Rationalisation of Sydney

[MrE_Assassin]

It's not adding more clubs in Sydney.It's actually reclaiming lost territory. DON'T think abandoning northern Sydney with 1.2 million people is a wise idea!?Easily enough population for two clubs covering the Central Coast and northern Sydney.

If you add a team to the central coast and have it play games out of North Sydney, and don’t remove any other clubs from the Sydney/NSW area; how is that not adding a new club?

In my post I never suggested abandoning NS. I said the Sea Eagles should rebrand to encompass NS. That’s still reclaiming and consolidation WITHOUT addition of a club.

You say this can’t happen because there is too much history but the NS Bears have been dead and buried as a stand alone NRL club for 20 years now. That’s a whole generation. That history and rivalry is almost as non-existant as the Bears are in the NRL.

Northern Sydney/Central Coast Bear-Eagles also have a history as the Northern Eagles. The only thing that stopped them from remaining was their board/money all because of a power struggle on who got to run the club. Why couldn’t Manly become a Northern Eagles 2.0?

Also by your logic the NRL should bring back Newtown to consolidate that inner western Sydney area.

I think you just need to face it that the NRL/majority of Australia has moved on without the Bears. It’s only the rust of the sunken ship that remains attached to it.

 

[Stallion]

If you add a team to the central coast and have it play games out of North Sydney, and don’t remove any other clubs from the Sydney/NSW area; how is that not adding a new club?

In my post I never suggested abandoning NS. I said the Sea Eagles should rebrand to encompass NS. That’s still reclaiming and consolidation WITHOUT addition of a club.

You say this can’t happen because there is too much history but the NS Bears have been dead and buried as a stand alone NRL club for 20 years now. That’s a whole generation. That history and rivalry is almost as non-existant as the Bears are in the NRL.

Northern Sydney/Central Coast Bear-Eagles also have a history as the Northern Eagles. The only thing that stopped them from remaining was their board/money all because of a power struggle on who got to run the club. Why couldn’t Manly become a Northern Eagles 2.0?

Also by your logic the NRL should bring back Newtown to consolidate that inner western Sydney area.

I think you just need to face it that the NRL/majority of Australia has moved on without the Bears. It’s only the rust of the sunken ship that remains attached to it.

Look at the history! North Sydney Bears were there since 1908.It's a reclamination for sure! The rivalry is natural sports culture which has now been eroded. Although there are still plenty of hibernating Bears fans about. (people are living longer and tv replays instill Bear memories and relevance ) It's worth the reclamation. The loss of relevance and subsequently fans has been immense. Todd Greenberg knows about the damage that has been done in this area.

 

[MugaB]

Having said that if you’ve got a total virgin area you desperate to have in an nrl club in, say Adelaide or NZ south, then there are advantages to a established brand moving in and starting strong from day one,

Agreed whole heartedly on this
Lets say for an example, perth and bris2 came in already brand new, then the sharks and manly were about to fold, Adelaide Sharks, South Island Sea Eagles, or vice versa,
Eastern Suburbs and Souths could expand to those areas, and take on a larger area, leaves us with the 18 teams we know is most likely coming, and if Qld were to get another team, then add that and a Cc/Ns entity, with manly non existent
A newer team could start fresh with a relocated sea eagles, 20 teams is possible, with more games per week, but less rounds, play each other once, then reverse the following season, and a bigger tv deal
Not to mention covering perth time slot
and 2 Nz games, more Qld games and coverage geographicaly, all it needs is to relocate those 2 clubs, to the new virgin areas

 

[Stallion]

Agreed whole heartedly on this
Lets say for an example, perth and bris2 came in already brand new, then the sharks and manly were about to fold, Adelaide Sharks, South Island Sea Eagles, or vice versa,
Eastern Suburbs and Souths could expand to those areas, and take on a larger area, leaves us with the 18 teams we know is most likely coming, and if Qld were to get another team, then add that and a Cc/Ns entity, with manly non existent
A newer team could start fresh with a relocated sea eagles, 20 teams is possible, with more games per week, but less rounds, and a bigger tv deal
Not to mention covering perth time slot
and 2 Nz games, more Qld games and coverage geographicaly, all it needs is to relocate those 2 clubs, to the new virgin areas

At worse case scenario. It's OK. But for genuine growth : the additional clubs and in some cases reclamation/consolidation of lost areas clubs is the prudent way to go forward. The superleague "agreement" saw to this message. Reclamation and consolidation with additional expansion clubs is worthwhile. Not destructive and very progressive instead of being regressive or remaining stagnant. Another 4 teams over a planned time period is good for this competition.

 

[MugaB]

At worse case scenario. It's OK. But for genuine growth : the additional clubs and in some cases reclamation/consolidation of lost areas clubs is the prudent way to go forward. The superleague "agreement" saw to this message. Reclamation and consolidation with additional expansion clubs is worthwhile. Not destructive and very progressive instead of being regressive or remaining stagnant. Another 4 teams over a planned time period is good for this competition.

