snake77
He is the ultimate flip flopper. His opinions always depend on what argument he is trying to convey. He often goes on about not being able to grow playing in small suburban grounds and should be moving to better facilities. When they do that he complains about leaving the traditional suburban grounds.
For this one he is probably justifying his wooden spoon pick from the last two years. Leading up to the 2011 Grand Final he wrote that the Warriors are one of the most valuable teams in the comp with the NZ TV rights they bring in.
And why would that be I wonder... perhaps to deflect everyone's natural attention from his drug cheating perennial grub of a team which survives only on handouts??In the Tele this morning in Buzz Rothfields column he asked the question basically why wouldn't the Warriors be axed from the comp. Does he know something we don't know or is he not aware that the broadcasting rights stipulate there has to be a team in NZ
Whiteknight
Fox/9 won't want to lose the Warriors, they fill the early game well with the different time zone, that's why Perth are a chance for a team for the other end of the evening
bruce
Contributor
Buzz is a wanker. End of story. Probably thinks Auckland is just off the coast of Cronulla. It has to be Cronulla that goes because:In the Tele this morning in Buzz Rothfields column he asked the question basically why wouldn't the Warriors be axed from the comp. Does he know something we don't know or is he not aware that the broadcasting rights stipulate there has to be a team in NZ
(1) They are broke
(2) They have no way out of being broke and the NRL cannot bail them out.
(3) They are in St George territory anyway, and if they don't like that they can follow Souths.
Plus (4) Cheats, (5) Peptide Users and (6) Grubbs.... lots of reasons !! … and 12000 is a huge crowd for them WTF... even when things are going great
Tim burgess
Sharks and Dragons is obvious merger . Both clubs are short of cash when compared to South's and Roosters etc.
You have to think about long term planning. At the moment neither Sharks or Dragons are pulling in enough fans to make to clubs commercially viable. An indicator is Sharks, they've had a halcyon period in terms of winning the comp and still broke and could only average 15000k per gsme, which is the same for the Dragons.
You have to think about long term planning. At the moment neither Sharks or Dragons are pulling in enough fans to make to clubs commercially viable. An indicator is Sharks, they've had a halcyon period in terms of winning the comp and still broke and could only average 15000k per gsme, which is the same for the Dragons.
Worried2Death
Dragonsharks sound pretty scary, better than the Queensland Warrioroos or whatever we end up as.
Ever Hopeful
Contributor
I found it astounding that a TV network has so much control over the NRL and can make demands that interfere with the history of the game in order to maximise revenue.
Not a far stretch to suggest refs have ulterior motives and salary caps are swindled is it?
Not a far stretch to suggest refs have ulterior motives and salary caps are swindled is it?
Fearmuss
Sharks still have that development money unless it has fallen through.
Watch out they might buy the warriors...
Watch out they might buy the warriors...
snake77
Can see NRL 360 tonight being like when Geyer proposed kicking the Warriors "Why they are in our competition, why can't they play in their own, we're making them stronger when the Kangaroos play".
Gets told about the state of the game in NZ and how most of it is dependent on the sole NRL club. Australia needs opposition to play or the international game would be even more stuffed than it is now.
Sits there with a dumbfounded look on his face mouth wide open.
Gets told about the state of the game in NZ and how most of it is dependent on the sole NRL club. Australia needs opposition to play or the international game would be even more stuffed than it is now.
Sits there with a dumbfounded look on his face mouth wide open.
Yep Murdoch dictates to the NRL how to schedule games for max pay for view coverage. If I was going to pay x billion for tv rights over y years. I'd be telling them what to do to... in order to get my money back plus profit.. no doubt that would be in the contract somewhere..
Well looks like Sydney's maxed out for NRL clubs too many other codes to compete with .. and financially 1 or 2 cant support themselves... so axe 1 or 2 or relocate. Plus if they relocate to an area with a large coverage more money for Murdoch ..
In AFL some Melb clubs relocated and are doing pretty well.
