By Paul J
November 10th 2009 @ 2:02am
Loading ...Related coverage
The NRL can learn a lot from the NFL
Jarryd Hayne in action during the Week 3 Playoff NRL match between the Bulldogs and the Parramatta Eels at ANZ Stadium in Sydney, Friday, Sept. 25, 2009.The Eels beat the Bulldogs 22 - 12. AAP Image/Action Photographics, Robb Cox
For those rugby league fans who are excited about the potential for the game now that an independent commission seems imminent, here are some ideas that may give you even more reason for optimism.
Michael Searle and Co. have advised that the new leadership model will be based on both the AFL and NFL independent commissions with more emphasis being on the NFL model.
If you are not yet sold on what an independent commission can do, then consider what Paul Tagliabue achieved for the NFL in his time as NFL commissioner from 1989 to 2006.
For starters, he increased the leagues revenue from $975 million in 1989 to a staggering $5.7 billion in 2006. He also has helped to cement American Footballs place as easily the number one sport in the USA.
Considering that level of success, here are four initiatives from the NFL that should be seriously considered by rugby league’s new controlling body.
1. TV rights: Sell, Sell, Sell…
To gain maximum revenue regular season, NFL games are broadcast on no less than five separate networks: CBS, Fox, NBC, ESPN and the NFL Network. The NRL is currently shown on only one free to air network –Chanel 9. To increase revenue, one channel cannot be given a monopoly on all rugby league games.
Thankfully David Gallop has indicated that Rugby League games will be sold separately in the next TV rights deal starting in 2012. Speculation is that talks have already begun with Channel 7 and Channel 10 in regards to the sale on State of Origin and regular season games.
Imagine two games on Friday night on Channel 9, one on Saturday afternoon on Seven, one Saturday night on Ten and one Sunday afternoon on Nine. Plus Monday night football and mid week games on Foxtel.
State of Origin could be shown for the first time on Seven and the four nations on Ten.
Ex-Channel Nine commentators such as Ben Ikin, Paul Harrigan, Mario Fenech, Laurie Daley and even Matthew Johns may well have jobs at Seven or Ten in two years time. And who’s to say Channel 9 stalwarts such as Peter Sterling or Andrew Voss would not jump ship for a pay increase?
2. Three strikes, you’re out
Tagliabue has always stressed presenting a professional and clean cut image of the NFL and its players to the public. The NFL banned substances policy is the longest running in American professional sports.
He has even gone so far as to having strict rules in place (and enforced) as to players’ sock length, uniform appearance and sideline attire.
Protecting the NFL brand from tarnishing has been a key priority and is exactly what the NRL needs to come into effect as soon as possible.
Offences such as DUI, alleged assault, and recreational drug use should fall into a strict three strikes and you’re out policy.
First strike will incur a fine and suspension and compulsory counselling. A second strike an increased fine and suspension and compulsory counselling. Third strike and you are banned from playing in the NRL for life.
No appeals.
Any player who tests positive to a performance enhancing drug is given an immediate two year ban. Any player convicted of assault is given a minimum five year ban or more if the commission deems fit.
This will greatly improve the codes’ damaged image and show fans that an independent commission is serious in protecting the game and its future.
Let’s give the game back to the good guy majority.
3. Build it and they will come.
Tagliabue also established a fund that allowed the NFL to build its own stadiums rather that rely on public or Government funding.
Of the 32 NFL teams, 17 play in new stadiums that have been built since Tagliabue became commissioner in 1989. The NFL makes money through football, but also by being a stadium construction company.
A long-term commitment to a similar fund would greatly benefit rugby league (in a smaller capacity – the USA does have a population of approximately 300 million).
This fund would allow the NRL greater flexibility in regards to expansion by allowing it to build a stadium at the Sunshine Coast or Perth (where it could be rented out to other rectangle field sports such as rugby and soccer).
They could also look at renovating and modernising existing stadiums. Newer stadiums increased crowd figures for the NFL, especially an increase in women and children watching the game.
The Broncos and Titans have the best crowd figures in the NRL and both play in new stadiums. Your first visit to Suncorp Stadium or Skilled Park will leave you in no doubt as to the benefits a modern stadium can bring to sport.
4. Revenue sharing.
Tagliabue instituted revenue sharing between players and owners and maintained the sharing of TV income equally among the franchises.
