Salary Cap

[Sproj]

Let's help them get started.

Non-Sydney Teams must stay:

1. Broncos (they are your cash cow, work with them)
2. Cowboys
3. Raiders
4. Knights
5. Warriors
6. Titans
7. Storm
8. Sea Eagles

Sydney Teams that must stay as they are supported / rich:

1. Bulldogs
2. Roosters
3. Rabbit pjs
4. Dragons

Teams that need to be merged / dropped:

1. Sharks
2. Tigers
3. Eels
4. Panthers

Merge the Sharks and Panthers if you have to keep them for some reason.

Merge another two if you must but that leaves two potential new teams to go with 14 that would stay. This is more feasible than a blanket dropping of sides or expansion as the NRL needs to phase this process in.

Then, you have two spots open for a 16 team comp and you can easily start with:

15. Adelaide
16. Perth

You can look at an extra Brisbane team preferably out of the south-east/west corridor around Ipswich or Inala, PNG, Rockhampton, Geelong, Darwin (pfft) or Hobart, second NZ team moving ahead.

Some of that may not work but some of it will and at the very least, it is forward thinking. Outline a plan like that transparently with your Sydney fans and tell them to support their team or disappear.

 

[Porthoz]

14 teams operated at a loss last year. That would just leave a competition consisting of NQ and Bris. There would be some great games and the Broncos would make the GF but it probably wouldn't work out.

The salary cap is a good thing because it keeps the comp relatively even. Without it, some clubs wouldn't survive hence making the NRL quite lame. Such is the drawback in a sport which plays second fiddle to the AFL.

Would those 14 teams operate at a loss if they weren't being dragged down by the hopeless teams, which take resources and public away from the more viable ones?

The NRL doesn't play second fiddle to the AFL in NSW or Qld, its management is a different thing entirely!

 

[Kimlo]

Do mergers work?

I'd pretty much quit watching the NRL if the Broncos became the Brisbane Titans, probably only tune in for Origin and the GF.

 

[Accept]

Do mergers work?

I'd pretty much quit watching the NRL if the Broncos became the Brisbane Titans, probably only tune in for Origin and the GF.

The Broncos won't have to worry about merging as they have been the richest club basically since inception. The Titans, on the other hand, face a very bleak future. A relocation is the only thing that will save them. North Sydney is their likely destination.

Let's help them get started.

Non-Sydney Teams must stay:

1. Broncos (they are your cash cow, work with them)
2. Cowboys
3. Raiders
4. Knights
5. Warriors
6. Titans
7. Storm
8. Sea Eagles

Sydney Teams that must stay as they are supported / rich:

1. Bulldogs
2. Roosters
3. Rabbit pjs
4. Dragons

Teams that need to be merged / dropped:

1. Sharks
2. Tigers
3. Eels
4. Panthers

Merge the Sharks and Panthers if you have to keep them for some reason.

Merge another two if you must but that leaves two potential new teams to go with 14 that would stay. This is more feasible than a blanket dropping of sides or expansion as the NRL needs to phase this process in.

Then, you have two spots open for a 16 team comp and you can easily start with:

15. Adelaide
16. Perth

You can look at an extra Brisbane team preferably out of the south-east/west corridor around Ipswich or Inala, PNG, Rockhampton, Geelong, Darwin (pfft) or Hobart, second NZ team moving ahead.

Some of that may not work but some of it will and at the very least, it is forward thinking. Outline a plan like that transparently with your Sydney fans and tell them to support their team or disappear.

 

[Kimlo]

Well I'm not old enough to remember the mergers of Balmain or St Merge, for those who are, how did that go down? Did many leave the game? Or was it huff and puff but ultimately accepting it had to happen?

 

[Porthoz]

The Broncos won't have to worry about merging as they have been the richest club basically since inception. The Titans, on the other hand, face a very bleak future. A relocation is the only thing that will save them. North Sydney is their likely destination.

That would be counterproductive... another team in Sydney?

They need to persevere with the Gold Coast, which is a rich grassroots area, like they need to persevere with Newcastle and Penrith for example.

I agree merging or relocating clubs to areas like Perth, Wellington, SEQ West corridor, maybe even Central Qld would definitely end up benefiting the competition.

But if we need Bosford to have a team, then we can't have Manly. If we need Penrith, then we can't have Parramatta. If we need the Chooks, then we can't have Souffs. If we need the Dragons, then we can't have the Sharks. If we need the Bulldogs, then we can't have Wests. And suddenly we have 5 less teams in the Sydney area, and areas with plenty of potential to grow into.

