Which team should relocate to western austrlia?

[bobmar28]

No one needs to be relocated. Mergers are the way to go in Sydney. That would free up franchises for the WA Pirates and Ipswich Jets.

 

[Bulldog Force]

Why merge? Why can't the NRL acquire more licenses like we did in 1995 when we had 20 teams in the competition?

More teams means more sponsors = more money to spend on players = less chance of players going to Victorianland or Yawnion!

 

[20teamarl]

Why merge? Why can't the NRL acquire more licenses like we did in 1995 when we had 20 teams in the competition?

More teams means more sponsors = more money to spend on players = less chance of players going to Victorianland or Yawnion!

This. Not to mention more fans. I will never get my head around why some people STILL fall for Ribot's rubbish, somehow believing that cutting supporters out of the game manages to "expand" it. IMO a 22 team competition is ideal (same 20 team layout as 1995 plus Melbourne and Adelaide).

 

[CQ Italia]

Adelaide where nearly no one wants a team and where there is no bid. Have to go where the fish are biting, not a backyard pool. So CC, CQ and Perth would fall under that category, Brisbane unsure of as not enough bid support at present and 2 se qld sides in bottom 8.

 

[The Great Dane]

Adelaide where nearly no one wants a team and where there is no bid. Have to go where the fish are biting, not a backyard pool. So CC, CQ and Perth would fall under that category, Brisbane unsure of as not enough bid support at present and 2 se qld sides in bottom 8.

Ahh yes this is true, but their is such a thing as overfishing!

Overfishing is when to many fishermen fish in the same spot the fish are all caught and eaten before they have time to reproduce and eventually their numbers start to fall and they go extinct.

Over fishing is whats happening Sydney and what is threatening to happen in Queensland, to many fishermen not enough fish, so eventually what needs to happen is for some of the fishermen to find new fishing holes and develop new techniques to catch the fish in those fishing holes and that's what's should and eventually will happen in the NRL.

Unfortunately the fishing holes on the CC are to close to the Sydney fishing holes and the ones in CQ are to spread out so their both not a option at the moment. Perth on the other hand is a huge fishing hole and some smart fishermen are starting to get a lot of bites and Brisbane is big enough to house another fisherman.

Other fishermen are starting to attempt some new techniques in Wellington, Adelaide, PNG and other places and with a little determination all of them will eventually find success and when that happens and it's time to expand again the CC and CQ will be over looked for these bigger fishing holes.

 

[Bulldog Force]

Adelaide where nearly no one wants a team and where there is no bid. Have to go where the fish are biting, not a backyard pool. So CC, CQ and Perth would fall under that category, Brisbane unsure of as not enough bid support at present and 2 se qld sides in bottom 8.

Actually the SA Government has a RL team in the back of their minds - we've already seen them fund a couple of games there since 2010 - Bulldogs and Sharks have both hosted games there.

 

[dev'o]

Bring it to Perth, we're champing at the bit for a team here!

 

[flippikat]

This. Not to mention more fans. I will never get my head around why some people STILL fall for Ribot's rubbish, somehow believing that cutting supporters out of the game manages to "expand" it. IMO a 22 team competition is ideal (same 20 team layout as 1995 plus Melbourne and Adelaide).

Hang on - if you're talking about the same 20-team layout as 1995, does that mean DE-MERGING the Tigers & Dragons and bringing back the Crushers and Norths (presumably on the Central Coast)?

I agree that a 22-team comp with everyone playing everyone else once is the long term goal, but the additional 6 teams should be as follows:

Expansion phase 1 (next 5 years):
* Central Coast Bears
* Brisbane 2 (Call for bids in Brisbane/Ipswich area, choose the best business case)
* West Coast Pirates

Phase 2 (10-15 years):
* NZ 2 (as with Brisbane.. call for bids, choose the best business case)
* Adelaide Rams
* Queensland club #5 (call for bids throughout the state, choose the best business case)

NZ 2 could be put in with phase 1 if we want the competition to keep an even number of teams.

 

[Diesel]

That is the blueprint that most fans want and the ARLC should be implementing, I just wonder in what form, ie more mergers, relocations or expansion of teams

 

[The Great Dane]

Hang on - if you're talking about the same 20-team layout as 1995, does that mean DE-MERGING the Tigers & Dragons and bringing back the Crushers and Norths (presumably on the Central Coast)?

