WA BEARS

[Colk]

It’s

Super League vs NRL: Which Has More Overseas Players? - The Stats Zone

www.thestatszone.com

24 percent of all nrl players are kiwis

that’s with one nz team

nz is a gold mine and we’ve hardly tapped it

Again, I agree with you on the player development front. It’s worth the risk and I think it could be potentially good but I am talking about the whole proposition of a second Kiwi side including corporate/financial and potential support.

For example how many of that talent, particularly top end, is playing for the Warriors now? That’s the problem.

You can probably find a high percentage of players from Newcastle or Gold Coast in the NRL but those players have probably been scouted and developed by other clubs and ultimately for the last ten years those sides have largely been on the bottom of the ladder. A large part of that is because they don’t or didn’t have the resources to compete against other much more wealthier clubs.

The biggest factor in the success or failure of any side is money - pure and simple.

 

[Wb1234]

Again, I agree with you on the player development front. It’s worth the risk and I think it could be potentially good but I am talking about the whole proposition of a second Kiwi side including corporate/financial and potential support.

For example how many of that talent, particularly top end, is playing for the Warriors now? That’s the problem.

You can probably find a high percentage of players from Newcastle or Gold Coast in the NRL but those players have probably been scouted and developed by other clubs and ultimately for the last ten years those sides have largely been on the bottom of the ladder. A large part of that is because they don’t or didn’t have the resources to compete against other much more wealthier clubs.

The biggest factor in the success or failure of any side is money - pure and simple.

A second nz team at worst will create spots for at least another 15 out of 30 nz players

 

[Colk]

Of course it could, if we were the afl and willing to pump significant funds into it. but we aren’t and we won’t.
One of the key reasons the warriors arent producing talent is they don’t have the funds to invest significantly in nz development. Why do you think the best kiwi 15 year olds left to go to Australian nrl systems?
If warriors, in the strongest rl city with a population of 1.6million have struggled pretty much forever, what makes you think a club in Christchurch where union is stronger and it’s a 1/4 the size would be stronger?
the game would be better off if the $15million plus a Christchurch would cost was given to nzrl to improve the whole systems. At the moment nzrl get around $300k a year from the ARLC!

Totally agree.

 

[Perth Red]

Not for team 18 no

but for team 19 after nz ? Or 20 after Logan / Ipswich ?

sure

I said Perth were favourites based on joining with the bears

without it they go to the back of the queue

You flop around more than a fish in a boat lol.

Perth>>>>>>>>>NZ2>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PNG>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The Bears.

 

[Colk]

A second nz team at worst will create spots for at least another 15 out of 30 nz players

Ok. But are they going to keep their best talent and are they going to be able to compete with wealthier clubs?

Look at the ladder over the past however many years and what does it tell you. The wealthiest clubs are at the top and the bottom clubs are predominantly those that have been struggling financially. The reason is because those top clubs have the resources to find and recruit players from Pacific Islands, NZ, QLD and NSW etc.

Money and proper coaching and development is just as important factor with bringing players through to the NRL than any location argument

 

[Wb1234]

You flop around more than a fish in a boat lol.

Perth>>>>>>>>>NZ2>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PNG>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The Bears.

We’re talking rugby league here buddy

looks like you got the sports mixed up

competition for a space in the nrl is hot

unlike the afl they aren’t adding a team as a pin on a map just to pretend to be like afl

 

[Colk]

You flop around more than a fish in a boat lol.

Perth>>>>>>>>>NZ2>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PNG>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The Bears.

I’m not sure that Perth is that far ahead. It’s just as likely to be NZ 2 and I wouldn’t be surprised with either. Although that is dependent on the Warriors though

 

[Wb1234]

Ok. But are they going to keep their best talent and are they going to be able to compete with wealthier clubs?

Look at the ladder over the past however many years and what does it tell you. The wealthiest clubs are at the top and the bottom clubs are predominantly those that have been struggling financially. The reason is because those top clubs have the resources to find and recruit players from Pacific Islands, NZ, QLD and NSW etc.

Money and proper coaching and development is just as important factor with bringing players through to the NRL than any location argument

The warriors have problems keeping players they have signed from other clubs

plus a lot of the talent they have lost lately is due to them either playing away from nz for too long (shek) or going back to nz (Walsh etc)

they let Shaun Johnston go (junior)

 

[Colk]

The warriors have problems keeping players they have signed from other clubs

plus a lot of the talent they have lost lately is due to them either playing away from nz for too long (shek) or going back to nz (Walsh etc)

they let Shaun Johnston go (junior)

Besides the Walsh issue, those problems aren’t going to go away.

I still want to see the Warriors going well and the junior pathways to be actually built up there after the last three years. We need to put another side there on the back of momentum. The worst thing that could happen would be having two Kiwi sides over there in the bottom four

 

[Wb1234]

Besides the Walsh issue, those problems aren’t going to go away.

I still want to see the Warriors going well and the junior pathways to be actually built up there after the last three years. We need to put another side there on the back of momentum. The worst thing that could happen would be having two Kiwi sides over there in the bottom four

Not wrong there and yeh the warriors need to be better

under their current owner I dunno when this will happen

plus singing a panthers assistant is so depressing

he might be ok he might be another flop

 

[siv]

Haha it’s like you were in the room with vlandys and the WA govt. didn’t the original report say they were advised to talk to CLUBS? That’s clubs plural Not just the bears. I wonder who the others were? I’ve no interest in supporting a Sydney club playing games in perth, f**k that.

Time the abandon the rusty old state

Anyway was soon as PVL says go talk to another bid - its a kiss of death - anyway

Just ask Ipswich, Bombers and Firehawks

 

[Colk]

Time the abandon the rusty old state

Anyway was soon as PVL says go talk to another bid - its a kiss of death - anyway

Just ask Ipswich, Bombers and Firehawks

You seem to be a strange person. Why do you want the game to be only played in one state?

