The National Rugby League (NRL) is soon to announce the 17th team in an expanded competition.
Meanwhile, word is already leaking out: the Premiership may extend to 18 teams in the next five years. Is there a place for the Bears?
The NRL were desperate for a second Brisbane team. Yet, of the three current bids, only the Brisbane Firehawks are locally based in Brisbane, and it appears that despite this fact that Redcliffe is favoured to win the bid. So, then which bid is next for the 18th team?
Will it be the next best bid from these recent franchise applications? Will it be a second New Zealand team? Or the West Coast Pirates? Or, could is it possible that a club discarded and abandoned by the game gets its rightful place back in the Premiership?
The North Sydney Bears were a foundation club of rugby league in Australia. Unfortunately, at the conclusion of the Civil War of Super League, they did not meet the criteria set to continue at the elite level. Yes, a ridiculous merger/takeover with/by their arch-rivals (which resulted in the atrocious Northern Eagles) allowed them to continue briefly before being once more relegated to second class status and surviving as a feeder team for other NRL teams.
Greg Florimo (Photo by Getty Images)
If the game is to expand to 18 teams, where will this expansion take place and is there a place for the Bears?
Bringing the Bears back has a sense of justice to it. There is a population base (roughly 600,000 people) in the North Sydney District catchment to support a fan-base. Furthermore, if the Bears re-entered as a North Sydney Central Coast outfit, the club caters to two regions and a million people.
Though, there are issues with this model. Where do the Bears play most of their games? Central Coast or North Sydney. Moreover, the Central Coast has been adopted by the Eastern Suburbs Roosters as their junior base. With this in mind, the Bears coming back weakens an established club.
I get what you are saying – “It is the Roosters; they have no fans! Who cares?” The answer is as simple as true – the Roosters and their fans do, and the NRL administration does. In fact, all Sydney clubs would be hard-pressed to support the reintroduction of a local competitor.
On top of all this, a Perth-based team or a second New Zealand club expand the game’s footprint. And considering this may add eyeballs to television screens that may end up purchasing Foxtel, it gives these other bids an advantage over the Bears.
There is also a possibility that if Redcliffe is not permitted as the 17th franchise, then they may be given the 18th and be classed as a Moreton Bay / Sunshine Coast regional team. In either case, the Bears remain stranded in the second tier of the sport.
Though, despite the obstacles, there are questions fans of the mighty North Sydney Bears must ask their administration. What financial proposal is the administration putting to the NRL to gain entry into the elite level in the future?
Would the club be North Sydney or Central Coast-based? What processes is the club putting together to ensure they are at the top of any future expansion list? Is there enough genuine support for the Bears re-entry? Is the club even attempting to gain re-entry into the Telstra Premiership?
I wonder, would the North Sydney Bears members support the club’s relocation to Adelaide or Perth on the condition of entry?
The whispers of the club lacking funds suitable for the NRL won’t hold water when supporters believe (rightly or wrongly) that if the Bears were given the same funding as the other Sydney-based clubs, they would be in an almost equal position financially.
In the end, it would be nice if the NRL at least entertained the idea of North Sydney’s return by letting the Bears pitch their proposal and then made a judgement based on the value of the Bears bid. Also, if NRL denied the request to re-join, then let the fans know why minus any political spin.
All in all, I do hope that the NRL one day sees fit to allow the Bears back to their rightful place – a foundation club competing at the highest level in Australia.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
Rugby was another great football code from the English. It was played at many universities and spread from there. Rugby League broke away in a few isolated places. Rugby clubs/players in the AF states accept they are dwarfed by Aussie Rules and Soccer. Rugby is big in Europe and exists all over the world so they have no reason to make changes to accommodate League. Players with a low centre of gravity {Mal Meninga & Les Boyd} were harder to tackle than tall players who become levers that rotate around the fulcrum (the tackler's shoulder) and hit the ground with the speed they were running at.
