NRL Conference Plan (Merged threads)

[Davo5]

12 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

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

40 minute difference in flight times,hardly an issue.

[Smudger06]

This isn't a new concept. It's been in the pipe line for years. Big Picture is right on this I do believe. 

[Big Picture]

1 minute ago, Davo5 said:

40 minute difference in flight times,hardly an issue.

The Aussies sure don't see it that way, the way they're panning it over on LU makes that very clear.

[Davo5]

4 minutes 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.

The Storm haven’t had an issue when taking a “home” game to Suncorp in previous seasons.

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

The Aussies sure don't see it that way, the way they're panning it over on LU makes that very clear.

A handful of people on a 3 page thread is the Aussies now? 

[Copa]

7 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

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.

For Canberra to play in Sydney it’s a minimum of 3 hours sitting still on a bus for a professional athlete. We’d be at an advantage if we didn’t have to go to Sydney all the time. Flying elsewhere will keep us fresh for the game.

[Davo5]

Given that Melbourne are the only non Sydney team in the top 6 I’m sure they will be more than happy to fly up to Queensland 

[Davo5]

12 minutes ago, Damien said:

A handful of people on a 3 page thread is the Aussies now? 

So a handful of extra flights & 4 irate fans,surely grounds for scrapping the whole thing.

[lucky 7]

5 hours ago, Scubby said:

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.

It could easily go to 2 conferences of 10 in time. For argument sake for Brisbane 2 in Queensland to rival the Broncos and a 2nd Kiwi team to rival the warriors you could also  have a team in Cairns which would form a rivalry with the Cowboys in North Queensland and a team on the Central Coast in the Sydney conference. 

[lucky 7]

4 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

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

I think that's a given if the plans go ahead

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

So a handful of extra flights & 4 irate fans,surely grounds for scrapping the whole thing.

The Aussies are that irate there are more posts on the thread on this forum than an Australian one! If something like this had been proposed by Super League we'd be on 20 pages by now and half a dozen people would have walked away from the game.

[Oldbear]

Like the general idea, plus it does give a structure to add additional teams at later dates. My issue is with the playoff system, as an NFL fan I don’t like the whole NFCvAFC Super Bowl, because as was pointed out earlier, conference finals have often featured the 2 best teams, and I have often wondered whether some of the Patriots success has been founded on the AFC being weaker during those periods of dominance, giving the Pats an easier passage to the Super Bowl, where they face a beaten up NFC team who are not as fresh due to a gruelling Conference final which would in fact been a more fitting Super Bowl (think Pats v Seahawks a few years ago, Seattle were pretty beaten up, having played an amazing NFC final a couple of weeks earlier against a Packers team which themselves were also deserving of a final berth). 
 

I like the conference idea, but the playoffs should be structured to allow 2 teams from one conference to make the Grand Final, otherwise no possibility of Storm v Raiders, or Panthers v Eels, even if they were the best teams.

[Henson Park Old Firm]

I've got the right people for a half time show...

 

[Tommygilf]

I think you could have unofficial conferences and keep it as one league.

The NRL already has an uneven fixture list, with no relegation at stake I see no problem making the "uneveness" skewed towards local derbies where possible. In an 18 team league play everyone once and then 9 teams H/A for a 26 game regular season. I only see specific conferences being necessary where a season that incorporated everyone playing eachother once was impossible.

It would also remove the concern over 2 clubs from the same conference being unable to make the Grand Final.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Playoffs should be mixed so that teams from the same conference call reach the final. That appears to be the biggest complaint I've seen so far.

If they need a conference final, just do it in the first weekend using the same playoff system that use now.

 

Week 1

1st v 2nd (Sydney conference final, winner gets bye to semi, loser to quarter)

1st v 2nd (Pacific conference final, winner gets bye to semi, loser to quarter)

3rd Pac v 4th Syd (winner to quarter, loser out)

3rd Syd v 4th Pac (winner to quarter, loser out)

Week 2:

Seeded draw to keep top 2 teams separate.

Week 3:

Seeded draw to keep two conference final winners separate

Week 4:

Grand Final

 

That system follows the current progression exactly the same, but includes conference finals, allows for any mixture in the final, the excitement of a live draw but the fairness of seeding. Can't ask for more than that.