For it to work those clubs would have fold or be close to it, it wouldn't have to be the sharks exactly can be another sydney club, but it most definitely has to be manly.
20 teams, 19 rounds vs each other,
1 heritage round (an extra rival game = like eastsVsouths, penriff vs parra)
1 magic round (for the historically dud rated clashes why not send to Suncorp)
And a possible split round through origin,
22 weeks of league then finals should be 210 games, plus 11 games for finals.
And with 20 teams you can have the proposed 10 team finals they brought up last week.
In regards to a CC/NS team can step away from red and black of the bears and magenta(maroon) and white of manly, and have the team Brown and Dark Brown, call them Northern Sydney Browns or Gosford Browns
(Like Cleveland Browns in NFL) a new brand but still having a slight nostalgia, without calling it out
Hopefully getting the old and new fans aboard, jersey similar to WSW (stripes)
and heritage jersey the bears of 90s but brown not red, unique color, catering area from cammeray to gosford.

 

[Stallion]

For it to work those clubs would have fold or be close to it, it wouldn't have to be the sharks exactly can be another sydney club, but it most definitely has to be manly.
20 teams, 19 rounds vs each other,
1 heritage round (an extra rival game = like eastsVsouths, penriff vs parra)
1 magic round (for the historically dud rated clashes why not send to Suncorp)
And a possible split round through origin,
22 weeks of league then finals should be 210 games, plus 11 games for finals.
And with 20 teams you can have the proposed 10 team finals they brought up last week.
In regards to a CC/NS team can step away from red and black of the bears and magenta(maroon) and white of manly, and have the team Brown and Dark Brown, call them Northern Sydney Browns or Gosford Browns
(Like Cleveland Browns in NFL) a new brand but still having a slight nostalgia, without calling it out
Hopefully getting the old and new fans aboard, jersey similar to WSW (stripes)
and heritage jersey the bears of 90s but brown not red, unique color, catering area from cammeray to gosford.

Most of what you state is good. The northern Sydney idea will not work. The folks of this area are mostly very conservative and dare I say it traditional. .They will embrace a familiar concept. A mooted club like the Central Coast Bears along with the strong Manly Warringah rivalry will work. 1.7 million people with two clubs from the Central Coast to northern Sydney is very doable.(And a handy trainline helps) It will gain back fans and consolidate the code instead of disenfranchising so many fans.

 

[Perth Red]

Paul Kent believes the only way for expansion to work in rugby league is to relocate one of the nine Sydney teams.
Expansion has been a hot topic in rugby league, with a second Brisbane team and a Perth team considered viable options.

Whether to expand from 16 teams or relocate a struggling Sydney team remains the question, but Kent doesn’t think adding teams will work in the long run.

“We all concede nine teams in Sydney is too many because the market is saturated with sporting teams with other codes as well,” Kent told NRL 360.

NRL CEO Todd Greenberg concedes the answer to the expansion question may not be popular for everyone, but will be done with the game’s best interests in mind.

“At the end of the day we are going to have to make some decisions and some of our decisions aren’t popular,” Greenberg said.

“It is a big decision for the game and it has to be genuinely long term thinking. Do we want an extra game with extra teams or do we want to consider the footprint and geography of the game?

“I don’t have an answer for you today, but it is going to be a hot topic.”

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...b/news-story/91d8998b59b769ea82eed8285c770098

 

[Perth Red]

The NRL are set for a fiery debate with expansion or relocation set to be one of the big talking points of the upcoming season.

The talk of expanding the NRL has been a talking point for some time with the NRL eager to serve more of the country.

Back in 1998 when the Super League war ended, the NRL had 20 teams but it lead to the mergers of the Dragons and Illawarra Steelers and a year before the Wests Tigers were formed out of the Western Suburbs Magpies and Balmain Tigers.

The Adelaide Rams and Western Reds, who represent an area of interest for the NRL are still unrepresented.

But speaking on the League Life fan forum, Broncos CEO Paul White suggested the old thought process of adding teams was not sustainable.

“Do you expand geographically or do you expand the number of teams? Paul White said.

“I don’t know anyone out there who thinks we should expand to an 18 team competition.

“The example is in the AFL where the Suns and GWS are money pits for the game and we don’t have the money as a game to apply those sorts of resources.

“The challenge for the game is to see if we look at relocation as a way of expanding the game, but it has to be part of the discussion.”

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/n...m/news-story/f4fd036f322be13969d7f7ed250a8c1a

 

[Stallion]

The NRL are set for a fiery debate with expansion or relocation set to be one of the big talking points of the upcoming season.

The talk of expanding the NRL has been a talking point for some time with the NRL eager to serve more of the country.

