Conference system

[JC99]

Conference has no positives that I can see. Means more repetitive games, less of the best teams playing each other and the grand finals will be weaker than normal.

Stupid idea. Just because it works in America doesn't mean it's good for us

 

[TigerVinnie]

Issue is the quality balance between each conference. The Sydney conference difficulty looks alot harder than the outer.

If hypothetically teams like Roosters, Rabbits, Penrith and Parra continue staying dominate - then teams like ours will never get a shot at finals football. Whereas with the regular top 8 model we could push for the last 4 spots.

 

[cochise]

I am not a fan of the idea, having said that i'm not a fan of the current system as well that has some teams playing each other twice and others once.

The NRL wants to increase revenue and they are on the right track by adding teams and increasing the number of games played.

I would like to see one comp where the Sydney teams play each other twice and the outside teams play each other twice and the two groups play each other once.

Increase the squad sizes so teams can rest players but do not increase the cap comparatively so teams cannot stack their squads with stars.

Im sure there are holes in my thinking but i think there are holes in the two conference system as well.

Your idea is the conference system with a combined finals

 

[Tigerstruck]

Love the conference idea and have for a while now when its been mentioned. Obv the strength of each conference will ebb and flow, atm it looks as though the Sydney conference would be stronger but that would've been very different in say 2015, and will be again in another five years' time.

As shown by this thread the two major problems are the finals system and the travel for the out of Sydney conference.

For the finals, I'd like to see the 1A v 2B, 1B v 2A, winners go through and the losers play winners of 3A v 4B, 3B v 4A, etc, as thats the fairest way to do it to reward those that do well throughout the season.

However, if they stick with the finals within conferences, they need to at least do 1v2, winner goes straight through to the conference final and the loser plays the winner of the 3v4, and the winner of that also goes to the conference final. That way you're still rewarding the teams that do well.

The only problem I see with the 'secret dossier' is the lack of a talent pool - I just don't think we have enough talent to support another two teams. Though in saying that there's enough good reggies players going around that if the salary cap actually does its job we could make it.

 

[hank37w]

I don't like the proposed final system.

?‍♂️

Why ...?

I like the teams that have earnt the right getting a second chance, I also don't like the finals being split by conferences. Just me being an old man complaining lol. I still miss the old top 5, I like the rivalries created when teams play each other twice during the finals.

Nah no second chances
Top 4 or Postcards from kiama

Anyway once the top 8 is sorted in both conferences I’d say it’ll be the normal top 8 system

That is not what the article says, it says that the top 4 from each conference will play a knockout against each other with the winner of the 2 conferences playing the Grand Final. It would mean we could never have an all Sydney Grand Final under that system.

Why not have top 2 from each conference automatically qualify for the finals. Next 4 teams and based on season record. Teams are then ranked 1-8 and finals follow same as now.

Yeah I would prefer that.

Yeah, me too.

I would prefer some sort of a system where the 2 best teams from whatever conference play in a Grand Final, whether they are both from the same conference or a team from each would be the best and fairest outcome and hopefully produce the best footy for the fans.

 

[jirskyr]

Dumbest idea I've heard for a while

Yet more V'Landys and Abdo conspiring to maximise media money and trash the traditions and history of rugby league. And, the world's greatest opportunist, Wayne Bennett, thinks it's a good idea, no doubt to squeeze a few more seasons into his superannuation plan.

I appreciate your passion but tradition and history in league is a very broad concept. Which tradition, the 1908 one? The 1940 one? The 1980 one? Because they have been evolving the game every decade since 1908 and it's not going to stop, and unfortunately yes, that may mean the discontinuation of certain traditions.

And actually, in my opinion, in some ways a conference system would return some old traditions to the fore, by re-creating a version of the NSWRL with emphasis on local derbies.

If the game doesn't grow and adapt to modern tastes, modern technologies, streaming services, content creation etc... it will fail.

My guess is the conference concept has been "leaked" to start to try and gauge fan feedback, as well as the clubs themselves.

