The Case for Adelaide.....

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I wonder, after the dust has settled on 2020, what that level of financial support will be.

Could it be reducing the support but incentivising relocation, or even mergers...... a hark back to days of the past.

How can these Sydney Clubs stand on their own two feet. Where is there revenue increase and/or profitability going to come from. I'm sure the NRL will help guide where they can but surely financial handouts at the level of recent times will be targetted to reduce.

Personally I'd hate to see any of these clubs simply die. But if 2020 has taught us anything it's that the world isn't the same place it used to be, and to rely on financial support as a line-item on your budget just isn't good enough. Unless they go to ScoMo to apply for Jobkeeper - so I suppose the Sharks are all good for a while yet.

Merge Wests Magpies and Penrith Panthers to form the Western Sydney Panthers. Colours black and white.

Give the Wests Tigers licence to the Easts Tigers and rename them Brisbane Tigers. That's Brisbane 2 sorted.

Relocate Canterbury Bulldogs to Christchurch. Colours red and black. Keep the name Canterbury Bulldogs. That's NZ 2 sorted.

7 Sydney
2 Brisbane
2 NZ
2 Regional QLD
1 Canberra
1 Regional NSW
1 Melbourne

16 NRL CLUBS.

 

[Santino Patane]

I honestly don’t get the case for a second New Zealand team ( I’d actually love to hear from an actual kiwi on this point- is there a desire for a second team?), in my mind (limited knowledge, just from logic) NZ2 would just canibalise the Warriors and would hardly grow the game. The NRL is best to ensure the success of the Warriors to grow the game in NZ.

At least if we went to Adelaide (but even more Perth) the potential for the game (if it’s done right) is far greater. I’ve read all the arguments against and whilst the points are valid, the points for still stand.

To me, Brisbane 2 is a no brainer due to the size of the talent pool and Rugby League fan base. There is a sizeable portion of league fans in SEQ that have no time for the Broncos and would take on a new team- probably as their second team initially, but then would go in fully over time. This is what happen to my family and best mate in becoming Titans fans.

 

[Perth Red]

what is the differnce as a percentage of total deal?????

Difference in what?

 

[jasonstevenswedgie]

I've got no problems with all the existing clubs staying. I've got a massive problem with the NRL's lack of ambition and strategy to expand and then blaming the lack of viability of the existing clubs as an excuse, whilst refusing to do anything about it.
The AFL brings in (pre covid) $265mill a year more than the NRL! That gap would pay for massive investment in heartland grass roots, money for new NRL clubs and decent investment in growing the game at all levels in new areas. We need a closing the gap strategy! Its getting wider!!

2013 Gap $199mill
2016 Gap $219.3mill
2019 Gap $265.4mill

difference in the gap compared to toal revenue

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

I honestly don’t get the case for a second New Zealand team ( I’d actually love to hear from an actual kiwi on this point- is there a desire for a second team?), in my mind (limited knowledge, just from logic) NZ2 would just canibalise the Warriors and would hardly grow the game. The NRL is best to ensure the success of the Warriors to grow the game in NZ.

At least if we went to Adelaide (but even more Perth) the potential for the game (if it’s done right) is far greater. I’ve read all the arguments against and whilst the points are valid, the points for still stand.

To me, Brisbane 2 is a no brainer due to the size of the talent pool and Rugby League fan base. There is a sizeable portion of league fans in SEQ that have no time for the Broncos and would take on a new team- probably as their second team initially, but then would go in fully over time. This is what happen to my family and best mate in becoming Titans fans.

I get the logic behind NZ2 (established local comps for player pools - national "rivalry" benefits) but until the Warriors can get it right (they've had 25 years so far) to be a financial and footballing powerhouse - it doesn't check out for me.

Bris V2 absolutely should be next, then I feel Adelaide is the net best logical step (in my original thread posts). Costs are less, One team-town, new eyeballs to the game etc.

Player Pool?

• The Pacific Islands is a huge pool to develop.
• QLD - yep they'd have 4 x teams by then
• Perth - Yep Red wont be happy but identifying talent in Perth, moving them to Adelaide COULD help BOTH cities. A viable conduit for WA players to be developed into NRL-level talent (yes with strategic investment)..... which - when thriving - gives Perth a huge advantage for them to mount a huge case to come back - quality local junior pools.

