The Case for Adelaide.....

[Jim Rockford]

All I can say is Thank God the two mental midgets above aren't controlling the game.

 

[Perth Red]

I cannot help but wonder if having six Sydney sides, plus one on the Central Coast and another in Wollongong, from 1998 onwards, would have prevented fumbleball from making so many inroads in regional NSW?

Central Coast Bears and Illawarra Dragons?

Roosters might be a lot stronger today if the decision to cut South Sydney wasn't overturned. It would have allowed Sharks to rebrand as South Sydney Sharks. No more congestion. Short term pain for long term gain.

Keeping the Reds and Rams with 6 teams in Sydney and one each in Illawarra and Central Coast would have put the game in a better position to compete with fumbleball.

If it was cheaper to run an NRL club then yes covering regional areas more would have been a strength for the game given there are nearly as many regional TV viewrs watching NRL as there are Sydney viewers. As of today it is hard to see regional sides being able to generate the revenue they need without pokies topping up significantly. There's probably only 3-4 NRL clubs at the moment that could survive without pokie funding at current expenditure levels. Even Newcastle with its massive fanbase went bust without LC bail outs. The football cap either isnt being implemented or doesnt seem to have made any difference to the running costs of an NRL club. Clubs need to be able to generate around $13-15million a year in football operations to not need pokie funding top ups. Its hard to see Gosford or Illawara beingable to manage that as stand alones. If we capped total expenditure at around $21million for an NRL club then it would open up more possibilities for expanding the NRL.

 

[The Great Dane]

If it was cheaper to run an NRL club then yes covering regional areas more would have been a strength for the game given there are nearly as many regional TV viewrs watching NRL as there are Sydney viewers. As of today it is hard to see regional sides being able to generate the revenue they need without pokies topping up significantly. There's probably only 3-4 NRL clubs at the moment that could survive without pokie funding at current expenditure levels. Even Newcastle with its massive fanbase went bust without LC bail outs. The football cap either isnt being implemented or doesnt seem to have made any difference to the running costs of an NRL club. Clubs need to be able to generate around $13-15million a year in football operations to not need pokie funding top ups. Its hard to see Gosford or Illawara beingable to manage that as stand alones. If we capped total expenditure at around $21million for an NRL club then it would open up more possibilities for expanding the NRL.

And that number is only going to go up.

 

[flippikat]

If we want a competition that's 16 or 18 clubs (a manageable size), there's no way you can have 6 or more in one city AND regional teams like Illawarra, Central Coast etc (even NQ Cowboys) AND a club in every state capital.

AFL have made it a priority to go for the "big fish" - partly because AFL-land doesn't have mid-size cities like NSW does (with the exception of Geelong, which has a heritage AFL club). Because of that, they can still have a lot of Melbourne clubs and decent presence - in fact derbies - in state capitals

NRL has a lot of Sydney clubs, plus regional/mid-size market clubs (Dragons, Cowboys, Knights and I'd include the Warriors in there, arguably the Raiders too). Result? We have to go to 17 teams just to put a derby in Brisbane.. and if we want Adelaide & Perth, thats 19.. then if we want to get a derby in NZ (and more TV money from over here), 20 teams.

The choice is stark.

We go to 20 (or more) to take on other codes, or we rationalise to do it with an 18 or 16 team competition.

If we grow, the NRL needs to work hard on the playing, coaching & sponsorship depth to support that.

 

[siv]

I cannot help but wonder if having six Sydney sides, plus one on the Central Coast and another in Wollongong, from 1998 onwards, would have prevented fumbleball from making so many inroads in regional NSW?

Central Coast Bears and Illawarra Dragons?

Roosters might be a lot stronger today if the decision to cut South Sydney wasn't overturned. It would have allowed Sharks to rebrand as South Sydney Sharks. No more congestion. Short term pain for long term gain.

Keeping the Reds and Rams with 6 teams in Sydney and one each in Illawarra and Central Coast would have put the game in a better position to compete with fumbleball.

