Possible Solution

[butchmcdick]

no they havent, so stop being condecending.

Foxsports have said, more games on TV = more money in TV rights.

AFL know this thats why they are adding 2 mickey mouse teams.

2 extra teams means an extra game. perth should add quite a bit to the TV rights because it makes the game seen in another capital city. also perth can offer a live friday night game shown at 9.30 into eastern markets which also is very valuable.

But perth already has 2 AFL teams, a super 14 franchise and an A League team. Isn't the market a bit saturated already ?

 

[innsaneink]

the NRL goes to whoever gets the TV rights next time and says, right we are bringing in 2 more teams, one from perth, how much more is that worth?

it would cost $7 million in club grants from the NRL.

surely an extra game on TV, and having games in the perth market are worth at least $7 million?

id have thought much more than that myself.

but you need a CEO who undertakes how to grow and what tv companies want

Errr...the players, where do they come from?

Round n round n round we go.....

 

[LeagueXIII]

Hasn't stopped the AFL putting another team in Sydney. Isn't this a market that we are constantly told is overcrowded?

Just another RL "it's too hard" decision. Grow the bloody game if there isn't the support, have a plan, don't just say it's too hard.

 

[vlad]

expansion will work if you reduce the teams to ten players each . the excess players can then spread out .:roll:

but seriously , if the owner/broadcaster of the NRL is genuine about maintaining the level of it's product then maybe they should do what they did in the SL War days and contract marquee players to themselves and allow the clubs to bid for them .

For those who can't remember the gist of that ... the NRL contracts a player for $1M ... an NRL club agrees to pay him 500K and the NRL top up the rest .

The ARU and ACB already do similar deals in their sports ... maybe RL needs to follow suit .

 

[griff]

Errr...the players, where do they come from?

Round n round n round we go.....

see my post above ink

we don't need any more players, we just need the ones we've got to have marginally longer careers

 

[joshreading]

I think two new teams need to be added but personally think they should initially come from Perth and NZ. (then start times for sides such as CC, SQ etc.)

Where will the players come from?
ESL by such time is reducing dramatically the number of foreign players. We won't be able to stop some of the stars but there are alot of players that would've stayed given the opportunity. There is no 'round and round we go' - ESL is cutting foreigners in 2011 - they have over a hundred - we can get some quality back. NZ in particularly could draw players back.

NZ would soon open up a bigger stream of talent as well. There are over A HUNDRED Kiwis and Aussies in England. We would only need possibly thirty graded players for the new teams. Even WA could potentially field a team nearly half full of WA players in their first year given a good run into the NRL.

Money - Expansion to new TV areas does mean more money. The AFL recognise this (and West Sydney will likely add LESS TV viewers than WA would to RL) The same could be said for NZ, if SKY etc. in NZ said they could add five million to the NZ TV contract per annum with a new team would you not go for it?

Set up costs - there are always costs but you already have a number of groups seeking entry and I am sure that atleast in some regard they have thought of this.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

But perth already has 2 AFL teams, a super 14 franchise and an A League team. Isn't the market a bit saturated already ?

Not at all. The S14 only overlaps at the start of the season and the A-League overlaps at the end. The Reds would only be competing against the two afl franchises and that's not a big ask, considering how many the Storm have to put up with.

 

[Sea_Eagles_Rock]

My location (which is beside the point) is in my profile ;-)

You are a bulldogs fan. You could be anywhere...

You answered on question but not the other. How does the CC improve the game as a national competition?

 

[mattyg]

the 50-60 players will come from players not going to ESL or french rugby. The $8 million won't make much of a difference in this sense, but the extra money a Perth and IMO an Adelaide team would add to the TV deal will allow the salary cap to rise to maybe $6,000,000 or $7,000,000 per season. This would allow our highest paid players to be on about 750k per season, which should be enough to keep them in our code. Also i'd love to see 10 year players not counted under the cap at all.

 

[Bulldog Force]

the 50-60 players will come from players not going to ESL or french rugby. The $8 million won't make much of a difference in this sense, but the extra money a Perth and IMO an Adelaide team would add to the TV deal will allow the salary cap to rise to maybe $6,000,000 or $7,000,000 per season. This would allow our highest paid players to be on about 750k per season, which should be enough to keep them in our code. Also i'd love to see 10 year players not counted under the cap at all.

I think there should be some exemptions. 10 per team is a bit too much IMO. Maybe 1 from each team.

 

[KalgoorlieRed]

Why not expand the game nationally... meaning more teams are in the comp... meaning an extra $4,100,000 to spend per team on shore. Say we introduce 2 more teams - WA Reds and CC Bears.

Total to spend = $8,200,000.00

That means that our new and young talent coming through can chose to live on the Central Coast or Perth (Australia's fastest growing city) and the money those team can offer players might temp them to stay here instead of going to England or Union.

More teams + More money in the NATIONAL comp = Players staying put.

Thoughts?

You're not allowed to use initiative in rugby league. It doesn't work my friend. :lol:

 

[mattyg]

how many 10 year players do you see running around in the NRL these days?? If you had 10 players loyal to a club for 10 years you almost deserve to be able to keep them all regardless of what they are on.

 

[Perth Red]

RL isn't a strong enough sport to have a national presence in Australia.

 

[Loudstrat]

How does adding a team to the CC actually make the competition more of a national competition?

Demographically, it does.

The biggest issue is that the NRL isn't a wealthy company, if they where then more money would go to the clubs now.

:lol::lol: Half of the joint venture is one of the biggest companies on the planet!

Not at all. The S14 only overlaps at the start of the season and the A-League overlaps at the end. The Reds would only be competing against the two afl franchises and that's not a big ask, considering how many the Storm have to put up with.

The Stupid 14 is expanding in length next year. A league isn't an issue, but effectively adding a club to perth would have the saturation equivalent of adding 2 NRL teams and an ARL team to Brisbane.. Yes, we can do it. Getting an average of 15k to games is another thing