NRL TV rights:...$1.7 billion

[happy_tiger]

Perhaps not though Happy, more teams means more money across the clubs, so we would see more marquee players distributed across the game. 34 players in a game, I'm not naive enough to suggest that you would see SOO marquee 2 players on average at every club, but you probably wouldn't see four to six players coming out of one club (ala Brisbane/Nth QLD/Easts/Canterbury/Melbourne,) because there is more big money to be had with the additional 2-4 clubs to chase the origin tier players.

If the origin rep talent is more evenly spread, the quality of games would improve IMO.

Do we have the talent to spread across 18-20 teams over 26 rounds CB ??

Personally I thought if anything in the past it proved the gulf between the haves and the have nots was wider when the competition had more sides

Just my opinion though

 

[cqtiger]

Perhaps not though Happy, more teams means more money across the clubs, so we would see more marquee players distributed across the game. 34 players in a game, I'm not naive enough to suggest that you would see SOO marquee 2 players on average at every club, but you probably wouldn't see four to six players coming out of one club (ala Brisbane/Nth QLD/Easts/Canterbury/Melbourne,) because there is more big money to be had with the additional 2-4 clubs to chase the origin tier players.

If the origin rep talent is more evenly spread, the quality of games would improve IMO.

Do we have the talent to spread across 18-20 teams over 26 rounds CB ??

Personally I thought if anything in the past it proved the gulf between the haves and the have nots was wider when the competition had more sides

Just my opinion though

Happy I think it can be done successfully with more teams in the competition but only if there are some critical rule changes. Example: Allow every club to have at least one marquee player that is not included in the salary cap for starters, possibly two.

That will at least spread the very top talent around however many teams there are. Do you think that there are 36 marquee players if we had 18 teams? I do.

I could argue that our team alone has a few.
Farah, Woods. Tedesco

Anyway, all I am saying is a larger comp could work but not as it is run now.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[happy_tiger]

Perhaps not though Happy, more teams means more money across the clubs, so we would see more marquee players distributed across the game. 34 players in a game, I'm not naive enough to suggest that you would see SOO marquee 2 players on average at every club, but you probably wouldn't see four to six players coming out of one club (ala Brisbane/Nth QLD/Easts/Canterbury/Melbourne,) because there is more big money to be had with the additional 2-4 clubs to chase the origin tier players.

If the origin rep talent is more evenly spread, the quality of games would improve IMO.

Do we have the talent to spread across 18-20 teams over 26 rounds CB ??

Personally I thought if anything in the past it proved the gulf between the haves and the have nots was wider when the competition had more sides

Just my opinion though

Happy I think it can be done successfully with more teams in the competition but only if there are some critical rule changes. Example: Allow every club to have at least one marquee player that is not included in the salary cap for starters, possibly two.

That will at least spread the very top talent around however many teams there are. Do you think that there are 36 marquee players if we had 18 teams? I do.

I could argue that our team alone has a few.
Farah, Woods. Tedesco

Anyway, all I am saying is a larger comp could work but not as it is run now.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

I don't think the marquee players are the issue CQ

Its the middle of the road players that make your team /squad

The Broncos ,Cowboys ,Dogs and Roosters are a good example

The Dogs have players like Eastwood , Pritchard , Tolman who are fringe first graders at the Dogs but would walk into our side

Cowboys have Hannant , Spina ,Bolton,Lui etc who would walk into most sides

Roosters have Aubusson ,Moa , Napa , Taukifaho again who are fringe players who would walk into most sides

 

[cunno]

Expand the comp by two teams, with the extra money from the new deal set limits that clubs have to spend on junior development and country leagues so that more players are developed and given a chance in the nrl.

 

[Bones]

I don't think the quality would have to suffer that much with expansion it just depends on how it is done. For example you could make a bloody high quality side with players that have left the NRL to go elsewhere in the last few years. For examplke a new club could potentially sign S. Burgess, SBW, Sandow, Carney, Pritchard, etc. You could just about make a 17 man side that would be a genuine top 4 side without signing a single NRL contracted player.

I know its not that simple but if they money is there to attract players then we might not loose so many and the comp would end up stronger.

 

[tigerbenji]

I don't think expansion is the go @ the moment, I think the League should give Clubs extra Money & the Clubs should have a country group to look after & have one game a Year in that City or Town.

