Rugby league in dire straits in NSW as Queensland leads the way

[Bluebags1908]

How would it go without a salary cap?

The salary cap is there to protect ALL clubs, not just the Sydney ones. If there was no salary cap then there would be a few out of Sydney clubs would be in dire staits just as much and in some cases even moreso than some Sydney teams.

And besides, a salary cap is used by most major professional sports around the world. It's not as if it is some unusal phenomenon that applies just to the NRL.

You may perhaps counter-argue that the salary cap would be higher if there were less Sydney teams, but I don't think that would ring true either. Sydney is where the money is and the NRL wouldn't be able to get as lucrative a TV deal it the game wasn't dominant in Sydney (and that's not even taking into account the dodgy TV deal the NRL did last time due to being half-owned by News Limited - our current TV deal should be much higher and hopefully it will be next time). Cut Sydney teams and it will have an impact on interest and TV ratings in Sydney and therefore and less $$ for the next TV deal for all clubs = reduced salary cap.

 

[Sam I Am]

The salary cap is there to protect ALL clubs, not just the Sydney ones. If there was no salary cap then there would be a few out of Sydney clubs would be in dire staits just as much and in some cases even moreso than some Sydney teams.

And besides, a salary cap is used by most major professional sports around the world. It's not as if it is some unusal phenomenon that applies just to the NRL.

I don't think that the salary cap should be scrapped. I do think that it is being kept artificially low in order to keep some Sydney clubs alive.

Cut Sydney teams and it will have an impact on interest and TV ratings in Sydney and therefore and less $$ for the next TV deal for all clubs = reduced salary cap.

Not necessarily. Ratings are at record high levels over the past couple of years, aren't they? And we don't have Balmain, Wests (Magpies), Norths, Illawarra, St George...

 

[Ladmate]

This thread should be titled:

Rugby league in dire straits in Parramatta, Cronulla as Brisbane leads the way

It is more accurate, the Cowboys and the Titans aren't averaging much more than NSW crowds.

 

[ramble_on]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...?section=sport

Fittler says the league may soon need to consider such proposals with the financial situation surrounding clubs like Cronulla.


"I think there's no doubt that at some stage we've got to smarten up," he said.


"If there's going to be limited teams in Sydney, which I think we've got to do, then we've got to do it.



"No one wants to see Cronulla fall out the way it's happening at the moment.


"But if clubs can make smart decisions and move to, whether it's the Central Coast or Sunshine Coast or whatever we see fit to the rugby league future, then that's the preferable way."

Fittler can see the writing on the wall. The Roosters, the team that has increased its crowd the most over the last decade, know the gig is up for the current number of teams in Sydney.

LMAO at the example you use to prove you point (in bold). The sentence makes no sense whatsoever. Is it a direct quote? If so then it shows you Qlders have a far better understanding of gibberish....... or just like using gibberish to support your points....

 

[Sam I Am]

LMAO at the example you use to prove you point (in bold). The sentence makes no sense whatsoever. Is it a direct quote? If so then it shows you Qlders have a far better understanding of gibberish....... or just like using gibberish to support your points....

It's true that the NSW-man quoted has difficulty speaking clearly. However, having been through an education system that has taught me to parse a sentence, I can determine the meaning of what he was saying. that would be because I read it.

Anyway, here begins the lesson:

Original passage:

"I think there's no doubt that at some stage we've got to smarten up," he said.

" If there's going to be limited teams in Sydney, which I think we've got to do, then we've got to do it.
​

The second sentence, running straight from the first, can be broken up into three parts:

1. If there's going to be limited teams in Sydney: This part is self-evident, methinks. He is postulating that there will be a number of teams in Sydney.
2. which I think we've got to do: The "we" in this part of the sentence can be read as "we the rugby league community, competition, NRL". He is saying that we need to limit the number of teams in Sydney.
3. then we've got to do it: The "do it" he is refering to here is the "smartening up" from the previous sentence.

Got all of that. Must be tough trying to read two sentences in a row. You'll probably need a lie down.

 

[Timmah]

Got all of that. Must be tough trying to read two sentences in a row. You'll probably need a lie down.

Exactly what I'm getting at, was that necessary? And try answering without "you're a hypocrite" because it's getting tired.

As for still insisting Freddy's a credible example of "someone in the know" in the game, you're sorely misguided if you think that's the case. If we had a club CEO or Chairman saying similar things, it might've helped your cause a little more...

 

[Bluebags1908]

I don't think that the salary cap should be scrapped. I do think that it is being kept artificially low in order to keep some Sydney clubs alive...

Disagree.

Not necessarily. Ratings are at record high levels over the past couple of years, aren't they? And we don't have Balmain, Wests (Magpies), Norths, Illawarra, St George...

Well if ratings are at record levels then what are we all complaining about? If it aint broke then don't fix it.

Sure, we've merged a couple of Sydney sides - and yes I believe Balmain/Wests was the perfect merger and minimal damage was done there. However, we were fortunate that the two clubs were a perfect fit and circumstances were right for them.

