Rationalisation of Sydney

[Walter sobchak]

Sorry wasn't sure why all the penrith specific questions were asked of

Campbelltown needs more presence in my opinion too, so yeah that is a fast growing area, and also sydneys population is shifting west, the cheaper the housing is the further west or southwest you go
Currently the Tigers would do well if they play more games at campbelltown or atleast base themselves there, like the dragons should in Wollongong, if you want the largest part of your base to follow you, you should train and play there more often

You’re a panthers fan and I’m in England and know sweet fa about Sydney/greater sydney.

Agree with you 100% on Campbeltown having a fulltime presence as well as Wollongong.

 

[Stallion]

Again im not following why that matters, if your saying roosters are a must for the comp coz politis is rich, and penrith run on pokies/leagues club funded, then thats a point your assuming is realistically valid, but then Canterbury, and Parramatta are the same, souths is owned run by packer,
Im not sure what the difference in clubs whether they are rich with no catchments, or vast in catchments with leagues club funding, what does that have to do with rationalisation of sydney, nathan tinkler was rich. Doesnt mean the club will always be successful, most clubs have patches of success, Canterbury are this years example

Penriths catchment is St.marys stretching past bathurst, they've got 3 players from dubbo and a guy from wellington in the run on side this year, if your talking population vs memberships, then Penrith has 20k in members, where the reigning premiers "Sydney" have 15k, and funnily enough they had more before they won (around 16k) in comparison the major cities,
Melbourne have about 25k, brisbane 34k,
So If we went to Perth and Adelaide that would be possibly 20-25k each, most Sydney clubs are 20k, manly are 12k, at the lowest end and Souths at 30k are the highest end

Funnily enough even if you call yourself "Sydney" rather than Eastern Suburbs Roosters you still don't represent "Sydney"
Not when there's 30k of south supporters next door

The Roosters should be known as the East Sydney Roosters. Much more accurate and historically recognised. The Sydney part is important as it pin points there location in a national competition.

 

[flippikat]

Here's the evidence (lol) you've produced for this widespread support of the Bears so far:

• 100 years of existence
• Colours
• Logo
• Location
• Rivalries

Go and look up the definition of evidence and get back to me.

Mate, trying to win an argument against that sort of emotive, irrational, repetitive, baseless rubbish is like trying to nail jelly to a tree.

Pointless AND impossible.

Logic, data & the example of just about every other major sports league in the world indicates that Sydney is oversaturated.

We just need administrators with some guts to face reality, and confront the issue in a logical, planned process.

 

[Stallion]

If you don't like it then get off the thread - it is a thread created to discuss options for rationalising Sydney

Lol. If this is a discourse anyone should be in their rights to dissagree with the negative chatter!

 

[Stallion]

It certainly can be a noted and respected aspect for a club but there is no way that it automatically equalls widespread support without success and community engagement. There are plenty of clubs in many sports that have existed for decades that aren't a blip on the radar outsie of their own community.



Yeah ok, it was ignored but I've referred to it in post # 928 of this thread. Do you even try to make coherant posts? Newtown were around during the 70's and early 80's (until 83) of the early TV era but they don't have widespread support so that one has been debunked.

How did the TV boom in the 90's work out for the NBL?
https://www.espn.com.au/nbl/story/_...-40-years-counting-national-basketball-league

That TV era was important but it was no guarantee of sustained widespread support and the above are just two examples of it.



If you'd address the points instead of ignoring them we wouldn't be going around in circles.

Here's the evidence (lol) you've produced for this widespread support of the Bears so far:

• 100 years of existence
• Colours
• Logo
• Location
• Rivalries

Go and look up the definition of evidence and get back to me.

You are talking about a very culturally relevant and isolated competition that happens to have its foundations in Sydney.OMG. You truelly are an ignoramus! How could you compare the highest rating sports product in Australia to the NBA. You have truelly lost any semblance of rational thinking. Totally innapropriate and lacking genuine feel for this great but very vulnerable code of football.

 

[Stallion]

Mate, trying to win an argument against that sort of emotive, irrational, repetitive, baseless rubbish is like trying to nail jelly to a tree.

Pointless AND impossible.