Essentially to the NRL, this would mean that it wouldn’t matter if a Broncos or Bulldogs game gets a higher TV rating than a Raiders or Cronulla game or if a team has private ownership or is owned by a leagues club or the NRL.
Every team gets an equal share of the profits of future TV broascast deals.
When the NRL is flush from its next TV broadcast deal, the first priority should be an ongoing commitment to increasing player payments.
The salary cap is to be increased by as much as possible with each new TV rights deal signed. This will help retain our star players to our code and allow young players to choose rugby league as a lucrative career option.
These are just a few of many ideas from the NFL that an NRL commission could use to its own advantage and it can realistically strive to achieve them.
Taking the inconsistencies of the decision-making of the clubs out of the picture and having an independent commission to have unbiased control of the game will give rugby league potential that it has never before dared to consider.
Get Australia's best NRL opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(60)
danwighton said | November 10th 2009 @ 2:21am | Report comment
Awesome article – looks like you have gone to a great length in researching etc – and I am getting excited just reading it!
While a lot is speculation, lets hope that an Independent Commission can have a similarly positive impact on league as on the NFL.
As for salary cap, it wouldnt take much for the NRL to be the highest paying Rugby league in the world (which is fair considering its status as the most watched and the most well attended).
The current TV deal is approx $520m. I know its ambitious, but if it can be increased to levels near the AFL deal (approx $750m – which wouldn’t be unreasonable considering the NRL rivals the AFL in ratings), with Internationals, All Star games and SOO on top, the game would be flush with money.
If this allowed the NRL to increase its salary cap to AFL levels of $7/8m, $1m for one player would not be unheard of. The game could then compete to buy players of Dan Carter, and Bryan Habana quality.
Paul J said | November 10th 2009 @ 7:40am | Report comment
Thanks Dan
Australian sports fans can see how productive an independent commission has been for the AFL but we probably would not know as much about the NFL.
The more i read about what this type of leadership has done for the AFL & NFL the more i realise just how poorly rugby league has been run for years. It was no where near as good as it could have been before the super league war and even worse since.
An independent commission can improve rugby league greatly and i believe it is the most important thing to happen to the game in many many years, possibly ever.
MyGeneration said | November 10th 2009 @ 8:22am | Report comment
I haven’t read the article in detail, but on overview one thing stuck out. You praise the NFL’s drugs/behavioural policies. Be careful there. The NRL’s behavioural issues pale in comparison with the NFL’s (multiple star players have been implicated in violent incidents in recent years, from Michael Vick’s dog-fighting up to numerous assaults and a few murders as well), so I’m not sure they should serve as a template. And I don’t know why, but when I think of steroids, I think of weightlifters and NFL lineman. I think in many cases, the NFL is a template for how not to acculturate young, aggressive men with too much money too quick. Mind you, it hasn’t stopped the sport making money, and that’s the point, isn’t it? Isn’t it?
M1tch said | November 10th 2009 @ 8:23am | Report comment
Great article..
It does sound all so simple and it shows how much the game has been held back the past 10 years.
Hopefully the independant commission comes in ASAP to stand up for the game and lets see it grow.
sheek said | November 10th 2009 @ 8:55am | Report comment
“Build it and they will come”.
Great line from an equally great movie, but it’s flawed, just like that other great saying,”if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’.
Back in the 70s, was it, the VFL built Waverley Park, their very own owned & controlled ground, but it never really took off with the public. Way, way back in 1908, the then NSWRU bought its own ground, but this only alienated players & fans who believed the controlling body was hoarding funds. Another reason why league broke away from union.
The point is, while the two issues above were great ideas, they still need to be built on solid ground (viable reasons), not just a couple of dreams!
Dave1 said | November 10th 2009 @ 3:14pm | Report comment
The SANFL built their own ground Football Park in 1973.
It has been successful. Though it looks like it now might of have had its day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_Park
The SANFL has been run by an independant commision since 1991
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australian_Football_Commission
JiMMM said | November 10th 2009 @ 9:03am | Report comment
While I think the idea of an indeoendant commision for League is a good move, and would hopefully do a lot of things that you mention Paul, unless the commision is willing to do teh hard yards that teh NFL and AFL have done in terms of raionalistion of teams, relocating teams and expanding into new areas, there wont be any gains.
