Peter Beatte NRL 360 - expansion

[The Great Dane]

What rubbish, St.George has supporters everywhere, Souths also, Parramatta too just to name a few.

I can tell you Balmain were a very popular club also outside Sydney.

I never said they didn't...

 

[The Great Dane]

I understand very well how forums work, you're just a tool about you go about replying to others, you troll them. as if we all are beneath you, and you argue pointlessly every post when it comes to anything i would post, basically you're defensive and constantly post dribble about how you have to make yourself and others accountable for their facts, figures and debate, these forums don't exist for arguing some fact finding missions, but it seems its all you want to do, like a troll climbing some debate ladder
The forums are about discussion, ideas and expression, not attacking other members arguments, for your own validation

Firstly, whether or not something is pointless is subjective and nobody is singling you out or targeting you, least of all me, if anything you have been the one singling people out (including myself) by calling them trolls and the such.
You cannot expect to express a point of view that is at best contentious and at worst outright false in a public forum and for nobody to respond to it, or at least request that you back your stance up, to expect such a thing is not only asinine it's incredibly f**king childish (especially when you obviously maintain the right to do exactly what you are complaining about others doing as your above post and others show).

For some reason you seem to have identified me as a troll that turns every thread into an argument, well frankly I've been here since 2012, I've mainly posted on this sub-forum since then, for most of that time most threads didn't devolve into arguments, but then people like for example Stallion (no offence Stallion, I don't mean to pick you out but you have to admit everywhere you go an argument follows so you are a good example) showed up on a more and more regular basis that would say things that were blatantly false, they'd literally say things like e.g. x team has x amount of members and therefore x should happen, when x team didn't have x amount of members and therefore everything that they said was total BS, but instead of admitting that they got it wrong they'd double down and then start an argument about the facts, then this started to happen in almost every thread cause a handful of the usual suspects would show up and turn every thread into those same handful of arguments ad-nauseam, but I'd like to point out that it isn't me that brings up the f**king Bears and CC in every thread...

Admittedly I'll sometimes partake in those arguments, cause you know what sometimes it's fun to partake in those arguments, and I'm not the only one in those arguments that is having fun either, and whether you like it or not arguments are also part of the "discussion, ideas and expression" that "forums are about", but apart from this argument now I haven't really been in an argument in a while now, more often than not I like to participate in dialectics with peoples or people that hold ideas that I find interesting for whatever reason, not cause I'm trying to change their minds or whatever, but because I'm trying to understand them, their ideas, or where they are coming from.
If you don't like that then that is your problem, not mine or anybody else's, and who exactly are you to tell me, or anybody else for that matter, what manner of discourse they should participate in and how they should participate in it!?

If Stallion and Titoelcolombiano want to argue about something for a hundred pages that is none of your business, or anybody else's for that matter, so long as they are staying broadly topic and not totally derailing the thread!

 

[MugaB]

Great rebuttal, ill finish reading 2mrw when i have an hour or so to kill, i got upto the word asinine

Curiously when did forums get so heated over arguing esthetics, instead of just paragraphs of wishful thinking.

Let me tangent into teams that have a possible bid for 2022 post comp
Perth Pirates?
Central Coast Bears?
PNG+Cairns?
Brisbane Brothers/Western Corridor?
Redcliffe Dolphins?
Wellington Orcas?
Any of these or more got any chance in the new TV deal, ARL & NRL say they'll be looking into it this year, i haven't heard much from the bids of late
I do remember the Bombers bid wasn't happening for some reason, and the CQLD bid also, anyone know the rundown of any/all of these
I personally would like to see more QLD teams in the comp

 

[Stallion]

Great rebuttal, ill finish reading 2mrw when i have an hour or so to kill, i got upto the word asinine

Curiously when did forums get so heated over arguing esthetics, instead of just paragraphs of wishful thinking.

