- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Reading comments over the past few weeks regarding expansion got me to thinking over the Christmas break – a strong competition should have strong clubs. So where should the NRL have teams?
Starting in Queensland, my home state, there has to be two Brisbane teams for sure plus Gold Coast.
I only think we can justify one team north of Brisbane, however. Rockhampton is way too small but has mining money. Townsville has the population but not the same resources.
Rather than weaken the Cowboys I would love an NRL compliant stadium built at Rockhampton and the team alternate home games between there and Townsville. If this cannot be done then no Central Queensland side till they have a population base of over 300,000 close to Rockhampton – its currently about half that. So we’re looking 20-30 years, same as PNG.
NZ requires one more team on the north island, whether it be a second Auckland side or Wellington.
For Australia outside NSW, Perth I think is the only viable new candidate – resources, young and increasing population and attractive TV timeslot potential. Adelaide has an ageing, static population whose 2 AFL teams chew up every corporate dollar.
As for Sydney, I’m not in favour of culling teams yet – I would want to see how the TV deal, poker machine tax reductions (presuming a Liberal-National win the NSW State election in March) and expansions affect existing clubs. If some of them still struggle, then in time cull them or let natural attrition take its course.
I would divide the existing teams into those that must exist at all costs (keepers), and those who will have to continually justify their existence (justifiers).
My keepers would be Parramatta, Canterbury-Bankstown, Wests-Tigers, St George-Illawarra (plus Newcastle and Canberra outside Sydney). To those I would add the Central Coast Bears.
The remainder are justifiers, based on future demographics, corporate sponsorship potential, junior teams. These teams include Penrith, Manly, Souths, Cronulla, Sydney City. Of these, I think the Rabbitohs and the Roosters have better branding and hence merchandise and sponsor potential as historic brands. So my teams that long term have concerns are Penrith, Cronulla and Manly.
I stress that if these justifiers can continue to increase memberships and sponsorships, they are under no threat at all, ever. Due to their locations, I see Manly and Cronulla in particular though having to find support from interstate or in NZ.
In summary I think four teams can be added to the competition as their bids develop – Central Coast Bears, a second Brisbane team, WA Reds and another NZ side. On current strength, Central Coast are a no-brainer for entry, WA Reds are almost ready, Brisbane 2 is probably 6 or 7 years away, as would be another NZ side.
Just because I’m a Queenslander doesn’t mean I cannot see the historic reasons why there are so many teams in NSW and I have no problem with a top-heavy NSW model, just as AFL is a top-heavy Victorian model. However, if it means strong areas/teams are denied access to prop up weak teams, then I do have a problem.
As stated above, I am also anti Central Queensland entry as its own entity. A model similar to St George-Illawarra, Wests-Tigers or Central Coast Bears is required for northern Queensland, where player strength in one area is combined with corporate/branding strength in another.
Otherwise we’ll end up with two weak teams in northern Queensland rather than one strong one.
So if all teams can survive, I foresee a 20-team comp in ten years time. I think the NRL would be loathe to cull teams so that’s the way I think we’ll be heading. I certainly think the competition will benefit from the addition of the new teams.
Reckon you can pick the winning team? Build your own dream team with Draftstars daily fantasy and compete on any match. For great odds on the NRL head on over to PlayUp. Imagine what you could be buying instead. Set a deposit limit.