West Coast Pirates Bid News

[bazza]

Though Manly's badge looks like a bald eagle (definitely not native to Australia lol), it's meant to be a white-bellied sea eagle which is found across India, China, South East Asia, the Pacific, and Australia. Just like with Dolphins literally any costal city, and a lot of inland cities as well (basically anywhere there're large bodies of water), could feasibly carry the white-bellied sea eagle as their mascot.

I believe that Manly were initially the "Seagulls" - as they were near the coast
I think they rebranded to "eagles" to be something more intimidating

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I can't see another Brisbane team coming in the next 10 years. The Broncos and Titans would riot- Broncos would start Super League 2.0. It's got to be Perth or NZ.

It will come down to money and assets. Eastern Suburbs Tigers have both and a very successful Leagues Club that outperforms Broncos Leagues. A few years ago Easts Leagues were brought in to manage Broncos Leagues.

NZ 2 and Perth do not offer the same level of financial security. I cannot see the ARLC introducing a club that will need to be supported like the Melbourne Storm after PVL said ad nauseum that "the business case needs to stack up". Sugar daddies are unreliable and can run off at the first sign of trouble. NZ2 and Perth will rely on sugar daddies during their first 10 years.

Broncos and Titans can riot all they like, but if the option is between a self-sufficient Brisbane 3 or an NZ 2/Perth that requires more funding to survive then News Ltd will choose the former as they won't want to foot the bill considering they're billions of dollars in debt.

 

[flippikat]

It will come down to money and assets. Eastern Suburbs Tigers have both and a very successful Leagues Club that outperforms Broncos Leagues. A few years ago Easts Leagues were brought in to manage Broncos Leagues.

NZ 2 and Perth do not offer the same level of financial security. I cannot see the ARLC introducing a club that will need to be supported like the Melbourne Storm after PVL said ad nauseum that "the business case needs to stack up". Sugar daddies are unreliable and can run off at the first sign of trouble. NZ2 and Perth will rely on sugar daddies during their first 10 years.

Broncos and Titans can riot all they like, but if the option is between a self-sufficient Brisbane 3 or an NZ 2/Perth that requires more funding to survive then News Ltd will choose the former as they won't want to foot the bill considering they're billions of dollars in debt.

This, basically. Why would a risk-averse administration go to NZ or Perth when they can just choose the "next cab off the rank" in Brisbane, from the last bidding war? Especially if it's a pokie/asset rich Qld Cup club.

Money doesn't talk, it SCREAMS.

 

[Colk]

It will come down to money and assets. Eastern Suburbs Tigers have both and a very successful Leagues Club that outperforms Broncos Leagues. A few years ago Easts Leagues were brought in to manage Broncos Leagues.

NZ 2 and Perth do not offer the same level of financial security. I cannot see the ARLC introducing a club that will need to be supported like the Melbourne Storm after PVL said ad nauseum that "the business case needs to stack up". Sugar daddies are unreliable and can run off at the first sign of trouble. NZ2 and Perth will rely on sugar daddies during their first 10 years.

Broncos and Titans can riot all they like, but if the option is between a self-sufficient Brisbane 3 or an NZ 2/Perth that requires more funding to survive then News Ltd will choose the former as they won't want to foot the bill considering they're billions of dollars in debt.

It would be a disgraceful decision but it is possible. They may even sit out the 18th club for a little bit longer than you think also.

 

[RL The greatest game]

It will come down to money and assets. Eastern Suburbs Tigers have both and a very successful Leagues Club that outperforms Broncos Leagues. A few years ago Easts Leagues were brought in to manage Broncos Leagues.

NZ 2 and Perth do not offer the same level of financial security. I cannot see the ARLC introducing a club that will need to be supported like the Melbourne Storm after PVL said ad nauseum that "the business case needs to stack up". Sugar daddies are unreliable and can run off at the first sign of trouble. NZ2 and Perth will rely on sugar daddies during their first 10 years.

Broncos and Titans can riot all they like, but if the option is between a self-sufficient Brisbane 3 or an NZ 2/Perth that requires more funding to survive then News Ltd will choose the former as they won't want to foot the bill considering they're billions of dollars in debt.

