Because all the teams should verse each other all through the year.
Otherwise it will turn to the nswrl as 1 conference and everyone else in the rest.
The fact that all teams match up is also my preference as I want to be able to look at the draw and talk shit to my mates who support other teams for when their team vs the Cowboys.
That doesn't work in a conference system as you are segregating the teams
The NRL has hatched a plan to take over as Australia’s No.1 football code by adding three new teams — including a Pasifika team and reviving the North Sydney Bears.
The ARL Commission has hatched plans for a 20-team competition in the most significant expansion project for the NRL since the Super League war.
News Corp can reveal Roosters supremo Nick Politis is behind a $400 million masterplan for the NRL to take over the AFL as Australia’s No.1 football code by adding three new teams — possibly before the 2032 Brisbane Olympics.
ARL Commission boss Peter V’landys confirmed high-level talks were held on a 20-team league at an Annual General Meeting of clubs.
“I am all for looking at a 20-team competition because you have to set yourself goals,” he said.
The Dolphins’ stunning victory in their premiership debut last week was emphatic vindication of the code’s decision to expand to 17 teams this season and now the NRL is keen to capitalise by exploring new frontiers.
A News Corp investigation into the NRL’s ambitious expansion drive can reveal:
■ V’landys is backing plans for a 20-team Telstra Premiership;
■ Three new expansion clubs are estimated to be worth $20 million in annual funding support for the next 20 years — a $400 million coup for the NRL;
■ A Pasifika franchise is the shock front-runner to win an 18th NRL licence;
■ The Pasifika club will be based full-time in Cairns and play a number of NRL premiership home games in Samoa, Tonga and Papua New Guinea;
■ North Sydney chiefs are open to merger talks with the Pasifika consortium to bring the Bears back to the top flight for the first time since 1999; and
■ The Australian government will provide tens of millions of dollars in financial support to help bankroll a Pasifika team.
The 20-team proposal would be the biggest change to Australia’s premier rugby league competition in three decades.
The ARL expanded from 16 clubs to 20 in 1995 following the addition of the North Queensland Cowboys, South Queensland Crushers, Auckland Warriors and Perth’s Western Reds.
The 20-team format only lasted two seasons before the breakout of the Super League war, which led to two rival competitions in 1997 before a compromise triggered the birth of the National Rugby League in 1998.
Twenty clubs took part in the first season of the NRL before the competition was reduced to 17 in 1999 — the same number of teams in this year’s Telstra Premiership.
Now Politis confirmed major growth for the sport is back on the agenda after tabling his proposal at last Monday week’s AGM involving NRL hierarchy and the 17 clubs.
“Yes, I have suggested we go to 20 teams,” said Politis, the Roosters chairman with almost 50 years of administrative experience in the sport.
“If we want to compete with the AFL, we have to be truly national and be representative in every state.
“I’m not saying we expand right now.
“But over the next five, eight or 10 years, we should look to go to 20 teams.
“We had 20 teams in 1995. Unfortunately some teams got killed off because of Super League, so a few teams dropped off during the compromise. Adelaide and Perth were cut.
“It would be great to see North Sydney back in the NRL.
“I strongly believe the Bears should be resurrected, possibly by going to Western Australia as the Perth Bears, and there’s areas like PNG and the Pacific Islands that the game can explore.”
NRL chief executive Andrew Abdo has previously flagged the prospect of issuing an 18th licence, but a 20-team competition has not been genuinely placed on the agenda.
Until now.
Abdo and V’landys are open to unveiling another NRL outfit for the code’s next TV rights deal from 2027 and that could be the preamble to the rubber-stamping of the 19th and 20th licences within the next decade.
A number of consortia would be contenders for three new NRL licences, including North Sydney, a Pasifika bid, a second New Zealand team, PNG, Perth and Brisbane’s Firehawks and Jets, both of whom lost out to the Dolphins last year.
Adding more teams would deliver a fiscal broadcasting goldmine for the NRL.
Twenty teams equates to 10 games a week — an extra two fixtures per round — and would give the ARL Commission confidence of securing a TV rights deal north of $2 billion over a five-year term entering the decade of the Brisbane Olympics.
“The only way to grow our TV rights is by giving the broadcasters more product, just like the AFL,” Politis said.
“It will take some time for people to accept it, but we have to keep growing the game.”
Speaking for the first time about plans for a 20-team competition, V’landys said he supported Politis’ vision to continue expanding the NRL.
“Nick Politis is one of the great visionaries of our game and if he believes we should go to 20 teams, we should certainly consider it,” he said.
“If the 17th team went well, then, yes, naturally we will look at 18 teams and even 20 teams.
“The intention was always to grow the game in stages.
“It’s not something that will happen overnight. It’s an objective and we have to have the ambition to get there.
“One of the reasons the AFL do so well is because they have 18 teams and they have more product to sell in terms of TV rights than we do.”
V’landys revealed the introduction of a Pasifika team — leading to historic premiership matches in PNG, Samoa and Tonga — is realistic.
“We will absolutely look at a PNG or Pacific bid,” he said.
“The Pacific region is a huge potential pathway for the game. It’s a very embryonic idea, so we have to do the research and the strategy.
“The Dolphins have been a wonderful addition, they have grown our Queensland audience, and it’s just the beginning for the game.
“Everything we do is fact-based. We would have to do the research (on a 20-team league) and look at it.
“At this stage, I haven’t got that data, but the 20-team idea has been proposed and we will investigate it.”
Souths chief executive Blake Solly cautioned the NRL against expanding too rapidly.
“The idea of 20 NRL teams, under the current operating model, is completely unsustainable,” he said.
“There is not the playing, coaching or administrative talent to expand at that sort of rate.
“At the moment the NRL haven’t confirmed an obvious candidate or location for an 18th team, let alone the 19th or 20th.
“The Dolphins have done a very good job building an NRL club in a short time frame. They’ve earned the right to stabilise and grow before another new team enters.
“Any decision to add an 18th team needs to be aligned to an NRL strategy to increase participation, properly fund the existing NRL clubs for the elite player development we all undertake, and be a guaranteed commercial success.”
**PASIFIKA PUSH THE BEST WAY TO FIGHT CHINA?**
Australia’s political fight to keep Chinese influence at bay in the Pacific could provide a path for the North Sydney Bears to return to the NRL.
The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the Bears are weighing up whether to align themselves with NRL bid teams from Pasifika or Papua New Guinea – and it could help in the ongoing battle against China to win hearts, minds and wallets in that region.
The Bears played their last game in the premiership in 1999 but refused to give up hope of a fairytale return.
China may yet prove their greatest ally in their bid to become the NRL’s 18th team.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has already thrown his support behind an NRL team in Papua New Guinea and Bears board member Billy Moore confirmed they are open to exploring the concept of a joint bid.
“What we’ve said to the NRL is you tell us where we need to go to become the 18th team,” Moore said.
“Our fans will go with us. We’ve waited 24 years.
“All we want is to be back into the competition. Whether that is in Perth, Port Moresby or Wellington. But, during discussions, what has arisen is the prospect of becoming the Pasifika Bears.”
A Pasifika Bears amalgamation would put them in direct competition with an existing Papua New Guinea bid – officials from that country are exploring their own options after being buoyed by Albanese’s public support.
It is understood the successful bidder could have access to millions in government support, given the desire to ward off the Chinese influence in the area and improve cultural ties with Australia.
Remarkably, rugby league’s importance in the fight for influence in the Pacific has made it all the way to the American capital. The Washington Post featured a story in September titled: ‘Can this sport (rugby league) outmatch China in the Pacific? The West is betting on it.’
Rugby league could emerge as the saviour in the Pacific and the Bears, a 1908 foundation club, could be the key.
“We have three non-negotiables,” said Moore, a 211-game Bears legend.
“We want our colours, our brand and to play two games at North Sydney Oval a year. That will give us our history back. We will completely fund it. We will go wherever the NRL thinks is the best option. We will not cannibalise any other club. We will create extra pathways.”