 

[cqtiger]

Perhaps not though Happy, more teams means more money across the clubs, so we would see more marquee players distributed across the game. 34 players in a game, I'm not naive enough to suggest that you would see SOO marquee 2 players on average at every club, but you probably wouldn't see four to six players coming out of one club (ala Brisbane/Nth QLD/Easts/Canterbury/Melbourne,) because there is more big money to be had with the additional 2-4 clubs to chase the origin tier players.

If the origin rep talent is more evenly spread, the quality of games would improve IMO.

Do we have the talent to spread across 18-20 teams over 26 rounds CB ??

Personally I thought if anything in the past it proved the gulf between the haves and the have nots was wider when the competition had more sides

Just my opinion though

Happy I think it can be done successfully with more teams in the competition but only if there are some critical rule changes. Example: Allow every club to have at least one marquee player that is not included in the salary cap for starters, possibly two.

That will at least spread the very top talent around however many teams there are. Do you think that there are 36 marquee players if we had 18 teams? I do.

I could argue that our team alone has a few.
Farah, Woods. Tedesco

Anyway, all I am saying is a larger comp could work but not as it is run now.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

I don't think the marquee players are the issue CQ

Its the middle of the road players that make your team /squad

The Broncos ,Cowboys ,Dogs and Roosters are a good example

The Dogs have players like Eastwood , Pritchard , Tolman who are fringe first graders at the Dogs but would walk into our side

Cowboys have Hannant , Spina ,Bolton,Lui etc who would walk into most sides

Roosters have Aubusson ,Moa , Napa , Taukifaho again who are fringe players who would walk into most sides

m

Exactly my point!
These fringe players "who would walk into most sides" are being kept "fringe" by the stars who take up most of the cap.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

I share CQ's view, that was the point I was trying to make. More clubs = more money, which means the marquee talent is more evenly spread around, and there's more positions available for "fringe first graders" at big clubs like your Aubussons/Tolmans etc. Even if multiple marquee players stayed at one club, you'd have an additional 2-4 clubs (depending on expansion,) where other players could go to chase a full time first grade spot.

The one thing that must happen in order to feed a 18-20 team comp is a genuine NRL reserve grade. The gulf between NSW/Q Cup and first grade is ridiculous, and it's not utilised as a transitional pathway for youth players to ply their trade until they step up to first grade.

 

[pHyR3]

the season will be shortened by 2-4 games and SOO stand alone, no question about it.

and definitely some expansion too, not sure how theyll do QLD. Ipswich, Logan, Bris 2 all options. and then perth as well.

 

[Geo]

Wow….Expansion eh...even if 2 teams...good luck trying to find another 70-80 players up to NRL standard...

 

[cqtiger]

Wow….Expansion eh...even if 2 teams...good luck trying to find another 70-80 players up to NRL standard...

So we'll put you in charge of expansion

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[pHyR3]

Wow….Expansion eh...even if 2 teams...good luck trying to find another 70-80 players up to NRL standard...

would need about 40-45 NRL players what are you talking about??

i wouldnt class our 35th or 40th best player as 'up to NRL standard'

i think the depth is there, they'll go with it and it will most likely be fine.

 

[happy_tiger]

the season will be shortened by 2-4 games and SOO stand alone, no question about it.

and definitely some expansion too, not sure how theyll do QLD. Ipswich, Logan, Bris 2 all options. and then perth as well.

I'd love to see the NRL pump 30 million into the PNG and create a side up there

It would be packed every home game

 

[Geo]

Wow….Expansion eh...even if 2 teams...good luck trying to find another 70-80 players up to NRL standard...

would need about 40-45 NRL players what are you talking about??

i wouldnt class our 35th or 40th best player as 'up to NRL standard'

i think the depth is there, they'll go with it and it will most likely be fine.

Most teams run with a squad of 35 x 2 = 70…the gulf between the haves and the have nots will be wider.....as you say our 35th player is NOT NRL standard..even if it's 40..where they coming from....that would consistently compete with the Roosters Dogs Souff's and Broncs etc when it's obvious the competition currently can not... a quick squizz at the ladder tells you that...it's been tried and failed every time...

Name a side of the fringe players that could compete...

