The Bears

[MugaB]

I'm a black fella ya f**kin merkin. And with a comment like that I'd rip ya fucin head apart if I ever met you.

Seems like the gibberers of the forum have gone and pigeonholed every sharks fan into being a white supremacist poster boy.. Okkk

 

[bad boy bubby]

Seems like the gibberers of the forum have gone and pigeonholed every sharks fan into being a white supremacist poster boy.. Okkk

Yeah, they are not ashamed to show their ignorance.
Cheers mate.

 

[Dark Corner]

Due in part to the fact Aussie Rules is a religion in Melbourne.

Aussie Rules in Melbourne is a religion like union in New Zealand is.

Yes but having 2 Rugby codes in Sydney and Brisbane for the past 100 odd years hasn't helped even through Union has and maybe at the moment been on a massive slide.
What I'm saying is if NSW/QLD had 1 Rugby code it would of been easier and would of competed well against the obsessed VFL ...crikey if New Zealand had been Rugby League then Aussie Rules and Soccer would be in for hiding in Australia but the Bears should of stayed and a Central Coast team also entered but what 2 teams should of gone for them ?

 

[Dark Corner]

Pretty sure St Merge have the confirmed Neo Nazi fan.

He was supposedly banned in the 70's but he still sneaks into games from all reports.

Is that the little bald f**ker with glasses ?

 

[Colk]

I am not confusing anything

The community of northern Sydney to the CC and exclude Manly from this due to the physical barriers

Is not serviced by RL

The number of people serviced, juniors and corporate $ is bigger than every other bid

Yeah you are. You are wanting the game to go back to a Sydney suburban competition. That’s the only reason why you keep pushing this barrow because otherwise you would clearly see (maybe re-position yourself as an outsider) that this is not the biggest or best bid.

On your points:

Number of people serviced - clearly wrong. The population between North Sydney and CC would be roughly 600-700k. Brisbane 3 (if you look at the area south of the river has over 1 million; Perth has a population of over 2 million, NZ South Island has a population of over 1 million so there are three bids already with more people. If SA put a bid in (unlikely but let’s say hypothetically) that’s another area of over 1 million without a side.

Juniors: The amount of juniors serviced in a 3rd Brisbane side would be more. South Island if you are looking at taking on Rugby Union would have more. Again though the point is that juniors between North Sydney and CC can play for anyone of 10 clubs in NSW so they are not lacking access or opportunity.

Corporate $ - absolutely wrong. Both of the failed Brisbane bids would dwarf the corporates on offer for another Sydney side. You also have the whole state of WA which has probably the most corporates of any state (half of the biggest companies in Australia are WA companies) who don’t even have one team, so the potential corporate dollars there are several times more than that created by an extra Sydney team. This is not even thinking of TV dollars to which, needless to say, any of the other existing bids would offer substantially more

Furthermore, just look at recent history. We have teams already struggling in Sydney for corporate dollars - compare Wests Tigers, Manly or the Sharks to that of the Roosters, South Sydney or Parramatta and you have had what six Sydney teams die or merge (Manly, North Sydney, Balmain, Wests, St George and Newtown) in the past 40 years and you want to stick another side in that market.

Absolute lunacy

 

[taipan]

As I was highlighting

People in Sydney liked their sports, they had their RL team in the community, you will find they also followed a AFL team, north & east side had a RU team, we followed the Socceroos and national cricket

People walked away with their feet and their cash

As as been shown, you kill off a club you give opposition sports a leg up

Been my argument all along.Kill a team or relocate a team, tribalism is lost. People tend to do other things and the not so rusted on ,look at other code opportunities to watch. The Bears a classic example.Now IMO it's too late for their NSW return.
When souths wer flicked ,did their fans rush to watch other Nrl clubs? No way Jose.

 

[Perth Red]

Been my argument all along.Kill a team or relocate a team, tribalism is lost. People tend to do other things and the not so rusted on ,look at other code opportunities to watch. The Bears a classic example.Now IMO it's too late for their NSW return.
When souths wer flicked ,did their fans rush to watch other Nrl clubs? No way Jose.

