[Bulliac]

Re: Changes needed : Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:00 am  

Bullnorthern wrote:

However one possible compromise would be to ask clubs outside the Super League to state whether they aspire to become full time or not. Ask them to provide business plans. I honestly believe that some of the clubs in the Championship harbour no such ambition .

I think, rather than looking at other clubs joining the 'few', we maybe need to ask how long clubs such as the Bulls can stay 'fulltime' if they remain, for a prolonged period, in the championship?

How long will crowds hold up in such an uncompetitive league is the major factor for me. The early bit of the season, the 'championship' bit, was poor with far too many easy wins, not necessarily with blow-out scores, but games where we 'coasted and you knew who was going to win after 20 minutes. A set-up with only three pro teams [even though one imploded]and only needing to get in the top four was dire, imo, since it was obvious before a ball was kicked that us and Leigh would be in the four, and the season really only came to life in the 'eights'.

It was nice, for this season, to be winning games but, I suspect, this scenario won't carry on attracting good crowds.

Re: Changes needed : Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:55 pm  

Bulliac- I agree with your first point . If this structure continues I believe there will be fewer clubs able to continue full time.
This weekend was finals weekend in Australia. The Aussie Rules drew over 98,000 fans on Saturday. The NRL final drew over 82,000 fans even though the 2 teams were from Queensland. Incidentally it was a cracker- and unsurprisingly the Aussie commentators and coverage put our broadcasters to shame.
There are 16 teams in the NRL. Since 2005 , 11 of those teams have reached at least one grand final. And all of the other 5 ( Sharks Knights Panthers Raiders and Titans) have been in at least 1 play off series. Far more even and far less predictable than our competition.
All of those teams have a reserve side and an under 21 team. All of them have a " feeder" club system.
One final point - I think that our game might be the only team sport where the governing body has a bigger
running cost budget than any single club in the top flight. If that statement is wrong I stand to be corrected.