 

[pHyR3]

Wow….Expansion eh...even if 2 teams...good luck trying to find another 70-80 players up to NRL standard...

would need about 40-45 NRL players what are you talking about??

i wouldnt class our 35th or 40th best player as 'up to NRL standard'

i think the depth is there, they'll go with it and it will most likely be fine.

Most teams run with a squad of 35 x 2 = 70…the gulf between the haves and the have nots will be wider.....as you say or 35th player is NOT NRL standard..even if it's 40..where they coming from....that would consistently compete with the Roosters Dogs Souff's and Broncs etc when it's obvious the competition currently can not... a quick squizz at the ladder tells you that...it's been tried and failed every time...

Name a side of the fringe players that could compete...

why should i pick fringe players?? i'll pick players that aren't consistently playing in the NRL, or players leaving the NRL next year.

1\. Hayne
2\. Sio
3\. Tonga
4\. Folau
5\. Ryan Hall
6\. Tomkins
7\. Sandow
8\. Dave Taylor
9\. Cherrington
10\. Keefy
11\. SBW
12\. Hinchcliffe
13\. Burgess

just off the top of my head.

add in the WEALTH of talent in the islands. Tonga, Samoa, Fiji have around 1.3-1.5 million people between them. Another 7 million in PNG. Tonnes more talent from the south of NZ. Australia will have most likely gotten to around 30 million people within 15-20 years too.

 

[Geo]

Wow….Expansion eh...even if 2 teams...good luck trying to find another 70-80 players up to NRL standard...

would need about 40-45 NRL players what are you talking about??

i wouldnt class our 35th or 40th best player as 'up to NRL standard'

i think the depth is there, they'll go with it and it will most likely be fine.

Most teams run with a squad of 35 x 2 = 70…the gulf between the haves and the have nots will be wider.....as you say or 35th player is NOT NRL standard..even if it's 40..where they coming from....that would consistently compete with the Roosters Dogs Souff's and Broncs etc when it's obvious the competition currently can not... a quick squizz at the ladder tells you that...it's been tried and failed every time...

Name a side of the fringe players that could compete...

why should i pick fringe players?? i'll pick players that aren't consistently playing in the NR, or players leaving the NRL next year.

1\. Hayne
2\. Sio
3\. Tonga
4\. Folau
5\. Ryan Hall
6\. Tomkins
7\. Sandow
8\. Dave Taylor
9\. Cherrington
10\. Keefy
11\. SBW
12\. Hinchcliffe
13\. Burgess

just off the top of my head.

Roosters by 50…

 

[Tiger_Watto]

Expansion is paramount, but the comp will still be 16 Teams

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[Geo]

Expansion is paramount, but the comp will still be 16 Teams

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

Who's getting the Chop…?

 

[pHyR3]

Most teams run with a squad of 35 x 2 = 70…the gulf between the haves and the have nots will be wider.....as you say or 35th player is NOT NRL standard..even if it's 40..where they coming from....that would consistently compete with the Roosters Dogs Souff's and Broncs etc when it's obvious the competition currently can not... a quick squizz at the ladder tells you that...it's been tried and failed every time...

Name a side of the fringe players that could compete...

why should i pick fringe players?? i'll pick players that aren't consistently playing in the NR, or players leaving the NRL next year.

1\. Hayne
2\. Sio
3\. Tonga
4\. Folau
5\. Ryan Hall
6\. Tomkins
7\. Sandow
8\. Dave Taylor
9\. Cherrington
10\. Keefy
11\. SBW
12\. Hinchcliffe
13\. Burgess

just off the top of my head.

Roosters by 50…

haha are you serious? A spine of Folau, Hayne, Tomkins and Cherrington (couldnt think of a good hooker). With Sam burgess, sonny bill william and hinchcliffe and roosters by 50 :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

okay mate you're right. there's not enough depth. the NRL will expand to 18 in 3 years time., and the quality will plummet no one will watch and itll be an absolute disaster. we'll see how that pans out

 

[Geo]

Well it's about as silly as naming players that don't even play the code anymore….assuming they will even come back 3 years older and be competitive...don't see where I said no one will watch and NRL will die and be a disaster either...

How successful were the Western Reds Norther Eagles Adeliade Rams Hunter Mariners South QLD Crushers various Gold Coast incarnations including the current one out of curiosity