Sydney: 4 contrived teams or 1 or 2 "super" clubs?

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

With all the talk about Sydney clubs etc...

If Sydney clubs had to go what would you prefer?

- 4 new teams (the often talked about option of mass-mergers)

- 2 new teams (Sydney & West Sydney - no ties to old clubs, sort of two Broncos-ish clubs)

--

I ask mainly because I think the 4 team option would just speed the death of RL... but amazingly it seems to be the favoured option thrown around by commentators etc re: reduction of Sydney clubs.

If done right 2 teams might work but only if we had a strong televised Sydney comp at the old traditional venues played Saturday (ABC?) & Sunday afternoons. "The Big 2" would probably be Sydney's best hope for big crowd attendances at SFS and ANZ. The two local derbies should fill both, and be a catalyst for establishing a new image as a top class national sport.

 

[Perth Red]

putting all your eggs in 2 baskets!

Have you learnt nothing from the Super14? generally people aren't interested in provinicial teams.

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

putting all your eggs in 2 baskets!

Have you learnt nothing from the Super14? generally people aren't interested in provinicial teams.

Re: S14, I think people just aren't interested in Rugby Union.

 

[pcpp]

4 Sydney clubs is far too few, let alone two.

If the NRL were to drastically reduce clubs (to four or less), I would start them all brand new.

 

[joondalup_giant]

sydney is such a touchy subject, wateva they do there im glad im not making the decisions no matter what they do there there'll be some fans burnt

 

[Teddyboy]

putting all your eggs in 2 baskets!

Have you learnt nothing from the Super14? generally people aren't interested in provinicial teams.

The Waratahs get the biggest crowds out of the 2 codes in Sydney.

 

[The Tank]

The Waratahs get the biggest crowds out of the 2 codes in Sydney.

:? The Blues got 67k and 78k this year. The Tards averaged something like 25k-30k.

 

[joshreading]

Waratahs average last year was just over 22000 - that's all for the ONLY Pro Rugby Team in the WHOLE State. Yep that is more than RL. Your a true genius Teddy.

Individual Sydney teams in the NRL have gotten near that in averages.

 

[nadera78]

If things had been planned properly 20 years ago we wouldn't be in this situation now, with clubs fighting each other for pennies. When the comp moved from a NSW one to allow out of state clubs there should have been a new comp set up. A national comp.

If we had three Qld teams, two in Sydney, Newcastle, southern nsw, Canberra, Melbourne and Perth, plus two from NZ and we'd have a 12 team comp that would have strong attendances and even stronger corporate dollars.

Below that we'd have a NSWRL Premiership with all of the old traditional clubs, playing semi-pro (affordable for their business models, instead of them fighting to sustain full time pro clubs as they do now) with all of their rivalries and history. Same for the Qld Cup.

There would only be one NRL game per week in Sydney, so people would stil be able to afford to go and watch their local club as well as go to see the big boys.

That's if the game had planned things out sensibly, of course. Rather rare in RL unfortunately.

 

[Monk]

i think that one of the few things that gallop got right was the RL needs gradual change. if you just do a massive overhaul then its not going to survive.how many syd teaams we got now, 9 or something. if you suddenly dropped that to 4, (N Syd, S Syd, E Syd and W Syd) then you are basically killing RL as we know it.

 

[mrbishi]

im sick to death of all this the sky is falling too many sydney teams rubbish, what do you think is going to happen when they start getting rid of clubs with 100 years of history, others with 60+ years of history, the bears fans still go on to this day that they should never have been kicked out, many dont follow rugby league anymore because they were kicked out of the comp, now just picture if say, Parra, the dogs, roosters, manly, whoever were forced to merge or turned into a new super club with no ties at all to all the history that they have built up, rugby league will die if they cull sydney teams. If that happens i know i wont be following nrl anymore, id prefer to follow nswcup, you cant just get rid of 100 years of history in some teams cases, and 60 years for others.

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

f**king man bear pig.

he's all over the place causing mass hysteria.

 

[DINGb@T]

4 Sydney clubs is far too few, let alone two.

If the NRL were to drastically reduce clubs (to four or less), I would start them all brand new.

Agree. I reckon you'd want to keep 6 just to maintain the league saturation in Sydney. Any less and AFL etc look like they're just as much a part of the fabric of the city (wether it's true or not).

And a radical overhaul would need new franchises. It's the only way to have a different number of teams and keep fans happy- they can support their own team in NSW Cup and the new regional scale franchise that their own team is feeder for.

 

[johns_reds]

im sick to death of all this the sky is falling too many sydney teams rubbish, what do you think is going to happen when they start getting rid of clubs with 100 years of history, others with 60+ years of history, the bears fans still go on to this day that they should never have been kicked out, many dont follow rugby league anymore because they were kicked out of the comp, now just picture if say, Parra, the dogs, roosters, manly, whoever were forced to merge or turned into a new super club with no ties at all to all the history that they have built up, rugby league will die if they cull sydney teams. If that happens i know i wont be following nrl anymore, id prefer to follow nswcup, you cant just get rid of 100 years of history in some teams cases, and 60 years for others.