sheek
Roar Guru
Tim Buck 3, Ironically, I see rugby union having a better chance of establishing teams in Perth (which they have) & Adelaide (which they might). Historically, rugby was more proactive in spreading the game than league. The RU comps in these cities are much stronger than those of RL. The strong presence of a RU comp in Melbourne actually indirectly helped the Storm come into existence. Neither code has all the answers & maybe one day they will merge, since there probably aren't enough resources for 4 footy codes in Oz, including now also women's versions. This is how big business operates, so maximising profit by merging the two codes will be the battle cry. What the fans think will be irrelevant. If a red-hot capitalist like Peter V'Landys thinks he can make more money from merging the two rugby codes, then he will do his upmost to bring it about. That's primarily what people like him all care about, making money. When there is a merger the game played will be mostly rugby, but the major national clubs will be almost exclusively ex-league. Then Adelaide can be added. For the present, the NRL should just concentrate on NSW & Qld. I would even punt NZ. Of course, the problem, an ironic problem, is that most teams will eventually be filled by Melanesian, Polynesian & Maori heritage players, who thrive on the 'clash/crash' aspect of the rugby codes.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
Yes sheek, it is a want. I may have been influenced by the 'The Honest Truth' who used need twice. Or it may have been my recent reply, in another article, to an 'AFL is taking over the northern suburbs of Sydney' comment. I want to see a fair draw where each team plays all other teams once. I want to see St.George-Illawarra win a grand final before I die but there is no need.
sheek
Roar Guru
Nat, Probably. I think the first time I've responded to you, so quite likely I've missed something. I often complain myself the written word misses nuances that the facial expressions &/or words otherwise would give away.
Nat
Roar Guru
What is GGTSS?
Nat
Roar Guru
I guess the subtleties of our banter is lost on some.
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
Firstly, a 20 team competition won't work. It's too big, which means too many games, too long a season and too much of a physical toll on the players. Given that most fans expect to see their side play each other team twice, there is a solution of sorts. It eliminates the haphazard draws that always result in some sides that get a softer draw over others, like the Panthers over the Rabbitohs this year. :stoked: At least there will be a degree of consistency, with the same teams played twice or once each year. No team would have an advantage. I would say, though, the Southern Conference would be at a significant disadvantage as well that given that 5 of the top 8 teams this year would be playing in the Southern Conference while only 3 are playing in the Northern Conference. Had the Sharks taken the Titans place (they almost did) that would be a ratio of 6 - 2 showing that (at least at present) the Southern Conference is the harder conference. It is a real Gordian knot you have given me to untangle sheek, but I will give it a go. There is a way to keep the season fixed at 25 rounds. Firstly, you will need to cut all of your "hypothetical teams" and begin with a competition of 18 teams... in two conferences, Northern and Southern. That would leave 9 teams in each conference. The teams in each conference play each other twice (home & away) and they play the teams in the other conference once. That's 8 teams in their conference x 2 (16 games) and 9 games from the other conference, or 25 games in all. No byes. Southern Conference: (it makes sense to keep the Sydney based teams together) 1. South Sydney Rabbitohs (my list, my order) :silly: 2. Sydney Roosters 3. Manly-Warringah Sea Eagles 4. St. George-Illawarra Dragons 5. Parramatta Eels 6. Canterbury Bulldogs 7. Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks 8. Wests Tigers 9. Penrith Panthers Northern Conference: (disadvantages Storm, Raiders, Warriors, Knights and Bears) * 1. Redcliffe Dolphins 2. Brisbane Broncos 3. Melbourne Storm 4. Gold Coast Titans 5. North Queensland Cowboys 6. Canberra Raiders 7. Newcastle Knights 8. Central Coast Bears 9. NZ Warriors (if we must) ** You have to stick to the status quo as much as possible, sheek if you don't want to risk new clubs going bust and dropping out of the competition. All clubs need to be commercially viable. * At least from a covid-19 lockdown restrictions perspective, it makes some sense to isolate the Sydney based teams and leave the teams outside of Sydney and south of the QLD border to be free to come and go as they please "potentially". Of course, it would be more likely that the 2 teams just north of Sydney would need to relocate temporarily to QLD as we saw this year. ** Personally, I would favour a team from Ipswich (West Brisbane) being in place of the Warriors. Sorry Warriors fans, but we have already seen for the last two seasons what the cost can be for a foreign team playing in another country's *National* competition, during a pandemic driven dystopian reality. Much safer if NZ held their own domestic competition, perhaps? Still, I gave you a spot, so no whinging. :silly:
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
As another foundation club I would love to see the Bears back (in the same colours) but in reality I don't see them being in North Sydney. Like you said, it would make no sense, and they have no financial backing as a platform, not to mention junior base. Their best shot is to make their home on the Central Coast as the Central Coast Bears. The Central Coast got behind them once before and would do so again, I believe.
