NRL Conference Plan (Merged threads)

[Scubby]

1 hour ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Why not just keep all the clubs in one league as they are now. After everyone’s played each other once have all the Sydney clubs play each other a 2nd time and the non Sydney based clubs play each other a 2nd time. They play some clubs once and some clubs twice as things stand anyway. 

Because I suppose 2x9 conferences could easily grow to 2x10 or 2x12. The contentious part is the guaranteeing of Sydney clubs' status when some of them are pretty poorly run to say the least.

[Davo5]

38 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

A Sydney division and an "Expansion" division eh?  ROFLMAO what moron thought that up?

As the Yahoo report states, "The travel factor would be immense for the likes of Newcastle and Canberra, who would spend every third week headed interstate.

In comparison, Sydney teams would have to leave the NSW/ACT area just four or five times a year."

More typical Sydney-centric thinking at work.

Like they do now. 

[Big Picture]

18 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Like they do now. 

No they don't.  In 2018 (before the NRL adopted the Magic weekend idea) their respective away opponents (in order of when they played each of them away) were:

Newcastle's away trips 2018:

Canberra, Sydney, St George-Illawarra, Melbourne, Wests, Manly, Gold Coast, Parramatta, North Queensland, Auckland, Penrith, Cronulla

Canberra's away trips 2018:

Gold Coast, Manly, South Sydney, North Queensland, St George-Illawarra, Wests, Brisbane, Canterbury, Cronulla, Melbourne, Penrith, Auckland

I've italicized their out of state opponents so they stand out more; as you can clearly see, less than half of their away trips were out of state.  I stand by my statement that this is another ridiculous Sydney-centric idea.

[Damien]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

A Sydney division and an "Expansion" division eh?  ROFLMAO what moron thought that up?

As the Yahoo report states, "The travel factor would be immense for the likes of Newcastle and Canberra, who would spend every third week headed interstate.

In comparison, Sydney teams would have to leave the NSW/ACT area just four or five times a year."

More typical Sydney-centric thinking at work.

The Queensland clubs would have less traveling and there would be no difference for the NZ sides who are flying (and for the Warriors an extra NZ side means less travelling). The main sides affected would be Newcastle and Canberra. No matter what way you do conferences there will be winners and losers.

[Blind side johnny]

This would provide even more temptations for the better quality British players to move to greener pastures.

[Big Picture]

15 minutes ago, Damien said:

The Queensland clubs would have less traveling and there would be no difference for the NZ sides who are flying (and for the Warriors an extra NZ side means less travelling). The main sides affected would be Newcastle and Canberra. No matter what way you do conferences there will be winners and losers.

No they wouldn't, the only opponent closer to them than the Sydney clubs is Newcastle (don't forget that Gold Coast is a Queensland club too).  The main clubs affected (or to be accurate, benefitted) are the Sydney clubs who'll get off lightly regarding travel while most of that burden and expense is pushed out onto the "expansion" clubs.  So as I said it is a ridiculous Sydney-centric idea.

I notice that you ignored the facts about Newcastle and Canberra as they contradicted your prior statement.

[Scubby]

16 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

This would provide even more temptations for the better quality British players to move to greener pastures.

They would be avoiding most of West Sydney then?

[Davo5]

46 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

No they don't.  In 2018 (before the NRL adopted the Magic weekend idea) their respective away opponents (in order of when they played each of them away) were:

Newcastle's away trips 2018:

Canberra, Sydney, St George-Illawarra, Melbourne, Wests, Manly, Gold Coast, Parramatta, North Queensland, Auckland, Penrith, Cronulla

Canberra's away trips 2018:

Gold Coast, Manly, South Sydney, North Queensland, St George-Illawarra, Wests, Brisbane, Canterbury, Cronulla, Melbourne, Penrith, Auckland

I've italicized their out of state opponents so they stand out more; as you can clearly see, less than half of their away trips were out of state.  I stand by my statement that this is another ridiculous Sydney-centric idea.

Yeah let’s halt expansion plans because Canberra & Newcastle have to catch a couple of extra flights,sounds fair

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Davo5 said:

Yeah let’s halt expansion plans because Canberra & Newcastle have to catch a couple of extra flights,sounds fair

Who were once expansion teams themselves.

[Davo5]

20 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

No they wouldn't, the only opponent closer to them than the Sydney clubs is Newcastle (don't forget that Gold Coast is a Queensland club too).  The main clubs affected (or to be accurate, benefitted) are the Sydney clubs who'll get off lightly regarding travel while most of that burden and expense is pushed out onto the "expansion" clubs.  So as I said it is a ridiculous Sydney-centric idea.

I notice that you ignored the facts about Newcastle and Canberra as they contradicted your prior statement.

Are those the same Sydney clubs who regularly take games to Darwin/Perth/Qld ?

[Big Picture]

42 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Yeah let’s halt expansion plans because Canberra & Newcastle have to catch a couple of extra flights,sounds fair

Who said anything about halting expansion plans?  On the contrary a ridiculous Sydney-centric structure such as they propose would cause more problems for expansion due its implication that half of the teams must always be in Sydney so the two divisions can have an equal number of teams.

Again you're overlooking the fact that under this proposed structure the Sydney clubs would rarely have to fly anywhere while the others would be flying somewhere every few weeks.

