Dear Davo Smithy, today it’s time to kick the hornet’s nest. I’m talking about that often feared phrase that strikes fear into the hearts of the most one-eyed fans: Sydney team rationalisation.
Let’s be honest here, this is nothing new. Talk of Sydney teams relocating and merging has been going on for decades.
Why? Because the NRL was born out of a suburban comp that never predicted that one day it would become an international competition.
But we still cling to these suburban teams out of heritage and loyalty.
The problem is however that while some teams have made the transition from the suburbs to the big show, several are stuck in the doldrums.
Now let me get this out of the way early – this is not an attack on the current Sharks situation.
When I first read sensationalist journos wanting to boot them out during their worst time of distress, I said it would be a foolish mistake.
Expansion should be positive, a sign of growth. You shouldn’t base your policy around kicking existing fans when they’re down.
So no, now’s not the right time for reactive measures. That said it’s actually a good opportunity to talk about long term strategy.
In my opinion there are haves and have nots in Sydney and the gap between the two groups looks set to widen.
The have-nots are the clubs that appear to be bogged down in their enclaves. History has shown us that the big clubs get bigger and the smaller clubs all face an inevitable crunch – being propped up, folding, relocating or merging.
Propping up clubs long term isn’t healthy. Those clubs will always be dragging down the rest of the comp but if we want to remain in key strategic locations then we might not have any other options.
On the other hand folding a club is insane. Rugby league has lost enough fans during the previous culls. I say put the axe down. That leaves two options: relocation or an intra-city merger.
For mine a merger is preferable. Fans in the original heartland can still have a team that’s based there rather than one that’s hundreds of kilometres away.
Also every home game would be in Sydney rather than interstate and the issues of two smaller clubs can be addressed at the same time rather than just one.
Meanwhile, you don’t have to sell non-heartland fans the concept of adopting a failed club.
The other benefit is that in a 20-team competition it opens up five expansion positions (potentially Perth, Adelaide, Central Coast, South-West Brisbane and Wellington-Christchurch).
There are certainly plenty of metrics to be considered when ranking the Sydney clubs. Crowds, members, financial security, demographics, junior structures et al. However for the moment I’d like to focus on one in particular – fan-base.
It’s one thing to say that you’ve got all the money under the sun or that you’ve got a massive population to tap into. But if you haven’t converted that into TV viewers, members or bums on seats, then you need to ask yourself what business you have in running a major sports club to begin with:
So some measures/rankings for you to consider:
• 2012 Roy Morgan NRL Club Supporters Poll
• 2001-2011 Roy Morgan NRL Club Supporters Poll Averages
• 2012 Crowds
• Crowds Over The Past 5 Years
• Crowds Over The Past 10 Years
• 2012 Memberships
The rankings are as follows:
• Dragons (1st, first, fourth, sixth, sixth, second)
• Eels (second, second, third, fifth, third, fourth)
• Tigers (3rd, third, fifth, first, fifth, sixth)
• Sea Eagles (4th, fifth, sixth, fourth, ninth, fifth)
• Bulldogs (5th, fourth, first, second, second, third)
• Rabbitohs (6th, sixth, second, third, first, first)
• Roosters (7th, seventh, eighth, seventh, seventh, seventh)
• Panthers (8th, eighth, ninth, eighth, eighth, eighth)
• Sharks (9th, ninth, seventh, ninth, fourth, ninth)
There are five teams (including two merged teams) – Dragons, Eels, Tigers, Bulldogs and Rabbitohs – who have never ranked in the bottom three teams for any of these metrics.
Those clubs have built up or are building a degree of stability that will ensure their long term futures.
Manly is right behind them although their rankings have had a lot more to do with their on field performance.
A few bad seasons strung together might expose some difficult truths. Ultimately though, Manly’s location and fan-base is difficult to integrate with other clubs and locations.
Abandoning everything north of the harbour would be a mistake. Their saving grace might arise in renewed business investment and a cross-promotion on the back of a revived Bears and revitalised North Sydney rugby league fan-base that returns the code to the A-list.
The obvious needs to be said about the Panthers, Roosters and Sharks: these clubs consistently rank in the bottom three. The Panthers though face similar issues to Manly.
Merging them with a natural rival like Parramatta would be similar to revisiting the Northern Eagles fiasco.
Booting them would open up a blackspot for others to fill. The main hope for Penrith is the population growth that’s destined to fall on their doorstep but planning for that, converting those people to the Panthers brand, needs to have started yesterday.
That leaves the Roosters and the Sharks. One is afflicted by shifting demographics and money has done little to remedy it.
Meanwhile, the other is also stuck in their enclave and while new developments offer a sorely needed financial stability the odds are that both will remain bottom three clubs for the rest of their existence.
However if these two clubs were to merge akin to the Wests Tigers (ranked third) and St George Illawarra Dragons (ranked first) and retained a similar base as to what those clubs did, then the new Roosters-Sharks club could rank higher than the Rabbitohs and Bulldogs in fourth place. The NRL would then have six big Sydney clubs.