We certainly need a lot more junior development than we have now for the game to grow

 

[flippikat]

It would be a disgraceful decision but it is possible. They may even sit out the 18th club for a little bit longer than you think also.

I wouldn't imagine them wanting to run a weekly bye for any longer than they have to - it's just inefficient to have at least one team on the sidelines any given weekend during the season.

I've noticed a real silence about the prospects of a 2nd NZ team recently too - especially after the NRL was talking it up so heavily just pre-covid.

Rightly or wrongly, NZ and WA have taken a very protective approach to their borders - and I can't help but think that'll play into the hands of Brisbane 3 getting that 18th team, no matter what the situation is when the decision is made (the NRL may forgive, but not forget!).

Even if Covid is well and truly in the rear view mirror by then, the aftertaste of WA/NZ's restrictions compared to Qld's "lifeboat" could be a factor.

 

[Colk]

I wouldn't imagine them wanting to run a weekly bye for any longer than they have to - it's just inefficient to have at least one team on the sidelines any given weekend during the season.

I've noticed a real silence about the prospects of a 2nd NZ team recently too - especially after the NRL was talking it up so heavily just pre-covid.

Rightly or wrongly, NZ and WA have taken a very protective approach to their borders - and I can't help but think that'll play into the hands of Brisbane 3 getting that 18th team, no matter what the situation is when the decision is made (the NRL may forgive, but not forget!).

Even if Covid is well and truly in the rear view mirror by then, the aftertaste of WA/NZ's restrictions compared to Qld's "lifeboat" could be a factor.

No doubt that right there would be the justification for the decision; however, I feel a third team in Brisbane would negate any benefits from having a second Brisbane side.

It would potentially oversaturate a market, which is a fate worse than the problem of not having enough sides in the South East Qld, which has been the issue since the Crushers demise.

The ARLC shouldn’t want to replicate what has happened to the Sydney teams and the way that competition expanded in 1947 and 1967. Having nine small Sydney clubs (or at least a majority of them as small) is not a strength; however some foolish people want to spin it

The goal should be to add more sides with the popularity and reach of the Broncos and Storm, rather than endless small clubs

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

This, basically. Why would a risk-averse administration go to NZ or Perth when they can just choose the "next cab off the rank" in Brisbane, from the last bidding war? Especially if it's a pokie/asset rich Qld Cup club.

Money doesn't talk, it SCREAMS.

Abdo did tell Easts and Ipswich they were a chance of picking up the 18th licence. That right there tells me the ARLC has second thoughts about NZ2 and aren't interested in Perth.

It would be a disgraceful decision but it is possible. They may even sit out the 18th club for a little bit longer than you think also.

Depends on the logistics of running a bye every week. Clubs who get the bye early in the season are going to be angry because it won't benefit them.

We certainly need a lot more junior development than we have now for the game to grow

Correct. NZ2 and Perth could help foster junior development in the long term. So can Brisbane 3.

I wouldn't imagine them wanting to run a weekly bye for any longer than they have to - it's just inefficient to have at least one team on the sidelines any given weekend during the season.

I've noticed a real silence about the prospects of a 2nd NZ team recently too - especially after the NRL was talking it up so heavily just pre-covid.

Rightly or wrongly, NZ and WA have taken a very protective approach to their borders - and I can't help but think that'll play into the hands of Brisbane 3 getting that 18th team, no matter what the situation is when the decision is made (the NRL may forgive, but not forget!).

Even if Covid is well and truly in the rear view mirror by then, the aftertaste of WA/NZ's restrictions compared to Qld's "lifeboat" could be a factor.

COVID-19 threw a spanner in the works and shifted the goalposts. WA, Vic and NZ caused problems for the NBL and NRL by closing their borders. Queensland opened its borders to the NRL and AwFuL when no one else would. The ARLC will remember this and take it into consideration when the 18th licence is up for grabs.

No doubt that right there would be the justification for the decision; however, I feel a third team in Brisbane would negate any benefits from having a second Brisbane side.

It would potentially oversaturate a market, which is a fate worse than the problem of not having enough sides in the South East Qld, which has been the issue since the Crushers demise.