I agree that a 22-team comp with everyone playing everyone else once is the long term goal, but the additional 6 teams should be as follows:

Expansion phase 1 (next 5 years):
* Central Coast Bears
* Brisbane 2 (Call for bids in Brisbane/Ipswich area, choose the best business case)
* West Coast Pirates

Phase 2 (10-15 years):
* NZ 2 (as with Brisbane.. call for bids, choose the best business case)
* Adelaide Rams
* Queensland club #5 (call for bids throughout the state, choose the best business case)

NZ 2 could be put in with phase 1 if we want the competition to keep an even number of teams.

I know all the Queenslanders are going to get pissy about this but does Queensland really need 5 teams, in my opinion no. They may want more then 4 teams but they don't need more then 4 teams! I think that 4 is enough for quite some time (a couple of decades at least).

We already have one very over saturated market at the expense of other possible markets the last thing we need is another market over saturated at the expense of other possible markets, leave some expansion spots for other areas and spread the game around some more I say.

Look at it this way, what would be better for the game over the next half century, two more teams in Queensland (most likely both in Brisbane) or giving that expansion spot to another new market!

 

[flippikat]

I know all the Queenslanders are going to get pissy about this but does Queensland really need 5 teams, in my opinion no. They may want more then 4 teams but they don't need more then 4 teams! I think that 4 is enough for quite some time (a couple of decades at least).

Well, there is always the possibility of a 3rd NZ team.

Auckland, Canterbury, Wellington, Waikato/Bay of Plenty & the South Island's West Coast are the traditional strongholds of Rugby League.

Now you can discount the West Coast out of low population base, but Canterbury, Wellington & Waikato/Bay Of Plenty would all have strong arguments for being a 2nd or 3rd NZ team.

* Waikato/Bay of Plenty would cover an area including the cities of Hamilton, Rotorua & Tauranga (one of our fastest growing cities), but might have to split home games between centres. The Hamilton rectangular stadium is decent enough for an NRL team.

* Wellington has a great modern stadium, but may strike some scheduling troubles due to it's use conditions (Thorndon residents don't want night events every week) & trying to accomodate NRL with everything else it hosts. This can be mitigated by taking the odd game out to Palmerston North, New Plymouth, Napier etc.. in effect emulating the Hurricanes regional model in Super Rugby.

* Christchurch has a recently built rectangular stadium that'll do the job, supposedly until they get their flash covered stadium as part of the earthquake rebuild. Great potential for a Christchurch based team to have the whole South Island as it's territory and play the odd game in Dunedin's flash new covered stadium.

 

[The Great Dane]

Well, there is always the possibility of a 3rd NZ team.

Yeah that would be the most likely IMO, but who knows by the time we're at that point there could be other cities interested that we're not currently considering right now.

 

[flippikat]

Yeah that would be the most likely IMO, but who knows by the time we're at that point there could be other cities interested that we're not currently considering right now.

You have a point - places like Central Queensland may not have the concentrated population base or infrastructure for an NRL team now, but in the future things can change.

The NRL has a war on two fronts - In Australia the biggest competitor is naturally the AFL, and I can understand the desire to expand to lucrative non-heartland markets - especially if they've done significant work in developing their player base (such as WA).

But the other front can't be forgotten - New Zealand, where Rugby Union rules the roost.

Sure there are issues in creating non-Australian clubs - different laws to work-around for a start, but you have a population of 4 million here with a built-in culture of all things Rugby (Union, League, Sevens, Touch..). The Warriors are a valuable beachhead into this market, but to really unlock it's potential you need at least a second team to get the game really humming.

It provides a vital local derby, gets the game out to at least one more major centre, and opens up a great pathway for juniors who can forge their careers in their home country.

There's other things the NRL can do here - one that springs to mind is merchandising. If the NRL can get affordable merchandise (like what Best & Less have) out to the NZ market, you'll see far more people wearing team gear.

 

[The Great Dane]

You have a point - places like Central Queensland may not have the concentrated population base or infrastructure for an NRL team now, but in the future things can change.

The NRL has a war on two fronts - In Australia the biggest competitor is naturally the AFL, and I can understand the desire to expand to lucrative non-heartland markets - especially if they've done significant work in developing their player base (such as WA).

But the other front can't be forgotten - New Zealand, where Rugby Union rules the roost.

Sure there are issues in creating non-Australian clubs - different laws to work-around for a start, but you have a population of 4 million here with a built-in culture of all things Rugby (Union, League, Sevens, Touch..). The Warriors are a valuable beachhead into this market, but to really unlock it's potential you need at least a second team to get the game really humming.