[The Frying Scotsman]

5 hours ago, lucky 7 said:

It could easily go to 2 conferences of 10 in time. For argument sake for Brisbane 2 in Queensland to rival the Broncos and a 2nd Kiwi team to rival the warriors you could also  have a team in Cairns which would form a rivalry with the Cowboys in North Queensland and a team on the Central Coast in the Sydney conference. 

Perth?

Always seems a bit conspicuous by its absence. It is the NRL after all....

[Pippen94]

7 hours ago, Oldbear said:

Like the general idea, plus it does give a structure to add additional teams at later dates. My issue is with the playoff system, as an NFL fan I don’t like the whole NFCvAFC Super Bowl, because as was pointed out earlier, conference finals have often featured the 2 best teams, and I have often wondered whether some of the Patriots success has been founded on the AFC being weaker during those periods of dominance, giving the Pats an easier passage to the Super Bowl, where they face a beaten up NFC team who are not as fresh due to a gruelling Conference final which would in fact been a more fitting Super Bowl (think Pats v Seahawks a few years ago, Seattle were pretty beaten up, having played an amazing NFC final a couple of weeks earlier against a Packers team which themselves were also deserving of a final berth). 
 

I like the conference idea, but the playoffs should be structured to allow 2 teams from one conference to make the Grand Final, otherwise no possibility of Storm v Raiders, or Panthers v Eels, even if they were the best teams.

Whole point of conferences is that each final = big game particularly when you're talking about a Sydney championships. If you start messing with that it defeats purpose of conferences

[Pippen94]

5 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Playoffs should be mixed so that teams from the same conference call reach the final. That appears to be the biggest complaint I've seen so far.

If they need a conference final, just do it in the first weekend using the same playoff system that use now.

 

Week 1

1st v 2nd (Sydney conference final, winner gets bye to semi, loser to quarter)

1st v 2nd (Pacific conference final, winner gets bye to semi, loser to quarter)

3rd Pac v 4th Syd (winner to quarter, loser out)

3rd Syd v 4th Pac (winner to quarter, loser out)

Week 2:

Seeded draw to keep top 2 teams separate.

Week 3:

Seeded draw to keep two conference final winners separate

Week 4:

Grand Final

 

That system follows the current progression exactly the same, but includes conference finals, allows for any mixture in the final, the excitement of a live draw but the fairness of seeding. Can't ask for more than that.

Sydney title game would be huge in biggest market in Australia. Start messing with playoffs & you lose that.

[Pippen94]

8 hours 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.

Getting from Manly to Penrith or the gong is no short car trip

[Davo5]

2 hours ago, Pippen94 said:

Sydney title game would be huge in biggest market in Australia. Start messing with playoffs & you lose that.

How can you mess with something that doesn’t exist yet,surely never having another all Sydney Grand Final would be a bigger loss.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

4 hours ago, Pippen94 said:

Sydney title game would be huge in biggest market in Australia. Start messing with playoffs & you lose that.

You'd still have a Sydney title game. It would be the first game.

You could potentially have a second one if they qualify for the national final too in my proposed system.

[Pippen94]

1 hour ago, Davo5 said:

How can you mess with something that doesn’t exist yet,surely never having another all Sydney Grand Final would be a bigger loss.

Guaranteeing Sydney team in gf is better than potentially having gold coast - Canberra gf.

Sydney team plus another big city team like Brisbane & Melbourne will equal largest audience

[Pippen94]

15 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

You'd still have a Sydney title game. It would be the first game.

You could potentially have a second one if they qualify for the national final too in my proposed system.

Conferences don't work that way. That's bastardized version which reduces stature of conference finals which should be big deal.

[The Future is League]

The latest is it won't go ahead until 2225 and has a 50% chance getting the thumbs up

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/raiders-knights-likely-to-be-biggest-losers-under-conference-system-20210428-p57n3f.html

[RayCee]

I read this quote about the proposed expansion:

"You have to begin with the end in mind, you have to always keep an eye on the long term and you have to think about what is moving you closer to becoming an even more sustainable and relevant and viable sport."

I wouldn't normally associate RL with such sentiments.