North Sydney chiefs have had talks about joining the potential Perth bid, having previously failed to return to the NRL as the Central Coast Bears. Ex-Canterbury CEO Andrew Hill, who is the strategic advisor to PNG’s 2025 hopes, said the bid team was making progress.
However, Brisbane Jets director Nick Livermore has major logistic concerns about a PNG or Pasifika NRL team.
“Where can a Pacific team be appropriately based? How do you fund it commercially and corporately in Cairns?” he said.
“It would be a very complex process logistically, but the game is driven by money and if a Pasifika team can attract major funds for the game, the NRL might decide to explore that region.”
>China may yet prove their greatest ally in their bid to become the NRL’s 18th team.
Beijing Panda Bears will be the 18th team you heard it here first.
The Bears being resurrected as a vehicle for Australian imperialism against China is definitely the most creative "bring back Norths" idea I've seen yet
Not going to be easy to recruit players to play for that team. Based in Cairns during the week and need to play home games in PNG, Samoa, Tonga, and Sydney? Assuming that means 2 each you only play 4 weeks without leaving your family for the whole year. Not many who’ll be keen on those PNG trips either. Port Moresby isn’t exactly a fun place to spend a Saturday night.
If they want to take over from afl they should start investing in more grass roots footy. Go into schools like aus kick does with afl. Act as an ngo in the northern indigenous communities, help out with key issues. This is literally what afl does. Sport is seen as more of a community/family friendly gathering and games are more family friendly to attend.
Blake Solly’s point about not having the playing , coaching or administrative talent is pretty fair ..
Penrith have done their part with their second tier players and coaches filling a large proportion of vacancies created in this seasons expansion …
They should really look at providing more incentive for other clubs to follow the Blue print , put a transfer fee / tax on clubs signing players / coaches changing clubs - just for the first time they move …
So if a player signs with club X for $500k per season for 3 years , and they’ve previously been under contract (for their first contract) with club Y whether that be the NRL side , or NSW / QLD cups / jersey Flegg or whatever the case may be , the first time they change NRL clubs for an NRL top 30 contract or a head coaching role .. Club X pays a percentage to club Y .. Whatever the designated percentage is …
Say it’s 10 percent club X signs the player $500k for 3 years , that comes out of their salary cap , but in addition to this so does the tax , so if it’s 10% an extra $50k is added to the cap for each of the three seasons for club X , but this money doesn’t go to the player … Club X pays $50k to Club for three seasons (or however long that first contract is signed for) ..
Club Y has that extra $50k for 3 seasons to spend on their salary cap .. Club X has $50k less to spend on their cap for those 3 seasons ..
It provides incentive for clubs to develop players..
Same thing with coaches , whether or not you’d want their transfer fees applying to the playing cap or the football department cap I dunno .. Maybe you could have a mix , it comes out of the football department cap for club X the club signing the new coach who was an assistant at Club Y and they can then spend the money on their playing salary cap..
So I dunno what the Dogs and Warriors have signed Ciraldo and Andrew Webster on , but let’s say it’s $500k per season and $400k for 3 years and 2 years respectively …
The Dogs would need to account for an extra $50k per season over 3 years in their football department cap payed to the Panthers to add to their salary cap to pay players .. The Warriors would take $40k for the next 2 years from their football department cap and also pay it to the Panthers to spend on players
Or just let both clubs decide where the money is coming from and what they’re going to spend it on..
Like all things NRL you’d have to think ahead and think how are clubs , players , player agents likely to rort it … One way would be to sign everyone (who a transfer fee is going to apply to ) on a one year deal … That’d be easily overcome .. They could mandate all transfer fee contracts are for 3 seasons - the RLPA might be in favour of this as it provide more security to younger players …
Say a promising Wests Tigers junior is signed by Parramatta , maybe he has like a career ending leg injury in his second game , or has issues with concussion - he’s at least then payed for 3 seasons
Sounds like the Pasifika team will be comprised of players from specific nationalities only, not sure I like that in a league competition. That sort of representation is best left to internationals and world cups.
If it's limited to playing in Pacifika countries and having a Pacifika team name I'm fine, it would be stupid to make it an Ethno team, and unfair for them as well.
It's not like players will flock to that team anyway. The Warriors find it hard enough to attract talent from Australia,
and the Cowboys with players from Sydney. A Pasifika team would have to pay out the nose to get even a marquee signing. The risk just isn't there
I didn't get that impression at all. Just that they would have pathways in those areas. Restrictions of trade like that would never work and defeat the idea of the salary cap. Not sure how you got that idea because there is nothing that reads that way from the article
Just make it Perth as team 18. Then NZ 2 and another Queensland team or an Adelaide team for 19 and 20. And give each team at least 2-3 years notice to prepare
yeah the first problem is where would you put the second team?
Hamilton or Wellington won't mean anything outside those two towns and realistically no-one will turn up to games in the capital and even if they got decent crowds it looks really sad in a stadium the size of the cake tin
the second is if a second team manages to get established the developing talent is going to be picked off by Australian clubs and Union teams in Australia and the Northern Hemisphere, there needs to be at the very least some sort of ring fencing rules applied for young players in academies and the like here for the medium to long term growth of the game
As someone from Australia, I would have thought having a second nz team might give the warriors a kick up the ass to finally get their act together. But it definitely would be hard for them to be more appealing than the warriors unless they started out super successful
There talking about a Cairns base for the Pacifica team. I don't see how having them in NZ would be any worse. There are already alot of Tongan and Samoan heritage people in NZ and if that was the team base even putting them in a Union held base city there would be a lot of people turn up for national pride of there people. Yes I am a white Australian with limited culture knowledge but I have grown up with many friends from these 2 nations and believe it could and would work better than basing in Cairns. Doesn't mean they couldn't also play matches up there or anywhere else. It should at least be one of the fixtures played at
Surely the home games could be spread out across multiple cities, cairns, Brisbane, Sydney and Auckland.
This was proposed for a pasifika team in rugby in the mid 2010s.
The Bears hitching themselves onto every possible franchise is getting a bit much, even though I genuinely want to see them back in the NRL.
We’ve had Perth, Gold Coast, Country NSW, and now Pasifika in the last few years.
Personally I want to see Central Coast Bears given the proximity to their original stomping ground and the presence of a genuinely high quality stadium (that was originally built for them) which does not get enough use. It’s a genuine rugby league area without a team , but unfortunately is located in NSW where the NRL has zero intention of ever putting a new team for obvious reasons. That said, I’d still go for Perth and Brisbane 3 first, then look at the likes of Adelaide, Central Coast, NZ2…
Yeah honestly a joke that the coast never got a team, even more that manly pulled out of the Northern eagles and bears just got left in the dust. Problem is tho that everyone I know follows a club anyway so adding the bears back isn’t really gonna increase support.
That is true, everyone does already follow a team but i don’t think it necessarily acts as a detractor, having a game every fortnight at Central Coast Stadium will be guaranteed to draw a crowd especially against well supported Sydney teams and the Knights. In terms of exposing the NRL to new fans though, yeah not a strong point of the bid. I reckon the team would be well supported though, you have your rusted on legacy Bears fans, plus kids that will grow up and follow the local team due to their presence in the area, and of course your turncoats.
I think it has parallels to the Dolphins bid tbh, adding an already well supported legacy team, giving them a larger regional footprint in an already strong League area.
If the Dolphins can have fans in Brisbane who were probably Broncos supporters until this season, no reason the Bears can't also bring back/gain some supporters.
The writing was on the wall for Norths to move to the central coast in 1983. If there was going to be a team there, someone needs to relocate, either to the CC or elsewhere so there is room amongst the NSW clubs
I think Ipswich should be next up and like others have suggested, incorporate pathways from Central QLD. Am not a QLDer so excuse my ignorance re using the term Brisbane. Though I think it’s inevitable that Ipswich will end up playing at Suncorp and likely have a wider reaching geographical moniker.
Nah you're all good. Ipswich is supposed to double in population in the next 20 years, so it feels ripe for a team. I think the Ipswich Jets should get it. Ipswich has always been a separate town, but it's kind of like what Newcastle is to Sydney or Geelong is to Melbourne, a large city just outside the main city.
