mrblonde
I like the idea but don't think there's the depth for 20 teams. I like the draw being even rather than this "you play them, them, them twice and that team, that team and that team once" draw we have at present.
Orifice
wizards rage
I've posted before about reducing down to 12 a side. With players getting bigger, stronger and faster the space has cut down over time and this has a lot to do with the defensive mindset that teams prioritise. Ironically, flair has been a lost by-product of having better athletes who cover the ground better.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 ...
The game has slowly favoured slow, smothering teams like the Storm and Sharks over time and disadvantaged physically dynamic teams like the Warriors used to be.
gREVUS
Long live the Rainbows and Butterflies
Contributor
its an unnecessary change if u reduce the number of interchanges. a simpler change imo
Johnnyray
I am all in favour of that too. 12 man teams, 6 interchanges. Shit, I know that it doesn't do anything to protect player safety but just from image perspective I would get them to also wear helmets as well, along with padding and protective guards all along body. I know for most of you reading this you'll think I'm crazy for even suggesting it still thing is I saw Auckland Warriors logo drawn across old American football helmet behind bar somewhere in Hamilton once. That shit was so cool, I would love to see it again and introduce into NRL ...
🤪
wizards rage
We have done that and the teams just get fitter. All that will happen is the props become like second rowers...
Kearney’s ahead of the curve!
snake77
Saw another Aussie guy pushing for the Warriors to be axed. Why don't we ax Brisbane, North Queensland, Gold Coast, Canberra, Newcastle and Melbourne and go back to a Sydney competition. We can then stop the moaning on how hard it is for the Sydney teams travelling.
Who wants progress, it's overrated.
They sound like some of our ministers at the moment. This worked in the 60's and 70's. Last I checked I don't have big side burns and I'm not wearing flares, time to move on.
Who wants progress, it's overrated.
They sound like some of our ministers at the moment. This worked in the 60's and 70's. Last I checked I don't have big side burns and I'm not wearing flares, time to move on.
snake77
Also seen Gould pushing his conference system again with a Sydney and out of Sydney conference.
At least this time he has the numbers right. Last time he was wanting it with the current 16 clubs. Probably had someone point out either St George Illawarra or Penrith who he was working for at the time would need to be in the regional conference. That would of been a good look pushing that to save the club money. It gets implemented and they end up travelling more.
Now he's promoting an 18 competition split in half.
At least this time he has the numbers right. Last time he was wanting it with the current 16 clubs. Probably had someone point out either St George Illawarra or Penrith who he was working for at the time would need to be in the regional conference. That would of been a good look pushing that to save the club money. It gets implemented and they end up travelling more.
Now he's promoting an 18 competition split in half.
Worried2Death
Drums are beating in Oz to dump us before any of the Sydney clubs, they reckon we're fucked and don't offer anything in the comp.
18 team comp, play each other once, that's the only logical way to go. I don't like these split competitions, Sydney would be dominated by the Roosters, we'd be up against Melbourne and the Broncs twice a year, can't see it ending well for us. Can we just have a conference with the Titans? Alternatively, how do you fullas feel about the Gold Coast Warriors? Could be better than nothing.
18 team comp, play each other once, that's the only logical way to go. I don't like these split competitions, Sydney would be dominated by the Roosters, we'd be up against Melbourne and the Broncs twice a year, can't see it ending well for us. Can we just have a conference with the Titans? Alternatively, how do you fullas feel about the Gold Coast Warriors? Could be better than nothing.
Last edited:
RiceOwl
I like your thinking there! Perth Pirates has a nice ring to it and I’m always for bringing back the Bears and shafting Manly. Dream scenario right there!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.
tajhay
🏉
Relocate to PNG or the Pacific islands. PNG Warriors or Pacific Warriors has a nice ring to it. Who needs NRL to help kill the game in NZ when ARL and NZRL do a fine job of it as is.
Similar threads
- Sticky
Toookey
