would a conference system work in the nrl?

[Dogs Of War]

Just curious as to why you believe it's such a poor idea. Dismissing an idea without any reasons seems silly, and something that Dennis Fitzgerald would do.

 

[Ron Jeremy]

I am very interested to see what problems a transparent conference system would cause?

Pro's for me are :

- Divisions are organised by region, thus placing more importance on regional rivalries. Plus guarantees that these matches occur home and away every single year.

- Draw can be better manipulated to make sure these divisional games occur at the end of season, to maximise crowds, and make sure end of season matches are between sides trying to grab a finals spot as each conference is entitled to one at least.

- Possible options for TV channels to bid for different conferences to Televise, depending on which market they are after. I would believe that more dollars could be gained this way.

- Each region is guaranteed representation at the end of season, thus creating interest in all areas of Australia in the finals.

That's it, their are no problems, it's win win. I'd be sending this idea to the NRL anyway.

 

[God-King Dean]

Ah I can see it now.

St George Illawarra Dragons

NFC Champions !

 

[Dogs Of War]

Ah I can see it now.

St George Illawarra Dragons

NFC Champions !

Yep. Maybe that will even let the Sharks win something. Divisional champs gives more clubs something to celebrate.

Though you could probably rename the division from something like Southern Region, to something that celebrates famous identities in Rugby League. Like the Eastern Division could be called the Dally Messenger Conference, Northern Division the Wally Lewis Conference etc.

 

[joshreading]

I actually think it would be a raging success. The nationally based clubs already fly every other week. It would help Sydney in that it would hopefully bring out the tribal elements (sell a Sydney season ticket)

Just play home and away for your conference and then one game against each of the other teams.

Also gives the opportunity for a 'All Stars' style game helping NON NSW QLD players represent and put themselves up for Australia in the long run.

 

[Dogs Of War]

I actually think it would be a raging success. The nationally based clubs already fly every other week. It would help Sydney in that it would hopefully bring out the tribal elements (sell a Sydney season ticket)

Just play home and away for your conference and then one game against each of the other teams.

Also gives the opportunity for a 'All Stars' style game helping NON NSW QLD players represent and put themselves up for Australia in the long run.

Maybe once Origin has run it's course, the All Star games could be divisional based, and thus we have the stars of the Eastern Conference, playing the Western Conference, the next night the same happens with North vs South.

Each conference plays each other (so 3 games each), with whomever leads the table declared the winner. But that for me is 20 years away at least.

 

[Pigskin]

Conference system ideas above all sound good in theory, but when you can figure out a way to make the conferences somewhat even across the board, perhaps you will have a winner

We all know, although some won't admit it, one-city teams will only get stronger while Sydney clubs will progressively get weaker

Its amazing how many "proposals" are popping up in these forums atm trying to revitalise the game - fans of Sydney clubs are in denial of what really needs to be done and the first step is admitting the problem

Let us know when you ready

Oink !

 

[ozjet1]

The draw is rigged as it is. With a conference system it becomes much easier to work out (as well as transparent), and as it values local rivalries above all else, you would find a much improved crowds for these matches.

the NRL should give this man a job.........after me ofcourse.

A division system will be transparent.........clubs will know which teams they're playing twice a year, teams will know where they're playing teams from out of their division (basically home one year, away the other).

Rivalries will flourish.

ranks teams primarily against division rivals (teams who have shared a common draw) for playoffs

the NRL does not require separate conferences where teams are segregated based on affiliations, and subsequent separation in finals. This goes completely against the way the traditional competition structures of rugby league. However, a division system to schedule the season, and then, rank teams primarily against division rivals (teams who have shared a common draw) for playoffs retains the probability that any two teams can playoff in the GF.

furthermore, id alter finals to be knockout all the way through. it's shorten it by a week, but it would also save the competition of the farcial 2nd week.

the double chance is a crock and goes against the spirit of 'best on the day' which is the crux of finals football. it suggests that a team may lose a final in the 1st wk. but what about a minor premier who loses the prelim, or GF. if the the double chance is to be applied equally, all top 4 teams should receive it. but ofcourse, the system was introduced purely to increase $$$ and it isnt even good at that nowadays. Simply, its against the spirit of finals.

in division-style setup, each division winner is ranked 1 through 4, then the 2 best NRL records (ex division winners) are ranked 5 and 6.