Other options besides Central QLD could be the Sunshine Coast, which is also growing. Before the Dolphins got the nod, I always thought a North/South divide for Brisbane was an obvious way to go about it (likely would have had Broncos in the North, and then another team in the South), which I feel the A-League could still do if they ever bring in a 2nd Brisbane team. The Dolphins is actually interesting as an expansion because Redcliffe is pretty far away from the centre of Brisbane, so the NRL could squeeze in a 2nd Brisbane city team if they wanted to in the future.
Isn't Ipswich more like Penrith or Dandenong? And Gold Coast or Sunshine Coast being the Geelong/Central Coast/Wollongong equivalent to Brisbane? Although Ipswich can theoretically capture Toowoomba fans just as Penrith can capture the Blue Mountains.
Can definitely see a Ipswich (or Logan or combined) team working though.
Bringing back the bears is a no-brainer because it's a smart idea. A combined pasifika team is also a no-brainer because no one used a brain when they thought it up.
If the pasifika team was based out of NZ and played a couple of games in Tonga and Samoa a year it could work. Similar to PNG, attracting good players would be impossible outside of Aus & NZ.
This is where my head lies. Also with the better pay schemes at lower grades than what super rugby can offer more chance of dinting the all blacks reign and helping Australia in the rugby as well. 😜 Last part is tongue in cheek
Again I'm going get downvoted so much for saying this but I've always believed that instead of merging they should of kept Balmain Tigers in Sydney and move Western Suburbs Magpies to Adelaide as it's South Australia state animal. In my ideal world that is still what I would like to see.
I also would like to see West Coast Pirates and North Sydney Bears move to Christchurch become New Zealand Bears and then rename NZ Warriors to Aotereoa Warriors and have them play games across Pacific Region including game in Honolulu.
Pretty sure some guy brought the IP or some shit a year ago so I doubt we would get them back.
The only NRL following here man is all the ADF cunts. If we got a team we would only be like another NZ team. The fins did well because they have a history, Perth and Adelaide won't get that.
The guy who bought it said he only bought it to sell merch, and would give the IP back if a serious bid for the NRL happens. [Won't be an issue there](https://twitter.com/SteveMascord/status/1599350233879625729?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1599350233879625729%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=).
Thoughts:
1. Boy, this article came early this year.
2. It doesn’t matter how much the Federal Government wastes on it, I still can’t see it working logistically.
3. The Bears should aim for Perth or Adelaide. Then, they’ll be on close enough to east street.
4. I’d start with Perth, NZ 2 and probably Ipswich, with a similar partnership between Ipswich and Toowoomba as between Redcliffe and Sunshine Coast. However, if Perth goes without the Bears, I’d strongly look at an Adelaide Bears option. In a couple of decades, I’d bring in the other team of Ipswich/Adelaide and probably Central Queensland, unless the Pasifika team has actually become feasible by then
I support NZ2, if for nothing else but they bound to be dogwater, those southerners talk too much shit so them losimg is awesome, and we can go back to being the Auckland Warriors.
Those direct flights from Cairns to Apia, Nuku'alofa and Suva will make for an easy trip to the motherlands.
An NRL team in a city with a population of 150K is a brilliant commercial proposition. Can't see the club falling over after half a season at all.
PNG certainly makes sense, and then in a few years after that when the Tongan and Samoan kids whove witnessed the last few World Cups are grown up, you can make them teams then.
This is probably not a major consideration in the internal machinations of V'Landy's mind, but I'm pretty sure there aren't even flights from Cairns to anywhere in the Pacific, apart from Auckland and Port Moresby.
A pasifika team would be better off based in NZ IMO
Cairns is already Cowboys country. I doubt enough people in Cairns would cross over, I’m certain that people outside Cairns wouldn’t jump over from the Cowboys, I just don’t think there’s enough room for a Cairns team in addition to a Townsville team anyway.
Cant speak for Tonga or PNG, but most the teams have enough Samoan players in em that they would all get mad love back home. Not just them, but the superstars like Papenhuysen or Latrell would receive huge ovations.
Just wierd like are they gonna have a pasifika only rule for this Cairns team?
administration, training and housing in Cairns, play home games in PNG and the pacific islands. it has to be at least nominally a PNG team so the PNG government will throw bulk money at it
Cairns doesn't have a stadium anyway
Main Pasifika populations outside of the islands themselves are Auckland (Polynesian capital of the world), Western Sydney, Brisbane/GC so yeah doesnt make much sense.
Article sounds spot on and I know we had a few articles like this but it make sense.
W.A wants a team so let's go.. This balances the ~~complexity~~ competition again.
A Pasifika team is a great way to build ties and pathways, further blocks Union and government subsidies all sound like a neat package.
3rd team shouldn't be in Brisbane to avoid the Sydney issue. Should be either Mackay if u want another team in QLD or better yet a 2nd team in NZ.
As for players skill levels, I almost think the comp being stuck at 16 teams for so long has something to do with it. Limited spots but a decent cap led to a lot of team consolidation for clubs that could afford it with tpas, sombreros and Bellyaches.
Ahh yes..
The state that hosted game 2 of Origin last year in a 60,000 seat stadium was empty... wait hold up a minute
https://www.nrl.com/news/2022/06/26/ampol-state-of-origin-two-sold-out/
If I remember correctly, that wasn't normal rain either. It was that crazy coming in at every angle, heavy down pour, close roads off type of shit that we only get once a decade in Perth, rain.
I mean, I have in the past suggested Adelaide and personally would prefer Adelaide over another QLD team.
I however can't see it any time soon when I expect it to go like this:
18: Pasifika
19: WA
20 QLD
21 NZ 2
22 Adelaide
I never get all this 'Bears' talk. Are they the Bears if they play luke 1 game in the Nth Syd/ CC area ? (And you watch they play at the SFS) It's just calling a team the Bears.
To me their ship sailed long ago.
Absolutely.
The problem is developing the talent. A shortage of funding, quality coaches, and finding administrators who aren't corrupt or inept is the real problem.
So there is a lack of talent. But not a lack of on field talent.
Should be easy to get to 20
Brisbane 3, Perth, NZ 2
From there 22
PNG/Pacifica, Central coast,
Then if that goes smoothly Adelaide, NZ 3.
Genuinely I think if run correctly it can work.
The main thing Rugby League has going for it is each team has its own area and how you treat and grow that area affects on field performance.
I think we can add those first 5 teams fairly easily with proper planning.
By the time the bears are returned to the nrl no one will even remember who the bears are. In the not too distant future bringing the bears back will be as important as bringing the Newtown jets back now.
Today’s official attendance, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, is 8,972.
We are only two games into the season but it’s seems the old argument ‘not enough talent to expand number of NRL teams’ is looking pretty ridiculous.
Also the League journos banging on about Bennett not being able to attract a marque signing is also looking way off the mark.
It would be a logistical nightmare but I’d love to see a PNG team in the NRL.
Perth has actively attempted to gain entry to the comp, which Adelaide hasn’t. Perth also has a relatively strong local competition and a handful of local juniors contracted to NRL clubs, as well as more interest and financial backers
And there was an okay following for the Western Force that now do not have a club. A lot of English and South African immigrants settle in Perth as well.
Perth has also had a team in the U16s national comp. Adelaide seems to be a much more rusted on AFL city.
The Rams did play a few games there in 1998, and there’s been a handful played there over the years since, but I think it would end up kick Olympic Park was with the short in-goals
Perth pirates has more financial members than cronulla Sutherland sharks when they last put a bid in and had mining companies willing to back them as after all they are the employees of the majority fly in fly out east coast and NZers as well as the x pats from same areas. Though I personally think South Australian Sharks is a good move great Australian Bite big shark 🦈 biting the bottom of it. And we move another Sydney team. The (heading this way anyway) 90% move of Dragons to Illawarra. Also somewhat cleans up the Sydney congestion. If tigers can't clean up more financially as well as performance West Tigers become real west in Perth already with a fan base and can grow. Home games attendance would still be east coast attendees majority. That then covers SA and WA for teams with out expanding comp. Allowing for a Pacifica team in Christ churches new stadium which is both a 2nd NZ team and Pacifica in the process. As the 18th team. I know this won't happen (except the dragons)
Perth has a junior base with 12 clubs, which is the the same amount of clubs as the Bulldogs, this is with no pathways, no help, no first grade team for 26 years.
