Jump to content

Don’t Expect NRL To Take Internationals Seriously...


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 11/12/2019 at 13:04, Oliver Clothesoff said:

If you read the article in the OP, while damning towards Perth, it makes sense to target Brisbane and Queensland further when it is Rugby League’s Second State, the percentage (15) of contracted players eligible for Queensland in the NRL and because State of Origin’s stature in the game. 

I don’t read it as shutting the door on Perth completely, more secure-prioritising them while they attempt to grow their Golden Turkey, State of Origin. Perth are still getting the Nines, State of Origin and regular NRL games, it’s not as though they’re getting nothing, it just seems at this time that they’re not top of the NRL’s list and I don’t think that’s a problem. 

Absolutely a 2nd team in Brisbane and expansion elsewhere are not mutually exclusive, there is no limit on the number of teams that can play in the NRL, they can expand the league to 18 and beyond.

A 2nd Brisbane team makes complete sense and needs to happen ASAP, I think they may tie it in with the new tv deal as it’s attract to broadcasters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Oxford said:

How to ruin a good fill in as applicable competition and thread at the same time Talk yawn and get an RL discussion moved to the Twilight zone.

 

i think the australian sporting landscape is really interesting.

ever since the super league war league has been struggling.

probably for the first time since 1995 its in a position to get back to dominance one day whereas before it had no chance.

unlike other sports with their failed expansions the nrl could easily add 6 teams in places that actually are desperate for an nrl team.

its best for league to wait till the sporting market rationalises itself as its way overcrowded now

but the nrl could easily add :

1. perth

2. adelaide

3. central coast

4. queensland three clubs

5. new zealand

6. png

it could even do a pacific islands team too if it wanted too

before the super league war it was league first, daylight second

after that AFL overtook it, even a small sport like union became a threat.

slowly league is winning back its dominance

even in sydney league is nowhere near where it should be

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aj1908 said:

i think the australian sporting landscape is really interesting.

So is the geographical make-up of the Moon and just as relevant.

 

1 minute ago, aj1908 said:

ever since the super league war league has been struggling.

I wish SL was struggling the way the NRL is!

3 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

slowly league is winning back its dominance

Dominance is one thing what you do with it is what the thread is about and in the end it will be the crucial thing.

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Absolutely a 2nd team in Brisbane and expansion elsewhere are not mutually exclusive, there is no limit on the number of teams that can play in the NRL, they can expand the league to 18 and beyond.

A 2nd Brisbane team makes complete sense and needs to happen ASAP, I think they may tie it in with the new tv deal as it’s attract to broadcasters.

If you read the OP, you’d read that the number of teams does seem limited at this stage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, aj1908 said:

especially if the ARLC add redclff.

Redcliffe would be a disaster, it'd be Brisbane's version of Manly, a tiny suburban club in a disparate part of the city.

The NRL doesn't need more suburban clubs, it needs big clubs with city wide appeal. Any new Brisbane club needs to be aiming to be the Man City to the Broncos Man Utd, not a tiny club getting 12k out of a suburban ground.

6 hours ago, aj1908 said:

once the suns fold the titans will get back all the fans they lost before they came in 

they used to get over 20k before the suns came in and they had the problems with the centre of excellence.

The only time that the Titans averaged 20k was in their first two years in the competition, and there's absolutely no evidence that Suns had any significant impact on their numbers whatsoever.

The biggest impact on the Titans crowds is the fact that they've been absolute for most of their existence.

6 hours ago, aj1908 said:

it would be like the super league war aftermath where we bled fans to AFL and super rugby in sydney, canberra and queensland when clubs got killed off

There's zero evidence that ever happened on a mass scale. 

It's just a myth that has been repeated so many times that it's been accepted as fact.

What is actually a fact, that a lot of people want to ignore, is that the Swans, Brumbies, and Lions, all went into golden periods, where they had once in a generation teams that had heaps of success and won a ton of premierships. Something tells me that had way more effect on their success in the early 00s (and the Swans continued success) then SL...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Oxford said:

So is the geographical make-up of the Moon and just as relevant.