The ARLC shouldn’t want to replicate what has happened to the Sydney teams and the way that competition expanded in 1947 and 1967. Having nine small Sydney clubs (or at least a majority of them as small) is not a strength; however some foolish people want to spin it

The goal should be to add more sides with the popularity and reach of the Broncos and Storm, rather than endless small clubs

Three clubs in Brisbane isn't equivalent to nine clubs in Sydney. The population of Sydney is twice the size of Brisbane. Having a third team in Brisbane would be like Sydney having six clubs, which is fair for both cities. A third Brisbane club isn't going to be in a saturated area either, as both bids, Easts and Ipswich, are located south of the river whereas the Broncos are northwest of the CBD and Dolphins are in Moreton Bay, which is on the northern outskirts.

Melbourne developed a strong supporter base in Brisbane because SEQ was under represented for 25 years.

 

[Perth Red]

Back to the thread and future Perth club! HBF Park is getting $35mill more spent on it with upgrades to some facilities like lighting and pitch. We still need that new west stand though! It . will be interesting to see where the temp seating goes and what extra to the 20,500 capacity it adds?

Major boost to HBF Park ahead of 2023 Women's World Cup | HBF Park

 

[Colk]

Abdo did tell Easts and Ipswich they were a chance of picking up the 18th licence. That right there tells me the ARLC has second thoughts about NZ2 and aren't interested in Perth.



Depends on the logistics of running a bye every week. Clubs who get the bye early in the season are going to be angry because it won't benefit them.



Correct. NZ2 and Perth could help foster junior development in the long term. So can Brisbane 3.



COVID-19 threw a spanner in the works and shifted the goalposts. WA, Vic and NZ caused problems for the NBL and NRL by closing their borders. Queensland opened its borders to the NRL and AwFuL when no one else would. The ARLC will remember this and take it into consideration when the 18th licence is up for grabs.



Three clubs in Brisbane isn't equivalent to nine clubs in Sydney. The population of Sydney is twice the size of Brisbane. Having a third team in Brisbane would be like Sydney having six clubs, which is fair for both cities. A third Brisbane club isn't going to be in a saturated area either, as both bids, Easts and Ipswich, are located south of the river whereas the Broncos are northwest of the CBD and Dolphins are in Moreton Bay, which is on the northern outskirts.

Melbourne developed a strong supporter base in Brisbane because SEQ was under represented for 25 years.

Whether or not it is completely equivalent to Sydney is besides the point, I’m referencing the sort of thinking that is pervasive to Rugby League in this country and which would embody such a decision. The idea that your can’t go anywhere else outside of Qld and NSW and that you need sides in every square inch of an area. It’s wrong on three counts

1. It makes no difference to your competitors - anybody who is a fan of the Lions or Rugby Union is not suddenly going to stop watching those sports because another league side in introduced in that area. It is more likely that those people have already assessed their options and prefer those sports and are not going to be cajoled; or even more likely those supporters are band wagon supporters who have dropped off the Broncos etc because they are losing and followed the Lions etc because they are winning. They will flip continuously between the two in any case.

2. You’re going to be splitting active supporter groups rather than increasing the total amount of supporters. Where are you getting the new supporters from? People already have access to RL and with a second side in Brisbane, people can now attend a RL game there every week, which was the selling point of the second side (good one btw) So, why would there suddenly be a swath of new active supporters with the introduction of a third side so quickly after the introduction of a second one? All those supporters for the third side would be just taken from the Broncos or more dangerously from the Dolphins or Titans. Let the SEQ area naturally grow to the point where there is enough expansion in population for a new side to actually be large of its own accord and not damage existing brands i.e don’t repeat the mistakes of Manly-North Sydney or St George- Cronulla where you now have two financially weak clubs (or historically so) or dead clubs.

3. Lastly it just shows no ambition. If you are worried about SEQ invest more in grassroots but remaining stagnant should not be an option. Go to a completely new area - you’ll get new people going to games, buying new memberships and you won’t be damaging existing clubs which is a win-win

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Back to the thread and future Perth club! HBF Park is getting $35mill more spent on it with upgrades to some facilities like lighting and pitch. We still need that new west stand though! It . will be interesting to see where the temp seating goes and what extra to the 20,500 capacity it adds?

