NRL in talks to expand to 20 teams

[Damien]

8 minutes ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

At last someone on this thread picks up on the real problems that any NRL expansion will cause northern hemisphere rugby league

Many of those players are seen as either not good enough, too old and past it and/or too expensive and can be replaced by someone up and coming. 3 new teams isn't going to change that.

[Copa]

11 hours ago, DACS said:

Good luck finding 90+ additional players of NRL standard.

Initially they could harvest a lot of the top athletes in super league plus quite a few in nsw and qld who have potential but can’t be squeezed into current squads.

If they get pathways in PNG working well there’s a large potential player pool right there.

[lucky 7]

22 minutes ago, Copa said:

Initially they could harvest a lot of the top athletes in super league plus quite a few in nsw and qld who have potential but can’t be squeezed into current squads.

If they get pathways in PNG working well there’s a large potential player pool right there.

Also Samoa, Tonga and Fiji, but i acknowledge it will be harder in them countries than PNG.

[Oxford]

NRL talks last about a decade when it comes to expansion.

I think this thread might be previous.

[rlno1]

1 hour ago, ShevWig90 said:

Is there much of a League in scene in Darwin and Tasmania? Or to obscure for expansion?

yes the Darwin scene has been around since the war. There are six clubs fielding all grades. 

The Gt Britain touring team in 1984 kicked off their campaign with a game up there.

Check this out as it has alot of history on Darwin RL;

https://www.facebook.com/groups/menofleaguent

[stookie]

1 hour ago, ShevWig90 said:

Is there much of a League in scene in Darwin and Tasmania? Or to obscure for expansion?

There isn't even a RL org in Tasmania as far as I know (the nrl.com icon for Tasmania links to NRL Victoria). The population is tiny, and very AFL focused.

 

For Darwin and the NT, a rule of thumb people often say is it's 50/50 RL/AFL. But again, the population is very small.

 

Hobart: 250k population. Darwin: 150k. Neither place is any near having a RL team.

[The Daddy]

4 hours ago, The Rocket said:

Not only that but I watched every trial match this year where teams regularly field their second and third string teams. I was struck by the amount of players I`d never heard of who looked right at home in the top-grade.

Another point, sometimes I think that what we lack is more coaches who are better at developing players, rather than the players themselves. Take Melbourne, converted Cooper Cronk from a utility player to a very good half-back. He leaves they flipflop around between Croft/Hughes et.al. not really not knowing where to play Hughes, now he`s an outstanding first-grade halfback. I put that down to the Melbourne system and their ability to develop players.

Hit the nail on the head. When people say they don't think there's enough players, what evidence do they have to back that up, what are they basing the opinion on? 

As you've quite rightly highlighted, my view has always been that its the systems and levels of coaching at each club that creates talent, even after they've gone professional. The better the coaching system, the more players are created that can compete at the highest level. 

Why is it that historically a player is average at one club but when they move to Melbourne Storm that player improves out of sight? 

Why are some clubs better at identifying and creating talent than others? These are the more pertinent questions. 

We need to focus on creating more effective coaching systems not on whether there are supposedly enough players, coz coaches make players

[stookie]

Regarding NZ2, when the expansion discussion came up a few years ago, there was the usual comparisons between NZ2 and Perth. And the NRL/ARLC kept making vague promising statements about teams in Wellington and Christchurch etc.

There was a story (newspaper I think), and the guess was that the NRL/ARLC was fishing for interest - there was simply no expressions of interest in putting together a new NZ team. Whereas Perth had 2 separate, unrelated parties already in the process of developing bids. NZ2 was preferred, but as the Dolphins show, the way for a bid to be accepted is for the funding to be secure; and noone was stumping up the cash for NZ.

I really wish I remember where I saw that report, but sadly, the best I have at the moment is "trust me". Will try to find it.

But, in summary, we can all talk about NZ2 but it seems there is no independent source of funding for it, and that will stop it cold from the outset.

[JM2010]

2 hours ago, stookie said:

There isn't even a RL org in Tasmania as far as I know (the nrl.com icon for Tasmania links to NRL Victoria). The population is tiny, and very AFL focused.