This is a thread about NRL expansion (or rather the current lack there of).

You can't talk seriously about NRL expansion without talking about the Australian sporting landscape and the impact that other codes have on the NRL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

Redcliffe would be a disaster, it'd be Brisbane's version of Manly, a tiny suburban club in a disparate part of the city.

The NRL doesn't need more suburban clubs, it needs big clubs with city wide appeal. Any new Brisbane club needs to be aiming to be the Man City to the Broncos Man Utd, not a tiny club getting 12k out of a suburban ground.

The only time that the Titans averaged 20k was in their first two years in the competition, and there's absolutely no evidence that Suns had any significant impact on their numbers whatsoever.

The biggest impact on the Titans crowds is the fact that they've been absolute for most of their existence.

There's zero evidence that ever happened on a mass scale. 

It's just a myth that has been repeated so many times that it's been accepted as fact.

What is actually a fact, that a lot of people want to ignore, is that the Swans, Brumbies, and Lions, all went into golden periods, where they had once in a generation teams that had heaps of success and won a ton of premierships. Something tells me that had way more effect on their success in the early 00s (and the Swans continued success) then SL...

Yeh it's not like a know lots of people who became afl fans after their team merged or because of super league

Everybody started supporting the swans 

Redcliff is the nrl choice 

I prefer them over th.bombers 

And I want Ipswich jets in too

It is a risk they would be seen as a suburban team.  They should play all their queensalnd rivals at suncoep and the rest at home 

Titans copper a double whammy 

First the centre of excellence then the suns 

If you don't think a cashed up suns with Gary ABlett impacted on tjr titsnd then its wishful thinking 

Look.how.much help.thr suns.have got from the afl.  favourable stadium deals huge handout extra and priority draft picks 

Titans have had nothing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aj1908 said:

Yeh it's not like a know lots of people who became afl fans after their team merged or because of super league

Everybody started supporting the swans 

Anecdotes are the worst form of evidence, literally meaningless.

You're right though, the Swans did see a big jump in support, right around the same time that they became the force that they are in the AFL and won their first premiership in 72 years. Coincidence? I think not!

1 hour ago, aj1908 said:

Redcliff is the nrl choice

That doesn't mean that it's a good choice.

1 hour ago, aj1908 said:

It is a risk they would be seen as a suburban team.  They should play all their queensalnd rivals at suncoep and the rest at home 

They shouldn't even be considered for a license unless they agree to a re-brand that totally disconnects the NRL club from Redcliffe and the Dolphins brand, and to play all of their games at Suncorp (or another centralised stadium).

They need to be forced to do what the Queanbeyan Blues were forced to do to join the NSWRL in 1982.

1 hour ago, aj1908 said:

Titans copper a double whammy 

First the centre of excellence then the suns 

If you don't think a cashed up suns with Gary ABlett impacted on tjr titsnd then its wishful thinking 

Look.how.much help.thr suns.have got from the afl.  favourable stadium deals huge handout extra and priority draft picks 

Titans have had nothing 

The Suns main target audience is the large expat population from Victoria that has moved to the GC (and surrounding regions). The vast majority of that expat population were never Titans fans and are never going to be Titans fans no matter what.

So no I don't think that Gary Ablett  and the money invested by the AFL has had any major effect on the Titans (yet), and it's pretty obvious that the Titans lack of success and chronic mismanagement has had a much more significant effect.

If the Titans weren't constantly having financial problems and drama off the pitch, weren't constantly letting their fans down, didn't have the worst brand in the league, and weren't totally hopeless on the pitch for pretty much all of their existence, that'd go a lot further to fixing their problems then the Suns fading into history.

