Rationalisation of Sydney

[adamkungl]

The Broncos have been privileged being in a one city situation, no other rl teams, making a fortune, yet receiving the same grants as smaller clubs.

If only there was some way to gain this privilege for yourself.

Complaining about 1 club-cities and refusing to entertain the possibility of becoming one.
That's really the crux of this debate. There are 2 unclaimed capital cities, 2 opportunities available for someone to become the next Storm/Broncos level club.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Bring back the NSWRL Premiership!

Who the hell gets a hard on for any non Sydney sides?

A local derby between North Queensland and Melbourne?

The days of Johnny Ribot and his self styled nazi capitalists are over.

What about his promise to bring the game to China?

Beijing v Hong Kong might work I guess.

 

[adamkungl]

Who the hell gets a hard on for any non Sydney sides?

Probably some of the 20 million odd people in Australia who arent from Sydney

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Like this fine student of the game mr bluester:


This is what the rationalisers want the average nrl fan to be.

 

[flippikat]

Who the hell gets a hard on for any non Sydney sides?

Ahem. I'm a Warriors fan who keenly enjoys matches with Brisbane (our first ever opponents, plus my in-laws moved there about 20 years ago), Melbourne (Who doesn't love beating the Storm? We've had good clashes with them too), and Cowboys (the only other 'class of '95' club that's still around).. the only Sydney team I get excited about is playing is Souths, and that's just because my wife cheers for them.

 

[taipan]

How many clubs have zero ties to pokie money? And if, for example, pokies were banned from outside of casinos tomorrow, how many clubs that do get money from pokies would still survive?

Melbourne sold off their only hotel & pokies this year, and are about to launch "Storm Money" (from what I can tell its financing and insurance), and theyre also looking into a fan ownership model like the Green Bay Packers

Sharks seem pretty good with their developments, I think the Titans have a sizeable ammount of land with a golf club/course and a housing estate (?)

Anything else?

Agree.The Sharks in the past received little from their Licensed club, and trying to continue along that line with the new upmarket refurbished club ,when completed.
Poker machines are becoming less and less of an influence,they are in just about every pub anyway.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Ahem. I'm a Warriors fan who keenly enjoys matches with Brisbane (our first ever opponents, plus my in-laws moved there about 20 years ago), Melbourne (Who doesn't love beating the Storm? We've had good clashes with them too), and Cowboys (the only other 'class of '95' club that's still around).. the only Sydney team I get excited about is playing is Souths, and that's just because my wife cheers for them.

I’m happy for you. I’ve often said that nz should join Australia as a state ( as our constitution provides for) and we can expel Queensland from the union.

Having said that, I could not say with any certainty that you represent the vast majority of fans based in Sydney.

Here in Sydney, the warriors are only well thought of because of their connection with the Maori, who have a noble and fascinating culture.

 

[taipan]

If only there was some way to gain this privilege for yourself.

Complaining about 1 club-cities and refusing to entertain the possibility of becoming one.
That's really the crux of this debate. There are 2 unclaimed capital cities, 2 opportunities available for someone to become the next Storm/Broncos level club.

I didn't bring the point up initially ,it was on NRL 360 from memory.

So a team with all the rugby league city to themselves ,with twice as much sponsorship as most Sydney clubs, still needs /demands the same funding as the smaller clubs.And they haven't had a sellout so far this year.No wonder they spent decades not wanting a second team in Brisbane, whilst making all this hay.

Well I'm sure you're in a might fine rush for the Roosters to become a one city club in Adelaide.
In fact you might have a better opportunity there ,to at least have juniors. Just send a petition to Nick ,and let the Rabbits take over the East Sydney with teh SFS as home,which they just about do anyway.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Old mate is jeering the Souths gun, James Roberts. Being from Brisvegas, he is hundreds of yards away with 33,000 mates.

In Sydney, say at Manly, our own local tools actually try to belt players we don’t like through fences.

On our own.

That’s the difference.

