Lets talk Expansion starting with Brisbane.

Gaz

NRL Player
1,072
679
Monday Buzz: Let’s talk expansion, starting with Brisbane
Phil Rothfield
The Daily Telegraph
At some stage in the near future the NRL needs to fast forward to the difficult conversation about expansion and, more importantly, the long-term future and sustainability of nine Sydney clubs.
In two years the governing body will enter negotiations with TV networks and live streaming services for the next broadcasting deal. The current contract ends in 2022.
The reason for the urgency is that you need certainty around the product before you go to market.
The NRL must look to Brisbane for expansion, believes Buzz Rothfield.
We’re raising the topic again today because it’s an issue that has to be addressed not only for the broadcast deal but to give potential new franchises the opportunity to properly prepare.
Last week your columnist visited the magnificent new $30 million Broncos centre of excellence in Brisbane. From the moment you walk in on the ground floor it hits you … the Sydney clubs cannot possibly compete against this sort of professionalism.
Their set-up is out of this world.
The Broncos have $14.5 million worth of sponsors. The Cronulla Sharks had none until they snared a $1 million jersey sponsor over the weekend.
The Broncos are setting the standard for professionalism across the NRL.
The Broncos have 30,000 members — the highest in the league — spending on average $200 per head for another $6 million in revenue. On top of that they get the NRL grant of $12 million.
Their business now turns over well north of $50 million each year.
The Broncos have a city of 2.5 million to themselves and the best rugby league stadium in the southern hemisphere.
Plus the best high-performance centre I have seen in this country.
Sydney has nine clubs in a population of five million.
The longevity of nine Sydney clubs must be questioned.
What became obvious during the visit north of the border is that Brisbane needs a second team.
Even the Broncos’ highly regarded chief executive Paul White said: “The city’s big enough and it’s growing.
“Competition and competitiveness drive innovation. I support the growth of our game and having a future direction beyond the next five-year cycle.”
The Broncos are superbly run and leave a lot of the Sydney clubs looking like they are almost stuck in the chook raffle days.
The NRL is competing with 142 elite sporting franchises in Australia.
It’s chalk and cheese and the gap is only increasing.
The Broncos even have a sponsor for their training balls.
The commercial department got a copy of every edition of last year’s Courier Mail newspaper and printed copies of the pages where the training ball was photographed.
They took a big fat folder into the market and received $200,000 just for the football.
Their major sponsorship with NRMA is said to be worth almost $2 million a year, which is almost double what most of their Sydney rivals get for the same position on their jerseys.
Importantly, the aim shouldn’t be to weaken the Broncos. They are the benchmark.
Rivals clubs, particularly those in Sydney, need to lift their own games.
As White said: “I don’t think the game can sustain a competition with more than 16 teams.
“There are some telling indicators in that a number of Sydney clubs are struggling.”
So the conversation needs to happen. Not next year, but now.
To cut a Sydney team would be a highly dangerous move.
We saw what happened when that was tried on the South Sydney Rabbitohs.
Yet there are now 142 elite sporting franchises in Australia competing for the corporate dollar. We’re talking Supercars, Big Bash, all forms of male and female cricket, netball, league, union, AFL, soccer, basketball etc, etc.
It’s a tough ask for a suburban rugby league team to survive in this market.
 

Gaz

NRL Player
1,072
679
Can’t believe Paul White would be for it. After all if you own a pub you don’t want someone else building one in your back yard.
 
11,525
5,350
Gold Coast
I don't have a problem with another Brisbane side, provided it's built new from the ground up and done so in a professional manner(the mentality that a team will be an instant success here is misleading/dangerous) because quite frankly your asking a fiercely Brisbane/South East Queensland/Queensland fan base that in general has a strong hate for anything south of the border to take on board a club that has no history or tie to that fan base outside of the odd fan who supports that team.

As for the problems Sydney club are experiencing and have been for years, anyone with half a brain saw this was coming back in the mid 90's but those in charge of the game didn't want to acknowledge or deal with it and as a result this is the position all clubs in Sydney and the surrounding area face. You want Sydney clubs to be in a stronger position well that means making some really tough decisions in order to do so.
 
Last edited:

Tom

State of Origin Rep
5,728
4,627
Can’t believe Paul White would be for it. After all if you own a pub you don’t want someone else building one in your back yard.
I don't think he is, Rothfield is just trying to spin it that way. There are no quotes from White that mention a second Brisbane team. Only:

“The city’s big enough and it’s growing.

“Competition and competitiveness drive innovation. I support the growth of our game and having a future direction beyond the next five-year cycle.”

Any number of questions could have gotten these quotes out of White. Rothfield is just scum, please don't invite him back to our training sessions club.
 

Battler

NRL Captain
3,452
1,701
North Brisbane
Perth needs to be next. WA has a stronger jr base than a state that has had an NRL side for 20 years (storm aka another QLD team/ second Brisbane side given the makeup of their catchment base) and has just lost a super rugby team (even though that competition is shocking).

I don't know why Hobart isn't talked up more either. Tassie only has cricket teams, and although afl has infested that area, the people still don't have a footy team to follow. The city is growing at a rapid pace as is Tasmania. It's audacious, but I reckon a team would thrive there.
 

abashii

NRL Player
1,366
1,668
Deep Didgeridoo
Perth needs to be next. WA has a stronger jr base than a state that has had an NRL side for 20 years (storm aka another QLD team/ second Brisbane side given the makeup of their catchment base) and has just lost a super rugby team (even though that competition is shocking).