Logic, data & the example of just about every other major sports league in the world indicates that Sydney is oversaturated.

We just need administrators with some guts to face reality, and confront the issue in a logical, planned process.

Tell that to the AFL on Melbourne and top flight soccer on London. YOU BLOKES CAN'T COUNT! Your flawed topic is based on one of the highest populated regions in Australia! And you want to dilute the presence of the code. Amazingly dumb and proves you cannot COUNT! You have also failed in history and cultural studies !

 

[flippikat]

Tell that to the AFL on Melbourne and top flight soccer on London.

Ok, aside from the usual emotive, baseless rubbish (basically most of the rest of your post).. let's just look at your initial statement.

AFL is seriously stretched too thinly - just a casual look at the table and the results shows that up. Yes, they probably need rationalisation in Melbourne, just as the NRL needs it in Sydney - but their saving grace is that they have derbies in every city that matters (and close to it in SE Queensland), so they can get by on cross-subsidising underperforming teams. To be honest, as a New Zealander I don't care whether AFL does that.. but so long as they have to carry so many underperforming Melbourne clubs, it maybe helps the NRL.

As far as top flight soccer goes, only 5 out of 20 Premier League teams are from London, compared to half the NRL being Sydney clubs.

By implication of your own argument, you appear to suggest that Sydney only needs 4 top level NRL clubs (which is fine by me).

 

[Stallion]

Ok, aside from the usual emotive, baseless rubbish (basically most of the rest of your post).. let's just look at your initial statement.

AFL is seriously stretched too thinly - just a casual look at the table and the results shows that up. Yes, they probably need rationalisation in Melbourne, just as the NRL needs it in Sydney - but their saving grace is that they have derbies in every city that matters (and close to it in SE Queensland), so they can get by on cross-subsidising underperforming teams. To be honest, as a New Zealander I don't care whether AFL does that.. but so long as they have to carry so many underperforming Melbourne clubs, it maybe helps the NRL.

As far as top flight soccer goes, only 5 out of 20 Premier League teams are from London, compared to half the NRL being Sydney clubs.

By implication of your own argument, you appear to suggest that Sydney only needs 4 top level NRL clubs (which is fine by me).

Do you understand that Sydney is the biggest city that has rugby league as its main sport? You advocate losing this status. This code is a vulnerable code you are recklessly discoursing about.At no stage (repeat NO STAGE) have I rejected /objected to expansion clubs. Genuine expansion can be gained without imploding the code in its major city.The historical and generational fanbase which is widespread is too big an advantage to give away to other codes. Yes! By all means add expansion clubs.Even gain back and strengthen the code where it's been weakened (Northern Sydney /Central Coast Bears option) But diluting this great competition with your trash "rationalisation buzz word " ideas in Sydney and surrounding regions is shear lunacy! Quite simply mathematical nonsense and total disrespect for this competition and code. Please note the AFL know the value of generational support and won't be diluting their much loved and widely recognised Melbourne based clubs. They will fake an intention and then happily see dummies like yourself continue on with the implosion creating chatter you offer. Knowing full well what is at the stake: Widespread and local popularity of well recognised and iconic clubs that have generational support. You lose that : you lose the long fought advantage of many decades of existence and notoriety. This MATTERS & they know it! YOU DONT!

 

[flippikat]

Please note the AFL know the value of generational support and won't be diluting their much loved and widely recognised Melbourne based clubs.

Well, they already allowed the Swans to relocate to a non-AFL location and the Lions to relocate AND merge with an expansion team. Maybe there's no immediate calls for more relocations, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens again within the next decade or so.

Those two AFL relocation scenarios are just couple of creative solutions to an oversaturated market that I'd be perfectly comfortable with the NRL copying. Yet whenever this has been raised in the past as a method to preserve traditional club brands in the top tier AND expand the game without diluting the playing/coaching base, you've shot the idea down.

 

[Stallion]

Well, they already allowed the Swans to relocate to a non-AFL location and the Lions to relocate AND merge with an expansion team. Maybe there's no immediate calls for more relocations, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens again within the next decade or so.