Considering Cronulla haven't won a comp in 40 years, they could be the first to go as there isn't much history there, lol

 

[Mr Angry]

lol that would be 40 years of history dingbat.

 

[Eels Dude]

With all the talk about Sydney clubs etc...

If Sydney clubs had to go what would you prefer?

- 4 new teams (the often talked about option of mass-mergers)

- 2 new teams (Sydney & West Sydney - no ties to old clubs, sort of two Broncos-ish clubs)

--

I ask mainly because I think the 4 team option would just speed the death of RL... but amazingly it seems to be the favoured option thrown around by commentators etc re: reduction of Sydney clubs.

If done right 2 teams might work but only if we had a strong televised Sydney comp at the old traditional venues played Saturday (ABC?) & Sunday afternoons. "The Big 2" would probably be Sydney's best hope for big crowd attendances at SFS and ANZ. The two local derbies should fill both, and be a catalyst for establishing a new image as a top class national sport.

We have to keep the heritage of rugby league. Whether you like it or not, League's history and most popular market is NSW. Throw away all the Sydney clubs and you may as well throw rugby league out the window with it.

A reduction in teams in Sydney is the best option, however to cull them all restart with 2 completely new sides is ridiculous.

Most league fans were brought into the game supporting a particular club, sometimes through generation and generation. To eliminate all clubs would lead to a large percantage of diehard fans, semi fans, and family fans losing interest in the game completely.

 

[johns_reds]

lol that would be 40 years of history dingbat.

40 years of history that has no significant importance, no one remembers any of the sharks teams, merge them with st george/Illawarra i say,

Cronulla/Illawarra Dragons
or
StGeorge/Illawarra Sharks

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

We have to keep the heritage of rugby league. Whether you like it or not, League's history and most popular market is NSW. Throw away all the Sydney clubs and you may as well throw rugby league out the window with it.

A reduction in teams in Sydney is the best option, however to cull them all restart with 2 completely new sides is ridiculous.

Most league fans were brought into the game supporting a particular club, sometimes through generation and generation. To eliminate all clubs would lead to a large percantage of diehard fans, semi fans, and family fans losing interest in the game completely.

As I say, I think mass mergers would fail.

Starting fresh could work if the Sydney tier comp took on a strong historical significance, with plenty of local media interest. There's nothing to compare it to at the moment, it would be very different but I think it would be the best way to have i) expansion and a truley national image, and ii) maintain the history and traditions of Sydney Rugby League clubs, certainly more so than any of the "mass-merger" options.

 

[Eels Dude]

As I say, I think mass mergers would fail.

Starting fresh could work if the Sydney tier comp took on a strong historical significance, with plenty of local media interest. There's nothing to compare it to at the moment, it would be very different but I think it would be the best way to have i) expansion and a truley national image, and ii) maintain the history and traditions of Sydney Rugby League clubs, certainly more so than any of the "mass-merger" options.

I accept your arguments.

The reason why we shouldn't cull Sydney clubs to the point you're suggesting, is because Sydney is why rugby league is so successful. There's no point in expanding League to areas where there isn't any following, but sacrifice Sydney clubs at the same time.

If League is going to have a national image, it needs to have a dominant market. Otherwise it'll just end up like the NBL, or NSL (5 years ago), competitions which have got a limited interest despite being nation wide.

I'm not sure what your idea is in regards to Sydney tier clubs are, you've not mentioned them in this thread though if you can provide me a link I'll happily discuss.

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

I accept your arguments.

The reason why we shouldn't cull Sydney clubs to the point you're suggesting, is because Sydney is why rugby league is so successful. There's no point in expanding League to areas where there isn't any following, but sacrifice Sydney clubs at the same time.

If League is going to have a national image, it needs to have a dominant market. Otherwise it'll just end up like the NBL, or NSL (5 years ago), competitions which have got a limited interest despite being nation wide.

I'm not sure what your idea is in regards to Sydney tier clubs are, you've not mentioned them in this thread though if you can provide me a link I'll happily discuss.

"The Big Two" option would have to see the creation of a new Sydney Comp, with all of the top traditional Sydney clubs. THough again, there's no current setup, or level in any sport in Aus to compare this concept to. Both the Sydney Comp and the two National Sydney Teams would be reliant on each other, working together to promote RL. It wouldn't work without media interest in the Sydney comp - it would be like the current NRL with two Swans/Warratah like Rugby League clubs who could go toe to toe with those two codes on the national stage.

I think it'd be worth discussing how to make it work. The key is that the two levels work together = instead of losing clubs we'd theoretically be adding more Rugby League teams in Sydney.