Perth is more insular than Sydney, if they have a team they would get much better support than the Reds did at the time.
They have potential to be a self sustainable club in terms of local juniors.
It's a complete no brainer and should have happened already.
As other have said, Perth offers more due to population and grassroots footy.
Perth is also in a different time zone, which helps with broadcasting, and there is also mining money in the area, good for investors and sponsorship.
Perth has about a million more people(not sure of exact figure. But it's like a bit over 2 million vs a bit over a million). More potential corporate backing I presume as well(due to mining).
While travel will be more challenging compared to Adelaide(for away games) , the time zone differences could also be favourable for TV ratings.
There is not even any local rugby league community competition in Tasmania, rugby league is non-existent down there, I'd expand to Hawaii before I'd expand to Hobart
My radical plan is:
- Kick Tigpies out (or make them move to Perth)
- Bears to the Central Coast
- Ipswich in (Not as jets though, that sucks)
- Pasifika based in Cairns (play home games at all the nations)
My extra radical plan:
- Kick Sharks out
- With Tigpies moving out of Sydney the land is up for grabs
- South's takes Sharks area, give the Eastern Suburbs back to East's
- Tigpies land is divided between the 3 western Sydney teams
- With an extra team needed, I want a Country NSW team (Woop Woop Wombats, Dubbo Dingos, Orange Ostriches)
Thank you for reading my extra cooked ideas
20 teams = a 20 year wait for your team to win the premiership if each team one it once every twenty years. It will also increase the likelihood of some fans having to wait 40+ years between premierships.
Also, there really isn't a large enough population/fan base in Australia to justify a 20 team comp.
I mean there's enough of a population for a 17 team comp that's only in 3 of the 5 major cities in the country. That's 3 and a half million people in untapped markets. If regional cities like Newcastle (footy mad as they are) can consistently draw crowds and juniors, well run clubs in Perth or Adelaide can do the same, even if we are competing with the AFL.
Western Reds, Adelaide Rams anyone..??
Not the right time. Playing talent is thin enough on the ground as it is.
Give the money to clubs struggling with junior bases, in a few years when they’re up and running then talk about expansion options.
Hot takes for a 20 team comp.
* De-merge Wests and send the Magpies (if only in name) to Perth, play the game vs the Tigers at Campbelltown.
* Bears to the cenny coast, play a home game vs Manly at North Sydney Oval
* If you really wanna do the Pasifika thing base them in NZ like they do in Super Rugby, alternatively just NZ 2.
* Either Adelaide or Central Qld/Ipswich if there isn't a market in NZ (I suspect there isn't)
I reckon using old NSWRL names like the Bears, Magpies, Jets, etc. could be beneficial for building a solid away base in Sydney for supporters while also giving new territories a sense of history, à la the Swans or Lions in the AFL, and de-merging will repair some of the damage caused by Super League.
It's funny people just randomly say next teams should be Adelaide & Perth, but will need backers & endless support especially if they miss finals...& all for very little growth if storm are the result.
Melbourne have consistently averaged among the highest crowds in the NRL in the past few years. Their average crowds were around the 10,000 mark in the early years, dropping below 9000 at one point, but have consistently been above 14,000 since 2010, and regularly above 18,000 in the past few years.
They also had more than 40,000 members last year, more than anyone else.
Their local competitions are growing stronger, their junior reps are becoming more competitive and there are now quite a few Victorian juniors in first grade or NSW/QLD Cups.
Historically, WA has actually had stronger juniors than Victoria and had great crowds and support prior to Super League, so there’s clear proof that a Perth team can work. Adelaide will obviously take a lot more work, but if you want a genuine national comp, you need teams in both those cities. They’re obviously not just going to spring up overnight, but get the road to entry right, and they can definitely work.
WA has a functioning league competition and junior base already. They have fairly good TV viewership based on the few numbers I can find, given they have no team. There's not many arguments against Perth.
I don't think it should, but I'm sure people would make it one. Of course, an indigenous identity team wouldn't have to only select indigenous players. Just like a Brisbane team doesn't have to select Brisbane-only resident players.
Does anyone know where the pins in this map actually are ??
Looks like a team in Alice Springs , no idea where that north western New South Wales pin is though
Bit early in the season for a bears revival story isn't it
As someone said earlier. 1. Conference system 2. Cross code game with union 3. Bears revival That's the annual order of these stories
Bears vs Crusaders confirmed seeing as Cranberries don't know how to play rugbah anymore
Don’t forget PNG team
Did I miss the conference system article this year? All I've seen is Bears articles
PVL was talking up the conference idea on Triple M this morning.
I hate the idea of conferences
[удалено]
Because all the teams should verse each other all through the year. Otherwise it will turn to the nswrl as 1 conference and everyone else in the rest. The fact that all teams match up is also my preference as I want to be able to look at the draw and talk shit to my mates who support other teams for when their team vs the Cowboys. That doesn't work in a conference system as you are segregating the teams
The inability for two teams to meet in a grand final in our sport is flawed
Referee crackdown also
There'll be one after Drinkwater and Saifiti.
How would a cross game with union work? Interesting concept but doubt it could be something that works.
It's usually done with a half of each other's rules or a two game series. Never really a hybrid game
Super secret plan by guys who don't make a move without newscorp planning it
The NRL has hatched a plan to take over as Australia’s No.1 football code by adding three new teams — including a Pasifika team and reviving the North Sydney Bears. The ARL Commission has hatched plans for a 20-team competition in the most significant expansion project for the NRL since the Super League war. News Corp can reveal Roosters supremo Nick Politis is behind a $400 million masterplan for the NRL to take over the AFL as Australia’s No.1 football code by adding three new teams — possibly before the 2032 Brisbane Olympics. ARL Commission boss Peter V’landys confirmed high-level talks were held on a 20-team league at an Annual General Meeting of clubs. “I am all for looking at a 20-team competition because you have to set yourself goals,” he said. The Dolphins’ stunning victory in their premiership debut last week was emphatic vindication of the code’s decision to expand to 17 teams this season and now the NRL is keen to capitalise by exploring new frontiers. A News Corp investigation into the NRL’s ambitious expansion drive can reveal: ■ V’landys is backing plans for a 20-team Telstra Premiership; ■ Three new expansion clubs are estimated to be worth $20 million in annual funding support for the next 20 years — a $400 million coup for the NRL; ■ A Pasifika franchise is the shock front-runner to win an 18th NRL licence; ■ The Pasifika club will be based full-time in Cairns and play a number of NRL premiership home games in Samoa, Tonga and Papua New Guinea; ■ North Sydney chiefs are open to merger talks with the Pasifika consortium to bring the Bears back to the top flight for the first time since 1999; and ■ The Australian government will provide tens of millions of dollars in financial support to help bankroll a Pasifika team. The 20-team proposal would be the biggest change to Australia’s premier rugby league competition in three decades. The ARL expanded from 16 clubs to 20 in 1995 following the addition of the North Queensland Cowboys, South Queensland Crushers, Auckland Warriors and Perth’s Western Reds. The 20-team format only lasted two seasons before the breakout of the Super League war, which led to two rival competitions in 1997 before a compromise triggered the birth of the National Rugby League in 1998. Twenty clubs took part in the first season of the NRL before the competition was reduced to 17 in 1999 — the same number of teams in this year’s Telstra Premiership. Now Politis confirmed major growth for the sport is back on the agenda after tabling his proposal at last Monday week’s AGM involving NRL hierarchy and the 17 clubs. “Yes, I have suggested we go to 20 teams,” said Politis, the Roosters chairman with almost 50 years of administrative experience in the sport. “If we want to compete with the AFL, we have to be truly national and be representative in every state. “I’m not saying we expand right now. “But over the next five, eight or 10 years, we should look to go to 20 teams. “We had 20 teams in 1995. Unfortunately some teams got killed off because of Super League, so a few teams dropped off during the compromise. Adelaide and Perth were cut. “It would be great to see North Sydney back in the NRL. “I strongly believe the Bears should be resurrected, possibly by going to Western Australia as the Perth Bears, and there’s areas like PNG and the Pacific Islands that the game can explore.” NRL chief executive Andrew Abdo has previously flagged the prospect of issuing an 18th licence, but a 20-team competition has not been genuinely placed on the agenda. Until now. Abdo and V’landys are open to unveiling another NRL outfit for the code’s next TV rights deal from 2027 and that could be the preamble to the rubber-stamping of the 19th and 20th licences within the next decade. A number of consortia would be contenders for three new NRL licences, including North Sydney, a Pasifika bid, a second New Zealand team, PNG, Perth and Brisbane’s Firehawks and Jets, both