Who should go.. the clubs thats financially struggling would be good start...
Well looks like Sydney's maxed out for NRL clubs too many other codes to compete with .. and financially 1 or 2 cant support themselves... so axe 1 or 2 or relocate. Plus if they relocate to an area with a large coverage more money for Murdoch ..
In AFL some Melb clubs relocated and are doing pretty well.
Who should go.. the clubs thats financially struggling would be good start...
Pozza
Its still coming should help them short term, but if things don't change in the Shire they'll be back to square one in a few years
playdaball
Heritage Member
Aussie PM will be fighting to keep Cronulla in the NRL
Johnnyray
According to some people I know, NRL in 90s deliberately let Gold Coast Chargers die just so they can absorb them back into competition and use their cash assets to prop up Newcastle Knights as they were almost facing bankruptcy from Super League Wars that were happening at time which is ironic since it was them and their team which everybody back then were fighting about as belief was who ever ended up with Knights, would end up owning Rugby League in Australia. So I wouldn't be surprised to see them killed off another team if they feel like it would save game. I just don't feel like they will and think this acts more of warning to other teams out there who are still fighting against NRL expansion.
Having thought about it alot over years my preferred option when it comes to expansion is that if they are going to relocate and move on Sydney based sides, the only fair and decent way of doing it I feel is to strip Sydney of every team there except foundation clubs and then shift everybody else out while also expanding to twenty team competition. Here's how that would look :
1.) Auckland Warriors
2.) Wellington Paraparaumu Eels
3.) St George Christchurch Dragons
4.) Melbourne Titans (Merge)
5.) Canberra Raiders
6.) Newcastle Knights
7.) Central Coast Cossacks
8.) North Sydney Bears
(Now includes former Sea Eagles territories)
9.) South Sydney Rabbitohs
(Now based in former Dragons/ Sharks territories)
10.) Eastern Sydney Roosters
(Now includes former Bulldogs territories)
11.) Western Sydney Tigers
(Now includes former Eels territories)
12.) Penrith Panthers
13.) Adelaide Magpies
14.) Perth Pirates
15.) Fremantle Sea Eagles
16.) Redcliffe Dolphins
17.) Sunshine Coast Sharks
18.) Brisbane Broncos
19.) Nth Qld Cowboys
20.) Rockhampton Hound Dogs (formerly Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs).
So with that you would have five teams in Queensland, seven teams in NSW, one team in ACT, one team in Victoria, one team in South Australia, two teams in West Australia, and three in New Zealand which to me would make for much even competition.
On top of that I would have make it 24 week competition with every team playing each other once and getting two byes. I also would have three week 'halftime' during season which would allow not only for Origin and Representive Football but can also act as transfer window where players are free to go from one team to another. The only thing I would keep is top eight as I feel having top eight in twenty team competion allows for better finals as it means you have to be above average throughout season to get there. There's more but that basic gist of what I would do if I was put in charge of NRL expansion.
Having thought about it alot over years my preferred option when it comes to expansion is that if they are going to relocate and move on Sydney based sides, the only fair and decent way of doing it I feel is to strip Sydney of every team there except foundation clubs and then shift everybody else out while also expanding to twenty team competition. Here's how that would look :
1.) Auckland Warriors
2.) Wellington Paraparaumu Eels
3.) St George Christchurch Dragons
4.) Melbourne Titans (Merge)
5.) Canberra Raiders
6.) Newcastle Knights
7.) Central Coast Cossacks
8.) North Sydney Bears
(Now includes former Sea Eagles territories)
9.) South Sydney Rabbitohs
(Now based in former Dragons/ Sharks territories)
10.) Eastern Sydney Roosters
(Now includes former Bulldogs territories)
11.) Western Sydney Tigers
(Now includes former Eels territories)
12.) Penrith Panthers
13.) Adelaide Magpies
14.) Perth Pirates
15.) Fremantle Sea Eagles
16.) Redcliffe Dolphins
17.) Sunshine Coast Sharks
18.) Brisbane Broncos
19.) Nth Qld Cowboys
20.) Rockhampton Hound Dogs (formerly Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs).
