Redcliffe put their hand up

[LeagueXIII]

I don't know who it would be because relocation isn't ideal. I would suggest if a Sydney club is still struggling after they get a fair go with the new NRL funding and new stadia (in some cases) then the NRL would look at this sort of option before axing them altogether. At least it keeps the club in the NRL with Sydney fans still getting to watch them play regularly in Sydney as an away team.

I have no doubt that the bears could make a go of the central coast, I just don't think the NRL should grant another NSW licence instead of expanding to new markets in other states or New Zealand.

They can do both. We can have another NZ team that wouldn't affect Australia that much.

Sydney clubs are getting their acts together, look at Cronulla, historically have always struggled financially now are on the verge of being a very rich club. Same as South Sydney.
It just took proactive management that didn't rely on the grant from leagues clubs to get by and grow their clubs revenue streams.

I believe we should be locking everyone we can into being a rugby league supporter, this will help grow our game and make it strong for the future.

 

[ReddFelon]

Watford is a town of less than 100,000. How the hell are they suppose to be as big as Man U or London's big clubs. I would have thought it was common sense. The same happens in the NRL we have the big clubs and smaller ones eg Canterbury v Cronulla.

Exactly, you can't have these tiny teams competing with much larger teams. There's a reason the Premier League has been dominated by the big four/six since it's inception. With the notable exception being the hammers, almost none of the small teams are able to compete financially with the larger corporate backed teams.

This is precisely why the Redcliffe bid has to be bigger than just Redcliffe. Cronulla, Manly, etc. Likely won't survive in the long-term. The Northern Eagles was the right idea, executed poorly because it spent too much time trying to cater to three fanbases instead of embracing their new home. This is where NRL expansion and/or relocation/amalgamation falls apart compared to the rival AFL.

When they moved the Swans to Sydney they slapped SMFC in tiny letters on the back and spent decades cultivating a support base in Sydney. Compare it to Wests where you're split between three home grounds. That's not sustainable and the oversaturation has created a crowded market place, too many options and not enough consumers.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Exactly, you can't have these tiny teams competing with much larger teams. There's a reason the Premier League has been dominated by the big four/six since it's inception. With the notable exception being the hammers, almost none of the small teams are able to compete financially with the larger corporate backed teams.

This is precisely why the Redcliffe bid has to be bigger than just Redcliffe. Cronulla, Manly, etc. Likely won't survive in the long-term. The Northern Eagles was the right idea, executed poorly because it spent too much time trying to cater to three fanbases instead of embracing their new home. This is where NRL expansion and/or relocation/amalgamation falls apart compared to the rival AFL.

When they moved the Swans to Sydney they slapped SMFC in tiny letters on the back and spent decades cultivating a support base in Sydney. Compare it to Wests where you're split between three home grounds. That's not sustainable and the oversaturation has created a crowded market place, too many options and not enough consumers.

Look at every league in Europe they are mostly dominated by two or three clubs from big cities, it's just the way it is. They have more resources, the only way to balance it out is to go to a European league (champions League). It's not just an English problem caused by the Premier league, it's always been there.
I do believe though that Leicester City and Blackburn Rovers have won the PL, its a tough comp to win as it tests your depth.
Northern Eagles was a farce, and should never be mentioned again. What Manly need is a stadium of 25,000 which can pull in decent corporate support. That is what they lack.
The Swans only became successful because of Super League, before this they were on their knees. Guess what happened around that time.....clubs were merged and relocated, killed off....how successful was that again...............

 

[LeagueXIII]

Tell us again about the implosion! Face facts nobody cares about the bears. Sydney needs to drop 2-3 teams to develop scarcity which will increase demand, not expand so that the same fans are split further.

I care about the Bears....and the rest of what you say is rubbish....it will only result in people turning away from the game....GWS could do with a super league scenerio to help them.

 

[ReddFelon]

Look at every league in Europe they are mostly dominated by two or three clubs from big cities, it's just the way it is. They have more resources, the only way to balance it out is to go to a European league (champions League). It's not just an English problem caused by the Premier league, it's always been there.
I do believe though that Leicester City and Blackburn Rovers have won the PL, its a tough comp to win as it tests your depth.
Northern Eagles was a farce, and should never be mentioned again. What Manly need is a stadium of 25,000 which can pull in decent corporate support. That is what they lack.
The Swans only became successful because of Super League, before this they were on their knees. Guess what happened around that time.....clubs were merged and relocated, killed off....how successful was that again...............