 

For Darwin and the NT, a rule of thumb people often say is it's 50/50 RL/AFL. But again, the population is very small.

 

Hobart: 250k population. Darwin: 150k. Neither place is any near having a RL team.

What’s the RL scene like in Melbourne/Victoria?

[The 4 of Us]

5 hours ago, stookie said:

Regarding NZ2, when the expansion discussion came up a few years ago, there was the usual comparisons between NZ2 and Perth. And the NRL/ARLC kept making vague promising statements about teams in Wellington and Christchurch etc.

There was a story (newspaper I think), and the guess was that the NRL/ARLC was fishing for interest - there was simply no expressions of interest in putting together a new NZ team. Whereas Perth had 2 separate, unrelated parties already in the process of developing bids. NZ2 was preferred, but as the Dolphins show, the way for a bid to be accepted is for the funding to be secure; and noone was stumping up the cash for NZ.

I really wish I remember where I saw that report, but sadly, the best I have at the moment is "trust me". Will try to find it.

But, in summary, we can all talk about NZ2 but it seems there is no independent source of funding for it, and that will stop it cold from the outset.

Report here from Mr Chalmers in 2021 regarding Wellington Orcas for 2026.

He thinks the funding is there but not sure whether he is considered credible or not? 
 

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/10/12/wellington-orcas-make-their-case-to-become-the-nrls-18th-franchise/

[Balmainboy]

Perth, NZ & PNG. 

Perth in next as a merger with the Bears & what's left of the old Western Reds. Can't see the Bears working anywhere else. 

Do it gradually but make the decision quickly. PNG needs a lot of work (and money - though gov will stump up so not really the barrier) but has lots of potential. 

[Sports Prophet]

10 hours ago, stookie said:

Regarding NZ2, when the expansion discussion came up a few years ago, there was the usual comparisons between NZ2 and Perth. And the NRL/ARLC kept making vague promising statements about teams in Wellington and Christchurch etc.

There was a story (newspaper I think), and the guess was that the NRL/ARLC was fishing for interest - there was simply no expressions of interest in putting together a new NZ team. Whereas Perth had 2 separate, unrelated parties already in the process of developing bids. NZ2 was preferred, but as the Dolphins show, the way for a bid to be accepted is for the funding to be secure; and noone was stumping up the cash for NZ.

I really wish I remember where I saw that report, but sadly, the best I have at the moment is "trust me". Will try to find it.

But, in summary, we can all talk about NZ2 but it seems there is no independent source of funding for it, and that will stop it cold from the outset.

This is where the NRL must consider expansion as the primary financial backer and having the confidence in their product and revenue streams to make it a self-funded success. 

In my opinion, if RL can be popular in Melbourne, then RL can be successful in the south of NZ.

[The Future is League]

14 hours ago, Oxford said:

NRL talks last about a decade when it comes to expansion.

I think this thread might be previous.

To quote the Chinese proverb

"The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The next best time to plant a tree is now"

[The Rocket]

15 hours ago, stookie said:

There was a story (newspaper I think), and the guess was that the NRL/ARLC was fishing for interest - there was simply no expressions of interest in putting together a new NZ team.

I recall exactly the same report, it was the sort of thing that stuck in my mind because it was so significant.

[DACS]

Those talking about some reserve grade players looking OK in trials, get real. Trial games are just that - low intensity matches. The players involved are in the squads of existing teams - those players wouldn't suddenly become available if we added three new teams.  If you took them all out then the existing teams would have to drop down a tier looking for squad players. You can see how this works unless you dramatically increase the number and quality of juniors?

You always get the odd kid that stands out, but most of those are well known beforehand as they will have been in junior systems for years, and are earmarked for NRL careers at existing clubs. 

Anyway, like I say the issue isn't finding fillers - its finding high quality players, particularly in playmaking roles. There are lots of blah forwards around who end up back in Qld Cup or going to England, but there aren't two quality halfbacks in every NRL team now. A fair few don't even have one with real class.  If the depth was so enormous there wouldn't be the gulf that there obviously is between top and bottom of the existing sides. 