Let me tangent into teams that have a possible bid for 2022 post comp
Perth Pirates?
Central Coast Bears?
PNG+Cairns?
Brisbane Brothers/Western Corridor?
Redcliffe Dolphins?
Wellington Orcas?
Any of these or more got any chance in the new TV deal, ARL & NRL say they'll be looking into it this year, i haven't heard much from the bids of late
I do remember the Bombers bid wasn't happening for some reason, and the CQLD bid also, anyone know the rundown of any/all of these
I personally would like to see more QLD teams in the comp

It's astonishing that two "licenses"to print money with basic infrastructure in place (Central Coast Bears & Brisbane2) are not in short term additional club strategy as we speak. These two clubs have grounds and juniors in place. A bit of endeavour would see the sponsors come clamoring in. But we get procrastination instead. Other more ambitious additional clubs should be planned as well for future growth. ((West Coast Pirates etc)But it's sitting on hands stuff as time goes on!

 

[The Great Dane]

Let me tangent into teams that have a possible bid for 2022 post comp
Perth Pirates?
Central Coast Bears?
PNG+Cairns?
Brisbane Brothers/Western Corridor?
Redcliffe Dolphins?
Wellington Orcas?
Any of these or more got any chance in the new TV deal, ARL & NRL say they'll be looking into it this year, i haven't heard much from the bids of late
I do remember the Bombers bid wasn't happening for some reason, and the CQLD bid also, anyone know the rundown of any/all of these
I personally would like to see more QLD teams in the comp

The CC Bears and Wellington Orcas bids have folded and as such won't be bidding, but that doesn't mean that new Bears, Wellington, or even independent CC bids won't pop up in the future or that the CC Bears or Wellington Orcas bids won't be resurrected by somebody in the future, only that as of this very moment they are dead and won't be bidding. Also you are right that the CQLD bid has folded as well.

Brothers and Western Corridor are two separate bids, I think you are confusing the Brothers bid for the Ipswich Jets bid which did merge with the Western Corridor bid.

PNG+Cairns is a proposed bid, but there isn't actually a consortium that is from PNG+Cairns that is actually confirmed to be bidding, however there is an independent PNG bid.

The Bombers bid is still alive they just aren't actively promoting it at the moment cause realistically there's no reason for them to do so at the moment as it's expensive and the NRL hasn't announced that they are going to expand so it'd effectively be money wasted.

It's confusing but technically the West Coast Pirates aren't a bid team anymore cause the NRL now owns the WARL which owns the West Coast Pirates (so effectively a West Coast Pirates bid would be the NRL bidding for a spot in their own competition), however the WARL are still trying to get a license in an expanded NRL comp they just aren't officially bidding anymore cause of the conflict of interest, i.e. officially they aren't bidding for a license but they are still trying to get the NRL to grant them a license through other means.

Tony Sage (the owner of the Perth Glory) has publicly stated his intent to bid for an NRL license for a club to be based in Perth when the NRL announce that they are starting the expansion process, he's supposedly working with Benny Elias on the bid, but it's definitely on the back burner for the moment and whether or not it'll actually amount to anything isn't clear.

There's also another bid that is officially confirmed to be bidding that is often forgotten about called the South Pacific Cyclones (here's a link). It's proposed that they'd be based in Wellington and play half their games in Wellington with the other half to be played across the South Pacific.

That is the run down of all the bids that have publicly announced that they are bidding or that you asked about, however there is also a bid proposed by Marwan Koukash from the UK called the British Bulldogs which would be based in London (which will almost certainly never actually bid for a license), and a handful of proposed or rumoured bids from Brisbane, Perth, Cairns, The Sunshine Coast, Wellington, Auckland, Christchurch, and even Hawaii, but those bids aren't publicly announced and may or may not actually exist let alone actually bid when the NRL announces the expansion process, so take them with a grain of salt.

As to which bids actually have a chance of getting a license when the NRL next expands, well unless somebody comes along offering something extraordinary (like offering to invest a stupid amount into the NRL but only if the NRL gives them a license for their city/region of choice) or one of the bids manages to get the backing of someone like Shad Khan, a Saudi Prince, or whatever, the only bids that realistically have a chance would be bids from Perth, Brisbane, NZ, and as dark horses Adelaide or Melbourne, all the other bids have basically no hope of getting a license for the time being.