False, the Swans were pulling an average of 25,000 in the 80s during the Capper years, their attendances dropped in the early 90s when they copped three wooden spoons in a row. They had already started rebuilding two years before Super League happened. It's a baseless myth that getting rid of the bears magically made the Swans successful, like all Sydney based teams they only draw when they win regularly.

Big whoop if you care about the bears, evidently not enough to go to their empty NSW Premiership games.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Tony Lockett was on the radio saying that if it wasn't for Super League War the Swans would never have been as big, it would have been a fad. They weren't tapping into the corporate money.
The SL War has cost us the fringe sports fan, a market we had captured under the Tina Turner campaign and one we have lost to AFL as the media have pounded us for 20 years.
The SLW is a fact that people in Victoria and the AFL downplay or don't consider due to their arrogance towards rugby league.....and is the reason GWS will always fail unless we relocate 2-3 teams...........

 

[ReddFelon]

Tony Lockett was on the radio saying that if it wasn't for Super League War the Swans would never have been as big, it would have been a fad. They weren't tapping into the corporate money.
This is a fact that people in Victoria and the AFL downplay or don't consider due to their arrogance towards rugby league.....and is the reason GWS will always fail unless we relocate 2-3 teams...........

Yeah and Steve Roach was on the radio saying we should abolish golden point and have a system where each team lose a player per minute until someone scores. Getting your information and ideas from ex players isn't a good idea.

Not a single Sydney based team is averaging 20,000 this year, they can't fill any stadiums and you think increasing stadium sizes is going to improve this? Reductions are necessary when the market is openly telling you there is more supply than demand.

 

[taipan]

The Swan's Crowds at home:
82 15,993
83 12,015
84 12,495
85 10,137
86 25847 also about when the ARL(under Arko and Quayle) started to crack down on violence in the game
87 21987
88 12,323
89 12,317
90 9,275
91 11,140
92 9,963
93 9,423
94 9,814

95 the first year of the stirrings of SL 15,976
96 the year when SL won their court case 24,574
97 the year when SL and ARL had their two comps going 35,818

For anyone to suggest Super league had little impact ,the figures suggest otherwise.Yes AFL had the Cappers etc but only two decent crowd averages from 1982-96.Even allowing for finals appearances.
It's hardly a secret that AFL fans ,were happy with the SL war.Just as we would ,should they have something similar involving Vic clubs.

It was the negativity within the game, the bitterness of fans because of Murdoch's intrusion,the lies and friendships lost, even joint ventures that turned decent numbers of fans off the code .


I guess we'll never know what their crowds would have been ,if Murdoch hadn't stuffed things up.That club had to get assistance from the likes of Willessee and Co,and eventually the AFL financially to keep their heads above water.

What we have now ,should only be changed if any NRL club can't handle the financials and is in deep trouble.Then relocation should be considered.
I doubt that would happen,as just about every club in Sydney has got or is getting their a*se into financial gear.

I'll bet my last dollar, when Parra stadium is built, the crowd averages will jump, ditto a rectangular reduced size with decent cover ANZ.I think the SFS should be no more than 25-30,000 ,45,000 is ridiculous.

 

[Perth Red]

Tony Lockett was on the radio saying that if it wasn't for Super League War the Swans would never have been as big, it would have been a fad. They weren't tapping into the corporate money.
The SL War has cost us the fringe sports fan, a market we had captured under the Tina Turner campaign and one we have lost to AFL as the media have pounded us for 20 years.
The SLW is a fact that people in Victoria and the AFL downplay or don't consider due to their arrogance towards rugby league.....and is the reason GWS will always fail unless we relocate 2-3 teams...........