Scheduling requires an all-of-game approach. There is potential for other clubs (Rabbitohs-Tigers-Dragons) to be playing home matches at the SFS.
Those three games could be combined with a five home games to form an 8 game SFS package. That’s likely more games than what current average Roosters fans are attending.
Meanwhile, seven home games could be played at Endeavour and both could be sold in a 15 game package.
As for branding I think that while the Sydney name is strong for a national comp, when there is a bunch of other clubs equally applicable, it does become a little redundant.
I would rather see a resurrection of the traditional name modified slightly as Eastern Sydney. Meanwhile, the Cronulla brand should be dropped but their mascot adopted for the new club.
The combining of those three elements has strong potential from a national marketing viewpoint.
So let’s be honest. If in five to ten years time the NRL’s money has poured in and these clubs are still at the bottom of the pecking order, drop the taboo and let’s seriously examine the benefits of the Eastern Sydney Sharks.
Now let’s hear from the hornets nest…
Easts To Win
Guest
I sure as hell wouldn't watch a Souths/Easts merger or a cronulla/easts merger either. I would simply stop supporting Australian Rugby League and switch to union. The way I see it, the tahs have a seat waiting for me.
81paling
Roar Rookie
In answer to your first question yes, there is no doubt that Dorahy, Boyd and Ray Brown left Wests in 1979 and joined Manly cause they knew Wests could not match the Money Manly offered by Manly. However the next thing you say is that it was the influence of manly that brought the players to them, well as recent incidents with Brett Stewart (who was unfairly treated by the media) go to show Manly no longer hold that draw card either. So now they are out of money, influence, juniors, fans, active members and therefore out of a future in the game. Inevitably time and the bank managers will get this selfish club and the game will be far better for it.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
I have already stated there is no demand as such for a 2nd NZ team at present.That does not preclude the future.My point was simply to argue there has been historical interest outside Auckland ,not NO real interest. To even compare any consideration of an AFL team in NZ (regardless of what the crowd may be in Wellington) with rugby league in that country is ludicrous. One code has a history there, the other does not. I could suggest based on your premise ,the NRL start a club in Hobart due to the 14,000+ in attendance at the storm v Broncos pre season game.That of course would be laughable. Rugby league has been played internationally against Australia for ages,the code has been strong in Auckland for quite a while,and there are pockets of strength in the outer Wellington areas. Games have been played by the Warriors either preseason or NRL in areas such as Hamilton,Rotorua,Invercargill,Forsyth Barr Dunedin and Lancaster Park Christchurch(22,000 in appalling conditions). If there were no real interest the Bulldogs would not be playing the Warriors in Wellington this year in an NRL match.And the NRL club would not have countenanced a game at Christchurch. Union is king over there ,that is a given. The code needs to expand into Perth and Brisbane 2 as priorities.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Far too early Planko.There are more important cities to consider in mainland Australia.
planko
Roar Guru
The rest of world stuff that is gold. The hatred on MANLY is quite funny. You talk about a by gone era that I will be blunt you know very little about. Do you think Manly got West, Souths and East players during the 70's players just because of Money ? What players got away with in the 70's and 80's makes Dugan look like a choir boy. Most players loved playing for Manly cause they had no problem covering up a lot of things and helping them off the field financially not just with the quantity of dollars . I know this cause Dad and Uncle played with Manly in that era. Good luck 81 who do you support ?
81paling
Roar Rookie
Ha haa! Planko is a Manly supporter, that is funny. Well Planko let me tell you a little secret that the rest of the world knows. The reason the Tigers will never have to schedule a home game at Gosford against Manly is because the people of Gosford hate you (not personally but, your club, just has greater effect the way I phrased it). The reality is that as soon as Manly cross a bridge they are in hostile territory and when I say a bridge, I do not mean the harbour bridge or the Anzac bridge I mean the Spit bridge and the Roseville bridge. However when all is said and done rugby league will miss something when Manly and Melbourne are no more, it is called scum and good riddance to you both.