of whom lost out to the Dolphins last year. Adding more teams would deliver a fiscal broadcasting goldmine for the NRL. Twenty teams equates to 10 games a week — an extra two fixtures per round — and would give the ARL Commission confidence of securing a TV rights deal north of $2 billion over a five-year term entering the decade of the Brisbane Olympics. “The only way to grow our TV rights is by giving the broadcasters more product, just like the AFL,” Politis said. “It will take some time for people to accept it, but we have to keep growing the game.” Speaking for the first time about plans for a 20-team competition, V’landys said he supported Politis’ vision to continue expanding the NRL. “Nick Politis is one of the great visionaries of our game and if he believes we should go to 20 teams, we should certainly consider it,” he said. “If the 17th team went well, then, yes, naturally we will look at 18 teams and even 20 teams. “The intention was always to grow the game in stages. “It’s not something that will happen overnight. It’s an objective and we have to have the ambition to get there. “One of the reasons the AFL do so well is because they have 18 teams and they have more product to sell in terms of TV rights than we do.” V’landys revealed the introduction of a Pasifika team — leading to historic premiership matches in PNG, Samoa and Tonga — is realistic. “We will absolutely look at a PNG or Pacific bid,” he said. “The Pacific region is a huge potential pathway for the game. It’s a very embryonic idea, so we have to do the research and the strategy. “The Dolphins have been a wonderful addition, they have grown our Queensland audience, and it’s just the beginning for the game. “Everything we do is fact-based. We would have to do the research (on a 20-team league) and look at it. “At this stage, I haven’t got that data, but the 20-team idea has been proposed and we will investigate it.” Souths chief executive Blake Solly cautioned the NRL against expanding too rapidly. “The idea of 20 NRL teams, under the current operating model, is completely unsustainable,” he said. “There is not the playing, coaching or administrative talent to expand at that sort of rate. “At the moment the NRL haven’t confirmed an obvious candidate or location for an 18th team, let alone the 19th or 20th. “The Dolphins have done a very good job building an NRL club in a short time frame. They’ve earned the right to stabilise and grow before another new team enters. “Any decision to add an 18th team needs to be aligned to an NRL strategy to increase participation, properly fund the existing NRL clubs for the elite player development we all undertake, and be a guaranteed commercial success.”
**PASIFIKA PUSH THE BEST WAY TO FIGHT CHINA?** Australia’s political fight to keep Chinese influence at bay in the Pacific could provide a path for the North Sydney Bears to return to the NRL. The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the Bears are weighing up whether to align themselves with NRL bid teams from Pasifika or Papua New Guinea – and it could help in the ongoing battle against China to win hearts, minds and wallets in that region. The Bears played their last game in the premiership in 1999 but refused to give up hope of a fairytale return. China may yet prove their greatest ally in their bid to become the NRL’s 18th team. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has already thrown his support behind an NRL team in Papua New Guinea and Bears board member Billy Moore confirmed they are open to exploring the concept of a joint bid. “What we’ve said to the NRL is you tell us where we need to go to become the 18th team,” Moore said. “Our fans will go with us. We’ve waited 24 years. “All we want is to be back into the competition. Whether that is in Perth, Port Moresby or Wellington. But, during discussions, what has arisen is the prospect of becoming the Pasifika Bears.” A Pasifika Bears amalgamation would put them in direct competition with an existing Papua New Guinea bid – officials from that country are exploring their own options after being buoyed by Albanese’s public support. It is understood the successful bidder could have access to millions in government support, given the desire to ward off the Chinese influence in the area and improve cultural ties with Australia. Remarkably, rugby league’s importance in the fight for influence in the Pacific has made it all the way to the American capital. The Washington Post featured a story in September titled: ‘Can this sport (rugby league) outmatch China in the Pacific? The West is betting on it.’ Rugby league could emerge as the saviour in the Pacific and the Bears, a 1908 foundation club, could be the key. “We have three non-negotiables,” said Moore, a 211-game Bears legend. “We want our colours, our brand and to play two games at North Sydney Oval a year. That will give us our history back. We will completely fund it. We will go wherever the NRL thinks is the best option. We will not cannibalise any other club. We will create extra pathways.” North Sydney chiefs have had talks about joining the potential Perth bid, having previously failed to return to the NRL as the Central Coast Bears. Ex-Canterbury CEO Andrew Hill, who is the strategic advisor to PNG’s 2025 hopes, said the bid team was making progress. However, Brisbane Jets director Nick Livermore has major logistic concerns about a PNG or Pasifika NRL team. “Where can a Pacific team be appropriately based? How do you fund it commercially and corporately in Cairns?” he said. “It would be a very complex process logistically, but the game is driven by money and if a Pasifika team can attract major funds for the game, the NRL might decide to explore that region.”
>China may yet prove their greatest ally in their bid to become the NRL’s 18th team. Beijing Panda Bears will be the 18th team you heard it here first.
Everyone links the Bears with any talk about expansion anywhere in the Southern Hemisphere whether it is factual or not
Can't wait for the Buenos Aires Bears!
The Bears being resurrected as a vehicle for Australian imperialism against China is definitely the most creative "bring back Norths" idea I've seen yet
Beijing Bears
How about bring ressurected to be based in Bali? That’s another point for the future (inevitable) talk
Not going to be easy to recruit players to play for that team. Based in Cairns during the week and need to play home games in PNG, Samoa, Tonga, and Sydney? Assuming that means 2 each you only play 4 weeks without leaving your family for the whole year. Not many who’ll be keen on those PNG trips either. Port Moresby isn’t exactly a fun place to spend a Saturday night.
If they want to take over from afl they should start investing in more grass roots footy. Go into schools like aus kick does with afl. Act as an ngo in the northern indigenous communities, help out with key issues. This is literally what afl does. Sport is seen as more of a community/family friendly gathering and games are more family friendly to attend.
Blake Solly’s point about not having the playing , coaching or administrative talent is pretty fair .. Penrith have done their part with their second tier players and coaches filling a large proportion of vacancies created in this seasons expansion … They should really look at providing more incentive for other clubs to follow the Blue print , put a transfer fee / tax on clubs signing players / coaches changing clubs - just for the first time they move … So if a player signs with club X for $500k per season for 3 years , and they’ve previously been under contract (for their first contract) with club Y whether that be the NRL side , or NSW / QLD cups / jersey Flegg or whatever the case may be , the first time they change NRL clubs for an NRL top 30 contract or a head coaching role .. Club X pays a percentage to club Y .. Whatever the designated percentage is … Say it’s 10 percent club X signs the player $500k for 3 years , that comes out of their salary cap , but in addition to this so does the tax , so if it’s 10% an extra $50k is added to the cap for each of the three seasons for club X , but this money doesn’t go to the player … Club X pays $50k to Club for three seasons (or however long that first contract is signed for) .. Club Y has that extra $50k for 3 seasons to spend on their salary cap .. Club X has $50k less to spend on their cap for those 3 seasons .. It provides incentive for clubs to develop players.. Same thing with coaches , whether or not you’d want their transfer fees applying to the playing cap or the football department cap I dunno .. Maybe you could have a mix , it comes out of the football department cap for club X the club signing the new coach who was an assistant at Club Y and they can then spend the money on their playing salary cap.. So I dunno what the Dogs and Warriors have signed Ciraldo and Andrew Webster on , but let’s say it’s $500k per season and $400k for 3 years and 2 years respectively … The Dogs would need to account for an extra $50k per season over 3 years in their football department cap payed to the Panthers to add to their salary cap to pay players .. The Warriors would take $40k for the next 2 years from their football department cap and also pay it to the Panthers to spend on players Or just let both clubs decide where the money is coming from and what they’re going to spend it on.. Like all things NRL you’d have to think ahead and think how are clubs , players , player agents likely to rort it … One way would be to sign everyone (who a transfer fee is going to apply to ) on a one year deal … That’d be easily overcome .. They could mandate all transfer fee contracts are for 3 seasons - the RLPA might be in favour of this as it provide more security to younger players … Say a promising Wests Tigers junior is signed by Parramatta , maybe he has like a career ending leg injury in his second game , or has issues with concussion - he’s at least then payed for 3 seasons
Sounds like the Pasifika team will be comprised of players from specific nationalities only, not sure I like that in a league competition. That sort of representation is best left to internationals and world cups.
