For all the talk of relocation and expansion in the NRL, there’s a simple solution for those who fear their team could be relocated: attend the games.
Sydney NRL fans can call their city the heart and soul of rugby league in Australia, but the thousands of empty seats on a weekly basis say otherwise. For all the talk about how much they love their suburban grounds, they rarely sell out round to round despite existing clubs having decades to build fan-bases.
The Sydney Roosters, for all their success, can’t even half fill their stadium after sustained success. If any other team had the triumphs the Roosters have had over the past six years, they would surely see a substantial increase in crowds, particularly if that team were Newcastle or Parramatta.
The Sydney NRL clubs in particular have had enough time to develop and grow there fan-bases, yet on occasion they’ve had to be bailed out by the NRL for financial mismanagement. By now the clubs have enough funding from the NRL to sink or swim. There can be no excuses for any of the NRL clubs to run at a loss. There are no more bailouts.
For far too long the self-interest and reckless spending of the NRL clubs have created a constant cycle of draining the funds of the NRL. Money is being spent to prop up incompetent clubs when it could otherwise be better directed towards a future fund or potential expansion. Instead it is being pocketed by the established teams just to keep them in existence.
From now to the new TV deal the NRL clubs need to do everything they can to prove they should stay around and survive on their own. If they can’t, they should be relocated, as it’s been far too long that the NRL has rewarded improper management.
So simply put, show up or your team will be shipped out. Low attendance and low membership figures can and should be used as a reason to relocate teams.
The Barry
Roar Guru
It’s a really good reason to move...far better than “there were 27,000 empty seats...”
westernred
Hardley any kids in the area is another reason to move. Plenty kids here.
Superspud
Roar Rookie
Yeah Perth vs Gold Coast on a Saturday afternoon!! Better get your ticket early for that one. Do a little bit of research and look at crowds when Perth DID have a side. Seriously!!
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
WOE.No thanks. We wouldn't like losing $48m(ARU) held in the Bank, or losing Super clubs, because the talent was thinly spread or too expensive to run.Hardly going gangbusters in this country .And not being seen on FTA TV, and securing a TV deal that barely pays for sandwiches at H/O. And the RFU(the richest union in the world) losing 31mPounds last year ,making 54 people redundant.And Brexit was called a mish mash!!! Let alone the myriad of rules that choke the game. Such that even many players are seen scratching their heads.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
That's true,but as I clearly spelt out to the AFL guy, the Eels play at a stadium not suited ATM for rectangular codes, ditto WSW.Their (Eels)average crowd last year was 11,175 at ANZ ,whilst they were a very ordinary team at the bottom. He had a shot at the ANZ crowd last night, (which indeed was ordinary), but it is not played at their"home" based rectangular stadium, which he appears to want to ignore.The Swans have had a quality run over many years, when things go bad we'll also see the result crowd wise.They play all the time at their home base, not forced to use another one in Sydney outside the majority fan base areas.In fact their fans dislike ANZ as shown in the past. Many other sports except the American football usually have themselves domiciled in the "home" area. I've been to the Leeds stadium in 2003, it is still nonetheless a home based club. I don't believe I implied anywhere ,the Eels will play to full houses all the time.My view is the new venue will improve their crowds dramatically, and not just for the first year.Suncorp rarely plays to full houses. Scheduling also plays a part in crowd numbers. From my reading of blogs and comments in the news,people are realistically accepting of a 30,000 seat stadium.If the Eels average 20,000 plus they would hardly be complaining.With 3 other NRL clubs not that far away.
Nat
Roar Guru
You make some fair points and I don't think I made mine as succinct as possible. It's far from THE test but it is definitely part of a number of KPIs considered in making the decision. TV money has improved the quality of the game significantly. Obviously with the vested interested in creating a better product for us to consume so they can sell to advertisers. TV money doesn't exist without advertisers, however, rugby league has, can and does exist in every club in Australia long before TV dominated every conversation. But I am getting away from the point. Expansion, in whatever form, will happen. Be sure TV execs are at the table in that discussion. Their risk analysis is purely dependent on who would they lose in viewers from one area vs new viewers and advertising opportunities in the new area. The NRL have more to consider and the financial viability and community support/memberships definitely contribute to that. Nothing contributes more directly to the clubs profitability than memberships and bums on seats. All other things being equal, if your club gets 20k to every game, you are in a much better position to avoid being a victim of expansion than another who may ave 8k.