Unfortunately we have no real evidence of what happened to bears fans. Or Newtown fans for that matter. We may have lost some of a generation but if the game is still #1in the city and options to support an nrl club, or nine, are still on the doorstep there is no reason we have to lose subsequent generations.

not to mention if you accept the game has finite resources and can only sustain X amount of top tier clubs then you also have to look at will we gain more from bringing someone else in than we lose cutting someone, such is economics.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Been my argument all along.Kill a team or relocate a team, tribalism is lost. People tend to do other things and the not so rusted on ,look at other code opportunities to watch. The Bears a classic example.Now IMO it's too late for their NSW return.
When souths wer flicked ,did their fans rush to watch other Nrl clubs? No way Jose.

Attendances, television ratings and revenue streams prove there's not enough demand for RL in metropolitan Sydney to support its nine professional clubs. People who are for the continuation of the status quo don't have an argument that has any legs when this subject is brought up, so they resort to insults and appeals to emotion.

 

[Colk]

Been my argument all along.Kill a team or relocate a team, tribalism is lost. People tend to do other things and the not so rusted on ,look at other code opportunities to watch. The Bears a classic example.Now IMO it's too late for their NSW return.
When souths wer flicked ,did their fans rush to watch other Nrl clubs? No way Jose.

This tribalism argument is such a false construct. Define tribalism and suggest how or why it matters if clubs run out of money because they don’t have enough support. In the end a club is judged in a professional competition by how much supporters it can generate and whether it can sustain themselves.

The next clubs should be determined on that potential and nothing more

 

[siv]

Unfortunately we have

Did you read the impact as quoted by Ian Heads

 

[Perth Red]

Did you read the impact as quoted by Ian Heads

No do you have a link to it? Was it opinion or evidence based?

 

[flippikat]

Attendances, television ratings and revenue streams prove there's not enough demand for RL in metropolitan Sydney to support its nine professional clubs. People who are for the continuation of the status quo don't have an argument that has any legs when this subject is brought up, so they resort to insults and appeals to emotion.

Exactly! Just look at EVERY top tier sports league in the world and see how many have half the teams in 1 city.

Our competition is still terribly imbalanced.

 

[Dark Corner]

Arko wanted 4 teams in Sydney, 4 NSW teams and 4 from Queensland I think back in 1982 ?

 

[flippikat]

Arko wanted 4 teams in Sydney, 4 NSW teams and 4 from Queensland I think back in 1982 ?

I think the Arko/Quayle administration wanted to reform the competition, but gradually.. but the Superleague war weaponised the expansionists' frustration with their slow pace.

I liken it to the final days of the Soviet Union, with Gorbachev trying to reform & keep all sides content - which proved damn near impossible - and fast forward to now, and we have an old-school KGB operative running Russia, when for a brief period in the 1990s there was the glimmer of hope that reform into a modern functioning democracy could have happened.

 

[taipan]

Unfortunately we have no real evidence of what happened to bears fans. Or Newtown fans for that matter. We may have lost some of a generation but if the game is still #1in the city and options to support an nrl club, or nine, are still on the doorstep there is no reason we have to lose subsequent generations.

not to mention if you accept the game has finite resources and can only sustain X amount of top tier clubs then you also have to look at will we gain more from bringing someone else in than we lose cutting someone, such is economics.

The evidence is, SFA went to either the Silvertails ,Tigers or Easts, else their crowds would have shown decent increases.
The game and clubs can earn more if they expand, and if some dopey players can remember that any F...up they do, usually gets reported by a ravenous press.
Well we gained bugger all, when Souts were flicked .That's a starting point.

 

[taipan]

This tribalism argument is such a false construct. Define tribalism and suggest how or why it matters if clubs run out of money because they don’t have enough support. In the end a club is judged in a professional competition by how much supporters it can generate and whether it can sustain themselves.