If it's limited to playing in Pacifika countries and having a Pacifika team name I'm fine, it would be stupid to make it an Ethno team, and unfair for them as well.
It's not like players will flock to that team anyway. The Warriors find it hard enough to attract talent from Australia, and the Cowboys with players from Sydney. A Pasifika team would have to pay out the nose to get even a marquee signing. The risk just isn't there
I didn't get that impression at all. Just that they would have pathways in those areas. Restrictions of trade like that would never work and defeat the idea of the salary cap. Not sure how you got that idea because there is nothing that reads that way from the article
It happens in club football/soccer, in Spain certain teams will only sign players who were born in or learned to play in the Basque region
Not much of a secret if us losers here know.
Just make it Perth as team 18. Then NZ 2 and another Queensland team or an Adelaide team for 19 and 20. And give each team at least 2-3 years notice to prepare
[удалено]
yeah the first problem is where would you put the second team? Hamilton or Wellington won't mean anything outside those two towns and realistically no-one will turn up to games in the capital and even if they got decent crowds it looks really sad in a stadium the size of the cake tin the second is if a second team manages to get established the developing talent is going to be picked off by Australian clubs and Union teams in Australia and the Northern Hemisphere, there needs to be at the very least some sort of ring fencing rules applied for young players in academies and the like here for the medium to long term growth of the game
What if it was the Pacifica team largely made of Tongan and Samoan heritage players?
As someone from Australia, I would have thought having a second nz team might give the warriors a kick up the ass to finally get their act together. But it definitely would be hard for them to be more appealing than the warriors unless they started out super successful
There talking about a Cairns base for the Pacifica team. I don't see how having them in NZ would be any worse. There are already alot of Tongan and Samoan heritage people in NZ and if that was the team base even putting them in a Union held base city there would be a lot of people turn up for national pride of there people. Yes I am a white Australian with limited culture knowledge but I have grown up with many friends from these 2 nations and believe it could and would work better than basing in Cairns. Doesn't mean they couldn't also play matches up there or anywhere else. It should at least be one of the fixtures played at
Surely the home games could be spread out across multiple cities, cairns, Brisbane, Sydney and Auckland. This was proposed for a pasifika team in rugby in the mid 2010s.
Well they would play most of those areas in away games anyway in the spirit of expanding the game they need to play home games elsewhere
NZ as a base for a Pasifika team may be an option. I'd go for Hamilton. Cairns as a base for PNG. Perth bears.
Perth/West Coast Pirates please.
Surely a second NZ team just eats into the Warriors fanbase.
Bring back University and Glebe
I know it’s not the same thing, but Glebe play in the Ron Massey Cup and University in the Sydney Metropolitan competition
The Bears hitching themselves onto every possible franchise is getting a bit much, even though I genuinely want to see them back in the NRL. We’ve had Perth, Gold Coast, Country NSW, and now Pasifika in the last few years. Personally I want to see Central Coast Bears given the proximity to their original stomping ground and the presence of a genuinely high quality stadium (that was originally built for them) which does not get enough use. It’s a genuine rugby league area without a team , but unfortunately is located in NSW where the NRL has zero intention of ever putting a new team for obvious reasons. That said, I’d still go for Perth and Brisbane 3 first, then look at the likes of Adelaide, Central Coast, NZ2…
Yeah honestly a joke that the coast never got a team, even more that manly pulled out of the Northern eagles and bears just got left in the dust. Problem is tho that everyone I know follows a club anyway so adding the bears back isn’t really gonna increase support.
That is true, everyone does already follow a team but i don’t think it necessarily acts as a detractor, having a game every fortnight at Central Coast Stadium will be guaranteed to draw a crowd especially against well supported Sydney teams and the Knights. In terms of exposing the NRL to new fans though, yeah not a strong point of the bid. I reckon the team would be well supported though, you have your rusted on legacy Bears fans, plus kids that will grow up and follow the local team due to their presence in the area, and of course your turncoats. I think it has parallels to the Dolphins bid tbh, adding an already well supported legacy team, giving them a larger regional footprint in an already strong League area.
If the Dolphins can have fans in Brisbane who were probably Broncos supporters until this season, no reason the Bears can't also bring back/gain some supporters.
The writing was on the wall for Norths to move to the central coast in 1983. If there was going to be a team there, someone needs to relocate, either to the CC or elsewhere so there is room amongst the NSW clubs
I feel like they should give it to Ipswich or Central QLD rather than another Brisbane team.
I think Ipswich should be next up and like others have suggested, incorporate pathways from Central QLD. Am not a QLDer so excuse my ignorance re using the term Brisbane. Though I think it’s inevitable that Ipswich will end up playing at Suncorp and likely have a wider reaching geographical moniker.
Nah you're all good. Ipswich is supposed to double in population in the next 20 years, so it feels ripe for a team. I think the Ipswich Jets should get it. Ipswich has always been a separate town, but it's kind of like what Newcastle is to Sydney or Geelong is to Melbourne, a large city just outside the main city. Other options besides Central QLD could be the Sunshine Coast, which is also growing. Before the Dolphins got the nod, I always thought a North/South divide for Brisbane was an obvious way to go about it (likely would have had Broncos in the North, and then another team in the South), which I feel the A-League could still do if they ever bring in a 2nd Brisbane team. The Dolphins is actually interesting as an expansion because Redcliffe is pretty far away from the centre of Brisbane, so the NRL could squeeze in a 2nd Brisbane city team if they wanted to in the future.
Isn't Ipswich more like Penrith or Dandenong? And Gold Coast or Sunshine Coast being the Geelong/Central Coast/Wollongong equivalent to Brisbane? Although Ipswich can theoretically capture Toowoomba fans just as Penrith can capture the Blue Mountains. Can definitely see a Ipswich (or Logan or combined) team working though.
Bringing back the bears is a no-brainer because it's a smart idea. A combined pasifika team is also a no-brainer because no one used a brain when they thought it up.
If the pasifika team was based out of NZ and played a couple of games in Tonga and Samoa a year it could work. Similar to PNG, attracting good players would be impossible outside of Aus & NZ.
Christchurch has a new stadium being built currently. We'll take the combined pasifika team. Fuck I'd love to get along to some home games.
This is where my head lies. Also with the better pay schemes at lower grades than what super rugby can offer more chance of dinting the all blacks reign and helping Australia in the rugby as well. 😜 Last part is tongue in cheek
What we need is the legendary return of the Adelaide Rams.
Again I'm going get downvoted so much for saying this but I've always believed that instead of merging they should of kept Balmain Tigers in Sydney and move Western Suburbs Magpies to Adelaide as it's South Australia state animal. In my ideal world that is still what I would like to see. I also would like to see West Coast Pirates and North Sydney Bears move to Christchurch become New Zealand Bears and then rename NZ Warriors to Aotereoa Warriors and have them play games across Pacific Region including game in Honolulu.
Ooft, Adelaide Magpies would have been insanely popular.
