“The NRL can learn from the NFL and NHL”

[The Great Dane]

7 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Whatever the number of teams in the comp, it doesn’t matter... with a conference set up, there are only half the number of teams that any club is required to better, in order to make the grand final. That is a very simple equation that brings every fan that little bit closer to a GF berth before a ball has even been kicked to start a season.

(I simply concluded that Canberra were included in the NSW conference, to even up the numbers of teams, wasn’t that difficult and is a good fit)

I can argue that point. Depends on your interpretation of the word “National”. Is the NRL the peak RL competition in the nation? Yes it is. Do the top RL clubs of the nation all compete in the national competition? Yes they do.

In saying that, I do recognise your point, but, I can argue that it all day long.

Interstate teams still get their opportunity to play each other at a minimum of once per season in the proposed 2 conference system, so don’t be disingenuous by suggesting that they will not. Apart from Melbourne v Manly or Cronulla, there probably isn’t any great interstate rivalry with a “highest drawing fixture” anyway.

 I understand we will never see eye to eye on this point so it is futile to argue, but for the benefit of anybody else, I could say the Sydney clubs combined are the biggest asset to the sport in Australia.

When you talk of ice hockey and baseball having the resources to support competitions with a greater national footprint, then I don’t think the resources for the NRL, or lack there of, is a fair assumption.

Clubs are no longer dependent on the NRL for survival, as has clearly been stated by Greenberg on numerous occasions. They are required to live within their own means and if they fail financially, then there is no bail out. The Sydney clubs (nor others like GC and Newcastle) are not a weight around the neck of the NRL in any fashion.

I wrote a giant post responding to each and every one of your points, pointing out how you were playing a semantics game to ignore the criticism of the NRL not being national, how you arbitrarily define the Sydney clubs as one symbiotic entity when really they aren't, how you were moving the goal posts on a Sydney conference when it was convenient, going into detail about how the NRL gives each club AU$13 mil in grants and how that amounts to just the Sydney clubs getting $117 a year in grants, almost three times what the grassroots gets as a whole, and how investing that kind of money into one market is a massive weight around the NRL's neck, that is definitely making the NRL think twice about expansion and investing money elsewhere.

Then literally as I was getting ready to proof read it and post it, my computer overheated and crashed, and I lost it all.

Honestly I can't be bothered redoing that whole thing again, so instead I'm only going to really respond to one point, the one I think is most important:

7 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Why on earth does the NRL need to cut clubs with tens of thousands of supporters, when they can just keep them and add new teams anyway. It’s a daft argument that you need to cut “half the clubs in Sydney” in order to add the number of teams.

Nobody said anything about just "cutting" anybody?

The NRL doesn't need to cut anybody, it needs to shed some of it's excess weight by moving some of the clubs that don't really have any business being in a national competition anymore into an arena that would better suit both them and NRL.

By moving a handful of the less sustainable Sydney clubs into the NSWRL they'd not only be freeing up tens of millions of dollars a year that could be used to expand to new markets (and/or other things) without having a major impact on their geographical and spread and market penetration, but they'd also be moving clubs whom are no longer competitive (as businesses) at the NRL level anymore into a level where not only would they be competitive but they'ed be adding value to the NSWRL, making it a much more valuable and marketable product in it's own right, and all their fans would still have a club to support.

It's a win-win-win situation, the NRL is better off, the clubs are better off, and the NSWRL is so much better off that it's probably become a valuable alternative product to the NRL that commands a reasonable broadcasting contract in it's own right. On top of all that, not one fan (apart from only the most unreasonable) loses there club.

[aj1908]

This guy contradicts himself from one sentence to the next.

The Nrl.doesnt.need to cut anybody ...

Then in the next sentence argues just for that 

Omg lol

I'm.not surprised his computer overheated either lol 

[aj1908]

Afl is.a.natonal competition without a.camberra team 

So by your logic we should cut the raiders? 

[The Great Dane]

9 hours ago, aj1908 said:

1. Still, V’landys has been deep in discussions with members of government to ensure the upgrade of grounds like Leichhardt Oval, Brookvale and Campbelltown Stadium.