Those two AFL relocation scenarios are just couple of creative solutions to an oversaturated market that I'd be perfectly comfortable with the NRL copying. Yet whenever this has been raised in the past as a method to preserve traditional club brands in the top tier AND expand the game without diluting the playing/coaching base, you've shot the idea down.

? That's nonsense! Did you read about the suggestion of having the "unseen" Magpies club given life in the top flight as the West Coast Magpies? Haven't you been reading about the Bears being reinvigorated as the Central Coast Bears.On top of that regaining iconic club names/brands like Balmain (Balmain Campbelltown Tigers ) all would gain back lost fans , strengthen the code which has been decimated as a result of an unfair and disgraceful 'peace' outcome poorly thought out in 1997/98.

 

[flippikat]

? That's non sensible! Did you read about the suggestion of having the "unseen" Magpies club given life in the top flight as the West Coast Magpies? Haven't you been reading about the Bears being reinvigorated as the Central Coast Bears.On top of that regaining iconic club names/brands like Balmain (Balmain Campbelltown Tigers ) all would gain back lost fans , strengthen the code which has been decimated as a result of an unfair and disgraceful 'peace' outcome poorly thought out in 1997/98.

The Magpies and Bears suggestions both involve resuscitating brands that haven't been in NRL level for nigh-on 20 years. That's not relocation of a existing NRL-status club.

Bringing back the Magpies in Perth doesn't make sense to me when the AFL already have a team branded the Magpies, and the current Perth NRL bid was rebranded from the Reds to Pirates (I assume to avoid confusion with Super Rugby's own Reds). Yes I realise both NRL and AFL have clubs nicknamed the Tigers (albeit with different colour schemes), but one brand overlap is enough. Besides, don't the Magpies have the upper hand in the Tigers joint venture anyway?

As for the Bears, look.. I really do think the NRL screwed up by not financially supporting them during their move. I've said so many times here - they were pro-active, saw their future as a regional club, and jumped before they were pushed. I admire that. But the only way that brand should come back (if at all) is via a non-NSW expansion team - whether that's in an AFL-heartland location (Adelaide, Melbourne 2 for a derby with the Storm, Perth if theyre willing to drop the Pirates brand) or rugby/league destination (Maybe not Brisbane 2, but regional Queensland IF the market can support it, or somewhere in NZ like Christchurch).

The boat has sailed for an NRL Bears team to be on the Central Coast. It just ain't gonna happen. If the competition needs a team based there, it'll be a relocation of an existing NRL Sydney club.

The Roosters already have a foothold on the Central Coast, and they're in prime position to be the Sydney club that does what the Bears & Northern Eagles were incapable of doing.

The problem is, the experience of the Bears has probably made any Sydney club VERY gunshy of relocation. That rings back to my earlier point - the NRL screwed up by not supporting Norths through the difficulties of their move, because if they'd done so, relocation wouldn't have the stigma of failure.

 

[Stallion]

The Magpies and Bears suggestions both involve resuscitating brands that haven't been in NRL level for nigh-on 20 years. That's not relocation of a existing NRL-status club.

Bringing back the Magpies in Perth doesn't make sense to me when the AFL already have a team branded the Magpies, and the current Perth NRL bid was rebranded from the Reds to Pirates (I assume to avoid confusion with Super Rugby's own Reds). Yes I realise both NRL and AFL have clubs nicknamed the Tigers (albeit with different colour schemes), but one brand overlap is enough. Besides, don't the Magpies have the upper hand in the Tigers joint venture anyway?

As for the Bears, look.. I really do think the NRL screwed up by not financially supporting them during their move. I've said so many times here - they were pro-active, saw their future as a regional club, and jumped before they were pushed. I admire that. But the only way that brand should come back (if at all) is via a non-NSW expansion team - whether that's in an AFL-heartland location (Adelaide, Melbourne 2 for a derby with the Storm, Perth if theyre willing to drop the Pirates brand) or rugby/league destination (Maybe not Brisbane 2, but regional Queensland IF the market can support it, or somewhere in NZ like Christchurch).

The boat has sailed for an NRL Bears team to be on the Central Coast. It just ain't gonna happen. If the competition needs a team based there, it'll be a relocation of an existing NRL Sydney club.

