NRL expansion and the potential conference system have been a hot debate topic of late, and with the inevitable expansion of a new Queensland team, it looks like Peter V’landys is keen on making some big changes to the competition.
I really think a two-conference system is not ideal, as it rules the possibility of having an all-Sydney grand final or having the two best teams actually play each other in the grand final. There might also be a lack of interest among fans when teams are not playing from their conference, as ultimately it doesn’t have any real effect on their respective sides.
I suggest the NRL instead introduce a division system of four teams apiece.
This would create two scenarios. First, it would manufacture rivalries between all teams in the division. Even if the teams previously were not rivals, the introduction of a division system will organically create these rivalries among all sides trying to win their segment of the competition.
(Photo by Ashley Feder/Getty Images)
Second, the notion of fans not worrying about teams not in their own side’s conference won’t hold true in with divisions, as while the teams that win their division would make the finals, it would be the next best five sides across all divisions that would fill the other finals spots.
The NRL is looking at 17 teams at the moment, but ultimately it should expand to a 20-team competition with a fourth Queensland team, a second New Zealand team and a team based in Perth. Determining the location of the final team is a bit difficult, but I really think the NRL should enter new markets, so Adelaide should be the 20th side. It’s the biggest capital city without a team, and if we really want to be a national competition, we can’t be concentrated in the eastern states.
So we’d have 20 teams across five divisions of four teams each. Each division winner would make the finals and the next-best five would also qualify, which would lead to a ten-team post-season. This may seem like too many teams in the finals, but half the teams make the finals this year anyway. Anyway, having more games means making more money from the TV broadcast rights.
This ensures teams wouldn’t be punished for being in a strong division. They could still hypothetically make the finals from last place in their segment.
As per my plan, the divisions would be as follows.
North division
Brisbane Broncos, North Queensland Cowboys, Gold Coast Titans and the fourth Queensland team
This is very straightforward: all Queensland teams would play in the same division. Having 12 Queensland derbies would be very appealing to TV broadcasters.
Beaches division
Cronulla Sharks, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Sydney Roosters and Manly Warringah Sea Eagles
These teams are already rivals, and with most of them in close proximity to each other, Roosters and Sea Eagles fans won’t need to travel too far.
West division
Wests Tigers, Parramatta Eels, Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs and Penrith Panthers
All four western Sydney teams would play together. This division would probably have the most passionate fans. Expect every game to be big.
East division
Newcastle Knights, New Zealand Warriors, St George Illawarra Dragons and the second New Zealand team
Having both New Zealand teams together is simple. Given there are nine Sydney teams, one had to be cut, and as the Dragons are based in Wollongong, they would be best placed in this division. The Knights also had to be put somewhere, and this was the closest and most logical division for them.
City division
Melbourne Storm, Canberra Raiders, a Perth team and an Adelaide team
Not only are these four teams based generally in their respective capitals, but it also plays on the AFL-based rivalries between Perth, Adelaide and Melbourne.
The NFL is the biggest league competition in the world, and the division system would play a key role in that, making games between division rivals carry more weight and intrigue.
You would play each team in your division twice and every other team once to make 21 games. That falls three games shy of the 24 we have now, so you could make it that each team plays each divisional rival three times – though that might be overkill.
You could introduce a midweek cup featuring the top 16 teams from last year in a knockout tournament, or you could just leave it at 21 games, as the introduction of four new teams would already have 18 more games per year compared to what we have now. But teams would play three fewer games, hopefully meaning fewer injuries.
This is something that won’t happen anytime soon, but the NRL should be trying to plan ahead with a vision for how the game will look 20 years from now, and a 20-team division system would marry the good aspects of the current NRL system and the suggested conference system.
Haz
Roar Rookie
Brilliant. I think this solves all the Sydney/non-Sydney problems the current half and half conference system creates. I hope someone at league central is listening.
