BHQ RL Poll Results - State of the Game

[Ari Gold]

 

[Ari Gold]

Couple of generic sort of ones to start with but they tie in well together.

How would you rate the health and strength of the game?

25 answered this question, with options of outstanding, good, average, poor and The Canberra Raiders are in better shape than the game is.

The Verdict: 13 of you answered good and the other 12 voted average. The take away from this is that the game is okay, not poorly it would seem, but not outstandingly well either. An interesting complimentary result to this was...







The success of your team aside, do you think the game is better and more exciting than it was 10 years ago?

25 answered this question too, with options of Yes by a long or small margin, No by a long or small margin, feels about the same and didn't follow the game 10 years ago.

The Verdict: 4 of you answered yes, but all who did said only by a small margin. 9 said it feels about the same, whilst there were 3 respondents who only took up interest in the game in the last decade. 9 in total said it was worse, 5 by a small margin and 4 by a big margin.

To simplify this verdict, out of the 22 people who followed the game 10 years ago, 18 do not believe it is a more exciting product than it was in 2004. Now, I did ask people to exclude our success, but maybe it's hard and the fact we've had a lean 2-3 years is a factor.

My 2c: I myself said no by a small margin. Things like the wrestle and the slowing down of the play the balls, coupled with extraneously long times spent on video reviews for both tries and foul play, coupled with an amazing inability to still get it right are all reasons that kill some of the excitement for me. And that's despite the game having a lot of exciting players, more so IMO than in recent years.

 

[Ari Gold]

Result from the big survey part where you were asked to disagree or agree with a statement.

I believe the game needs to introduce a Rookie Draft.

25 votes were received. Of those votes...

8 strongly disagreed
9 disagreed
3 sat on the fence
4 agreed
1 strongly agreed

The Verdict: Only 20% of those surveyed believe the game needs to introduce a rookie draft.

My 2c: It seems like a mess of an idea. Hard to implement and even harder to make it effective. Teams have too much already invested in juniors and there's no collegiate program to make it viable like there is in the USA. Titans probably wouldn't mind as they don't seem to like juniors.

 

[Ari Gold]

What is the ideal number of teams to have in the NRL?

25 responded to this one. Almost half (12) voted that 16 is the magic number.

The Verdict: Almost half (12) voted that 16 is the magic number. 8 thought 18 was ideal, whilst 3 favoured 20 and 2 wanted a reduction down to 14.

My 2c: Ideally I think 20 is a good number, but in the short term it is not practical. I think the game has a lot work on before we can ever get to that number but I think there are a lot of regions that deserve a team. I feel these regions not only truly expand the game (as in locations where the game is present) but open up key markets in terms of the commercial side of the game.

 

[Ari Gold]

So, where should those new teams come from? Luckily I was smart enough to ask that question!

Which of the following proposed/theoretical new teams should be part of the NRL?

24 responded to this question, which actually allowed multiple answers. Essentially, you got to select any region you thought deserved a team.

The Verdict:

Of the 24 respondents, all 24 agreed Perth should have a team. Next most agreed upon location was Wellington with 10 votes. Ipswich (8), 2nd Brisbane Team (7), Mackay (3) and Sunshine Coast (2) showed there was an appetite for another QLD team to varying degrees whilst Central Coast (5) and Adelaide (4) were the other Australian based options. Of the Island options, PNG (4) was the most popular with Fiji and Samoa both polling a single vote.

Will it be long before these guys raid the game? Arrrr, I hope not!

My 2c: Perth is a no brainer. The 2hr delay in their time zone is ideal for broadcasting and it truly helps to nationalise the sport. I also voted for Wellington as I feel NZ needs a 2nd team. IMO The Warriors are a threat to have better juniors than the Broncos did in yesteryear and I don't think that makes for a balanced comp. Once more, I think it's important we open up more doors for young Kiwis who don't want to move abroad to potentially play NRL over Union. A 2nd team achieves this whilst also making the broadcast rights in NZ more valuable. I don't actually know if this is significant or not as I don't know the terms of the deal but it's just a cherry on top. A 2nd Kiwi team is vital for the growth of the game IMO.

I also feel a 2nd Brisbane team makes sense. It sucks from a Broncos POV but considering the size of the Brisbane market it seems like a missed opportunity. It might also mean we get some day games!

 

[Ari Gold]

Considering all factors, including the fact that it has allowed for an increased salary cap, what are you thoughts on the current broadcast deal?

This is an easier way for me to post results:

My 2c: It's a necessary evil. Salary cap going up is great but we still need to bring more money into the game. Still, longer term we need to balance the wants of Channel Nein with improving attendance and other areas of the game that aren't as good as we'd want them to be.

 

[Ari Gold]

Would you support the introduction of a captain's challenge?

The Verdict: Nobody can really decide what the change should be, but most want it. Can't believe someone said everything is fine the way it is.


My 2c: I want the Captains challenge so players can put up or shut up. I'd give them 2-3 though, not just one. Also want the video ref removed otherwise, to stop all this bullshit diving and milking etc.

 

[Big Pete]

I sat down and wrote an entire thesis on the standards of Rugby League vs 2004, never got around to it and have neglected this thread ever since.

The game is going fine right now. Could always be better and plenty left to improve but it's on the right track.

I reckon I said yes by a small margin. Teams are a lot smarter now than they were a decade ago and the competition is far more even too. Back in the day, most of the games weren't even worth watching where as there always seems to be a hook or surprise in each game this year.

16 teams is the way to go for the time being. While I believe a few clubs need to be introduced, I also think a few clubs have got to go, so in the end it may just fall into 16 team category.

Agree on Perth & Wellington. They're the ideal teams but hope they've learned a lot since the Reds days. Only lived there for relatively short time but the community didn't buy into the ARL at all. Lots and lots of fuss about the AFL, still remember a bunch of kids trying to give me grief over the Bears - like I gave a shit.

Necessary evil although 9 are basically shooting themselves in the foot. Hopefully they come through on their promise to make the Sunday afternoon game live, broadcast the games in HD, advertise the sport better and hire better commentators. I don't hate the man, but Gilbert isn't fit to call League.

Having watched enough NYC, I can tell you now the NRL will absolutely HATE the captain's challenge. You're basically inviting the video referees more and more into the game - they're terrible at their jobs and it makes for an absolute lottery.