81paling
Roar Rookie
I hear what you say but, the Manly that drained Wests of it's talent in the 70's and would go on to do the same to Norths and others is no longer the behemoth controlling NSWRL HQ on Phillip st that was the central club of those that Gibson spoke of when he said that his team (the Eels) had to be 8 points better than their closest rival in order to win a Grand final as he felt some clubs like Manly get favourable treatment (watching replays of their finals game against the Cowboys it is good to see some things do not change) and still find things to complain about. It still holds a tremendous sway of influence though (far beyond it's contribution to the game but, now it must use talent scouts (as it does very well) to scour the landscape far and wide scavenging on the young of rival clubs rather than buying their developed talent as it once did, for Manly is no longer the wealthy club it once was. Its few fans in its small drawing area will often on this site proclaim how they will stay home and watch games on TV rather than attend live matches an all the while their neighbouring clubs grow despite their limited success. Yet Manly who's success is not matched by any club in Sydney flounders and stagnates if not grows weaker year after year. Whilst the Manly drawing area takes into account a population of just over 350,000 and their average home crowd even in their most successful season struggles to break the 15K they must simply look in fear at the potential club that is morphing from their former team mates whom they in fact murdered on the 3rd of June 2002 in the form of the Bears. The modern hybrid of the NRL Bears bid have a drawing area of just over 1.2million people in an area where they are approaching 10,000 juniors and contains 2 grounds were Leagues is played (1 very modern ground) that both hold a greater capacity than Brookvale. Planko is right though as with Manly it is not that simple and whilst common sense says Manly should be punted and replaced by the Bears, unfortunately as we all know common sense is not that common when it comes to politics and in particular the games that Manly club officials are brilliant at playing in their cynical manipulative way, the Manly club is not done yet. They will continue to weaken the game of rugby League in their traditional selfish manor until my guess is a bank forecloses on their selfish, scavenging disgrace for a club that has no sense of community other than to itself.
Dean - Surry Hills
Guest
Souths fans still followed the NRL when they were banished from the comp - I know a number of them personally, and most adopted another team which they supported in their absence. Its a funny thing that even the most die hard supporters generally have a team that they consider to be their second favorite.
clipper
Guest
One average crowd does not equate to enough interest to have a permanent team - otherwise there will be calls for an AFL team after the St Kilda Swans match is played in Wellington!!
planko
Roar Guru
Crosscoder you are right up until the weekend they did not have 1 NRL team.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
NZ doesn't need a 2nd NRL team.By 2031 auckland's population is estimated to grow to nearly 1.97m,representing 61% of the country's population. Victoria Unis georgrapher Philip Morrison said " Auckland's growing dominance was good for the national economy.There is growing evidence that agglomeration increases labour productivity.including changes of employment and expected income.the larger auckland gets,the greater the economies of scale and the possibility of greater economic returns." No real interest yet when the Warriors have played at Christchurch they have gotten 22,000 and a big crowd at Dunedin.More than the Tahs get in their homeland city.There is interest ,just not enough for a 2nd team.You don't get crowds if there is no interest. Anycase now the code is getting more high schools involved in Auckland .Around 18 involved in a new tournament.Stick to the population centre.
clipper
Guest
Johnno, absolutely agree, outside of Auckland (mainly south with a little west) there is no real interest, unlike soccer which has interest all through NZ and would be more suited to a second team.
adam
Guest
I doubt any code could support two fully fledged first and second tier comps in Australia with teams travelling across the country. AFL & RL are split 50/50, A League is too small and Super Rugby is an afterthought.
planko
Roar Guru
Epiquin seriously I am giving you an open discussion I would love to see a team go up there but Tigers have not gone their under their own steam before. They will need to get told to go. Please all I was saying is that Tigers choose not to play there so why would they move their club there ? My grandfather was selector at the bears back just after the WWII before he moved to Beacon Hill. He was selector there at Manly but had to stand down once dad started playing Matthews. In the day god knows how he got that job as he did not play.. I hope CC Bears get a run mate I will not fight you on that.
Epiquin
Guest
Okay... So you are an Eagles fan, I mentioned that I was a bears fan... Was trying to have an open discussion. I should've known there would be one moron who would ruin it with his "Bears suck Eagles rule woooo" argument...
planko
Roar Guru
What are you talking about ... The Eagles are in comp .. EAGLES get PAID to play there in Central Coast .... EAGLES are winners BEARS are still crying in there beer at Cammeray. Please all I was saying is that Tigers choose not to play there so why would they move their club there ?
Epiquin
Guest
Really well if the current fans don't choose to even go the SFS for a finals game!!! well do you really think they will travel up to Gosford to watch them. Interesting... Good luck... GO LOGICAL ARGUMENTS!
Renegade
Guest
"destined for success" I've been hearing this about penrith for over a decade now.....and they still pull 10k crowds and have the lowest support and member numbers. .
planko
Roar Guru
Really well if the current management don't choose to play one game there !!! well do you think they will move their whole club there. Interesting... Good luck ... Go the EAGLES
Epiquin
Guest
I don't really see what that has to do with anything. Souths play home games at Bluetongue as well. All I'm saying is: -That there is a large supporter base for the Tigers on the coast. -The Tigers are a strong brand as The Entrance Tigers are the coasts biggest club. -Tigers supporters are not as bound by geography as other clubs -They currently use three home grounds all over Sydney -Shifting the clubs focus away from Western Sydney could allow the Panthers to grow and unify the outer west. No. The tigers don't play a home game on the coast 'off their own bat'. Probably because they already have to split their home games between three stadiums already. But I don't really see why that matters. I'm not even saying that it SHOULD happen. Just that its something else to consider...