We can't ignore that AFL has become financially ascendant in Australia and Rugby Union is dying, so now is the exactly right time to strike with a novel strategy, if they think it will improve the game. Also, Australia is a fairly saturated sports market, and it's not just local product, it's international product as well; the main way to gain additional market share now is to take it from other sports.

 

[jirskyr]

Conference has no positives that I can see. Means more repetitive games, less of the best teams playing each other and the grand finals will be weaker than normal.

Stupid idea. Just because it works in America doesn't mean it's good for us

Well that's dependent on the year, isn't it? Who are the best teams right now? Top 6 is currently Panthers, Eels, Rabbits, Storm, Roosters Dragons. So that would be overwhelmingly in favour of the Sydney conference.

Top 6 just 3 years ago (Rd 8 2019) was Dragons, Panthers, Warriors, Storm, Tigers (!), Knights. That's 50/50 for each conference. Rd 8 2016 it was Broncos, Cowboys, Storm, Sharks, Eels, Bulldogs - 50/50 but Top 3 from ex-Sydney.

I think you can easily tweak the finals system to mix up the conferences, rather than promote only 1 Sydney and 1 ex-Sydney team to the GF. For example, you could promote the top side in each conference directly to the finals, maybe they could even play each other for a Grand Final berth, with the loser playing the winner of a pool comprising the Top 2-4 from each conference (6 other clubs).

 

[TCL]

I am not a fan of the idea, having said that i'm not a fan of the current system as well that has some teams playing each other twice and others once.

The NRL wants to increase revenue and they are on the right track by adding teams and increasing the number of games played.

I would like to see one comp where the Sydney teams play each other twice and the outside teams play each other twice and the two groups play each other once.

Increase the squad sizes so teams can rest players but do not increase the cap comparatively so teams cannot stack their squads with stars.

Im sure there are holes in my thinking but i think there are holes in the two conference system as well.

Your idea is the conference system with a combined finals

Not quite, there is one ladder and the finals are played by the teams who finish in the top 8 just like today.

 

[balmain boy]

This has to be one of the worst ideas ever in the history of NRL.

 

[innsaneink]

I love the conference idea. I’ve suggested the EXACT idea for years with a slight difference in the finals system.

The final system should be made up of 4 top teams from each conference and the finals system should stay the same.

Final system should be as follows:
Team 1A vs 2B
Team 2A vs 1B

Winners get a week off (losers get 2nd chance and play winners of next 4)

Team 3C vs 4D
Team 4C vs 3D

Losers knocked out

Highest ranked team in each game gets home advantage at any stage and same with grand final based on for and against in finals competition.

For example if teams 1A and 1B meet in the grand final than the team with the best for/against percentage in the finals series gets the grand final in their capital city.

From a Sydney (say conference S) perspective that’s probably a better way to do it. What if the Others ( say conference O) never get to the grand final because conference S is stronger. Or the other way around if Conference O is stronger and no team from Conference S ever gets to a Grand Final. They way it is proposed ensures that a team from each conference is in the Grand Final.

I don’t have a preference either way but I can see why they have chosen the final method they have. I do like the overall conference concept.

Shouldn't the two best teams in the comp.be in the GF?
That's usually how. It ends. Up now... But unlikely with a conference systrm

 

[Needaname]

Actually what might work is a conference split of maybe North and South the eastern seaboard.
But instead of following the American Suit. How about a finals system that is played across conferences. That way the best teams play everyone twice as oppose to having some teams play 3 times a season.

 

[Tiger5150]

*A secret dossier given to NRL clubs has revealed the bombshell plan to revolutionise the game.
The NRL has taken a huge step forward in it plans to split the competition into two conferences as part of its expansion plans for the 2023 season.

The league has previously flirted with the concept of a divided competition, but it emerged on Tuesday night the league is more serious than ever about the plan to turn the competition on its head.