The simple fact is that in a 16 team comp to have 9 teams in one market is unsustainable, and some of these clubs will need to close merge or relocate, but as we constantly see in the media (including internet) none of these clubs are willing to do so.
The only way that I can see anything like this happening is the creation of a nationl second tier comp, relegating some of the existing clubs into this and bringing expansion franchises in at this level
PastHisBest said | November 10th 2009 @ 9:11am | Report comment
And don’t forget that white elephant concord oval, sheek.
prowling panther said | November 10th 2009 @ 9:42am | Report comment
great stuff. particularly like the tough stance on off field issues. Speaking of which, its been pretty quiet on that front. maybe the players are realising the extra scrutiny theyre under…hope i didnt jinx it
prowling panther said | November 10th 2009 @ 9:45am | Report comment
and whats the latest on the commission. are they certainties to get it up and running by next year? i for one would like them to cover all bases before it becomes operational so hopefully its not rushed…
Paul J said | November 10th 2009 @ 10:11am | Report comment
Prowling Panther
About a month ago there was a lot of media reports about the independent commission, seemingly for out of nowhere. It was all kept very hush hush up until then.
I keep looking for any more info on this but they seem to be keeping it under their hats again, sort of a need to know basis. A bit frustrating for the fans but maybe they think it’s more productive to keep it quiet while it is all finalised.
A lot of media types are talking about it as if its a fore gone conclusion.
prowling panther said | November 10th 2009 @ 10:19am | Report comment
’sort of a need to know basis’ thats probably a good thing. shows their damn serious about it. i wouldn’t mind if it was delayed to 2011 just to make sure all bases are covered. only problem with that is they leave themselves little time for tv negotiations. in any case theyve gotta have most of the deal done as they afl finishes their deal in 2012 otherwise the networks will have less money to offer and god forbid ch9 may be the only bidder.
Mushi said | November 10th 2009 @ 10:21am | Report comment
The NFL first appointed a commissioner in the 1940s, so just using stats from taglibues reign is exceptionally misleading.
All taglibues achievements highlight is that the he was far more effective than other commissioners and that a commission in and of itself is not a simple answer. At the end of the day it is a management structure appointed by the owners of the league it is not the formation of an administration diety that will deliver us from teh evils of sport.
Also the NFL would kill to have the NRL’s off field! By and large the NRL is far more aggressive with it’s punishment than the NFL for the various offences you highlighted above.
Paul J said | November 10th 2009 @ 11:10am | Report comment
Prowling Panther
I agree its usually wise to get it completety right before rushing in but in this case i hope its up and running for next year regardless. We need News out of league ownership before the crucial tv rights deal and as you say to lever some of the networks coin away from the AFL.
Mushi
You’re right that the NFL commission has been around for a long time but Tagliabue showed that an independent commission can make an amazing impact on a sport even in the competitve modern marketplace.
There is no way league will be worse off in any way that we are now if we have an independent commission and the AFL & NFL have shown in the last 20 years just how much potential there is for league with this type of leadership model.
Mushi said | November 10th 2009 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
To be clear I’m not saying we shouldn’t look at other sports but we should be very careful as to how transferable their practices are also what elements we attribute success to.
For example Paul Taglibues “success” is relative to other commissioners not only of his own sport but across the three other major professional leagues.
You are comparing his success to the relative lack of success of the other men who operated under the same basic premise. Therefore his success can not logically be attributed to the system.
Of the other three major sports they have had mixed results over the past 2 decades using a comissioner. The NHL actually lost an entire season and have been forced to rebuild under the fabled infallible modern sports environment revolutionising commission they had in place.
What taglibue, in combination with his less successful counterparts, had shown is that the system is of limited consequence compared to selecting the right leaders themselves.
There is always “a way” for a negative impact when putting in a new layer of management. Is their scope for improvement of course I just don’t think it is automatic. I’d rather have the right guy in the wrong structure than the other way around.
King of the Gorganites said | November 10th 2009 @ 11:12am | Report comment
have any of you leaguies seen the trailers for the new rugby movie called ‘ Invictus’. Its a movie about nelson mandela and the 1995 WC. its made by the legendary Clint Eastwood and starts Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon. Already talk of oscars. This movie will do massive things for rugby in the US, and all around the globe.
what was the last league movie made? something startting the disgraced matty johns. ha.
