who'll be at risk of relegation, like Leeds, St Helens, Wigan etc in England.

Yep, so weak clubs will need to get their shyte together (maybe get a rich owner) or they will languish in second division in perpetuity just as Newtown and Norths have done and survived.

 

[Travitoh]

Hawthorn are huge where they are and so were never going to relocate. If Perth went this route it could pick on a no hope sydney team with sub 10k attendences and no money and persuade them to keep upping the number of games.

And Tasmania are no closer to getting a team. Why should the state fully commit thousands of dollars to a team on the other side of the country that won't fully commit to them?

 

[T-Boon]

If Easts played more than 1 of their dregs on the fixture list a season in Adelaide i would attend as many as i did last season. After the initial appearance of the game, it only appeals to those who are already supporters of the club visiting.

I agree that the Roosters taking games elswhere is pointless as there needs to be at least an indication of a going concern about the move. eg by having 4 games per year and words on the jersey like 'WA tourism'.

 

[T-Boon]

And Tasmania are no closer to getting a team. Why should the state fully commit thousands of dollars to a team on the other side of the country that won't fully commit to them?

It seems to me like Tasmania's problem is it is small. There is no logical city to have a team with the hopes of it growing to AFL Melbourne size crowds. If a sydney team took 4 games a year to Perth (pop: 1mill) and found they got twice the crowd size (not saying that would happen merely saying if it happened) they would have to seriously consider making that 6 games a year and so on.

 

[Travitoh]

I agree that the Roosters taking games elswhere is pointless as there needs to be at least an indication of a going concern about the move. eg by having 4 games per year and words on the jersey like 'WA tourism'.

Sure, giving Adelaide and Perth the NRL's scraps will totally encourage them to follow the game.

 

[Travitoh]

It seems to me like Tasmania's problem is it is small. There is no logical city to have a team with the hopes of it growing to AFL Melbourne size crowds. If a sydney team took 4 games a year to Perth (pop: 1mill) and found they got twice the crowd size (not saying that would happen merely saying if it happened) they would have to seriously consider making that 6 games a year and so on.

Again, there's no actual commitment from the NRL/club. As a Souths fan, what's in it for me? Why should i pay $20 4 times a year to watch a failing club that i don't support? Why should a West Coast or Fremantle fan pay $20 to watch a failing Sydney NRL club that isn't fully committed to the city?

 

[T-Boon]

Again, there's no actual commitment from the NRL/club.

There is a commitment. 4 games per year and the city name on the jersey front. It might not be enough for YOU but it IS a big commitment and would drag fans in Perth.

Why should a West Coast or Fremantle fan pay $20 to watch a failing Sydney NRL club that isn't fully committed to the city?

Perth fans already turn out to watch RL over there. It is dwindling because it is so hodge podge who plays there. But a team flirting with them would get a good crowd.

 

[T-Boon]

Anyway, at the end of the day I don't care. The game rolls on while Perth bitches and moans meanwhile not really doing what they can to get a team.
Todays topic is promotion/relegation.

 

[Travitoh]

Yep, so weak clubs will need to get their shyte together (maybe get a rich owner) or they will languish in second division in perpetuity just as Newtown and Norths have done and survived.

How do you expect a team coming up from the second division to "get their shyte together" when their wage budget is increased by 150% with no guarantee of income beyond the next season and the only available players in the market at seasons end being the high earners that have had to be cut (and probably paid off) by the teams that are going down?

 

[Travitoh]

There is a commitment. 4 games per year and the city name on the jersey front. It might not be enough for YOU but it IS a big commitment and would drag fans in Perth.

Oh, the Sydney-sider says that getting the scraps from the table is enough of a commitment so we should all fall in line and accept it.

Perth fans already turn out to watch RL over there. It is dwindling because it is so hodge podge who plays there. But a team flirting with them would get a good crowd.

So Perth have already shown enough to warrant a NRL team over there? Why f**k around with the dregs from Sydney then and instead capitalise by starting a team in the city? There's room for a start up with the commitment to a second Brisbane team.