Five elements NRL could steal from NFL

On further review.... the play stands! TOUCHDOWN!

I think the fumble rule has merit, but I'm worried about how much it'll change the play. For the 99% case, it's definitely easier to initiate. But the borderline case, when someone is just catching a ball as they're being tackled, will be difficult. Also, I'm worried that allowing free-for-all strips will lead to all ball carriers holding onto the ball tighter, which will dissuade players from offloading and promoting second-phase play.

Following on from Von's point about jerseys well I do think the same with centralisation, namely that the NFL can put itself and her teams first in it's branding. Well the same to be said for world soccer and cricket Having your team identity as the main focus is a good thing. Maybe the NRL is establishing herself as a brand then one day they'll establish each team. What I mean would be to provide that space combined with the limitation of sponsor money. That will be a good day indeed! For time stoppage it's a fatigue balance is it not? The last ten or five minutes to draw it out would be perfect! Maybe we don't need a draft I do love how NRL is putting itself first and how all the bits and bobs are coming together now they have more time to devote

I wrote earlier do a search for my name above about how americans view their sport, and also why some of these implementations in the article would be good, but perhaps not just right now, and one, the draft - ever. Let me explain. -The NFL had been doing many things over its course to make it as big as it is now - but none more deliberate and planned as they have been in the past 30-40 years. Since the idea of the super bowl thats when it started to pick up speed - you can focus all the attention on one single match. Back 30 years ago, yes baseball was probably the american favorite before the strike. But to say baseball is small now is wrong. The one sport that does lag a bit, purely by inherent traits is probably ice hocky, and the cost to play it and the need of an ice rink, and its predisposition to the north/canada. But hocky is not small by world standards either. USA people do not hate on their sports like we do, they wish them well and its more than just "you're big I will follow you"; they ALL enjoy wide support, as do their lower leagues. If you goto certain towns, they dont think big about the NFL like some towns do - they may instead support the lower league team. - But thats not to say that American sport is not highly competitive between the Sports - its just that the populace do not walk around with a large dislike for either one; they may prefer one over the other, but multi sports fans are common. Its easier in some senses for the NFL because they can promote the sport with one eventual event, rather than a 5 game playoff series, so you build a culture of prestige around that - especially when you are selling 30 second adverts for 1 million dollars a pop. - Because of above reason - because people generally are neutral to all sports/no hate - thats never stopped any sporting body like it has in Australia --- who can forget the whole "lets not put a team in melbourne - because they "hate" rugby league".... in the USA, they just roll-on, they don't get put off by irrationality, they think pretty clearly. -So 2 things the NFL got right that helped - the centralization of government and increased commission power (we are talking in terms of growth here, its given them the ability, I am not saying I like or dislike it), amalgamation, and the re-unification of the 2 leagues - and reducing stadium sizes whenever possible (last 20 years) to improve spectator comfort, settling on 70-80k where possible, sometimes less (tho note a recent super bowl was held at a baseball stadium in Florida I think; people upset a bit/done for $$$), so its more intimate/enjoyable/viewable and that must give them a boost. They've done well. And its what we should be striving for, many lessons to be learnt. But I want to point out something important: - Sport is all about centralization; years ago in the online community I wrote about such things before anyone else was. You got to run your sport like its the Iron Curtain. And rugby league was very De-centralized. You cannot allow too much autonomy, its a fine balance. The NFL is helped because the power stems from Rich Team owners, so its centralized at various "nodes". So when they sit down for a commissioners meeting (and they agree, usually by which option makes more money for longer>popularity) they can run a tight ship. - When I began suggesting years ago to people that the NRL needs an independent commission, I supposed that one of the off-shoots would be centralization. And the difference in our case is that the clubs were largely unprofessional in their running's, so any independent commission would obviously be better levelled than them, and the weight would shift. Yes, the clubs would allow themselves to be commissioned-out to a higher authority, but thats the mechanism on top of the impetus. -Its funny tho because Australian sport is a different beast to american sport, we take many of our cues from British things, and we are a much smaller country. - But note the raft of changes since the commission has come into being. This is the power of centralization. Pre Super League was not a centralized form - it was an Oligarchy (multiple places of power held by a few separate families/entities), that at times wrecked or halted progress made, often by outside whim for things other than the 'betterment of rugby league enjoyment'. - So we are now only seeing a shift in the past few years - I think many of the points that the OP has raised cannot be implemented without a centralized authority with the power to enact them. I like them all, apart from the draft, which I have explained above if you search - my reasons are not only compelling, they are correct. Just the same while I agree the jerseys have become an eye-sore, now is not the time to remove sponsorships from them. - These things we talk about may seem trivial to outsiders but they are integral to sporting progression. Its great to see that the ARLC and the CEO and his team have set about to secure the foundations of the game. The points the OP talk about, are more 'next' level. All in good time, and I reckon my views on the draft are practically and logically undefeatable, we don't need one, it would be a waste of money because our system already sorts itself out without restraining trade. (but this is yet another good feature of centralized sports management - the ability to let in/out that which do and do not want.)

