Next TV rights deal part 2

[Last Week]

Continuing on from

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=431436&page=201

 

[Last Week]

Grant's just being political when it comes to expansion. It hinges on the outcome of the next broadcast deal. They've done their homework and are laying the groundwork for it.

As for increasing the player pool, if the players come from outside the existing NRL system there's no dilution.

Fumbleballers. Rugby Union players. Even rugby league players in PNG, Pacific Islands, Southern NZ, Affiliated States and elsewhere overseas.

Signing a player from those markets has no impact on the existing NRL player pool.

One possible solution - bring in that AFL style Marquee Player Salary Cap Exemption for key target markets. And if they don't want to put the financial burden on the clubs, have it as a Third Party Sponsor Arrangement (but signed centrally by the NRL). 1 or 2 players per club = 18 - 36 outside players added to the pool.

If the NRL/clubs can't find 18-36 players outside the existing system then there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the game finds and attracts talent in general.

I agree mostly. It doesn't make sense if that's the reason to not expand. It doesn't matter when or where we expand to. The quality players will be spread out more thinly and more reserve graders will come up. There is no stopping it as there will always be that gap between NRL and what ever is below it.

Although, to address your point of just getting players from elsewhere, yeah, that's possible, but for 2 new NRL teams, that's 50 players that will need to be brought in to the comp, and there's also junior squads which will also be spread out further. And, coaching staff too, which you cannot get from AFL or Union.

It doesn't matter when we expand or how much money we put into every grade below NRL, the quality of football and depth is going to take a hit.

 

[reanimate]

I agree mostly. It doesn't make sense if that's the reason to not expand. It doesn't matter when or where we expand to. The quality players will be spread out more thinly and more reserve graders will come up. There is no stopping it as there will always be that gap between NRL and what ever is below it.

Although, to address your point of just getting players from elsewhere, yeah, that's possible, but for 2 new NRL teams, that's 50 players that will need to be brought in to the comp, and there's also junior squads which will also be spread out further. And, coaching staff too, which you cannot get from AFL or Union.

It doesn't matter when we expand or how much money we put into every grade below NRL, the quality of football and depth is going to take a hit.

You can get coaching staff from Union, Unionites still tackle and do strength and conditioning.

 

[docbrown]

The quality players will be spread out more thinly and more reserve graders will come up.

for 2 new NRL teams, that's 50 players that will need to be brought in to the comp, and there's also junior squads which will also be spread out further. And, coaching staff too, which you cannot get from AFL or Union.

Well I can see why you would argue them but just on the logic of these 2 points:

The first assumes that there will only ever be 'X' amount of quality players in the game and instead of 'X' divided by 16 the dilution occurs because it's now 'X' divided by 18 etc.

However when you're talking about quality players I'm assuming you're not talking about whole squads (your 50 number), you're talking about key/star players.

Lets say there are 2 new teams. How many key/star players are there on each team? X=3? 5? 7? Even across two teams that's still only around a dozen or so 'quality' players max, if that. And the NRL can't find those in the whole wide world?

If that's true then the NRL may as well give up trying to be the premier 'rugby' code if it can't attract that small number of talent.

What I'm saying increases 'X'.

The proof is in the past. If expansion does dilute the quality of the game then where is the comprehensive proof that the game was of a better quality before the Titans? Or before the Rabbitohs were readmitted into the comp? I am ready to accept any serious hard proof of the matter (I do keep an open mind about these things).

Really it's quite a hard thing to measure other than subjectively. The game has expanded before - from a Sydney comp into NSW, QLD, ACT, Nationally and Internationally. I'm not even arguing for a throwback to 1997 when we had 22 teams but surely we can handle 4 less teams almost 2 decades later if the right system is put in place.

Obviously the AFL doesn't have this advantage. It isn't really played overseas at any more than a joke level and it is distinct from the other football codes. So really it does have to grow its grassroots base to do the same. I don't believe the quality of the NRL competition will end up like Fumbleball.

As for junior squads -- that's a good point though the number of extra players required may differ as a result of the State & Holden Cup changes. I mean lets keep in mind even if it stayed the same you're still only talking finding 12.5% more players, if that.