Wk 1 - 3 v 6; 4 v 5
Wk 2 - 1 v lowest-ranked winner Wk 1; 2 v highest ranked winner Wk 1
Wk 3 - Winners of Wk 2.

we also dont have to put with the crap of a 7th or 8th ranked teams who dont even deserve to be in the finals if thats all they can achieve in the prior 6 months of football. Reward quality, not mediocraty.

 

[Dogs Of War]

Conference system ideas above all sound good in theory, but when you can figure out a way to make the conferences somewhat even across the board, perhaps you will have a winner

Hmm, it works in NFL as the stronger conferences still get good representation in the finals due to the wild card scenario. In some seasons, a conference will be weaker than the others, but ultimately, they will only get one representative in the finals, who will probably be bundled out very quickly.

We all know, although some won't admit it, one-city teams will only get stronger while Sydney clubs will progressively get weaker

Its amazing how many "proposals" are popping up in these forums atm trying to revitalise the game - fans of Sydney clubs are in denial of what really needs to be done and the first step is admitting the problem

Let us know when you ready

Oink !

Well it will happen sometime, and conferences should be restructured once clubs like Souths make a decision on what they want to do (like move to Central Coast/Perth).

But for the time being, this sort of conference idea could revitalise the game in Sydney, making the regional rivalries valued above all else.

 

[Eels Dude]

I am very interested to see what problems a transparent conference system would cause?

Pro's for me are :

- Divisions are organised by region, thus placing more importance on regional rivalries. Plus guarantees that these matches occur home and away every single year.

- Draw can be better manipulated to make sure these divisional games occur at the end of season, to maximise crowds, and make sure end of season matches are between sides trying to grab a finals spot as each conference is entitled to one at least.

- Possible options for TV channels to bid for different conferences to Televise, depending on which market they are after. I would believe that more dollars could be gained this way.

- Each region is guaranteed representation at the end of season, thus creating interest in all areas of Australia in the finals.

Ok some of the problems I see are

1) A lot of rivalries go beyond simple geography and it would get very messy determining these conferences as different clubs would have different preferences as to whom they play twice. For example, Parramatta v Manly, and the always strong crowds for Bulldogs v Roosters. I can't see the logic in putting Manly in with the QLD sides. End of the day if even one club is displeased with their conference position it is unfair.

2) It enables poorer performing sides to make the finals, or getting a higher ranking finals spot, then better performing sides. For example, the western conference this year would be very mediocre. All those clubs could miss the finals this year, but based on your system one of them would recieve a top 4 position. I don't think any amount of tinkering would prevent discrepencies.

3) There just isn't enough of a defined border to determine who goes in who's conference. The Western one makes sense, as does grouping the QLD sides together, whatever the remaining set up though will just be making up groups for the sake of it. Geographically isolated clubs like the Warriors and Melbourne are going to have no set relation to the other clubs in their conference and thus would be a pointless exercise for them. I can't see Dragons fans cheering the Storm in the finals just because they happen to be in the same conference.

It works in the NFL as there is a greater spread between teams but it won't work here.

 

[Ron Jeremy]

Dogs of war i'd send the proposal to the NRL, probably say no and yeah it is so much better for the game in SYD playing NQ and Canberra twice a year lol

 

[Pigskin]

Ok some of the problems I see are

1) A lot of rivalries go beyond simple geography and it would get very messy determining these conferences as different clubs would have different preferences as to whom they play twice. For example, Parramatta v Manly, and the always strong crowds for Bulldogs v Roosters. I can't see the logic in putting Manly in with the QLD sides. End of the day if even one club is displeased with their conference position it is unfair.

2) It enables poorer performing sides to make the finals, or getting a higher ranking finals spot, then better performing sides. For example, the western conference this year would be very mediocre. All those clubs could miss the finals this year, but based on your system one of them would recieve a top 4 position. I don't think any amount of tinkering would prevent discrepencies.

3) There just isn't enough of a defined border to determine who goes in who's conference. The Western one makes sense, as does grouping the QLD sides together, whatever the remaining set up though will just be making up groups for the sake of it. Geographically isolated clubs like the Warriors and Melbourne are going to have no set relation to the other clubs in their conference and thus would be a pointless exercise for them. I can't see Dragons fans cheering the Storm in the finals just because they happen to be in the same conference.

