PNG's back.

[Perth Red]

Doesn't make sense tho... why would souths be "north/city" team they are in homebush

To maximise crowds and interest needs to be built more on rivalry than notional geography, though the numbers dont ideall stackup. You'd want a Sydney club 4/5 split but then it makes it hard to fit Qlnd/PNG and NZ all in one conf..

Id go:

National Conference
South Sydney
Roosters
St's
Sharks
Manly
Newcastle
Perth
Melbourne
Canberra
Wests

Pacific Conference
Penrith
Bulldogs
Parra
Broncos
Dolphins
NQ
Gold coast
Auckland
Christchurch
Port Moresby

Play each other twice for 18 games + 6 games v other conf clubs rotated each year.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Doesn't make sense tho... why would souths be "north/city" team they are in homebush

Don't fight it. Mine is better.

 

[MugaB]

To maximise crowds and interest needs to be built more on rivalry than notional geography, though the numbers dont ideall stackup. You'd want a Sydney club 4/5 split but then it makes it hard to fit Qlnd/PNG and NZ all in one conf..

Id go:

National Conference
South Sydney
Roosters
St's
Sharks
Manly
Newcastle
Perth
Melbourne
Canberra
Wests

Pacific Conference
Penrith
Bulldogs
Parra
Broncos
Dolphins
NQ
Gold coast
Auckland
Christchurch
Port Moresby

Play each other twice for 18 games + 6 games v other conf clubs rotated each year.

We are not talking about your two conference idea, we are talking about 4 pools/conferences, backtrack on the thread, besides rivalries will increase the more they all play each other anyways, trying to cling onto old rivalries, just discounts others, besides all syd clubs are basically rivals

 

[MugaB]

Don't fight it. Mine is better.

Yours is rubbish because of it, again it all made sense bar that souths

 

[i0Nic]

The biggest stumbling block, other than how to split them, is what does winning a conference mean to teams and fans?

In MLB, which is probably the most split comp in the US, there is a real prestige in winning either the National or American league penant. Not as prestigious as the world series but still big. Also, rivalries in each league are often bigger than geographical rivals in inter-conference games.

The NRL when it gets to 20 teams should keep it simple.

Each team plays each other once = 19 rounds.

Then split into 4 groups of 5 who play each other again = 23 rounds.

Groups:
Queensland: Brisbane, Dolphins, Gold Coast, North Queensland, PNG
South: Canberra, Cronulla, St George Illawarra, Melbourne, Warriors
West: Canterbury, Parramatta, Penrith, Perth, Wests Tigers
North/City: Manly, Newcastle, Roosters, Souths, TBA

If team 20 is a Queensland team you could slot them into the Queensland group and move PNG into the North/City group. If it’s NZ2 you could swap Melbourne into North/City group and put NZ2 into the south group.

Anyway, just spitballing, hope that's OK with Chairman Pipsqueak.

This is not bad but doesn’t create the most opportunities for local derbies. Ie Saints vs Roosters / Bulldogs

 

[AlwaysGreen]

This is not bad but doesn’t create the most opportunities for local derbies. Ie Saints vs Roosters / Bulldogs

No problem, it was just an example.

 

[MugaB]

This is not bad but doesn’t create the most opportunities for local derbies. Ie Saints vs Roosters

Yes it does,
All qlds together (add png)
Western suburbs together (add perf)
Knights, manly, syd, together (add 2 nz's)

just Souths, Dragons, Cronulla should be in one (as I mentioned) (then add melb, canb)

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Yours is rubbish because of it, again it all made sense bar that souths

I told you not to fight it.

Mine is better.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Yes it does,
All qlds together (add png)
Western suburbs together (add perf)
Knights, manly, syd together (add 2 nz's)

just Souths, Dragons, Cronulla should be in one (as I mentioned) (then add melb, canb)

Souths v Roosters is the oldest rivalry in the game. Yet you've ignored it.

 

[MugaB]

Souths v Roosters is the oldest rivalry in the game. Yet you've ignored it.

Yep, and in 2000 we all ignored it aswell, need to split NSW 4 ways, can't have them all, and souths is no longer the city team it once was, they took the money from Accor, to be the gentrified hipster team slowly moving out west

 

[Wb1234]

Nswrl conference (Penrith dogs sharks you are forgiven) plus Newcastle

Super league conference

You know it’s what many of you guys have hoped for. Reebs would be so happy

 

[Perth Red]

surely you'd go:

Souths, Roosters, Manly, Perth, Melbourne
Parra, Wests, Bulldogs, Auckland, Christchurch
Sharks, Dragons, Penrith, Canberra, Newcastle
Broncos, Titans, NQ, Dolphins, PNG

 

[i0Nic]

I guess whichever way you cut it if you do a 4 way conference you’ll miss out on some key rivalries.

 

[shadowformz]

Development pathway to National Rugby League

LITTLE Clifford Yaglkane Mollomb will be turning two years old soon. Like many boys his age, he plays a lot and one of his favorite sports is rugby league.

www.postcourier.com.pg

 

[Wb1234]

Yep, and in 2000 we all ignored it aswell, need to split NSW 4 ways, can't have them all, and souths is no longer the city team it once was, they took the money from Accor, to be the gentrified hipster team slowly moving out west

They will move back to the Allianz (sfs) once the lease is up at Accor

They tried to get out of the lease after they realised their mistake but the nsw govt played hardball

 

[Vee]

To maximise crowds and interest needs to be built more on rivalry than notional geography, though the numbers dont ideall stackup. You'd want a Sydney club 4/5 split but then it makes it hard to fit Qlnd/PNG and NZ all in one conf..

Id go:

National Conference
South Sydney
Roosters
St's
Sharks
Manly
Newcastle
Perth
Melbourne
Canberra
Wests

Pacific Conference
Penrith
Bulldogs
Parra
Broncos
Dolphins
NQ
Gold coast
Auckland
Christchurch
Port Moresby

Play each other twice for 18 games + 6 games v other conf clubs rotated each year.

Prefer NZ in the other conference. Teams should share the impost of international travel.