Which teams deserve the axe?

Read the history books and learn why there is 9 teams based in sydney, the Nrl grew from the NSWRL, as did AFL grew from the VFL, geographically its not ideal, but there is history, and growth that stems from that. You cannot just invent a league from scratch and plonk 2 teams in each city… hope for the best. These comps existed way before grandaddy was a sperm. The clubs are not just new branded gold coast franchises from either code. They have legacy.. and if i see one more merger of cronulla and stgeorge thread ill go nuts, they are sworn rivals, just like easts and souths, same as penrith and parra. Norths are gone but if they come back, expect manly to be their rival too The mergers that are still around only worked coz they weren’t rivals and had something to gain from it, i dont see anymore mergers taking place, only relocations or bust

Personally i wouldn’t merge anyone, relocate yes, to places that dont have a strong junior base like Perth, Adelaide, Hobart or Darwin, but never relocate any to QLD, and i’d break the current mergers, and see each club stand alone, then drop whoever couldnt cope to nsw cup, which basically has those teams anyway, but theyd be somewhat stronger, as the mergers are all lope sided, and not contributing down to junior level on the lower sides. Also the idea of this article is what most fans think until its their own club involved But i must agree, souths/easts merged dogs/dragons and parra/penrith, is stupidity Especially since they are fierce rivals, i mean penrith is 30km away from parra And parra is 20kms away from the city Between them there is tigers,dogs and rabbits in that 20kms stretch, but no go on and merge the other way

Actually the AFL needs to increase to 20 with 2 conferences of 10 each. Definitely there's tremendous value in 2 teams minimum in each mainland state. It puts the AFL light years ahead of the NRL. The concentration of clubs in Melbourne - similar to the NRL in Sydney - DOES afford each code a 'fortress' home market. However - there is a major contrast. The AFL fortress is far better attended, subscribed (memberships) and the 'satellite' markets of Adelaide and Perth are very secure 2 team markets. The NRL footprint is far more diluted and 'fortress' Sydney is shared far too greatly with the other codes.

You've covered a lot but said not much. Taking crowd figures for the past 20 years as a sole measure of who goes and who stays not really practical why don't we just cut who has had the worst designed jersey? As far as Super rugby goes. There is no way cutting halve the current Aussie teams and 40% of NZ teams is going to fly. Putting in a Pacific team possibly could work or add a Singapore based team?

I was harsh in my original comment, but I stand by my sentiments. What I will say is you have my respect for continuing to hold and defend your viewpoint against overwhelming negative opinion, so kudos. Given that, I’ll respond to your ideas a little more reasonably. Merging clubs more often than not is unsuccessful. The Northern Eagles were a disaster which killed the Bears, South Sydney famously preferred to be booted out of the game than throw away history in a merged team, and the two current merged entities in the NRL (namely the St. George Illawarra Dragons and the Wests Tigers) both feature a successful, dominant faction and an inferior presence clinging on for dear life. Any merge in today’s competition would not work. It just couldn’t. There are no two clubs that could successfully pull off a merge. Merging the foundation clubs in Eastern Suburbs and South Sydney would be seem as near blasphemy, the Dragons and the Bulldogs are far too different, and the Parramatta Eels are too successful (despite some bright spark who responded to my first comment thinking that success is based on premierships) to merge with Penrith, another club that is doing fine for itself. Relocation does not work either, because rather than allowing a community to get behind a proposed club that is built from the ground up and benefits from genuine local support, you just plonk an already existing club in the middle of a new region and tell the locals to support them. It just doesn’t work that way. If you want to expand in Perth; in Adelaide; in Brisbane 2; in New Zealand, you have to do it properly. So, what’s the answer to the amount of clubs in the NRL? I truly believe the best solution is expansion to Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane 2, and Central Coast (in that order), and featuring a promotion/relegation system with the NSW/QLD Cups.

The merger I'd love to see is League and Union to merge.

So you want the failed "Super League" again? The solution is the opposite to what you are arguing for. Imagine a major expansion to 30 or more teams, in 3 divisions. There's room for a dozen Sydney teams and plenty more. I don't care much about a thinning of talent, what I care about is that the game can either choose to wither and die, or expand and flourish. Bring back the Newtown Jets, Western Suburbs Magpies, North Sydney Bears, Illawarra Steelers and grow the game!

If you're going to cut teams based on business principles then looking at crowd numbers as a way to determine who get's culled is just plain wrong. From a business PoV, things like financials, governance, sponsors, 3rd party deals, stability, sustainability and key growth indicators should be the key factors when selecting who to cut. The crowd numbers just seems like an easy cop out option that makes no real sense.

The concept is correct but as El Loco points out, this one has very little analysis, it comes across as change for change sake. These clubs you wish to merge have history, members, financial support and fans but also rivalry that generates money for the code and clubs. I cannot offer much about the AFL but we will get to the point of rationalisation of some Sydney clubs and it will take quite a while for either side fans to gravitate toward their merged entity but success speeds up that process. This also has to be done gradually, one merger, one expansion team every 5-10 years. A cut and shut approach will not generate enough new support to compensate for the loss of faith in the system running the game. In turn less eyeballs watching = less money from sponsors. So, I respect it's an 'ideal scenario', most of the angst pulling apart the concept is due to the lack of analysis, reasoning and timeline behind the concept.

Did a big chunk of your article get cut out by editors? Yesterday you wrote a good piece with a lot of data and research. Whether people agreed or not, the research and facts were there for people to interpret. This looks like you looked at a map, nothing more. There is no data to back up your proposals. All for reducing the number of teams in Sydney, but rather than upsetting two supporter bases just upset one. E.g Instead of merging Souths and the Roosters and having both fans bases turn their nose, relocate one (Souths if you are asking as they have a strong brand and are no longer tied in anyway to a geographic location) and do it in a manner that is more an inconvenience than total destruction of their brand (which has a value) which is what a merger does

Nice comedy piece. Oh wait you are serious. Oh dear..

With agenda's,and alleged experts. Did they go to rugby league university and get a degree? NRL tried having teams in WA,SQ, & SA - They all failed.

Everything Paul said - Reasons or pointless article.

For sure. Eg: Brisbane and Gold Coast in the NRL = ha,ha,ha... One of the most successful and wealthiest clubs, with a poor club. Why would Brisbane do it lol

Yeap.

This. Glad the author doesn't run the sports.

Whoops..missed the Souths / Roosters merger. I stand by the rest though...

Well, in 120 seasons of V/AFL footballing history, this is the record: - one club disappeared completely (now plays in the VAFA): University - one club moved from Melbourne to Sydney - two clubs merged to form the Brisbane Lions and that's it. That one and only merger caused so much turmoil that the AFL Commissioners have all but lost the taste of it. Don't expect another in a hurry. (And given the Norths and Souths experience in the NRL, don't count on anything drastic happening on that front either). Moves remain a possibility, but the last one which was seriously considered, North Melbourne to the Gold Coast, never eventuated, and that is the main reason why we now have an 18 club comp (and I'd say the Commissioners are very happy with the end result becuase it forced them to achieve what they had always wanted: at least two teams in all mainland capitals - hell will freeze over before they go back on that achievement). About the only thing you can expect in the next 10 years is North playing an additional game or two in Tassie.