“There’s been no resistance from government,” V’landys.

“There are buckets of money"

2. i was talking about the upgrade of bankwest, sfs and homebush

Frankly I don't trust a damn word that V'landy's says.

He stinks of a used car salesman who'd say anything to get a sale.

9 hours ago, aj1908 said:

last year canberra had one of their best years in 20 years.  their crowd average was surpassed by 5 sydney clubs, some who had awful seasons.

Mate Canberra is a regional market and Sydney is a major metropolitan city.

Every Sydney club should be massively outdrawing a Canberra based club just as a matter of course, it's just the nature of operating in each market. The fact that none of them are massively outdrawing the Raiders shows that the Sydney market is oversaturated and needs to be rationalised.

9 hours ago, aj1908 said:

maybe we should kick out canberra as its a small country town, and channel nine never want to show their games, its worth nothing to broadcasters.

The Raiders being worth nothing to Nine is a self fulfilling prophecy. If they never show the Raiders on their channel the Raiders can't draw an audience for them, and they can use the fact that the Raiders aren't drawing an audience for them to justify not broadcasting more of the Raiders games on their channel, which fulfils the self fulfilling prophecy and the cycle continues.

At this point it'd be pointless for Nine to put many more of the Raiders games on FTA anyway, because pretty much every serious Raiders fan has Fox or Kayo to watch the Raiders and will continue to watch them on those platforms even if the game is being broadcast on Nine. 

9 hours ago, aj1908 said:

i mean in the league with big city teams, what can a small country town add ?  lol

I'll tell you one thing they add that the Dragons can't claim: None of the clubs from "small towns" have cannibalised another club to ensure their own survival. . . But I forget myself, Dragons fans are like Germans and the Wars, they don't mention the Steelers and it's impolite to remind them of them.

Also you don't pass up a vain of gold just because it isn't as big as another vain that you mine, especially when you have this smaller vain all to yourself while every miner in the country is fighting with each other to take their chunk of the other vain. 

[aj1908]

5 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

Frankly I don't trust a damn word that V'landy's says.

He stinks of a used car salesman who'd say anything to get a sale.

Mate Canberra is a regional market and Sydney is a major metropolitan city.

Every Sydney club should be massively outdrawing a Canberra based club just as a matter of course, it's just the nature of operating in each market. The fact that none of them are massively outdrawing the Raiders shows that the Sydney market is oversaturated and needs to be rationalised.

The Raiders being worth nothing to Nine is a self fulfilling prophecy. If they never show the Raiders on their channel the Raiders can't draw an audience for them, and they can use the fact that the Raiders aren't drawing an audience for them to justify not broadcasting more of the Raiders games on their channel, which fulfils the self fulfilling prophecy and the cycle continues.

At this point it'd be pointless for Nine to put many more of the Raiders games on FTA anyway, because pretty much every serious Raiders fan has Fox or Kayo to watch the Raiders and will continue to watch them on those platforms even if the game is being broadcast on Nine. 

I'll tell you one thing they add that the Dragons can't claim: None of the clubs from "small towns" have cannibalised another club to ensure their own survival. . . But I forget myself, Dragons fans are like Germans and the Wars, they don't mention the Steelers and it's impolite to remind them of them.

Also you don't pass up a vain of gold just because it isn't as big as another vain that you mine, especially when you have this smaller vain all to yourself while every miner in the country is fighting with each other to take their chunk of the other vain. 

Hey if raiders had never gone to super league there wouldn't have been any of those mergers lol.

But raiders get to.stand alone and illawarra got killed.off.becauase.of.their betrayal lol.

Your points kind of show why Canberra isnt needeed in a national competition lol.

That's actually the problem for league.  Too many teams.from.regional.areas.  not enough big city teams 

[The Great Dane]

21 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

This guy contradicts himself from one sentence to the next.

The Nrl.doesnt.need to cut anybody ...