 

[MugaB]

That Cyclones bid was intresting, its exactly what i thought was a possible idea for south pacific islander team, i actually thought it would be based in Christchurch tho, to include south Island and gains a rivalry towards the warriors, but this works better, since its more east of Auckland, and maybe not logistically closer but geographicaly closer to the trio of fiji, tonga, and samoa than the south island towns would be (even tho the distance is SYD-PNG away) this by far is a team i'd be wanting to see in NRL someday maybe not happening in 2023 tho

 

[The Great Dane]

That Cyclones bid was intresting, its exactly what i thought was a possible idea for south pacific islander team, i actually thought it would be based in Christchurch tho, to include south Island and gains a rivalry towards the warriors, but this works better, since its more east of Auckland, and maybe not logistically closer but geographicaly closer to the trio of fiji, tonga, and samoa than the south island towns would be (even tho the distance is SYD-PNG away) this by far is a team i'd be wanting to see in NRL someday maybe not happening in 2023 tho

After the novelty effect wears off it'd be a flop...They would be trying to be everything to everyone and will only achieve appealing to nobody.

The people in Wellington by and large won't support it cause they won't identify with it being a club for Wellington but as a club for the islander communities, the people from Rotorua, Napier, and the other towns on the North Island they plan to engage with will view it as a Wellington club or as a club of islander communities that doesn't really represent them either, and the over time the islanders in Fiji and Samoa (Tonga isn't in their plans cause they don't have the infrastructure to host games) will drop the team as they'll see it as an NZ team and they'll look to have their own clubs (Fiji has basically already dropped their support for the bid to back the Fiji NSW Cup bid).
So yeah it'd be really popular for a moment, then the novelty would wear off and they'd circle the drain for a few years, then they'd either fold or be reformed as an exclusively NZ or Wellington club.

Maybe sometime down the line a "South Pacific" club will make sense (but realistically by that point just allowing clubs from the islands into the comp will probably make more sense), but what the NRL needs in a second club from NZ is a club that is well placed in it's home city with a good quality stadium in a central part of the city that is easy to travel to and from for most people, that has a reasonably competitive team from day one that can act as reasonably good rivals for the Warriors, and that either represents it's area very well (for example a Wellington or Christchurch club) or a club that takes over from the Warriors as trying to represent all of NZ and allows the Warriors to focus on Auckland, not a club that is trying to be a sideshow across the South Pacific.

 

[MugaB]

Agreed on the novelty effect, but im tracing back 25 years ago, where ARL went with adding 4 teams in 1995, in NZ, Perth, Nth & Sth Qld, and after thinking about it now, Nz and Nth qld seemed to be the novelty idea of the 4, in comparison to a 2nd brisbane and perth side, and those first two are the ones who have stuck, (whilst most of us know why it all happened the way it has) cowboys being in a far north region pooling a team from vast areas of Cairns, Townsville to CQLD to a team, and then warriors being from another country altogether, is pretty ballsy/risky. The safer teams would have been Perth Reds with its large city growing population, and Brisbane 2 (being the Sth Qld Crushers) and its large brisbane junior RL population, should have been a lot more strategically safer, & we're only now on the cusp of getting back there to try once more .... maybe
Not sure if going safe is historically the next step,

I brought up the promotion of cronulla and penrith in 1967 (NSWRL) earlier in another post, and that was based on what region was acceptable to expand into, 50 years back tho, then Newcastle & Illawarra was then looked at after in the 80s but it ended up Illawarra & canberra instead (ACT being another state in a NSWRL comp), with Newcastle opting to stay with its own comp till later on in 88, when the 2 Qld teams also came about.
Regardless of how it all transpired, giving a license to a risky bid/team, could end up working out, could also be stupid too, and i know now is a different era, with so much dependant on PTV and sponsors, but its not a stretch to try something new like South Pacific Islands/Nz Cyclones bid or even Adelaide & Png or whoever etc