I don't know why Hobart isn't talked up more either. Tassie only has cricket teams, and although afl has infested that area, the people still don't have a footy team to follow. The city is growing at a rapid pace as is Tasmania. It's audacious, but I reckon a team would thrive there.
Would many players want to move to Tassie? The weather there's worse than Canberra it snows in winter, the avg max daily temp in July is 12 degrees. The avg ground temperature is close to freezing. Doesn't sound like a great place for footy.
 

Sproj

International Rep
14,493
7,103
They need to do two new sides: Perth and Brisbane 2.

Following that, go with removing at least 3 Sydney teams and placing them elsewhere but as new clubs, no relocations. Put one in on the Central Coast (Bears maybe) and that way you are diversifying the saturated and unproductive Sydney market.

So 1 Central NSW Coast, one Adelaide and one/two elsewhere - ask for bids, even consider a NZ 2.
 

Sproj

International Rep
14,493
7,103
Perth needs to be next. WA has a stronger jr base than a state that has had an NRL side for 20 years (storm aka another QLD team/ second Brisbane side given the makeup of their catchment base) and has just lost a super rugby team (even though that competition is shocking).

I don't know why Hobart isn't talked up more either. Tassie only has cricket teams, and although afl has infested that area, the people still don't have a footy team to follow. The city is growing at a rapid pace as is Tasmania. It's audacious, but I reckon a team would thrive there.
I think you could get away with a Hobart team but it would need to have lower expectations and a lot of financial support, it would take years to get established. Hobart is not growing THAT rapidly, the population there is still tiny.
 

Foordy

International Rep
16,942
7,876
my one concern with a second Brisbane team is the NRL making the exact same mistakes as Sydney (and lets face it, i doubt the NRL are smart enough to learn from their mistakes)

and that mistake is saturating the Brisbane market with too many clubs. i think South East Queensland can handle 3 clubs max. Broncos, Titans and one other (Ipswich, Redcliffe, Brisbane 2, sunny coast maybe)

but i do think that the first place to get an expansion team should be Perth. they have been crying out for a team for a long time, they have strong junior base, quality stadium and the best bit is the time difference (for TV rights negotiations)
 
Last edited:

Porthoz

International Captain
I don't think you can expand the NRL to more than 16 teams, as White implies in this article.

This means relocation of Sydney based teams, and I think 3 would be the right count. Perth is the absolute first in line imo, but we could certainly look at Wellington and I think Brisbane can certainly have a second team without great impact to the Broncos, whether it's Redcliffe or Ipswich is the question...

I don't believe any other location is sustainable, no matter how much a few Bears volunteers would like to make it look possible in the Central NSW coast.
 

Sproj

International Rep
14,493
7,103
I don't think you can expand the NRL to more than 16 teams, as White implies in this article.

This means relocation of Sydney based teams, and I think 3 would be the right count. Perth is the absolute first in line imo, but we could certainly look at Wellington and I think Brisbane can certainly have a second team without great impact to the Broncos, whether it's Redcliffe or Ipswich is the question...

I don't believe any other location is sustainable, no matter how much a few Bears volunteers would like to make it look possible in the Central NSW coast.
I agree about the central coast but I don't trust the NRL to be competent and bold enough to get fully out of Sydney. This is the reason I think they should go central coast, it just spreads the Sydney based teams that little bit.

But the thing I just don't understand is why the NRL hasn't jumped at Perth after the union time folded, Perth is ripe for the picking and as Foordy Foordy said, the time difference makes back to back night games perfect.
 

Gaz

NRL Player
1,072
679
I don't think you can expand the NRL to more than 16 teams, as White implies in this article.

This means relocation of Sydney based teams, and I think 3 would be the right count. Perth is the absolute first in line imo, but we could certainly look at Wellington and I think Brisbane can certainly have a second team without great impact to the Broncos, whether it's Redcliffe or Ipswich is the question...

I don't believe any other location is sustainable, no matter how much a few Bears volunteers would like to make it look possible in the Central NSW coast.
Let’s relocate them to North Korea
 

Art Vandelay

QCup Player
690
503
I think the window for expansion is pretty much closed for the time being for reasons completely separate from the NRL. The economy sucks right now, and is trending even suckier. Perth isn't the slam-dunk it used to be, the Sharks' financial fortunes are tied up in Sydney property and Brisbane has not eventuated into the next big boom despite over a decade of blue-sky predictions.
 

Morkel

International Captain
20,204
16,363
The "fairest" way to cull the Sydney teams is to say that 2 will be going, no questions. The ones that go will be the ones with the fewest legit supporters, ie, ticketed members. Teams will be allowed to merge in order to pool members. So either the ones in danger merge, or they risk being cut.

The reason for ticketed members is because there are teams that sell super-cheap (~$10) "supporter" memberships that get you a sticker and discount vouchers, aimed at being used as gifts, and it'd be too easy to fudge figures for teams that have rich owners but few genuine fans.
 

Super Freak

International Captain
24,178
11,307
Brisbane
More teams is not going to work.

The NRL needs to focus on Sydney and reduce the amount of teams there before they worry about expansion.
 

Unbreakable

International Rep
14,091
10,111
27.4° S, 153.0° E
I love that the best argument for not having a Perth team is the travel...

Other teams will have to fly there once a year.. Who cares.. NBA teams fly that distance 4 times a week and they don't complain. (Although, private jet)
 
Top