If the plan was to do something to increase junior production then expanding might have merit. But right now it would turn the competition into a lop-sided mess, or just dilute the quality at the top.

[Damien]

11 hours ago, Balmainboy said:

Perth, NZ & PNG. 

Perth in next as a merger with the Bears & what's left of the old Western Reds. Can't see the Bears working anywhere else. 

Do it gradually but make the decision quickly. PNG needs a lot of work (and money - though gov will stump up so not really the barrier) but has lots of potential. 

Perth merging with the Bears is nonsense. There is no need and Perth should be a standalone entity. The Bears working shouldn't be a factor in expansion. 

Edited March 14, 2023 by Damien

[gingerjon]

17 hours ago, stookie said:

There isn't even a RL org in Tasmania as far as I know (the nrl.com icon for Tasmania links to NRL Victoria). The population is tiny, and very AFL focused.

 

For Darwin and the NT, a rule of thumb people often say is it's 50/50 RL/AFL. But again, the population is very small.

 

Hobart: 250k population. Darwin: 150k. Neither place is any near having a RL team.

Even with Tasmania being massively AFL, hosting AFL matches for years (and sponsoring, I think, Hawthorn) and having a decent-ish standard state league, not even the AFL is simply sticking a team in Hobart. There are well advanced plans for one but the amount of hoops to be jumped through and guaranteed stadium work and financing would make IMG's Super League proposals blush.

That 250,000 population is bigger than Warrington's. Just to show (again) something of the disparity between the game here and there.

[DACS]

The AFL make nearly as many mistakes as the NRL when it comes to expansion (namely both codes stuck with poor teams in the money pit and fake 'market' that is the Gold Coast). However, they show far more commitment to new clubs in terms of salary cap exemptions, draft picks (something the NRL doesn't have) etc. That's because they want new clubs to succeed and understand that building a club takes time and that the other teams will not voluntarily sacrifice themselves to launch a new team. 

The NRL by contrast almost hamstrung Redcliffe. They get no cap exemptions, no preferable access to juniors, and most people think they probably needed a year longer to recruit and set themselves up. The only thing that saved them is the financial strength and commercial nous of the Dolphins, who pretty much own the peninsula. They brought Bennett in which helped in terms of recruitment and creating a buzz, but even with all that they couldn't attract a genuine marquee player.  If Bennett stays a couple of years they might well be a reasonably strong team (I'd certainly give them a good chance of being way better than the Titans). 

If you talk Adelaide, Perth or anywhere else you're more than likely not going to have an existing organisation with anything like the Dolphins' capability. Which means that to have even half a chance of success the NRL would have to get other clubs to accept things they have previously shown zero willingness for - namely to make some short-term sacrifices for the sport as a whole. 

[AB90]

2 hours ago, DACS said:

Those talking about some reserve grade players looking OK in trials, get real. Trial games are just that - low intensity matches. The players involved are in the squads of existing teams - those players wouldn't suddenly become available if we added three new teams.  If you took them all out then the existing teams would have to drop down a tier looking for squad players. You can see how this works unless you dramatically increase the number and quality of juniors?

You always get the odd kid that stands out, but most of those are well known beforehand as they will have been in junior systems for years, and are earmarked for NRL careers at existing clubs. 

Anyway, like I say the issue isn't finding fillers - its finding high quality players, particularly in playmaking roles. There are lots of blah forwards around who end up back in Qld Cup or going to England, but there aren't two quality halfbacks in every NRL team now. A fair few don't even have one with real class.  If the depth was so enormous there wouldn't be the gulf that there obviously is between top and bottom of the existing sides. 

If the plan was to do something to increase junior production then expanding might have merit. But right now it would turn the competition into a lop-sided mess, or just dilute the quality at the top.