Then in the next sentence argues just for that 

Omg lol

I'm.not surprised his computer overheated either lol 

It's not a contradiction, you are just to stupid to understand that I'm saying that no clubs need to be folded for rationalisation.

20 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

Afl is.a.natonal competition without a.camberra team 

So by your logic we should cut the raiders? 

The AFL doesn't need a Canberra club to be a national competition, they just have to have the vast majority of the nation represented in by it's competition. Something that it has and the NRL doesn't come anywhere close to doing considering that basically half the nation isn't represented in the NRL.

Also, if we use the standards that the Dragons use to claim they represent Wollongong, the Giants can claim they represent Canberra. Truth be told the Dragons no more represent the Gong then the Giants do Canberra. 

[aj1908]

7 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

It's not a contradiction, you are just to stupid to understand that I'm saying that no clubs need to be folded for rationalisation.

The AFL doesn't need a Canberra club to be a national competition, they just have to have the vast majority of the nation represented in by it's competition. Something that it has and the NRL doesn't come anywhere close to doing considering that basically half the nation isn't represented in the NRL.

Also, if we use the standards that the Dragons use to claim they represent Wollongong, the Giants can claim they represent Canberra. Truth be told the Dragons no more represent the Gong then the Giants do Canberra. 

Yeh the afl knows all.those regional teams are a drag on the competition 

Worse.large numbers of their fans aren't counted in metro ratings.  

Maybe the nrl should go.down the same path as afl.and more teams in capital cities lol.

No need for personal Insults lol tut tut

[The Great Dane]

6 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

Hey if raiders had never gone to super league there wouldn't have been any of those mergers lol.

But raiders get to.stand alone and illawarra got killed.off.becauase.of.their betrayal lol.

Saying that the Raiders "betrayed" the ARL is a bit like claiming a North Korean defector betrayed the Dear Leader, technically it's true but can you really blame them?

[The Great Dane]

3 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

Yeh the afl knows all.those regional teams are a drag on the competition 

Worse.large numbers of their fans aren't counted in metro ratings.  

Maybe the nrl should go.down the same path as afl.and more teams in capital cities lol.

No need for personal Insults lol tut tut

Facts are facts, if you don't like the facts because they offend you that is your problem not mine.

[aj1908]

3 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

Facts are facts, if you don't like the facts because they offend you that is your problem not mine.

You just hate Sydney teams because one smashed you in the grand final lol 

Let's be honest 14k crowds off.the back of a grand final are bad.

[aj1908]

[The Great Dane]

2 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

Let's be honest 14k crowds off.the back of a grand final are bad.

Let's be honest 9813k average in a city with a potential market of 5.23 million makes the Raiders 14k in a potential market of 403 thousand look utterly amazing.

BTW that 14k average isn't off the back of a grand final appearance. . . The Raiders didn't even make the finals in 2018.

[The Great Dane]

5 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

 

Do you really think this upsets me?

I mean you do realise that it's totally outside of the Raiders control whether the referees screw up right!? 

[aj1908]

3 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

Let's be honest 9813k average in a city with a potential market of 5.23 million makes the Raiders 14k in a potential market of 403 thousand look utterly amazing.

BTW that 14k average isn't off the back of a grand final appearance. . . The Raiders didn't even make the finals in 2018.

Lol

[The Great Dane]

1 minute ago, aj1908 said:

Lol

What's wrong, can't argue the point?

[aj1908]

2 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

What's wrong, can't argue the point?

Too repetitive I'm.bored hence memes lol

[Sports Prophet]

1 hour ago, The Great Dane said:

.

Moving goalposts on a Sydney comp? I never brought the suggestion of a “Sydney” conference to the table or dubbed it as such, I warmed to the idea of conferencing and find Canberra to be an easy fit to even the numbers of a proposed 22 team comp. Don’t forget, Newcastle were included too and they are not Sydney.

—————

A team being dropped to NSWRL is the same as being cut. No way do the tens of thousands attending now, start attending the lower tier. It’s unfathomable and consideration as such is ignorant.

Dropping teams or relocating them is not expansion. I believe in true expansion, whereby new teams are added to the competition. Which Sydney club is no longer financially competitive anyway?