St. George was basically a takeover of Illawarra so I would hardly call that a merger so practically no damage done there from a St. George point of view (I know that Illawarra fans may have got the rough end of the pineapple here but Illawarra is not a Sydney team - I am only talking about Sydney here).

Despite the two examples above, it doesn't necessarily mean we should keep doing it just for the sake of reducing teams - for mergers to work the two clubs involved must be a perfect fit and the circumstaces must be right - as you can see with the Northern Eagles it was a disaster.

As for Norths - I think there is very clear evidence right there what will happen if more Sydney teams get cut. Rugby League is dead on the North Shore. The loss of Norths has done enormous damage to Rugby League in Sydney. Hopefully they will be back as the Central Coast Bears wering the Red & Black colours, as the North Shore will have a connection to that team as the Central Coast is only 50km up the F3 (especially if they play 1 or 2 games a year at North Sydney Oval for e.g. Heritage Round). Since Norths got punted I have not met a single Bears fan that has said they will not be back following the Central Coast Bears and the game in an instant.

We've managed to go from 11 teams per-Super League to 8.5 teams, but how far do you do before irreperable damage is done? If you cut any more Sydney teams you put at risk the game's saturation and dominance in the biggest city and most lucrative market in Australia. Very bad news.

 

[Sam I Am]

As for still insisting Freddy's a credible example of "someone in the know" in the game, you're sorely misguided if you think that's the case. If we had a club CEO or Chairman saying similar things, it might've helped your cause a little more...

So you are claiming that NRL coaches know nothing about how clubs are going? Or about how the competition is going?

 

[Eion]

Disagree.



Well if ratings are at record levels then what are we all complaining about? If it aint broke then don't fix it.

Sure, we've merged a couple of Sydney sides - and yes I believe Balmain/Wests was the perfect merger and minimal damage was done there. However, we were fortunate that the two clubs were a perfect fit and circumstances were right for them.

St. George was basically a takeover of Illawarra so I would hardly call that a merger so practically no damage done there from a St. George point of view (I know that Illawarra fans may have got the rough end of the pineapple here but Illawarra is not a Sydney team - I am only talking about Sydney here).

Despite the two examples above, it doesn't necessarily mean we should keep doing it just for the sake of reducing teams - for mergers to work the two clubs involved must be a perfect fit and the circumstaces must be right - as you can see with the Northern Eagles it was a disaster.

As for Norths - I think there is very clear evidence right there what will happen if more Sydney teams get cut. Rugby League is dead on the North Shore. The loss of Norths has done enormous damage to Rugby League in Sydney. Hopefully they will be back as the Central Coast Bears wering teh Red & Black colours, as the North Shore will have a connection to that team as the Central Coast is only 50km up the F3 (especially if they play 1 or 2 games a year at North Sydney Oval for e.g. Heritage Round).

We've managed to go from 11 teams per-Super League to 8.5 teams, but how far do you do before irreperable damage is done? If you cut any more Sydney teams you put at risk the game's saturation and dominance in the biggest city and most lucrative market in Australia. Very bad news.

Well said Bluey.

 

[Sam I Am]

Disagree.
Well if ratings are at record levels then what are we all complaining about? If it aint broke then don't fix it.

Because low crowds are impacting on the financial bottom line of clubs, and the record ratings are not translating into record revenues for clubs.

Sure, we've merged a couple of Sydney sides - and yes I believe Balmain/Wests was the perfect merger and minimal damage was done there. However, we were fortunate that the two clubs were a perfect fit and circumstances were right for them.

Agreed.

St. George was basically a takeover of Illawarra so I would hardly call that a merger so practically no damage done there from a St. George point of view (I know that Illawarra fans may have got the rough end of the pineapple here but Illawarra is not a Sydney team - I am only talking about Sydney here).

Also: agreed.

Despite the two examples above, it doesn't necessarily mean we should keep doing it just for the sake of reducing teams - for mergers to work the two clubs involved must be a perfect fit and the circumstaces must be right - as you can see with the Northern Eagles it was a disaster.

Again: agreed. And this is why I say that any clubs involved in any merger or relocation need to be committed to it 100%. I don't want to point the finger at Manly, but... :sarcasm: And this is why I say we need to start planning now for what we might do in 5 or 10 years time. If we cobble together mergers, for example, we will probably end up with another Northern Eagles. And that doesn't do anyone any good.

As for Norths - I think there is very clear evidence right there what will happen if more Sydney teams get cut. Rugby League is dead on the North Shore. The loss of Norths has done enormous damage to Rugby League in Sydney. Hopefully they will be back as the Central Coast Bears as the North Shore will have a connection to that team (especially if they play 1 or 2 games a year at North Sydney Oval).

Again: agreed. If the process is done badly, there will be bad consequences. That doesn't mean it is better to do nothing. It means that it is better to do something properly.

We've managed to go from 11 teams per-Super League to 8.5 teams, but how far do you do before irreperable damage is done? If you cut any more Sydney teams you put at risk the game's saturation and dominance in the biggest city and most lucrative market in Australia. Very bad news.