So with that you would have five teams in Queensland, seven teams in NSW, one team in ACT, one team in Victoria, one team in South Australia, two teams in West Australia, and three in New Zealand which to me would make for much even competition.
On top of that I would have make it 24 week competition with every team playing each other once and getting two byes. I also would have three week 'halftime' during season which would allow not only for Origin and Representive Football but can also act as transfer window where players are free to go from one team to another. The only thing I would keep is top eight as I feel having top eight in twenty team competion allows for better finals as it means you have to be above average throughout season to get there. There's more but that basic gist of what I would do if I was put in charge of NRL expansion.
Last edited:
wizards rage
The NRL needs to increase the quality of its product before expanding and adding extra teams. In saying that, the talent is there, it’s just the distribution of talent across the competition that is the big issue.
Ideally every team should be in the top 8 about half the years over an extended period. However some teams are perennial cellar dwellers who occasionally have a good year... Titans, Tigers, Knights, Cowboys, etc while other teams continually thrive. I appreciate you need the right environment to attract players but the NRLs role has to be to reduce the gap between the top and bottom teams before expanding or else the strong will just get stronger and the fans of the disadvantages clubs will just switch off as there prospects are further watered down. I believe the disadvantages some clubs face are systemic and if the will was there they could be addressed.
Self interest sees the glamour clubs pooling the talent but that is short sighted and ultimately limits the growth/ expansion of the whole game.
Ideally every team should be in the top 8 about half the years over an extended period. However some teams are perennial cellar dwellers who occasionally have a good year... Titans, Tigers, Knights, Cowboys, etc while other teams continually thrive. I appreciate you need the right environment to attract players but the NRLs role has to be to reduce the gap between the top and bottom teams before expanding or else the strong will just get stronger and the fans of the disadvantages clubs will just switch off as there prospects are further watered down. I believe the disadvantages some clubs face are systemic and if the will was there they could be addressed.
Self interest sees the glamour clubs pooling the talent but that is short sighted and ultimately limits the growth/ expansion of the whole game.
matiunz
This year yet?
Contributor
Always thought ‘Canterbury’ Bulldogs was a natural for relocation to Christchurch, could almost do the Paremata Eels in Wellington too lol.
Wests would be a better fit (ironically) for your ‘Easts’ side just give the Campbelltown portion to either Parra or Penrith.
Bulldogs locationwise and demographicwise are a perfect fit for an Eels merger
Souths could work for either Adelaide or Nz2 just drop the Rabbitohs name, the colours would be perfect for a keas motif if NZ2
tajhay
🏉
yep. instead of 1 underachieving team in the comp, lets have 3 of them.
Johnnyray
Yeah absolutely. I agree with your sentiments that it's important that NRL does more about quality of game and looks for ways to improve it.
Like for instance a couple of months back Phil Gould suggested in his regular newspaper column that NRL should reduce teams down to 12 man side and get rid of number 13 as he feels with players having more ground to cover it would open game up more and help take away wrestle as fatigue would set in alot quicker. It would also make game less physical and more athletic. It why I agree with his proposal and think it something they should do let alone consider ...
Worried2Death
This could go terribly wrong, we couldn't defend a 12 man team this year. John Hart was right, you can't win anything without 15 players in this country.Yeah absolutely. I agree with your sentiments that it's important that NRL does more about quality of game and looks for ways to improve it.
Like for instance a couple of months back Phil Gould suggested in his regular newspaper column that NRL should reduce teams down to 12 man side and get rid of number 13 as he feels with players having more ground to cover it would open game up more and help take away wrestle as fatigue would set in alot quicker. It would also make game less physical and more athletic. It why I agree with his proposal and think it something they should do let alone consider ...
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Sticky
Toookey
