Reduce the number of Sydney NRL clubs and make our competition truly 'national'

Hey champ. 100% Right. My young bloke only had the option to play areal ping pong at school. No league. This current crop of administrators literally have no idea or clue. I'm only a distant observer, but an idiot can see that the VFL have it all over the NRL. And now the players are rubbing their greedy little hands together and yes looking for a bigger piece of the pie for them selves. When they threaten the NRL, they are actually threatening the fans. Its the fans who suffer. They claim that the NRL aren't doing enough for grass roots so they say, give us the money and we'll look after it. Really? Our game is in trouble, the one I 100% agree with this article is that something needs to be done. Just feel it's all going the way of the Dodo Bird.

And the NRL players are demanding a bigger piece of the pie?

What a completely pointless and useless article......void of anything useful. Thanks!

I never said you were making up numbers, I'm saying the Broncos crowds are irrelevant to this. It's not a similar situation. The Broncos were one team representing one Queensland city entering the NSWRL compared to killing off nine Sydney clubs to create five plastic franchises are not remotely similar. Any businessman relying on Brisbane crowd numbers from 30 years ago as any sort of business model or justification for this situation would be initially laughed at and the unceremoniously sacked. It's just not a relevant comparison in any way.

I am not making up numbers that is what happened in a real life situation that is very similar to what is proposed in this article. If that is not enough for you then in my opinion nothing will be. You would have to suffer some losses to get stonger in the long term. Sydney won't have that and they will suffer in the long term. Brisbane people slowly switched over btw, a lot of that is generational as I am suggesting would happen in Sydney. Many of the old BRL fans did not switch over and that is why people suggest there is plenty of ill will in Brissy towards the Broncos and there are many who would support a new team. But over time new fans come in as they grow up. Marketing is insidious and they will easily win over kids to new teams. I personally support both my local QRL team (Souths) and the Broncos. Many people are the same.

It's possible, but not likely. You've based your future visions of the Sunshine Coast on numbers too though, and that's a bit dangerous. Numbers don't equal fans. Perth has 2 million people and I bet you'd fail to fill any stadium. I've lived at Caloundra too and I'm not certain the population there would be as League focussed as you reckon. They are itinerant, touristy types. Cairns, plus PNG, are much more devoted. One idea I do like is a North vs South Brisbane team. The Broncos can cop a hit, they lead by miles in terms of members and probably wouldn't mind too much. But if it got going, what a local derby. Beats St George Cronulla or Penrith Parra all to hell. It would rival Origin. Any expansion will result in supporter movements so any established club might lose something until new supporters can be found. But the expansion line trumps it all so it's worth the risk. I reckon the big gamble is PNG. Sure, not at Moresby. But somehow, somewhere.

I know that my opinions are just that. I have backed some of mine up with (anecdotal) evidence. Now you have backed some of yours up with the same. I think it is hard to come back with some definitive answers that 'this type of person, from this town, will support this team', and so what we do need to go on is some opinions, some anecdotal evidence, some presence of concrete stats or infrastructure like existing rail lines, or numbers of ex-pats in Cairns etc. But you can't say for certain that there are "no more Broncos supporters in Ipswich than other parts of Queensland", either and expect me to take it as anything more than your opinion either. My points and the logic behind the cannibalising comments were that I can see 3 scenarios playing out if the NRL were to put a team in Ipswich: 1. The Ipswich team gets little support as most of the city already supports the Broncos (a disaster for one club: Ipswich, and what I am saying I think is the most likely scenario) 2. The Ipswich supporters who are currently Broncos fans or members do jump ship, and stop buying tickets, memberships, merchandise and subscriptions to the Broncos (a disaster for the Broncos, and by extension the whole NRL as the Broncos are the most successful and profitable club, but less likely in my eyes) 3. There are enough Ipswich and SEQLD locals who don't already have a team that they will now support the new team. A win-win which I see as incredibly unlikely With the Cairns situation, it is more likely that existing Cowboys fans will jump ship, as the Cairns to Townsville trip is 4 hours, and so why do it if you can get to a local game. So I see this as most likely to go the way of scenario 2, as above. Not quite as big a disaster, but terrible for the Cowboys. What I'm saying is that there are better options for expansion, especially in SEQLD, than to expand to these areas, as other options like Sunshine Coast, promoting an already successful QCup team like Redcliffe or Wynnum, or the Brothers bid, or a bid that capitalises on an already existing rivalry such as a South vs North rivalry are better bids in my eyes as they don't run the risks I've outlined above (i.e. aren';t as likely to end in scenario 1 as they have less rusted on supporters). If you take a bet, and 2/3 of the outcomes are failure, and of those 1 of those is a complete disaster, wouldn't you be stupid to take the risk if there were less risky (or more certain) options available?