The next clubs should be determined on that potential and nothing more

Souths getting flicked knocked that view into the outfield. Where did South's fans go ,when they were gone. Certainly not to other clubs.
Clubs not being able to continue ,I have no argument against them being relocated or flicked.
Tribalism is based on tradition built up over the years, where the tribe itself can be dominant in terms of members and committment,be it attendance, merchandise purchasing.It is strengthened when father passes his love for the club to his children and grandchildren.
New clubs can't be determined on tribalism ,only on potential and what they may bring to the game.
It appears all clubs now can sustain themselves.

 

[Perth Red]

The evidence is, SFA went to either the Silvertails ,Tigers or Easts, else their crowds would have shown decent increases.
The game and clubs can earn more if they expand, and if some dopey players can remember that any F...up they do, usually gets reported by a ravenous press.
Well we gained bugger all, when Souts were flicked .That's a starting point.

hmm, now I by no means suggest these stats prove anything as there is a ton of variables but just as counterbalance to your argument..... Bears had roughly 10-12k active fans attending in the early 90's before SL and then their demise.

Roosters crowds have gone from 9-11k to 13-16k since the demise of the bears
Balmains went from 7-9k to 12-17k as Wests Tigers in that period
Manlys hasnt changed but they play a t a sht ground thats hard to get to so not surprising there

And you could argue booting the Bears created space for GC which is avg'ing 13-14k and has ppotential to be a lot bigger, so more than we lost.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Souths getting flicked knocked that view into the outfield. Where did South's fans go ,when they were gone. Certainly not to other clubs.
Clubs not being able to continue ,I have no argument against them being relocated or flicked.
Tribalism is based on tradition built up over the years, where the tribe itself can be dominant in terms of members and committment,be it attendance, merchandise purchasing.It is strengthened when father passes his love for the club to his children and grandchildren.
New clubs can't be determined on tribalism ,only on potential and what they may bring to the game.
It appears all clubs now can sustain themselves.

We don't know which clubs are sustainable because they all get $13m a year from the ARLC.

If there's ever a massive hit in broadcast revenue then quite a few clubs will find it hard to survive.

 

[siv]

We don't know which clubs are sustainable because they all get $13m a year from the ARLC.

If there's ever a massive hit in broadcast revenue then quite a few clubs will find it hard to survive.

Player payments are tied to NRL Grants

So if broadcast revenue drops then player payments drop by the same %

But a paradigm shift will impact things, but it will depend on what that is

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Player payments are tied to NRL Grants

So if broadcast revenue drops then player payments drop by the same %

But a paradigm shift will impact things, but it will depend on what that is

The annual grant is 130% of the salary cap. About $3m to $4m of the grant goes directly to the football department of each club. Some Sydney clubs would struggle to compete if they had to produce that $3m to $4m on their own. Many of them struggle to make ends meet with the $3m to $4m they're getting from ARLC.

It's unfair for Sydney teams to receive this money when most of them add nothing to the broadcast rights revenue, which is evident by the most watched teams being Broncos, Storm and Cowboys with the lowest-drawing clubs being from Sydney. It would make good business sense to kill the least popular Sydney brand and replace it with a 3rd Brisbane team, a 2nd NZ team, a Perth team and possibly an Adelaide team to form a strong 20 team competition that has 8 in Sydney, 3 in Brisbane, 1 in Adelaide, 1 in Melbourne, 1 in Perth, 2 in NZ with 4 teams in regional QLD/NSW and ACT. That's a good spread that provides pathways for kids all over the country and lucrative local derbies for the broadcasters in Sydney, Brisbane and NZ. If NZ 2 is successful then another Sydney team could relocate to NZ or be killed off so that we can have more local derbies in NZ and help RL compete with RU for talent and media coverage in the Shaky Isles.

Seven to eight teams in Sydney is more than enough and more than Sydney RL fans deserve. Any Sydneysider who whinges about that is just a petulant sook with an entitlement complex.