Trying to blame the Titans problems on the Suns is just a lame excuse for incompetence of multiple Titans administrations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree about the titans being a basket case as part of their problems.  I'M not saying it's all.caused.by afl.  

I don't know about another Brisbane city team.  How would.it.be different from.the.broncos

They could call.themselves north.brisbane dolphins or sunshine coast dolphins 

Like.ipswich could.be west Brisbane jets or south Queensland jets 

I'd keep.the dolphin logo too 

Maybe they should play out of Suncorp. But if they get accepted I can't see them giving up their ground 

The Queensland government would probably be up for.building them a new ground anyway like.the cowboys or titans.  Something around 30k.capacity.

I think the Broncos are lazy.  With more clubs they will.be motivated to keep their fans and market more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

You can't talk seriously about NRL expansion without talking about the Australian sporting landscape and the impact that other codes have on the NRL.

Sorry that's rubbish, fates unlike circumstances are in your own hands when you're in a strong position, anything else is a ready made excuse and little else. When you have the means it's the will that's lacking. It has nothing to do with other sports.Oz isn't France or England there is really no mitigation. Even the RFL would have made progress if it had had half of the resources etc of the NRL ARL!

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Sorry that's rubbish, fates unlike circumstances are in your own hands when you're in a strong position, anything else is a ready made excuse and little else. When you have the means it's the will that's lacking. It has nothing to do with other sports.Oz isn't France or England there is really no mitigation. Even the RFL would have made progress if it had had half of the resources etc of the NRL ARL!

So now your interested in the Australian sporting landscape eh lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Oxford said:

Sorry that's rubbish, fates unlike circumstances are in your own hands when you're in a strong position, anything else is a ready made excuse and little else. When you have the means it's the will that's lacking. It has nothing to do with other sports.Oz isn't France or England there is really no mitigation. Even the RFL would have made progress if it had had half of the resources etc of the NRL ARL!

The NRL aren't in a particularly strong position, nor do they really have the means to achieve everything that they want/need to as quickly as they need to.

And I don't know what you mean by mitigation in this context, but if you mean that the NRL doesn't face as strong competition as RL face's in England and France then you are either ignorant or deluded.

Oh and if the RFL had the NRL's resources they would have ###### it all up against a wall on pointless internationals, exhibition games, and other cockamamie ideas by now. Not a cent of it would have trickled down past the professional level, and the players probably wouldn't have got a fair cut either because there's no players union.

Just imagine Nigel Wood with a few billion dollars to blow, he would have put on a Great Britain Lions world tour and lost a few hundred grand at each stop, or some other ###### lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Great Dane said:

And I don't know what you mean by mitigation in this context, but if you mean that the NRL doesn't face as strong competition as RL face's in England and France then you are either ignorant or deluded.

Sorry it is you that have shown yourself to be completely ignorant and deluded with this comment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

The NRL aren't in a particularly strong position, nor do they really have the means to achieve everything that they want/need to as quickly as they need to.

And I don't know what you mean by mitigation in this context, but if you mean that the NRL doesn't face as strong competition as RL face's in England and France then you are either ignorant or deluded.

Oh and if the RFL had the NRL's resources they would have ###### it all up against a wall on pointless internationals, exhibition games, and other cockamamie ideas by now. Not a cent of it would have trickled down past the professional level, and the players probably wouldn't have got a fair cut either because there's no players union.

Just imagine Nigel Wood with a few billion dollars to blow, he would have put on a Great Britain Lions world tour and lost a few hundred grand at each stop, or some other ###### lol.

the nrls finances arent that bad now.  sure its not AFL level but its good.

they recorded two annual profits, and around 100 million in the bank plus land next to the sFS at 20 million.

the digital business they invested in is growing strongly.

and all clubs are in a good spot too, getting 12.5 million vs 9.5 million salary cap

i think the problem is after the super league war and all the expansion clubs got killed off, there is a view that expansion has failed and not to try again.

they are going to add one team.  they could easily add a second.  another game on tv should at least cover the costs of those new clubs.

waiting isnt that bad though as i think other sports will consolidate leaving the market more open to expansion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, aj1908 said:

the nrls finances arent that bad now.  sure its not AFL level but its good.

