Peter Beatte NRL 360 - expansion

[tri_colours]

A "fact" that nobody has ever been a able to prove...

It's not a fact, its just an idea that has been repeated enough that it's become 'fact'.

Most peoples knowledge of the games history is not restricted to what they've read on Wikipedia.!

 

[titoelcolombiano]

"t no time did I or say or imply that AFL had taken over North Sydney.
Though they have become stronger in that area"



Swans crowds at the outset of the war,


1994:10k - Swans received

95: 16k

96: 25k


Today: 34k

+ GWS



I don't know what else to tell you.

1994:10k - Swans received the wooden spoon and had years of poor performances

95: 16k - The club signed Barrasi (coach), Brereton, Paul Kelly and Tony Lockett with cash that the AFL injected to help save the club (star power) and they lifted to 12th on the ladder.

96: 25k - Star team and a minor premiership and a grand final appearance (first ever as Sydney) will have this affect

Today: 34k - After 30 years this is pretty poor.

+ GWS - No one cares, no one asked for them, losing money, poor crowds, completely propped up by AFL money

 

[tri_colours]

1994:10k - Swans received the wooden spoon and had years of poor performances

95: 16k - The club signed Barrasi (coach), Brereton, Paul Kelly and Tony Lockett with cash that the AFL injected to help save the club (star power) and they lifted to 12th on the ladder.

96: 25k - Star team and a minor premiership and a grand final appearance (first ever as Sydney) will have this affect

Today: 34k - After 30 years this is pretty poor.

+ GWS - No one cares, no one asked for them, losing money, poor crowds, completely propped up by AFL money

Maybe your partly right , Maybe you can put much of the growth the Swans & Bears had over this period down to successful seasons. But certainly not all . Anyone who thinks the game didn't lose supporters over this period has issues

And aren't you just supplying me with further reasons why fans walked away during this period?











i

 

[Perth Red]

You have zero evidence that they will not provide such funds! Given that rugby league is the most popular football product on Australian tv; I suggest it's a fair assumption! ?

I have ten years of evidence. We have had a TV deal in 2013 when they could have paid more for a ninth game. Then we had a TV deal for 2018 when they could have paid more for a ninth game. I mean seriously what more evidence do you need? Where is your evidence they will pay more because history is showing us that so far they havent.

 

[Perth Red]

That's laughable! The "agreement" to go to 14 teams had everything to do with forced mergers and lost clubs! It was soon found out that the carve up was excessive and some desperate remedial strategic re-inclusions( South Sydney & Gold Coast ) had to occur.

Woosh you totally missed the point, the mergers and loss of clubs did not massively see a boost to Swans crowds ergo AFL has not benefited in attendances from the loss of Bears or mergers which is what tri was asserting. The FACTS clearly show this hasn't been the case.

 

[Perth Red]

The SL war had everything to do with the loss/mergers of Sydney teams.

In December 1997 when the ARL and Super League agreed to reunite and form the NRL it was agreed that the competition had to be reduced to 14 teams by 2000.

That forced panicked mergers, culling of teams etc. Considering a Melbourne side had been accepted for 1998, they had to reduce 23 teams down to 14.

Hunter basically became Melbourne
Balmain and Wests Merged
Norths and Manly merged
St.George and Illawarra merged
Souths axed
Gold Coast axed
Perth axed
Adelaide axed
South Queensland axed

and that left 14 teams.

6 Sydney clubs, 5 of which were foundation clubs, the other almost was (at first grade level that is) were slashed.

Again not the point I was making, the claim was the mergers and cuts post SL led to a massive increase in Swans crowds, its simply not true.

 

[Stallion]

I have ten years of evidence. We have had a TV deal in 2013 when they could have paid more for a ninth game. Then we had a TV deal for 2018 when they could have paid more for a ninth game. I mean seriously what more evidence do you need? Where is your evidence they will pay more because history is showing us that so far they havent.

I feel your frustration PR. However you can blame poor administrators that were in place at that time. Remembering that two clubs (Rabbitohs & Gold Coast)were readmitted after the league worked out that they were very much needed.

 

[madunit]

Derbies aren't built from inner city teams either, or from a long association, they come and go

Melbourne v Manly
Melbourne v Cronulla

The 90's had Brisbane v Canberra

Whereas one of the most passionate derby in the last 50 years, Manly v Wests basically doesn't exist anymore.