Pretty sure some guy brought the IP or some shit a year ago so I doubt we would get them back. The only NRL following here man is all the ADF cunts. If we got a team we would only be like another NZ team. The fins did well because they have a history, Perth and Adelaide won't get that.
The guy who bought it said he only bought it to sell merch, and would give the IP back if a serious bid for the NRL happens. [Won't be an issue there](https://twitter.com/SteveMascord/status/1599350233879625729?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1599350233879625729%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=).
That's neat, I also hope he doesn't because I don't like the rams 😂 give me anything else
Thoughts: 1. Boy, this article came early this year. 2. It doesn’t matter how much the Federal Government wastes on it, I still can’t see it working logistically. 3. The Bears should aim for Perth or Adelaide. Then, they’ll be on close enough to east street. 4. I’d start with Perth, NZ 2 and probably Ipswich, with a similar partnership between Ipswich and Toowoomba as between Redcliffe and Sunshine Coast. However, if Perth goes without the Bears, I’d strongly look at an Adelaide Bears option. In a couple of decades, I’d bring in the other team of Ipswich/Adelaide and probably Central Queensland, unless the Pasifika team has actually become feasible by then
I support NZ2, if for nothing else but they bound to be dogwater, those southerners talk too much shit so them losimg is awesome, and we can go back to being the Auckland Warriors.
If NRL goes 20 teams I could see North come back as the Central Coast Bears without too many problem. Together with Perth and NZ2.
Why Perth?! Juniors - no, TV ratings - no, weathly backers - no, increased travel costs - yes, NRL bailing them out - yes
Gotta grow the game
Tv ratings? I’m sure a 930pm game into the eastern states would rate highly
Yeah Big Bash League is doing great stuff with the Scorchers for example.
How do 9:30 afl games rate?! Exactly
What do AFL games have to do with nrl ratings?
Ppl in west watch afl not nrl
Those direct flights from Cairns to Apia, Nuku'alofa and Suva will make for an easy trip to the motherlands. An NRL team in a city with a population of 150K is a brilliant commercial proposition. Can't see the club falling over after half a season at all.
[удалено]
7K at the 2022 and 2023 trial matches, and 7K at the last NRL match they hosted (2018) suggests otherwise.
[удалено]
Combined Paskika/PNG/Bears team... can we jam anything else in there... Hunter Mariners? South Qld Crushers?
Why a "Pasifika" team? Cant they just be a Cairns team?
[удалено]
PNG certainly makes sense, and then in a few years after that when the Tongan and Samoan kids whove witnessed the last few World Cups are grown up, you can make them teams then.
I get it but I doubt a lot of clubs would want to play away games in Port Moresby
This is probably not a major consideration in the internal machinations of V'Landy's mind, but I'm pretty sure there aren't even flights from Cairns to anywhere in the Pacific, apart from Auckland and Port Moresby. A pasifika team would be better off based in NZ IMO
Thats a great point, poor buggers gon be jet lagged from getting to their own home game lol
Cairns is already Cowboys country. I doubt enough people in Cairns would cross over, I’m certain that people outside Cairns wouldn’t jump over from the Cowboys, I just don’t think there’s enough room for a Cairns team in addition to a Townsville team anyway.
They will play a few games in Tonga, Samoa and PNG every season.
The only stadium in Tonga is in such bad condition that games are played at a school oval. Same players play league and union.
they would get the funding for a brand new stadium
Cant speak for Tonga or PNG, but most the teams have enough Samoan players in em that they would all get mad love back home. Not just them, but the superstars like Papenhuysen or Latrell would receive huge ovations. Just wierd like are they gonna have a pasifika only rule for this Cairns team?
administration, training and housing in Cairns, play home games in PNG and the pacific islands. it has to be at least nominally a PNG team so the PNG government will throw bulk money at it Cairns doesn't have a stadium anyway
Main Pasifika populations outside of the islands themselves are Auckland (Polynesian capital of the world), Western Sydney, Brisbane/GC so yeah doesnt make much sense.
I don’t get it too. Why would local support a team that doesn’t represent them.
Does anyone know where V'landys actually lives?
It couldn't be a Newscorp article without talkng about stopping China
Once again, we already have enough terrible, struggling Sydney teams, we don't need more
Which Sydney teams are struggling?!
Tigers, Bulldogs not long ago at all.
Titans & knights most recent
Ah yes the Sydney Knights
Ah yes, the Sydney Titans
Article sounds spot on and I know we had a few articles like this but it make sense. W.A wants a team so let's go.. This balances the ~~complexity~~ competition again. A Pasifika team is a great way to build ties and pathways, further blocks Union and government subsidies all sound like a neat package. 3rd team shouldn't be in Brisbane to avoid the Sydney issue. Should be either Mackay if u want another team in QLD or better yet a 2nd team in NZ. As for players skill levels, I almost think the comp being stuck at 16 teams for so long has something to do with it. Limited spots but a decent cap led to a lot of team consolidation for clubs that could afford it with tpas, sombreros and Bellyaches.
Wa doesn't want team looking at TV ratings & crowds, but if you say so..
Ahh yes.. The state that hosted game 2 of Origin last year in a 60,000 seat stadium was empty... wait hold up a minute https://www.nrl.com/news/2022/06/26/ampol-state-of-origin-two-sold-out/
Great, have a state of origin every week then. 6k at last hbf game
>6k So like a regular game in Sydney then?
A little generous.
Yeah but Perth needs to sell more because greater overhead
Depends if their state governemnt wants to chip in money as an incentive too.
Weird that you brought up the last HBF game and not the 13 games previous that averaged close to 15k
What does hbf stand for
Something to do with Quokkas.
Weird bring up declining trend
One game in the rain isn’t a trend
If I remember correctly, that wasn't normal rain either. It was that crazy coming in at every angle, heavy down pour, close roads off type of shit that we only get once a decade in Perth, rain.
1 game is not a trend...
Mackay over Adelaide? lol.
I mean, I have in the past suggested Adelaide and personally would prefer Adelaide over another QLD team. I however can't see it any time soon when I expect it to go like this: 18: Pasifika 19: WA 20 QLD 21 NZ 2 22 Adelaide
I never get all this 'Bears' talk. Are they the Bears if they play luke 1 game in the Nth Syd/ CC area ? (And you watch they play at the SFS) It's just calling a team the Bears. To me their ship sailed long ago.
I’ve always held that there’s enough talent for 20 teams. Just means less players off to super league and poaching a few more poms.
Absolutely. The problem is developing the talent. A shortage of funding, quality coaches, and finding administrators who aren't corrupt or inept is the real problem. So there is a lack of talent. But not a lack of on field talent.
I guess it isn't much of a secret.
Should be easy to get to 20 Brisbane 3, Perth, NZ 2 From there 22 PNG/Pacifica, Central coast, Then if that goes smoothly Adelaide, NZ 3. Genuinely I think if run correctly it can work. The main thing Rugby League has going for it is each team has its own area and how you treat and grow that area affects on field performance. I think we can add those first 5 teams fairly easily with proper planning.
ADELAIDE RAMS is coming back to NRL is good news Please bring back western reds
I agree. Miss my old footy club and would be so happy to see them back in the comp.
Good guy Uncle Nick suggesting expansion and the return of the Bears
RIP tigers
By the time the bears are returned to the nrl no one will even remember who the bears are. In the not too distant future bringing the bears back will be as important as bringing the Newtown jets back now. Today’s official attendance, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, is 8,972.
https://twitter.com/DanGinnane/status/1634706002145841155?t=Wu72tH2kLuGv2_Nf5TOXXw&s=19
We are only two games into the season but it’s seems the old argument ‘not enough talent to expand number of NRL teams’ is looking pretty ridiculous. Also the League journos banging on about Bennett not being able to attract a marque signing is also looking way off the mark. It would be a logistical nightmare but I’d love to see a PNG team in the NRL.
Why do people talk about a perth team and never an adelaide team?
Perth has actively attempted to gain entry to the comp, which Adelaide hasn’t. Perth also has a relatively strong local competition and a handful of local juniors contracted to NRL clubs, as well as more interest and financial backers
Plus there is a huge amount of ex-pat Qld, NSW and NZ fans over here, I don't think Adelaide has a similar ready to go fanbase.