The Roosters already have a foothold on the Central Coast, and they're in prime position to be the Sydney club that does what the Bears & Northern Eagles were incapable of doing.

The problem is, the experience of the Bears has probably made any Sydney club VERY gunshy of relocation. That rings back to my earlier point - the NRL screwed up by not supporting Norths through the difficulties of their move, because if they'd done so, relocation wouldn't have the stigma of failure.

We agree that the NRL should have assisted the Bears. That doesn't mean it's a no go zone. The population is still there and growing. NORTH Sydney and the Central Coast would easily get behind the Central Coast Bears. The other examples are relocation name suggestions that (believe it or not) still resonate and are identifiable with the fans of today. Just like the Bears fans they haven't dIed off. But we are lead to believe so by some on this website. These are generationally supported clubs that are still known by rugby league fans . My idea of the West Coast Magpies is something I believe should have been thought of in 1997/8. The Pirates is a good name for the current scenario. I'm aware of Wests holding the upper hand but the use of an iconic name such as Balmain and adding Campbelltown to the merger name would be a popular naming. Balmain Campbelltown Tigers sounds okay. Better than the vague consolation Wests Tigers name from my point of view. ANY WAY THE MESS IS HERE AND WE NEED TO DEAL WITH IT AS BEST WE CAN .

 

[MugaB]

Wests own the Tigers, they'll be able to become the "magpies" at any point in time as they see fit, but know the fans of the balmain tigers would revolt, besides a tiger is a far more attractive mascot branding than a magpie,
Which im dumbfounded by the "Northern Eagles" when a Bear is the far more attractive mascot to me, but im assuming manlys winning premierships percentage, in comparison, that plus "northern" covered that half of the merger already.... still FAIL!!
The only merger i can see working is Roosters and Sharks in future, along with a Relocated "Souths" into Suncorp/Brisbane
Geez you could see the papers outselling everyday, seibold said this, bennett shrugged,
Won, and Strutted away in the sheds,
Brisbane would light up "South Brisbane Rabbitohs" who said a sydney team would never work up there, might be the only one,
And you know uncle Nick would be extremely happy to see souths out of sydney

 

[greenBV4]

Wests own the Tigers, they'll be able to become the "magpies" at any point in time as they see fit, but know the fans of the balmain tigers would revolt, besides a tiger is a far more attractive mascot branding than a magpie,
Which im dumbfounded by the "Northern Eagles" when a Bear is the far more attractive mascot to me, but im assuming manlys winning premierships percentage, in comparison, that plus "northern" covered that half of the merger already.... still FAIL!!
The only merger i can see working is Roosters and Sharks in future, along with a Relocated "Souths" into Suncorp/Brisbane
Geez you could see the papers outselling everyday, seibold said this, bennett shrugged,
Won, and Strutted away in the sheds,
Brisbane would light up "South Brisbane Rabbitohs" who said a sydney team would never work up there, might be the only one,
And you know uncle Nick would be extremely happy to see souths out of sydney

I'd say Souths and Cronulla would be a better fit, seeing as Cronulla is "Southern" Sydney already, so the name fits, with Dragons to Wollongong full time then thats 1 team for South Sydney.

Manly to better represent all of the North or to go somewhere else, in that case Roosters pick up the north all the way the CC, as well as keeping their nook in the east/CBD, so thats the East and North.

Then keep Parra and Penrith for the West. And keep one of Wests or Bulldogs for the South-West.

That leaves 6 or 5 teams depending on Manly's choice/ability with the dragons full time in Wollongong with the odd game at kogarah

 

[taipan]

I'd say Souths and Cronulla would be a better fit, seeing as Cronulla is "Southern" Sydney already, so the name fits, with Dragons to Wollongong full time then thats 1 team for South Sydney.

Manly to better represent all of the North or to go somewhere else, in that case Roosters pick up the north all the way the CC, as well as keeping their nook in the east/CBD, so thats the East and North.

Then keep Parra and Penrith for the West. And keep one of Wests or Bulldogs for the South-West.