 

[Wb1234]

You seem to be a strange person. Why do you want the game to be only played in one state?

He means wa

he’s making a pun of rusty state vs vlandys comment about rusted on afl states

 

[Colk]

He means wa

he’s making a pun of rusty state vs vlandys comment about rusted on afl states

I understood his comment. He keeps pushing CC and he is against any option that is outside NSW and Qld. He seems to want the game to regress back to the NSW Cup. It is a strange mindset

 

[Wb1234]

I understood his comment. He keeps pushing CC and he is against any option that is outside NSW and Qld. He seems to want the game to regress back to the NSW Cup. It is a strange mindset

Yeh I don’t think he really means all of it

it’s just Perth red keeps falling for the bait so he keeps repeating it

 

[Reflector]

I've still yet to see any research that shows that talent production is a numbers game rather than a quality of pathways game. So lets say there are 100k kids playing Rl now, and out of that 100k kids we get 50 a year make the NRL first grade. Hypothetically If we doubled the number of kids playing to 200k would that mean we would A) get 100 kids a year ready for NRL first grade or B) still only get 50 kids making first grade but they would be better quality or C) neither?

The argument over talent in first grade always seems to focus on participation numbers but I'm not so sure. I think quality of coaching, training, nutrition, psychology, talent spotting pathway to 1st grade in your city etc etc could be equally, if not more, important for jnr systems. Some evidence that backs up my theory:

1. Panthers have always had a massive jnr participation region but only in recent years have they got serious about offering a very high quality pathway experience. This is now showing in the quality of first grader they are bringing through has improved significantly.

2. In the lead up to a country hosting the Olympics they spend a lot of money on sports preparation, participation numbers in those sports dont go up yet performance does as the host countries often get record medal hauls.

3. Despite a few thousand jnrs in Victoria the money spent on grassroots there is a pittance and has failed to produce any significant talent despite having a successful 1st grade team for 25 years.

4. PNG has a massive playing pool, yet has produced very few NRL players

5. NFL has expanded number of teams significantly but there has not been any significant increase in college players during that period, yet the NFL quality has not been diluted.

So is it numbers or systems thats the problem? Personally I think its more systems.

The "not enough NRL standard players to justify adding more teams argument" always reeks of a convenient deflection from:

a) Existing clubs, who don't want their aspirations at a Premiership/ finals football becoming more difficult than they are

b) Existing coaches, who don't want their competency as an NRL standard coach brought under any more scrutiny than it currently is

 

[Canard]

Catchment boundaries is such a Sydney centric view of junior development.

It doesn't exist outside of the original NSWRL clubs and in itself is a meaningless concept.

There is no incentive or disincentive (or system) that ties any players to there catchment.

The "catchment" for any club outside a traditional area should be the entire Rugby League playing world.

 

[Reflector]

Oh yeah.....Sarcasm

Billy just needs to tout the North Singapore Bears and he'll be considered a genius...

 

[Perth Red]

Billy just needs to tout the North Singapore Bears and he'll be considered a genius...

I’m sure WB would be jumping on board and touting them as the latest dead certs lol


let’s just catch our breath and remind ourselves why perth are still favourites

1. number of interested rich backers wanting to bid
2. Proven strong existing RL fanbase in a city of over 2mill that is growing rapidly
3. adequate stadium with a 21k capacity and 19k seats with around 14k of them undercover, good public transport links and short walk to cities main entertainment area
4. cashed up WA govt on record as ready to support rugby league if perth gets a club
5. despite minimal investment a jnr system that is the strongest outside the heartland states and is producing nrl and nrlw first graders
6. provides a positive 6pm sunday time slot with it still being a day game in perth boosting crowds and quality of football
7. opportunity to partner with qlnd cup and/or png partners for further jnr pathway development

as long as the consortium can tick the nrls boxes for investment and confidence then perth is a no brainer for club 18. If they agree to fund nrlwa a mill a year as well as run female clubs and can get a qrl cup partnership agreement then there is no reason the nrl shouldnt take a step to being national, as Vlandys has stated they want to do. Simple fact is we don’t need Bears if we have the above.

If we don’t then Bears might be the only option now, as bad as it will be.

 

[Colk]

I’m sure WB would be jumping on board and touting them as the latest dead certs lol


let’s just catch our breath and remind ourselves why perth are still favourites

1. number of interested rich backers wanting to bid
2. Proven strong existing RL fanbase in a city of over 2mill that is growing rapidly
3. adequate stadium with a 21k capacity and 19k seats with around 14k of them undercover, good public transport links and short walk to cities main entertainment area
4. cashed up WA govt on record as ready to support rugby league if perth gets a club
5. despite minimal investment a jnr system that is the strongest outside the heartland states and is producing nrl and nrlw first graders
6. provides a positive 6pm sunday time slot with it still being a day game in perth boosting crowds and quality of football
7. opportunity to partner with qlnd cup and/or png partners for further jnr pathway development

as long as the consortium can tick the nrls boxes for investment and confidence then perth is a no brainer for club 18. If they agree to fund nrlwa a mill a year as well as run female clubs and can get a qrl cup partnership agreement then there is no reason the nrl shouldnt take a step to being national, as Vlandys has stated they want to do. Simple fact is we don’t need Bears if we have the above.

If we don’t then Bears might be the only option now, as bad as it will be.

I think point 7 can be done by any option. Look, I agree with you in that they are the best option, particularly from the perspective of corporate potential but I’m not as sure as you.

We have to remember that the game is incredibly conservative.