No sorry mate. You're inventing your own hypothetical situations and then attributing it to me. I'm not setting impossible standards. Show me the numbers and the methodology behind them then if the add up you beauty I'm on board. 15,000 to turn into 50,000. Wow! I won't call that a failure but show me how you got those figures? It's ridiculous to compare the set up of a Brisbane team entering the NSWRL for the first time to axing nine Sydney teams and creating plastic franchises in their place. They're completely different scenarios. If you're seriously extrapolating Brisbanes crowd numbers and applying to the Sydney scenario you're talking about then it's irrelevant. But say we do go ahead and replace nine Sydney teams with five Sydney teams and four 'other' franchises are you seriously suggesting that this new configuration will generate MORE revenue for the game than the old? Where's the benefit for broadcasters? No additional games. Mild to massive drop in Sydney numbers - Australia's largest market. You're certainly not going to see more viewers. One of the other franchises goes into Brisbane 2. I genuinely think that would be great. I'm sure a lot of league fans in Brisbane would love it. They deserve it. But how many NEW eyes is that going to get on the game? And it's new eyes that equal broadcast revenue. I can say the same for NZ2. Or Rockhampton. Or Central Coast. Then we get a team in Adelaide where rugby league is so popular it's not even shown on FTA at all, let alone late at night. Will the broadcasters pay more for that? Would they pay the same? I can say the same for Perth or Hobart or Darwin. The model you've suggested might end up with 100,000 at every game but it's a moot point because the game won't survive five years. There's no probably about the game losing in the short term. The game will lose hundreds of millions in the short term. I know that in the past you and others have lamented the impact the creation of the Broncos had on the Brisbane rugby league competition. But now you're wondering why Sydney fans aren't throwing themselves at a similar scenario? The difference is that Brisbane got a team in the NSWRL against all of NSW that they could get behind. I know not everyone did, but a lot did. But you're asking Sydney people to cash out on their teams and adopt same made up team. The BRL didn't fold over night. You (collectively not personally) could still have chosen between your BRL team or the Broncos. But most Brisbane people jumped on the Broncs.

It's a massive problem. Much bigger than I would have thought 12 months ago. The NRL does next to nothing to promote the game to kids. If my kids grow up with any passion for footy it will be because of me not the NRL. My oldest is in year five. He's had NRL players come to his school once. This year. Bulldogs reserve grade and u20 players. My youngest had his first year of u7s this year. Not a single NRL player sighted all season. They had a gala day at Hurstville Oval. Over the PA we heard "get your photos taken with NRL stars in front of the stand" we raced over and there were kids lined up to get their photo taken with Todd Greenberg. The announcement came again and I realised they were saying "get your photo taken with NRL STAFF". Good on Toddy for showing up but fair dinkum... My kids team has the bare minimum of players. Whenever anyone is sick we play short or borrow players from the opposition. Every kid comes from a different suburb and school. Back in the day every suburb would have had its own team. Meanwhile his soccer team from last year has about eight teams in his age group. One club. My influence at home may not be enough. I take the kids to a few games every year and we watch the Sunday footy game most weeks. Pretty much every other game is on too late. We have a family tipping comp at home. But when they go to school none of their mates are interested so there's no influence at peer level. I really think building and shoring that next generation of players and fans is by far a bigger priority for the NRL than getting a team in Adelaide or wherever.

Don't be touchy about the spelling thing, I was just quoting you. I lived in both places too and your opinions are just that... opinions. No more Broncos supporters in Ipswich than any other place in Queensland for a start. And you defeat your own logic by talking about Cairns "cannibalising" the Cowboys and then saying a second Brisbane team won't shift Broncos supporters from Ipswich. You don't want to touch PNG for 20 years until it's safe, and maybe you're right, but you can't ignore the player base and 8 million fans. Cairns is the perfect compromise. You'd be amazed how many PNG ex-pats live there and will attend matches (I know, I have). Plus the Hunters just won the minor premiership in Intrust. So try not to be too dismissive of ideas that don't line up to your own, Padawan ;)