MyGeneration said | November 10th 2009 @ 11:43am | Report comment
Hey King, you’re double trolling, you scamp. Here’s a copy of my reply to the same pointless post you made on the other League thread:
You’re right, it was the Final Winter and Matty Johns played a supporting role. Got good reviews too. A very unsentimental, gritty look at the game in the 80s it was, more a kitchen sink drama than anything else. Before that we had This Sporting Life in 1963 (once again very unsentimental and gritty): Nominated for 2 Oscars (not just “talk of…”), Rachel Roberts won a BAFTA and Richard Harris won best actor at Cannes, also nominated for Golden Globes. So how many Rugby Union movies have won awards? And the point of this latest digression?
macavity said | November 10th 2009 @ 11:52am | Report comment
If the Americans are interested in RU, we just need to make sure they have opportunity to see RL too.
I am confident they will prefer the faster, more spectacular RL.
Mick from Giralang said | November 10th 2009 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
You’re right Mac, just look at the viewers comments on Spike TV in the States which showed the NRL finals series…they wwere stunned at how good it was.
Luke W said | November 10th 2009 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
Actually, Americans don’t prefer faster sports at all. MLB, NHL and in particular NFL are all “slow” games, with lots of stoppages.
Nam Turk said | November 11th 2009 @ 3:32am | Report comment
The NHL is slow? What the hell?
Mushi said | November 11th 2009 @ 7:23am | Report comment
yes – the speed of the game is normally in reeernce to how much of the total minutes taken were actaully times when the puck/ball were contested. Between corner dumps, goal tenders killing the puck, trapping on the boards and face offs the game is “slow” from this stand point.
MyGeneration said | November 11th 2009 @ 7:40am | Report comment
Have you seen NHL live, Mushi? Slow is not the word I would use. The puck is normally put back into play fairly quickly and the game goes at blinding speed. Have you got figures for your statement re ball-in-play versus total minutes? BTW, I can’t really watch it on TV, but I saw a game live in Ottawa many years ago, and it was fantastic.
Pippinu said | November 11th 2009 @ 7:43am | Report comment
I’m not a hockey expert – but to my uneducated eyes – Ice Hockey looks like a damn fast game!!!
Dave1 said | November 10th 2009 @ 3:23pm | Report comment
The thing is Amerticans like slower sports like NFL, baseball and golf. The longer the better and lots of stats
prowling panther said | November 10th 2009 @ 8:20pm | Report comment
Do they? THese sports are seen as American so I think patriotism plays a part. Its really the only sports that are stuffed down their throats
Mushi said | November 11th 2009 @ 7:24am | Report comment
As opposed to all the information you have that they don’t like these sports – which is none, nadda, zero
Dave1 said | November 10th 2009 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
Other Rugby league movies “This Sporting Life” (1963), “Up ‘n’ Under” (1998), Footy Legends (2006) and The First Kangaroos (1988)
Mick from Giralang said | November 10th 2009 @ 5:28pm | Report comment
This Sporting Life launched the acting career of Richard Harris, and is widely regarded as one of the great movies about sport.
MyGeneration said | November 10th 2009 @ 5:35pm | Report comment
And like The Final Winter, it’s not a air-brushed Hollywood version of sport. But how could it be as good as a movie that hasn’t even been released yet?
Mick from Giralang said | November 12th 2009 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
Loved the scenes in the Final Winter where the drink of choice in the pubs was a long neck of Tooheys Export Pilsener, drunk straight from the bottle!
Ah, the memories…
keeper11 said | November 10th 2009 @ 11:18am | Report comment
NFL is a sporting behomoth, on a truly national level in a country/ market of some 300 million…..
shares the limelight with 3 other genuine national sports….
NRL is a semi-national, one-city centric quasi suburban comp in a country of 20million…
i fail to see much similarity b/w the two…..
Dave1 said | November 10th 2009 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
but the NRL can learn lessons from the NFL just as the AFL and the SANFL has.
Paul J said | November 10th 2009 @ 11:19am | Report comment
And in regards to off field behaviour i agree that the NFL can make the NRL look like a bunch of choir boys but they do have far more fame and money and the right to bare arms.