I can't really say Gold Coasts 3 incarnations have been successful yet with the Titans not in finals contendership for most of its 12 years, even tho its known for being a RL city, and expansion hasn't been NRL's strongest attribute or we'd have more teams by now,
But then again Penrith only really had success in late 80s onwards, and Cronulla only finally won a GF in 2016, so really time will only judge whats worth pursuing, maybe Brisbane is destined to be all alone in its big city, and Perth may never be what we would hope it could be (Melbourne Storm like)

 

[The Great Dane]

Agreed on the novelty effect, but im tracing back 25 years ago, where ARL went with adding 4 teams in 1995, in NZ, Perth, Nth & Sth Qld, and after thinking about it now, Nz and Nth qld seemed to be the novelty idea of the 4, in comparison to a 2nd brisbane and perth side, and those first two are the ones who have stuck, (whilst most of us know why it all happened the way it has) cowboys being in a far north region pooling a team from vast areas of Cairns, Townsville to CQLD to a team, and then warriors being from another country altogether, is pretty ballsy/risky. The safer teams would have been Perth Reds with its large city growing population, and Brisbane 2 (being the Sth Qld Crushers) and its large brisbane junior RL population, should have been a lot more strategically safer, & we're only now on the cusp of getting back there to try once more .... maybe
Not sure if going safe is historically the next step,

Actually as I remember it at the time North Queensland was seen as a safe bet cause it was a heartland with a strong RL culture and the Western Reds were seen as the risky move cause of WA's history with Aussie Rules, but I get what you are trying to say, but realistically the Crushers only failed because SL which were some pretty extraordinary circumstances that are unlikely to be repeated anytime soon, on other hand the Reds probably would have folded sometime in the late 90s or early 00s, but that is a whole other subject.

I brought up the promotion of cronulla and penrith in 1967 (NSWRL) earlier in another post, and that was based on what region was acceptable to expand into, 50 years back tho, then Newcastle & Illawarra was then looked at after in the 80s but it ended up Illawarra & canberra instead (ACT being another state in a NSWRL comp), with Newcastle opting to stay with its own comp till later on in 88, when the 2 Qld teams also came about.
Regardless of how it all transpired, giving a license to a risky bid/team, could end up working out, could also be stupid too, and i know now is a different era, with so much dependant on PTV and sponsors, but its not a stretch to try something new like South Pacific Islands/Nz Cyclones bid or even Adelaide & Png or whoever etc

There's risky and then there's doomed to fail.

More likely then not an Adelaide club would be a risky prospect, there'd be a lot at stake and it could go south, but it could also have huge rewards if the NRL can pull it off.

On the other hand when we're talking about PNG, Fiji, Samoa, etc, we're talking about third world countries and everything that goes along with that, so they aren't exactly the richest markets with the largest amounts of money to chuck around, then on top of that any clubs operating in those countries are going to have huge travel costs, higher security costs, etc, so not only are they going to be operating in poorer markets but they're going to cost a hell of a lot more to run than your average club as well, so really it's a double whammy of bad circumstances that as things stand at the moment are probably insurmountable outside of extraordinary circumstances.

But even if we don't accept that a PNG team or a Cyclones style team is basically a crazy prospect for the time being, there's still next to no chance of either getting a license because they simply aren't as valuable to the NRL as say a Perth or Brisbane club, as the broadcasting rights for PNG, Fiji, Samoa, etc, aren't really worth all that much, their populations have next to no disposable income, etc, etc.

I can't really say Gold Coasts 3 incarnations have been successful yet with the Titans not in finals contendership for most of its 12 years, even tho its known for being a RL city, and expansion hasn't been NRL's strongest attribute or we'd have more teams by now,
But then again Penrith only really had success in late 80s onwards, and Cronulla only finally won a GF in 2016, so really time will only judge whats worth pursuing, maybe Brisbane is destined to be all alone in its big city, and Perth may never be what we would hope it could be (Melbourne Storm like)

Firstly, when talking about successful expansion clubs really we're talking about whether or not they have been successful businesses and if they have benefited the league, not whether or not they have had success on the field, cause even if a club wins 8 premierships in a row it really doesn't mean all that much if they are running at a massive loss and have to be propped up by the NRL to survive.

