A model for the future of the NRL

Exactly. Teams with poor attendance in Sydney would hardly make a dent in interest IF they were culled from the comp and replaced by teams in Growth areas....

Large Supporter numbers??? Maybe one for them, potentially IF the team is winning but large?? How is it that a supposedly World Class Football League calls 12,000 people a large crowd. A team in either Adelaide or Perth would out-draw almost every Sydney team....

Yes I see your point. Fittler's proposal was probably based on analysis done by fellow legend Andrew Johns. Great players with great football brains but that's it.

Tim ,not disputing the valid points you raise.I was just highlighting the hippocracy of the argument that Freddy and others use in cherry picking there biased criteria and ignoring others. I'm not opposed to rationalising the Sydney Clubs . I just believe if your gunna be fair dinkum ,then all cards should be put on the table and analysis done independently.

The western East's have won the toss and elected to run west to east. :laughing:

Two tier competition. Top tier is 10-12 teams - expands to 16 over a loooong period of time. Second tier is 12 teams expands to 16+ over a loooong period of time. Expansion teams enter the lower tier and move up through promotion / relegation. Salary cap in top tier is removed and replaced by rules against squad stacking and Financial Fair Play. Grants from NRL HQ are reasonable Let the well run clubs prove they can run like a business. Salary cap and club grants in lower tier is skewed to provide financial stability so that only a terribly run club could feasibly go bankrupt - e.g. club expenses and concessions are also giverned under caps and grants. BRL and NSW cup continue to act as reserve grade/feeder clubs, but always have the option to push for a NRL licence to move into tier 2. This way there are no mergers, forced relocations or clubs killed, unless economics plays out that way. However, none of this is possible without insuring the future of rugby league through player welfare, grassroots participation and diversification of funding sources. If you can't convince people to play the game today, then there will never be enough talent for more teams in future.

Easts and Souths are the oldest traditional rivals with large supporter numbers. And they have won 35 premierships between them although most of them were won in the old rules of unlimited tackles. And Souths won three in the 4 tackle rule where the games were won by scrum penalties and 2 point field goals. No wonder scrums are no longer a contest for possession.

You are trying to manufacture tribalism. Doesn't work, never has.

Kicking Souths out was wrong because they had a huge following whereas Norths and Newtown lost what fans they had through a history of poor results and were demoted or removed. There wouldn't be many left that would tune into another code that they had previously ignored.

Your rhetorical questions are quite confusing. No one has suggested that the NRL needs a Tasmanian team. I suggest that you go back and read the original comment. The NRL has moved on from the days of the Sydney Suburban comp -> some teams died (Newtown and Norths), some teams relocated / merged (ie St George, Western Suburbs and Balmain) and some teams changed their identity (ie Sydney Roosters). Looking to the future, the Sydney Roosters, Parramatta Eels and Western Sydney (Wests) Tigers will have identities that are strongly tied to the three Cities outlined in the GSC masterplan. The remaining suburban teams will need to embrace a strategy of their own in order to survive. I think Cronulla, Manly, Penrith and Souths will be safe, while Canterbury might be squeezed out through changing demographics in their traditional suburbs. But a move to the Central Coast could help their survival.

No, it's not. How many people in western Sydney? And how does this compare to northern Sydney? And geography doesn't have demographics. How many people in these areas are league fans, or potential league fans? it's like saying a national competition needs a Tasmanian team, when the Hunter region has 20% more people then the whole of Tasmania

Geography and population are equally important for Sydney suburban clubs.

There is little correlation between fantasy points and what happens on the field. The points system was looked at, but do you rate all Tier 1 internationals the same? Is playing for Australia the same as playing for NZ? How do you value a player who played all 3 Origins last season but missed 2 this season due to injury? Do teams pressure players to retire from rep football so their points value can fall? At what stage is a player considered a "junior"? How do you value players coming from, or have spent time, in the ESL? And most importantly, how do you value players across different positions?

Maybe. Fantasy Leagues work around the world, I’ve done the cricket odi World Cup that’s cool. Supercoach is pretty big and successful. They use a dollar sign, but it’s just a points value of a player and your have your set budget or points cap. Daly M is sudjective and held in high regard. As long as set group doing valuing has it guidelines and independent. Players could possibly earn more cause no cap.

Arko and Quayle were the last great chiefs . Since then it’s just been a parade of overpaid Indians.

Actually, Sydney (Harbour City) is more Souths territory than Easts. Easts can move to Perth and be the Western Easts.....

I don’t agree with relocations or club mergers. Relocations haven’t worked and merged teams lose their soul. Sydney’s population has grown significantly over the last 20 years, yet there are less clubs, less games, less fans and less teams. I think the game has had very poor and weak administration at all levels that has seen clubs, juniors, fans and players manipulated by broadcasters.