However i feel the NRL needs to bring in a 3 strikes you’re out policy asap to let players and fans know that they are serious about off field behaviour. It will reduce the number of players who get in trouble and if someone does have 3 strikes despite knowing the penalty then he will not be missed and does not deserve to play in the NRL.
Paul J said | November 10th 2009 @ 11:29am | Report comment
“NRL is a semi-national, one-city centric quasi suburban comp in a country of 20million…”
Not quite.
The title was not ‘The NRL is bigger than the NFL’.
It was ‘The NRL can learn a lot from the NFL’.
Pippinu said | November 10th 2009 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
On that point – and as many have already intimated – the AFL’s growth since 1990 (when the VFL became the AFL) has pretty much been due to pinching NFL ideas right across the board.
It’s a pretty solid model for sports administration – but the NFL model (also used by the AFL), includes many elements that non-AFL people do not like.
Norm said | November 10th 2009 @ 12:24pm | Report comment
Good article Paul some very interesting concepts. The next few years should be intriguing to say the least.
keeper11 said | November 10th 2009 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
..made the point that rationalisation of sydney clubs and expansion into ‘new’ non-league territory are crucial issues in the future for the NRL if it hopes to become truly ‘national one day….
the NFL is undisputably national…so comp structure and changes in its city teams/ franchises is quite different..
Raysie said | November 10th 2009 @ 5:34pm | Report comment
On the note of making the NRL really a national sport in Australia…is it really a good thing? That would surely mean more teams, which could also mean a whole new competition structure. We could be talking about a competition decided by pool fixtures, such as the Rugby World Cup for a quick example. I don’t know about you guys, but the only think that keeps Rugby League alive is its rivalries. I don’t think I could survive a season without seeing the Bulldogs playing its toughest rivalries.
Though I’m still wondering why the NRL isn’t called the EANZRL (Eastern Australia New Zealand Rugby League). I think the NRL needs to do some tough changes and even consider losing the Warriors in the process. They’re a New Zealand team for goodness sake. I’d like to see a whole new New Zealand competition that could one day rival the NRL and ESL.
Also, the NRL really needs to get its TV rights deals changed big time.I hope this change can allow for all Australians to watch Rugby league on television just like it is for the AFL. Imagine the young children from all over Australia that would finally have access to watching the NRL in their lounge rooms. Until this happens, Rugby League will always be an Eastern Australian sport.
Rugby League is the best sport in the world, and one day (with the leadership of the ARL) it can finally be noticed by all.
Robbo said | November 10th 2009 @ 7:28pm | Report comment
Kick the Warriors out? Are you brain dead? Having a NZ team is beyond the AFL’s wildest dreams – yet you want to kick the Warriors out?
Raysie said | November 11th 2009 @ 8:25am | Report comment
It does sound crazy, but it is called the “NATIONAL” Rugby League. I think it could be a good thing for New Zealand Rugby League if they could set up their own well known Rugby League competition. It may also stop that whole “My grandma is from New Zealand pass”.
oikee said | November 10th 2009 @ 5:35pm | Report comment
All we have to do is hire Paul Tabliabue, problem solved. He can run the commission.
True Tah said | November 10th 2009 @ 5:51pm | Report comment
I thought you would send David Gallop over there to run the NFL.
The Guru said | November 10th 2009 @ 8:53pm | Report comment
Ideas are one thing, you got to have the right person in charge to make sure they happen. Colin Love is no Paul Tabliabue
jim_bar said | November 10th 2009 @ 5:38pm | Report comment
what do we need bigger stadiums for? seems like whenever I watch an NRL game the stadiums are half empty…………..
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/2009.html scroll down the page to the worst crowd numbers section
True Tah said | November 10th 2009 @ 5:45pm | Report comment
The whole thing about stadium ownership is not relevant to Australia. How many sporting organisations own their own stadia here? SANFL own Football Park in Adelaide, and the QRU own Ballymore which isnt even used. This is not US, UK or South Africa where certain codes have enough financial clout to own their own digs.
tifosi said | November 10th 2009 @ 6:12pm | Report comment
Actually many NFL stadiums have public/govt spending in them.
New Dallas Cowboys stadium has $325 million dollars of public money in it. Lucas Oil stadium in INDY cost 725 million but the Colts only put in 100 million, the rest mostly from the city via increased taxes.