View attachment 57903

Major boost to HBF Park ahead of 2023 Women's World Cup | HBF Park

The western stand needs to be bulldozed and rebuilt.

Whether or not it is completely equivalent to Sydney is besides the point, I’m referencing the sort of thinking that is pervasive to Rugby League in this country and which would embody such a decision. The idea that your can’t go anywhere else outside of Qld and NSW and that you need sides in every square inch of an area. It’s wrong on three counts

1. It makes no difference to your competitors - anybody who is a fan of the Lions or Rugby Union is not suddenly going to stop watching those sports because another league side in introduced in that area. It is more likely that those people have already assessed their options and prefer those sports and are not going to be cajoled; or even more likely those supporters are band wagon supporters who have dropped off the Broncos etc because they are losing and followed the Lions etc because they are winning. They will flip continuously between the two in any case.

2. You’re going to be splitting active supporter groups rather than increasing the total amount of supporters. Where are you getting the new supporters from? People already have access to RL and with a second side in Brisbane, people can now attend a RL game there every week, which was the selling point of the second side (good one btw) So, why would there suddenly be a swath of new active supporters with the introduction of a third side so quickly after the introduction of a second one? All those supporters for the third side would be just taken from the Broncos or more dangerously from the Dolphins or Titans. Let the SEQ area naturally grow to the point where there is enough expansion in population for a new side to actually be large of its own accord and not damage existing brands i.e don’t repeat the mistakes of Manly-North Sydney or St George- Cronulla where you now have two financially weak clubs (or historically so) or dead clubs.

3. Lastly it just shows no ambition. If you are worried about SEQ invest more in grassroots but remaining stagnant should not be an option. Go to a completely new area - you’ll get new people going to games, buying new memberships and you won’t be damaging existing clubs which is a win-win

There's 2.4 million people in Greater Brisbane. That's more than enough for three teams.

Gold Coast isn't part of metropolitan Brisbane and it has 600k people within its borders. Too much distance between Brisbane and Gold Coast for a third Brisbane team to cannibalise the Titans. No one from the Gold Coast is going to support a Brisbane team as there's a rivalry between the two cities.

 

[Perth Red]

Coaches favour the next club to be Perth

 

[Perth Red]

The western stand needs to be bulldozed and rebuilt.

There's 2.4 million people in Greater Brisbane. That's more than enough for three teams.

Gold Coast isn't part of metropolitan Brisbane and it has 600k people within its borders. Too much distance between Brisbane and Gold Coast for a third Brisbane team to cannibalise the Titans. No one from the Gold Coast is going to support a Brisbane team as there's a rivalry between the two cities.

So you want to see the brisbane clubs match the Sydney clubs with 12k crowds?

 

[Perth Red]

After capping off the 2021 NRL WA season, the Great Southern Nines in Albany will kick off the 2022 season, with the event set to take place over the March long weekend.

Hosted by the Albany Sea Dragons, the 2022 edition of West Australia’s largest nine-a-side tournament will feature clubs from across the state, with the likes of the South Hedland Cougars, Joondalup Giants and Gur Wirimalpa sides joining regular participants such as the Mandurah Storm, Sea Dragons, Serpentine Jarrahdale and defending Champions, the Fremantle Roosters.

The 2022 event is set to expand with the addition of Women’s tackle and tag competitions as well.

The 2021 Great Southern Nines was won by the Fremantle Roosters, who defeated the Western Fijians in the tournament Final. The Roosters have won the last two nines.

The tournament will kick off the 2022 NRL WA season.

Great Southern Nines to kick off 2022 NRL WA season - Asia Pacific Rugby League

After capping off the 2021 NRL WA season, the Great Southern Nines in Albany will kick off the 2022 season, with the event set to take place over the March...

asiapacificrl.com

 

[flippikat]

Coaches favour the next club to be Perth

View attachment 57922

Put into numbers (out of 31)

18 - Perth
6 - No Expansion
3 - Second NZ team
2 - Central Coast
1 - North Sydney
1 - Second Melbourne team

Some interesting observations:

* BRISBANE 3 IS NOWHERE. The NRL needs to realise that the Dolphins will need time to bed-in, and there's no appetite in the coaching ranks for another SE-Qld team in this phase of expansion.

