Is it time for change to the current NRL structure?

I loved this article. What a great idea.

I have similar thoughts on the international calender as the author. butni would have tours replace the internarional friendlies for Australia, NZ and england. Tour every four years between hemispheres, the third team plays warm up games against the other two and the minor nations in the region to complete their fixture list. As for the nrl i disagree with the 1t round proposal on the grounds that its to little football and will devalue the broadcast value. My view is that the only way forward is to expand to 18 teams in year 1 and 2 of the next broadcast deal and once the 18th team is admitted implement a conference model for the league. My preference for expansion is the ipswich logan bid and the west coast. I would like to see 2 conferences of nine teams with the top 4 qualifying for finals, play every team in your conference twice, then 6 more games which will be based on the previous years rankings. this gives a total of 22 games per club thus satisfying the RLPA over burnout and broadcasters as with the 18 teams its an increase in games. conference makeup could be: Conf 1: broncos, cowboys, titans, ipswich-logan, west coast, souths, roosters, parra, Canterbury Conf 2: warriors, melbourne, newcastle, canberra, penrith, wests, dragons, sharks, manly The sydney teams should never be allowed to play in one conference as some pundits and club figures have mooted, they should be split between conferences similar to above. I say this as not every sydney matchup is a rivalry anyway and for every team to play each other twice in the metro area is overkill from that regard. also to shift the burden of travel onto the regional and other teams would be infair.

I can't see how adding four games means players will burn out any more than they do now. Add two weeks to the season at the start. have a break in the middle for SOO and the players can recharge their batteries. With the extra revenue four games bring, an additional player can be added to the squad of 25 to allow for more depth. A shortened competition will never happen because of the impact on revenue. Of course, if we add extra teams it starts to get more difficult to play teams twice and the conference system has to apply.

you could have a 9s comp on the during the origin weeks to give broadcasters happy as well as keeping players fit. NRL gives the winners $500,000 and the clubs will start to take it seriously

I' a firm beleiver that anyhting which borrows from the NFL probowl is inherently a bad idea.

But then it is a commerical entity so deliberately reducing ratings whilst fair (in the equitable sencse not in return for value sense) would be as commerically sensible as putting a shotgun in your mouth

I think there is a pretty tacit nod to "fairness" if difficulty is set arbitrarily

Sevens rugby isnt successful, its for guys who cant cut it elsewhere and is a day on the drink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashes_%28rugby_league%29

They would be complaining because it will be difficult, but not because it is unfair. To win an Open you have to beat, every single opponent you come up against. If you can beat Nadal but not Federer, then you don't deserve to win. Why would it be fairer that someone else has to play both those guys.

I don't see it as political correctness gone made, just that it's unnecessary.

That tennis analogy is off the mark. I bet if someone had to play Nadal and Federer twice to win the Australian Open they would be complaining...

And because of the above, the conference system will never work in rugby league.

The Ashes is in cricket, not league.

Better off having a Middle-East/Africa group for cost and geographic purposes It would be more practical for Lebanon and UAE (who also play) to play against Morocco, S Africa etc Perhaps an Asia-Pacific group. The Asian teams would start on a lower tier, ie, equal to lesser Pacific Nations such as Vanuatu, Niue etc

We're still stuck with this TV deal that feels like our soul was sold for a high price. Come next deal we'll have a former banker in the top job with a few years of RL management experience under his belt, money invested from the current deal, and a lot more bargaining power. At the moment I think there's a lot of good ideas but not a lot of freedom.

Don't get me wrong, I see both sides of the story with playing in the bush. But in my instance, I'm a Dragons fan, what does my team get by going to Tamworth to play a competition match there? If there is no financial reward, no home ground advantage, and piss off members by playing away from home, what is the point? Most country adult league fans would have followed their team since childhood and won't convert to the Dragons just because they play a game there every now and then, maybe once a year if they are lucky. Yes you might gain a few kids as supporters but is that enough to off-set the cost of travelling to the Bush? As I said I see both sides of the coin and feel each club should play a game each season in the bush, but why should the club pay for it when it is the NRL responsibility to ensure the league grows its brand not individual clubs. What is the point of a war chest to fight off other sports and consolidate the support it has if they are not going to help its struggling loyal regions? Why are they purposely neglecting their most loyal supporters

Yet that was the general feeling in rugby league circles. The independent commission would fix everything that was wrong with the game with a flick of their fingers. From Roar authors to journalists from the Daily Terrorgraph were calling for Gallop to leave the game and to bring forward the saviour of Rugby League, the almighty Commission. What have we found? Not that much different, yes News Corp is out of our game and I guess we won't really know how different it will be, only time will tell. To be honest, I haven't been to impressed so far.

Max 20 NRL teams,each in 4 conferences of 5:Messenger,Gasnier,Lewis,Beetson which I continually bang on about. . Each team plays within their own conference the other team twice= 8 games. Then plays the remaining 15 teams in the other 3 conferences once=15 games.Swap teams within conferences annually. 23 rounds. Leaving 3 clean weekends for Origin 26 weeks in toto.Eases pressure on Origin stars and provides fans with at least as best full strength teams for all NRL rounds.Maximising crowds,TV ratings and interest. Add in mid year one test against the sheep chasers. All Stars/9s remain at the beginning.World club challenges IMO would be past their use by date. I agree with a later start,season without the swelter demanding enough.

I agree that minnow nations need to play more games more often, but I think it will be hard to get people excited about 'friendlies.' having something to play for will bring in a bit more interest.