Just a few ideas rattling around in my head. But makes sense to me

 

[Perth Red]

difference in the gap compared to total revenue

Total Revenue
2013 AFL $502.7mill NRL $303.4mill Gap 2013 Gap $199mill
2016 AFL $569.8mill NRL $350.5mill Gap $219.3mill
2019 AFL $793.9mill NRL $528.5mill Gap $265.4mill

TV difference in 2019 accounted for $71.8mill of the gap. (2019 tv revenue AFL $396.4mill v NRL $324.6mill)

Whilst we have closed the TV revenue gap to some degree, the non tv revenue continues to widen. Taking out the tv revenue difference we still sit a massive $193.6mill behind in corporate sales, sponsorships and other central revenue raising areas. When you consider we have Origin and Internationals to sell its even more staggering a gap!

Close that gap and we can afford proper expansion, proper heartland growth of grassroots, proper funding to ensure every club is viable. serious investment in asset base etc.

We could even afford Perth AND Adelaide lol

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I honestly don’t get the case for a second New Zealand team ( I’d actually love to hear from an actual kiwi on this point- is there a desire for a second team?), in my mind (limited knowledge, just from logic) NZ2 would just canibalise the Warriors and would hardly grow the game. The NRL is best to ensure the success of the Warriors to grow the game in NZ.

At least if we went to Adelaide (but even more Perth) the potential for the game (if it’s done right) is far greater. I’ve read all the arguments against and whilst the points are valid, the points for still stand.

To me, Brisbane 2 is a no brainer due to the size of the talent pool and Rugby League fan base. There is a sizeable portion of league fans in SEQ that have no time for the Broncos and would take on a new team- probably as their second team initially, but then would go in fully over time. This is what happen to my family and best mate in becoming Titans fans.

I advocate for NZ2 and, eventually NZ3, because it will add value to the NZ broadcast rights and create local derbies that will give local kids a reason to choose RL over RU. A stronger RL scene in NZ will improve the NZ Kiwis and possibly make Tests between Australia and NZ as lucrative as the Bledisloe Cup.

I cannot see Adelaide and Perth ever adopting RL as anything more than a niche sport that generates attention when their teams, which will be littered with New South Welshman, New Zealanders and Queenslanders, are winning. Few kids from either city will bother playing the game and, the few who do, will struggle to make a serious dent in top grade as the junior pathways in both cities will not be strong enough for them to develop the skills required to thrive in the NRL. Test football doesn't benefit from teams in Adelaide and Perth.

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

Who needs some inspiration?

If you're feeling a bit down, maybe in an off-season mire, and need a big lift to go and conquer your world..

This tune will get you in the mood to run through walls...

 

[flippikat]

I get the logic behind NZ2 (established local comps for player pools - national "rivalry" benefits) but until the Warriors can get it right (they've had 25 years so far) to be a financial and footballing powerhouse - it doesn't check out for me.

From my NZ perspective (Born & raised in the Greater Wellington region, living in Lower Hutt), I think the your argument that the Warriors need to shape up before we have a 2nd NZ team is right.

IMO the next phase of expansion SHOULD be Brisbane2 and Perth anyway - It'd be queue-jumping for NZ to expect consideration for team 17 or 18.

However I think the foundations now are in place for the Warriors to improve - coaching, ownership, squad depth etc.. and if the NRL considers further expansion or relocation in the mid/late 2020s, then we'd have to be in the mix with Adelaide. (Note the tie-in with the thread topic).

Christchurch is a no-brainer for a 2nd NZ team. There's a bit of a RL history there, by then they'll have a NEW covered rectangular central-city stadium, plus the North/South rivalry (and Auckland/Canterbury rivalry at provincial level) is ready-built.

The work needs to start now - with at least a game (preferable two) per season in Adelaide and Christchurch to lead in towards the NEXT wave of expansion later this decade.

 

[Pippen94]

Total Revenue
2013 AFL $502.7mill NRL $303.4mill Gap 2013 Gap $199mill
2016 AFL $569.8mill NRL $350.5mill Gap $219.3mill
2019 AFL $793.9mill NRL $528.5mill Gap $265.4mill

TV difference in 2019 accounted for $71.8mill of the gap. (2019 tv revenue AFL $396.4mill v NRL $324.6mill)

Whilst we have closed the TV revenue gap to some degree, the non tv revenue continues to widen. Taking out the tv revenue difference we still sit a massive $193.6mill behind in corporate sales, sponsorships and other central revenue raising areas. When you consider we have Origin and Internationals to sell its even more staggering a gap!

Close that gap and we can afford proper expansion, proper heartland growth of grassroots, proper funding to ensure every club is viable. serious investment in asset base etc.