It provides a vital local derby, gets the game out to at least one more major centre, and opens up a great pathway for juniors who can forge their careers in their home country.

There's other things the NRL can do here - one that springs to mind is merchandising. If the NRL can get affordable merchandise (like what Best & Less have) out to the NZ market, you'll see far more people wearing team gear.

I didn't disagreed with you.

NZ defiantly needs at least one more team (preferably two more IMO), I was just pointing out that things may change and that in 20 or 30 years time the NRL may be looking at putting a team in other markets that we wouldn't even consider at the moment or would even call crazy or impossible, maybe not even in Australia, New Zealand or PNG.

It's far enough in the future that a lot can change, that's all I was saying.

 

[flippikat]

No one needs to be relocated. Mergers are the way to go in Sydney. That would free up franchises for the WA Pirates and Ipswich Jets.

Trouble is, it's hard seeing room for more mergers in Sydney.

Presumably the Tigers & Dragons are off the table because they're already joint ventures.

Then you get into combinations that just won't work due to long-seated rivalry - do we really want another version of the Northern Eagles?

If you take this into account it doesn't leave many options.

No, I think the most likely ways that rationalization will happen is by clubs dropping out of the NRL or by relocation.

 

[The Great Dane]

Trouble is, it's hard seeing room for more mergers in Sydney.

Presumably the Tigers & Dragons are off the table because they're already joint ventures.

Then you get into combinations that just won't work due to long-seated rivalry - do we really want another version of the Northern Eagles?

If you take this into account it doesn't leave many options.

No, I think the most likely ways that rationalization will happen is by clubs dropping out of the NRL or by relocation.

Mergers between two rivals could work if they were given a independent board with no members from the old clubs present and strict ruling from the NRL/ARLC.

The problem with the Northern Eagles (and to a lesser extent the Wests Tigers) was that we had the Bears old boys club and the Manly old boys club, who had spent their whole lives hating each other and we put them together, gave them free run of the place and insisted that they worked together when they had no interest in doing so and rather were only interested in undermining each other in bids for control.

If the NRL was to (initially) have complete control of this rivals merger's license and make sure that none of the two old clubs power brokers had anything to do with the club then it might work given time.

We should learn for our mistakes and our mistake wasn't that we merged the Bears and the Eagles, it was that we left people from the old clubs in control and allowed them to continue unsupervised at the first sign of trouble.

 

[reanimate]

I didn't disagreed with you.

NZ defiantly needs at least one more team (preferably two more IMO), I was just pointing out that things may change and that in 20 or 30 years time the NRL may be looking at putting a team in other markets that we wouldn't even consider at the moment or would even call crazy or impossible, maybe not even in Australia, New Zealand or PNG.

It's far enough in the future that a lot can change, that's all I was saying.

South Africa? I've always thought it'd be a market worth chipping away at over time. Maybe once we nail a few big name Union converts, a few exhibition games or trial matches could be taken there, plus maybe get a few NRL teams to form pathways with local teams/leagues there to give SA players a chance to make it here. Continue that for a while, build up a bit of a fanbase, play a few regular season matches there for points and see of it'd be feasible for a full time team there. Obviously that would take decades of work, but it could be worth pursuing.

Trouble is, it's hard seeing room for more mergers in Sydney.

Presumably the Tigers & Dragons are off the table because they're already joint ventures.

Then you get into combinations that just won't work due to long-seated rivalry - do we really want another version of the Northern Eagles?

If you take this into account it doesn't leave many options.

No, I think the most likely ways that rationalization will happen is by clubs dropping out of the NRL or by relocation.

Yeah, I can't see many feasible mergers. Possibly Parra/Penrith, but they're a long way from each other and Parra has a strong fanbase by itself.

Mergers between two rivals could work if they were given a independent board with no members from the old clubs present and strict ruling from the NRL/ARLC.

The problem with the Northern Eagles (and to a lesser extent the Wests Tigers) was that we had the Bears old boys club and the Manly old boys club, who had spent their whole lives hating each other and we put them together, gave them free run of the place and insisted that they worked together when they had no interest in doing so and rather were only interested in undermining each other in bids for control.

If the NRL was to (initially) have complete control of this rivals merger's license and make sure that none of the two old clubs power brokers had anything to do with the club then it might work given time.

We should learn for our mistakes and our mistake wasn't that we merged the Bears and the Eagles, it was that we left people from the old clubs in control and allowed them to continue unsupervised at the first sign of trouble.