Coaching staff - I don't think that's a big hurdle, they'll find their people within the game itself.

 

[siv]

About 160 players graduate from u20s at NRL and BRL - EVERY year

They either leave or push other players out of the system

Getting 50 players out of this pool or ESL isnt a issue

As for lower grade players - they will come from.their junior structures - eg U18 graduates

 

[Starkers]

Probably going a bit off topic from TV rights, but I think expansion can be handled easily. It just needs to be in the right areas and the pathways being developed correctly.

To me, Brisbane 2 and Wellington would be first. Then the next stage Perth and Adelaide.

The second tier comps also need to be re-adjusted. More country teams in NSW Cup will lead to further quality players. And I think NZ deserves a stand alone second tier including the islands. PNG works well for Qld Cup, but Fiji in NSW Cup is silly.

NZ could have 3 or 4 from the Auckland area, 2 or 3 from Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa and Cook Islands.

Once we lock up the East Coast and NZ + Islands, then we head west for Adelaide and Perth.

 

[applesauce]

Saw on the news the reach rules and two-out-of-three rules will be scraped through parliament by Christmas.

To anyone who may knows more than me, does this help the TV rights in anyway, i.e. more money from mergers of city and regionals or Foxtel having more cash to throw around if they buy into more media outlets?

 

[Last Week]

Well I can see why you would argue them but just on the logic of these 2 points:

The first assumes that there will only ever be 'X' amount of quality players in the game and instead of 'X' divided by 16 the dilution occurs because it's now 'X' divided by 18 etc.

However when you're talking about quality players I'm assuming you're not talking about whole squads (your 50 number), you're talking about key/star players.

Lets say there are 2 new teams. How many key/star players are there on each team? X=3? 5? 7? Even across two teams that's still only around a dozen or so 'quality' players max, if that. And the NRL can't find those in the whole wide world?

If that's true then the NRL may as well give up trying to be the premier 'rugby' code if it can't attract that small number of talent.

What I'm saying increases 'X'.

The proof is in the past. If expansion does dilute the quality of the game then where is the comprehensive proof that the game was of a better quality before the Titans? Or before the Rabbitohs were readmitted into the comp? I am ready to accept any serious hard proof of the matter (I do keep an open mind about these things).

Really it's quite a hard thing to measure other than subjectively. The game has expanded before - from a Sydney comp into NSW, QLD, ACT, Nationally and Internationally. I'm not even arguing for a throwback to 1997 when we had 22 teams but surely we can handle 4 less teams almost 2 decades later if the right system is put in place.

Obviously the AFL doesn't have this advantage. It isn't really played overseas at any more than a joke level and it is distinct from the other football codes. So really it does have to grow its grassroots base to do the same. I don't believe the quality of the NRL competition will end up like Fumbleball.

As for junior squads -- that's a good point though the number of extra players required may differ as a result of the State & Holden Cup changes. I mean lets keep in mind even if it stayed the same you're still only talking finding 12.5% more players, if that.

Coaching staff - I don't think that's a big hurdle, they'll find their people within the game itself.

Sorry doc if I don't argue your points specifically.

The assumption that any team only has X amount of quality players is not what I was suggesting.
I don't think there is a limit or a way to test quality. It is, as you say, entirely subjective. I only commented based on my noticeable subtle drop in quality of the NRL after the Titans were admitted based on my own experience in the game and observations. Nothing more.

Using previous expansion way back to 1995 to 1997 I don't think is fair considering the vast difference in quality between the athletes from then until now, as well as the amount of money and resources put in to making prospective juniors into the athletes they are today.

My ultimate point in response to what Grant said as to why we shouldn't expand was that his argument was correct but moot. The game is never going to have 50 players ready to go to fill the void should 2 new clubs be introduced. It is inevitable that a drop in quality of the competition will happen with expansion. I also have faith that the commission know this or at least will know this in future discussion.

The game returned to the high quality it has today when all junior systems were able to make their players into the athletes that they are today. The systems will work. And it will work even after 2 more expansion teams are introduced.

I don't think Grant really thinks the NRL can't expand because of player numbers. I think he knows that there are players out there who can fill some voids, such as Super League and Union, and any short falls will be covered by players from lower grades.