[Davo5]

48 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Who said anything about halting expansion plans?  On the contrary a ridiculous Sydney-centric structure such as they propose would cause more problems for expansion due its implication that half of the teams must always be in Sydney so the two divisions can have an equal number of teams.

Again you're overlooking the fact that under this proposed structure the Sydney clubs would rarely have to fly anywhere while the others would be flying somewhere every few weeks.

And again,the Broncos,Titans,Cowboys,Storm& Warriors do it already

[AB90]

46 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Who said anything about halting expansion plans?  On the contrary a ridiculous Sydney-centric structure such as they propose would cause more problems for expansion due its implication that half of the teams must always be in Sydney so the two divisions can have an equal number of teams.

Again you're overlooking the fact that under this proposed structure the Sydney clubs would rarely have to fly anywhere while the others would be flying somewhere every few weeks.

It's really not that ridiculous and some would say it's actually quite practical.

Yes - Sydney clubs won't fly interstate that much which they already don't under the current structure due to having 11 teams all within a 3 hour drive of one another. I'm struggling to see your point here as this 'unfairness' you speak of already exists in the current format.

[Big Picture]

5 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

And again,the Broncos,Titans,Cowboys,Storm& Warriors do it already

So why shouldn't the Sydney clubs do it too then?

4 minutes ago, AB90 said:

It's really not that ridiculous and some would say it's actually quite practical.

Yes - Sydney clubs won't fly interstate that much which they already don't under the current structure due to having 11 teams all within a 3 hour drive of one another. I'm struggling to see your point here as this 'unfairness' you speak of already exists in the current format.

Yes it is ridiculous.  The whole reason for leagues to be structured in geographically-based divisions is to reduce travel for all member clubs and create a level playing field where travel is concerned, but this moronic proposal would slightly reduce travel for some and significantly increase it for the others.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

26 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

So why shouldn't the Sydney clubs do it too then?

Yes it is ridiculous.  The whole reason for leagues to be structured in geographically-based divisions is to reduce travel for all member clubs and create a level playing field where travel is concerned, but this moronic proposal would slightly reduce travel for some and significantly increase it for the others.

Tell me one league where every club has the same amount of travel?

[Copa]

3 hours ago, Big Picture said:

No they don't.  In 2018 (before the NRL adopted the Magic weekend idea) their respective away opponents (in order of when they played each of them away) were:

Newcastle's away trips 2018:

Canberra, Sydney, St George-Illawarra, Melbourne, Wests, Manly, Gold Coast, Parramatta, North Queensland, Auckland, Penrith, Cronulla

Canberra's away trips 2018:

Gold Coast, Manly, South Sydney, North Queensland, St George-Illawarra, Wests, Brisbane, Canterbury, Cronulla, Melbourne, Penrith, Auckland

I've italicized their out of state opponents so they stand out more; as you can clearly see, less than half of their away trips were out of state.  I stand by my statement that this is another ridiculous Sydney-centric idea.

It’s 3 to 4 hours travel time on a bus from Canberra to the stadium in Sydney. It’s around 1 hour travel time on a plane to Brisbane, Gold Coast  or Melbourne. The players are generally always more refreshed when they travel from Canberra by plane as they aren’t sitting in a small seat for hours on end.

[Big Picture]

5 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Tell me one league where every club has the same amount of travel?

I didn't say the same amount of travel, I said less travel for everyone by having them play geographically closer teams more often and teams further away less often.  That's how a league structured around geographic divisions is supposed to work and it's how the North American leagues which pioneered the concept work.  The NFL is a slight exception, they've opted to keep some teams in the same divisions even though some others are now geographically closer so they can maintain established rivalries which predated the addition of some of those closer teams.

Sydney being a lot less far from Melbourne than Brisbane, Gold Coast or North Queensland, on that basis Melbourne would be in the same division as teams in Sydney, not teams up in Queensland.

[Mr Frisky]

I was looking for this on the Australian forum - randomly found it on here..

 

[Scubby]

I assume the expansion conference will get a bigger central handout to cover all the extra expense?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

16 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

I didn't say the same amount of travel, I said less travel for everyone by having them play geographically closer teams more often and teams further away less often.  That's how a league structured around geographic divisions is supposed to work and it's how the North American leagues which pioneered the concept work.  The NFL is a slight exception, they've opted to keep some teams in the same divisions even though some others are now geographically closer so they can maintain established rivalries which predated the addition of some of those closer teams.

Sydney being a lot less far from Melbourne than Brisbane, Gold Coast or North Queensland, on that basis Melbourne would be in the same division as teams in Sydney, not teams up in Queensland.

How do Melbourne travel to Sydney currently?

[Big Picture]

1 minute ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

How do Melbourne travel to Sydney currently?

Presumably they fly, but I haven't checked.

[Big Picture]

And to confirm what I've said about the idea, it's getting roundly panned over on LeagueUnlimited.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

7 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Presumably they fly, but I haven't checked.

So how big a difference is there between flying to Sydney than to Brisbane?

[Big Picture]

9 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

So how big a difference is there between flying to Sydney than to Brisbane?

A simple search told me that Brisbane is twice as far away from Melbourne as Sydney and Townsville three times as far.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

A simple search told me that Brisbane is twice as far away from Melbourne as Sydney and Townsville three times as far.

A simple search told me it's 1hr 25 mins from Melbourne to Sydney, and 2hrs 10 mins from Melbourne to Brisbane on plane.

 

It's hardly earth shattering.