Money isn't the only expression of strength.

Politically and culturally the NRL is way behind the AFL.

4 hours ago, aj1908 said:

the digital business they invested in is growing strongly.

The very same digital business that V'landys has earmarked as something the NRL could look into selling to cut costs, which would be a disaster.

4 hours ago, aj1908 said:

and all clubs are in a good spot too, getting 12.5 million vs 9.5 million salary cap

Grants that the NRL couldn't afford to pay without cutting into money that was budgeted for the grassroots!

Money that the grassroots desperately needed and the area where the NRL is struggling against other sports the most. It was literally a case of taking from the poor and giving it to the rich!

4 hours ago, aj1908 said:

i think the problem is after the super league war and all the expansion clubs got killed off, there is a view that expansion has failed and not to try again.

they are going to add one team.  they could easily add a second.  another game on tv should at least cover the costs of those new clubs.

No the problem is that after the SL war the NRL was owned by a giant multinational broadcasting company that (unsurprisingly) always put it's interests before those of the games, and as such used it's position as owner to get broadcasting rights for next to nothing for the next decade, which left the NRL in a position where they couldn't really afford to sustain what they already had, let alone expand.

On top of that almost all of the "expansion clubs" of the 80 and 90's were sacrificed to save Sydney clubs that don't really have any business being in a national competition, which means a further decade of work was flushed down the toilet.

This set of circumstances has left the NRL a few decades of development behind their largest competitor on almost every front, whether that be financially, political support, participation, national reach, market penetration, etc, which has left the NRL in a position that isn't particularly strong.

Yes they are starting to turn things around, but that doesn't change the fact that in 2019 the NRL is literally back at the point that the AFL was at in the mid 80s when they started to seriously expand nationally!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

Money isn't the only expression of strength.

Politically and culturally the NRL is way behind the AFL.

The very same digital business that V'landys has earmarked as something the NRL could look into selling to cut costs, which would be a disaster.

Grants that the NRL couldn't afford to pay without cutting into money that was budgeted for the grassroots!

Money that the grassroots desperately needed and the area where the NRL is struggling against other sports the most. It was literally a case of taking from the poor and giving it to the rich!

No the problem is that after the SL war the NRL was owned by a giant multinational broadcasting company that (unsurprisingly) always put it's interests before those of the games, and as such used it's position as owner to get broadcasting rights for next to nothing for the next decade, which left the NRL in a position where they couldn't really afford to sustain what they already had, let alone expand.

On top of that almost all of the "expansion clubs" of the 80 and 90's were sacrificed to save Sydney clubs that don't really have any business being in a national competition, which means a further decade of work was flushed down the toilet.

This set of circumstances has left the NRL a few decades of development behind their largest competitor on almost every front, whether that be financially, political support, participation, national reach, market penetration, etc, which has left the NRL in a position that isn't particularly strong.

Yes they are starting to turn things around, but that doesn't change the fact that in 2019 the NRL is literally back at the point that the AFL was at in the mid 80s when they started to seriously expand nationally!   

Some of that is true.  

The Nrl can afford to expand now.though.  our tv deal is on par with afl.  Clubs have never been better funded.

Two new clubs would cost around 30 million pa.  For a.business turning over around 500 million its not a lot.  Especially as its am.extra game on tv

The Sydney clubs have too much say and they aren't in favour of expansion.  They want all the money for themselves.

We need a boss who can put politics aside. Vlandys will.be good but he wont.add perth or adelaide.

We need someone like Arthurson or Quayle.

Afl got lucky with the super league war. We had four teams in queensland a team in nz and a team in perth.  Thats more expansionist than afl.