Adam Bagnall
Roar Guru
Your system seems based on the flawed logic that what works for a league in a country of 320 million people, must also work on a country of 26 million. It won't. Australia does not have the market size for divisions, conferences and promotion and relegation. A simple fact that these articles choose to ignore
zonecadet
Roar Rookie
I think your structure would result in 22 games not 21. 6 against your divisional opponents (3 opponents home and away) and then 16 against the rest of the league.
Paul
Roar Rookie
I don't think we need conferences or divisions. They are a structure for the American market where they cover large areas and there's a genuine East Coast v West Coast mentality. I think any investment going forward should be at a state level where they have an FA style cup for state teams, like Werribee (Vic) v Redcliff ( Qld). Granted there's be parity issues but games like that Could be curtain raisers or even played during the breaks at magic round and aim at creating pathways in non traditional markets and further broadening the player pool and participation. Not wishing to compare but Rugby Union tries this with some good results. As a direct result we now have several genuine Victorians names in the Wallabies initial training squad. Something worth considering I think.
Graham
Guest
Probably want at least twelve teams in each division for pro rel to be viable Wonder how many current second division teams are full time professional? Or how far away they are
Graham
Guest
Have people considered a promotion relegation system?
Bee bee
Guest
Broncos would benefit from some local rivalry. I don’t think they need to worry about losing strength.... Bad luck, bad management and leaking young talent is doing more damage to their strength than any second team would.
no one in particular
Roar Guru
No. Just no
Megeng
Roar Rookie
I thought you meant a first and second division with promotion and relegation. 10 teams each. That would be more interesting for the fans. If all teams had the same salary cap and there was a draft, it would be interesting to see if super clubs could even evolve. Teams to add; Ipswich-Newtown Jets, Adelaide, Perth, Central coast Norths Bears
Lenny
Guest
This current system isn't fair either, you have a advantage if you only play the big 5 teams twice while other teams play them once.
Lord Ted Said
Roar Rookie
The expansion idea will fail. It has before, and the costs of running these other teams isn't commercially sustainable. NZ might like the idea of a second team but just because it sounds good doesn't roll. A second Brisbane team will just dilute the strength of the broncos, which makes no strategic sense, and anyway they have a second team representing the region an hour south that has a fair way to progress. Adelaide and Perth is just ridiculous, did I mention un$ustainable? Central Coast may be the only one with RL bona fides but its an old Sydney team and the one of the greatest hotbeds of soccer talent no longer has an A-League side, so what does that tell you?
Emmanuel R
Guest
Really like this idea, as an NFL fan you not only become a fan of your team but a fan of every other team playing against teams in your division. Normally as a Sharks fan I wouldn't really care who would win if the Roosters and Knights played each other, but with this division system it gives you a reason to follow. Games were your team isn't involved
no one in particular
Roar Guru
so your idea is 4 (or 5) conferences instead of 2
brookvalesouth
Roar Rookie
Can we stop talking about this? Each and every idea that is put forward is worse and more unfair than the current draw system.
Rob9
Roar Guru
Not a bad structure for a 20-team comp (although I’d take out NZ2 and Adelaide and replace with the Sunshine Coast and Central Coast)- but what exactly do you think the difference is between conferences and divisions? There’s more divisions than conferences? Your shutdown of the NRL conference model is really based on a definitive finals structure, but there were a couple of options presented. It wasn’t necessarily all about keeping the teams in their conference through until Grand Final day. An option was presented where there would be inter-conference play in the finals and 2 teams from inside or outside Sydney could still potentially meet in the GF. I’d have the top 2 from each conference occupying positions 1 to 4 in the finals (eg. Sydney 1 v Non Sydney 2 etc) and then take through the next 4 regardless of conference to fill up spots 5 to 8. Still, I like the idea for a 20 team comp. I just think you’ll be waiting a while to get there and the NRL’s conference idea is a decent one in the interim.
Steven
Guest
Just leave it alone, add your two extra teams if you must but please keep the current Premiership system as it is, there is nothing wrong with it. Change just for the sake of it is ridiculous.