I think derbies is something English clubs have and they maintain them, whereas in Australia, I don't think the fans are as obsessed by rivalries. Even Souths v Easts derbies had dull moments in the past with crappy crowds.

It's a flimsy premise to hang an argument upon.

 

[Perth Red]

And aren't you just supplying me with further reasons why fans walked away during this period?

i

Did we really lose that many? Take a look at club avg crowds in 1995 compared to last year. I'm not seeing a mass exodus of fans in that 20 year period? TV audiences are also bigger now than in the early/mid 90's. We certainly didnt lose them to AFL in Sydney that is a FACT

https://www.afltables.com/rl/crowds/1995.html

https://www.afltables.com/rl/crowds/2015.html

 

[Timmah]

I feel your frustration PR. However you can blame poor administrators that were in place at that time. Remembering that two clubs (Rabbitohs & Gold Coast)were readmitted after the league worked out that they were very much needed.

Gold Coast weren't readmitted, an entirely new club was created. While they honour the past of top-flight RL in the region, they have no direct association with the Giants/Seagulls/Chargers era at all.

 

[Perth Red]

I feel your frustration PR. However you can blame poor administrators that were in place at that time. Remembering that two clubs (Rabbitohs & Gold Coast)were readmitted after the league worked out that they were very much needed.

So you think that TV would have paid but the NRL just didn't ask? I know they are incompetent but even I would struggle to believe they were that incompetent. In fact they are on record as saying they did ask and TV didn't want expansion.

 

[madunit]

Again not the point I was making, the claim was the mergers and cuts post SL led to a massive increase in Swans crowds, its simply not true.

Swans crowd average 1992-1999

1992 - 9963
1993 - 9423
1994 (when the war officially began) - 9814
1995 - 15976
1996 - 24574
1997 (Super League kicked off) - 35818
1998 (reunification) - 31549
1999 - 30539
from 2000 til 2018 their lowest average has been 24981in 2012.

I think it would be a little foolish to dismiss the claim entirely. The whole Super League war was quite good for the Swans.

Coincidentally, they became a regular in the finals the year before Super League began.

From 1946-1995 - made the finals 4 times
From 1996-2018 - missed the finals just 3 times.

Furthermore, NRL crowds have barely improved over the period. from 13k in 1994 to 15k in 2018.

The fans have gone somewhere. They certainly didn't go to Rugby Union or the soccer.

 

[Perth Red]

Swans crowd average 1992-1999

1992 - 9963
1993 - 9423
1994 (when the war officially began) - 9814
1995 - 15976
1996 - 24574
1997 (Super League kicked off) - 35818
1998 (reunification) - 31549
1999 - 30539
from 2000 til 2018 their lowest average has been 24981in 2012.

I think it would be a little foolish to dismiss the claim entirely. The whole Super League war was quite good for the Swans.

Coincidentally, they became a regular in the finals the year before Super League began.

From 1946-1995 - made the finals 4 times
From 1996-2018 - missed the finals just 3 times.

Like I posted before they also got 25k in '86 and 22k in '87 so its not like they dont have a record of significant crowd spikes when they do well. The fact the crowds dropped away again in 2000-2002 and 2011-2013 would suggest their crowd improvements are more to do with on field form than the outcome of the loss of the NS Bears and mergers?

 

[madunit]

Like I posted before they also got 25k in '86 and 22k in '87 so its not like they dont have a record of significant crowd spikes when they do well. The fact the crowds dropped away again in 2000-2002 and 2011-2013 would suggest their crowd improvements are more to do with on field form than the outcome of the loss of the NS Bears and mergers?

The dips and spikes in crowd figures since 2000 are not as dramatic. They have maintained a much higher crowd average since the Super League war, while RL has barely had any increase (up approx 2k on average from 1994 to 2018)

 

[Stallion]

Like I posted before they also got 25k in '86 and 22k in '87 so its not like they dont have a record of significant crowd spikes when they do well. The fact the crowds dropped away again in 2000-2002 and 2011-2013 would suggest their crowd improvements are more to do with on field form than the outcome of the loss of the NS Bears and mergers?

The loss of the Bears and the mergers have absolutely pissed off fans!

 

[Perth Red]

The loss of the Bears and the mergers have absolutely pissed off fans!

