NRL owned super league clubs

[Douglas]

Looks like the NRL&super league linkup/investment talks have hit a snag so I wonder if the next best thing would be for the NRL to actually own and control a super league team?

the best and obvious choice would be London broncos but they already have the backing and investment from Darren Lockyer and Andrew gray so the next best options could be a Manchester based team or a Birmingham team?

you could possibly have a Dublin based team and tap into the RU talent pool in Ireland as well.

[iffleyox]

2 minutes ago, Douglas said:

Looks like the NRL&super league linkup/investment talks have hit a snag so I wonder if the next best thing would be for the NRL to actually own and control a super league team?

the best and obvious choice would be London broncos but they already have the backing and investment from Darren Lockyer and Andrew gray so the next best options could be a Manchester based team or a Birmingham team?

you could possibly have a Dublin based team and tap into the RU talent pool in Ireland as well.

Has the season finished already? The summer flew by.

[M j M]

1 minute ago, Douglas said:

so the next best options could be a Manchester based team or a Birmingham team?

you could possibly have a Dublin based team and tap into the RU talent pool in Ireland as well.

This is just silly, fantasy land stuff. The NRL aren't going to burn say AU$40m to set up these teams.

The reason they want SL is because it has a well established core fan base that can be built on. It's an existing league which they believe can be potentially grown with a bit of investment, new strategies and some cross promotion/synergies.

They aren't coming in to set up ruinously expensive new franchises.

[Douglas]

27 minutes ago, iffleyox said:

Has the season finished already? The summer flew by.

Splitting the trees here in gods country.

 

[Douglas]

27 minutes ago, M j M said:

This is just silly, fantasy land stuff. The NRL aren't going to burn say AU$40m to set up these teams.

The reason they want SL is because it has a well established core fan base that can be built on. It's an existing league which they believe can be potentially grown with a bit of investment, new strategies and some cross promotion/synergies.

They aren't coming in to set up ruinously expensive new franchises.

Would it cost that much to setup and run?

maybe the NRL could get teams to invest in super league clubs like the rumoured Sydney roosters investment in Salford?

[Damien]

It is clear the NRL dont even want to pump money into SL and want others to pay for it. No way are they going to spend millions per year per team setting up expansion sides.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Douglas said:

Would it cost that much to setup and run?

maybe the NRL could get teams to invest in super league clubs like the rumoured Sydney roosters investment in Salford?

St Helens staff costs for the last recorded year were £5.7m. I assume you'll also want to rent a stadium, pay for travel and training facilities (and equipment), buy some kit, accommodate those who don't live locally, and advertise your new club to a new audience and provide them with entertainment on match days and in the community.

So, to do it right, you'll need to cover around £10m expenditure. And also work on the assumption that SL won't give you a share of the Sky money.

[M j M]

37 minutes ago, Douglas said:

Would it cost that much to setup and run?

maybe the NRL could get teams to invest in super league clubs like the rumoured Sydney roosters investment in Salford?

It was a conservative estimate for the initial setup and first five year losses. 

I recommend you consult David Hughes on how much this stuff costs. And he even had a team and a fanbase, albeit moderately sized, to start with. 

[Douglas]

40 minutes ago, Damien said:

It is clear the NRL dont even want to pump money into SL and want others to pay for it. No way are they going to spend millions per year per team setting up expansion sides.

Well PVL vision of global expansion will fall flat on its face then without investment and serious investment at that.

[lucky 7]

52 minutes ago, Damien said:

It is clear the NRL dont even want to pump money into SL and want others to pay for it. No way are they going to spend millions per year per team setting up expansion sides.

The likes of Leigh, Castleford,Wakefield etc would have zero appeal to them, but international cities like Leeds and London might if they are serious about global expansion.

They aren't going to put teams in Manchester or Birmingham etc.

[M j M]

23 minutes ago, lucky 7 said:

The likes of Leigh, Castleford,Wakefield etc would have zero appeal to them, 

This is a total misreading of why the NRL wants to be involved in the British game. They want to grow the NRL brand internationally and believe Super League, with its existing decently sized and very enthusiastic support base, is a way of doing that. Both through improving SL to and by cross-promoting their own brand. 

The NRL's own strategy for decades has been heartlands first. 

[Agbrigg]

2 hours ago, Douglas said:

Looks like the NRL&super league linkup/investment talks have hit a snag so I wonder if the next best thing would be for the NRL to actually own and control a super league team?

the best and obvious choice would be London broncos but they already have the backing and investment from Darren Lockyer and Andrew gray so the next best options could be a Manchester based team or a Birmingham team?

you could possibly have a Dublin based team and tap into the RU talent pool in Ireland as well.

What a load of rubbish, NRL havnt a clue how to run a competition !!!

Teams in Birmingham and Manchester, my Harris.