That's oversimplifying the situation a bit. The merger was basically forced on Manly and the Bears. Those involved with Manly were incredibly unhappy about it thanks to the Bears side of the merger bleeding money, with the team being propped up by Manly towards the end of the merger, with the club basically being Manly under a different name. I don't think a completely new board could have helped the fact that the very notion of a Bears/Sea Eagles merger was abhorrent to both sets of fans. All it did was alienate and anger a section of fans in both fanbases and resulted in the death of the Bears. I'd be fine with the Sea Eagles being the North Shore's team again, obviously in a lesser capacity than before. What I mean by that is the NRL should give the directive to Manly to go out and engage with the North Shore- do meet and greets, do some fan events, encourage people to follow them, get public transport organised to Brookvale for games etc.. I'd be against a name change to anything like 'Manly-North Sydney Sea Eagles', but we should be the North Shore's team in everything but name IMO. I realise that the idea sounds a bit ridiculous, as some people from the North Shore despise Manly and always will, especially some of those that used to follow the Bears, and because the Bears still exist in lower grades, but there are a fair number of people I know and have met from the North Shore that follow Manly. They aren't super vocal about it, especially those that are former Bears supporters, but the support is there (e.g. the last two pubs I've been to on the North Shore, Northbridge Hotel and Hotel Cremorne, have had Manly memorabilia up on the walls and messages of support for Manly up around the bar) and has the potential to grow if done right. It's an area that the NRL needs to cover, that's for sure.

 

[The Great Dane]

That's oversimplifying the situation a bit. The merger was basically forced on Manly and the Bears. Those involved with Manly were incredibly unhappy about it thanks to the Bears side of the merger bleeding money, with the team being propped up by Manly towards the end of the merger, with the club basically being Manly under a different name. I don't think a completely new board could have helped the fact that the very notion of a Bears/Sea Eagles merger was abhorrent to both sets of fans. All it did was alienate and anger a section of fans in both fanbases and resulted in the death of the Bears. I'd be fine with the Sea Eagles being the North Shore's team again, obviously in a lesser capacity than before. What I mean by that is the NRL should give the directive to Manly to go out and engage with the North Shore- do meet and greets, do some fan events, encourage people to follow them, get public transport organised to Brookvale for games etc.. I'd be against a name change to anything like 'Manly-North Sydney Sea Eagles', but we should be the North Shore's team in everything but name IMO. I realise that the idea sounds a bit ridiculous, as some people from the North Shore despise Manly and always will, especially some of those that used to follow the Bears, and because the Bears still exist in lower grades, but there are a fair number of people I know and have met from the North Shore that follow Manly. They aren't super vocal about it, especially those that are former Bears supporters, but the support is there (e.g. the last two pubs I've been to on the North Shore, Northbridge Hotel and Hotel Cremorne, have had Manly memorabilia up on the walls and messages of support for Manly up around the bar) and has the potential to grow if done right. It's an area that the NRL needs to cover, that's for sure.

The thing is if you were going to go the route I suggested before you'd basically be kicking out the two clubs and starting a completely new one, so it'd a merger only in name and colours apart from that it'd be a completely new club, there'd be no rich half and a poor half because this new club would have to find different ways to fund it's self specifically so it can be independent of the old clubs.

As for the angry and disenchanted parts of the fan base, they'd be left behind in the hopes that they'll be replaced with new generations of fans coming through, like the Wests Tigers have experience with many old fans dropping off after the merger and slowly being replaced by a new group of purely Wests Tigers fans instead of old Magpies fans and Balmian fans.

So basically take the Rabbits and the Roosters for example, start putting things in place for a new team in Sydney like any bid team would do when preparing to enter the comp. Then when it comes time to renew the Rabbits and Roosters license's kindly inform them that their license's will not be renewed for whatever reasons (I don't really know how the licensing works so that could be completely wrong) and effectively punt them from the NRL but allow them to continue in the lower grades. Then give one license to this new Sydney Rabbits club (for example) and the other to one of the bid teams.

 

[reanimate]

The thing is if you were going to go the route I suggested before you'd basically be kicking out the two clubs and starting a completely new one, so it'd a merger only in name and colours apart from that it'd be a completely new club, there'd be no rich half and a poor half because this new club would have to find different ways to fund it's self specifically so it can be independent of the old clubs.

