1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Conferences for NRL – worth considering

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by mozgrame, May 1, 2014.

  1. mozgrame

    mozgrame Well-Known Member

    +5,118 /51
    Would this work? I like the idea.

    Denis Keeffe – CEO | Central Queensland NRL Bid

    There is talk from a few NRL commentators that a “conference” system may be considered for an EXPANDED NRL. I think the idea has real merit. So let’s examine a few facts about such a format for a future NRL competition.

    The most obvious format is two conferences – all Sydney clubs in one conference, pool A, and all other clubs in the second conference, pool B.

    There are nine clubs in Sydney and seven from outside of Sydney. Conference B, the non-Sydney pool would have to be expanded to nine with two expansion clubs bringing the total number of participating clubs to eighteen – i.e. nine per conference.

    The conferences would be:

    Pool A – Roosters, Bulldogs, Rabbitohs, Dragons, Sea Eagles, Tigers, Panthers, Sharks, and Eels.

    Pool B – Broncos, Titans, Cowboys, Warriors, Raiders, Storm, Knights + two expansion teams e.g. Central Queensland and Ipswich (Western Brisbane)

    Each club plays clubs in the same pool twice per season on a home and away basis, thereby totalling sixteen games in their own pool for each season. During the season each club play clubs in the other pool clubs once on a home OR away basis resulting in eight games from outside of the pool. Games played outside the pool are alternated on a home or away basis every second year. I.e. If, say, the Roosters played the Broncos at home in year one they would play them away the following year. Each club will play twenty-four games in total per year.

    Why is this radical new system attractive and workable?

    With every national competition we find that at times the visiting teams, especially those who travel interstate, often don’t attract large crowds in a different city, state or even country. This is very apparent in large stadia where vast numbers of vacant seats do not look good on television and these vacant seats are not good for the financial condition of the hosting club. This is especially obvious in Sydney when a so-called traditional Sydney club plays a club from outside Sydney. We can’t expect the Cowboys and Titans, for example to have a vast number of supporters in Sydney who will attend away games. Conversely the Dragons fans will be at the Sharks game in numbers and the Roosters fans will pack into a Rabbitohs game, when the two teams clash. Larger attendances result in a much more attractive television product which in turn is good for the game and its revenues.

    The vacant seat situation is no so apparent in regional cites where support for visiting Sydney teams, for example, have always been problematical. The support however is more intense for games where “rivalry” has been developed for many years. E.g. for many years now, a Broncos versus Cowboys game in Brisbane or Townsville has always been an attractive event, often selling out. With the exception of the Melbourne Storm, the regional or country clubs are more supported on a per capita basis that their Sydney counterparts because of the genuine “heartland” sentiments and the limit of national sporting activity in these regions.

    I think a conference configuration for an expanded NRL competition is workable so I am supportive.

  2. HappilyManly

    HappilyManly MWTS Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +19,022 /367
    By splitting the competition into Sydney and Others, we are back to the Super League days of a split competition.:cool:

    Once the Big 3 fade out of Melbourne, I can't see how any Pool B Team outside of the Knights, would be of threat/interest to anyone supporting a Sydney Team.

    The NRL have diluted their product with the constant game day changes and the ever changing roster till 30 June every Season :dodgy:

    Attendance habits have been broken and nothing in the NRL Vision is addressing this simple fact :sleepy:
  3. Fluffy

    Fluffy Well-Known Member

    +5,615 /203
    If Brisbane is supported "per capita" better than Sydney teams then why do they not sell out every single game?

    Their popultaion is appox 60% of Sydney and Sydney teams average about 80K across the 4 1/2 games each round which means per capita Brisbane should get more than 60% of that or more than 48K
  4. globaleagle

    globaleagle Je saisis mon chapeau. Staff Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +13,310 /117
    I dunno, I've gotten used to a conference system living over here.

    One would argue that conference b is at a disadvantage due to the extra travelling compared to conf. A

    Though it could be argued that happens already.

    But, all ideas for better attendance should be thrown into the mixed and discussed.

    So then the nrl can ignore everyone and make it's own decision picking the worst options.
  5. Clint

    Clint . Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +2,172 /34
    There is certainly some merit in the idea, but this is one of the first issues I thought of too GE.
  6. The Who

    The Who Well-Known Member Premium Member

    +7,247 /173
    I like the idea, but it does give an obvious advantage to the Sydney clubs.
    To offset the objections to the travelling the 'outer conference' has to do, why not: play all the Sydney V 'outer' teams' matches at the 'outer' teams home venue?
    That would even it up, wouldn't it?
  7. Duff

    Duff Well-Known Member

    +631 /12
    How would that be even close to fair?
    I agree that the proposed system gives unfair travel advantages to Sydney teams but reducing them to only 8 home games per year whilst outer teams get 16 is ridiculous.
    Think of the lost revenue from memberships, ground sponsorships, corporate events, ticket sales, merch etc.

    Broncos would love it. Sydney teams would go broke.

    Mixed conferences is the only way to make it close to fair.
    Maybe a redistribution of conferences after 4 years.
  8. The Who

    The Who Well-Known Member Premium Member

    +7,247 /173
    I'm just evening up the amount of travel, which was the major concern raised. If lost revenue from crowd numbers is your main issue then institute a simple 50-50% split of ground taking between both teams.
  9. Duff

    Duff Well-Known Member

    +631 /12
    Travel is not the main issue.
    It's the main issue with the proposed system because it's the only issue. It's a great system otherwise.
    Fixing the travel issue is not worth stuffing up anything else.

    It just doesn't work that way in Sydney and you know it.
    There's all the different stadium deals with different sponsors. The Sharks own their ground, we pay to play at Brookie and others get paid to play at some grounds. It's just not that simple.

    And the huge issue is that every single Sydney team, who are the traditional and most important teams, would only play one third of their games at home.

    Stuff the blow ins. Let 'em travel.
  10. Brissie Kid

    Brissie Kid Well-Known Member

    +1,176 /19
    The downside for the Sydney clubs is they would bash each other up every week.

    We all know that when Manly is a mid table strength team that away games in Sydney are hard to win.

    Playing away games every year against the Roosters, Bulldogs, Rabbitohs, Dragons, Tigers, Panthers, Sharks, and Eels - how many away grounds would even the current Manly team roll up as a sure thing to win? Being realistic I would say none.
  11. mickqld

    mickqld Sack Greenslime 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +5,249 /109
    Wont work. The Bonkos biggest crowds are when they play Sydney clubs Souffs, Goons, Parra, Tigers,Dogs,Manly so because they (Bonkos) basically run the game it won't happen.
  12. mozgrame

    mozgrame Well-Known Member

    +5,118 /51
    Cheers everyone. Interesting views.
  13. Mals

    Mals Well-Known Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +1,650 /39
    I like it, would work a treat. Our supporters living in QLD probably wouldn't be happy though...
  14. EagleFromMay1967

    EagleFromMay1967 Sky Punching : send them High as the Clouds

    +1,371 /49
    All we need to do is NOT divide up the conferences geographically. I suggest the system abovementioned would work equitably if the conferences were simply split alphabetically.
    Pool A: Broncos, Bulldogs, Cowboys, Dragons, Eels, Knights, Panthers, Rabbits
    Pool B: Raiders, Roosters Storm, Sea Eagles, Sharks, Tigpies, Tornadoes (Ipswich), Wolves (Central Qld)

    This method provides a nice mix even if you change the moniker of the new teams.

Share This Page