* Any concept of Norths coming back (Central Coast or North Sydney) as an expansion team has virtually no appeal to the coaching group.

* Some bizarre visionary out there wants a derby for the Storm very soon! (Or is it a mad rogue with an axe to grind against the Storm, who wants to stick a 2nd team in Melbourne - in a misguided attempt to knee-cap the Storm juggernaut?)

* A fair number want a pause to expansion after we go to 17 teams - would be interesting to see if they voted for that out of protecting their territory (Broncos, Titans could be 4 of those 6 votes), or wanting a weekly bye for player welfare (nevermind the inefficiency of having a team on the sidelines each week), or concern about overall player/coaching depth.

* For all the bluster pre-Covid about a 2nd NZ team, the idea has fallen flat in coaching circles. I strongly suspect the Warriors Covid experience has influenced that, and it's not a "no" so much as a "not now" vote. Time to either put that on the back-burner for team 19 or 20, or looking to relocate a failing Sydney club across the Tasman if that's at all possible.

While the coaching group isn't the be-all and end-all, these guys have an unique insight into recruiting, logistics, player welfare etc.

Their own club priorities aside, to see 18/31 of that group saying "Perth for team 18" speaks pretty loudly & cuts across any individual team's (or any bloc of teams) agenda.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

So you want to see the brisbane clubs match the Sydney clubs with 12k crowds?

Why do you expect Brisbane's clubs to draw two or three times as many fans through the gate than their counterparts in Sydney, Melbourne, NZ and future teams in Adelaide and Perth?

You know very well that the Melbourne Storm and West Coast Pirates will never average 30k or 20k on a regular basis, yet you're fine with them having a spot in the NRL. If it's all about 25k+ every game them let's just have a one team competition consisting of the Brisbane Broncos playing a Barbarians XIII at Lang Park every week, because that's the only way we'll get what you want.

In the past I've seen people demand the Broncos have 52k at every game before considering a second team. It's a massive double standard and unrealistic.

I do think Perth, Adelaide and NZ 2 should be introduced. If they're introduced before Brisbane 3 them so be it. I don't think any of these teams need to average 30k in order to be a success. I don't think it's reasonable to expect any team to average 30k pundits flocking through the gates as history has set the benchmark at 15k to 18k. I'd like crowds to be bigger, but there's no point in demanding 30k when there's only been 15k to 18k willing to go to each game over last 20 years. Something drastic will need to happen if attendances are to double.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Put into numbers (out of 31)

18 - Perth
6 - No Expansion
3 - Second NZ team
2 - Central Coast
1 - North Sydney
1 - Second Melbourne team

Some interesting observations:

* BRISBANE 3 IS NOWHERE. The NRL needs to realise that the Dolphins will need time to bed-in, and there's no appetite in the coaching ranks for another SE-Qld team in this phase of expansion.

* Any concept of Norths coming back (Central Coast or North Sydney) as an expansion team has virtually no appeal to the coaching group.

* Some bizarre visionary out there wants a derby for the Storm very soon! (Or is it a mad rogue with an axe to grind against the Storm, who wants to stick a 2nd team in Melbourne - in a misguided attempt to knee-cap the Storm juggernaut?)

* A fair number want a pause to expansion after we go to 17 teams - would be interesting to see if they voted for that out of protecting their territory (Broncos, Titans could be 4 of those 6 votes), or wanting a weekly bye for player welfare (nevermind the inefficiency of having a team on the sidelines each week), or concern about overall player/coaching depth.

* For all the bluster pre-Covid about a 2nd NZ team, the idea has fallen flat in coaching circles. I strongly suspect the Warriors Covid experience has influenced that, and it's not a "no" so much as a "not now" vote. Time to either put that on the back-burner for team 19 or 20, or looking to relocate a failing Sydney club across the Tasman if that's at all possible.

While the coaching group isn't the be-all and end-all, these guys have an unique insight into recruiting, logistics, player welfare etc.

Their own club priorities aside, to see 18/31 of that group saying "Perth for team 18" speaks pretty loudly & cuts across any individual team's (or any bloc of teams) agenda.