 

[mongoose]

Who’d have thought, a load of Sydney blokes don’t want change in Sydney but happy to let the Gold Coast fans lose their only team. what’s the saying about doing the same thing the same way?

Gus vouched for the Titans, he's a big supporter of Rugby League on the Gold Coast (cause he is smart and understands demographics). He just said they need the right people.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Gus vouched for the Titans, he's a big supporter of Rugby League on the Gold Coast (cause he is smart and understands demographics). He just said they need the right people.

Finding the right people on the Gold Coast is impossible, unless you are a hooker or an ice dealer

 

[Stallion]

Whilst NS and Manly had a good rivalry back in the day, I don't think it really has the same impact today as it did nearly 20 years ago. As the Bears fans demographic ages and the new generation of rugby league fans are growing up without having ever seen the Bears in the current competition, its safe to say that the rivalry has subsided a fair bit.

I think it is also folly to think that rivalries are created solely on the geographic location of a team. It also doesn't need to be steeped in a long history. The example I point to is the Manly/Melbourne rivalry. "The Battle of Brookie" as they call it and the consecutive GFs they played in with differing results has been brought out every year since when these two clubs come out to play. That in itself builds a rivalry. We just find it easy to build rivalries out of geographic locations. Grudge matches are just as good, in not better sometimes, than geographic derbies. At the end of the day its how it gets sold.

Absolutely dissagree! The longer the rivalry the greater it's respect, cultural impact and relevance. Plus it's validity is far greater than newer rivalries . It's important . And their are plenty of people still very much aware of the Bears and North Sydney. I see it basically every day if the Bears comes into a discussion . The Bears fans are absolutely out there and it shear folly to underestimate this latent but very real support. It's very real and its not going away like some seem to hope!

 

[Stallion]

Although I believe the NRL cannot sustain the current number of Sydney clubs in the long term, trying to arbitrarily pick the winners and losers in any rationalization is clearly something the NRL is unwilling to do.

With that in mind, I'm willing to call (as they say in poker).

I proposed above an expansion to 20 teams with Perth, Brisbane 2, NZ 2 and Adelaide being added - in a kind-of re-run of 1995.

That could be all at once, in lots of two (Perth & Brisbane 2, then NZ2 & Adelaide).. or a team at a time (Perth then Brisbane 2 to give the best bid time to emerge, the NZ2, then Adelaide).

If your argument is right, the existing Sydney footprint thrives and coaching & playing depth grows to make all teams competitive, great.. we'll have a 20 team competition that needs no massive changes for some time. I'd be ok if that happens.

If adding 4 teams shows up the oversaturation of Sydney, however.. then the NRL needs to talk relocation or demotion to some clubs.

That way we either get the playing strength consolidated by going to less than 20 clubs, OR the broke club gets replaced by a Brisbane 3 or NZ 3.. or even Melbourne 2 or Perth 2 that may add something of value to TV deals.

Sounds good?

Do you believe that would deliver what you promise?

Absolutely. It's the prudent way to go. My fear is though that their exists people within the code/competition that are there to make sure genuine growth of this code/competition does not occur. A deliberate containment and constrainment of this "vulnerable " (internationally speaking ) code. This game has little "friends in high places" and this is promoting a containment of this particular code like no other.

 

[Perth Red]

Who the hell gets a hard on for any non Sydney sides?

A local derby between North Queensland and Melbourne?

The days of Johnny Ribot and his self styled nazi capitalists are over.

What about his promise to bring the game to China?

Beijing v Hong Kong might work I guess.

Storm are the highest watched club on fox, go figure.

 

[flippikat]

Absolutely. It's the prudent way to go. My fear is though that their exists people within the code/competition that are there to make sure genuine growth of this code/competition does not occur. A deliberate containment and constrainment of this "vulnerable " (internationally speaking ) code. This game has little "friends in high places" and this is promoting a containment of this particular code like no other.