Secondly there have been 5 Gold Coast clubs in the NSWRL/ARL/NRL's history: the Giants, Seagulls, Gladiators, Chargers, and Titans.

 

[MugaB]

Actually as I remember it at the time North Queensland was seen as a safe bet cause it was a heartland with a strong RL culture and the Western Reds were seen as the risky move cause of WA's history with Aussie Rules, but I get what you are trying to say, but realistically the Crushers only failed because SL which were some pretty extraordinary circumstances that are unlikely to be repeated anytime soon, on other hand the Reds probably would have folded sometime in the late 90s or early 00s, but that is a whole other subject.



There's risky and then there's doomed to fail.

More likely then not an Adelaide club would be a risky prospect, there'd be a lot at stake and it could go south, but it could also have huge rewards if the NRL can pull it off.

On the other hand when we're talking about PNG, Fiji, Samoa, etc, we're talking about third world countries and everything that goes along with that, so they aren't exactly the richest markets with the largest amounts of money to chuck around, then on top of that any clubs operating in those countries are going to have huge travel costs, higher security costs, etc, so not only are they going to be operating in poorer markets but they're going to cost a hell of a lot more to run than your average club as well, so really it's a double whammy of bad circumstances that as things stand at the moment are probably insurmountable outside of extraordinary circumstances.

But even if we don't accept that a PNG team or a Cyclones style team is basically a crazy prospect for the time being, there's still next to no chance of either getting a license because they simply aren't as valuable to the NRL as say a Perth or Brisbane club, as the broadcasting rights for PNG, Fiji, Samoa, etc, aren't really worth all that much, their populations have next to no disposable income, etc, etc.



Firstly, when talking about successful expansion clubs really we're talking about whether or not they have been successful businesses and if they have benefited the league, not whether or not they have had success on the field, cause even if a club wins 8 premierships in a row it really doesn't mean all that much if they are running at a massive loss and have to be propped up by the NRL to survive.

Secondly there have been 5 Gold Coast clubs in the NSWRL/ARL/NRL's history: the Giants, Seagulls, Gladiators, Chargers, and Titans.

The 3 "previous" incarnations for Gold coast were Giants, Seagulls, Chargers.
Titans are here now, Gladiators really doesnt count as they never really played IMO, one game in world 7s hardly qualifies.
But thats inconsequential, and Gold Coast is in RL heartland also, but that's not really in their favour considering the turnover of multiple clubs, soccer included.

and as far as successful goes, the business works well when your popular, make consistant finals, win a premiership or more, memberships rise, more crowds, that said cronulla have seen better days, even after their maiden win, Melbourne are successful, but Titans aren't really there as of yet.

The others i mentioned were in NSWRL/ARL, but i wasn't really counting there involvement in "NRL's" ability to expand, since 1998
As reds/rams/crushers/chargers/hunters all were unique cases in a merger of comps, whos to say whether they would be thriving now given the chance that the cowboys/warriors still existing from that late 90s expansion era

 

[The Great Dane]

and as far as successful goes, the business works well when your popular, make consistant finals, win a premiership or more, memberships rise, more crowds, that said cronulla have seen better days, even after their maiden win, Melbourne are successful, but Titans aren't really there as of yet.

That is a terribly unstable business model...

You can't win all the time and if the fans only show up when you win then when you go through a rough patch your club is going to really struggle, so clubs either need to be able to be an attractive product even when the team isn't successful on the pitch, or they need to diversify their revenue streams so they aren't completely reliant on the results of footy games for their survival, preferably they'd do both...

Also attitudes like that are why Australian sport will always be small time and niche outside of this country... People who have no clue and no interest in e.g. American football become interested in the NFL daily cause the NFL doesn't only invest in the team and hope things go well, they invest a shit ton of money into the event and the spectacle as well as the team and the spectacle attracts and holds more uninitiated peoples attention long enough to attract them as fans when in of itself they wouldn't have given the sport a second look...