I think at this stage we should go with 2 teams less, which will cost TV dollars revenue, but also less thinning of talent and more quality in a truly national competition, albeit still involving local derbies to spice up the rivalries.
It would deliver more fans to games (a Roosters - Bulldogs could easily attract 30K+ at the SFS for example), and while powerhouse teams would draw public to the growth areas initially, those could also build a fan base if and when marketed properly, because we do have an excellent product! This in turn would attract more sponsorship and the capability of most clubs supporting themselves, or at least be a lesser drag on the others.

 

[Big Pete]

Well I'm not old enough to remember the mergers of Balmain or St Merge, for those who are, how did that go down? Did many leave the game? Or was it huff and puff but ultimately accepting it had to happen?

Well the whole game was in disrepair at the time. Twelve clubs ceased to be with others on the verge of extinction. If they weren't bailed out by News Limited. Some clubs formed new entities so we didn't lose St George, Illawarra, Balmain, Wests, Norths and Manly altogether but it was close and some of those mergers didn't work.

As far as St George, Illawarra, Balmain and Wests go, they worked because the NRL was happy to give them salary cap concessions. Since a few of these clubs had never been in successful positions before, the merger was something of a success to begin with. It's easy to forget but Wests were one of the form teams of 2000 until Melbourne flogged them. It eventually led to a series of matches where they only won 3 of their past 12 clashes. One game I remember quite well was the Round 20 clash against Brisbane. It was close in the first half, then Brisbane produced a second half that was better than anything any other team had come up with that season. When Brisbane were in a mood that year, they would belt teams off the park...

...sorry getting distracted. 2000 happened to be my first year as a fan and to watch my team go from a bunch of rookies into one of the most dominant forces I've seen was something else. In conclusion, they worked out OK because fans enjoy success and for the Wests Magpies they had been knocking on deaths door since the 80s. The fact they were still around in some capacity worked for some fans and the Tigers eventually brought new fans into the game thanks to Benji Marshall.

 

[Broncoman]

Well I'm not old enough to remember the mergers of Balmain or St Merge, for those who are, how did that go down? Did many leave the game? Or was it huff and puff but ultimately accepting it had to happen?

One of my mums sisters was a mad St George fan and she told me the merger turned her away for a bit as it didn't feel like St George but she still goes for them these days. It's a real shame that Illawarra had no money just imagine how good they could've been in the early 2000's. The region loves Rugby League more than anything and it's the best sporting breeding ground in the country.

The people I know who cheer for the Wests Tigers they accepted it well because they had no choice and it was obvious it was going to happen to the Magpies eventually.

My dad was a big fan of the Bears and he hated the Northern Eagles but everyone thought it was rubbish. Whoever thought putting enemies together had to have been a real bright spark, no wonder it failed badly. The Bears were really told to FOAD to put a long story short and dad hasn't gotten over it.

 

[Sproj]

less thinning of talent and more quality in a truly national competition, albeit still involving local derbies to spice up the rivalries

It would be fun to watch a side like this from Rugby and fringe graders run around:

1. Hunt
2. Mead
3. Folau
4. Isaako
5. Lee
6. Marshall
7. Sandow
8. Ese'ese
9. Parcel
10. Taylor
11. SBW
12. Teo
13. Arrow

14. JNik
15. Fai
16. Williams
17. Perrett

 

[Nashy]

Operating at a loss, but instead of actually fixing it, restrict the ones who can run a business.

What a fucking dumb thing.

Imagine if that happened in the real world with companies.

But hey, seems like most don't give a shit that we are watching a bunch of shit ***** try and fail at business.

 

[Morkel]

That is the biggest drawback in mergers - ideally you'd merge teams that were within close proximity, but it's often those teams that have the biggest rivalries. Imagine trying to convince Souths and the Roosters to merge.

Would I support the Brisbane Titans or the South East Broncitans? Yep. If it was between that and no team at all, I'd take it. The whole thing would be such a massive shake-up, with mass player transfers and drama, that the media would have a field day. There would be so much exposure that not one single Australian would be unaware of what's going on. Any fans you "lost" would be easily made up with new ones.

Time the mergers to co-incide with the new teams entering and it would bring positivity to something that would otherwise be perceived as hostile.