It works in the NFL as there is a greater spread between teams but it won't work here.

along the same lines as my post above

spot on

Despite the possibility of great crowds which is appealing, the objective is to win the comp.
(Broncs fan) How on earth can the 3 existing Queensland sides be happy at playing each other twice when there are far easier games to be won by playing Sydney clubs. Yes the Cowboys are having a very poor season - but nobody could have predicted it at the start of the season and it wouldn't surprise if they were a genuine contender in 09. Its a farce the way the draw is now, so I guess nothing much would change.

Oink !

 

[KniGhTs BaTTLeR]

Hell No.

 

[Dogs Of War]

Ok some of the problems I see are

1) A lot of rivalries go beyond simple geography and it would get very messy determining these conferences as different clubs would have different preferences as to whom they play twice. For example, Parramatta v Manly, and the always strong crowds for Bulldogs v Roosters. I can't see the logic in putting Manly in with the QLD sides. End of the day if even one club is displeased with their conference position it is unfair.

I put Manly there, as their ground just doesn't allow for a good away supporter base to attend. As well the Knights fans are good travellers, and would be better for the game in Sydney.

Rivals such as Bulldogs vs Roosters, would still happen, just once a season, and probably be valued even moreso than it is now due to the scarcity of the matchup.

2) It enables poorer performing sides to make the finals, or getting a higher ranking finals spot, then better performing sides. For example, the western conference this year would be very mediocre. All those clubs could miss the finals this year, but based on your system one of them would recieve a top 4 position. I don't think any amount of tinkering would prevent discrepencies.

This happens already, you just don't realise it. Each season clubs get favourable draws depending on how poorly they went the previous system. This just makes the draw more transparent.

3) There just isn't enough of a defined border to determine who goes in who's conference. The Western one makes sense, as does grouping the QLD sides together, whatever the remaining set up though will just be making up groups for the sake of it. Geographically isolated clubs like the Warriors and Melbourne are going to have no set relation to the other clubs in their conference and thus would be a pointless exercise for them. I can't see Dragons fans cheering the Storm in the finals just because they happen to be in the same conference.

Those Geographically isolated clubs, would be the biggest winners out of all this, as their biggest rivals are defined by the division they are in. So these games should attract the biggest crowds, as when they want to make the finals, these games are valued above all else.

It works in the NFL as there is a greater spread between teams but it won't work here.

I don't get what you mean, greater spread of teams? Australia is a large country itself, yes 9 clubs in Sydney, but this won't always be the case. At some point new clubs are also going to be added. Something like 20 is sustainable, with say new clubs in QLD, WA, Adelaide and NZ (with Central Coast taking one of the Sydney teams). I think the conference system makes having so many teams in Sydney sustainable. As well as giving new clubs instant rivals by placing them within a conference.

 

[Pigskin]

Yeah, I'd scream blue murder also if I was a Knights fan ... you may very well get lumped into a conference with the 3 Queensland sides ... ie the toughest conference by a stretch.

Only poor management will see Newcastle as a struggling club in the medium term future so I don't see Newcastle as easy pickings for the Queensland sides either.

Oink !

 

[Dogs Of War]

Yeah, I'd scream blue murder also if I was a Knights fan ... you may very well get lumped into a conference with the 3 Queensland sides ... ie the toughest conference by a stretch.

Only poor management will see Newcastle as a struggling club in the medium term future so I don't see Newcastle as easy pickings for the Queensland sides either.

Oink !

One of the reason's I put them in that group, (Eastern Region), rather than with the QLD sides, is that I see Souths or the Roosters taking up the Central Coast region eventually. There is only room for one of these clubs within Sydney City. So when this finally happens, Newcastle and Central Coast would become one of the biggest matchups within this region.

 

[Pigskin]

If you that hellbent on a conference system, just rotate the teams by position on the ladder ever 3rd or 4th year.

Have a points system over the course of the 4 years (ie Teams 1,8,9 & 16 = Pool A).

Perhaps this may also counter somewhat, a team which at the start of a cycle has limited representative players and by the end of it is chock full of rep stars. But then again, the Broncos have provided more rep players than any other club since the beginning of time it seems, so probably only help a little.

There is no doubt you are trying to come up with a good idea, and thinking it through intelligently ... I just thought the point of tinkering with the draw was to make things even. And I fail to see any way this will achieve that goal.

Oink !

 

[Eels Dude]

I put Manly there, as their ground just doesn't allow for a good away supporter base to attend. As well the Knights fans are good travellers, and would be better for the game in Sydney.

Rivals such as Bulldogs vs Roosters, would still happen, just once a season, and probably be valued even moreso than it is now due to the scarcity of the matchup.