I am very familiar with America, and the conversation centering on the NFL being the demi Gods of sport worldwide is bordering on pedestalizing and a little silly - but maybe we need to discuss it to give perspective to the OP's NFL-points, which I mostly agree with and state elsewhere exactly which ones. I dont get this whole business much like Rob9, and the whole "grinding into the dust". They are all favorite things in America - and popularity to exclusion (to a certain degree/ and for some cases, not all) is really only to do with where certain sports have certain teams. The NFL is not without troubles, moving teams every couple of years, LA was one place an NFL team just could not compete for a long time. But LA has 2 basketball teams..and greenbay who just gather nationwide support, or the Yankees. And other such examples, it really is down to team placement and occassionally a player. American's dont think like we do about their sport. They are more readily to give sport "good wishes" than we in Australia are. The thing you must understand about NFL is - there's all of 16 rounds over 17 weeks, and BAM - thats it. No tests, no state of origin series. So think of that number -- then think of Major League Baseball thats got 220 odd games if IRCorectly per team, and still averages 20-30,000 per game and often gets 45K+ per game. Look, Baseball is HUGE in America, more people goto baseball than NFL, but its only due to the numbers of games. Basketball is big and is the one that gets talked about world wide more, but not as big as baseball in the culture, hockey is 3rd. But an American would never really sit down and debate rankings of their sports like we do here - there is no north/south divide in terms of sports or anything like that. American's love supporting american's and they dont do cross-sport hate very much, if at all. Pre 92 I think it was when baseballers struck for that whole season for a pay increase Baseball was undisputed king in the culture, but a steady progression since the late 60s/early 70s has been occuring for the NFL and their new tactics. Now you see the NFL more predominant in the culture but baseball has come back big time. I dont know much about basketball, except to say it does not enjoy any less or more attention than NFL or baseball. And thats the USA, they dont discriminate on their sports -- and this conversation would probably never happen there. Its ALL American, just like all our games should be seen as ALL Australian. There's no divide. But in terms of one decade that made the NFL like it is now, 60s/70s. It took 20 years and a little help but they have grown their pie endlessly - but this is no way puts down other sports. Its a big country in area and money so you don't really need to squash other sports.

Lets not make excuses again, the fact that the Waratahs plays teams outside of NSW and over in NZ and South Africa makes a mockery of what your trying to say. St Georges majority of games are against teams 20 minutes drive or more so they should have a bigger average since they get a large amounts of away fans as well. Super rugby is basically the home team only with a handful of expats in the stands where the NRL with a majority of teams based in Sydney and played in the same stadiums. Super rugby is rated very well in New Zealand and South Africa as well. No brainer there.

How so? Super Rugby has 3 conferences of 5. Both the NBA and MLB have 2 conferences but 3 divisions of 5 playing in each conference. All seem to work fine.

I dont think five division would work. You are best of with four divisions (2 conferences) uneven number borderlines insanity

With the 4 expansion sides that I'd like to see enter the comp, I'd introduce a 5 divisions of 4 teams model. Everyone plays everyone else once (19 games) then the 3 other teams in their division a 2nd time (3 games) for a 22 game regular season. At finals time, the top of the 4 strongest divisions are seeded 1 to 4 and occupy the top 4 positions. Seeds 5 to 8 can come from any division and then just run the finals as they currently do (week 1- 1v4, 2v3, 5v8, 6v7 etc). This is the division structure I'd introduce under a 20 team comp: East Sydney: Roosters, Rabbitohs, Dragons, Sharks. West Sydney: Eels, Bulldogs, Tigers, Panthers. Coastal NSW: Sea Eagles, Knights, Steelers (de-merge from St George), Central Coast (expansion side). Queensland: Broncos, Cowboys, Titans, Brisbane 2 (expansion side). Southern (or other): Storm, Raiders, Warriors, Perth (expansion side).

Auckland Warriors have awesome jersey's about the only club that is actively looking at the merchandise options available with multiple jerseys and they fit he sponsors in without it looking like eyesores. I agree with the articles sentiment. The Fumble rule might not work, could lead to fumblrooski type scenarios (i.e. accidentally on purpose dropping the ball and moving it forward for advantage). I'd like them to try a 1 forward pass instead of a kick rule too. While time wasting is annoying; conversions etc... the fact play doesn't end once the clock hits 40:00 and 80:00 means it too much of a drama. but I agree it can be improved.

Very good ideas and they are long overdue but you have to accept that none of them will happen with the current crop of clowns and muppets running the game almost exclusively for the benefit of Channel 9. These muppets won't even listen to the fans about fixing the Origin schedule so we've got buckleys chance of getting any of these done.

That's a cracker of an idea there Josh! The NRL absolutely needs to try and guarantee those 1-8 teams play each other twice. As solid as the idea of one home and away against each other team is, it's not particularly practical when there's 16 teams - a 30 week season, maybe stretched out another 3 weeks because of SOO and internationals, and then 4 weeks of finals? 37 weeks? That'd be from the last week in February through to the first week in November. If the NRL went back down to 12-14 teams though, it might be achievable. Couldn't see a decent way of running two divisions or two conferences though.

Average crowds are not the best indicators as it does not compare apples to apples. If you only have to go to 5 Super Rugby games compared to 13 for an NRL side then it is likely that you will go to all game 5 games rather than all 13. Get a grip man if you think the Super Rugby or the A league is more popular than the NRL (in NSW and QLD). If so why are they commanding bigger TV deals etc.

Maybe raking is only illegal in a three man tackle.

As stated I like the idea, but I would settle for in the one on one rake situation there is no knock on call (regardless of where the ball propels) - it is just play on.

Fan attendence ratio is probably not the best measure more either the stadium fill % or maybe some measure of dollars in terms of tickets , merchandise?

I could have also said ... poor little rich kid...