The key thing with the 20 team idea is that *if* one of the existing Sydney teams goes broke, the NRL has the ultimate power to decide if relocation, replacement or contraction (for player/coach depth reasons) is the best option.

With 4 additional teams being Perth, Brisbane 2, Adelaide & NZ 2, it leaves potential for a fulltime team on the Central Coast as a relocation/replacement option.

In reality, what I'm talking about is the plan that the ARL probably had in mind BEFORE the Superleague war dawned.. just using the current 16 clubs as a starting point instead of the 16 from 1994. I'm pretty sure Arthurson & Quayle were hoping that the Sydney scene would sort itself out after 1995 with little need for the ARL to pick winners and losers.

Only this time, there's no likelyhood of a breakaway competition that distorts the market and distracts from running the competition.

There would need to be some work done with broadcasters, to cover off the worst case eventuality of teams failing and not being replaced.. but it's do-able. Leagues have contracted before.

All the power would rest with the NRL, but none of the responsibility for "picking winners and losers".. which I imagine would be welcome, given how Sydney has been in the 'too hard' basket since the early 2000s.

 

[Stallion]

The key thing with the 20 team idea is that *if* one of the existing Sydney teams goes broke, the NRL has the ultimate power to decide if relocation, replacement or contraction (for player/coach depth reasons) is the best option.

With 4 additional teams being Perth, Brisbane 2, Adelaide & NZ 2, it leaves potential for a fulltime team on the Central Coast as a relocation/replacement option.

In reality, what I'm talking about is the plan that the ARL probably had in mind BEFORE the Superleague war dawned.. just using the current 16 clubs as a starting point instead of the 16 from 1994. I'm pretty sure Arthurson & Quayle were hoping that the Sydney scene would sort itself out after 1995 with little need for the ARL to pick winners and losers.

Only this time, there's no likelyhood of a breakaway competition that distorts the market and distracts from running the competition.

There would need to be some work done with broadcasters, to cover off the worst case eventuality of teams failing and not being replaced.. but it's do-able. Leagues have contracted before.

All the power would rest with the NRL, but none of the responsibility for "picking winners and losers".. which I imagine would be welcome, given how Sydney has been in the 'too hard' basket since the early 2000s.

The so called "oversaturation" logic is misleading. It involves the loss of existing established and widely popular fanbases and clubs. Arko admitted to this being a mistake on an interview with Sterlo on FOX a few years ago. In the end Arko said the "rationalisation logic" was flawed. They were wrong to expect fans to accept the loss of a club and its top flight status and not expect a massive backlash. These clubs are also well known Australia wide. The competitions growth was echoed by the increased FTA tv exposure from the 70's onwards. These clubs are part of Australia's sporting fabric. They are not just a number. In looking at numbers the population merits all their place and existence as well. The addition of clubs , perhaps, phased in over time, two in the short term and two later will net the competition genuine growth and widespread relevance. The end feeling I get is that their are agendas making sure this growth does not happen. Just my gut feeling and judgement.

 

[taipan]

Storm are the highest watched club on fox, go figure.

Yet the Melbourne media give them little time of the day and they don't get FTA.So Melburnians have to get Fox .And they are leading the comp.Even some of the Sydney ducks games were live on FTA.

The least watched team are the Titans an interstate Qld side.Go figure, with Qld being so league mad.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

People get rude and nasty on this thread and then wonder why we aren’t falling over ourselves to offer them a cut of the action.

Who wants to fly over a desert to watch your team bash up a side that is captained by Michael Lichaa?

Give us a break!

 

[VictoryFC]

Yet the Melbourne media give them little time of the day and they don't get FTA.So Melburnians have to get Fox .And they are leading the comp.Even some of the Sydney ducks games were live on FTA.

The least watched team are the Titans an interstate Qld side.Go figure, with Qld being so league mad.

What do you mean by this? We get the same FTA games as everyone.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

What do you mean by this? We get the same FTA games as everyone.

At 3.00am?