Even with the super league war league is still overtaking afl in many areas.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

The Nrl can afford to expand now.though.  our tv deal is on par with afl.  Clubs have never been better funded.

Sure the NRL can afford to expand, but they can't afford to expand as quickly as they need to. They also can't afford to do all the other stuff that needs to happen at the same time as well.

29 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

We need a boss who can put politics aside. Vlandys will.be good but he wont.add perth or adelaide.

We need someone like Arthurson or Quayle.

V'landys is a stooge. 

All the wrong people like him. News, the Old boys club, basically everybody that is for either the status quo or a return to "the good old days' of a Sydney suburban competition think he is great, and that is a very bad sign of what is to come.

The last thing the NRL needs is more old club men from the Sydney bubble, who put their clubs and their own power and legacy before the interests of the sport as a whole. A modern day Arthurson and Quayle would be someone like Nick Politis, and if Nick Politis had the power he'd effectively kill the sport if it was in the Roosters interest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

Sure the NRL can afford to expand, but they can't afford to expand as quickly as they need to. They also can't afford to do all the other stuff that needs to happen at the same time as well.

V'landys is a stooge. 

All the wrong people like him. News, the Old boys club, basically everybody that is for either the status quo or a return to "the good old days' of a Sydney suburban competition think he is great, and that is a very bad sign of what is to come.

The last thing the NRL needs is more old club men from the Sydney bubble, who put their clubs and their own power and legacy before the interests of the sport as a whole. A modern day Arthurson and Quayle would be someone like Nick Politis, and if Nick Politis had the power he'd effectively kill the sport if it was in the Roosters interest. 

The guys that put in New Zealand and Perth.along with Newcastle.. Canberra.illawarra Brisbane etc. Lol.

They had the vision to expand.out of Sydney.  

Vlandys will.do some.good things. He will.get a good tv deal and will.be good for the commercial.side.of.things 

He also.realises league isn't as strong as it should.be in Sydney 

Dave Smith was probably the best we've had since Arthurson. 

The grassroots isn't that bad.  Clubs fund juniors.too like.your club and Penrith.very successfully. The states are also well.funded.now.too.

The Nrl.doesn't really need.to.expand. it beats afl.on tv anyway with two less.teams. .I'd like.to.see.expsnsion of.course but the games.in.decent shape.now.

It is frustrating though that league never realises.its.potential

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

either ignorant or deluded.

Typical but unnecessary GD.

13 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

And I don't know what you mean by mitigation in this context, but if you mean that the NRL doesn't face as strong competition as RL face's in England and France

Sad that you don't know the history of the game in two of it major centers.

 

13 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

Oh and if the RFL had the NRL's resources they would have ###### it all up against a wall on pointless internationals, exhibition games, and other cockamamie ideas by now. Not a cent of it would have trickled down past the professional level, and the players probably wouldn't have got a fair cut either because there's no players union.

I see, well that's that then.

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Oxford said:

Typical but unnecessary GD.

It's true though.

You are literally either ignorant about RL's (and for that matter the AFL's) actual position in the Australian cultural and sporting landscape, or have an idealistic view of the NRL that doesn't conform to the reality of what it actually is.

Now I don't blame you for that, expecting an average joe to have intimate knowledge of the ins and outs of a big complex system from the other side of the world would be a bit silly. But again, it is true.

6 hours ago, Oxford said:

Sad that you don't know the history of the game in two of it major centers.

I know the history of both.

What I don't understand is how in one paragraph you can say 'your fates in your hands' bs while totally discounting the impact of other sports and cultural pressures in Australia's case, and then in the same paragraph go on to say 'it's different in England and France, unlike Australia the impact of culture and other sports actually matter in those places'. Actually I can understand how you can do that, I explained it before. . .

BTW, let's be honest, France hasn't really been one of RL's major centres since about the 60s or 70s.

6 hours ago, Oxford said:

I see, well that's that then.

Obviously I was being glib, but let's be honest there's a certain amount of truth to it as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.