The reason they are building these new stadiums has nothing to do with the average fan like you and I, its all about cramming in as many luxury suites as possible. Something which the old stadiums never had.
But true tah is right. No club in Australia could possibly afford to spend hundreds of millions on upgrading stadiums.
At any rate its the TV revenue that counts the most now and the NRL seem to be waking up on that one.
Ian Whitchurch said | November 10th 2009 @ 9:26pm | Report comment
True Tah,
It’s posts like yours that remind me just why Rugby Union is administered as badly as it is – it’s an entire code full of adminstrators who think just like you.
The AFL not merely owns large chunks of it’s own stadiums, it also now owns large chunks of other peoples’ home grounds.
Break the clubs. Break the provinces. Have a single ruling body with only one interest : the good of the code.
Do anything else, and you’re committing to failure.
Ian Whitchurch
True Tah said | November 11th 2009 @ 8:34am | Report comment
Ian
apart from Football Park, which stadiums does AFL own at the moment. I understand in a few years it will own Etihad Stadium, and in the past the AFL owned Waverley Park. Does the AFL own Carrara, SCG, MCG or the Gabba? That is not to say that the AFL are not important tenants, because the AFL is what makes these venues viable venues.
And in any case, the difference is that the AFL as a commission owns the stadiums, not the individual teams. In the NFL, the teams own the stadiums. In South African rugby, the individual provincial unions own their own grounds, not the South African Rugby Union.
In Australia, it does not make sense for stadium ownership, especially in NSW and QLD, as largely you will find a large degree of ground sharing between rugby, futbol and rugby league.
Plus where teams are privately owned, the team must pay the land tax on the stadium it owns, which would make it more expensive.
Billo said | November 10th 2009 @ 9:28pm | Report comment
A good article that points the way forward for the NRL.
It isn’t just structure, however, but getting the right people in place that is really important.
It’s hard to imagine it now, but the NFL was a nothing competition, smaller than the NRL is now in relative terms in the USA, when Pete Rozelle was appointed the NFL Commissioner in 1960.
Back then the NFL had just 12 teams. When he retired in 1989 it had 28.
Rozelle did many great things, but the key thing he did early in his career was to ensure that more than one broadcaster covered the game. He wanted competition between broadcasters for NRL games, and his success in doing that was what led to the amazing growth in NFL income.
The second key thing he did, in relation to that, was to ensure that all clubs shared the TV income, and that no club could strike independent TV deals.
If the NRL could find a Rozelle it would have a real chance of achieving its potential.
Ian Whitchurch said | November 10th 2009 @ 9:32pm | Report comment
Tifosi,
Your point is the entire point.
No club can afford it. But the code could.
So break the clubs, and empower the code.
Randwick ? Powerless. Brothers ? Gutless. NSW ? An incitement to fraud. Queensland ? Is, does, and will only look out for it’s own interests (and I dont care about what code for this point – there’s something in the water, and they can, will and will always act like that, whether it’s cricket, league or union).
Break the clubs. Empower the code.
If you’re unwilling to do that, well, then, see the thriving future basketball has in Australia.
Mushi said | November 11th 2009 @ 8:20am | Report comment
Break the clubs empower the code? What does that even mean?
You’ve got plenty of slogans and no content.
Please give us your grand plan on how “breaking” your constituents empowers the code as presently you sound like some crazed South American dictator whose planning to repatriate all of the privately owned assets in his country.
What does some grand stadium expansion program do for the clubs based in Sydney?
Get a map and look at Melbourne and look at the location of the clubs and then do the same with Sydney and tell me how we emulate the AFL’s stadium structure of a couple of centrally located grounds when
- there is no centrally available land in Sydney for the development of a new stadium; and
- how a centrally located stadium would service the more geographically dispersed Sydney based clubs
This is before even factoring in the Sydney are not as big a consumer of live sports as their Melbourne counter parts
danwighton said | November 11th 2009 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Youre right about Melbourne’s advantage in centrally located stadiums – all the Vic teams are a stone’s throw apart, except for Geelong (which has its own stadium). Vic also has the advantage of a better public transport system, and doesnt have the geographical issues which make travel across Sydney difficult.