Nobody under 25 in Sydney really knows or cares about the SL war, so why aren't they flocking to NRL grounds now? You can only blame 1997 for so long before you have to come to a realisation that the current model is based on an outdated suburban comp model that has not evolved. That is why a Redcliffe somethings or a Ipswich somethings should never, ever be the Brisbane expansion side. Lets learn from Sydneys mistakes. Has to be big population catchment appeal, large corporate support and playing out of the best stadia available.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Nobody under 25 in Sydney really knows or cares about the SL war, so why aren't they flocking to NRL grounds now? You can only blame 1997 for so long before you have to come to a realisation that the current model is based on an outdated suburban comp model that has not evolved. That is why a Redcliffe somethings or a Ipswich somethings should never, ever be the Brisbane expansion side. Lets learn from Sydneys mistakes. Has to be big population catchment appeal, large corporate support and playing out of the best stadia available.

Why aren't they flocking to games on the Gold Coast, Melbourne, Canberra, Townsville etc.

I would suggest that the old Sydney competition has evolved since 1982.

I have nothing against expansion however I want to keep the base ie. Sydney clubs strong. What we need are boutique stadiums in Manly, Penrith, Cronulla and for the Wests Tigers plus ANZ. Play more Sydney games in the day on Sunday and get rid of Thursday. Then we will see a feel good factor return to the game in Sydney.

 

[ReddFelon]

The Swan's Crowds at home:
82 15,993
83 12,015
84 12,495
85 10,137
86 25847 also about when the ARL(under Arko and Quayle) started to crack down on violence in the game
87 21987
88 12,323
89 12,317
90 9,275
91 11,140
92 9,963
93 9,423
94 9,814

95 the first year of the stirrings of SL 15,976
96 the year when SL won their court case 24,574
97 the year when SL and ARL had their two comps going 35,818

For anyone to suggest Super league had little impact ,the figures suggest otherwise.

It's easy to interpret results that way, comparatively you could just as easily put
1995-wins more games in one year than they did in three previous seaaons
1996-win minor premiership
1997-made finals

And that continued for another five years. It's also worth pointing out that 1988 is when they started losing players and their onfield record dropped. It's more believable to me that seven years of poor onfield performance being turned around in a single season was a bigger factor in their success than anything to do with Super League. Newcastle's a great example of the same effect, two home games this year have had bigger crowds than any they pulled last year.

Agree with your point about Allianz being brought down to 30,000.

 

[Stallion]

Guys can we have a pact NOT to respond to the troll? He infects every thread with his BS and his Bears/ Sydney/Union/Sunday nonsense and we keep biting and its killing every thread's topic area. I know its hard to let his stupidity go unchecked but he is clearly just looking for response to keep positing the exact same things in every topic so lets stop feeding him the opportunity and eventually he will go the way of the of the other trolls over the years.

The pledge: From this day forth I will not respond to Stallion no matter how stupid his post may be!

States PR the trumpeter of implosion, ignorance, inconsistency and poor judement along with disrespect, poor mathematics and geographical, cultural understanding of Australian sport. Especially rugby-league!

 

[taipan]

It's easy to interpret results that way, comparatively you could just as easily put
1995-wins more games in one year than they did in three previous seaaons
1996-win minor premiership
1997-made finals

And that continued for another five years. It's also worth pointing out that 1988 is when they started losing players and their onfield record dropped. It's more believable to me that seven years of poor onfield performance being turned around in a single season was a bigger factor in their success than anything to do with Super League. Newcastle's a great example of the same effect, two home games this year have had bigger crowds than any they pulled last year.

Agree with your point about Allianz being brought down to 30,000.

I can only work on my own experience.Attending the Sharks Leagues club ,when they decided to go to SL.The reaction in the room for quite a few was fiery to say the least.Some said stuff it I'm loyal to the ARL.I stuck with SL,because the Sharks needed the money to survive.Selfish I know.
I know the Swans made finals then and of course that helped and they still do,but the bandwaggoners (and that includes the disillusioned jumped on board).As they did when the Lions made and won grand finals.

Then we had the joint ventures ,which turned people off.Illawarra in particular were cheesed off then, they were the minor partner, ditto ATT Wests.

I have seen it mentioned on threads by AFL people ,who stated the SL war helped them ATT from a positivity aspect, and securing disillusioned rl fans.3 years of acrimonious court cases and a split competition hardly the recipe for some to continue to embrace your code.