In respect to your halves point this is the list of halves currently not playing in the NRL: George Williams, Brodie Croft, Lewis Dodd, Jonny Lomax, Jake Clifford, Blake Austin, Aiden Sezier, Marc Snyd, Will Pryce, Jake Trueman, Harry Smith, Cade Cust, Mikey Lewis.

Now I’m not saying these players would all be of elite quality (they wouldn’t) but I am confident in saying that at least half of these players would all be able to do a serviceable job with some being very good players in the NRL.

Just need to look a little further than NSW & QLD!

 

[The Rocket]

2 hours ago, DACS said:

, but there aren't two quality halfbacks in every NRL team now. A fair few don't even have one with real class. 

 Let`s face it these things go through ebbs and flows, we`ve been through a purple patch over the last decade with world-class halfbacks :

Cherry-Evans, Hunt, Reynolds, Hughes, Moses, Cleary, Keary, Cronk, Thurston, Hynes, am I missing any, these are all world class players and will be replaced. We are already seeing a few bright young stars appearing, that bloke Trindall at the Sharks, their second-string half-back, has first grader written all over him, and Souths have a couple of other young blokes behind IlIas for starters.

As far as two quality halves, there`s plenty of teams that manage without two star halves, always has been.

[stookie]

17 hours ago, JM2010 said:

What’s the RL scene like in Melbourne/Victoria?

I don't have any direct knowledge JM, only what I've read. It seems an interesting mix of people claiming the storm don't do anywhere near enough, or that they do OK in a difficult situation. Still, seems like there are 20-odd clubs, and to be honest it's a bit more than I expected.

 

13 hours ago, The 4 of Us said:

Report here from Mr Chalmers in 2021 regarding Wellington Orcas for 2026.

He thinks the funding is there but not sure whether he is considered credible or not? 

Yeah, while trying to find the article I referenced, I saw a few recent articles like that. Maybe there is some renewed interest now, compared to I think the 5 years ago the report that The Rocket & I saw. Good news!

 

9 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

This is where the NRL must consider expansion as the primary financial backer and having the confidence in their product and revenue streams to make it a self-funded success. 

I personally agree; the NRL should give some preferential treatment in the first few years of Perth or NZ2, and they should consider themselves a partner in the short term so that the entire game benefits long term. The type of stuff the AFL is very good at doing. Thing is SP, neither of us are in charge and it looks like the current admin have made it very clear the bid is by itself financially from day 1.

[jim_57]

2025 - Perth

2030 -  NZ South Island (Christchurch)

2032/33 - Ipswich/Logan or Adelaide.

PNG I don’t think is the best idea but wouldn’t write it off either given the current push by the government and who sits on the NRL board currently.

 

[Martyn Sadler]

1 hour ago, jim_57 said:

2025 - Perth

2030 -  NZ South Island (Christchurch)

2032/33 - Ipswich/Logan or Adelaide.

PNG I don’t think is the best idea but wouldn’t write it off either given the current push by the government and who sits on the NRL board currently.

 

It's been good to see the start made by the Dolphins but that club is a unique one that isn't a template for any new club that might come in from elsewhere.

If I were devising a strategy for the NRL, I would look towards adding a club every four years - 2027, 2031, 2035 and so on, probably in the order you have listed them. I would suggest that the second New Zealand club should be one representing the whole of the South Island (Southern Orcas?), playing home games in Christchurch, Dunedin and Nelson and perhaps even Invercargill.

In order to get it right I would appoint someone at a high level within the NRL to do the groundwork for getting clubs into the competition, effectively creating a template - securing the right backers initially, getting a commitment to improved stadia from state and local governments, creating a strong identity, building anticipation by taking NRL games there, increasing participation locally and so on.

[Leyther_Matt]

Apologies if already posted, but it looks like soccer is trying to get the run on Auckland

 

[pahars]

12 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Apologies if already posted, but it looks like soccer is trying to get the run on Auckland

 

I wouldn’t worry about it, the Auckland Kings/NZ Knights hardly set the world on fire and the A league is a proper farmers league.

The only concern for the NRL (or even cricket, AFL and RU for that matter) is that the sprogs of soccer Moms end up following European football on TV.