What you fail to understand is that the Sydney comp would have survived without expansion

Drop the 3 Qld clubs, Warriors and Storm

And replace them with the CC Bears, Steelers and Magpies and you have a 14 team comp over 26 rounds

And even if one fell over you have the Jets, Mounties or Western Division ready to step in

Its not Sydney clubs that need interstate clubs, its interstate clubs that need Sydney

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

What you fail to understand is that the Sydney comp would have survived without expansion

Drop the 3 Qld clubs, Warriors and Storm

And replace them with the CC Bears, Steelers and Magpies and you have a 14 team comp over 26 rounds

And even if one fell over you have the Jets, Mounties or Western Division ready to step in

Its not Sydney clubs that need interstate clubs, its interstate clubs that need Sydney

I get the gist of the logic here. The comp was built on Sydney and indeed would survive..

but in what form…

Hypothetically if the comp either stayed in Sydney, or retracted back to Sydney only..

I see..

Less Sponsorship revenue. Much, much less.
Less ratings nationally. Much much less.
Far lower broadcast rights revenue, a huge drop.
>> lower player earnings… much lower..

In turn…

Our competition from AFL (national) would gain a far bigger foothold in both Qld and NSW. With more dollars, they’d eat into league playing talent… both juniors and code hoppers…
>> less quality of football in N(SW)RL
>> less fans/ratings

Not in our generation, but possibly the next…

Rugby League could go a similar way to club rugby in NSW. A core following in pockets, but very, very much a lower tier sport.

The game as it existed 35 years ago (prior to the broncos entry) is not the game we’d go back to. It would be more regressive. In the face of opposition sport (never a real presence back then) with national sponsorship dollars and broadcast revenue that would annihilate rugby league.

Much like war… they’d divide and conquer NSW n QLD.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I think we can generally agree a NRL map like this:

NQ
Brisbane
Brisbane 2
Gold Coast
Newcastle
(Central Coast)
Illawarra / South Coast
Canberra
Melbourne
Auckland
NZ2
Adelaide
Perth
Sydney 6

How we get there…we’ll have to wait and see. But personally, I reckon at least 2-3 fully NRL backed and nurtured full relocations are the go.

If a Sydney team relocated to Brisbane it’d be a licence to print money. Only look when a Roosters, Souths, Bulldogs or a Manly play at Suncorp or GC…plenty of away fans in club colours.

@Bring back John Fifita
@Perth Red Do u reckon Adelaide /Perth cares if they got a relocated team?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

If we want a competition that's 16 or 18 clubs (a manageable size), there's no way you can have 6 or more in one city AND regional teams like Illawarra, Central Coast etc (even NQ Cowboys) AND a club in every state capital.

AFL have made it a priority to go for the "big fish" - partly because AFL-land doesn't have mid-size cities like NSW does (with the exception of Geelong, which has a heritage AFL club). Because of that, they can still have a lot of Melbourne clubs and decent presence - in fact derbies - in state capitals

NRL has a lot of Sydney clubs, plus regional/mid-size market clubs (Dragons, Cowboys, Knights and I'd include the Warriors in there, arguably the Raiders too). Result? We have to go to 17 teams just to put a derby in Brisbane.. and if we want Adelaide & Perth, thats 19.. then if we want to get a derby in NZ (and more TV money from over here), 20 teams.

The choice is stark.

We go to 20 (or more) to take on other codes, or we rationalise to do it with an 18 or 16 team competition.

If we grow, the NRL needs to work hard on the playing, coaching & sponsorship depth to support that.

This is true. If we go to 20 teams then there will be fewer resources for the current 16 NRL clubs, which will eventually lead to the demise of the ones with the smallest fanbases. That could very well lead to the demise of regional clubs and the least marketable Sydney teams. The only option for long-term stability is rationalisation if we wish to grow.

What you fail to understand is that the Sydney comp would have survived without expansion

Drop the 3 Qld clubs, Warriors and Storm

And replace them with the CC Bears, Steelers and Magpies and you have a 14 team comp over 26 rounds

And even if one fell over you have the Jets, Mounties or Western Division ready to step in

Its not Sydney clubs that need interstate clubs, its interstate clubs that need Sydney

Do that and you lose the Queensland, Victorian and NZ market. The value of the broadcast rights would drop by at least 50% -- probably 75% if we're being honest -- and players will head overseas to play onionball or in the Super League as that's where the money will be.