The others i mentioned were in NSWRL/ARL, but i wasn't really counting there involvement in "NRL's" ability to expand, since 1998
As reds/rams/crushers/chargers/hunters all were unique cases in a merger of comps, who's to say whether they would be thriving now given the chance that the cowboys/warriors still existing from that late 90s expansion era

Well actually a lot of people could say, all they have to do is look into each business and how they were traveling, in fact I'll do it right now for you!

The Reds were screwed from the beginning, they massively underestimated how much running a club would cost (especially with the extra expenditures that they were forced to carry by the NSWRL), they massively overestimated how many active supporters they'd attract, etc, etc, they were bleeding money and they didn't have the start up capital to cover the costs. Unless somebody came along and saved them financially (which they thought that was what News was going to do) they almost certainly would have folded sometime in the late 90s or early 00s.

Both the Rams and Chargers had money in the bank when they were folded, in fact they were in better financial positions then quite a few of the clubs that were allowed to continue on, so while they were by no means stable businesses (which isn't surprising since they were just starting up), there's no reason why they couldn't have been successful long term.

Given time there's no reason why the Crushers couldn't have been successful, unfortunately SL and the Broncos didn't give them that time.

I assume that when you say the "Hunters" that you mean the Hunter Mariners right? Well do I really have to explain why unless SL could kill off the ARL and the Knights along with them why the Mariners were doomed to fail!

As for both the Cowboys and Warriors, well the Cowboys were basically in the same situation as the Reds, in fact if it wasn't for the News money and them spending it well they would have almost certainly gone the same way as the Reds did.
The Warriors were also in the same boat as the Reds and Cowboys, but worse as they were bleeding money like no other, even with the News money they were already burning out owners chequebooks left and right and went through a handful before 2000, and they actually did fold. Technically the NZ Warriors and the Auckland Warriors are two different clubs, the Auckland Warriors folded but then Eric Watson came along bought their brand (and some of their other assets) then cut a deal with the NRL to give him a license and thus the NZ Warriors were born.

So yeah, baring extraordinary and unpredictable circumstances we can definitely pretty reasonably predict how each club would have turned out were it not for SL, and for most it's not pretty...

 

[Stallion]

That is a terribly unstable business model...

You can't win all the time and if the fans only show up when you win then when you go through a rough patch your club is going to really struggle, so clubs either need to be able to be an attractive product even when the team isn't successful on the pitch, or they need to diversify their revenue streams so they aren't completely reliant on the results of footy games for their survival, preferably they'd do both...

Also attitudes like that are why Australian sport will always be small time and niche outside of this country... People who have no clue and no interest in e.g. American football become interested in the NFL daily cause the NFL doesn't only invest in the team and hope things go well, they invest a shit ton of money into the event and the spectacle as well as the team and the spectacle attracts and holds more uninitiated peoples attention long enough to attract them as fans when in of itself they wouldn't have given the sport a second look...



Well actually a lot of people could say, all they have to do is look into each business and how they were traveling, in fact I'll do it right now for you!

The Reds were screwed from the beginning, they massively underestimated how much running a club would cost (especially with the extra expenditures that they were forced to carry by the NSWRL), they massively overestimated how many active supporters they'd attract, etc, etc, they were bleeding money and they didn't have the start up capital to cover the costs. Unless somebody came along and saved them financially (which they thought that was what News was going to do) they almost certainly would have folded sometime in the late 90s or early 00s.

Both the Rams and Chargers had money in the bank when they were folded, in fact they were in better financial positions then quite a few of the clubs that were allowed to continue on, so while they were by no means stable businesses (which isn't surprising since they were just starting up), there's no reason why they couldn't have been successful long term.

Given time there's no reason why the Crushers couldn't have been successful, unfortunately SL and the Broncos didn't give them that time.

I assume that when you say the "Hunters" that you mean the Hunter Mariners right? Well do I really have to explain why unless SL could kill off the ARL and the Knights along with them why the Mariners were doomed to fail!