Again, I agree with you to point. The post-Super League rationalisation is probably the best example of how not to do things for the good of the game. News and the ARL were cutting and merging teams (in and out of Sydney) for the sake of numbers with no consideration for the impact on the game.

As for David Moffett and his 14 teams at all costs policy? Disaster. I most definitely do not want to go down that road. But it is overly simplistic (and I am not insulting you here) to say that fewer teams equals disaster. The train wrecks that we had in the 1990s were due to appalling management all around. Let's not repeat those. As much as we don't like the AFL and ARU they sit down and plan. We need to do the same.

 

[Sam I Am]

NSW are in dire straits tonight! :lol:

 

[ramble_on]

Thanks for the hint.... comes on Fox here in 1 hour 20..... want to give me the final score too f**kwit?

 

[Loudstrat]

LOL. Onya Sam. Economics genius. A team cannot find a market to supply their income needs, and it's NOT a market failure?

Did you once work for HIH?

 

[bobmar28]

If it wasn't bad enough watching our no hopers cop a caning from the Raiders and put us in spoon contention, I log on and this thread is still going.

Here it is nice and simple:

My team may be shiate, they may make me want to pull the rest of my hair out at the game and throw the remote through the screen.

At the end of the day, they are my shiate team, so keep your filthy mits away.

Cheers (going back to the corner to sulk)

Bunnies merged with Sharks = Southern Sharks playing out of SFS and Shark Park.

 

[bobmar28]

Disagree.



Well if ratings are at record levels then what are we all complaining about? If it aint broke then don't fix it.

Sure, we've merged a couple of Sydney sides - and yes I believe Balmain/Wests was the perfect merger and minimal damage was done there. However, we were fortunate that the two clubs were a perfect fit and circumstances were right for them.

St. George was basically a takeover of Illawarra so I would hardly call that a merger so practically no damage done there from a St. George point of view (I know that Illawarra fans may have got the rough end of the pineapple here but Illawarra is not a Sydney team - I am only talking about Sydney here).

Despite the two examples above, it doesn't necessarily mean we should keep doing it just for the sake of reducing teams - for mergers to work the two clubs involved must be a perfect fit and the circumstaces must be right - as you can see with the Northern Eagles it was a disaster.

As for Norths - I think there is very clear evidence right there what will happen if more Sydney teams get cut. Rugby League is dead on the North Shore. The loss of Norths has done enormous damage to Rugby League in Sydney. Hopefully they will be back as the Central Coast Bears wering the Red & Black colours, as the North Shore will have a connection to that team as the Central Coast is only 50km up the F3 (especially if they play 1 or 2 games a year at North Sydney Oval for e.g. Heritage Round). Since Norths got punted I have not met a single Bears fan that has said they will not be back following the Central Coast Bears and the game in an instant.

We've managed to go from 11 teams per-Super League to 8.5 teams, but how far do you do before irreperable damage is done? If you cut any more Sydney teams you put at risk the game's saturation and dominance in the biggest city and most lucrative market in Australia. Very bad news.

The loss of Norths has done enormous damage to rugby league in Sydney? Have you been to the western suburbs lately?

 

[Bluebags1908]

The loss of Norths has done enormous damage to rugby league in Sydney? Have you been to the western suburbs lately?

Have you been to the North shore lately?

 

[Timmah]

The loss of Norths has done enormous damage to rugby league in Sydney? Have you been to the western suburbs lately?

Wow, talk about a simplistic, misguided response to a very well made point... North Shore people no longer care about RL, he said as much. Well done on a stupid reply

 

[bobmar28]

Wow, talk about a simplistic, misguided response to a very well made point... North Shore people no longer care about RL, he said as much. Well done on a stupid reply

He said damage to rugby league in Sydney. Last time I checked, the north shore was a small part of Sydney and I repeat, western Sydney? Damage to rugby league? Almost a million viewers last night. What damage?

 

[Bluebags1908]

He said damage to rugby league in Sydney. Last time I checked, the north shore was a small part of Sydney and I repeat, western Sydney? Damage to rugby league? Almost a million viewers last night. What damage?

And your answer my friend answers why we can't just cut Sydney teams willy nilly. Because Sydney is unique - it is a big place by Australian standards and the geography and demographic is made up of several distinct 'mini cities within a city'. People from the North Shore would hardly go out to the Western Suburbs or vice versa. People from Cronulla never go to Penrith and vice versa, etc. If they did we could probably cut 6 or 7 Sydney teams in an instant and no-one would blink and eyelid.

Last time I looked the North Shore was not only in Sydney but is the wealthiest part of Sydney. So if Rugby League is now dead on the North Shore that leads to the logical concusion that it has done damage to the game in Sydney.

Sydney is not just the Western Suburbs.

 

[Perth Red]

Do you have any evidence re what the North shore is doing as a population group? Is there any stats on jnr number changes, TV viewing figures in that area, if those fans are watching another NRL team or another code?

Not saying your wrong just wondering if you have any pre and post Bears stats to back your claims? There is some evidence that Sydney as a whole has been positively affected since (bigger TV viewing, bigger attendances etc) so what evidence do you have re the North Shore area?