NRL CEO Andrew Abdo last month put the 18-team conference system on the table for public discussion and it was reported Tuesday the plan has advanced to the stage of discussions with the 16 NRL clubs. He also claimed the New Zealand market was the perfect destination for an 18th club. The second Kiwi team would join a 17th team from Brisbane, which is on track to be introduced for the start of the 2023 season — when the NRL’s new TV rights deal would begin.

Round 8
The leading contenders to become the NRL’s 17th team are the Redcliffe Dolphins, who have lodged a Brisbane Dolphins trademark, the Brisbane Jets — a coalition of the Brisbane Bombers and Ipswich Jets — and the Easts Tigers-backed Brisbane Firehawks.

Watch The 2021 NRL Telstra Premiership Live & On-Demand with No Ad-Breaks During Play. New to Kayo? Get your 14-day free trial now & start streaming instantly >

RD 8 TEAMS: ‘Needs to find the old Papa’: Superstar ‘rested’ in selection shock

TEAM ANALYSIS: Kevvie’s fourth halves switch in eight weeks; unlucky Panther

The atmosphere of the 2019 NRL grand final.
The atmosphere of the 2019 NRL grand final.
Source: News Corp Australia

The Sydney Morning Herald on Tuesday reported Abdo and chairman Peter V’landys have been meeting with clubs. Channel 7 reported Tuesday night the NRL executives have been handing the clubs a secret dossier with the details of the proposed 18-team competition that would divide the league into two conferences made up of nine teams.

Bennett last month went public with his support of the concept

“I think they should play in conferences, I’ve always argued for conferences,” Bennett said.

“I think Sydney do themselves a great disservice by not playing each other on a regular basis home-and-away because that’s what the fans want in Sydney.

“(Sydney fans) embrace the national league but they also embrace the club rivalry and unless you’re living in Sydney you don’t realise how strong it is,” Bennett said.

“It’s what people outside of Sydney don’t get about Sydney is the genuine rivalry between the clubs here.

Get all the latest NRL news, highlights and analysis delivered straight to your inbox with Fox Sports Sportmail. Sign up now!!!

“It makes the game, I love it.”

The two conference system would include a Sydney-based conference and a conference made up of the teams outside Sydney.

The proposal includes the nine clubs in each conference playing each other twice, and playing the clubs in the other conference once — expanding the season to a 25-game home-and-away competition.

It will also result in an overhaul of the finals system with the proposal outlining plans to have the best four teams from each conference qualify for the finals.

The two conferences would then have separate finals systems before the best club from each conference clash for the NRL Grand Final.

It comes after the NRL last year flirted with the idea of breaking the competition into two conferences as part of the plan to re-start the season following the COVID-19 season shutdown.

The NRL in 2019 also investigated a proposal to expand the finals system with a wildcard weekend that would see teams from 7th to 10th play off for a chance to secure a spot in the top eight. The proposal was designed to eliminate the number of games played that had no impact on the make-up of the finals.

How the NRL conferences would look

Sydney conference: Roosters, Rabbitohs, Eels, Bulldogs, Tigers, Panthers, Dragons, Sharks, Sea Eagles

Expansion conference: Broncos, Titans, Cowboys, Storm, Warriors, Knights, Raiders, second Brisbane franchise, second New Zealand franchise

How the season would work:

The nine teams from each conference play each other twice (16 games) and each team from the other conference once (nine games)

How the finals system would work

Each conference would have a top four group of teams that qualify for the finals. The finals would then unfold as separate competitions in an elimination format that would begin with 1vs4 and 2vs3. The winners of each conference would then play for the NRL grand final.*

9 Teams Sydney conference 4 play finals.. must help our odds


Cant see how it would be fair, the Sydney Conference would be a LOT harder than the other

Maybe that’s the point ? Coincidentally this is coming in during a period where the best teams live within a 50km radius of each other . Just putting my conspiracy hat on for a sec .

Add to your conspiracy its coming in at the only time Brisbane seem shut out of the 8

 

[dazza65]

I like it

however my concern is the quality of players to field another two teams - the existing teams can barely fill out rosters with genuine 1st grade players.

