Which team adds the least to NRL?

[Perth Red]

The game could afford a 22 team comp if it wanted one but I get the sense they would rather expand the game whilst keeping the number of clubs as low as possible.

 

[Bovrick]

All clubs are important for different reasons

NFL has 32 teams. EPL 24 teams

ARL had 20 teams in 1995 and 22 minus Melbourne during the SL War

I don't believe we can ever go back to 12 teams so we need a new model

I like 20 teams in two conferences. A Sydney conference and a regional conference. Where you play each other twice and the other conference once over 28 rounds

Which means Perth, Central Coast, West Brisbane, Wellington can all join

Or expand to 26 teams over 25 rounds with Adelaide, C Qld, Redcliffe and Darwin, Hobart and Port Moresby

Yeah, conferences are probably the way forward, could even tend towards the NFL model with 4 conferences, idk something like:

North: Broncos, Brisbane2, Gold Coast; Central Queensland, North Queensland, Port Moresby
South: Storm, Pirates, Adelaide; Auckland, Wellington, South Island
NSW: Raiders, Sharks, Dragons; Eagles, Bears, Knights
Sydney: Rabbitohs, Roosters, Eels, Dogs, Panthers, Tigers

 

[Perth Red]

WC Pirates team for 2013 made up from players leaving NRL, ex nrl moving teams in SL, ex nrl in S15 or Returning to NRL. Who says there isn't enough players for expansion? Do you think this team would be competitive in the NRL?

1. Brent webb
2. Israel folau
3. Zeb taia
4. Joel moon
5. Cooper vuna
6. Travis burns
7. Thomas leuluia
8. Evan tuimavave
9. Scott Moore
10. Justin Poore
11. Corey Patterson
12. $BW
13. Daniel Holdsworth

14. Jeff Lima
15. Sam Moa
16. Tom Burgess
17. Brett finch

 

[Perth Red]

Yeah, conferences are probably the way forward, could even tend towards the NFL model with 4 conferences, idk something like:

North: Broncos, Brisbane2, Gold Coast; Central Queensland, North Queensland, Port Moresby
South: Storm, Pirates, Adelaide; Auckland, Wellington, South Island
NSW: Raiders, Sharks, Dragons; Eagles, Bears, Knights
Sydney: Rabbitohs, Roosters, Eels, Dogs, Panthers, Tigers

Don't really see any benefit of 4 conferences over 2. I'd just merge the south and north and call it the oceanic conference and nsw and Sydney and call it the nsw conference. Would be interesting to see which would eventually become the stronger.

Alternatively one comp of 22 teams with 21 games. 10 home, 10 away, 1 like the millennium magic where we have derbies played at one venue over a long weekend as a big RL extravaganza for fans.

 

[Bovrick]

Don't really see any benefit of 4 conferences over 2. I'd just merge the south and north and call it the oceanic conference and nsw and Sydney and call it the nsw conference. Would be interesting to see which would eventually become the stronger.

Alternatively one comp of 22 teams with 21 games. 10 home, 10 away, 1 like the millennium magic where we have derbies played at one venue over a long weekend as a big RL extravaganza for fans.

I was thinking more along the lines of how they keep it fresh over there by not playing every team every season, and was just loosely grouping teams to minimise travel costs I guess. The NRL already runs a weird pseudo-conference system within a single league (making sure the big games happen twice a season, and the lower moneymaking ones at least once). I think for the sake of finance that's probably the better way to go - keeping the local rivalries for the money, and the periodic more distant games more special.

You'd really really struggle to make 8 games at 1/2 venue(s) over a weekend, nevermind 11.

 

[no name]

WC Pirates team for 2013 made up from players leaving NRL, ex nrl moving teams in SL, ex nrl in S15 or Returning to NRL. Who says there isn't enough players for expansion? Do you think this team would be competitive in the NRL?

1. Brent webb
2. Israel folau
3. Zeb taia
4. Joel moon
5. Cooper vuna
6. Travis burns
7. Thomas leuluia
8. Evan tuimavave
9. Scott Moore
10. Justin Poore
11. Corey Patterson
12. $BW
13. Daniel Holdsworth

14. Jeff Lima
15. Sam Moa
16. Tom Burgess
17. Brett finch

But those players aren't available, they have been bought by clubs for a reason.

Also conferences will never work especially if you put a WA side and two or three NZ sides in the same one.

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

The Gold Coast Sharks? Hmmmmmmm.

 

[Evenflow]

Storm.

See what the tv rights deal would've been like in a monetary sense as opposed to the AFL if there wasn't a team in the second biggest market population wise in the country you clueless dickhead :lol:

 

[adamkungl]

What would Easts possibly have to offer in a merger of the two clubs? Nothing.

More importantly, what would we have to gain? We've been more successful than Souffs for 4 decades without their precious juniors :lol: Don't need them or want them.

We secured our future when we merged. Other clubs, even yours, can do the same.

Sharks secured their future when they went to Super League. Both clubs whored out, what's the difference really?