We could even afford Perth AND Adelaide lol

How are tiny ratings in Adelaide & Perth going to boast ratings??

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

From my NZ perspective (Born & raised in the Greater Wellington region, living in Lower Hutt), I think the your argument that the Warriors need to shape up before we have a 2nd NZ team is right.

IMO the next phase of expansion SHOULD be Brisbane2 and Perth anyway - It'd be queue-jumping for NZ to expect consideration for team 17 or 18.

However I think the foundations now are in place for the Warriors to improve - coaching, ownership, squad depth etc.. and if the NRL considers further expansion or relocation in the mid/late 2020s, then we'd have to be in the mix with Adelaide. (Note the tie-in with the thread topic).

Christchurch is a no-brainer for a 2nd NZ team. There's a bit of a RL history there, by then they'll have a NEW covered rectangular central-city stadium, plus the North/South rivalry (and Auckland/Canterbury rivalry at provincial level) is ready-built.

The work needs to start now - with at least a game (preferable two) per season in Adelaide and Christchurch to lead in towards the NEXT wave of expansion later this decade.

Great post. I’d genuinely be happy to see all of that if it eventuates, A 2nd team in NZ. Along with Perth and Adelaide getting back in at some point.

That may seem fairytale stuff to a lot of folk, very idealistic. But if it does happen - it truly means that Rugby League has grown, is thriving, isn’t beset by insular beliefs and infighting that limits presence it to effectively 3 states, a territory, and a yet-to-be-proven successful presence in Auckland.

It would mean the Warriors have a proven to be a powerhouse it should have been years ago. I’d love to see that and yep, I think Phil Goulds presence will be a great springboard to getting there.

 

[The Great Dane]

From my NZ perspective (Born & raised in the Greater Wellington region, living in Lower Hutt), I think the your argument that the Warriors need to shape up before we have a 2nd NZ team is right.

IMO the next phase of expansion SHOULD be Brisbane2 and Perth anyway - It'd be queue-jumping for NZ to expect consideration for team 17 or 18.

However I think the foundations now are in place for the Warriors to improve - coaching, ownership, squad depth etc.. and if the NRL considers further expansion or relocation in the mid/late 2020s, then we'd have to be in the mix with Adelaide. (Note the tie-in with the thread topic).

Christchurch is a no-brainer for a 2nd NZ team. There's a bit of a RL history there, by then they'll have a NEW covered rectangular central-city stadium, plus the North/South rivalry (and Auckland/Canterbury rivalry at provincial level) is ready-built.

The work needs to start now - with at least a game (preferable two) per season in Adelaide and Christchurch to lead in towards the NEXT wave of expansion later this decade.

I think this idea of a queue that people have is stupid. There shouldn't be a queue.

The team with the best bid should get the license, if that's Brisbane and/or Perth then so be it, but if a bid in NZ (or anywhere else for that matter) popped out of nowhere tomorrow with an amazing bid that is better than the others then we shouldn't pass them up because they aren't in the region we planned to expand to next.

That sort of attitude is why everyone is fighting over who should be the Brisbane club, when really none of the bids in Brisbane are up to snuff.

 

[Santino Patane]

From my NZ perspective (Born & raised in the Greater Wellington region, living in Lower Hutt), I think the your argument that the Warriors need to shape up before we have a 2nd NZ team is right.

IMO the next phase of expansion SHOULD be Brisbane2 and Perth anyway - It'd be queue-jumping for NZ to expect consideration for team 17 or 18.

However I think the foundations now are in place for the Warriors to improve - coaching, ownership, squad depth etc.. and if the NRL considers further expansion or relocation in the mid/late 2020s, then we'd have to be in the mix with Adelaide. (Note the tie-in with the thread topic).

Christchurch is a no-brainer for a 2nd NZ team. There's a bit of a RL history there, by then they'll have a NEW covered rectangular central-city stadium, plus the North/South rivalry (and Auckland/Canterbury rivalry at provincial level) is ready-built.

The work needs to start now - with at least a game (preferable two) per season in Adelaide and Christchurch to lead in towards the NEXT wave of expansion later this decade.

Thanks for giving me a Kiwi’s opinion on this- much more relevant than us Aussies calling it from our arses!!! Your opinion makes sense too!

 

[The Great Dane]

I also think that if we wait for the Warriors to improve that we could be waiting forever, and that forcing them to adapt by introducing a competitor could be the best thing that ever happened to them, if we did it right.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

How are tiny ratings in Adelaide & Perth going to boast ratings??