I like it better than a promotion relegation type system

 

[balmain boy]

There's not enough talent in the league for the current number of squads. It will take at least another 5 years before another team could potentially join, otherwise the gulf between the top and bottoms clubs will be even greater!

Never having two Sydney sides in the grand final is absurd.

There's just absolutely no need to tamper with what is already an uneven playing field, and make it even more uneven. The top 8 needs to be the top 8 sides across the entire competition.

If anything this would make the league far more boring and repetitive. Just incredibly unnecessary and potentially damaging to the entire league

 

[weststigers]

Does anyone see how a logical next step, if the NRL was that way inclined, would be to create a promotion and relegation system?

I.e. if the conference system wasn't working as planned and there was a distinct difference in quality across the conferences, the NRL could decide to relegate teams into the weaker conference? Just a thought...

Someone also brought up the point where the conference system could benefit mediocre teams. I.e. top 2 teams in Sydney conference win 20/24 games - both end up on 40 points, yet the outer Sydney conference may have their top 2 teams win only 17/24 games yet one makes the grand final...

It's a flawed system where if the 2 most consistent teams in the comp happen to be in the same conference, they cannot face off in a grand final.

It's not 100% bad, nothing ever is, but it needs tweaking to get majority support.

Ultimately, I'd prefer to see a 34 game season where each team plays a home and away fixture with fixed breaks within the season to guard against burnout, but adding 10 matches to a season will be seen as excessive overload on players.

**An out of the box idea**, which would reward clubs that invest in junior development, is you could have 10 matches per year that were limited to allow only 4 players with over 30 games of NRL experience or some other metric. That way, the main team gets a rest at regular intervals during the season and a teams juniors/reserve graders can get a run and gain experience in the top grade. In this scenario, you could avoid the burnout complaint and have a true home and away season. Giving teams cap concessions for developing juniors is all well and good, but if you can't hold onto your juniors because your team is performing badly, then it doesn't help those clubs - if developing juniors can add a few W's in your season then it makes sense for teams to invest in that area and build better pathways to first grade.

 

[jirskyr]

There’s just absolutely no need to tamper with what is already an uneven playing field, and make it even more uneven. The top 8 needs to be the top 8 sides across the entire competition.

Why exactly would it make it more uneven?

 

[balmain boy]

There’s just absolutely no need to tamper with what is already an uneven playing field, and make it even more uneven. The top 8 needs to be the top 8 sides across the entire competition.

Why exactly would it make it more uneven?

Currently clubs don't play one another an even amount of times. Dictating how often teams play one another based solely on geography creates an inherent and permanent bias.

 

[jirskyr]

There’s just absolutely no need to tamper with what is already an uneven playing field, and make it even more uneven. The top 8 needs to be the top 8 sides across the entire competition.

Why exactly would it make it more uneven?

Currently clubs don't play one another an even amount of times. Dictating how often teams play one another based solely on geography creates an inherent and permanent bias.

Currently clubs don't play one another twice, based on last year's results, and in a conference system they also wouldn't play each other twice, non-randomly. I fail to see the difference, except in a conference you know who those teams are. They may or may not be good sides in that season.

There's nothing biased about it at all, that's not the right word. In fact it's all rather arbitrary, drawing a line around a region and making two pools.

See I reckon your aim is to be the best team in the comp, and it shouldn't matter whether you always (or never) play Storm twice or Panthers twice or Broncos twice or whomever. If you require a certain combination of opponents to scrape into the finals, the real question is whether you really deserved to be there in the first place.

 

[mikey]

Sydney conference and non-Sydney conference? How would that work with both team and TV sponsors? It seems to me the sydney teams would attract less sponsorship given it is Sydney-centric. The other teams are exposed across a greater demographic of Australia and NZ and potentially attract more sponsorship dollars.
Reeks of mucking around with things that have already been mucked around too much. Sis again has created the most lopsided comp in years.

 

[Tiger_Fanatic3]

I wouldn't mind seeing a two division comp but would structure it differently. In one division i'd have Souths. In the other, everyone else.