That leaves 6 or 5 teams depending on Manly's choice/ability with the dragons full time in Wollongong with the odd game at kogarah

Souths fans revolted when they were kicked out for their time in isolation, and did not get involved with other NRL clubs.Rest assured they would be the last to entertain a joint venture ,especially when a redone ANZ is up and running.And similarly the Sharks.
If they were going broke ,one could argue in favour ,simply they aren't.Remember the Swans and Lions were in deep financial poo with falling crowds ,it was therefore a necessity .And they can also than the SL war for a great leg up, giving them further impetus.

Sydney NRL crowds are all over the shop ATM for many reasons ,poor Dragon's form,ANZ stadium,Thursday night football etc etc.,SCG,transport issues .
The AFL have the luxury of stability with their Melbourne stadiums in one area ,with direct public transport.

 

[Stallion]

I'd say Souths and Cronulla would be a better fit, seeing as Cronulla is "Southern" Sydney already, so the name fits, with Dragons to Wollongong full time then thats 1 team for South Sydney.

Manly to better represent all of the North or to go somewhere else, in that case Roosters pick up the north all the way the CC, as well as keeping their nook in the east/CBD, so thats the East and North.

Then keep Parra and Penrith for the West. And keep one of Wests or Bulldogs for the South-West.

That leaves 6 or 5 teams depending on Manly's choice/ability with the dragons full time in Wollongong with the odd game at kogarah

I wouldn't call this thread "Rationalisation..... " "Irrational..... " more to the point. So negative and disrespectful !
However looking at a definition of the term "rationalisation ',it does mention innapropriate ideas/logic toward a topic. So its a correctly named thread but totally negative in its objective. Shame.

 

[mongoose]

Souths fans revolted when they were kicked out for their time in isolation, and did not get involved with other NRL clubs.Rest assured they would be the last to entertain a joint venture ,especially when a redone ANZ is up and running.And similarly the Sharks.
If they were going broke ,one could argue in favour ,simply they aren't.Remember the Swans and Lions were in deep financial poo with falling crowds ,it was therefore a necessity .And they can also than the SL war for a great leg up, giving them further impetus.

Sydney NRL crowds are all over the shop ATM for many reasons ,poor Dragon's form,ANZ stadium,Thursday night football etc etc.,SCG,transport issues .
The AFL have the luxury of stability with their Melbourne stadiums in one area ,with direct public transport.

poor Dragons form? surely that is counterbalanced by the good form of the Eels who have a brand new stadium? Souths are up the top of the ladder too.

 

[taipan]

poor Dragons form? surely that is counterbalanced by the good form of the Eels who have a brand new stadium? Souths are up the top of the ladder too.

Agree . If the Eels were still at ANZ would they be getting the crowds like WSS now?Answer noooooooo!!!
Souths crowds are struggling at ANZ ,again proving my stadium's point.And they were kicked out at one stage,showing the stupidity of removal, and the loss of fans then.
And you think Souths in a joint venture with the Sharks will help crowds? More so when they are near the top of the ladder.
Remember Dragons is actually a joint venture, 'even with poor form that hasn't helped their crowds this year.And the West Tigers(joint venture) crowds have also been down on expectations
The Dogs crowds due to player exodus and early poor season form reinforce my views.

If your city dam is leaking, you don't drill more holes in it to relive the pressure .you spend money on it(reinforce it) to ensure it lasts.That's the analogy I place with the RL clubs in Sydney.The population is growing and there is plenty of competition around.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Mate, trying to win an argument against that sort of emotive, irrational, repetitive, baseless rubbish is like trying to nail jelly to a tree.

Pointless AND impossible.

Logic, data & the example of just about every other major sports league in the world indicates that Sydney is oversaturated.

We just need administrators with some guts to face reality, and confront the issue in a logical, planned process.

Good analogy mate - it certainly feels like trying to nail jelly to a tree.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

You are talking about a very culturally relevant and isolated competition that happens to have its foundations in Sydney.OMG. You truelly are an ignoramus! How could you compare the highest rating sports product in Australia to the NBA. You have truelly lost any semblance of rational thinking. Totally innapropriate and lacking genuine feel for this great but very vulnerable code of football.

I don't recall comparing it to the NBA