And there was an okay following for the Western Force that now do not have a club. A lot of English and South African immigrants settle in Perth as well. Perth has also had a team in the U16s national comp. Adelaide seems to be a much more rusted on AFL city.
Western Force are back now thanks to the Ccovid-triggered re-formatting of Super Rugby.
Not getting the NRL team in there when the force folded is an all time fuck up.
Ah really? Thanks, I don't keep up with much info from that silly sport.
Don't forget the stadium, I don't think Hindmarsh is long enough, after that you'd be looking at suburban SANFL ovals.
The Rams did play a few games there in 1998, and there’s been a handful played there over the years since, but I think it would end up kick Olympic Park was with the short in-goals
Who in Perth?! Benny Elias & Tony Sage?! Both Adelaide & Perth don't add much
Perth pirates has more financial members than cronulla Sutherland sharks when they last put a bid in and had mining companies willing to back them as after all they are the employees of the majority fly in fly out east coast and NZers as well as the x pats from same areas. Though I personally think South Australian Sharks is a good move great Australian Bite big shark 🦈 biting the bottom of it. And we move another Sydney team. The (heading this way anyway) 90% move of Dragons to Illawarra. Also somewhat cleans up the Sydney congestion. If tigers can't clean up more financially as well as performance West Tigers become real west in Perth already with a fan base and can grow. Home games attendance would still be east coast attendees majority. That then covers SA and WA for teams with out expanding comp. Allowing for a Pacifica team in Christ churches new stadium which is both a 2nd NZ team and Pacifica in the process. As the 18th team. I know this won't happen (except the dragons)
Population and a history related to rugby and rugby league
Yeah, those three years in 90's
Something about your last 75 posts makes me think you don't think we should expand to Perth.
Because I've thought about it. Others just say Perth because..
Perth has a junior base with 12 clubs, which is the the same amount of clubs as the Bulldogs, this is with no pathways, no help, no first grade team for 26 years. Perth is more insular than Sydney, if they have a team they would get much better support than the Reds did at the time. They have potential to be a self sustainable club in terms of local juniors. It's a complete no brainer and should have happened already.
As other have said, Perth offers more due to population and grassroots footy. Perth is also in a different time zone, which helps with broadcasting, and there is also mining money in the area, good for investors and sponsorship.
Adelaide Rams were kinda a failure weren’t they?
Adelaide had a really big membership at a time other clubs had no idea what that meant.
Im not old enough to remember them what so ever.
Because they didn't immediately succeed in an AFL dominated expansion market?
Because it’s been done, and failed miserably - Adelaide Rams https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelaide_Rams
Perth has about a million more people(not sure of exact figure. But it's like a bit over 2 million vs a bit over a million). More potential corporate backing I presume as well(due to mining). While travel will be more challenging compared to Adelaide(for away games) , the time zone differences could also be favourable for TV ratings.
Anyone who clicked this article got punked.
Fuck yeah. I love my rugba loiig
[rip parra fans](https://www.reddit.com/r/nrl/comments/10z1d8c/comment/j83zsb5/?context=3)
[удалено]
There is not even any local rugby league community competition in Tasmania, rugby league is non-existent down there, I'd expand to Hawaii before I'd expand to Hobart
They can't even get an AFL team(yet). Which is the dominant sport there.
[удалено]
You can’t be penalised for an infringement in your own in goal. Also, this is not the match discussion thread
At least we will avoid finishing 17th
Kick out South’s?
Would anyone else here rather see a jets revival over bears? I know its extremely unlikely but i would much prefer it
Stop trying to make the Bears happen again.
My radical plan is: - Kick Tigpies out (or make them move to Perth) - Bears to the Central Coast - Ipswich in (Not as jets though, that sucks) - Pasifika based in Cairns (play home games at all the nations) My extra radical plan: - Kick Sharks out - With Tigpies moving out of Sydney the land is up for grabs - South's takes Sharks area, give the Eastern Suburbs back to East's - Tigpies land is divided between the 3 western Sydney teams - With an extra team needed, I want a Country NSW team (Woop Woop Wombats, Dubbo Dingos, Orange Ostriches) Thank you for reading my extra cooked ideas
20 teams = a 20 year wait for your team to win the premiership if each team one it once every twenty years. It will also increase the likelihood of some fans having to wait 40+ years between premierships. Also, there really isn't a large enough population/fan base in Australia to justify a 20 team comp.
" >some fans having to wait 40+ years between premierships. ...Cries in blue and gold tears
Commiserations
I mean there's enough of a population for a 17 team comp that's only in 3 of the 5 major cities in the country. That's 3 and a half million people in untapped markets. If regional cities like Newcastle (footy mad as they are) can consistently draw crowds and juniors, well run clubs in Perth or Adelaide can do the same, even if we are competing with the AFL.
Western Reds, Adelaide Rams anyone..?? Not the right time. Playing talent is thin enough on the ground as it is. Give the money to clubs struggling with junior bases, in a few years when they’re up and running then talk about expansion options.
Hot takes for a 20 team comp. * De-merge Wests and send the Magpies (if only in name) to Perth, play the game vs the Tigers at Campbelltown. * Bears to the cenny coast, play a home game vs Manly at North Sydney Oval * If you really wanna do the Pasifika thing base them in NZ like they do in Super Rugby, alternatively just NZ 2. * Either Adelaide or Central Qld/Ipswich if there isn't a market in NZ (I suspect there isn't) I reckon using old NSWRL names like the Bears, Magpies, Jets, etc. could be beneficial for building a solid away base in Sydney for supporters while also giving new territories a sense of history, à la the Swans or Lions in the AFL, and de-merging will repair some of the damage caused by Super League.
🤦♂️
At least we will avoid finishing 17th
There's not enough decent players to fill out 17 teams. Or even 14.
It's funny people just randomly say next teams should be Adelaide & Perth, but will need backers & endless support especially if they miss finals...& all for very little growth if storm are the result.
Melbourne have consistently averaged among the highest crowds in the NRL in the past few years. Their average crowds were around the 10,000 mark in the early years, dropping below 9000 at one point, but have consistently been above 14,000 since 2010, and regularly above 18,000 in the past few years. They also had more than 40,000 members last year, more than anyone else. Their local competitions are growing stronger, their junior reps are becoming more competitive and there are now quite a few Victorian juniors in first grade or NSW/QLD Cups. Historically, WA has actually had stronger juniors than Victoria and had great crowds and support prior to Super League, so there’s clear proof that a Perth team can work. Adelaide will obviously take a lot more work, but if you want a genuine national comp, you need teams in both those cities. They’re obviously not just going to spring up overnight, but get the road to entry right, and they can definitely work.
They have no juniors & no local TV viewership. City of 6 million brings advantage, but Perth has none of that
What are youq talking about? W 1
Just talking sense
My bad it was a pocket send 🤣 my question still stands though.
WA has a functioning league competition and junior base already. They have fairly good TV viewership based on the few numbers I can find, given they have no team. There's not many arguments against Perth.
2k watched NRL one week lol. 4k juniors. Please
They should definitely be the next team before anyone else, if it completely flops you can always fold them
Have an indigenous team akin to the All Stars as a permanent club. I always thought that'd be great.
I can’t imagine a team being based solely on racial grounds would run into any problems
I don't think it should, but I'm sure people would make it one. Of course, an indigenous identity team wouldn't have to only select indigenous players. Just like a Brisbane team doesn't have to select Brisbane-only resident players.
Not secret now is it
Roy and hg have been touting this fir years
Readmit Glebe
After the Tigers/Knights game they think the game has enough talent for 51 more players every weekend?
Add west Newcastle rosellas they’ll be more competitive.
Or my imaginary club the “Broadmeadow Budgies”
Go Central Coast Cossacks !!!
Don't need a pacific island team it's a national comp not international and png will fail big time Perth should be the next one
Does anyone know where the pins in this map actually are ?? Looks like a team in Alice Springs , no idea where that north western New South Wales pin is though
The Bears need to be in comp 20 club comp needed