But have they become Swans/AFL fans like you claim? There is very little evidence they have. To suggest further reductions in the national league's sydney make up would give AFL a huge leg up in Sydney just isnt born out by the evidence of what has happened in the past. Given the absolute fortune the AFL has thrown at trying to make it happen it has been a failure and the loss of the Bears or the mergers have not played any significant part in AFL becoming a threat to NRL in Sydney. Swans and GWS crowds, number of genuine registered players and TV audiences simply do not show any evidence of this growth due to NRL footprint reduction. Not sure I can say it any other way to help you understand lol.

And its pissed off SOME fans. Clearly the 40k plus members of the two merged clubs are quite ok.

 

[The Great Dane]

Gold Coast weren't readmitted, an entirely new club was created. While they honour the past of top-flight RL in the region, they have no direct association with the Giants/Seagulls/Chargers era at all.

Not a big issue but the Chargers had no association with Giants/Seagulls either.

 

[tri_colours]

Did we really lose that many? Take a look at club avg crowds in 1995 compared to last year. I'm not seeing a mass exodus of fans in that 20 year period? TV audiences are also bigger now than in the early/mid 90's. We certainly didnt lose them to AFL in Sydney that is a FACT


https://www.afltables.com/rl/crowds/1995.html

https://www.afltables.com/rl/crowds/2015.html

Crowds are well down over that period. But your missing the obvious clubs have hundreds of thousands of fans. Not just 20 or 30k;

League crowds were fudged by both sides.

Just because you cant see something doesn't mean it didn't happen.


25 years later. Shouldn't they be the case?

FTA



They didn't have Foxtel. back then. Besides that TV numbers have fallen over the past few years

Swans crowds more than doubled . Brisbane bears fans also increased significantly during that period. But you can say, with certainty they didn't go to AFL

 

[Perth Red]

Crowds are well down over that period. But your missing the obvious clubs have hundreds of thousands of fans. Not just 20 or 30k;

Whats your evidence of this? There is nothing in attendances, memberships, merch sales or TV audiences to suggest clubs have hundreds of thousands of fans

They didn't have Foxtel. back then. Besides that TV numbers have fallen over the past few years

As theyhave for other sports, we ar enot ophans in this. Also we have not cut or merged any clubs during this recent decline period so again has no relevance to the argument.

Swans crowds more than doubled . Brisbane bears fans also increased significantly during that period. But you can say, with certainty they didn't go to AFL

No they didnt, as I have pointed out they were getting sporadic 20k plus crowds in the 80's, well before SL or mergers or Bears relegation. They've done well from the late 90's to now to maintain a 20k plus avg with sporadic peaks of 30k plus when they are winning premierships. Considering how much AFL has spent trying to get Sydney to like its game I would suggest the $300milllion'ish the AFL has invested in this period has a lot more to do with crowd increases than the Bears demise (opinion). You'd hope if the NRL had invested $300million in Melbourne that the Storm would be selling out AAMI by now.

 

[tri_colours]

Whats your evidence of this? There is nothing in attendances, memberships, merch sales or TV audiences to suggest clubs have hundreds of thousands of fans



As they have for other sports, we ar enot ophans in this. Also we have not cut or merged any clubs during this recent decline period so again has no relevance to the argument.



No they didnt, as I have pointed out they were getting sporadic 20k plus crowds in the 80's, well before SL or mergers or Bears relegation. They've done well from the late 90's to now to maintain a 20k plus avg with sporadic peaks of 30k plus when they are winning premierships. Considering how much AFL has spent trying to get Sydney to like its game I would suggest the $300milllion'ish the AFL has invested in this period has a lot more to do with crowd increases than the Bears demise (opinion). You'd hope if the NRL had invested $300million in Melbourne that the Storm would be selling out AAMI by now.

An Origin game often draws 4million. Often a million in Sydney alone. More than half a million in the NSW regionals. All or most would follow an NRL team. As well plenty elsewhere .


You bought it up about TV numbers so yes, i think mentioning Foxtel is a fair point

No they didn’t have memberships back then so its literally amazing how you can arrive at these decisions.


They have spent a lot of money and are very serious . So killing of more Sydney clubs would only help them further.


I never blamed it on just 1 thing. Rather a combination of the above.


I totally agree on expansion. But we should guard against stretching ourselves to thin.