As for both the Cowboys and Warriors, well the Cowboys were basically in the same situation as the Reds, in fact if it wasn't for the News money and them spending it well they would have almost certainly gone the same way as the Reds did.
The Warriors were also in the same boat as the Reds and Cowboys, but worse as they were bleeding money like no other, even with the News money they were already burning out owners chequebooks left and right and went through a handful before 2000, and they actually did fold. Technically the NZ Warriors and the Auckland Warriors are two different clubs, the Auckland Warriors folded but then Eric Watson came along bought their brand (and some of their other assets) then cut a deal with the NRL to give him a license and thus the NZ Warriors were born.

So yeah, baring extraordinary and unpredictable circumstances we can definitely pretty reasonably predict how each club would have turned out were it not for SL, and for most it's not pretty...

 

[MugaB]

(whilst most of us know why it all happened the way it has)

And yes mariners, (hunters hehe)

Jesus bro, this is a shit-ton long, and its not really what i was talking about, a history lesson aside, and forecasting their fate is a hypothetical, and i totally agree with you
But i was talking about given the chance to continue as a club, lets say crushers for an EXAMPLE (now dont get all logistical now peopes, its an example)
Had they been able to continue 25years onto nowadays, forget all the stuff that happened to them, if they got the "NRL bail out" most clubs have had, would they have been as good as any of the teams by now.

business models aren't what i view for a team to be successful, im pretty sure in 1908 business models were all the craze, nichè is a good thing its what makes this sport special, damn the americans and their NFL its such a boring game

 

[The Great Dane]

(whilst most of us know why it all happened the way it has)

And yes mariners, (hunters hehe)

Jesus bro, this is a shit-ton long, and its not really what i was talking about, a history lesson aside, and forecasting their fate is a hypothetical, and i totally agree with you
But i was talking about given the chance to continue as a club, lets say crushers for an EXAMPLE (now dont get all logistical now peopes, its an example)
Had they been able to continue 25years onto nowadays, forget all the stuff that happened to them, if they got the "NRL bail out" most clubs have had, would they have been as good as any of the teams by now.

Is there any reason to believe that they wouldn't have been successful? Sure maybe they wouldn't have won a ton of premierships by now or whatever, but there's no reason to believe that they wouldn't at least be a sustainable club with a reasonably sized fan-base,etc.

For one thing if the Crushers, Chargers, Reds, and Rams had all survived then they all would have been scouring the same player pools in Brisbane/SEQ that the Storm have traditionally sourced the core of their players from, which would have meant that in all likely hood the big 3/4 and a ton of other great players that have come through the Storm wouldn't have all gone through the Storm's system and would have been shared between those clubs. So Slater, Smith, Cronk, Folau, Inglis, etc, all would have been shared between those clubs which would have fundamentally changed the sports history, i.e. there wouldn't have been a Melbourne dynasty.

business models aren't what i view for a team to be successful, im pretty sure in 1908 business models were all the craze,

Sure business models aren't necessarily what makes a team successful, they are however what makes a club (the business built around the footy team) successful, and if the club isn't successful then eventually their is no team at all...

Look at it this way, from an expansion point of view what's better: a new Perth team that is financially stable and is around for years to come but never wins a thing, or a Perth team that is a flash in the pan, they pop up in in 2022, win about 4 or so premierships, have lots of success, etc, but because of poor management by 2032 they are dead? I think we both know the answer to that question...

Don't get me wrong the team and it's success or lack their of is important, but in the grand scheme of when it comes to discussions about potential expansion clubs it's not nearly as important as whether or not the club is sustainable.

nichè is a good thing its what makes this sport special, damn the americans and their NFL its such a boring game

Well I guess it depends on your point of view, if you are fine with RL and the NRL just being a back water sport and league that doesn't really have any presence on the world stage then's fine to only appeal to a niche audience, but if you want RL and the NRL to grow as big as possible and to be relatively competitive in the market then being a niche product is bad, very, very bad, especially when you consider the constant globalisation of the professional sports market which will have more and more of an impact on local products that don't have global appeal, which is already having a massive impact on Australian sports, all you have to do to see that impact is go to any high school in the country and see the sea of NFL, NBA, EPL, and other European soccer merchandise compared to local competitions and clubs merch... If the NRL, AFL, or any of the other Australian pro-sports leagues dies off more likely then not it won't be because of pressure from local competitors (i.e. the AFL won't muscle the NRL out of their share of the market), it'll be because of pressure from giant international competitors like the aforementioned...