Whoever gets grouped with the QLD sides would be disadvantaged long term. I can't see any Sydney club wanting to be there. If the QLD sides continue to improve and their juniors rise they'll all be dominant forces in the comp, making it very difficult for that 4th team in their conference to even come close to making the finals.

This happens already, you just don't realise it. Each season clubs get favourable draws depending on how poorly they went the previous system. This just makes the draw more transparent.

I meant in regards to win losses. In your system a side that wins less than half their games could get a top 4 finish while a side in a strong group that would normally finish in the top 4 could best hope for 5th spot or miss out completely.

At least under the current system if a side has a bad draw one year they could be more lucky the following. If they're locked to a permanent group it'll be worse.

Also if a club has a really dominant side for years in their conference, eg Melbourne, it's unfair because they'll know now matter how well they play in the season, they could be 2nd best in the comp. The best finals spot they can grab is 5th.

Those Geographically isolated clubs, would be the biggest winners out of all this, as their biggest rivals are defined by the division they are in. So these games should attract the biggest crowds, as when they want to make the finals, these games are valued above all else.

That's assuming they take to the idea. I think that's 50/50 perhaps less. You can't just manufacture a rivalry. If they don't it will just become meaningless

I don't get what you mean, greater spread of teams? Australia is a large country itself, yes 9 clubs in Sydney, but this won't always be the case. At some point new clubs are also going to be added. Something like 20 is sustainable, with say new clubs in QLD, WA, Adelaide and NZ (with Central Coast taking one of the Sydney teams). I think the conference system makes having so many teams in Sydney sustainable. As well as giving new clubs instant rivals by placing them within a conference.

I'm not sure the club set up at NFL level. But I'd assume there'd be a greatover and more even area covered, like separate cities, as opposed to NRL where Sydney is the dominant market. It makes it easier for travel in NFL and also for defining borders.

 

[Dogs Of War]

There is no doubt you are trying to come up with a good idea, and thinking it through intelligently ... I just thought the point of tinkering with the draw was to make things even. And I fail to see any way this will achieve that goal.

Oink !

Who said it was to make things even? It was to maximise revenue for the game. For both clubs, and the game.

 

[Dogs Of War]

Whoever gets grouped with the QLD sides would be disadvantaged long term. I can't see any Sydney club wanting to be there. If the QLD sides continue to improve and their juniors rise they'll all be dominant forces in the comp, making it very difficult for that 4th team in their conference to even come close to making the finals.

Manly have aligned themselves with the Sunshine Coast for juniors anyway, so they are drawing from that same pool.

Anyway, it's about smart management of players, rather than anything else that stopping whoever would get grouped with those clubs. You make it sound like whoever was the 4th team would never get a look in.

I meant in regards to win losses. In your system a side that wins less than half their games could get a top 4 finish while a side in a strong group that would normally finish in the top 4 could best hope for 5th spot or miss out completely.

At least under the current system if a side has a bad draw one year they could be more lucky the following. If they're locked to a permanent group it'll be worse.

It happens in the NFL, but it also happens in the NRL, that teams make the finals with an even win loss record. Maybe how the finals positions work could be looked into a bit. With maybe the best 2 division records being the 2 top ranked teams, with everybody else earning wildcard positions.

Also if a club has a really dominant side for years in their conference, eg Melbourne, it's unfair because they'll know now matter how well they play in the season, they could be 2nd best in the comp. The best finals spot they can grab is 5th.

See previous comment. But that said, if Melbourne are that good, these teams have more than enough reason to put everything on the line when they play them, to try and get that top spot in the division, so Melbourne are in the situation of having to try and win from 5th.

That's assuming they take to the idea. I think that's 50/50 perhaps less. You can't just manufacture a rivalry. If they don't it will just become meaningless

At the moment rivarlies taking decades to build, and see to be gone in an instant, as soon as a team is performing poorly. This will help with making defined rivals. With everything on the line when they play these teams, and scheduled correctly (at the start, and end of seasons), huge crowds would turn up as the divisional contenders line up to take the spot in the finals.

I'm not sure the club set up at NFL level. But I'd assume there'd be a greatover and more even area covered, like separate cities, as opposed to NRL where Sydney is the dominant market. It makes it easier for travel in NFL and also for defining borders.

Maybe you should read my other post again. As for the travel aspect, the costs go down for clubs as they don't have to travel as far (well most don't).