We have RL geniuses in the likes of Wood and Rimmer who obviously knows better, Dewsbury is the way to go and grow the game. Brighouse and Ramsbottom next, they will show the Aussies how it's done 

[Douglas]

33 minutes ago, lucky 7 said:

The likes of Leigh, Castleford,Wakefield etc would have zero appeal to them, but international cities like Leeds and London might if they are serious about global expansion.

They aren't going to put teams in Manchester or Birmingham etc.

Manchester and Birmingham are big cities known throughout the world with a small RL presence in them.

[Toby Chopra]

If I was the NRL I would make London the 20th NRL club and underwrite the travel costs. They get the international branding of a global city, access to the European market and one of the richest parts of it, and a load of players on their doorstep, all without getting caught up with the RFL and the northern clubs. The logistics of London playing in the league are doable if you want to make it work.

In a normal sport it would be blocked by the local NGB, via the global governing body, but what leverage would the RFL have to stop it? Maybe appealing to the new PM would be their best shot.     

     

[Charlie]

3 hours ago, Douglas said:

Manchester and Birmingham are big cities known throughout the world with a small RL presence in them.

They’d just invest in Salford as it’s a stones throw from Manchester many people even class Salford as Manchester ( without starting a geographic argument ) 

[gingerjon]

33 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

The logistics of London playing in the league are doable if you want to make it work.

Are they?!

It seems kind of impossible to me but I admit to not having dwelt too much on it.

[Gav Wilson]

24 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Are they?!

It seems kind of impossible to me but I admit to not having dwelt too much on it.

Once 'Project Sunrise' is in full operation it'll be theoretically doable. Bleeding expensive though.

[Toby Chopra]

21 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Are they?!

It seems kind of impossible to me but I admit to not having dwelt too much on it.

Not easy, but do-able if you really wanted to. London play in Oz in two blocks of six, and the visiting teams rotate over a couple of years. Have a bye after coming to London if possible, or play Thursday-Saturday in London-Sunday pattern. NFL teams will soon be playing overseas once every couple of years so it's not a uniquely silly idea.     

Finals are an issue and maybe some work permit problems if the RFL didn't play ball, so it'd probably never happen.  But if the NRL wanted the most cost efficient way of achieving their actual real goals - ie promoting and selling their own competition on a global basis, I genuinely think this would be their best shot of turning the NRL into an international brand, rather than funnelling money and time into the British game as a whole.

Whether it would be good for the British game is unclear. If it was successful, would having finally established a viable rugby league team outside the heartland do more for the image of British rugby league than the downside of it not actually being part of the British system and the image implications of such?

[Tommygilf]

4 hours ago, M j M said:

This is a total misreading of why the NRL wants to be involved in the British game. They want to grow the NRL brand internationally and believe Super League, with its existing decently sized and very enthusiastic support base, is a way of doing that. Both through improving SL to and by cross-promoting their own brand. 

The NRL's own strategy for decades has been heartlands first. 

That happens to be because their heartlands are in Australia's 1st and 3rd largest cities/metro areas, whilst also having inherited teams from 30 years back in the 2nd largest city in Australia, the Capital of Australia, and the largest city in New Zealand too.

Its like us having all the M62 teams in London, plus a strong presence in Manchester, and then strong teams in Birmingham, Leeds and Paris. 

Or rather we are like having all the NRL teams in Perth and Adelaide, plus a team in Dunedin and Waikato.

Its pretty easy to "focus on the heartlands".

[up the robins]

7 hours ago, Douglas said:

Looks like the NRL&super league linkup/investment talks have hit a snag so I wonder if the next best thing would be for the NRL to actually own and control a super league team?

the best and obvious choice would be London broncos but they already have the backing and investment from Darren Lockyer and Andrew gray so the next best options could be a Manchester based team or a Birmingham team?

you could possibly have a Dublin based team and tap into the RU talent pool in Ireland as well.

How about Swansea, with ospreys in danger of closing due to the restructuring of rugby union in Wales.

Rugby league has always done well with Welsh players and this team already has a fan base that may cross over, i know if the rfl shut rovers down, i wouldn't jump ship to another team in the area.

[Griff]

NRL have had a wake up call.   Running the game in the UK is harder.

[lucky 7]

15 hours ago, Griff said:

NRL have had a wake up call.   Running the game in the UK is harder.

I wouldn't be surprised if they withdrew their interest in it.

[M j M]

Sounds like it's just a typical V'landys negotiating ploy and the deal is very much still on.

[Griff]

1 hour ago, lucky 7 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if they withdrew their interest in it.

I wouldn't be surprised if DAZN have said "'Ow much??"

[JonM]

3 hours ago, M j M said:

Sounds like it's just a typical V'landys negotiating ploy and the deal is very much still on.

Perhaps a negotiating ploy is being tried on wrt Sky TV rather than the RFL?