 

[MugaB]

Yeah i like nichè, EPL is a sport for those who like thier soccer (sorry.. FOOTball) and you can like gridion, basketball & follow every other code for sport there is, but if youre living in Australia, you're blessed with NRL and AFL being a sport unique to its region of the world, yes Union is played in most countries, and is similar to league and excels in Nz, but RL is a far better game to watch than all the rest, and thats just my opinion, we dont need America to want to watch us, yet promoting it to them seems to be a novelty for the NRL, i already know our sport is better than what they have in comparison. I suppose it depends on what youve grown up playing/watching too, boston red sox fans, wouldn't bother with Australian cricket, but to me baseball is SOOOO boring

P.s. Slater, Smith and Cronk at the Crushers, that would have been awesome

 

[titoelcolombiano]

We see things very differently. I like the expansion clubs, but a loss of tradition is a huge blow, I see all Sydney clubs as massive strengths for the game, no matter where they sit on the spectrum.

Yes, Sydney is the cornerstone of the league, no doubt and we need to preserve that tradition. For me that shouldn't come at the cost of growth though. Newtown and Norths are gone from the top flight but the NRL is bigger than ever.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Believe it or not, even kids are still aware of the North Sydney Bears. The television replays have seen to this and their hibernating fans still speak of this club. The support is much bigger than you think! And that goes for all the Sydney based clubs that grew into public notoriety through the tv coverage of the 70s through to the 90s. It's a reality you refuse to appreciate or acknowledge.

Their support was poor when in the top flight and would be smaller now so who cares about their hypernating fans that aren't loyal enough to go and watch them every second week at North Sydney Oval. They are no longer taking up a spot in the NRL which means the game as a whole can move on and grow.

 

[Captain Apollo]

The Reds were screwed from the beginning, they massively underestimated how much running a club would cost (especially with the extra expenditures that they were forced to carry by the NSWRL), they massively overestimated how many active supporters they'd attract, etc, etc, they were bleeding money and they didn't have the start up capital to cover the costs. Unless somebody came along and saved them financially (which they thought that was what News was going to do) they almost certainly would have folded sometime in the late 90s or early 00s.

The biggest one being contributing to the travel costs for the visiting team when the reds were at home. It was also this cost that was used as justification in cutting them at the end of 1999 as News Ltd wanted to reduce costs. It is also why now the NRL pays for the travel costs when teams have to travel inter-state (though I think it is only for up to around 20 people all up - if the clubs want more people, they have to pay the rest themselves).

 

[Stallion]

Their support was poor when in the top flight and would be smaller now so who cares about their hypernating fans that aren't loyal enough to go and watch them every second week at North Sydney Oval. They are no longer taking up a spot in the NRL which means the game as a whole can move on and grow.

You have underestimated the support of such a club. It's bigger than you think. And dismissing any support , no matter in what form, is not wise. This leads to a disconnect and ambivalence toward the NRL as time goes on. The established clubs are gold! This doesn't mean that additional clubs cannot occur. They certainly can and with the blessing of all existing clubs If things are well planned both strategically and financially.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

You have underestimated the support of such a club. It's bigger than you think. And dismissing any support , no matter in what form, is not wise. This leads to a disconnect and ambivalence toward the NRL as time goes on. The established clubs are gold! This doesn't mean that additional clubs cannot occur. They certainly can and with the blessing of all existing clubs If things are well planned both strategically and financially.

Did you notice that no one marched in the streets when the bears were put in NSW Cup?

No fans, no money and they are where they belong - in NSW Cup.