I don't know about that Miller. Footy is pretty tribal. I would rather see a merger than a relocation. If Rabbits and Roosters merge for example, there would be some angst (there always is) but it would create a powerhouse. Both team's supporters would still have a team and it's still local. Some would be pissed off but the majority would work through it. And their kids wouldn't care as long as they have a team in the neighbourhood. But if you moved one to the Central Coast (for arguments sake) it would really become a Central Coast team. The geography doesn't work.

:lol: Wrooooooong. No one would work through it. It would crash and burn spectacularly, with Politis to buy the licence and revive Easts once the merger is no longer viable. Sounds familiar...

Spot on. Mergers are the go.

Very few teams have their traditional identities anymore anyway. Look at the Roosters squad...that place is just a transit lounge. Souths have sold out as well, they used to be the people's club...now they get about in Armani Suits and have basically bought (some) success through big name signings. If they merge, they still buy players...big deal.

Tradition helps some sports, look at the EPL. Conversely, it holds others back. The NRL falls into the latter IMO.

bzzzt, wroooooooooong. Somewhere between 11-13 of our top lineup have never played a first grade game anywhere else.

 

[Ronnie Dobbs]

More importantly, what would we have to gain? We've been more successful than Souffs for 4 decades without their precious juniors :lol: Don't need them or want them.



Sharks secured their future when they went to Super League. Both clubs whored out, what's the difference really?



:lol: Wrooooooong. No one would work through it. It would crash and burn spectacularly, with Politis to buy the licence and revive Easts once the merger is no longer viable. Sounds familiar...



bzzzt, wroooooooooong. Somewhere between 11-13 of our top lineup have never played a first grade game anywhere else.

Is that 12 then?

Thats only because they can't play. Laziest team in the NRL.

 

[Diesel]

Going back to the conferences, it would only be 2 that is needed. NSW and Pacific/Australiasia

 

[gypsy]

The Souths/Easts merger certainly makes a lot of sense. As mentioned, it would receive some initial kickback but things would settle down.

 

[big hit!]

Possibly, however take Inglis, Burgess x 8, Crocker, Taylor, Asotasi etc. out of the side and they wouldn't have been in the finals at all.

who gives a f**k how a football club puts its roster together?

there's a salary cap to adhere to and there are virtually no restrictions on recruiting for uncontracted services. within those parameters, a football club does what it can to build a competitive football program.

it's obvious it ain't just some club officers who are dinosaurs. There are numpty fans too.

 

[hardbaby]

The game could afford a 22 team comp if it wanted one but I get the sense they would rather expand the game whilst keeping the number of clubs as low as possible.

Not for a long time it can't. Look at the Super 15. Australia demands an extra franchise and the quality across the code falls massively. We just don't have enough good players to have 2 strong sides let alone 5. Australian rugby is awful at the moment.

AFL introduces 2 new teams and it drops off massively. I watch a lot of AFL and I have to say, last year was the lowest standard I have seen for years. Massive margins. Very few close games. Boring.

The best thing league has going for it is the quality of the game itself. We need to grow. We need a WA team for sure. We probably need another Brisbane team. Eventually we need another Kiwi team. But it must occur in a manner that doesn't diminish the playing standard. That means keeping the number of teams low until the population/participation/membership numbers are right.

On a side note, the rah-rahs boys just appointed their CEO. A full businessman with no professional sporting credits on his resume. This follows the league appointment of a guy with no knowledge of the game at all. Time's are changing. The sport has become a product. It competes in the entertainment market and that's tough market indeed.

 

[WayneBennett]

St Merge Cronulla Illawarra Steeler Sharks

 

[hardbaby]

They wouldn't be called the Sharks but this is a merger that probably should and will happen. And I would have no problem with it at all.

 

[soc123_au]

The only thing a Souffs/Easts Merger would do is create an entity more despised than Manly. Big ask to manage knocking the Eagles off that perch I know. Imagine a world where Manly fans had nothing to whinge about & Uncle Nick arm in arm with George Piggins skipping down Oxford Street. No thanks. Personally I prefer to dislike all 3 as separate clubs.

It would be funny as f**k to fans of other clubs for a week or two & then reality would kick in. Except for maybe fans of the clubs that have no soul. Getting rid of teams and forcing mergers is just stupid. If a team dies through natural selection then so be it.

Yes the comp is Sydney centric, so f**king what. All the out of town teams were busting to join the elite NSW comp, we let em in & they havent stopped moaning since. **Nth Qld seem to be an exception**

 

[soc123_au]

Not for a long time it can't. Look at the Super 15. Australia demands an extra franchise and the quality across the code falls massively. We just don't have enough good players to have 2 strong sides let alone 5. Australian rugby is awful at the moment.

We dont have enough people with hyphenated surnames. That is Rugbys biggest issue.

 

[newman]

The game could afford a 22 team comp if it wanted one but I get the sense they would rather expand the game whilst keeping the number of clubs as low as possible.

Please tell me you are not an accountant or involved in finance professionally at any level.

 

[hardbaby]

We dont have enough people with hyphenated surnames. That is Rugbys biggest issue.

Yep. The best and biggest players tend to go to league.