[DC77]

One thing we can definitely learn from NA sports is how not to do it.

Once upon a time I followed the Green Bay Packers of the NFL. Haven’t watched them in years (must be over a decade). Anyway, while trying to overcome some nervous tension prior to the FIFA Club World Cup Final involving my team Liverpool FC I decided to waste some time by having a gander at how the Packers were doing this season....doing pretty well, thought ‘good on em’...then I got to the fixtures...and saw...

Los Angeles Chargers.

Facepalm (literally).

For those of you who know nothing about NFL, San Diego Chargers is (was) a team, and apparently they have upped sticks and gone to Los Angeles.

“Cheerio folks, thanks for your...support, over the years...”

This cold, clinical, soulless excuse for a “sport”. Franchises are businesses first. Their aim is kerching. Supporters? Hahaha. For Petes sake even the players and coaches take a back seat as the bleedin “owners” lift the trophy.

A previous article posted on here touched on the difference between here and NA....the close connection we have with our clubs here, that are entrenched in the community, that doesn’t exist there. It can’t exist there otherwise “franchises” wouldn’t be able to get on their bike and move around as they please. “Los Angeles Chargers”. For crying out loud.

All this isn’t to say money doesn’t play a big role here...it does...we have the most valuable sports teams, the highest earning sports teams, the highest paid athletes in the world, but, none of that is ever at the expense of the clubs first and foremost representing our communities/towns/cities.

Speaking for my own club, Liverpool FC upping sticks and moving 1000 miles away....it would be WWIII. In NA? Part of the culture, where fans are transient (they have to be, otherwise, again, “franchises” couldn’t move around as they please...unlike here where the supporters would unleash hell).

We have it good here.

 

[aj1908]

1 hour ago, DC77 said:

One thing we can definitely learn from NA sports is how not to do it.

Once upon a time I followed the Green Bay Packers of the NFL. Haven’t watched them in years (must be over a decade). Anyway, while trying to overcome some nervous tension prior to the FIFA Club World Cup Final involving my team Liverpool FC I decided to waste some time by having a gander at how the Packers were doing this season....doing pretty well, thought ‘good on em’...then I got to the fixtures...and saw...

Los Angeles Chargers.

Facepalm (literally).

For those of you who know nothing about NFL, San Diego Chargers is (was) a team, and apparently they have upped sticks and gone to Los Angeles.

“Cheerio folks, thanks for your...support, over the years...”

This cold, clinical, soulless excuse for a “sport”. Franchises are businesses first. Their aim is kerching. Supporters? Hahaha. For Petes sake even the players and coaches take a back seat as the bleedin “owners” lift the trophy.

A previous article posted on here touched on the difference between here and NA....the close connection we have with our clubs here, that are entrenched in the community, that doesn’t exist there. It can’t exist there otherwise “franchises” wouldn’t be able to get on their bike and move around as they please. “Los Angeles Chargers”. For crying out loud.

All this isn’t to say money doesn’t play a big role here...it does...we have the most valuable sports teams, the highest earning sports teams, the highest paid athletes in the world, but, none of that is ever at the expense of the clubs first and foremost representing our communities/towns/cities.

Speaking for my own club, Liverpool FC upping sticks and moving 1000 miles away....it would be WWIII. In NA? Part of the culture, where fans are transient (they have to be, otherwise, again, “franchises” couldn’t move around as they please...unlike here where the supporters would unleash hell).

We have it good here.

 

I wouldn't mind it in the nrl tbh 

If Adelaide or Perth made a compelling offer for an existing club id be ok with it

In the nfl it usually means the new location building a.new billion dollar stadium whereas the old location wont

So if places want a team they have to give them the best facilities.  It puts competitive tension of places for a team 

[Sports Prophet]

1 hour ago, DC77 said:

 

 

Loud and clear, couldn’t agree more. People often comment by moving say a Sydney club to Perth, that they will still get the opportunity to see their club play on 6 Sydney away trip occasions. Neglecting that you move the club, the club no longer represents you.