The Queensland Cup could very well become a juggernaut that kills the Sydney competiton as it has a strong base in Brisbane, Cairns, Gold Coast, Ipswich, Moreton Bay, PNG, Rockhampton, Sunshine Coast, Townsville and would add Canberra, Melbourne, Newcastle, NZ and possibly Perth.

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

I think we can generally agree a NRL map like this:

NQ
Brisbane
Brisbane 2
Gold Coast
Newcastle
(Central Coast)
Illawarra / South Coast
Canberra
Melbourne
Auckland
NZ2
Adelaide
Perth
Sydney 6

How we get there…we’ll have to wait and see. But personally, I reckon at least 2-3 fully NRL backed and nurtured full relocations are the go.

If a Sydney team relocated to Brisbane it’d be a licence to print money. Only look when a Roosters, Souths, Bulldogs or a Manly play at Suncorp or GC…plenty of away fans in club colours.

@Bring back John Fifita
@Perth Red Do u reckon Adelaide /Perth cares if they got a relocated team?

Re relocated / new team...

If a team did get relocated here I think there wouldn't be the resistance you'd get from the likes of a city in a "heartland state" (eg Sunshine Coast, Bris2 etc etc). A team would most likely be accepted by many...

The only thing is that unlike many years ago with the Swans, Lions, etc etc... There's far more awareness and media platforms of sport these days - and to get a relocated team would be analysed heavily and could subsequently be seen as getting a "failure" of a team". Also, attention spans are much shorter these days. If that failure also equated to failure on the field, uncompetitive..... that could spell disaster right from the outset.

So - While I don't think there'd be great opposition at first it would not gather the collective interest of a new team that was "Adelaide's"...

Any team needs to identify with SA to capture the greater public attention. Not just the league fans here. I think a relocated team could indeed attract new fans to the sport... but not as many as possible.

As much as maroon is Qld and Blue is NSW, SA is Blue Red & Yellow... and so it's my firm belief any team here needs to carry these colours to identify with the state.

The Crows have this... The 36er's do... The Rams had it and I think any new team needs it.

But let say we got the Sharks, Dragons, Roosters or similar move over here....

Roosters hands-down would be the most likely to be accepted - have played here for many seasons and a club who's set up for sustained success.

Dragons would be possibly accepted ok enough, They are a "known" team here. Leaning on the history of the St George side perhaps would be an angle...

Sharks could be ok, but they are probably one of the lesser recognised teams. Like the Tigers.

That's all speculation but ultimately...

I believe a team here needs to be "South Australian" to maximise it's opportunity for success.

Melbourne Storm are the obvious blueprint to follow. Combining identity of the city/state (colours, storm - ie rain) with a strong foundation and management structure that will set the club up for sustained success.

Here - Adelaide needs to do the same.

They had the colours and name (Rams) that did that. What they didn't have was a foundation/structure that delivered success on the field. They were never given the chance.

 

[Perth Red]

More people watch the nrl on tv outside of sydney than in Sydney, just saying.

 

[Perth Red]

@Bring back John Fifita
@Perth Red Do u reckon Adelaide /Perth cares if they got a relocated team?

I think fans here are so sick of waiting for a club that they’d take anything at this point. I don’t think it would be as popular as a new perth club initially as many fans here already support someone who is likely some sort of rival.

 

[flippikat]

The Queensland Cup could very well become a juggernaut that kills the Sydney competiton as it has a strong base in Brisbane, Cairns, Gold Coast, Ipswich, Moreton Bay, PNG, Rockhampton, Sunshine Coast, Townsville and would add Canberra, Melbourne, Newcastle, NZ and possibly Perth.

Actually, that's an interesting idea.

What would it take for the Qld Cup to become more than just a 2nd tier feeder competition, and an actual direct threat/competitor to the NRL itself?

Maybe a spurned expansion bid (say Redcliffe gets turned down) pushes to put the Qld Cup "on steroids" ?

Could it be Superleague by an indirect pathway?

 

[Perth Red]

Actually, that's an interesting idea.

What would it take for the Qld Cup to become more than just a 2nd tier feeder competition, and an actual direct threat/competitor to the NRL itself?