Wise Old Elf
Guest
NRL is like horse racing or Shield cricket. Used to be well patronised, now people take a 'latent' interest in it and only attend the 'events'. They should look at moving the sport back into a 'greater rugby code' to give it some sort of context and legitimacy. The sham scrums, numbered amount of possession and mock internationals are just compounding the pointlessness of this ill conceived sporting mess.
duecer
Guest
The same is true for every sport - team goes down the ladder, so do the fans. The only time this doesn't hold true is when the fans feel there has been an injustice, like Rangers in the SPL, Leeds and the Storm when they had to play a year without points. Parramatta stadium should play to full houses for the first few games - and people will argue that it should have a bigger capacity. The real test will be once the novelty has worn off and the eels aren't doing well.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
ANZ is not a home stadium of Parramatta Eels or WSW, SCG is the home stadium of Swans.It would be akin for the Swans to play in western Sydney. ANZ is also not a rectangular configuration as it should have been immediately after the Olympics, whereas SCG is configured more so for AFL. Should Swans continue to lose over a period of time, their novelty will wear off. Fans tend to be fickle.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Yeah that’s all fair But importantly, there’s still a process about working out what revenue a new club, a relocation, a merger etc brings to the game versus what it costs that is far more complex than the tired old “Roosters don’t get crowds” or “no one likes Manly” or “Bulldogs are having a dud season” juvenile arguments like this article.
Gyfox
Roar Rookie
Last night’s attendances prove my point. ANZ 13,000 SCG 32,000 New stadium may improve NRL - but novelty will wear off
Dwanye
Roar Rookie
Why would it destroy the game in Sydney. Sure it would hurt but that leaves a good population coverage of clubs across the city.
mushi
Roar Guru
Barry I think they’ve shown that Qld ratings across the board go up for qld based teams. So commercially it adds value. Also highlights the benefits of local connections can manifest in something other than crowds.
mushi
Roar Guru
But why should that be the test? It’s not how people consume entertainment anymore. Seriously do we think the Sydney Theatre Company has a better commercial model than Apple TV or Netflix? It’s also fraught with danger to assume that only those that attend in person value a historical or local attachment. If we honestly believe that is the case then we should cash out now and switch to a more global sport.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
I'll form my judgement ,once the new all seater rectangular stadiums are up and running, in Sydney.Sydney is hardly endowed with 21st century rectangular comfortable stadiums.In fact it's embarrassing compared to the other states, well behind. Having the luxury of up to date stadiums, that are built to handle a particular sport does help.
peeeko
Roar Guru
AFL crowds are brilliant and pound for pound the rest of the world. congratulations
WarHorse
Roar Rookie
Except perhaps Brisbane whos crowds are the highest. But they only have 1 game a fortnight to go to so are starved of games. Give them the Titans.
The Barry
Roar Guru
So AFL has low crowds? Are they talking about relocating teams as a result. Crowd numbers is a daft way to determine the structure of the premiership.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Yeah...little simplistic. Their local area is a postage stamp. They haven’t had a junior base for at least 40 years and these days there’s hardly any kids that live in their catchment area. It makes it hard to “promote the game” (which you could argue is not really their job). Despite that they sit third in terms of most premierships won, they’re strong financially and are arguably the most successful clubs of the past 20 or so years. I’m not saying don’t relocate them - I actually think it has to be them or the Rabbitohs - just that anyone doing it solely on how many empty seats there are at the footy stadium is looking at things upside down. Bums not on seats is pretty close to an irrelevant metric.
westernred
Easily done. Plenty of ammo.