I doubt there is a large base of Baltimore Colts fans out there that support Indianapolis.

I really like the Bundesliga model where clubs are at minimum owned 51% by the fans. AFL is similar, many clubs are 100% owned by the members. Individual benefactors in AFL tend to get board positions, but they’re not owners. The board is elected by the club’s members.

[aj1908]

1 hour ago, Sports Prophet said:

Loud and clear, couldn’t agree more. People often comment by moving say a Sydney club to Perth, that they will still get the opportunity to see their club play on 6 Sydney away trip occasions. Neglecting that you move the club, the club no longer represents you.

I doubt there is a large base of Baltimore Colts fans out there that support Indianapolis.

I really like the Bundesliga model where clubs are at minimum owned 51% by the fans. AFL is similar, many clubs are 100% owned by the members. Individual benefactors in AFL tend to get board positions, but they’re not owners. The board is elected by the club’s members.

Arlc should grow some balls and add in four teams over ten years 

They have the finances they are just being too conservative 

They have 6 places or more places that want an nrl team badly 

Redcliff is a big step for the sport. So would Perth after them or Ipswich 

[The Great Dane]

14 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Moving goalposts on a Sydney comp? I never brought the suggestion of a “Sydney” conference to the table or dubbed it as such, I warmed to the idea of conferencing and find Canberra to be an easy fit to even the numbers of a proposed 22 team comp. Don’t forget, Newcastle were included too and they are not Sydney.

You "warmed" to the idea of conferencing because it'd rig the competition in your clubs favour, and make it easier for your club to make the GF.

In other words, you warmed to it not because it's what's best for the sport or the competition as a whole, but because it's what's best for you and your club. Your thinking on this is literally a microcosm of everything that has held the growth of this sport back for the last 100 years, self interest and attempting short cuts. . .

Also if you have two conferences of 11 that leaves you with odd numbers, which will inevitably cause problems with the draw.

14 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

A team being dropped to NSWRL is the same as being cut. No way do the tens of thousands attending now, start attending the lower tier. It’s unfathomable and consideration as such is ignorant.

Whether it's the Scholastic system or major and minor leagues in North America, or the P&R systems across Europe and other parts of the world, every single major sport across the world manages to maintain multiple tiers of competition, except Australian sports who are totally top heavy.

The only difference between Australia and those other places is that the Australian sports organisations have never really tried to support lower tier competitions to become successful products in their own right.

If you dropped an NRL club into the NSW cup right now they would definitely struggle, but that is because the NSW cup doesn't have it's whole competition broadcast and doesn't get good coverage. However if you changed that and got all of the NSW cup's games broadcast on TV and marketed the hell out of it, then with time it'd build it's own fan base and it would become feasible for an NRL club to be dropped into the NSW cup and thrive.

BTW, only one NRL club averages tens of thousands of people, Brisbane, so why are you worried about tens of thousands of people attending a NSW cup game when the NRL clubs aren't really drawing tens of thousands anyway. Besides that the Jets are drawing almost 10k a game, and building. That's about what the Dragons averaged last year and only a few k off your average Sydney club anyway.

15 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Dropping teams or relocating them is not expansion. I believe in true expansion, whereby new teams are added to the competition.

 You're not for "true expansion", you are no different then your Parksiders of the world.

You measure expansion by it's effect on you and your club first, so when he first heard about the Wolfpack his first concern was "won't this take players away from the English clubs", "what about the away attendance", "will this effect the central funding that English teams get", "couldn't this lead to many of the English clubs being replaced by American ones",etc, etc. You hear about expansion of the NRL and your first concern is 'how will this effect Sydney', 'couldn't this lead to Sydney suburban clubs being replaced by clubs representing big cities', etc, etc.

15 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Which Sydney club is no longer financially competitive anyway?