As for the angry and disenchanted parts of the fan base, they'd be left behind in the hopes that they'll be replaced with new generations of fans coming through, like the Wests Tigers have experience with many old fans dropping off after the merger and slowly being replaced by a new group of purely Wests Tigers fans instead of old Magpies fans and Balmian fans.

So basically take the Rabbits and the Roosters for example, start putting things in place for a new team in Sydney like any bid team would do when preparing to enter the comp. Then when it comes time to renew the Rabbits and Roosters license's kindly inform them that their license's will not be renewed for whatever reasons (I don't really know how the licensing works so that could be completely wrong) and effectively punt them from the NRL but allow them to continue in the lower grades. Then give one license to this new Sydney Rabbits club (for example) and the other to one of the bid teams.

The Wests Tigers situation is quite different though- they (bizarrely) weren't geographically next door to each other, and as far as I know, didn't share the same rivalry that Manly and the Bears did. Same goes for the Saints/Steelers.

To do what you're saying, the NRL back then would have needed a stack of cash to effectively establish a brand new franchise, with a brand new board and set of executives. That's the last thing the NRL had though, and they were forced to use the existing structures and people in place to make it work. It was doomed from the outset though, once it became apparent the Bears were struggling, they should have simply folded them and handed the North Shore to Manly. Which is what they should be doing now, screw this 'battle for the west' crap, Parra and Penrith have their pokie dens to fall back on and GWS is a total basket case. Once Parra get their shit together on the field they'll be more than fine. Help Manly get a good stadium upgrade and increase their support on the North Shore and you'll unlock an absolute powerhouse. There's a stack of money on the North Shore, and people with influence and contacts, it's something we need to work on. Of course, there's probably some bias there, but it's insane that we've left the North Shore alone.

 

[The Great Dane]

The Wests Tigers situation is quite different though- they (bizarrely) weren't geographically next door to each other, and as far as I know, didn't share the same rivalry that Manly and the Bears did. Same goes for the Saints/Steelers.

To do what you're saying, the NRL back then would have needed a stack of cash to effectively establish a brand new franchise, with a brand new board and set of executives. That's the last thing the NRL had though, and they were forced to use the existing structures and people in place to make it work. It was doomed from the outset though, once it became apparent the Bears were struggling, they should have simply folded them and handed the North Shore to Manly. Which is what they should be doing now, screw this 'battle for the west' crap, Parra and Penrith have their pokie dens to fall back on and GWS is a total basket case. Once Parra get their shit together on the field they'll be more than fine. Help Manly get a good stadium upgrade and increase their support on the North Shore and you'll unlock an absolute powerhouse. There's a stack of money on the North Shore, and people with influence and contacts, it's something we need to work on. Of course, there's probably some bias there, but it's insane that we've left the North Shore alone.

I think you misunderstand I wasn't talking about the past I was talking about possible future mergers, which by the way I don't support or think are a good idea. I was simply discussing ways that we could possibly achieve mergers between two rivals.

As for West Sydney and GWS I agree with you, mergers in West Sydney would be a pointless exercise at the moment, that if anything would help GWS more then hinder them.

As for Manly and the North Shore, I agree 100% that the NRL should be helping you guys to lobby for a new stadium/stadium upgrade just as they should be helping the Raiders, Brumbies, Canberra United and ARU to lobby the ACT government for a rectangular indoor stadium, I reckon that once they get everything sorted out at head office that they will start to do things like this given time.

On the other hand winning over the North Shore is all up to you guys and their's little that anybody apart from possibly the Bears, can do to help you and I can't see the Bears doing you guys any favors anytime soon. The first thing I'd look to do is a lot more stuff in the community on the North Shore, at the same time hit the North Shore hard with a huge unrelenting add campaign, plaster the Sea Eagle everywhere. Then you guys will need to sacrifice something and make a commitment to show the North Shore that your serious, maybe commit to play a couple of games a year at North Sydney oval and Bluetongue (which you are already doing), maybe wear a Bears jersey for heritage round one year in attempts to reconnect with that market. Publicly and seriously backing the hopeless CC Bears bid would a good idea as well as it would connect the Sea Eagles brand with the Bears brand even more and that's the key pushing the links between your brands.

The last step after many years of hard work and you've got a steady supporters base on the North Shore would be a re-branding to make the team truly represent the North Shore and not just Manly, that would include a new name (something like the North Shore Sea Eagles), a new logo, new jersey designs and maybe even a new colour scheme, which you've already said you would't be open to and if that is truly the case for all/most Manly supporters then Manly has no hope of connecting with the Northern Sydney RL community.