That said, Parramatta stadium is reasonably central, and is in a transport hub – I imagine it could be a candidate for redevelopment (at least for the Western sides like Parra, Pen, Canterbury, Tigers). Even a 35/40,000 capacity would be great.
Redb said | November 12th 2009 @ 7:21am | Report comment
it is a commom mistake to think the ‘central’ location of clubs in Melbourne means fans dont have to travel far. It is very unlikely that the majority of Carlton and Collingwood fans live in those small burbs. Essendon might have a larger geographical area, places like St Kilda though are tiny.
AFL fans live across the whole of metropolitan Melbourne from inner to outer suburbs.
The transport system is sort of better than Sydney (marginally) and it is easier to get around. The AFL moved away from suburban grounds due to their lack of capacity and run down facilities.
Redb
Pippinu said | November 12th 2009 @ 7:27am | Report comment
redb
that’s all true, but the move to 9 teams sharing two centrally located stadiums has helped considerably with both attendances and revenue.
Mick from Giralang said | November 12th 2009 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
On a brief visit to Melbourne last year, the public transport system seemed really impressive, a lot better thanSydney’s. Might be different if you work and live there though?
Jim Savage said | November 11th 2009 @ 2:37am | Report comment
As a lifelong rugby league fan who has lived in the United States for the past 20 years I`d just like to say how much I enjoyed Paul`s article.This guy is dead on in key areas.EVERYONE here watches the NFL.EVERYONE.During football season we are all tuned in to the 1pm game,the 4:15 game and then the Sunday night game.Then,thankfully,there is Monday Night Football.The NFL…because of it`s spectacular,explosive nature…is the dominant TV sport in the United States.It is also the one sport here that cuts across evry boundary.Major League Baseball has become a sport followed by a largely suburban,white and perhaps now increasingly Latino fanbase.The NBA is an African-American sport.The NHL ( hockey ) is a Canadian game whose U.S. fans tend to live in states close to Canada ( Massachusetts,Michigan,upstate New York ).No-one really follows soccer here,the comment I hear most about soccer is that it is a sport best suited for female athletes.
But EVERYONE watches football…it is a perfect TV game.And that is why rugby league`s future in Australia,New Zealand and recently Britain is assured.Like the NFL rugby league is a wonderful game to watch.It`s plays are dynamic,the defense can be as tough and almost as brutal as those in the NFL and even more so than in the NFL the players are easier to relate to as our players do not wear helmets as the NFL players have to.
Paul`s article makes one point I`d like to agree with the most:INCREASE PLAYER PAYMENTS!.I know the marketplaces are vastly different ( USA`s population is 300 million,Australia`s is 22 million ) but I cannot believe how poorly the NRL pays its players!!!.Then they are taxed at a far higher rate then the NRL`s players…double the penalty,if you will.The sacrifices NRL players make to become successful are akin to those of an aspiring NFL player.Yet when that NRL player wins a full time contract he can end up being paid less than $30,000 as a rookie.Amazing!!!No-one here in the U.S. would do it.
Thanks for a lovely read…and here`s to a great Four Nations final in England on Saturday.I`ll be watching,its on live here.
Mushi said | November 11th 2009 @ 8:35am | Report comment
NRL players, I believe, are paid a higher percentage of revenues than NFL players (from my shaky recollection of the last CBA and the NRL figures) and you can’t just say oh your tax rate is higher so even though that doesn’t increase my revenue as an employer here is a 25% bonus from money I don’t have…
ohtani's jacket said | November 12th 2009 @ 1:14am | Report comment
You know the NRL could learn a lot from the mistakes Tagliabue made as well. As big as the NFL is, there’s still no such thing as a perfect sport and Tagliabue had his share of failures. Tellingly for the NRL, one of the biggest failures was the expansion into Europe, but people ought to be wary of expansion failure and the trouble Tagliabue had with locating a team in Los Angeles, the second largest city/market in the United States.
Personally, I don’t think the NRL can ever replicate the success that the major American sports had in the early 90s in terms of global expansion. It was right around that time that the rest of the world started getting satellite TV access and coincided with Jordan, the Dallas Cowboys and other hugely marketable teams/stars. Needless to say, Australian culture doesn’t have the potential for globalisation that American culture has shown.
Rusty said | November 16th 2009 @ 9:09pm | Report comment
Apples and oranges.