 

[Foordy]

That is the biggest drawback in mergers - ideally you'd merge teams that were within close proximity, but it's often those teams that have the biggest rivalries. Imagine trying to convince Souths and the Roosters to merge.

Would I support the Brisbane Titans or the South East Broncitans? Yep. If it was between that and no team at all, I'd take it. The whole thing would be such a massive shake-up, with mass player transfers and drama, that the media would have a field day. There would be so much exposure that not one single Australian would be unaware of what's going on. Any fans you "lost" would be easily made up with new ones.

Time the mergers to co-incide with the new teams entering and it would bring positivity to something that would otherwise be perceived as hostile.

I would also find funny the inevitable outrage from fans south of the border complaining how it is unfair that the Broncos don't have to merge and how they always get all the advantages. lol

 

[Nashy]

That is the biggest drawback in mergers - ideally you'd merge teams that were within close proximity, but it's often those teams that have the biggest rivalries. Imagine trying to convince Souths and the Roosters to merge.

Would I support the Brisbane Titans or the South East Broncitans? Yep. If it was between that and no team at all, I'd take it. The whole thing would be such a massive shake-up, with mass player transfers and drama, that the media would have a field day. There would be so much exposure that not one single Australian would be unaware of what's going on. Any fans you "lost" would be easily made up with new ones.

Time the mergers to co-incide with the new teams entering and it would bring positivity to something that would otherwise be perceived as hostile.

I don't get the merge thing either. Let them decide, don't force them. If two business' want to merge, go nuts. Don't force them. But tell them, if they don't do something, they WILL lose their licence.

 

[Morkel]

I don't get the merge thing either. Let them decide, don't force them. If two business' want to merge, go nuts. Don't force them. But tell them, if they don't do something, they WILL lose their licence.

Agree that it would be slightly less aggressive to let the teams choose who to merge with, but it would be shit if they ended up merging with ones in a totally different region. I guess though that would be in the hands of the clubs.

 

[mitch222]

Let's help them get started.

Non-Sydney Teams must stay:

1. Broncos (they are your cash cow, work with them)
2. Cowboys
3. Raiders
4. Knights
5. Warriors
6. Titans
7. Storm
8. Sea Eagles

Sydney Teams that must stay as they are supported / rich:

1. Bulldogs
2. Roosters
3. Rabbit pjs
4. Dragons

Teams that need to be merged / dropped:

1. Sharks
2. Tigers
3. Eels
4. Panthers

Merge the Sharks and Panthers if you have to keep them for some reason.

Merge another two if you must but that leaves two potential new teams to go with 14 that would stay. This is more feasible than a blanket dropping of sides or expansion as the NRL needs to phase this process in.

Then, you have two spots open for a 16 team comp and you can easily start with:

15. Adelaide
16. Perth

You can look at an extra Brisbane team preferably out of the south-east/west corridor around Ipswich or Inala, PNG, Rockhampton, Geelong, Darwin (pfft) or Hobart, second NZ team moving ahead.

Some of that may not work but some of it will and at the very least, it is forward thinking. Outline a plan like that transparently with your Sydney fans and tell them to support their team or disappear.

Problem is that in your list there, the panthers, eels and Tigers all are needed in the NRL because of their junior catchment areas. They all serve a purpose and closing them up would mean you are losing valuable resources. If Sydney clubs are getting cut, its really the sharks and Roosters who should go as they don't have much junior areas.
Oh and Adelaide wont work, go to Perth, and drop a second team in the Brisbane area.

 

[Nashy]

Problem is that in your list there, the panthers, eels and Tigers all are needed in the NRL because of their junior catchment areas. They all serve a purpose and closing them up would mean you are losing valuable resources. If Sydney clubs are getting cut, its really the sharks and Roosters who should go as they don't have much junior areas.
Oh and Adelaide wont work, go to Perth, and drop a second team in the Brisbane area.

Second team in Brisbane is doomed to fail.

 

[mitch222]

Second team in Brisbane is doomed to fail.

Doesn't have to be in the heart of Brisbane. There is enough population to put a second team there. Ideally, **** the Titans off who don't develop any QLD juniors, and put a team at Ipswich. They are further away enough from Brisbane to be their own team.

 

[Sproj]

I think an Ipswich team has to happen eventually but for me, it doesn't come down to whether another Qld team would work or not, this is the NATIONAL rugby league, there NEEDS to be teams in Adelaide and Perth or it is stupid to call it the NRL.