Back in 1998 when the Super League war ended, the NRL had 20 teams but it lead to the mergers of the Dragons and Illawarra Steelers and a year before the Wests Tigers were formed out of the Western Suburbs Magpies and Balmain Tigers.

The Adelaide Rams and Western Reds, who represent an area of interest for the NRL are still unrepresented.

But speaking on the League Life fan forum, Broncos CEO Paul White suggested the old thought process of adding teams was not sustainable.

“Do you expand geographically or do you expand the number of teams? Paul White said.

“I don’t know anyone out there who thinks we should expand to an 18 team competition.

“The example is in the AFL where the Suns and GWS are money pits for the game and we don’t have the money as a game to apply those sorts of resources.

“The challenge for the game is to see if we look at relocation as a way of expanding the game, but it has to be part of the discussion.”

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/n...m/news-story/f4fd036f322be13969d7f7ed250a8c1a

Lol. You are aware that Paul White is using this to stop any chance of a Brisbane 2nd team? They(Broncos) are aware of the damage and infighting that will & does occur in Sydney.(It's been happening for decades) Meanwhile the Broncos continue on with their monopoly. And a relocated Sydney club has bugger all chance of gaining acceptance in Brisbane. So the Broncos are once again getting their way. The most selfish club in the League bar none! What's more startling that when arguing his reasons , he refers to the costly expansion efforts of the Gold Coast Suns & GWS Giants as failures in rugby league areas.He then uses this as evidence that another Brisbane team in Brisbane would not be feasible. This is despite Brisbane being a rugby league area with a population of over 2 million people! Amazing innept justification from the Broncos CEO. But their we have it. This guy gets a platform to state this to the public on a News Ltd programme! Wonder who's agenda that suits! Certainly not rugby league’s!

 

[The Great Dane]

If the NRL does go down the route of relocating clubs they'll be doing it for the wrong reasons and as such won't achieve what they hope to achieve.

Relocations are basically trading one market for another (any American example will work), when this is understood and they are treated as such they can work really well, but relocation attempts where the idea is to move a club to a new market but maintain their old market as well never works, most of the time the club just spreads it's self to thin and it ends up burning bridges in one of the two markets that it is trying to represent, sometimes it completely screws the club, be either way it never works.

From the way that relocation is discussed in the NRL I get the feeling that if it was attempted it'd be attempted in the later style of maintaining two markets which never works and as such would eventually be a failure... We just have to hope that it fails in a beneficial way, i.e. the clubs burn all their bridges in their old markets and not the new ones.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

Bring in the West Coast Pirates, get rid of the Cronulla Sharks, Manly and the NZ Warriors. Have them playing in the Canterbury Cup, obviously. Top 6 play-off in the NRL, over 3 weekends. Try and build a better domestic NZ competition.

I know by distance it's shorter to Auckland from Sydney than to Perth, but isn't the queuing time less for domestic flights, and the Pirates could stay in Melbourne for a few nights every now and then. It's got to be psychologically different if you're living in the same country as the comp is played. And I'm convinced that travelling overseas to another country is more draining than travelling further but over land within the same country.

 

[greenBV4]

Bring in the West Coast Pirates, get rid of the Cronulla Sharks, Manly and the NZ Warriors. Have them playing in the Canterbury Cup, obviously. Top 6 play-off in the NRL, over 3 weekends. Try and build a better domestic NZ competition.

I know by distance it's shorter to Auckland from Sydney than to Perth, but isn't the queuing time less for domestic flights, and the Pirates could stay in Melbourne for a few nights every now and then. It's got to be psychologically different if you're living in the same country as the comp is played. And I'm convinced that travelling overseas to another country feels longer than travelling further over land within the same country.

It'd be great if NZ could run its own domestic league , but I'm not sure it'd work, I also don't think the NRL would want to lose the money and time slot that a NZ team brings in

 

[taipan]

Paul Kent believes the only way for expansion to work in rugby league is to relocate one of the nine Sydney teams.
Expansion has been a hot topic in rugby league, with a second Brisbane team and a Perth team considered viable options.

Whether to expand from 16 teams or relocate a struggling Sydney team remains the question, but Kent doesn’t think adding teams will work in the long run.

“We all concede nine teams in Sydney is too many because the market is saturated with sporting teams with other codes as well,” Kent told NRL 360.

NRL CEO Todd Greenberg concedes the answer to the expansion question may not be popular for everyone, but will be done with the game’s best interests in mind.

“At the end of the day we are going to have to make some decisions and some of our decisions aren’t popular,” Greenberg said.

“It is a big decision for the game and it has to be genuinely long term thinking. Do we want an extra game with extra teams or do we want to consider the footprint and geography of the game?

“I don’t have an answer for you today, but it is going to be a hot topic.”