You are setting a situation that can never be meet. You are always going to loose hard core fans of some clubs if all the Sydney teams dropped down (though if they are fans they can still follow them) and porobably loose over all in the short term. The point is in the long term you will most likely get more gains if you are patient, as has been shown by the Broncs. If I said that 5 new clubs across Sydney averaged crowds 15,000 over their first couple of seasons but would deliver crowds of between 30-50,000 in 20 years time with commensurate TV ratings you would call that a failure. Those numbers are what the Broncos managed so it is not pie in the sky stuff and are areal world example of what could happen. The A-League, ABL and BBL are other examples. The only difference is how to sell the idea to Sydney people, and from my experience all it takes in today's world is some star power and over the top marketing. A knock out comp would also help so the old can play the new like a smaller version of the FFA cup in football. If the NRL can't sort out a real income from streaming this is a mute discussion anyway as it doesn't matter which clubs are in Sydney if there is no money.

First of all, rugby league is a national sport in Australia. Second, the governing body has to find a way to link the lower tiers of the code with the professional one. Third, professional sport is a form of entertainment. Fourth, global growth doesn't have to mean that every country in the world has to play the code professionally or even at the amateur level. Fifth, global growth of the code is easily tied in with the Super League in the Northern Hemisphere. Sixth, Origin is a money spinner. But not for the code.

That's fine and I don't necessarily disagree with you in a perfect world. But we all know that's not how people function. You can't just say "supporters need to come on board" because not all of them will. So it needs to be part of the equation. Putting a team in Perth needs to add more value to the game - and in particular the TV revenue - than the cost of cutting the Rabbitohs. Or whoever. None of these hypothetical models even come close to providing a reasonable explanation of how that occurs. That's Ryan's self confessed problem with his suggestions and that's where most of these fall down, is that they rely on an ideal, perfect world scenario which just doesn't exist in the real world.

That's a ridiculous comment. I've never run across a busy street with my eyes closed either. How have you achieved anything in life when you're willing to gamble billions of dollars and the future of the sport you love on a fantasy with no science behind it. Risk is only one side of the equation. Reward is the other side. I'm not saying don't do it until there is zero risk. I'm saying that the forecast reward has to far, far outweigh any potential risk. Get it right, great we've got teams in Adelaide and Perth and Ipswich or wherever. Get it wrong and we've wasted billions of dollars, alienated thousands of fans and potentially irreparably damaged the game. What I'm saying is not one single person in the hundreds - probably bordering on thousands - of comments I've read on this subject over the years has come close to clearly articulating what either the risk of the reward is. It's a pretty simple equation. How much ADDITIONAL revenue will new teams in (wherever) generate for the NRL versus how much existing revenue cutting / merging / relocating nine existing clubs will cost the game? Do you really think having teams in Perth or Adelaide will compensate axing nine NRL clubs? It's a ridiculous notion. It's all well and good saying "well in 50 years it will all be good" but the NRL has to guarantee it's survival beyond this next TV deal. Not one single person has come close to articulating that. Until that can be answered with science to back it up it's completely hypothetical to the point of being fantasy land. You may as well say let's have a team on the moon and one on Mars and one on Uranus so we can strengthen the interplanetary game.

I'd be gutted if my team dropped out of the top Comp. and I can sympathis with the rusted on supporters. But for the futher of the game the NRL has to start making some hard decisions to become a truely national competition in my opinion. They need a solid plan and the supproters need to come on board so the game can grow into a broader market. Success will only come if we are all brave enough to accept change when things are becoming stagnant.

I note the great entertainer Ben Cummins is back from the dead and is doing 2 free to air games this weekend (Fri night and Sunday)

That's an interesting question Perry Bridge, do you pour money into a city that's changed trying to restore your dominance, thereby assigning lesser resources to your new heartland areas in QLD and continuing support for Melbourne and hopes of expansion or do you accept the reality that the sporting landscape in Sydney has changed and try and adjust. Agent 11 - I haven't put down the professionalism and winning ways of the Storm - I've just stated, correctly, that after all the time in Melbourne and all their very successful seasons, they've yet to pass one AFL team in that city. GWS have been going a fraction of that time, started terribly, are doing well now and have passed 4 NRL teams in Sydney and needless to say the Swans, who are similar to the Storm in success and consistency have overtaken every NRL team in Sydney. That's the point I've always made.