Maybe a spurned expansion bid (say Redcliffe gets turned down) pushes to put the Qld Cup "on steroids" ?

Could it be Superleague by an indirect pathway?

It would need the qrl to break away from the arlc, it would need a tv or streaming service to throw hundreds of millions at it and would need 12 plus clubs to jump ship from nrl/arlc connected comps/ orgs

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Actually, that's an interesting idea.

What would it take for the Qld Cup to become more than just a 2nd tier feeder competition, and an actual direct threat/competitor to the NRL itself?

Maybe a spurned expansion bid (say Redcliffe gets turned down) pushes to put the Qld Cup "on steroids" ?

Could it be Superleague by an indirect pathway?

If it could get the Broncos, Warriors, Cowboys, Titans, Newcastle, Melbourne and Canberra to jump ship and sign a deal with Stan Sport and Spark Sport then it would have a chance.

Add the North Sydney Bears, a Central Coast team plus the West Coast Pirates and NZ 2/3 plus the Adelaide Rams and all of a sudden it will be in a position to become the most lucrative league in the world.

 

[Jim Rockford]

Hahahaha all this fanciful dreaming. You know how the old saying goes, "You can wish in one hand and shit in the other, see which one gets filled first"

 

[flippikat]

If it could get the Broncos, Warriors, Cowboys, Titans, Newcastle, Melbourne and Canberra to jump ship and sign a deal with Stan Sport and Spark Sport then it would have a chance.

Add the North Sydney Bears, a Central Coast team plus the West Coast Pirates and NZ 2/3 plus the Adelaide Rams and all of a sudden it will be in a position to become the most lucrative league in the world.

Them's rebel words, Mr GRoTD.. you cheeky fella...

Joking aside, though.. it's a well played-out "what if" for speculation - "What if the NRL was formed in the late 80s by merging the NSW & Brisbane Premierships?" - and unlikely as it is, the scenario you describe could be a way to force that to happen - albeit 35 years later than it perhaps should have happened...

 

[siv]

Actually, that's an interesting idea.

What would it take for the Qld Cup to become more than just a 2nd tier feeder competition, and an actual direct threat/competitor to the NRL itself?

Maybe a spurned expansion bid (say Redcliffe gets turned down) pushes to put the Qld Cup "on steroids" ?

Could it be Superleague by an indirect pathway?

It does solve most expansion issues

With Melbourne & Warriors are already in the Qld structure

So just add Adelaide & Perth

Then play a Super Bowl with the NSW Premiers

TV revenue protected

And add a Cross comp Midweek Cup

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

It does solve most expansion issues

With Melbourne & Warriors are already in the Qld structure

So just add Adelaide & Perth

Then play a Super Bowl with the NSW Premiers

TV revenue protected

And add a Cross comp Midweek Cup

I like this idea. That way we can have a national game with derbies to maximise interest and revenue.

A 10 team Blues Conference and a 10 Team Maroons Conference.

18 Round Season.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Them's rebel words, Mr GRoTD.. you cheeky fella...

Joking aside, though.. it's a well played-out "what if" for speculation - "What if the NRL was formed in the late 80s by merging the NSW & Brisbane Premierships?" - and unlikely as it is, the scenario you describe could be a way to force that to happen - albeit 35 years later than it perhaps should have happened...

The ARLC needs to become objective and fair, which it and its predecessors have never been. I'd like to see a feasibility study on the viability of having nine teams in Sydney and how the game would look without a few of them. It might very well find that the nine clubs are cannibalising one another and it would be best for RL in Sydney, from the grassroots to the NRL, for a couple to be relegated to the NSW Cup.

 

[flippikat]

The ARLC needs to become objective and fair, which it and its predecessors have never been. I'd like to see a feasibility study on the viability of having nine teams in Sydney and how the game would look without a few of them. It might very well find that the nine clubs are cannibalising one another and it would be best for RL in Sydney, from the grassroots to the NRL, for a couple to be relegated to the NSW Cup.

NRL: "We can't add a 2nd Brisbane team if it's going to impinge on the livelihood of the Broncos, Titans & Storm"

Expansion-minded fan: "You mean like how Sydney teams scrap over similar territory/fanbase/sponsor pool in an over-saturated market?"

NRL: "Shut up".