Take away the $177 mil dollars a year in grants, money that could be better spent elsewhere and a good chunk of which was money originally earmarked for the grassroots, and the Sea Eagles and Tigers are both instantly struggling, the Dragons aren't as bad off as those two but they aren't in a good spot either, the Sharks, Parra, Dogs, and Penrith are all totally reliant on leagues club backing (I don't really have a problem with that BTW, but that is another discussion), and the Roosters and Rabbits are happy for the safety nets that their owners/backers provide.

So basically, none of them are struggling financially but that is only because the NRL has been strong armed into sinking almost $200 mil into them (and the other clubs) a year to prop them up, money that the NRL can't really afford, and for bunch of clubs they don't really need. It's insanity.

[Sports Prophet]

7 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

You "warmed" to the idea of conferencing because it'd rig the competition in your clubs favour, and make it easier for your club to make the GF.

 

No I didn’t, but I did note it was a great benefit. That is not a benefit exclusive to my club, every club would have a 1 in 7 chance of making a GF in an 8 team conference and a 1 in six chance of making a conference final. 

7 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

Whether it's the Scholastic system or major and minor leagues in North America, or the P&R systems across Europe and other parts of the world, every single major sport across the world manages to maintain multiple tiers of competition, except Australian sports who are totally top heavy.

N American major and minor example is exactly what we have already in all major Australian football codes. What on earth are you talking about?

7 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

Besides that the Jets are drawing almost 10k a game, and building. That's about what the Dragons averaged last year and only a few k off your average Sydney club anyway.

you’ve got darn stars in your eyes, or damned clouds Newtown Jets do not average anywhere near 10k and that very comment demonstrates either your mischievous way to make a point or lack of true understanding of the NSWRL.
 

7 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

So basically, none of them are struggling financially but that is only because the NRL has been strong armed into sinking almost $200 mil into them (and the other clubs) a year to prop them up, money that the NRL can't really afford, and for bunch of clubs they don't really need. It's insanity.

You spoke earlier of Sydney clubs that are struggling financially and now you say they are not. Every dollar of that $200m belongs to the clubs. That is their fair earnings and distribution from the television rights.

Fake expansionist, don’t make me laugh. There are plenty of resources both financial and otherwise that supports the theory of NRL expansion with the addition of new clubs to those that exist in the competition already. Remember this, a 14k crowd average for the Sharks was worth about 78k Sharks fans at the 16 GF.

The clubs and the NRL have as much a duty to expansion clubs, to realise a 20k average at every Sydney club. Growth is not exclusive to new clubs in new markets.

[Rupert Prince]

On 16/12/2019 at 21:33, Tre Cool said:

The NHL and NBA teams play 82 games per season.  MLB play 162!! They are hugely commercially successful leagues too.  Why is less necessarily good?  Why follow NFL model? I think NRL has a good balance now.  SL has a few too many with challenge cup too.  But not sure other sports can guide us so much.

How many players in a ice hockey team?  There are endless replacements from a large bench.   How large is a typical ice hockey pitch and stadium?

Baseball is analogous to cricket in the way there are day after day after day games. Generally cricketers don't tackle or hit each other... 

NFL play a short focussed popular profitable season. It works for them.  Our game is over long, confused, declining in popularity and loses money. I dont see that working for us.

 

[Sports Prophet]

11 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

How many players in a ice hockey team?  There are endless replacements from a large bench.   How large is a typical ice hockey pitch and stadium?

Baseball is analogous to cricket in the way there are day after day after day games. Generally cricketers don't tackle or hit each other... 

NFL play a short focussed popular profitable season. It works for them.  Our game is over long, confused, declining in popularity and loses money. I dont see that working for us.

 

20 players in an ice hockey match day team. Stadiums are approx the same size as basketball and often dual use like Maddison Square Garden.
 

@Tre Cool I think the less is more approach is important for RL as there are far less teams to play regular fixtures against. You can’t compare an NHL/NBA season of approx 82 games when these league’s have 30+ clubs to pitch fixtures against with multiple fixtures a week. The repetition or ratio of repeated fixtures are far less than would be for SL. I agree, NRL has a fantastic balance. Some teams twice, some teams once in a reg season. Rather in SL, potentially 4 matches prior to SL finals.