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...b/news-story/91d8998b59b769ea82eed8285c770098

Paul Kent has been saying that for yonks.The same Paul Kent who after 20 years has indirectly admitted News Ltd (without naming names)stuffed the game with SL

"We all concede" Kent is speaking on everyone's behalf LOL."The only was for expansion to work" is just his view.AFL have stated 18 teams brings in extra TV revenue.Kent it could be argued is arguing from a News agenda perspective.

Of course it's a flipping big decision,because any relocation is going to bring in a South Sydney type backlash.and it will create a vacuum in the area/areas affected.
And of course as Greenburger has said, it's going to be unpopular.

But using Paul Kent as some sort of expert on the matter, please.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

It'd be great if NZ could run its own domestic league , but I'm not sure it'd work, I also don't think the NRL would want to lose the money and time slot that a NZ team brings in

It would have a Perth team playing in better conditions though. I think the Catalan Dragons should disband too, the concentration should be in improving the French domestic comp. Toronto are based in England, and it's a big N American city, there are always exceptions. So i wouldn't be against Toronto playing in the English league, which should be changed to the English RL Premiership from Super League.

 

[greenBV4]

Heres a question I'm interested to see people's answers to

If a rugby league comp was being set up today, ignoring any history/past, and purely based off of population, demographics and tv/sponsorship $$ where would you put 16 teams? And then where would the next 2 expansions be?

I think I would go

01. North Queensland
02. Brisbane 1
03. Brisbane 2
04. Gold Coast
05. Newcastle
06. CC/North Syd
07. Inner/East Sydney
08. West Sydney
09. South/South-West Sydney
10. Wollongong/South Coast
11. Canberra
12. Melbourne
13. Adelaide
14. Perth
15. Auckland
16. Wellington/South Island

17. Melbourne 2
18. Pacific Islands

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

If money was no object we could set up the Adelaide Rams tomorrow.

 

[Stallion]

Paul Kent has been saying that for yonks.The same Paul Kent who after 20 years has indirectly admitted News Ltd (without naming names)stuffed the game with SL

"We all concede" Kent is speaking on everyone's behalf LOL."The only was for expansion to work" is just his view.AFL have stated 18 teams brings in extra TV revenue.Kent it could be argued is arguing from a News agenda perspective.

Of course it's a flipping big decision,because any relocation is going to bring in a South Sydney type backlash.and it will create a vacuum in the area/areas affected.
And of course as Greenburger has said, it's going to be unpopular.

But using Paul Kent as some sort of expert on the matter, please.

Perhaps it may be unpopular for the greedy Broncos! ? I'm thinking a Brisbane 2 and either CCBears or West Coast Pirates as additional clubs is a show. All depends on how much balls the rest of the league and its administration have in convincing the monopoly maintaining Broncos that it's good for the competition and the code!

 

[Perth Red]

If the NRL does go down the route of relocating clubs they'll be doing it for the wrong reasons and as such won't achieve what they hope to achieve.

Relocations are basically trading one market for another (any American example will work), when this is understood and they are treated as such they can work really well, but relocation attempts where the idea is to move a club to a new market but maintain their old market as well never works, most of the time the club just spreads it's self to thin and it ends up burning bridges in one of the two markets that it is trying to represent, sometimes it completely screws the club, be either way it never works.

From the way that relocation is discussed in the NRL I get the feeling that if it was attempted it'd be attempted in the later style of maintaining two markets which never works and as such would eventually be a failure... We just have to hope that it fails in a beneficial way, i.e. the clubs burn all their bridges in their old markets and not the new ones.

Only advantage of relocation to a virgin area is 1) inheriting and sustaining jnr development pathways in Sydney b) funding from a leagues club to help with new club start up

Having said that if the leagues club has money to burn on the nrl club then they probably aren’t at risk of relocation!

Agree relocation to Brisbane is not an option and would be a slap in the face to qrl clubs looking to step up or partner with a new Brisbane nrl club. I think a joint ownership model with two rich qrl clubs owning and feeding into a new Brisbane club is the best option.

Potentially someone like Souths Logan and Ipswich co owning the SW Brisbane whatever’s.

Leaves the door open for a similar mdel. In north Brisbane whatever’s in years to come,

 

[Perth Red]

It would have a Perth team playing in better conditions though. I think the Catalan Dragons should disband too, the concentration should be in improving the French domestic comp. Toronto are based in England, and it's a big N American city, there are always exceptions. So i wouldn't be against Toronto playing in the English league, which should be changed to the English RL Premiership from Super League.

There simply is not anywhere near enough money to sustain fully professional comps in those countries and as such the better players would leave for nrl and SL anyway and kids would be less motivated To play the game in those counties. Whatbwe need is 2-3 teams from those countries in the top tier comps with a strong development league under them.

 

[Miller was a legend]

If Toronto and French sides can play in the SL, why can’t the Pirates?