You must also remember when SL came on board,the Sydney Morning Herald obviously in opposition to News,gave all the feel good, fluffy stories about the Swans.Some to the ARL comp.

Newcastle(In a rl heartland) this year have a far better roster, and have been performing much better, hence the crowd and membership jump.Swans is not AFL heartland.

The Eels have been playing like busteds, zero from 5,is it any wonder they got only 10,000 at the ANZ echo chamber.

Of course we can't blame SL now, the horse has bolted.The Swans have cemented their position in Sydney,even though their TV ratings are crap.
The next generation as we all know, couldn't give a rats about SL.As the Dragons have shown, people will attend when the club is a winner.Ditto the Warriors and Tigers.

I just don't want any more relocations or removals, it's been done and dusted.

 

[Stallion]

Tell us again about the implosion! Face facts nobody cares about the bears. Sydney needs to drop 2-3 teams to develop scarcity which will increase demand, not expand so that the same fans are split further.

Scarcity! So it fits in with weakening an envied competition ! That's your go union troll!

 

[herbert henry1908]

Tell us again about the implosion! Face facts nobody cares about the bears. Sydney needs to drop 2-3 teams to develop scarcity which will increase demand, not expand so that the same fans are split further.

Scarcity is good for the marketplace, but scarcity by reducing teams to create increased crowds will take decades.

Takes a lot for an existing fan to even consider switching to another team. Adults would rarely do it, so you’d be looking at waiting a long time for another generation to come through.



Scarcity in Sydney can be better addressed in the short term by teams taking a couple of their home games to different markets.

With all that said I doubt we’ll see a reduction by 3 teams. Unless it involves teams moving to Gosford & Wollongong.

 

[Stallion]

Scarcity is good for the marketplace, but scarcity by reducing teams to create increased crowds will take decades.

Takes a lot for an existing fan to even consider switching to another team. Adults would rarely do it, so you’d be looking at waiting a long time for another generation to come through.



Scarcity in Sydney can be better addressed in the short term by teams taking a couple of their home games to different markets.

With all that said I doubt we’ll see a reduction by 3 teams. Unless it involves teams moving to Gosford & Wollongong.

This reduction talk is unnecessary and negative.

 

[herbert henry1908]

This reduction talk is unnecessary and negative.

To me it wouldn’t necessarily be forced reduction, more just not supporting uneconomical clubs.

If the situation arises again, clubs shouldn’t be bailed out by the NRL unless other opportunities are explored.

 

[Stallion]

To me it wouldn’t necessarily be forced reduction, more just not supporting uneconomical clubs.

If the situation arises again, clubs shouldn’t be bailed out by the NRL unless other opportunities are explored.

The nature of sport some sides succeed and some don't. And all eventually have their ups and downs. Fans can cope with that. Taking away the existence on the basis of just money is not right or wise.Their is a cultural significance and relevance involved. This stuff is gold for any competition. It exudes credibility and respect. Things like junior development, overall popularity through tv and notoriety are major factors that must be factored in. For instance Souths were a basket case for a long time and their worth to the league is massive. It was a big mistake kicking out such a club and that was based on certain criteria and a poor agreement that didn't take into account things like junior numbers and overall popularity. It's more than making money. Money is a bonus. It's a culture and a pastime. It's what we like!

 

[herbert henry1908]

The nature of sport some sides succeed and some don't. And all eventually have their ups and downs. Fans can cope with that. Taking away the existence on the basis of just money is not right or wise.Their is a cultural significance and relevance involved. This stuff is gold for any competition. It exudes credibility and respect. Things like junior development, overall popularity through tv and notoriety are major factors that must be factored in. For instance Souths were a basket case for a long time and their worth to the league is massive. It was a big mistake kicking out such a club and that was based on certain criteria and a poor agreement that didn't take into account things like junior numbers and overall popularity. It's more than making money. Money is a bonus. It's a culture and a pastime. It's what we like!

Money isn’t a bonus, it’s required to run the competition in the professional sporting marketplace. Rugby league doesn’t exist in a vacuum.

The NRL can’t keep supporting uneconomical clubs. They’ve said as much too.

 

[LeagueXIII]

What we also lost was alot of the big corporate support which we were getting in the mid 90's....that has hit the game hard as it's now AFL they go to.