I can see a Perth team improving ratings in that city by 10k if it's mediocre on field to 30k if it is successful like the Storm, but that isn't much and will be worthless unless it also draws strong ratings in Brisbane and Sydney, as the Storm do because they are successful and were stacked with Origin players from Queensland. Ratings for the NRL GF and Tests will probably improve, which adds value to those events. Unless the team is stacked with Origin players then I cannot see SOO ratings improving too much. The problem is all of this is dependent on the team being a powerhouse like Melbourne Storm, which I cannot see happening.

Melbourne were able to compete on the field because they got to pick the best players from 3 clubs that folded at the end of 97. Perth won't have this luxury. The Cowboys, Reds, Warriors and Crushers had to pick up the discards of the other 16 clubs and struggled on the field as a result, as the elite players had been signed ro long term contracts.

Titans were able to lure some Queenslanders and players who were unwanted at the Broncos and Cowboys, plus Matt Rogers back from ARU. They struggled.

Perth wont have the luxury of luring many players to it as they will rather play in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and NZ.

The only way I can see a team being successful in Perth, or Adelaide for that matter, is if it's a relocated Sydney team that already has a roster of established players and a catchment in Sydney to draw juniors from.

 

[MugaB]

I can see a Perth team improving ratings in that city by 10k if it's mediocre on field to 30k if it is successful like the Storm, but that isn't much and will be worthless unless it also draws strong ratings in Brisbane and Sydney, as the Storm do because they are successful and were stacked with Origin players from Queensland. Ratings for the NRL GF and Tests will probably improve, which adds value to those events. Unless the team is stacked with Origin players then I cannot see SOO ratings improving too much. The problem is all of this is dependent on the team being a powerhouse like Melbourne Storm, which I cannot see happening.

Melbourne were able to compete on the field because they got to pick the best players from 3 clubs that folded at the end of 97. Perth won't have this luxury. The Cowboys, Reds, Warriors and Crushers had to pick up the discards of the other 16 clubs and struggled on the field as a result, as the elite players had been signed ro long term contracts.

Titans were able to lure some Queenslanders and players who were unwanted at the Broncos and Cowboys, plus Matt Rogers back from ARU. They struggled.

Perth wont have the luxury of luring many players to it as they will rather play in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and NZ.

The only way I can see a team being successful in Perth, or Adelaide for that matter, is if it's a relocated Sydney team that already has a roster of established players and a catchment in Sydney to draw juniors from.

Sorry but i don't agree, yes in theory they wont rate in Sydney and Brisbane over time, but neither does clubs IN sydney like manly, and bulldogs, then theres Qlds ugly dukling the titans...some teams just are hated for one reason or another, and just dont rate for that year or several years, Perth will be the new kid on the block, and everyone will tune in to see how they fare... but unless you have Cameron Smith playing as Captain/Coach that will wither... my disagreement stands on again time given.. as you mentioned before Perth Reds had 3 years of play time, unfairly having to foot the bill to away clubs, and most importantly to the aways reserves too... had they not been axed, might have had their 26th anniversay, as well as the Brisbane II Crushers..
Sure its tough to cement a following but look at the Cowboys first 20 years, from spooners to Finalists to Premiers in the space of 20 years, it only takes one Jonathan Thurston to lead a Perth club team through a decade where they can match it and be competitive, and with a whole state behind you, and a large one at that, its possible to find that diamond player, even if they are from NZ or Nsw or Qld, and now with a 9 million dollar cap, you can have a team in Chicago or the f**kn Moon, and still be able to get a decent roster, in the space of a decade... roosters are an example of that.. they dont have fans or juniors, they dont even need to be in sydney. so i don't agree Adelaide or Perth aren't worth the trouble, i think that they are more important because combined they are 4 million people without 2 possible RL clubs representing them.... and fk the cost or the sponsors or the TV ratings, coz thats not important to a league fan, that shits important to the admin and broadcasters who want to line their pockets, before putting back into any type of grassroots, or care about CRL in all states, fk if arko was still running things we'd be a national comp with a team in every major city, regardless of care factor towards what channel 9 thinks or foxtel etc... Tasman Demons man!!!!
So as much as this Sydney centric game has grown, there is sooo much upside if the whole pacifika region including all cities in Australia had a team... if super netball can have a sunshine coast team and a Perth team, why cant we?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Sorry but i don't agree, yes in theory they wont rate in Sydney and Brisbane over time, but neither does clubs IN sydney like manly, and bulldogs, then theres Qlds ugly dukling the titans...some teams just are hated for one reason or another, and just dont rate for that year or several years, Perth will be the new kid on the block, and everyone will tune in to see how they fare... but unless you have Cameron Smith playing as Captain/Coach that will wither... my disagreement stands on again time given.. as you mentioned before Perth Reds had 3 years of play time, unfairly having to foot the bill to away clubs, and most importantly to the aways reserves too... had they not been axed, might have had their 26th anniversay, as well as the Brisbane II Crushers..
Sure its tough to cement a following but look at the Cowboys first 20 years, from spooners to Finalists to Premiers in the space of 20 years, it only takes one Jonathan Thurston to lead a Perth club team through a decade where they can match it and be competitive, and with a whole state behind you, and a large one at that, its possible to find that diamond player, even if they are from NZ or Nsw or Qld, and now with a 9 million dollar cap, you can have a team in Chicago or the f**kn Moon, and still be able to get a decent roster, in the space of a decade... roosters are an example of that.. they dont have fans or juniors, they dont even need to be in sydney. so i don't agree Adelaide or Perth aren't worth the trouble, i think that they are more important because combined they are 4 million people without 2 possible RL clubs representing them.... and fk the cost or the sponsors or the TV ratings, coz thats not important to a league fan, that shits important to the admin and broadcasters who want to line their pockets, before putting back into any type of grassroots, or care about CRL in all states, fk if arko was still running things we'd be a national comp with a team in every major city, regardless of care factor towards what channel 9 thinks or foxtel etc... Tasman Demons man!!!!
So as much as this Sydney centric game has grown, there is sooo much upside if the whole pacifika region including all cities in Australia had a team... if super netball can have a sunshine coast team and a Perth team, why cant we?