Self interest on behalf of the clubs. A third Brisbane team makes it harder for the other clubs, especially those from interstate, to recruit juniors from SEQ and will lead to fewer people from the region supporting interstate clubs like Melbourne.

Broncos, Dolphins and Titans don't want another team competing for sponsors and FTA games.

At the end of the day the clubs only care about themselves and will choose the option they view as less threatening.

NZ 2 is threatening to them as NZ produces talent that all 16 clubs have poached. Warriors don't want a competitor.

Plenty of teams were against Brisbane 2 for similar reasons. Thankfully, the interests of the broadcasters won out over the self-interest of the clubs.

I can see News Ltd wanting NZ 2 if they think it'll help subscriptions for Sky Sports NZ. Perth is not going to appeal to Ch9, Foxtel or Sky News NZ. If The Dolphins help Ch9 and Foxtel them they'll want Brisbane 3 and the demands from the other clubs will be ignored. The clubs will bow down if Brisbane 3 or NZ 2 lead to more money from broadcast rights.

 

[Perth Red]

W

Why do you expect Brisbane's clubs to draw two or three times as many fans through the gate than their counterparts in Sydney, Melbourne, NZ and future teams in Adelaide and Perth?

You know very well that the Melbourne Storm and West Coast Pirates will never average 30k or 20k on a regular basis, yet you're fine with them having a spot in the NRL. If it's all about 25k+ every game them let's just have a one team competition consisting of the Brisbane Broncos playing a Barbarians XIII at Lang Park every week, because that's the only way we'll get what you want.

In the past I've seen people demand the Broncos have 52k at every game before considering a second team. It's a massive double standard and unrealistic.

I do think Perth, Adelaide and NZ 2 should be introduced. If they're introduced before Brisbane 3 them so be it. I don't think any of these teams need to average 30k in order to be a success. I don't think it's reasonable to expect any team to average 30k pundits flocking through the gates as history has set the benchmark at 15k to 18k. I'd like crowds to be bigger, but there's no point in demanding 30k when there's only been 15k to 18k willing to go to each game over last 20 years. Something drastic will need to happen if attendances are to double.

Well if you are happy with small crowds why do you keep going on about too many teams in sydney? what you’re advocating for vpbrisbane is exactly the same scenario we have in Sydney, yet you have major problems with sydney, it’s you thats got the double standards. I’d be dissapointed if Storm and Perth couldnt build to 20k crowds eventually, that should be the goal To ensure sustainability beyond pokie machines,

 

[Perth Red]

Self interest on behalf of the clubs. A third Brisbane team makes it harder for the other clubs, especially those from interstate, to recruit juniors from SEQ and will lead to fewer people from the region supporting interstate clubs like Melbourne.

Broncos, Dolphins and Titans don't want another team competing for sponsors and FTA games.

At the end of the day the clubs only care about themselves and will choose the option they view as less threatening.

NZ 2 is threatening to them as NZ produces talent that all 16 clubs have poached. Warriors don't want a competitor.

Plenty of teams were against Brisbane 2 for similar reasons. Thankfully, the interests of the broadcasters won out over the self-interest of the clubs.

I can see News Ltd wanting NZ 2 if they think it'll help subscriptions for Sky Sports NZ. Perth is not going to appeal to Ch9, Foxtel or Sky News NZ. If The Dolphins help Ch9 and Foxtel them they'll want Brisbane 3 and the demands from the other clubs will be ignored. The clubs will bow down if Brisbane 3 or NZ 2 lead to more money from broadcast rights.

Tv hasn’t paid anything for Brisbane2, it seems naive to think they will for brisbane3.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Tv hasn’t paid anything for Brisbane2, it seems naive to think they will for brisbane3.

You keep saying that but it's not true.

News Ltd agreed to pay the NRL an extra $100m to fund expansion into Brisbane.

"According to the News Corp report, the Foxtel deal, which is believed to be worth around $100 million over the next five years, will cover the costs of the expanded league."

'No brainer': NRL set to expand after $100m Peter V'landys deal

A whopping budget surplus thanks to a huge new TV rights deal has allowed rugby league boss Peter V'landys to move forward with a massive NRL project. Read more here.

au.sports.yahoo.com