sheek
Roar Guru
Tim Buck 3, In reality, is this really a 'need' or just a 'want'?
sheek
Roar Guru
Glory bound, I would have a 20 team comp comprising only Aussie clubs. 8 in Greater Sydney, 3 in regional NSW regional, one in ACT, 4 in Brisbane, 3 in regional Qld & Melbourne. Here are my 20 teams: 1. North Sydney Bears 2. East Sydney Roosters 3. West Sydney Tigers 4. South Sydney Rabbitohs 5. Manly-Warringah Sea Eagles 6. Parramatta Eels 7. Penrith Panthers 8. Cronulla-Sutnerland Sharks 9. Illawarra-St. George Dragons 10. Central Coast-Canterbury Bulldogs 11. Newcastle Knights 12. Canberra Raiders 13. Brisbane Broncos 14. Redcliffe Dolphins 15. Valley Brothers (joint merger) 16. Ipswich Jets (or other) 17. North Queensland Cowboys 18. Sunshine Coast Falcons 19. Gold Coast Titans 20. Melbourne Titans If there's bleating about the south & west & NZ, then you can add Adelaide Rams, Perth Reds, Auckland Warriors & Wellington Makos. But this is really just an ideal world fantasy musing on my part.
sheek
Roar Guru
Nat, Your arguments are poor. Give the Broncos time to wait 40 years between premiership. The Broncos have only been in the NRL 33 years, not even 40 years, so there's plenty of time. Indeed, their next premiership might not be until 2046!
sheek
Roar Guru
I would love to see the North Sydney Bears return, for no other reason than having only Manly on Sydney's North Harbour/Shore in rugby league's greatest city makes no sense. But counter to that, there's already too much whinging of too many Sydney teams & realistically, they had their chance over nearly 100 years & blew it through poor governance.
brookvalesouth
Roar Rookie
Maybe I do, but you keep replying...
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
Further South of Sydney? :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
Well, like them you seem to always want to have the last word. :laughing:
mushi
Roar Guru
Hmm on the compass point. Geographically where are St george and Cronulla in relations to the rabbitohs?
brookvalesouth
Roar Rookie
Seems like you don't.
NSWelshman
Roar Rookie
Max Delmege actually ensured Manly stayed afloat not the Penn family. The Penn family took over when Max hit hard times. A merger between the 2 clubs will never happen again. Manly were in a more financially stable position at the time of the merger whilst the Bears were broke. Taking the Bears & their debts on is what almost ended Manly. The merger was agreed to with Manly as the license holder & premier partner! When financial pressure hit Manly had no choice but to go it alone! I’m tired of reading rubbish that it’s Manly’s doing that the Bears no longer exist! The Bears were bankrupt & only have themselves to blame. I highly doubt they’ll ever be re-admitted.
NSWelshman
Roar Rookie
North Sydney supported the inclusion of Manly into the NSWRL…..they did not sponsor them! This occurred during a meeting between Manly & the NSWRL on 4 November 1946.
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
So TB3, you’re saying that if a relative made me the sole heir to a 20 million dollar trust fund which was set up and untouched since 60’s then I wouldn’t be a multi-millionaire with access to 20 million dollars today? Is that right? So because that money was sitting in an account before I was born it is worthless now? Correct?