How much money will Perth need to compete with the other NRL clubs?

Storm had News Ltd pumping millions into them so they would be able to recruit and develop the best juniors. It's estimated that News Ltd spent between an extra $2M-$5 per year on the Storm between 98-12, compared to what the other teams, bar Brisbane, operated on. ARLC guaranteed an extra $26.5M between 2013 and 2018. News Ltd isn't in a position to do the same for Perth and by all accounts, neither them nor FTA want a team in Perth.

I fail to see where the extra funds, that Perth will rely on to be competitive, will come from. Perth has the Wildcats (NBL), Glory (A-League), Fever (Netball), Scorchers (BBL) and Force (ARU) competing with one another for the corporate dollar and fan support in a dyed in the wool fumbleball city that has two powerful AwFuL teams.

 

[MugaB]

How much money will Perth need to compete with the other NRL clubs?

Storm had News Ltd pumping millions into them so they would be able to recruit and develop the best juniors. It's estimated that News Ltd spent between an extra $2M-$5 per year on the Storm between 98-12, compared to what the other teams, bar Brisbane, operated on. ARLC guaranteed an extra $26.5M between 2013 and 2018. News Ltd isn't in a position to do the same for Perth and by all accounts, neither them nor FTA want a team in Perth.

I fail to see where the extra funds, that Perth will rely on to be competitive, will come from. Perth has the Wildcats (NBL), Glory (A-League), Fever (Netball), Scorchers (BBL) and Force (ARU) competing with one another for the corporate dollar and fan support in a dyed in the wool fumbleball city that has two powerful AwFuL teams.

WtG? 9 million dollar cap, what part of that doesn't compute, i already said that any team could be based on the moon and still be able to compete with a 9million dollar cap, its all about sticking it out, time it takes to nurture an expansion team, ....money to fund a club?? seriously how many hand outs have the tigers, dragons and other clubs had..

 

[Perth Red]

How are tiny ratings in Adelaide & Perth going to boast ratings??

You might want to look at the gap and consider one code is a National competition and one is primarily a two state competition. Maybe the reach of a genuinely national competition is one of the reasons there is a massive revenue gap? Just a thought.

 

[Perth Red]

Pirates revenue will come from
1. Two rich backers that want to own the club
2. The 30k avid active RL fans living in perth who want to go to a game and get behind a club they can call their own
3. Sponsors who want significant exposure in the Sydney and Brisbane markets

will it be easy? Hell no, would nrl putting in some seed funding for first 5 years help? hell yes. Is it worth it long term for rugby league to finally grow up and become a national sport in Australia? You bet it would.

basically regardless of where any new club is situated they will need a revenue generation of around
$13mill nrl grant
$6mill sponsorships and corporate dealers
$5mill fan generated revenue

that’s to survive, to thrive you can add on another $3-5mill revenue to put them in the bigger spending clubs.