We will take a hit in player depth, sort of, but we will recover quite quickly.

 

[Perth Red]

Seems a strange tactic to talk down the chances of expansion and even worse tell the world if it does happen the product will be worse if they are trying to sell a ninth game? Not a very bright sales tactic I would have thought?

Grant: how much will you pay for a ninth game exclusive?
Fox: but I thought you said the game wasn't ready for expansion?
Grant: yes but how much for us to give you a ninth game
Fox: but didn't you say the product overall would be worse with a ninth game?
Grant, err, umm, agh

 

[Last Week]

It's simply a matter of who wants it more. The seemingly less desirable it appears to be for the game, the more Fox has to pay.

Like night time grand finals. No one but Nine wants that so of course they're going to pay a premium for it.

 

[Perth Red]

I've never sold anything by making it sound less desirable lol. I think you may be giving Grant too much credit here.

 

[DiegoNT]

Seems a strange tactic to talk down the chances of expansion and even worse tell the world if it does happen the product will be worse if they are trying to sell a ninth game? Not a very bright sales tactic I would have thought?

Grant: how much will you pay for a ninth game exclusive?
Fox: but I thought you said the game wasn't ready for expansion?
Grant: yes but how much for us to give you a ninth game
Fox: but didn't you say the product overall would be worse with a ninth game?
Grant, err, umm, agh

Or it could be played out like this.

Fox: we need another another exclusive timeslot, their needs to be a 17 and 18th team.
Nrl: look we don't have the strength ot finances to fund expansion at the moment.
Fox: look we really need that timeslot. How about if we add a shit load of money to the deal.
Nrl: well there's still the issue of player depth
Fox: fine, we'll step up an extra million per team per year so the nrl can keep a hold off/ attract more marquee players.

 

[DiegoNT]

I've never sold anything by making it sound less desirable lol. I think you may be giving Grant too much credit here.

Its a tactic when one party really wants something, and the other party doesn't want to give it up, or give it up cheaply.

Imagine a prostitute, and she has a john who desperately wants some 'back door action'. Now the prostitute tries to talk it down, say it's not possible, say it's not going to be great for either party, but that doesn't stop the john, he really wants it, so he offers the prostitute a huge fee for doing something she says she really doesn't want you do. Now imagine if at the time the john asked for some 'back door action' if the prostitute said 'that's a great idea, i actually wanted that to' she wouldn't of been been able to get as much money.

So the prostitute is the NRL, selling its valuables, the john is News ltd trying to get what it wants. 'Back door action' is expansion, something the john desperately wants, something the prostitute may also want but at the same time might be to painful and ir special to give up cheaply, so down talking it may increase its value.

Hopefully you guys get my sick and twisted logic

 

[Last Week]

Odd, but effective and funny analogy. Correct too.

 

[Last Week]

I've never sold anything by making it sound less desirable lol. I think you may be giving Grant too much credit here.

Every post you make just oozes bitterness towards the commission. You aren't Curtis Sironen's ex are you?

 

[Perth Red]

Lol that is a weird analogy Diego, don't even want to know how you came by it

Let's see, proof of the pudding and all that. IF we get expansion and a deal comparable to afl's from Fox I am more than happy to eat humble pie, however I feel I wil be proved correct again.

 

[DiegoNT]

Lol that is a weird analogy Diego, don't even want to know how you came by it

Let's see, proof of the pudding and all that. IF we get expansion and a deal comparable to afl's from Fox I am more than happy to eat humble pie, however I feel I wil be proved correct again.

I'll call it an ANALogy... and i had to think of a way to get through to some of the sick and twisted on LU

 

[siv]

International RL needs to gave its own standalone agreement co ordinated by the RLIF

And 4 Nations, 6N Euro Cup and 6N Pacific Cup sold as a package

 

[carlosthedwarf]

https://media.optus.com.au/media-re...igital-rights-to-the-barclays-premier-league/

Optus today announced it has won the bid for the exclusive Australian rights to the Barclays Premier League for three seasons, commencing in August 2016.

This includes live broadcast coverage and digital rights for broadband and mobile for all 380 Premier League games, every season.

NRL back in the drivers seat

 

[Edwahu]

That is huge news.